Blanche Lincoln

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I thank all of my colleagues today. I am so pleased to come down to the floor and join my fellow Democratic women colleagues in the Senate to discuss our checklist for change. Just so that people know, this checklist is not new. We started this several years ago. We got together and realized that all of us kept lists, like our mothers and grandmothers before us. Those checklists were helpful in accomplishing things. If there is anything we recognize from our constituents, it is that they are desperately wanting their Government to provide results, to get the results that the American people need, and they want to be able to move forward. And so we decided at that point, several years ago, that a checklist for change would be a good thing. So here we come back to this body, come back to our colleagues presenting, yes, another checklist for change and to say it is time to change the direction our country is going in, and here are some of the biggest priorities we face. These are age-old problems that we need new and innovative solutions to, but they are not problems we can't solve. When we come together, when we work together, we can solve these problems and bring forth for the American people what it is they are asking for, and that is results, there is no doubt. We have heard our colleagues today touch on several issues of importance to the American people that we have listed on our checklist. I know my checklist is full of a lot of different things, as Senator Klobuchar mentioned, with the end of school coming around, but I want to take a few minutes to discuss one of the most important priorities, and one of the most important things that appears on my personal checklist most frequently, and that is health care needs. Whether it is the health care forms for my boys to go to summer camp, or making sure they get their dental checkup, or ensuring they have gotten their immunizations to be able to start school, all those things are critically important to me, and there are many health care needs our working families out there are facing as well. It is not a secret that a health care crisis is looming on the horizon. Health care access and affordability is out of reach for way too many of our hard-working American families. When we go out to our States, at least for me, anyway, and I talk with people, one of the issues that is paramount on their minds is health care, but it is synonymous, when they speak about it, with the economy and whether they can afford it with the economy of their family budget, and what it does to the economy of their small community if health care is not available, and what it does to the economy of this country if we wait so long to provide the access to affordable health care so that people are in acute care because it is more costly. It is costing our economy more and it is lessening the quality of life of Americans who so desperately want to find that access to affordable and good health care. As many of my colleagues are very well aware, the number of uninsured in this country stands at about 47 million. You know, we see Americans are living longer. My husband's grandmother turns 111 this year, and she still lives on her own and does amazing things. My husband and I find that we are not just the sandwich generation, but we are the club sandwich generation. As Americans live longer, we also know, because statistics tell us, that a baby girl born in this country today has a 50-percent chance of becoming a centenarian. Moreover, as the baby boom generation begins to retire, the current Medicare system is not equipped to effectively handle the strains of such a major demographic shift. It is an issue that constantly weighs on my mind, whether it is as a caregiver for my children or for aging parents or aging grandparents, and we know it is on the minds of all working Americans out there, not just mine and not just my colleagues. I am sure it is on the minds of many of my colleagues, because we talk about it all the time. We talk about caring for our aging parents and the needs of our kids, and it is not going away any time soon. And it is certainly not going away if we don't begin to make it a priority and do something about access to health care. As mothers and daughters, wives, sisters, and legislators, the Democratic women of the Senate are committed to providing access to quality, affordable health care for all Americans. One way to address this issue is to put the focus first on small business owners, their employees, and self-employed individuals, who very often are those who are uninsured. To give a snapshot, my small businesses are the No. 1 source of jobs in my home State of Arkansas. However, only 26 percent of businesses with fewer than 50 employees actually offer health insurance. Small businesses need assistance. They need innovative ways to offer affordable, accessible health care to their employees. There is a misnomer out there that small businesses don't want to offer health insurance. They do, desperately. They know it increases their productivity, it increases their competitiveness, and their ability to attract good workers. But it has to be affordable. Small businesses have to maintain their competitive nature with big businesses and businesses all over the globe. That is why I have worked hard to design a comprehensive solution that will allow our small businesses to ban together and spread their risk, much like the programs that we as Federal employees enjoy. We also have to focus on critical reforms of Medicare if we have any hopes of ensuring our seniors, those who have built this great land we enjoy, continue to receive the essential care they need as they age. Efficiencies, quality measures, all of these issues we have talked about recently in some of our Medicare efforts and what we are trying to do in our Medicare reform bill, will lower our costs and provide greater quality, which is what we want to do. Modernizing Medicare to take advantage of those efficiencies, those new technologies--health IT, e-prescription, and a whole host of different technologies--will help us, if we make that investment, by providing the quality as well as the efficiencies we need. And we can't forget about the State Children's Health Insurance Program, known as SCHIP. We must make it a priority to expand health care coverage to the most vulnerable of our society--our children. I hope if my colleagues don't want to do it just because they love children, which most of us do--we understand they are our greatest blessing in this whole wide world--we should do it because it is an investment in our future. We know children who are healthier are going to go to school, they are going to learn better, they are going to turn out to be better adults, they are going to get their education, get better jobs, and pay more taxes. There will be a whole host of different things that will mean so much to this country if we provide that health care for our children. The clock is ticking, and it is up to us in Washington to find a solution so the hard-working families of this country can be assured of a healthy tomorrow. Each year that passes without action places more and more Americans in a vulnerable position. I challenge our President and our colleagues in the Senate and on the other side of the aisle to stand with us, not against us, in providing quality and affordable health care for all Americans. Look at how much it means to this country, to those individuals, those working families who are the fabric of this country. As the richest, most powerful country in the world, we owe it to our working families who want to protect themselves and their families from an uncertain future to provide the health care coverage they so desperately need. We owe it to the taxpayers of this country today and for generations to come to provide a quality health care system that is cost effective and sustainable. That is why I believe that providing access to good health care to America's working families is worth fighting for, and that is why it is primary on our checklist for change. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, certainly no apology is necessary from my colleague. He comes to the floor very passionately and has worked with great passion, and we appreciate that. Medicare Mr. President, I come to the floor today to echo so many comments that were made by many of my colleagues on the great policies in the Medicare bill that has been introduced by the Finance Committee chairman, Senator Max Baucus. I have, along with others, been exhausted, certainly disappointed and dismayed that so many in this body voted against moving forward on this bill today, a bill that I believe is essential to the needs and concerns of so many of the constituency I represent in our great State of Arkansas. When I first came to the Senate, people said: It is always easy to vote no. But to move things forward, to be progressive, to be willing to start and engage the debate and to move forward in starting to solve the problem, that means voting yes. And sometimes it is a difficult vote, to move forward and to get things going, to come together, to work together and to find the solutions that are necessary for this country. But as we have seen time and time again in these votes, it is a simple vote that happens on the other side. It is ``no.'' No, we are not going to create jobs and move forward in this tax extenders bill, providing tax cuts to industries for research and development and help in the creation of new jobs in the renewable fuels industry. No, we are not going to move forward in trying to fix the concerns our constituents have in their access to health care, particularly in the Medicare Program. ``No'' is that simple vote. The tough vote is yes; being able to say yes, it is worth it to the people of this country for us to come to the floor, to work together, and to be able to move forward in the debate. Not that any of us are going to get everything we want, but it is important that we are willing to come together and work on behalf of the people of this country. Now, I am not sure how many of my Senate colleagues here pump their own gas, but I do. I drive myself, unlike many of my colleagues, and I pump my own gas. I guess it was a couple of days ago, in between a Little League game and purchasing some items for the end-of-school party, that I stopped to buy my gas, and I was astonished, just as I had been the time before. My son commented on the fact that it had gone up so much since the last time we filled up, and I am thinking to myself here I am, with both my husband and me working and bringing home a paycheck, and realizing the crunch we feel. Think of how other hard- working Americans feel across this country. I know the Presiding Officer has many of the same duties I do, whether it is Little League or school parties or birthday events or all kinds of things, but I think it is so important for our colleagues to stop and think. Because if they do not fill up that tank, if they are not going to the grocery store, as I am, and seeing the rising cost of food, then they need to start. They need to understand what Americans out in our States, the hard-working families of this country, who are the fabric of our Nation, are faced with, the decisions they must make. Certainly on job creation, on moving forward with the tax cuts, we could have provided those to industries and businesses, extending some where people don't know whether they are going to be there, and certainly providing them the wherewithal, the businesses and industries of this country, to be progressive in addressing and creating the kinds of jobs we need out there in these new and innovative technologies and new and innovative industries. Here today, we had an opportunity to move forward on improving the Medicare system, the health care available to seniors and others, and we missed it. We missed that opportunity. We are not here to create a work of art. I say this all the time. We are here to create a work in progress. Several years ago, we passed the Medicare Modernization Act. Here we had an opportunity to improve upon and to move forward in making sure that some of these policies in Medicare can continue to happen. S. 3101, the bill we tried to move forward today, contains a number of provisions that would improve care and access to care for low-income Medicare beneficiaries, and a number of important provisions to support our providers in the Medicare Program. Low-income Medicare beneficiaries, the people more than likely who are on a fixed income, get hit the hardest by increased gasoline prices and increased food prices because they are on a fixed income. So here was an opportunity to say yes, we understand the pain you are feeling, we are working on it. We know there is not a ton of immediate impact that we can make on the price of fuel, but we can do some things, and here is something we can do. We chose not to, because there weren't enough votes to move forward. Besides fixing the reimbursement for physicians, it bolsters Medicare in rural areas and includes a number of provisions from the Craig Thomas Rural Health Care bill, in honor of our former colleague, Senator Craig Thomas. That is a bill I and so many of my colleagues in the Senate have supported year after year. These are not new things. These are things that are essential. If you look in rural America today--and I was visited in my office by elected officials from a county that is predominantly Federal lands. They won't be able to meet their county budget this year. They are operating a jail that is over 100 years old and on the National Historic Register, but it doesn't do the job they need it to do. People who live in rural America, hard-working Americans, those who have worked hard to make this country great, need us to be paying attention. Yet what are we doing? We are not moving forward. We are continually stymied from even getting to the debate on the issues and offering amendments and moving forward on these matters because people want to say no. It doesn't work. We have to come away from that. The bill we tried to bring up earlier today, S. 3101, would continue to allow exception to when seniors need medical therapy beyond current funding caps. I have seniors who will not get their therapy until August because they are worried they are going to fall and they will need their therapy more desperately in the last several months of the year. If they use it in the first part of the year, they will hit the cap. So what does that do? They do not get the therapy, because they do not want to reach their caps early in the year, so they are not as ambulatory, they are more fragile, and then what happens? Yes, what they anticipate does happen. They do have a fall in August and then they have to go through even more extensive rehabilitation. It is not cost effective and it doesn't make sense. These are such smart things we could do on behalf of Americans who need our help and our rationalization in moving forward. The bill also extends a provision to pay pathologists for the valuable, technical component of their services. I didn't understand this one, so I took a tour of a pathology lab. I was taken through the different processes of what happens in that pathology lab and I saw what that technical component was. There were several steps in that pathology instrument, or that pathology series of events that didn't catch the eye of the physician--the trained pathologist, because they wouldn't get reimbursed. He looked at me and said: Would you want that to be the sample of your cancer tissue, or the possibility that it is not going to be caught because we are going to leave out three different processes or three different pieces in this process? No. We want to be thorough, and there is no reason why we shouldn't be. The bill also gives Medicare beneficiaries access to cardiac and pulmonary rehabilitation, which has already shown us to lower costs associated with COPD and other respiratory diseases. These are diseases that oftentimes are predominantly in older people, low-income older people who live in rural areas who are least likely to be able to get the help elsewhere. Why would we not want to save those dollars and create a greater quality of life for these individuals? That is an investment. The bill also educates kidney disease patients with managing their disease, before they end up on costly dialysis, which can drastically improve their quality of life and greatly reduce medical costs down the road. Again, we are talking about procedures and making sure those procedures are reimbursed that are cost effective. That is how we improve on Medicare. We are getting ready to see an explosion of baby boomers who are going to be using the Medicare system. Why would we not want to act now to put in cost-saving measures that will create greater savings and greater quality of life? It also extends for 2 years the critical diabetes research conducted in the CDC and the NIH. I tell my colleagues if they have not met with the families in their State who suffer from diabetes, they should do so. I have never in my life sat with more passionate people, particularly those families who suffer with a child who has juvenile diabetes, who are passionate about the idea of not only how do we find better ways to care for our children but also investing in the research that will one day find the cure. I looked at a mother who had tears in her eyes and she said: My daughter, who is 12 years old, is going to her first sleepover, and I am going with her because I cannot leave her side. She needs to be so closely monitored, she said. But I refuse--I refuse--not to let my child have a childhood. These are the things we can change, and we should. Now, unlike the Republican alternative that was introduced by Senator Grassley, the Baucus bill also ensures that pharmacists receive prompt pay in Medicare. As I mentioned before, I don't work under the auspices that we are here to create a work of art, and when I supported the Medicare Modernization Act, I knew it wasn't perfect, and I knew we would have to watch to see what worked and what didn't work. I went a step further. I went to my State and I traveled county to county and had meetings with seniors, with the AARP, with our area agency on aging, and with Sunday school teachers to try and work through what we needed to know and what they needed to know to help one another about the prescription Part D in Medicare, and we had good results. Arkansas was one of the top States in terms of signing up seniors and getting them into the right plans, figuring out how we could help them, and working through making that a success. But the fact is that in rural America, oftentimes pharmacists are the last touch for a medical provider. If you are in a community that has a commuting physician, perhaps, or maybe you don't have a hospital and have to use one in a larger MSA somewhere, your pharmacist is probably the only person who is going to be there on the weekend, and it is critical that we keep them in business. Well, if they do not get paid on a timely basis--I had two, three pharmacists, at least, who had to take out loans of $500,000 to be able to carry over the burden of providing the prescription drugs for seniors on Medicare when we transitioned into the Medicare Part D. That is unreasonable to ask of any small business such as that, to have to carry that over. The bill we tried to move forward today also delays the harmful Medicaid average manufacturers price rule so that we can improve it to reflect the true cost that pharmacists face and to increase patient access to generic drugs; again, a commonsense way to move us into a more practical, more cost-effective delivery of Medicare services-- generic drugs. We all talk about them frequently. Here is something that would actually implement moving in that direction, not to mention the true cost these smalltown pharmacists face. Many of them can't work within cooperatives. They don't have the advantages, lots of times, of the large pharmacies out there, where they can buy in these huge bulk purchases and get greater prices. We need to make sure we are supporting everybody, and those pharmacists in rural America definitely have their needs. That was something in our bill that the Republicans did not address. S. 3101 makes several much needed reforms to the Medicare Advantage Program, or the Medicare Part C. This is something new we added. When Congress first decided to allow private insurers to participate in the Medicare Program, the health insurance industry maintained that the efficiency and the competitiveness of the private marketplace would enable them to provide Medicare beneficiaries with better coverage at less cost to the Government. Despite congressional intent, these plans do not save the Government money. As a matter of fact, they cost the Government money. Many of them offer absolutely no data to suggest they provide significant extra benefits or any better quality at all. Since passage of the Medicare Modernization Act in 2003, more and more private health insurers have entered the private Medicare market and enrollment in Medicare Advantage plans has increased exponentially across the country. I heard someone make the comment the other day that they were multiplying like rabbits, particularly in rural America. The high enrollment growth, especially for Medicare Advantage plan types known as private fee for service, is alarming to me since these private plans are paid 20 percent more by the Government, on average, than it would cost traditional Medicare to cover those same beneficiaries. So if they are multiplying like rabbits out there and we are paying them 20 percent more than what we would pay for traditional Medicare fee for service, we are wasting taxpayers' dollars. Private fee-for-service plans are not required to create networks with providers or to report any quality measures. So in terms of tracking whether they are providing greater quality, we have had studies done, but we cannot even track the measures to determine whether there is an improved quality. Many seniors in my State of Arkansas have run into trouble with private fee-for-service plans. Many of them have been duped into signing up for these plans through misleading or even fraudulent marketing practices. Once they do sign up, they often find that when they try to go to their regular doctor, their provider does not accept the plan. People have signed them up for something simply to get a bonus for the number of people they can sign up for a plan. We had one woman who came into our office. We heard about this case in Arkansas of a sales agent going door to door, wearing medical scrubs and a stethoscope, trying to enroll seniors in this plan, not knowing much about the plan, and certainly not being willing to work with these seniors to figure out what was best for them. The Baucus Medicare bill includes a number of improvements to the oversight of sales and marketing of Medicare Advantage plans, much needed and certainly a part of our responsibility, including banning certain practices such as door-to-door sales, cold calling, and free meals to seniors as an enticement to sign up. We saw the invitations sent out to seniors for a free meal if they come and sign up for this package or seniors who simply get cold-called in their homes who get kind of hassled and made to feel insignificant to the point they say: OK, whatever, come see me. It also asks the HHS Secretary to place limits on free gifts and commissions to sales agents. That is completely reasonable. We have heard of agents getting paid $10,000 for signing up up to 150 beneficiaries. That is not right. That is taking advantage of seniors who may not understand some of these programs and who need more time and assistance to be able to figure out what is right for them if, in fact, they need to change at all. S. 3101 also requires private fee-for-service plans and Medicare Advantage to develop networks of providers to ensure care for beneficiaries and to measure and report on quality of care. Plans would no longer be allowed to deem a hospital or provider as part of the plan's network without negotiating an actual contract for payment and care. In Arkansas, we have about 11 percent of our total Medicare-eligible population enrolled in Medicare Advantage. Most of these beneficiaries have the private fee-for-service plan type, and that is why it is especially critical to me that these plans work for our beneficiaries or, if they do not, that we get our seniors back into regular Medicare, where they can have their needs met. Let me tell you, we have worked hard. Some of these seniors have been duped. They called my office, we sat down with them, and we worked hard. Getting them back into traditional Medicare fee for service where they were, and they liked their service, is unbelievably difficult getting through that redtape over at CMS. We have heard a lot of rhetoric on the Senate floor lately about ``choice'' and ``fiscal responsibility.'' However, I would like to ask: What kind of choice is it when the plan you chose doesn't meet your needs, and you chose a plan because you have been harassed by people who are either trying to make an extra $10,000 or who are just out there trying to sign up as many people as they possibly can? As for fiscal responsibility, we already know the Medicare Hospital Insurance Trust Fund is estimated to be insolvent by the year 2019. When American taxpayers are subsidizing private companies' profits rather than the needs of our seniors, we are simply exacerbating that problem. We are adding to the debt of our children and our grandchildren. I, for one, would argue this is not fiscally responsible. I hope we can move beyond the rhetoric. I hope we can have productive, bipartisan negotiations over the next days and weeks and make these many needed improvements to our Medicare Program a reality. Simply saying no is not good enough. It is hard to say yes sometimes, but the fact is the American people need us to be working right now. They need us to be focused and paying attention to the issues with which they are faced. Yes, the price of gas is out of control. Yes, their food prices are going up. Yes, their health care costs are going up and their access is dwindling. The number of Medicare patients I know in my State who can no longer find doctors because doctors are no longer taking new Medicare patients--we actually experienced that in my own family. Our lifetime family physician who lived across the street passed away, my dad hit Medicare age, and all of a sudden we didn't have a physician. These are issues people in our States are facing every single day. The least we can do is bring forward measures that will show the people we are working toward figuring out some of these issues and some of these concerns that are hitting them square in the face. As I said before, I stop and pump my own gas and I do the grocery shopping at my house. I have to say I see what they are up against. I think every one of us needs to take the time to figure out what it is our constituents are facing and redouble our efforts to work together to find the solutions that will make an impact on this great country and, more importantly, on its greatest asset and that is the working families of this great country. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to lend my strong support to the Renewable Energy and Jobs Creation Act. I wish to applaud the incredibly hard work that was put into this package by the Finance Committee and particularly Chairman Baucus. I also wish to congratulate our counterparts in the House Ways and Means Committee for their efforts in putting together this important piece of legislation. I am so very disappointed--as we tried early this morning--that our friends on the other side of the aisle chose to block progress on this bill. It would have provided much needed tax relief to individual taxpayers and to businesses alike. I don't know about other Senators, but when I travel home people look to me and say: What are you doing to help us with this economy? We are paying $4 a gallon for gasoline to get to our jobs, to get to school, to get to all of the things we need to tend to. We are concerned about the jobs we have lost in our State. We are concerned about the increase in unemployment. We have to do something about this economy. We have to do something about stimulating the economy of our country to grow on behalf of all of the millions of Americans out there who need us to help them. This bill on which we were trying to proceed this morning could have done just that. It could have provided just the stimulus we needed to jump-start our economy. It would have been a good start. I think it is particularly frustrating not to be able to move on it in light of all of our current economic downturns. Taxpayers need this relief and they need it right now. We need to provide them every opportunity to keep this economy turning. One of the things I think that comes from our businesses and individuals across my State--and certainly across this country--is the concern of the unknown. We try to create in our Tax Code the types of incentives that will incentivize different cultural activities, such as the purchasing of a home and home ownership, but we also want to incentivize businesses to be able to grow and be competitive. If they don't know they are going to have that same tax treatment for more than 6 months, or in 6 months it is going to expire, how are they going to be able to make the reasonable business decisions to take the capital, which right now is very hard to come by, and invest in certain areas of their industry, to grow those jobs, and to grow those businesses that are out there in this great country? This package would have done just that. It provides businesses that make investments in research and development with a tax credit. We are falling behind every year. Other countries across the globe are working hard to provide the kind of research and development they need to move into new industries for multiple reasons: job creation, obviously, as well as our environment. Look at nations, such as Brazil, which have lessened their dependence on foreign oil from 80 percent to 11 percent. They have invested in research. They have invested in developing renewable fuels. We have to do that too. This is the bill that would have started us moving on that pathway to investing in companies that cannot only provide us the good types of industries that would help us clean our environment but would have created the jobs that would have made the difference. It also encourages infrastructure investment. One of the ways it does that is through the extension of the short-line rail credit which provides an incentive for the maintenance and expansion of our short line rail systems. When you come from a rural State as I do--we are very fortunate to have the major lines that come through our State to reach out to all of those small communities where we desperately need to create jobs--we need those short line rails that can connect to the major main line rails to take our goods and our services all across this great country into the ports that will take it to other countries with which we can compete. We need to give them the incentive to invest in themselves. In talking to one of my short line rails, they said to me: You wouldn't believe the number of jobs we could create, the investment we could make, if we just simply knew that Congress was supporting us, that they are going to help us with that incentive we have had in the past and we want to continue. The unknown is very frightening to businesses in this world we live in and in the economic times in which we are living. The margins right now are so slim, limiting their ability to compete with other modes of transportation, but without a doubt they can provide a service to industries that are competing with industries across the globe. This bill would have kept jobs at home through incentives to encourage domestic production of films, as one particular example. We are seeing our films being sent overseas and offshore because other countries are offering greater incentives. When you look at rural America, one of the strongest ways--and the quickest ways too--to see the investment and the revitalization of these small communities and their little downtown Main Streets is when somebody comes in to produce a film. They come in to produce a film, and they put a good picture on redoing that Main Street area. They bring in jobs; not only jobs with filmmaking, but they also come and eat in our cafes, and they use the shops and the other amenities that are there, keeping businesses at home. But we can't do that if those film companies don't know that they are going to get good treatment, at least as good as they get in other countries. They have a bottom line to meet too. They take their film crews and all the dollars they are spending in making those films, and they go into other countries. We need to keep them at home. Those are good jobs for electricians and contractors, plumbers, and a whole host of other people. I have a retired man at home, and they did a film--a made-for-TV movie--in my former Congressional District on the eastern side of my State, and he had two antique cars. You wouldn't have believed the difference it made in his life to be able to rent those two cars, those two antique cars to be featured in a vintage film and what it meant to his pocketbook as well. The bill we have been trying to bring forward and were prevented this morning from bringing forward allows our financial services businesses to remain competitive globally through the extension of the subpart F exceptions for the active financing income. It provides access to capital to our communities that need it the most--our rural and low- income communities--through an extension of the new market tax credit, enabling our businesses to be viable overseas, and also making sure that the new and innovative businesses we want to see in our small and rural communities can actually happen, that they can be a part of this global community, and that they will have the same kind of advantages that other industries and other businesses in bigger parts of our Nation may have. All of these provisions provide a huge benefit to our American businesses and would most definitely help to stimulate our slowing economy. In addition, the bill we were trying to bring up this morning provides very important relief for individual taxpayers. It includes tax cuts for college students, their families, and our teachers. With twin boys who are finishing the sixth grade and starting the seventh grade, right now in my mind I have a tremendous appreciation for our teachers and what they give day in and day out, being able to offer them the opportunity of a Tax Code that is going to reward them for this incredible job they do. I ask my colleagues--just as was my experience in the public schools of Arkansas--to look back and think of those wonderful teachers who have affected their lives. There are great teachers out there right now, and they need us because it is an institution and a business that, unfortunately, we are not seeing enough. We are hitting a brick wall. We are seeing more teachers who are retiring than we are seeing new teachers. What a great way for us in this country to show how much we believe in those teachers. It includes an incentive for our senior citizens who want to take part in charitable giving. That is the IRA rollover. Every week I get a call in my office from the same gentleman. He took advantage of the IRA rollover to be able to give to his church. Every Sunday morning he goes to his Sunday school and talks to the people in his Sunday school class about this great opportunity of being able to give through these IRA rollovers. Well, all of his friends in his Sunday school class want to know if this is going to be the law. Can we do this? Should we do this? Is this something that is going to continue? We can't even tell them that. We are being held back from doing so many productive things that would encourage not only individual involvement in being able to generate our economy and put the emphasis back on our economy from individuals, but also our businesses who need our help. The bill also includes an AMT patch to ensure more middle-income taxpayers aren't going to be hit by the AMT this year. It also has tremendous incentives for green jobs that we can grow in this country and looking at renewable fuels and all the many things we can do with those renewable fuels but also things such as wind--and we have had tremendous tornadoes in Arkansas--and wind mills, and energy from wind is not something we are really noted for doing. Our topography is not necessarily meant for that, like some other States. But we produce the blades for the windmills. That is hundreds of jobs in my State. Let me tell you, do you think those industries are going to want to continue to make the capital investment in the manufacturing of something that may or may not be used, because those other industries that are building and making that energy from wind don't know if they can depend on the tax credit--a tax incentive in the code that encourages the behavior of moving to a renewable energy source? Mr. President, we have to move forward. We cannot keep standing here fighting and bickering over whether we are going to proceed to talk about these things. We have to move forward and talk about them. Most important is an issue I have worked on for years which includes a provision very near and dear to my heart, and that is a patch to the refundable child tax credit, to ensure that thousands of hard-working low- income families aren't locked out of this credit. I wish to take a few minutes to explain the child tax credit provision, which I have worked on with my good friend and colleague, Olympia Snowe. As some colleagues may be aware, to be eligible for the refundable child tax credit, working families must meet an income threshold. If they don't earn enough, they don't qualify for the credit. The problem is, some of our working parents are working full time, but they still don't earn enough to meet the current income threshold to qualify for this tax credit, much less to receive a meaningful refund from it. When first enacted, the income threshold for the refundable child tax credit was set at $10,000. The threshold is indexed for inflation and thus has increased every year. For 2008, it is going to be $12,050. Unfortunately, as many of us are aware, wages are not increasing at that same pace. For example, a single mother who earns the current minimum wage and works a 35-hour-a-week job, 50 weeks out of the year, fails to qualify for the refundable portion of the child tax credit. Even after the minimum wage increases next month, that mother still will not meet the income threshold. That is what we want to encourage. We want to encourage people to work, to be able to change the cycle of poverty that exists for welfare today. We want to make sure individuals are encouraged to go to work, so that they can still take care of their children. Our children are our greatest resource. Why would parents who want to care for their kids not want to incentivize that. It is absolutely wrong to provide this credit to some hard-working Americans while leaving others behind. The single working parent who is stocking shelves in a local grocery score is every bit as deserving as the teacher, accountant, or insurance salesman who qualifies for the credit in its current form. It is imperative that we address this inequity, and we must ensure our Tax Code works for all Americans, especially those working parents who are forced to get by on minimum wage. I am extremely frustrated that our friends across the aisle chose to block action on this bill. I hope that we will reconsider this position, that we will look at the important value in all of these pieces of this legislation, and that we will come back again and go back to the drawing board and figure out how we can make this bill a reality. Again, I applaud our committee chairman for putting this package together and trying to move it through the Senate in a timely fashion. There is absolutely no reason we should not see this package. It is a commonsense package. It makes sense for everybody concerned. We owe it to our American businesses that are trying to remain competitive. We owe it to our teachers, students, and the families paying college tuition. We owe it to our communities that are desperately in need of infrastructure and jobs. We owe it to our working families with children. No one should stand in the way of this package that truly will bring relief to so many Americans. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the debate time on the motion to proceed to S. 3044 be divided in blocks of 30 minutes for the next 2 hours, with the majority controlling the first 30 minutes and the Republicans controlling the next 30 minutes, and so on; that at the expiration of the 2 hours debate time be limited to 10 minutes each.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to bring to my colleagues' attention the fact that today, June 10, 2008, is National Hunger Awareness Day. As a founder of the bipartisan Senate Hunger caucus and an original cosponsor of the legislation establishing this commemoration, I believe hunger is an issue that deserves our full attention. For the past 4 years, my fellow caucus cochairs Senator Smith, Senator Dole, as well as Senator Durbin and I have executed a food drive in our Senate offices with donations helping those in need in the Washington area. The collection began last month and culminates today National Hunger Awareness Day when we donate the collected goods to needy organizations. I have worked with my Senate colleagues to draw attention to this issue because hunger and poverty are not just global issues they are so pervasive that we all have some experience with them in our local communities. Worldwide, 3 billion people--nearly half the world's population--live on merely $2 per day. In our Nation alone, almost 35.5 million Americans struggle day in and day out to find adequate nutritious food. More than 13 million children live in households that are food insecure. According to the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance in my home State, approximately 80 percent of supplemental nutrition assistance goes to households with children, many of them in working families, including military families. Older Americans and those with disabilities also depend on these benefits. Every month, nutrition assistance programs enable almost 385,000 Arkansans 13.7 percent of my State's population to purchase groceries for themselves and their families. As a member of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, I worked to address this issue in the recently passed Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, and I am proud the bill aims to reduce food insecurity among our children and our elderly, and others in need. This bill commits $10.36 billion to continue the fight against hunger. It represents the largest amount of funding for nutrition programs in our Nation's history. One billion dollars is allocated to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, which provides free fresh fruits and vegetables to low-income children in schools nationwide. It also expands the senior farmers' market program by $50 million to help them purchase fresh food at places like farmers' markets and roadside stands throughout the country. In the coming weeks and months, I encourage my colleagues to become more aware, more educated, and more informed about the effects of hunger and poverty and to find out what impact you can have in your State and in your community. Government cannot do it alone, though. It has been said: To those to whom much is given, much is required. We must continue to work together to devote our time and resources to organizations in our communities committed to this cause and develop public/private partnerships to combat food insecurity in this country. Hunger is a disease that has a cure. It is our responsibility to strive hard each and every day to eliminate hunger in our country and around the world.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand in recess until 11:30.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I come before our body today because we are dealing with such an incredibly important issue. It is an issue that is full of technicalities but also a lot of passion, a lot of incredible passion about how we take care of this incredible blessing of a planet we have been given, take care of its climate and its environment and all of the incredible things it does for us, and what we have a responsibility to do in return. As a daughter of an Arkansas farmer, I was taught at an early age in life to be a good steward of the land we have been given, to understand there will be future generations who will need it, who will cherish it, and who will learn from it. Today, my husband Steve and I continue to instill those principles in our twin boys through all kinds of different activities, whether it is the Scouts they have participated in, whether it is their athletics, whether it is the fishing and hunting they love to do, whether it is the canoeing and camping we do on the beautiful rivers of Arkansas in the great outdoors--being together and sharing time, being together and being respectful of this great environment we have been given. Since the issue of global climate change first came before the Senate, it has become abundantly clear to me and I think to millions of Americans as well as those in this body that we have to take action on this issue if we have any hope of correcting it. We have had our heads in the sand for quite some time. It is important that we get busy. It is important that we get busy in making a difference, in changing our culture in many ways in order to be better equipped to deal with the problems we have in this environment. But it is also abundantly clear that we also have to make sure that our head is not in the clouds and that we are being realistic about the economy we have created, about the number of people on the face of this Earth who depend on this economy, and how critically important it is to provide the kind of partnership and empowerment to our existing culture to make the transition from what we have to what we want to have in terms of dealing with our climate through the economic engines we have in this great land, in this great country. As many of my colleagues have mentioned, the environmental impact of inaction threatens our coastline, the polar icecaps, weather patterns, and animal migration, but it also threatens our ability to be competitive in the world marketplace and to grow the kinds of jobs we truly want to grow if we ignore the opportunities that exist if we do this correctly. If we do this correctly, we can not only provide the kind of move in the right direction that will be positive for our environment, but we can also seize the opportunity to empower industry and our economy in a way that we can grow jobs at the same time. While the environmental danger that climate change poses is so considerable, I am also very concerned about many aspects of this bill. The reality is that the bill we have here before us today cannot pass. We cannot pass this legislation and believe the problem is going to be fixed because there are multiple problems. It is not just the climate and not just the environment, it is all of the things that contribute to it. As we move forward, it is the hard-working Americans who participate in this economy whom we have to consider. The pathway to saving the planet will require that we partner with the business community and empower them to transition from an old energy economy and energy technologies dating back centuries, to the emerging energy economy and the emerging energy technologies needed for a new, cleaner economy and a new, cleaner environment. Failure to do so could lead to the loss of jobs in communities all across our Nation. But it could also lead to a failed environmental policy because the fact is, if we do not get this right now, we could spend the next 2 or 3 years dealing with legislation that might not work, is not going to have all of the intricacies and all of the matters dealt with that need to be dealt with. And 3 years down the road, what happens? We repeal it? We have wasted 3 precious years, 3 or 4 precious years, where we could have been working productively to reach the goal of strengthening our economy and preserving our environment. Another concern is the unintended hardships the bill might place on the elderly and working families, particularly in my State. I am sure other Senators have those same concerns. In a State with a median income level of $37,420, ranking Arkansas 48th among all States, many of my constituents live paycheck to paycheck absolutely every week. I am rightfully concerned about a bill that could drive up utility rates, with the costs being passed on to consumers. And for my constituents, even a $15-per-month increase in their energy bills would be devastating. Now, for some of us, $15 we will notice, but it might not make a difference between whether we are going to sign our kids up for Little League or whether we are going to be able to help our grandparents or our parents with their prescription drugs or even put food on the table. But for some hard-working Americans, those kinds of increases could mean an awful lot. That is why it is all the more important that we get this bill right. I want to support climate change legislation. That is something I feel very passionate about. I want to because I believe it is ultimately our responsibility to preserve and protect our planet for future generations. I truly believe we can no longer afford to put our heads in the sand about this issue. We have to move forward. We have to express the importance and the urgency of this issue. But I also echo that it is critically important we get it right. That is why I say the devil is in the details. As we move forward in these discussions on what we are doing, we have to pay critical attention to the details of this bill. It is why we cannot afford to have, as I said, our heads in the clouds about the realities of the issues that are associated without fully understanding the impact of this bill as we have looked at it today, as currently written, on industry and working families of this country. I dedicate myself to making sure not only that we passionately look at this issue for all the right reasons of preserving our environment but that we also equally as passionately look at this bill to make sure the mechanisms that partner us with the economy and the engines of economy we get right. I am committed to working closely with the sponsors of the legislation as well as the industries in my State and all across this Nation. We have an obligation, an obligation and a responsibility not only to protect this environment but also to protect the incredible working families whom we represent, the hard-fought jobs they work in day-in and day-out to care for their families, and the good corporate citizens that are trying their best to make sure those jobs stay in this country. I believe we can craft a proposal that will appropriately balance the needs of business and consumers, especially those most vulnerable to an increase in energy costs or a shift in our culture of energy, to protect our environment for our children and our grandchildren but also to keep that balance in recognition with how important that impact is on our communities across our States and across this great country. I do so appreciate all of the hard work, the enormous effort so many Senators have put into this bill. Senator Lieberman and Senator Warner and, of course, Chairman Boxer have all invested a tremendous amount of time in this bill. As we continue to move forward in looking at this issue, in looking for solutions, I hope that in their leadership they will embrace all of the Senators who have great ideas in terms of how we can move forward in making this a success, in preserving our environment but ensuring that the working people of this country and the hard-fought industries that are here providing the jobs we want to see stay in this great country, that they are going to have a seat at the table and come up with a bill that will benefit everybody. While I still have some questions about what we are dealing with and the debate we had and will continue to have, I want to keep my door open. I want to work with my colleagues to address the real and the long-term issues of climate change in the weeks and months ahead. But I also want to make sure our focus does not lose sight of the other consequences that come from this bill. I appreciate the debate we have had, and I look forward to the coming months as we will continue to refocus ourselves, rededicate our time to making sure--making sure that any bill we come up with that we come to the floor and ask one another to give a final vote on will be a bill that we have embraced from all different perspectives of finding the solutions we need. This underlying bill is clearly not that bill, and many of us have grave concerns about where the priorities are in this bill and how we make those priorities more positive in all directions. I look forward to regaining our time and energy and being able to come back and talk about these issues and really solve all of the problems, all of the consequences that come with our ultimate passion of wanting to ensure that we do take a stand on climate change and that we do embrace our opportunity to make sure we do not make it irreversible in terms of what climate change is; that we will work hard to ensure that our children and our grandchildren will have an incredible planet to be able to live on, to work on, and again to reach their every potential and their every possibility.

Mrs. LINCOLN

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

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to rise today to introduce the S Corporation Modernization Act of 2008 with my good friend, Senator Orrin Hatch. I also want to say a special thanks to our cosponsors, Senators Gordon Smith of Oregon and Ben Cardin of Maryland. This legislation makes needed changes to the tax code to help small and family-owned businesses across this Nation. It is my hope that these policy changes will provide them the opportunity to grow their businesses, create jobs and stimulate the economy. In my home State of Arkansas, as in so many rural States across the country, the vast majority of our businesse are small businesses. They are the local insurance agency, the flower shop, the coffee shop--and they are most often organized as so-called ``S corporations.'' In fact, our country has more than four million S corporations nationwide. These businesses and their employees are truly the engines of our rural economies. We must do all we can to ensure they can continue to compete in a global economy that is becoming steadily more competitive. Because Congress has not updated many of the rules governing S corporations--such as allowing better access to capital--I am concerned that these privately-held businesses are not in the best position to deal with the current downturn in the economy. We must modify our outdated rules so that these businesses that are starved for capital have the means to expand and create jobs. Current law--particularly the punitive built-in gains tax penalty--not only limits the ability of S corporations to attract new equity investors, but also effectively forces businesses to sit on `locked-up' capital that they cannot access and put to use to grow their business. The S Corporation Modernization Act would update and simplify our S corporation tax rules. It increases access to capital, encourages family-owned businesses to stay in the family, eliminates tax traps that penalize unwary but well-meaning business owners, and encourages charitable giving. A strong economic recovery will depend on the health and strength of our small business sector--our S corporations. It is absolutely imperative that we work to ensure our tax rules that govern this sector are fair, simple and encourage growth. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee to ensure these important changes are made.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to voice my support as well to the supplemental appropriations bill before the Senate today. I commend Chairman Byrd and all the hard-working members of the Appropriations Committee for the good work they have done. It reflects many diverse needs at home and abroad at such a critical time in our Nation's history. A proposal we will be voting on this morning--as we enter the sixth year of this war in Iraq and Afghanistan--will provide the necessary resources for our brave troops to continue their task and finish the job. It also makes clear to the Iraqi people our support for this war can no longer be open-ended. It sets practical and realistic goals for beginning the phased deployment of U.S. troops in Iraq. When our troops begin returning home and transition back to civilian life in their communities, we appropriately recognize their service in this bill by providing benefits that better reflect the sacrifices they have made for each one of us. I appreciate the leadership exhibited by Senators Webb and Hagel, Lautenberg and Warner, to keep the drumbeat alive and make this a priority. They have served our country honorably in past conflicts, and they understand that educating our Nation's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines is a cost of war. One provision included in the GI bill will ensure that our citizen soldiers, our National Guard and Reserve serving multiple deployments abroad, will accrue additional education benefits similar to those Active-Duty troops receive when they are deployed. I have fought for this equity because guardsmen and reservists who serve multiple tours of duty do not receive one extra penny of educational benefits for their added service because benefits are based on the single longest deployment. Passage of this bill will make that change, and it will make it possible for those Guard and Reserve to accrue their educational benefits. Another important piece of this bill is the domestic investment it makes. There are dollars for VA polytrauma centers, rural schools, and law enforcement that need immediate attention. It also includes funding under the Adam Walsh Act to track and prosecute sex offenders and those who would do harm to our children. In addition, this bill provides vital resources to help in recovery efforts from all kinds of disasters, from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and other natural disasters such as the string of tornadoes and flooding that hit my State earlier this year. Arkansas has suffered a series of natural disasters this year unlike any I have seen in my lifetime. It has left 60 of our 75 counties in our State in need of Federal disaster assistance. Wave after wave of storms has rocked the residents of Arkansas and left many of them shocked by the disaster. It started on February 5, when a band of tornadoes created a path of destruction that stretched across 12 counties in Arkansas, killing 13 people and injuring 133--the deadliest storm in nearly 10 years. A little more than a month later, heavy storms hit Arkansas once again, this time bringing rain, floods, and devastation that we have not seen the likes of in 90 years. Thirty-five Arkansas counties were declared disaster areas from that storm. Again, on April 3, another set of tornadoes hit central Arkansas. Although not as deadly as the February tornadoes, four twisters touched down in a five-county area, including some of the counties suffering already from the floods. In addition, two more rounds of tornados hit the State earlier this month, bringing the total to 60 counties affected by these storms this year. This is evidence of the disaster upon disaster that hit our State. As we look at the opportunities we have before us with supplementals, this is what we use to address those kinds of devastation. I ask my colleagues to please support this part of the bill. These resources will help our State and other States in many other initiatives we truly need in our country. The citizens of Arkansas and in our communities all across this Nation have suffered much at the hands of Mother Nature. We are asking our colleagues to work with us to ensure that the things we could not predict, the things we could not prepare for, could be taken care of for those brave Americans in our great State.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am very pleased to rise today to introduce the S Corporation Modernization Act of 2008 with my good friend, Senator Orrin Hatch. I also want to say a special thanks to our cosponsors, Senators Gordon Smith of Oregon and Ben Cardin of Maryland. This legislation makes needed changes to the tax code to help small and family-owned businesses across this Nation. It is my hope that these policy changes will provide them the opportunity to grow their businesses, create jobs and stimulate the economy. In my home State of Arkansas, as in so many rural States across the country, the vast majority of our businesse are small businesses. They are the local insurance agency, the flower shop, the coffee shop--and they are most often organized as so-called ``S corporations.'' In fact, our country has more than four million S corporations nationwide. These businesses and their employees are truly the engines of our rural economies. We must do all we can to ensure they can continue to compete in a global economy that is becoming steadily more competitive. Because Congress has not updated many of the rules governing S corporations--such as allowing better access to capital--I am concerned that these privately-held businesses are not in the best position to deal with the current downturn in the economy. We must modify our outdated rules so that these businesses that are starved for capital have the means to expand and create jobs. Current law--particularly the punitive built-in gains tax penalty--not only limits the ability of S corporations to attract new equity investors, but also effectively forces businesses to sit on `locked-up' capital that they cannot access and put to use to grow their business. The S Corporation Modernization Act would update and simplify our S corporation tax rules. It increases access to capital, encourages family-owned businesses to stay in the family, eliminates tax traps that penalize unwary but well-meaning business owners, and encourages charitable giving. A strong economic recovery will depend on the health and strength of our small business sector--our S corporations. It is absolutely imperative that we work to ensure our tax rules that govern this sector are fair, simple and encourage growth. I look forward to working with my colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee to ensure these important changes are made.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, each May, our Nation pays tribute to the contribution older Americans have made to our great country as many communities all across our great Nation come together to celebrate Older Americans Month. Having grown up in eastern Arkansas in a small community, the daughter of a farmer, I was within walking distance of both my grandparents. I learned incredible lessons from them that I still carry with me today. I imagine there are many of my Senate colleagues who can stop and think about a wonderful memory of growing up with grandparents or maybe an older aunt or uncle who lived nearby, perhaps it was a favorite schoolteacher or a mentor in the community or in their neighborhood. The pride and dedication older Americans have had for our country was impressed upon me from a very early age, from all of those different figures in my life--my grandparents, obviously, but also from wonderful teachers, as well as neighbors, those who shared their stories with me, they shared their values with me, they helped me become the person I am today. Whether it was hearing about my grandfathers' service in World War I--both of them having served as infantrymen in World War I--or maybe it was the jar my grandmother left on the mantelpiece that stored the coins during the Great Depression or the story of my neighbor who, during World War II, flew over ``the hump'' and did tremendous feats in World War II, so many people who have affected my life. Again, I am sure that if any Senator takes the time, they will remember their lives have been affected as well by an individual just like that. Even though I didn't know it, I was a caregiver at an early age when it was one of my and my cousin's tasks to take dinner, nightly meals over to our grandparents' house. Later in my life, when my grandmother was ill and lived with us in our home and I shared a room with her, that time spent with my grandparents and with others, other elderly people in my community and in my neighborhood--they were priceless for both of us. Not only was I able to give something of my energy and my experiences in the current time, but it was wonderful also for her, my grandmother, who lived with us, because she was able to share her experiences and values with me, and I was able to learn so many of life's lessons from her and from the others in my community. Today's world is so much different. Even though we no longer live within walking distance of our parents or grandparents, my husband Steve and I make a very conscious effort to ensure that our children spend quality time with their grandparents. It seems appropriate, then, during Older Americans Month that I rise this morning to draw attention to a piece of legislation that I and my good friend and colleague from Utah, Senator Hatch, who has been on the Senate floor earlier this morning, have introduced that seeks to protect millions of older Americans. It is the Elder Justice Act. I also want to note that Chairman Kohl and ranking member Gordon Smith of the Senate Special Committee on Aging have been champions of this legislation as well, and I certainly appreciate all they do in bringing about both support as well as knowledge of this piece of legislation. I have been a cosponsor of the Elder Justice Act since it was originally introduced in 2002, and I helped pass a version of this bill out of the Senate Finance Committee in 2004, in 2005, and again in 2006. Unfortunately, the Elder Justice Act has yet to become law despite the fact that our Nation continues to grow older and despite the fact that the tragedy of elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation continues. It is hard for any of us to imagine that our elderly loved ones would be victim to those types of actions, the abuse or neglect or exploitation that exists in this country. We have held hearings on elder abuse for almost 25 years. Yet not one single Federal employee works full time on this issue. We are beginning to make progress. I encourage all my colleagues to join me, not only in this month when we celebrate the wonderful heritage of older Americans, but to ensure that we move a piece of legislation that will protect them. The House of Representatives recently held its first hearing on this issue in 17 years--thanks to the hard work of Congressman Rahm Emmanuel and Peter King--and the Elder Justice Act is currently going through the committee markup in that body. In addition to adding cosponsors, we are looking for opportunities to pass this legislation this year in the Senate. Abuse of our senior citizens can be physical, it can be sexual, it can be psychological, or it can be financial. The perpetrator may be a stranger, it may be an acquaintance, it may be a paid caregiver, it might be a corporation and, sadly, even a spouse or another family member. We have an obligation to the older Americans of this country not to sit around for another 25 years but to come up with the solutions that already exist for so many other Americans. Elder abuse happens everywhere and at all levels of income and in all geographic areas, whether you live in an urban area or out on a county road in rural America. No matter how rich you are, and no matter where you live, no one is immune. When we say no one is immune, it means none of our loved ones are immune from this horrific act. Congress must make our seniors a priority and pass the Elder Justice Act as soon as possible. This bill represents a consensus agreement developed by the Elder Justice Coalition, a national coalition of 547 members, including 226 organizations and 321 individuals, dedicated to eliminating elder abuse, neglect, and exploitation in this great country of ours. This bill reminds us that Congress has already passed comprehensive bills to address child abuse and violence against women but has continued to ignore the fact that we have no Federal law enacted to date on elder abuse. We have made great strides. I know, as cochairman of the Senate Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, we have made great strides in how we can better protect our children from exploitation and from all the different fears and dangers that are out there. Why would we not want to do this for the wonderful elderly people of this country who have given all of us so very much? Every older American has the right to enjoy his or her golden years free of abuse and neglect. As Americans age--and I know and many of us know from personal experience--they want to maintain their independence and their dignity and their pride. It is very difficult when they become exploited or abused or neglected. It is hard for them to reach out and ask for help and care, particularly of their children. It is not something easy for them to do. It is why we have the responsibility in the Senate to do something about elder abuse. The Elder Justice Act will enhance our knowledge about abuse of our seniors in all of its terrible forms. It will elevate elder abuse to the national stage. We cannot solve this problem if we do not understand it, we do not know how it occurs, and we do not begin to use the tools we have already to protect the seniors of this country. Too many of our seniors suffer needlessly. Each year anywhere between 500,000 and 5 million seniors in our country are abused. They are abused, neglected, or exploited, and, sadly, most of those abuses go unreported. This historical problem will only worsen as 77 million baby boomers begin to age. The Elder Justice Act confronts elder abuse in the same way we combat child abuse and violence against women--through law enforcement, public health programs, and social services at all levels of government. We are not talking about reinventing the wheel, we are talking about using what we have learned in the abuse of children and in the abuse of women and applying those tools to one of our greatest blessings, the elderly of this country. The bill also establishes research projects to assist in the development of future legislation. The Elder Justice Act will take steps to make older Americans safer in their own homes, in nursing home facilities, in neighborhoods all across this country. It enhances the detection of elder abuse, and it helps seniors recover from abuse after it happens. It increases collaboration between Federal agencies and between Federal, State, local, and private entities, law enforcement, long-term care facilities, consumer advocates, and families to prevent and treat elder abuse. I urge my colleagues, all of them, to remember those individuals in your life, certainly in your communities, and others who have given so much to this country, whether it was somebody years ago who helped to build this great Nation through education as a teacher, perhaps, an educator; maybe it was building our economy in this country by building a great company or a great effort there; perhaps it was a soldier from years past who defended the rights of this country and our freedoms today. Look back and consider the special people in your life, such as an elderly neighbor or a grandparent. I know there is not a day that goes by in my life that I don't think about those people who have so tremendously affected my life, who have taught me values, and who have shared stories with me, who have helped me become who I am. Each one of us needs to stop and think of those individuals. Maybe it was a teacher in the first grade. Maybe it was a coach. Maybe it was a music instructor. Maybe it was a Sunday school teacher. Maybe it was a police officer. I think of all those different people who have made a difference in my life, and I want to ensure that as a nation we respect their safety and their ability to live in this country with dignity and security. I hope all my colleagues will consider whomever those special people were in their lives, who helped support their dreams, provided wisdom, perhaps, and advice throughout their development--there are millions out there--and each one of us needs to take the time to remember them. It is time for Congress to pass comprehensive legislation to address elder abuse and protect those in their twilight of life. I urge my colleagues to take a look in this month of May, when we look in respect and admiration to the older Americans of this country, and provide the kind of law that we have provided for children and for women to protect them from abuse and exploitation. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to add my support as well to the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. It has been a very long and arduous process, but I think those of us who have been extremely engaged in this process are proud. We are proud of the hard, bipartisan work that has gone into this bill, and we are proud of the product. Although many of us know that none of us could get everything we wanted in this bill, we worked hard in a bipartisan way and in a way that was respectful to the diversity of this country to come up with a product we could all rally around and be supportive of on behalf of this country and the hard-working farmers out there who support this country as well as those of us who enjoy their bounty, not to mention the many other good components of this bill we worked hard together on, again, in a bipartisan way to come up with a good result. However, the finish line being in sight, it is still not quite over yet. That is why I wish to first of all encourage my colleagues to send a strong message to President Bush to sign this bill that supports rural America and sets a long-term strategy for investing in those communities across this land that provide us with the unbelievable bounty this great Nation affords us. This is only my third farm bill, so I have not been engaged in this process quite as long as many of my colleagues who have already spoken. But I have to tell my colleagues, as Senator Conrad mentioned, I feel quite passionate about this bill because I feel quite passionate about the farm families in this country. I myself come from a seventh-generation Arkansas farm family, and I have watched, as I have grown up--not just in my own family but in families across our State--the hard-working communities that take such a sense of pride in being Americans but, more importantly, providing for this country and the world the safest, most abundant and affordable supply of food and fiber anybody could. Yes, I am sure my colleagues will be delighted when I sit down and quiet up because I have been extremely passionate about this bill because I believe in those people of my State. I believe in the passion and the pride they have in who they are as Arkansans and, more importantly, who they are as Americans. I am proud of the work we have done, and I am proud to have fought hard for their needs and their concerns, for the diversity they represent in the infinite number of business operations and farm operations that exist in this great country, enabling us as a nation to be able to say that we can provide the most efficient and effective production of food and fiber for the world, particularly at a time when, as my colleague from Iowa mentioned, in places across the globe people are fighting over food and the need for food. We have the hard- working farm families of this country to thank for the incredible effort of making sure we don't go through that, that we don't experience those things. I wish to first start by thanking the chairman of our Agriculture Committee, Chairman Harkin, and his hard-working staff. I wish to thank the chairman for his leadership throughout this process and, again, although none of us got everything we wanted in this bill, his willingness and the willingness of his staff to be consistently there for us and to listen to the concerns we have expressed. I appreciate all of the hard work and the many hours they have put into this. I wish to thank not just his staff but the staff of all of the other Members who have worked so diligently with me and my staff through this process. We do have many perspectives in this bill from many different regions of this country, but we do know at the end of the day how to be respectful of one another. I especially wish to thank the ranking member, Senator Chambliss, and without a doubt his incredible staff, Martha Scott Poindexter and Vernie Hubert, who have been tremendous and have put incredibly hard work into this bill. They have been not only a great asset in the putting together of this bill, but they have been good friends, and I am enormously grateful. I wish to thank Chairman Baucus for his work and the excellent work of his staff on this very important tax title, along with his ranking member Senator Grassley and his staff. Their efforts to secure funding for this bill have been tremendous. I also wish to say a special thanks to Senator Conrad and his staff. They have sought to find the common ground and to bring people to the table. They have been thoughtful. They have been understanding. They have been tireless at making sure there was a reasonableness about our discussions and that the facts and the figures were clear as we debated all of these issues. So many of the other members of the committee as well as Members of the body who have engaged in all of these discussions have done a tremendous job in bringing this all together. Of course, on the House side, Chairman Peterson and Ranking Member Goodlatte as well as Chairman Rangel have done an incredible job in working with us, and we appreciate so much their hard work. I would also like to add my special thanks to my own staff, Ted Serafini and Anna Taylor, who have been an incredible support for me and made a tremendous effort in making sure our voice from Arkansas and the voices of the people we represent were so passionately heard with such great expertise, as well as my former staffer Robert Holifield, who worked very hard on this bill before he left our staff. Those of us on the conference committee have worked hard to come up with this bill, and we wanted it to be practical. We wanted it to be realistic and exhibit the reforms that so many people have been asking for. A lot of time and energy was put into the final bill, and it is a good compromise. While it doesn't contain everything, as I said, that I want to see or anybody else on the committee wanted to see, it does ensure that we maintain the blessings we have here in this great country of American agriculture. I often say to people at home that what we should be doing up here is not looking for legislation to be a work of art but to be a work in progress. As many of us who have worked on many farm bills know, it is a work in progress and continues to be--not just in what we do with this farm bill, but, as the Senator from Iowa mentioned, we look for making sure that the actions we have taken do not have unintended consequences and that we pay close attention to ensure that the things we have done do not disproportionately harm our great efforts of production agriculture. From day one, there was a lot of give-and-take. In the end, I think Members and their staffs have produced a good compromise and a compromise that respects and appreciates the diversity of our country and certainly the great wealth and bounty of what our Nation has. There are so many good things in this bill to be proud of, and I am. Several of my colleagues have already touched on the increased investment in nutrition, renewable energy, conservation, and rural development. All of these will benefit our country greatly. As one of the cochairs and cofounders of the Senate Hunger Caucus, I am very proud that nutrition was a priority in this bill. This bill commits $10.36 billion--nearly 73 percent of the bill--for nutrition to continue the fight against hunger. Hunger is a disease we can cure. We know how to cure it. We simply have to set it as a priority, and this bill does. It represents the largest amount of funding for nutrition programs in our Nation's history. At a time when 20 million Americans are living in poverty, it should represent certainly no less. One billion of that is allocated for the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program which provides free fresh fruits and vegetables to low-income children in our schools nationwide. It also expands the Senior Farmers Market Program by $50 million to help them purchase fresh fruits at places like farmers markets and roadside stands throughout the country. I am proud that the bill aims to reduce food insecurity among our children and our elderly, among our low income and those who are in need. This is a good part of our bill. This bill also provides farm families, ranchers, and small businesses throughout the greater part of rural America with the opportunities and the incentives to develop renewable energy sources and continue the drive toward greater energy efficiency in this country. As we have seen with the huge rise in gas prices this year, reducing our dependence on foreign oil is an absolute necessity for our Nation's future security. I see the passion in my Arkansas farmers and entrepreneurs in rural Arkansas and across this great country for producing alternative and renewable energy sources. They stand ready. They stand ready to take advantage of the incentives and the call we have in this bill to lessen our dependence on foreign oil and empower our own selves, our own country with renewable fuels that will not only create jobs but provide a better environment for future generations. In this bill, we have the beginnings particularly of making sure we not only lessen our dependence on foreign oil but we do so in a way that is good for our environment. I am also grateful that an important provision in this bill that I supported will bring tax parity to the timber industry which is so important to my State. This change will help our timber farmers and millers remain competitive globally during tough economic times. Last year, the downturn in the forestry industry resulted in the loss of more than 3,000 jobs and nearly $14 million in State and local revenues in my State of Arkansas. Conservation is also a big part of this package. It does a tremendous amount. As a farmer's daughter, I saw no greater conservationist than my own father, as a farmer who took great pride in not only the land of our farm and the future generations who would get to use that land but also in the conservation that surrounded our farm and in our county, because not only was it important to his livelihood and for future generations of our family, for the expertise and his productivity on our farm, but it also was an enhancement and an unbelievable endowment to future generations for the wonderful pastime that so many Arkansans enjoy. Whether it is fishing in our rivers and streams, whether it is hunting in our forests, all of the many things we see in our State that my children and other Arkansans enjoy, it is a true blessing to see that conservation, and certainly it is important to our agriculture producers and others. The chairman, Chairman Harkin, has been a tireless advocate for conservation programs, and we appreciate that. I am pleased that once again he has produced a bill that is progressive in this area. It includes a $4 billion increase in conservation programs, including a $1.3 billion investment in the Wetlands Reserve Program, which is very popular and productive in my State. We have the largest timber wetlands in North America, with the White River Waterfowl Refuge, along with the incredible lands--mostly nonproductive farmlands--that have been put into the wetlands reserve and the wetlands program and have contributed greatly to the environment. We have not only spotted the ivory-billed woodpecker, but we have tremendous migratory birds--not only the waterfowl but some of the largest areas for neotropical migratory birds, songbirds. It is a wonderful asset for this country and for future generations. It ensures we are the best stewards of the land that we possibly can be and, above all, it helps us to leave our children with the environment they deserve. It also includes a tax deduction to reduce the costs of implementing recovery plans under the Endangered Species Act. I see Senator Crapo, whom I have worked a lot with on this issue. The current Endangered Species Act plays a crucial role in protecting threatened endangered species and habitats and in promoting species recovery. However, on private lands, which are relied upon by the majority of threatened species for their survival and recovery, the current law doesn't provide all the necessary tools we need. This provision in the farm bill ensures that our private landowners are given the incentives they need to protect our endangered and threatened species and engage with State governments and the Federal Government to protect them by making sure they can work on their land and give the needed protections that are needed in order to protect the habitats so we never even see these species going on the endangered species list to begin with. This bill also provides an additional $150 million to promote economic growth, improve infrastructure, and create jobs in rural America through the rural development title. This investment will help improve access to broadband in rural America, as well as provide loans for rural hospitals, so they can provide the best care for patients living in those rural areas. Oftentimes, I think many of us who grow up in rural America, and who go home regularly to rural America, wonder if inside the beltway there are enough people still here who understand the importance of infrastructure needs and investing in rural America--whether it is broadband and making sure folks in rural America have an on-ramp to the information highway that exists or whether it is just that they have clean drinking water in those communities. It is something we can never forget because those precious rural areas of this country will remain out there and those people will remain out there and we have to stand up for them. The bill also provides serious reform while maintaining the safety net for our family farmers so they can compete in the global marketplace. Throughout this process, we have heard time and time again that there must be reform. So many of us started early in this process to see where we could bring about the kind of reforms that were being demanded. We have provided in this bill the most significant reform in our Nation's history in this farm bill. The bill lowers the overall cap on program payments from $360,000 to $105,000. We have seen the need to address the loopholes that allow producers to avoid the caps. So we have eliminated those loopholes most frequently--the three-entity rule and generic certificates. I also heard of the need for transparency, so the committee bill added direct attribution, which will track payments directly to a living, breathing individual producer, a farmer out there who is putting their hard-earned time, energy, blood, sweat, and tears into producing these agricultural products. I advocated for reform and transparency from the very beginning because I knew it was something people wanted to see. But I also think we must be careful that we understand what the possible consequences of these reforms might be. The 2002 farm bill established a solid safety net program when yields and prices were low. While we have maintained the integrity of that program, the $2.5 million means testing on income limits established in that bill in 2002 were never fully enforced by this administration. The Senator from Iowa brought up that point. It is hard to know where to go from those caps in the 2002 bill and today's bill to increase that transparency and increase those reforms, if we don't even know what the first limit actually did. That is why it does create some concern in me to hear that the administration is saying this bill doesn't go far enough in regard to these reforms. How do we know if it doesn't go far enough if we have never enforced what has been on the books to begin with? Prior to the 2002 farm bill, no means test existed for farm programs. Now, I have to say I have concerns that all of a sudden we are going to begin means testing farmers and producers across this country, but we shy away and shiver in this body when means testing is talked about for anything else. We knew it was important to eliminate loopholes that nonfarmers used to receive program payments, and during the 2002 farm debate, we instituted the $2.5 million test. In the bill that passed the Senate in December, we lowered the means- testing cap to $750,000, which respected our regional differences and avoided the unintended consequences that might arise in this compromise. Let's not forget that we also significantly reformed individual program pay limits on top of that, which should sharply reduce benefits to producers who remain eligible, as long as they are below that means- testing level we have imposed. I thought the Senate bill did a good job on that compromise and have remained hopeful that those limits, and certainly something close to those limits, is where we can be. During conference, we agreed to add an additional component that factors in nonfarm income. However, it is not enough for this administration, and they continue to threaten a veto of this incredibly hard-fought, bipartisan compromise. As I mentioned, I do have some concerns about means testing because we are means testing the most efficient and effective producers of agricultural products in the world, at a time when we are experiencing a world food crisis, and we want to ensure that not only will we maintain the kind of production that we have consistently but also that we do it by setting an example in respect to clean water and clean air and, certainly, in respect to all the other unbelievable demands and restrictions that are placed on our farmers with respect to the environment. We don't know what those consequences might be, and I hope we will keep in mind--as the Senator from Iowa mentioned--that as we move forward in looking at this bill, thinking about how those effects may have unbelievably unintended consequences. Again, there have been an awful lot of fights for the means testing on our agricultural producers, while there are so many other benefits in this country that are not means tested. I noticed my colleagues earlier mentioning the fact that farm income is up. But I also noticed that nobody hardly mentioned the fact that reflects the reality of what farmers in this country are going through in terms of the environment of skyrocketing production costs and restrictive trade laws, which in our region of the country are much more restrictive. Trade laws are much more restrictive to the commodities we grow, and certainly production costs that are much higher for capital-intensive crops. I hope the unintended consequences of establishing payment limits and means testing would not shift the landlord-tenant relations to cash rent and place producers, who are working hard each day to shoulder that risk solely of restrictive trade rules, bad weather, and unbelievably skyrocketing input costs--I hope that is not one of the unintended consequences that we see. In the end, this bill is about ensuring that our family farmers can continue to produce the world's safest, most abundant supply of food and fiber. Our farmers also produce their commodities the most efficiently and effectively in the world, and they do it by keeping the cost of our food and fiber per capita the lowest of any developed country, as Senator Conrad mentioned. Moreover, they do it with respect to our environment, so our children and future generations can enjoy this unbelievable country of bounty and beauty. They do it by following the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and so many other restrictions that we place on them in order to ensure they are setting the example and doing the best job possible regarding our environment. They are excellent conservationists and stewards of the land because they understand that if they care for the land, it will take care of them. It is something we should never lose sight of. I am proud of the work we have done on this bill, and I encourage my colleagues to support the final version. No bill is ever perfect. This one gives our family farmers the certainty they need to continue to compete effectively in the global marketplace. It focuses on the unbelievable needs throughout this country in nutrition, energy, conservation, and rural development. Again, I am proud to have worked in a bipartisan way with so many colleagues on the Senate Ag Committee, as well as others in this body and in the other body across the Capitol dome. My last plea before I yield the floor is to my colleagues. It is that we will never allow ourselves or the people of this country to take for granted what we have been blessed with in this country. This is a great country, and we have a lot of incredibly hard-working people. Many of them are spread out over the rural areas. I hope we will never allow the American people to take for granted what this bounty means to them and, more importantly, that we in this body will never take for granted the hard work that goes on beyond this beltway to make us the richest country in the whole world. I hope we can continue in that same bipartisan fashion, recognizing and respecting the incredible diversity across this country that has blessed us for so many years. I encourage my colleagues to support the great bipartisan product we brought to the floor. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 4705, as Modified

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the work of an outstanding young woman who has served Arkansas and our Nation this spring as an intern in my office, Tina L. Fletcher of Plumerville, AK. Last month, Tina, a senior at the University of Arkansas, was named the 2008 recipient of the Henry Woods Student Leadership Award, which recognizes one outstanding student leader and his or her contributions to the University of Arkansas campus community. She is the ninth recipient of the Woods award and will receive a $750 scholarship. Friends and associates of Henry Woods created this award to honor his 25 years of service in the Washington, DC, area. While in Washington, Woods worked for U.S. Representative Bill Alexander and U.S. Senators David Pryor and Dale Bumpers. I was also fortunate enough to have Henry work in my Washington office for a short time and lend his years of experience to my staff. Prior to his professional service with in Congress, Henry was active in numerous campus organizations and served for 2 years as editor of the Razorback yearbook while attending the University of Arkansas. In addition to winning the Henry Woods award, Tina is a Silas H. Hunt distinguished scholar and member of the Political Science Honor Society, Pi Sigma Alpha. She is a graduating senior in the J. William Fulbright College of Arts and Sciences completing a combined major in political science and African-American studies. In addition to serving as the former secretary of Pi Sigma Alpha, Tina also served as the 2007 president of the Kappa Iota Chapter of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc., the 2007 vice-president of the Black Students Association, and is the founder and first President of S.A.S.S.: Students Advocating Stronger Sisterhood. Tina is an active member of the Connections Mentoring Program, Order of Omega, and Tri- Council. In November 2007, Tina was selected as one of 10 students to serve as a Congressional Black Caucus/Wal-Mart Emerging Leaders intern. She was among the first group of students to receive the Silas H. Hunt distinguished scholarship. Tina has also received many additional honors and awards since arriving at the University of Arkansas as a freshman in 2004 including being named the NAACP's University of Arkansas Legend. Recently admitted into Harvard University, Tina will pursue her masters of education degree in political philosophy/political science and history during the upcoming school year. After receiving her master's degree, Tina plans to teach high school within the Delta region's urban and impoverished school districts. Mr. President, it goes without saying that the future looks bright for Tina Fletcher. While we will certainly miss her, we wish her the best in all her future endeavors.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, do I need to ask unanimous consent for more time? I ask unanimous consent to extend the time for an additional 5 minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I thank the chairman for his comments, and I certainly want to express this is a time-appropriate solution to the problems that exist, and I hope we will give every consideration to it. I thank the Chair.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I apologize to my colleagues. I know I am taking up time now when folks are ready to leave and do other things and then come back, but I do feel strongly about this amendment and I just wanted to voice my concerns. This is an amendment that Senator Smith and I are offering, along with Senator Snowe and many others--Senators Kerry, Stabenow, Levin, Schumer, Kennedy. It is a good amendment, and it will encourage our employers to provide group legal service benefits with an emphasis on real estate counseling for their employees. This is something which group legal service plans--which have been around since the 1970s--were intended to do and exactly what the Center for Responsible Lending said should be one of our top priorities in this effort in dealing with the housing crisis. We should be encouraging and incentivizing preventive legal services. What the center had cited increasing are those incentives for mortgage counseling legal services. It is a key policy recommendation for dealing with what we find ourselves in now--the crisis situation we are in. Borrowers need affordable and available legal review of mortgages, mortgage-related documents, and financing and loan modifications. These are complex transactions and sometimes, oftentimes, folks in States such as Arkansas and Montana have nowhere else to go. Legal services provide them that kind of proactive involvement in making sure they are making the right decisions. We should be giving the average American homeowner access to that legal advice so he or she can feel confident in the mortgages they are getting into, so that when, if, unfortunately, God forbid, things do go wrong, they can receive advice about their rights and responsibilities and what they are dealing with in foreclosure, what options are available to them in dealing with these crises. This is a good addition to this bill. It is positive. It is all of what we have been talking about that we need. It is consumer friendly. It is something we have used in this country. Unfortunately, section 120 of the Internal Revenue Code has lapsed. That section of the code was intended to provide the tax incentives so that our employers could set up and offer group legal service plans. Since it has lapsed, virtually no new group legal benefit plans have been created, and many employers are dropping those that do exist. So I would encourage us all to look at what we are trying to accomplish in this bill; not to just throw things overboard because somebody else didn't get what they wanted, but that we look at what we are trying to do for the American people. We should encourage these plans that provide our working Americans with access to legal advice. They review those mortgage documents, they assist those individuals in working with the lender to modify those loans, creating forbearance agreements and assistance in the restructuring of loans, and it provides that much needed counseling in foreclosure litigation when it is needed. I thank Chairman Dodd and the ranking member, Senator Shelby, for their patience because I know they see all of us in these frantic modes of wanting to improve the bill and wanting to provide something that we know has been beneficial to the people we represent, and we know it can be beneficial again, and this is the appropriate place to put it. So I just encourage that working through legal services, particularly in rural States such as mine, it is one of those places where people have to go. They do have the confidence of going to their neighbor, their country lawyer, and being able to get those services. They may not have a big, huge housing agency they can go to for the kinds of counsel they need, and these are good services that have proven themselves in years passed. Yet we find that employers cannot afford to provide them because we have lost that section in the Internal Revenue Code. So I do thank all my colleagues who have cosponsored this amendment. We have worked on this for quite some time. I say a big thanks also to the groups that have endorsed our amendment--the American Bar Association, the American Prepaid Legal Services Institute, the International Union, UAW, AFSCME, and the laborers. So many different groups realize hard-working Americans who get caught in these circumstances need this kind of assistance. I thank the Chair for his indulgence, and certainly my colleagues, the chairman, and the ranking member for trying to work with us. And I guess, Mr. President, and Mr. Chairman, my only option is to ask for a unanimous consent; is that correct? Is there something we can work through? Can I ask unanimous consent for regular order with respect to my amendment?

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to take every consideration as they move forward in putting together this bill; that if there is any possible way we can work through making sure these individuals who really have nowhere else to go will be able to have the types of services they are used to having in years passed, and providing the incentives the employers need in order to be able to provide those services because they are clearly not providing them now. It is not something small businesses can do.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I object.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I also want to say a very big thanks to all of the groups that have endorsed this amendment: the American Bar Association, the American Prepaid Legal Services Institute, the International Union, the UAW, the AFSCME, and the Laborers. All of these groups have recognized how important it is to be able to provide these legal services to hard-working American families. Particularly at a time when they may be affected in their home ownership or in the difficulties and challenges they face in the problems that exist in the mortgage industry right now, this is a critical component of the assistance we can provide them. To have let it lapse and to see that it virtually no longer exists is something we can correct. I hope we will with this amendment. So, Mr. President, I thank you for the time, and I also say a special thanks to my chairman, Chairman Baucus, and Ranking Member Grassley, who have worked with us on this issue, along with Chairman Dodd and Ranking Member Shelby, who have done such a tremendous job in organizing and putting together, in an expeditious way, the effort we have to address these issues that working families are facing. So I thank them and their staff for working with us, and we look forward to being able to move our amendment. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of such an important amendment, a vehicle as well as a component that we already know works because we have had it in this country for quite some time in providing legal services to working American families. We want to continue to see that happen. Amendment No. 4433 to Amendment No. 4387 Mr. President, before I yield the floor, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment and call up an amendment on behalf of Senator Snowe.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, the amendment Senator Snowe is offering with several other colleagues is an amendment that focuses on what we passed and maybe what we did not quite notice. The Finance Committee passed an important provision that would provide an additional $10 billion in mortgage revenue bonds for first-time home buyers and at- risk borrowers. This is something we have been trying to do, and we have had much leadership in the Senate on this issue. Under present law, however, mortgage revenue bonds are allocated with a small State set-aside. The $10 billion in the current package is allocated only based on State populations. As we know, the economic downturn and housing collapse do not necessarily correspond to the population of States. Those of us who come from smaller States recognize that and also recognize the benefits that have been provided in the underlying law that exists in that small State set-aside. The Snowe amendment adds enough additional bonds so large States will still receive their due under the allocation of the $10 billion by population, but small and rural States also receive their allocation based on a small State set-aside under the current law. I think it is an important point we have noticed in terms of what the underlying law does and has done effectively and making sure we incorporate that into what we do moving forward in the legislation we have. This amendment only costs about $134 million, but it means an awful lot for small and rural States in order to make sure they have equity in being able to access the resources their homeowners need and their States can provide through those revenue bonds. So I urge my colleagues to support this fair and reasonable amendment which will be a good addition to the mortgage revenue bond provision in the underlying bill. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, the amendment I am offering today is a very important amendment because we are all here because we are concerned about the crisis that exists in the mortgage industry and certainly in home ownership, but, more importantly, we want to prevent it from happening again. We want to make sure we are providing information to home buyers and others, counseling them in a way that really makes a difference. The amendment I am offering today will encourage our employers to provide group legal services benefits with an emphasis on real estate counseling for their employees. Group legal services plans have been around since the 1970s and are intended to do exactly what the Center for Responsible Lending says should be one of our very top priorities in this effort to deal with the housing crisis. We should be encouraging and incentivizing preventative legal services. I want to make sure my colleagues understand how important this benefit is for our Nation's employees, particularly employees in rural areas and low-income areas where access to lawyers might be scarce. We should be giving the average American homeowner access to legal advice so that she or he can feel confident in the mortgages they are getting into and so that when, God forbid, things do go wrong, they can receive advice about what their rights and responsibilities are in dealing with foreclosures and what options are available to them in dealing with this crisis. Section 120 of the Internal Revenue Code has lapsed. That section of the code was intended to provide a tax incentive so that our employers would offer group legal services plans to their employees. Since it has lapsed, virtually no new group legal benefit plans have been created and many employers are dropping those that do exist. We should be encouraging these plans because they provide our working Americans with access to the legal advice they need, that they deserve, and that they often cannot access. Those legal services would provide a review of mortgage documents, would work with lenders to modify the loans and would create forbearance agreements, would assist in the restructuring of loans, and would provide counsel in foreclosure litigation when that is needed. These are all complex transactions that require significant legal counsel, and my amendment will help ensure that America's homeowners, particularly those who are hard-working American families, and those home buyers, can get that much needed advice. We have provided this advice and certainly these services, as I mentioned earlier, since the 1970s through this benefit where employers can actually pool their resources in providing this type of advice and service to their employees. I wish to thank all of my colleagues who have cosponsored this important amendment. Many of us have worked on a separate bill, and we think this is absolutely an appropriate and a proper place to put this incentive. But Senator Smith, Senator Kerry, Senator Stabenow, Senator Levin, Senator Schumer, and Senator Kennedy are all cosponsors of our amendment. Mr. President, I also ask unanimous consent now to add Senator Snowe as a cosponsor, who is also a cosponsor of the bill.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside so that I might call up my amendment.