Blanche Lincoln

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I will continue visiting for a moment, and then I will let the Senator take time on his part. I am directing it solely to those businesses whose only purpose is to provide health insurance for the people of this country. I refer as an example to an article that came out yesterday. It references basically one of our large national insurance companies working hard, at least I hope they are, to do what is right. I see that they are going to be dumping 600,000-plus customers because they don't think their profits are big enough. Yet I look at the record, and I believe their CEO actually, in 2008, made over $24 million. If they can pay their top executive $24 million last year but they are going to complain that their profits are not big enough, that they have to dump patients, I would ask my colleagues, where do we go to correct this imbalance, if it is not to a very plausible amendment? My amendment does not restrict what industries, corporations can provide or give their executives in pay. It says we are not going to subsidize that with tax dollars. The very American taxpayers they are dumping are the ones who are subsidizing those incredible executive pay amounts. I have to say to my friends over there, those over there who are defending the status quo on behalf of the health insurance companies and their executives who are receiving these multimillion dollar compensation packages, it took nine of them at one time, so it is a tough lift to be able to defend these executive compensations for insurance company executives; otherwise, nine of them wouldn't have been down here trying to shift the conversation to something else. The American people do understand that is out of balance. Here we are with an opportunity to provide these insurance companies even more customers. We just simply want to be reassured that we are not, through taxpayers' dollars, subsidizing these enormous executive compensation amounts and, more importantly, that the savings that come from that are going to go into the Medicare trust fund to shore it up. I appreciate everyone's debate and their efforts to come to the floor today and talk about a critical issue. I remind my colleagues, current law allows all businesses to deduct up to $1 million annually per executive as a business expense. That is a million dollar tax break per executive per company that is subsidized by the taxpayers. There are multiple more ways they can obviously provide greater compensation, and there are lots of loopholes in there that allow them to get tax subsidies for more compensation for their executives. My amendment would limit this amount to $400,000, the very amount the highest public official in this land gets paid, the President, a $400,000 salary for those health insurance companies that will profit as a result of the health insurance reform. Our objective is to get more people insured. Working diligently through all of these technicalities, trying to get more people insured, we are creating a new marketplace for them with more consumers, a tremendous amount. This is only in regard to health insurance companies. It doesn't dictate what a business can pay an employee. It does limit the taxpayer subsidies for compensation. This is a fair policy. It is aimed at encouraging health insurance companies to put premium dollars toward lower rates and more affordable coverage, not into their pocketbooks. They are complaining about profits. Yet they are still paying these executives a tremendous amount of money. To be sure, there is evidence these companies need the encouragement to do the right thing for consumers. Where health insurers spent more than 90 cents per every dollar on patient care in the early 1990s, that number has decreased to just over 80 cents per dollar. For every dollar they spend, only 80 cents of it goes back into their efforts to provide coverage for consumers. That is in 2007. Those are the numbers we have. According to testimony delivered to the Senate Commerce Committee earlier this year, this trend has translated into a difference of several billion dollars in favor of insurance company shareholders and executives at the expense of health care providers and their patients. It is imperative that we do what we can to reverse that trend, particularly now when millions more Americans will be purchasing their health insurance coverage as a result of this health reform package. Taxpayers are footing the bill for this subsidy, and we must take steps to deter the health insurance companies from further enhancing their profit margins at the expense of the American people. We had a lot of Senators who came to the floor this morning on the Republican side to defend the status quo on behalf of the health insurance companies and their executives who are receiving these multimillion dollar compensation packages. Maybe they don't understand that under current law, the American people are already footing the bill for this tax windfall for health insurance executive pay. As we move forward, it is going to be a greater benefit to those executives and the ability for these insurance companies to be able to do that. We want to keep those insurance companies in business. We want to make sure they are there as providers. It is just a disconnect when they say they have to cut 600,000 of their insured under the current system because their profits aren't high enough. Yet they are paying their top executive a $24 billion compensation package that is subsidized by the taxpayers. I hope we will work together to figure out what is the right place to be here, if what we want to do is to make sure we are reforming health care, that we are asking everybody to come to the table and make an effort in putting ourselves back on track. Ultimately, we want that quality of life that a new, reformed health insurance and health care delivery system can provide. We also want to make sure we strengthen our economy. Making sure we make good use of every medical dollar, that we are getting the biggest bang for that buck is a critical part of putting our economy back on track. The assumption on the other side has basically been based on the current and broken marketplace where insurance companies really do bully their customers and monopolize choices. I don't know about their phones, but I hear a lot on my phones and from my constituents that they can't get insurance. They have a neighbor--a hard-working woman who is a single mom--who cannot get insurance because of a preexisting condition. I have others who have had insurance, and then when they did become ill, they got dropped. So our hope is we look at this in the context not of the broken marketplace that exists today but of what we are trying to create, and that is, a more robust marketplace, and one that makes sense both for insurance companies and for consumers as well. With insurance market reforms we plan to implement, along with more consumer choices through the exchange, these insurance companies are going to have to work to keep up with the business they have and to be able to be there for future customers. That is a healthy marketplace. I do not think I will get any disagreement from my colleagues on the other side that competition and choice is the way to go in the marketplace. That is who we are as Americans. It is to let those who have that entrepreneurial spirit--who want to get in the marketplace and provide a product at a reasonable cost--to be an active part of the marketplace. That is what we are trying to encourage in this legislation. So the amendment I am offering today would set the deduction cap at the same level as the highest paid government official, and that is the President. It is estimated to save approximately $650 million over 10 years, and will place these savings in the Medicare trust fund to further strengthen the solvency of that fund and protect our seniors. We want desperately to make sure we protect our seniors. We know that in many instances there are Medicare Programs out there, unfortunately, that are oversubsidized, which means those who are in regular Medicare Programs are having to pay for the outrageous subsidies in these other Medicare Programs. We want to make sure we bring them to balance and create a better system for everybody out there. That means bringing down long-term costs. It means making sure we are protecting Medicare for all seniors. It means we do it in a deficit-neutral way, which we have done in this bill and the other bills we worked on in the Finance Committee. It means we work to put our best foot forward and bringing about partnerships between States and the Federal Government, as well as with providers who understand this delivery system is broken as well. So in closing, the choice on this vote is very simple: either you support these revenues being placed in the Medicare trust fund or you support having the IRS write a check and sending it to health insurance companies to subsidize the multimillion-dollar salaries they are paying in their taxes. I urge my colleagues to support this effort on behalf of the American taxpayer and on behalf of our seniors, and to vote in favor of this amendment that I feel has been structured in a very fair way. Mr. President, I yield to the Senator from Montana.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 2905.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mrs. LINCOLN. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, with a mother who is covered by Medicare, I remain committed to protecting seniors' access to Medicare, just as I have throughout my public service, which is exactly why I am opposed to the McCain motion to commit. Mr. McCain's purpose is not to protect Medicare but to frighten our Nation's seniors so that they too will oppose health care reform. I have noted that he has taken his scare tactics to a new level by recording his voice for an automated phone call into my State claiming to seniors that these Medicare savings are going to cut their benefits. He urges them to call me. I believe the seniors in my State know me better than that. They know that I have worked my entire career in this body to protect Medicare. I have cosponsored the Bennet amendment as an extra safeguard to ensure our seniors that this bill does not cut the guaranteed Medicare benefits that they receive today and that any savings generated from making the Medicare Program more efficient will go back into improvements to the program. If we do nothing, the Medicare Program will be broke in just 8 years. This bill restores the program's solvency beyond 2022. It will reduce premiums and copays for seniors; ensure seniors can keep their own doctors; cut the billions of dollars of waste, fraud, and abuse that occur annually; provide new prevention and wellness benefits for seniors; lower their prescription drug costs; and help them to stay in their own homes rather than going to nursing homes if that is what they wish to do. So what about the $500 billion in Medicare cuts Republicans say seniors should be worried about? Well, what they are not saying is that part of the reason Medicare is insolvent is the fact that private insurers under the Medicare Advantage Program are overpaid by 14 percent on average. A typical couple pays $90 more per year in Part B premiums to pay for Medicare Advantage overpayments, even if they are not enrolled in these plans. This bill curbs those overpayments, saving over $118 billion, by for the first time requiring competitive bidding of Medicare Advantage plans against one another. Furthermore, Medicare and Medicaid subsidies to hospitals that help them cover the cost of the uninsured will be reduced since hospitals will have less need for them once millions more Americans have health insurance. That is another $43 billion. Provision after provision is specifically designed to ensure greater value in Medicare, all while the Republicans are using fear tactics to score political points. I have heard from many seniors in Arkansas, recently, and over the years, about their satisfaction with Medicare. It is not a perfect program, and as a Senator it is my job to ensure that Congress continue to improve upon the program as needed so that it can continue to meet the needs of our Nation's seniors. Rightly so, seniors in my State are concerned about the misinformation spreading that we will cut their benefits and allow bureaucrats to ration their care. Organizations such as AARP, the Alliance for Retired Americans, and the National Committee to Preserve Social Security and Medicare have stood up to say enough with the misinformation campaign. Today I add my voice to that chorus.

Mrs. LINCOLN

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

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I have asked for this time today not only to address my colleagues in this body but to speak directly to my constituents at home in Arkansas. After many months of debate on health care, we are nearing yet another important step in a very deliberative process. Today we are voting on whether to continue to discuss how to improve health care in America or to stop the debate. I personally have carried the mantle to improve health care for Arkansas throughout my public service, like many of my colleagues and so many others as well who have worked hard on this issue. Over the last several decades the advance of medical technology and our Nation's changing demographics have placed new demands on our health care system that it is not designed to meet. Our vote later this evening is not the first step toward making the necessary adjustments in health care, nor will it be the last, without a doubt. The Finance Committee on which I serve and which is led so ably by my good friend from Montana, Chairman Baucus, has produced what I still describe as the most responsible approach to health insurance reform. We deliberated for more than 22 months, incorporating recommendations from experts all across our great Nation and proved, through our bill, that America can achieve unprecedented health insurance reforms that expand coverage, reduce cost, and provide stability for those with existing coverage. We accomplished these goals without posing long-term risk for taxpayers. It was not a perfect bill. We never see perfect bills around here, quite frankly, but I can honestly say I will fight hard so our final product will more closely resemble the commonsense, deficit- reducing plan we produced in the Senate Finance Committee. At times like this I think it is very important for each of us to remember the very reasons we began this debate. Small businesses and working families are reaching the breaking point financially because of the relentless rise in health care costs. Nationally, our economic recovery will only be slowed by the inflationary cost of health care. Taxpayers and the insured are already bearing the cost of medical treatment for the uninsured at the most expensive point of delivery, in our emergency rooms. Health care in America today is a model that waits until people get sick rather than focusing on the wellness, prevention, and good management of illness that keeps people out of the hospital and from having the most costly care needs. Our current health care system wastes money and is so inefficient that the United States spends more than twice as much per person while insuring a smaller portion of our population than the average spending in 29 other industrialized nations. There simply are not enough health insurance options available to most Americans today when in at least 17 States, including my home State of Arkansas, only one insurance company controls more than half the insurance market, and in at least 22 States still only two carriers control half or more of the market. Patients and doctors are routinely making treatment decisions with little or no objective information about which treatments are more effective. American capitalism is based on choice and competition because when these elements are present, consumers can most always find the best value for their money. That is not true in health care. So by creating health insurance exchanges through which small businesses and individuals can choose from a menu of private plans, we can enhance cost transparency, create head-to-head competition, and allow market forces to reduce prices. These are facts. These are facts, and whether we are Republicans or Democrats or independent, I believe we can agree on most all of them. I know the great majority of Arkansans believe these facts and want to see us accomplish these reasonable goals. For months now, groups from outside my State have assigned various motives to my deliberations on health care and tried to define the meaning of my vote. According to the last tally, there has been more than $3.3 million worth of media ads that have been purchased in my home State of Arkansas by groups from outside of our State--certainly none by me--and most with my name in the ad. Still, I have continued to approach this issue as I always do. These outside groups seem to think this is all about my reelection. I simply don't think they know me very well. I am focused on my opportunity to influence the final version of health care legislation in a way that most helps my State. That is why the people of Arkansas sent me here. They sent me here because they know I am going to work hard to do the best job possible and to do the right thing; to stand my ground on my principles. I have avoided the extremist claims from the left and from the right and tried to pull the commonsense solutions from among all the policy options so that we get health care reform that benefits Arkansans and all Americans. That is our job in this body, to represent our States in this unbelievably historic body, the Senate. The truth is, this issue is very complex. There is no easy fix, and it is imperative that we build on what is already working for health care in America and not turn away from the problems we face. We keep building until we can truly say one day that all American citizens will have access to quality and affordable health care. In order to improve upon and build upon what we already have, I do not support the creation of a so-called robust, government-administered public plan. I believe we should work to make sure we do not expose American taxpayers and the Treasury to long-term risks that could occur over future government bailouts of a public plan. Rather than create an entirely new government-run health plan to compete with private insurers, I support health insurance reform that focuses on changing the rules of our existing employer-based private health insurance system. I believe we should change the current rules that permit insurance companies to bully their customers and cherry-pick healthy patients, so we can force them to compete with each other. My first loyalties are with the people of Arkansas--not insurance companies, the health care industry, or my political party. In fact, I authored an amendment during consideration of legislation in the Senate Finance Committee which limits taxpayers' subsidies for health insurance companies that pay their top executives millions in salaries. Responsible health insurance reform should ensure that insurance executives are not receiving a personal windfall, and that companies they work for are not receiving excessive tax breaks while at the same time profiting from government requirements on consumers to buy insurance. The reason we are having this vote is because our Republican colleagues object to beginning debate and consideration of amendments on health care legislation. Although I do not agree with everything in this bill, I have concluded that I believe it is more important that we begin this debate to improve our Nation's health care system for all Americans rather than simply dropping the issue and walk away. That is not what people sent us here to do. Attempts by the National Republican Party and other conservative groups to portray this as a vote for or against this particular health care reform bill are untrue and deliberately misleading. The vote tonight will mark the beginning of consideration of this bill by the full Senate, not the end. Republicans have sought to revive their political party by opposing any real solution to our Nation's health care crisis. In fact, this vote for or against a procedure that allows us to begin debate on health care reform is nothing more and nothing less. Put simply, those who vote yes on this vote believe our Nation's health care system needs reforming, and they are ready to have an honest and open debate in the Senate about how to best achieve that reform. I am not afraid of that debate, nor am I afraid of coming before this body to say what I believe is the most important thing we can do to reform health care. I hope none of us are. Our country needs us too desperately now to be making good decisions and moving forward. I will not allow my decision on this vote to be dictated by pressure from my political opponents, nor the liberal interest groups from outside Arkansas that threaten me with their money and their political opposition; the multitudes of e-mails and ads we have received, unbelievable types of threats about what they are going to do and how they are going to behave. The fact is, I am serious about changing our health care system, as most Arkansans and most Americans are. I am not with those who seek to avoid the debate, nor with those who use political attacks to achieve their narrow goals. I will vote in support of cloture on the motion to proceed to this bill. But let me be perfectly clear. I am opposed to a new government- administered health care plan as a part of comprehensive health insurance reform, and I will not vote in favor of the proposal that has been introduced by Leader Reid as written. I, along with others, expect to have legitimate opportunities to influence the health care reform legislation that is voted on by the Senate later this year or early next year. I am also aware there will be additional procedural votes to move this process forward that will require 60 votes prior to conclusion of the floor debate. I have already alerted the leader and my colleagues that I am prepared to vote against moving to the next stage of consideration as long as a government-run public option is included. The public option, as a part of health insurance reform, has attracted far more attention than it deserves. While cost projections show that it may reduce costs somewhat, those projections don't take into account who pays if it fails to live up to expectations. If, in fact, premiums don't cover the cost of the public plan, it is taxpayers in this country who are faced with the burden of bailing it out. Our colleagues cannot ignore the growth in the Federal Government since the year 2000. I can assure you that the American people have not ignored it. According to the American Institute for Economic Research, government spending grew by 55 percent under President Bush. As he was leaving office, government launched a massive bailout of Wall Street. Then it was the domestic auto manufacturing industry that needed taxpayer funds to survive. And finally, in order to revive a dying economy, it took a government economic recovery package to save or create hundreds of thousands of jobs. We can argue about the necessity of these unprecedented steps, but we need not argue about the impression they have made on the American people. We should be stopping the growth of government, not expanding it more. Without the public option, we could still force private insurance plans that participate in the exchanges to provide standard benefit packages that are easy to compare and more fairly priced. We will be bringing millions of new customers to the exchanges so insurers should be motivated to lower prices and be competitive. I have pledged to dialog with Leader Reid regarding my concerns that remain about this bill. I look forward to continuing that dialog on improvements that I believe are necessary in order to meet the challenge. I will be asking my colleagues to consider these additional important changes I believe will improve our chances for real health insurance reform and that can also enjoy the support of most Arkansans and most Americans. Some of these include that the legislation remain deficit neutral, now and in the future, and curbs future cost, that it protects Medicare beneficiaries for seniors and extends solvency of the Medicare Program, that it improves accessibility and affordability of health insurance for employees and owners of small businesses and the self-employed through access to health insurance exchanges and tax credits, that it enhance choice and competition of health insurance plans for small businesses and individuals without the inclusion of a government-run public option, and that it build our Nation's health care workforce and ensure continued access to quality health care providers, especially in rural America. Today I know I will ultimately be held accountable by my constituents in Arkansas for all of my votes on health care, not the National Republican Senatorial Committee, not by other groups from outside my State that continue to engage in a conversation they have begun. I know my decision to support the upcoming cloture vote on the motion to proceed is not my last nor only chance to have an impact on health care reform. I am optimistic and encouraged about the step we are preparing to take in the Senate, to amend and craft a bill that will improve access to quality, affordable coverage options for the residents and businesses of my State who desperately need relief, a bill that improves the quality and efficiency with which we deliver health care, all without adding to our Nation's deficit and while lowering the cost of health care over the long term. I am committed to using every power of my office to achieve success on this issue by enacting meaningful reforms that will benefit the people of Arkansas and our Nation. I have spent the last several months in a passionate dialog with my constituents about health care reform. It was not only in townhall meetings where I heard from Arkansans. I had hundreds of conversations with many of them in groups and one-on-one conversations. They may not be in agreement about solutions, but I can assure my colleagues that each Arkansan I speak to expects us to roll up our sleeves and get this right. We can. Following the vote tonight, the bill that will be laid before us will not be the only possible solution. I know my decision to support cloture on the motion to proceed is not my last or only chance to have an impact on overall health care reform. My strongest hope is that each of us can lay political fortunes aside and make the tough, commonsense choices our constituents expect of us, whether you are a Democrat or Republican, and look at what we face and the challenges of our Nation. Make sure that as we are working toward an end result, that each of us is working as hard as we can to come up with a pragmatic solution that our constituents expect of us. We may not get this opportunity again in our lifetime. Today I am thinking about the Arkansas working family who can't pay their mortgage because of their sick child's medical bills. I am thinking of the Arkansas small business owner who told me that more than 20 percent of the cost of running his business now goes to health insurance for him and his workers. I am thinking about the 450,000 Arkansans who have no health insurance. I am not thinking about my reelection, the legacy of a President, or whether Democrats or Republicans are going to claim victory in winning the debate. I hope all of my colleagues join me in looking forward to working with the leader and all of our colleagues in the days and weeks ahead as we strive to solve a problem whose solution is long overdue. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I thank the chairman very much for that important clarification which will provide more certainty for our constituents who wish to purchase a manufactured home.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, today I am joined with my colleague, Senator Pryor, to recognize the Aerojet-General Corporation's Camden, AR, production facility. The Camden facility recently achieved the milestone shipment of its 5,000th MK 104 dual thrust rocket motor to Raytheon Missile Systems and the U.S. Navy. Aerojet is a world- recognized aerospace and defense leader principally serving the missile, space propulsion and armaments markets. This most significant milestone will be commemorated with a celebration ceremony held in Camden, AR, on Wednesday, October 28, 2009. The MK 104 dual thrust rocket motor provides the main propulsion for the standard missile 2 (SM-2), the U.S. Navy's primary surface-to-air air defense weapon. SM-2 is an integral part of the AEGIS weapon system aboard Ticonderoga-class cruisers and Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. The MK 104 dual thrust rocket motor also is the second stage propulsion for the Navy's newest defensive weapon, the standard missile 6 extended range active missile, SM-6, which will provide extended range anti-air warfare capability over both sea and land. The MK 104 also is utilized on the standard missile 3, SM-3, for aegis ballistic missile defense, BMD, from the sea missions. Aerojet has manufactured the MK 104 dual thrust rocket motor since 1987 at its Camden facility. The Standard Missile family of products, which also includes the MK 72 booster and MK 125 warhead, are noteworthy elements of Aerojet's industry-leading tactical propulsion portfolio produced in Camden. On the occasion of this milestone, Senator Pryor and I are proud to join together and lend our voices to congratulate and honor the nearly 600 Aerojet workers in Camden, AR, on a job well-done. You have served our State and our Nation admirably for more than 20 years.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, it is with Arkansas pride that today I honor one of the great sons of the Natural State, Parker Westbrook of Nashville, AR. On October 20, 2009, the Howard County Democratic Central Committee is sponsoring a dinner to honor his lifelong public service to Arkansas and his country. The day after Christmas in 1948, Westbrook set out with newly elected Congressman Boyd Tackett of Nashville for Washington, DC. Over the course of the next 26 years, Parker served his home State in our Nation's Capital for four members of the Arkansas congressional delegation, most notably as a special assistant to U.S. Senator J. William Fulbright. In 1975, he returned to Arkansas and served as a special assistant to Governor David Pryor. Although public service in government was a calling for much of Mr. Westbrook's life, his true passion was historic preservation. Westbrook was born in 1926 and was the third generation of the Westbrook-Parker families to live in the home of his maternal grandfather, which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The house and farmstead provided Parker with an early appreciation for historic preservation, and after leaving Washington in 1974, he set out on a course to help preserve Arkansas's cultural legacy. While working for Governor Pryor, Westbrook was elected to the Pioneer Washington Foundation, Inc. Board, a private nonprofit group committed to preserving Historic Washington. Washington, AR, is home to the oldest continuous post office in Arkansas, established on February 23, 1820 shortly after Arkansas became a territory. In 1979, Westbrook became a full-time volunteer and restoration adviser. In 1980, he became the executive director and was elected president of the foundation in 1990. He continued in that role until May of this year. In 1975, Westbrook was elected to the Historic Arkansas Museum Board of Directors and has served that organization continuously for 34 years. For many years, he was chairman and now holds the title of chairman emeritus. Westbrook was also appointed to the Arkansas State Review Board of the Historic Preservation Program in 1975. He was reappointed three times by Governor Bill Clinton and again by Governor Jim Guy Tucker and served as chairman for 4\1/2\ years. In addition, Westbrook has served on a number of other Arkansas historic entities including the Historic Preservation Alliance of Arkansas, Department of Arkansas Heritage Advisory Board, the President William J. Clinton Birthplace Foundation, Corinth Cemetery Association in Howard County, Friends of the Carousel, and Main Street Arkansas Advisory Board. He has been awarded the Arkansas Historical Association's Endowed History Award and was recognized in 1986 as Arkansas's Distinguished Citizen for his volunteer work. In 1995, President Clinton recognized Westbrook's longstanding service to historic preservation and appointed him to the President's Council for Historic Preservation where he served until 2003. In addition, Interior Secretary Bruce Babbit twice appointed Parker to the National Park System Advisory Board where he served as chairman of the Committee on National Historic Landmarks. As you can see, Parker Westbrook has a long and distinguished career serving his community, Arkansas, and our Nation. As the Howard County Democratic Central Committee recognizes Mr. Westbrook's service, I extend my sincere thanks and appreciation on behalf of all Arkansans for his devotion and commitment to public service throughout his life.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, it is with great pleasure that today I honor and recognize more than 25 years of service by Laura Rhea to our great State of Arkansas. Laura has served the Arkansas Rice Depot with steadfast leadership as President and CEO, ensuring the organization remained a faith-based ministry and developing innovative solutions to ending hunger. 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, three billion people, nearly half the world's population, live on merely $2 per day. In our Nation alone, almost 36.2 million Americans struggle day in and day out to find adequate nutritious food. More than 12.4 million children live in households that are food insecure. According to the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance, approximately 80 percent of supplemental nutrition assistance goes to households with children, many of them in working families, including military families. In Arkansas, Laura Rhea has been making a difference to reduce those figures. Under her leadership, Arkansas Rice Depot has grown from a small hunger program that distributed only rice, to a comprehensive hunger agency that distributes almost 7 million pounds of food and supplies in Arkansas each year. Laura grew up in North Little Rock. As a child she dreamed of becoming a missionary, but never dreamed that her mission field would be feeding hungry Arkansans. She is a certified volunteer manager and was recognized as a certified fund raising executive in 1995. Laura developed Food for Kids, a backpack program serving over 600 schools in Arkansas, sending home backpacks of food to over 25,000 students who face food insecurity. This program has been recognized by the Wall Street Journal, CNN, and has been replicated in over 40 States. Laura also developed Simple Pleasures, a gourmet gift shop that sells the Rice Depot line of soup and chili mixes. Proceeds from the gift shop are used to purchase food for Rice Depot's hunger relief efforts. Faith is an important part of Laura's life. In 2003, Laura suffered a heatstroke unloading a truck. Although she would continue to serve her life's mission from a wheelchair, she is not limited by her disability. She often quotes Psalms 37:11 to sum up her life, ``Delight yourself in the Lord and he will give you the desires of your heart.'' And last but certainly not least, Laura's family--her husband Don, daughter Allison, and four grandchildren are not only inspirations for her but also stalwart supporters. In fact, her daughter Allison shares her mother's mission and has served the Rice Depot for the past 12 years. In addition, Laura's granddaughter worked there over the summer, bringing three generations of her family to the effort to wipe out hunger. As you can see, Laura Rhea is a generous, compassionate, and dedicated individual. So as Rice Depot celebrates its 27th year of progress in finding sensible solutions to hunger in Arkansas, I salute The Rice Depot, its staff, the many volunteers, and especially Laura Rhea for their commitment to feeding those who hunger in Arkansas.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I thank the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. He is a good and trusted friend, and I appreciate all the hard work he and all of our colleagues on the Judiciary Committee have done and all the efforts they have put into this nomination and hearing process. I rise today to discuss what I think is one of the most consequential and long-lasting decisions in the duties a Senator can perform under the Constitution--the confirmation of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. It is a rare practice, so rare, in fact, that my consideration of the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor will mark only the third Supreme Court nomination I will have considered since I was first elected to the Senate in 1998. Even though the President today making this Supreme Court nomination has changed from the previous two nominees, as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee has mentioned, my standards and the standards of any of us for evaluating a nominee have not changed, nor should they have changed. I believe the people of Arkansas, our great State, and certainly our Nation deserve a Supreme Court Justice who is able to interpret and apply the rule of law fairly without political favor or bias. Ensuring that a nominee meets this standard is an obligation I have sworn to uphold as a Senator and, moreover, is the standard I expect for a lifetime appointment to our Nation's highest Court. In making my decision about Judge Sotomayor, I have taken a number of factors into account in evaluating her qualifications for serving on our Nation's highest Court. First among these are the opinions of my constituents in my home State of Arkansas, including those in the legal community. I have heard from a number of Arkansans who have expressed strong support for Judge Sonia Sotomayor, emphasizing her unique background, impressive resume, and solid judicial record. I also gained a lot of insight when we met at length in June. I was able to learn firsthand about who she is as a person, her temperament, and her unique life experiences--all of which I believe will help give her the ability to give every litigant who comes before the Supreme Court a fair shake. Arkansans can readily identify with her because Judge Sotomayor is no stranger to hard work. She was born in New York, and is the daughter of parents who came to the United States from Puerto Rico. After her father died, when she was young, Judge Sotomayor was raised by her mother, a nurse, a hard-working woman with tremendous values. She went on to become valedictorian of her high school, a member of Phi Beta Kappa at Princeton, and editor of the Law Review at Yale Law School. She has a breadth of professional experience, having served as an assistant district attorney and in private practice before beginning her 17 years serving as a Federal judge. She has a long history, and, again, one that starts with hard work and dedication to hard work. Arkansas is known for its ability to grow self-made Americans, and those are Americans who are no strangers to hard work. They understand what is involved in putting into who you are, and what you are trying to become, and what it is you want to achieve on behalf of others. Judge Sotomayor even told me in our personal meeting that she had entered her practice in real estate and business law because she had a great appreciation for business and the industries of this great country and she wanted to increase her knowledge of corporate law and broaden her experience. Moreover, I was impressed during our meeting with her eagerness to learn more about Arkansas and her attentiveness to what issues were most important to my constituents in my home State of Arkansas. The Senate Judiciary Committee hearings also provided me with an opportunity to learn about her record and judicial philosophy. I was able to monitor the hearings and watch her performance under intense scrutiny and pressure, and I was impressed with her knowledge, her composure, and her candor. Given the weight of this decision and the responsibilities I have to my constituents and my country, I have carefully examined the information available about Judge Sotomayor's nomination and am ready to announce I will support Judge Sonia Sotomayor for the U.S. Supreme Court. I have confidence, as she made clear through the committee hearings, that she understands a judge's obligation is first and foremost a ``fidelity to the law.'' As the chairman of the Judiciary Committee mentioned earlier, I was raised as an avid duck hunter and a gun owner. Gun ownership is a unique part of my State's heritage. I was pleased to hear Judge Sotomayor made a promise before the Senate Judiciary Committee to have an open mind on the issue of the second amendment and to understand what it means in terms of our rights as American citizens. In response to questioning, Judge Sotomayor expressed caution in declaring how she would rule on an unsettled constitutional issue likely to come before the Supreme Court before hearing the arguments and studying the opinions before her. I would have been concerned about a nominee who had already made up their mind about an unsettled legal issue that is likely to come before the Court. Her responsibility is to not come in there prejudging or predetermined in her decisions, but to come to the Court with an open mind. Based on her substantial record, serving on two courts, I am satisfied Judge Sotomayor will give future cases involving the second amendment and the rights of Americans to own firearms for recreation and self-protection a very fair hearing. I am also satisfied that her past rulings on these issues follow precedent and fall within the judicial mainstream. And I think Senator Sessions mentioned some of that in his comments in terms of being judicial mainstream. Overall, I appreciated Judge Sotomayor's approach to the judiciary hearings and her willingness to respond to questions from Senators on both sides of the aisle on many important topics. Based on her answers, I believe Judge Sotomayor cares more about following the law and maintaining the respect for the judiciary than she does about politics and ideology. As Judge Sotomayor stated: The task of a judge is not to make law. It is to apply the law. Finally, I have again searched my conscience and reflected on my principles as a Senator for the people of the great State of Arkansas, using my experiences a legislator both here and in the House of Representatives and also as a farmer's daughter, my experience as a wife, a mother, a neighbor, to evaluate a decision of such great weight. It has become apparent to me Judge Sotomayor does meet the test to serve in our Nation's highest Court. I base this conclusion on the respect and support she has earned from those in my home State, colleagues on both sides of the aisle who know her well, on the evidence and the record from her own comments and those of her colleagues, that she has had an abiding respect for the Court's decisions, and that she understands the value of continuity in our law. We also see the support from industry representatives, such as the Chamber of Commerce, as well as labor organizations. The Senate Judiciary Committee received a letter of support for Judge Sotomayor's nomination from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the world's largest business federation, representing businesses and organizations of every size, sector, and region. The U.S. Chamber wrote, in their letter: Pursuant to our long-standing endorsement policy, the Chamber evaluated Judge Sotomayor's record from the standpoint of legal scholarship, judicial temperament, and an understanding of business and economic issues. Based on the Chamber's evaluation of her judicial record, Judge Sotomayor is well-qualified to serve as an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Her extensive experience both as a commercial litigator and as a trial judge would provide the U.S. Supreme Court with a much needed perspective on the issues that business litigants face. Consistent with her Senate testimony, the Chamber expects Judge Sotomayor to engage in fair and evenhanded application of the laws affecting American businesses. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee from the Chamber of Commerce be printed in the Record.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I do believe Judge Sotomayor will make an excellent Supreme Court Justice and she will give all who come before the Court on which she is poised to serve a fair hearing and the attention and respect they deserve. So in this very important decision that each of us as Senators must make, I am proud to be able to support her nomination. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, with Arkansas pride and heartfelt gratitude, I would like to thank and honor the brave Arkansans who served as Women Airforce Service Pilots--or WASPS, as they were more commonly called--during World War II. During the war, women were recruited to fly noncombat missions under the Army Air Corps, so that male pilots could be deployed in combat. They served as test and instructor pilots, towed targets for air-to-air gunnery practice and ground-to-air anti-aircraft practice, ferried and transported personnel and cargo, including parts for the atomic bomb, and simulated combat maneuvers. In short, they flew every type of military aircraft on every type of mission, except direct combat missions. Between 1942 and 1944, 25,000 young American women volunteered for flight training and service. Of these, 1830 were accepted and 1074 would eventually successfully complete their training. Four of those who received their wings were from Arkansas. Dorothy Rae Barnes, from Hot Springs, AR, graduated from Hot Springs High School in 1935. She became a WASP, she said, because she had friends who were early WASP recruits and they encouraged her to join. She graduated from flight school in July 1943 and, as a WASP, flew the AT-6, a single-engine advanced trainer aircraft used to train fighter pilots, and the BT-13, a basic trainer flown by most American pilots during World War II. After her wartime experiences, she returned to Hot Springs, where she still lives today. Geraldine Tribble Vickers Crockett, from Stevens, AR, became interested in flying because of an older brother, who was a flight instructor. He enrolled her in a civilian pilot training program that he was teaching in Little Rock and it was there that she earned her private pilot license. She went into the WASPs in 1944 and, like Dorothy Barnes, flew AT-6 and BT-13 aircraft. After deactivation, she went on to get her instructor and commercial licenses and taught flying to veterans on the G.I. bill. She now lives in Palm Springs, CA. Betty Fulbright White, from Clarksville, AR, was in the last WASP class to graduate in December 1944. During her shortened service, she pulled targets for gunnery practice and transported cargo. After the war, she returned to Clarksville, where she passed away in 1985. Thirty-eight women died during their service. They were denied military honors and their families bore all the costs of transporting their bodies home and arranging for their burials. One of those was Lea Ola McDonald. Lea McDonald was born in Hollywood, AR, on October 12, 1921. She entered WASP training in Houston, TX, in January 1943 and graduated in April 1944. She was killed less than 4 months later while flying an A-24 attack bomber on a practice flight at the age of 22. During their time in service, these women faced overwhelming cultural and gender bias. They received unequal pay, did not have full military status, and were barred from becoming military officers. At the end of the war, the women were ordered to leave military service and paid for their own transportation home. It was not until 1977 that the WASPs who served during the war were provided veterans' benefits. WASPs were America's first women to fly military aircraft and are a source of inspiration for current and future generations of Americans. I am so proud of these women from Arkansas, and from all over the United States, who served our country under dangerous and difficult circumstances. While we could never fully express the extent of our appreciation for their service, President Obama signed Public Law 111- 40 on July 1, 2009, authorizing Congress to bestow a gold medal in honor of these patriotic Americans. I was honored to be an original cosponsor of the bill and I am happy that Congress has bestowed this long-overdue honor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that amendment No. 1487 be called up.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I thank the chairman, Senator Levin, and Senator McCain, Senator Graham, and the others for allowing me to bring up this amendment. This is a critical amendment at a critical time. Many of us visit our home States, and we see the disadvantaged youth all across our States who are having difficult times. We know unstable economic times bring about instability in our schools, in our families, and in a host of different places. One of the ways we have of combating this is with the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program. It is an excellent program put on by our National Guard in many of our States where these at-risk youth come in and they are surrounded by both structure and support and guidance to be able to meet their needs of getting a GED and their high school education and then going on to make something of their lives, really turning themselves around and making sure they are becoming great parts of our communities, whether it is finding a job or entering the military on their own but certainly turning their lives around and being productive. What we do in this amendment is we open up our National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program to new States. Right now, we have it in several of our States. Many of us have been able to see the rewards of this program, but this will open it up to other States to be able to participate. One of the biggest problems we have had with this program is not the success, because the success has been tremendous, but it is the ability of our States to be able to financially support these programs. Right now, they have to come up with 40 percent of the resources that are necessary. Quite frankly, our States are not entering into these programs because they do not have the resources. These are excellent programs. They have tremendous results. And one of the things we want to make certain of is that we don't lose the opportunity to catch these young people early on and turn their lives around. So our amendment provides a 75-25 percent cost sharing with the States instead of the 60-40. We don't change the amount of money spent, we just change the way it is allocated. We also allow the opportunity for some new States that want to start these programs to come in, and for the first 2 years the Federal Government will support 100 percent of those programs as they get their feet on the ground and they get these programs started, and then they must again resume that 25-percent State responsibility in these programs. We have a great bill we have introduced. We have tremendous bipartisan support. We have 32 cosponsors of our bill. I am joined in this amendment by Senators Byrd, Casey, Cornyn, Hagan, Landrieu, Murkowski, Risch, Rockefeller, Snowe, and Udall of Colorado, along with Senator Wyden. So we have great support for this amendment. It is something that is important for our kids, and it is certainly a great opportunity for us to see how our military can empower our youth by giving them the kind of support that is necessary to turn their lives around through both education and opportunity, helping them to develop skills, working in the community, and really making something of themselves. I thank the chairman for the ability to be able to offer this amendment on behalf of our States and on behalf of our National Guard, which is doing a tremendous job in these programs, but most importantly on behalf of our children and the great things it does for our children all across this Nation. Mr. President, a special thanks to the chairman and the ranking member for their indulgence in letting me offer this amendment. I am looking forward to hopefully seeing how we can move it forward.

Mrs. LINCOLN

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

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, today I rise to speak in support of five amendments that I have introduced to the bill before us, the National Defense Authorization bill for fiscal year 2010. Each amendment focuses on improving the benefits and care for the members of our Nation's National Guard and Reserve forces so that we can improve military readiness and strengthen our efforts to recruit and train quality men and women to serve. I know each of us from our States recognizes the tremendous bravery, courage, and the dedication of our National Guard and reservists in each of our States. They are part of our community. They certainly, in many instances I know of from our seeing the deployments, are people of public service, but they are also people who are serving their communities. Whether they are firemen or police officers, maybe they are school principals, maybe they have small businesses that hire a tremendous number of people in those communities, they are hard-working Americans who also find time to serve their country. They are dedicated, they are brave, and we certainly know the critical role they play. It is a reality that our military is relying increasingly upon our reserve components as an operational reserve, not just simply a strategic reserve. My amendments reflect that reality by taking needed steps to honor the increased service and invest in these men and women who give so much on our behalf. When duty called, they stepped up to the plate, and now it is time for Congress to do the same. My first amendment is identical to the Selected Reserve Continuum of Care Act I introduced in May. This legislation will ensure that periodic health assessments for members of the Guard and Reserve are followed by government treatment to correct any medical or dental readiness deficiencies that are discovered at those screenings. We know we will begin to see these periodic health assessments, because they are mandatory beginning in September, and we need to make sure we follow up on these. As an operational force serving frequent deployments overseas, these men and women require greater access to health care so they are able to achieve the readiness standards demanded by current deployment cycles. Far too many men and women are declared nondeployable because they have not received the steady medical and dental care they need to maintain their readiness. We have all heard the horror stories of the military simply pulling soldiers' teeth and sending them on to Iraq and Afghanistan because they don't have the time to provide adequate dental care to bring them up to the medical/dental readiness status necessary in order to be deployed. Now that we are going to have mandatory assessment, there is no reason we would not want to provide them the medical care they need in order to meet that assessment. This is absolutely unacceptable, that we would not. And it is inexcusable. Considering the sacrifices we are asking them to make on our behalf, the least we can do is provide them the care they need to meet the readiness standards we have set. Pulling their teeth and rushing them to war is simply not going to get it done. This practice itself has become so prevalent, we now have a name for these men and women. They are called pumpkin soldiers. How absolutely awful is that? It is awful that it is such a prevalent practice that it has a nickname. Compounding this challenge is the fact that short-notice deployments occur regularly within the Reserve Forces. When men and women are declared nondeployable, it can cause disruption in the unit by requiring last-minute replacements from other units or requiring treatment periods that should be set aside for the predeployment preparation and training. Last year, prior to the second deployment of the Arkansas National Guard's 39th Infantry Brigade Combat Team to Iraq, members from 11 units across our State were pulled to fill out the combat team. Some of these cross-leveled members had as little as 2 or 3 three weeks' notice prior to their deployment. They were having to fill in because when it came time, those who were in those units, the regular Guard and Reserve who were there, did not meet the deployable standards, and so consequently we had to pull people from all different units at a late notice to put them in there while these others met that medical and dental readiness. My amendment would prevent, in large, all of this from happening in the future by providing the necessary care at the front end of these assessments. Instead of compressing treatment costs into a short predeployment period or the bottlenecked medical support unit at the mobilization station, my amendment would spread the same costs over a longer period, with a more orderly and reliable result. We are having a huge debate right now on health care reform. One of the things we see is that if we can provide prevention or wellness, or certainly make sure that medical care gets there when we first detect what that medical problem is, the outcome is better and it is usually less costly in the overall. The further out from the deployment uncorrectable conditions are discovered, the more time a unit will have to replace a discharged member and mitigate the effects from that loss. So it is not just the well-being of the soldiers we are looking at, it is also the well-being of the unit. We can and should do more to bring our Selected Reserve members into a constant state of medical readiness for the benefit of the entire force. My amendment does just that. That is why it has been endorsed by the Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent uniformed services and veterans associations representing over 5.5 million members across this country. I am proud to have worked with Senators Landrieu, Tester, Risch, and Byrd on this important legislation and thank them for that support and realization of how important, how practical, and how much sense it makes for us to use these assessments to quickly provide the medical treatment that is necessary to ensure our soldiers, when they do receive those orders to be deployed, are meeting the medical and dental readiness they need to meet in order to be deployed. Mr. President, my second amendment calls for an increase in the Montgomery GI bill rate for members of the Selected Reserve to keep pace with their increased service and the rising costs of higher education. I am pleased my friend, Senator Mike Crapo, and I have joined in this effort. Mike and I have worked together on so many different issues, everything from wildlife to education and certainly with our military, representing States that have large rural areas and therefore large numbers of Guard and Reserve. It has also been endorsed by the Military Coalition as well, the group I mentioned earlier. This amendment would simply tie education benefit rates for guardsmen and reservists to the national average cost of tuition standard that is already applied to Active-Duty education benefit rates. We have worked hard to try to increase the educational benefit to be commensurate with the time these guardsmen and reservists are working on our behalf, who are so bravely deploying and working and serving alongside our Active- Duty military. The problem is, now that we have increased their access to a more commensurate educational benefit, the value of that benefit is immediately losing value because they depend on the appropriators and us to increase that amount. When it is increasing at half the rate of the cost of higher education, then they are getting further and further behind each year in keeping that commensurate benefit at a rate that makes sense and certainly is adequate for their needs in education. I believe it is absolutely critical that we do this. It builds upon my Total Force GI bill, first introduced in 2006, which was designed to better reflect a comprehensive total force concept that ensures members of the Selected Reserve receive the educational benefit more commensurate with their increased service. The final provisions of this legislation became law last year with the signing of the 21st Century GI bill. Now it only makes sense that we would maintain that benefit at a rate, again--just at the rate of increase we are seeing in higher education. It certainly makes sense for our Guard and Reserve. My third amendment would lower the travel reimbursement threshold for National Guard and Reserve members who are traveling for drills from 100 miles to 50 miles. Our current high threshold has caused undue hardships for members of the Selected Reserve, especially those in rural areas who often incur significant expenses because they have to travel significant distances. If we cannot ease their burden, I fear we are creating significant obstacles to recruiting and retaining men and women to serve in the Guard and Reserve--particularly during times of economic hardship. We saw the price of gasoline explode last year. We know how difficult it is, particularly for many of our Guard and Reserve who live in those rural areas. I believe this is a commonsense thing we can do on behalf of these brave men and women. I am so very pleased to be joined here by Senators Tester and Wyden in offering this amendment. It was among the recommendations of the independent Commission on the National Guard and Reserves. It is supported by numerous military and veterans service organizations. It only makes sense that we would appropriately provide them the reimbursement they need and the travel expenses to get to where they need to be for their drills and for their training. My fourth amendment would enable a valuable program, the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program, to expand to new cities and new sites and reach even more of our young troubled Americans. Currently operating in 22 States, the Youth ChalleNGe Program trains and mentors youth who have dropped out of high school. It puts them on a path to become more productive, employed, and law-abiding citizens. I recommend to any of my colleagues in this body who have not visited a National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program to go and visit. I have visited our Youth ChalleNGe Program on more than one occasion and have been amazed, both at those who have graduated from that program and come back to mentor these other youths--who are disadvantaged, who have found themselves in the court system, have been thrown out of school, or are certainly in a troubled nature--and amazed at those who are able to come into this environment and to feel the security of the military and the rules of the military that prompt them into a sense of pride and a sense of courage and a sense of accomplishment so they finish their education and they go on to do so many great things, so many things that otherwise could have turned sour for these youths. As I said, I encourage any of the Members of this body, if you have never visited one of those National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Programs, I really encourage you to do so. For 22 weeks, these young men and women receive more than 200 hours of classroom learning designed to prepare them to take the general equivalency diploma exam. I attended the graduation of a class in Arkansas, and I can attest to the program's positive results. At a time when we know financial insecurity in our country is shaking our families, our youth who are finding themselves in, certainly, different circumstances than many of us did growing up, with all kinds of temptations and distractions and things that can put them on the wrong pathway, here we have an opportunity, when they start out on that wrong pathway, to grab them and put them into a program that is going to continue to build on the positive things they have to offer and set them on a good pathway. Since the inception of the National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program, more than 85,000 young men and women have graduated from the program nationwide, and they have received their high school degrees. Nearly 80 percent have gone to college, earned productive jobs, and joined the military. Currently, the Department of Defense provides 60 percent of the funding, while States are responsible for the remainder. Unfortunately, the current cap on funding has restricted many of our States from establishing additional programs or building on their existing programs. Along with additional funding, this amendment would help jump-start the Youth ChalleNGe Program by fully funding new programs for 2 years while they get their feet on the ground. When they better understand the tremendous value of this program and, more importantly, how their States can begin to invest in a program such as this, it ensures that the Federal Government's share is 75 percent into the future instead of the current 60 percent that it is right now. This amendment is endorsed by the National Guard Youth Foundation, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States, and the National Guard Association of the United States. I am so pleased to be joined by Senators Byrd, Casey, Cornyn, Hagan, Landrieu, Murkowski, Risch, Rockefeller, Snowe, Udall of Colorado, and Wyden in this effort. It is identical to the legislation I have previously introduced which has 32 bipartisan cosponsors. It is a great move, to help our children, particularly our troubled children and, more importantly, it really sends them in the right direction so they can become contributing parts of this great Nation. I encourage my colleagues to look at this amendment and help us get it passed in this very important bill. Mr. President, you have been incredibly patient. I appreciate that patience, having to talk about five different amendments, but these are issues that are critically important to me and critically important to the people of Arkansas, particularly our Guard and Reserve. My final amendment is an amendment that would grant full veteran status to members of our Nation's Reserve Forces who have 20 or more years of service. I am joined in this effort by Senator Hutchison of Texas. This amendment is endorsed by the Military Coalition, which is the large group, the coalition of military groups. Under current law, members of Reserve components who have completed 20 or more years of service are considered military retirees. At the age of 60, they are eligible for all the benefits received by Active- Duty military retirees. Unfortunately, they are denied the full standing and honor that comes with the designation of ``veteran'' if they have not served a qualifying period of Federal Active Duty other than Active-Duty training. As a result, these men and women are technically not included in various veterans ceremonies and initiatives, such as an effort to have veterans wear their medals on Veterans Day or Memorial Day, or in legislation authorizing veterans to offer a hand salute during the playing of the national anthem or the presentation or posting of the colors. I don't know about you, but when I am at an event at home in Arkansas--or here as well but certainly at home--when I am surrounded by my family of Arkansas people and the flag comes down the parade or the colors are presented, I support making sure everyone who has stood up and said ``I am ready to serve my country when it calls on me'' should be given that respect of being noticed as a veteran. My amendment does not seek to change the legal qualifications for access to benefits. Instead, it simply seeks to correct this inequity by honoring and recognizing those who have served their country for 20 years or more, those who have said continually over those 20 years: When my Nation needs me, if my Nation needs me, I will be there. I will take up my arms. I will do what is asked of me as a member of the military forces. Those men and women wore the same uniform, were subject to the same Code of Military Justice, received the same training, and spent 20 or more years being liable for callup whenever it did happen. This amendment recognizes their long careers of service and would entitle them to receive proper recognition as a veteran of the United States of America. I know of few designations that embody such dignity and honor. These men and women certainly embody those traits, and it is time we grant them the recognition they have earned. I ask my colleagues to give these efforts thoughtful consideration. These five proposals help us keep our promise to these brave men and women and will help to strengthen recruitment and retention for our National Guard and Reserve and increase their readiness as an operation force in the continued defense of this great Nation that we all love and are all so very pleased to be a part of. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today to thank the Senate for adopting my resolution that authorizes a marker to be placed in the new Capitol Visitor Center. The marker recognizes the role of African Americans in the building of this great U.S. Capitol Building. I also thank Susan and my legislative director, Jim Stowers, who have been tireless in their work and certainly have done an incredible job in bringing forth this resolution, along with many others we have been working on to try and recognize the tremendous work and labor that was put into building this magnificent symbol of our freedom and particularly that which was done by the slave labor in this country when the Capitol was built. Those two individuals have done a remarkable job in working on this resolution. I am very grateful to them and all of the work they have put into it. I also thank Congressman John Lewis for his unbelievable leadership in moving this resolution through the House and for his leadership of the Slave Labor Task Force. I had the privilege of serving with Congressman Lewis in the House, and upon my election to the Senate, we worked together on a number of issues, including funding for the Little Rock Central High Visitor Center and the Slave Labor Task Force. It has been an honor to work with him on these very important issues. He is a tremendous gentleman to work with on all issues, but I have had the particular pleasure of being able to work with him on these two. It has been a great learning experience for me and certainly an honor. The crowning feature of our Nation's Capitol is the majestic statue that stands atop its dome. It was designed by an American, Thomas Crawford, to represent ``Freedom triumphant in War and Peace.'' It has become known simply as the Statue of Freedom to those of us who come in and out of the Capitol on a daily basis. Thomas Crawford cast the five-piece plaster model of his statue at his studio in Rome, Italy. Before it was shipped to the United States to be cast, Crawford passed away. Once it arrived in Washington, DC, problems soon arose. A workman who assembled the plaster model for all to see, just as it is downstairs, soon got into a pay dispute, and when it came time to disassemble it and move it to a mill in Maryland where it would be cast in bronze, he refused to reveal how it had been taken apart. Work on the statue stalled until a man named Philip Reid solved the mystery. Mr. Reid was an enslaved African American who worked for the owner of the foundry selected to cast the bronze statue. Mr. Reid figured out how to disassemble the plaster model by attaching an iron hook to the statue's head, and he gently lifted the top section until a hairline crack appeared. The crack indicated where the joint was located. Then he repeated that operation until all five sections were visible. If you go down to the Capitol Visitor Center, you can see this huge plaster cast and you can see how large it is, how cumbersome it is, and how difficult it would be to work with even in today's age with the tools and all of the mechanics we have. Yet this gentleman on his own figured it out with very little other than just a hook to be able to pull up and figure out where he would find that path of least resistance. We know about Philip Reid today because Fisk Mills, the son of the foundry owner, told the story to a historian who recorded it in 1869. It describes Philip Reid as an ``expert and an admirable workman'' and ``highly esteemed by all who know him.'' Philip Reid's story is probably the best known among the enslaved African Americans who worked so diligently on our Nation's Capitol. Unfortunately, there are many others who worked in obscurity. When the Capitol was first being built in the late 1700s and early 1800s, enslaved African Americans worked in all facets of its construction. They worked in carpentry, masonry, carting, rafting, roofing, plastering, glazing, painting, and sawing. These slaves were rented from their owners by the Federal Government for about $60 a year. For nearly 200 years, the stories of these slave laborers were mostly unknown to the visitors of this great building, our Capitol. Then in 1999, old pay stubs were discovered that showed slaves were directly involved in the construction of the U.S. Capitol. To recognize these contributions, I sponsored a resolution in July of 2000 to establish a special task force to make recommendations to honor the slave laborers who worked on the construction of this great Capitol. The bicameral, bipartisan Slave Labor Task Force brought together historians and interested officials to work on this issue. In 2007, the task force presented the congressional leadership with our recommendations. This resolution fulfills one of those recommendations, the resolution we passed in the Senate. It authorizes a marker to be placed in Emancipation Hall to serve as a formal public recognition of the critical role that enslaved African Americans played in the construction of the Capitol. Much of the original Capitol no longer stands, due to the fires of war and renovations to create more space for the ever-growing body. In fact, some of the stones that were removed when the Capitol was renovated have been stored in Rock Creek Park. It is our hope that those very stones that were quarried years and years ago by the slaves will be used to make the CVC marker we hope to place in the CVC. I also would like to take a moment to remember one of the members of the Slave Labor Task Force, Curtis Sykes, who was a native of Little Rock, AR, and an original member of Arkansas's Black Advisory Committee. I asked Mr. Sykes if he would come and serve on this committee. I selected him because he was, first and foremost, an educator. During his time on the task force, he was focused on the need to ensure that as many citizens as possible be made aware of the contribution of enslaved African Americans in the building of this great U.S. Capitol. Unfortunately, Mr. Sykes passed away before our work was completed. Nevertheless, he made important and lasting contributions to our work. I know he is looking down with a great sense of pride for what we have been able to accomplish. The heart of this effort and the mission of the Capitol Visitor Center is education. It was at the root of what Mr. Sykes stood for, and it certainly has been at the root of what our task force has been professing and wanting more than anything to create for the visitors who come through our Nation's Capitol. That is why there is no more appropriate place for this marker to recognize those who built the Capitol than our new Capitol Visitor Center, an education model in itself. The plaster model of the Statue of Freedom, the same one that was separated by Philip Reid, now stands tall in Emancipation Hall of the CVC for all visitors to see. Visitors look at the model each and every day and can compare it to the actual statue standing atop the Capitol dome. I want to make sure every visitor who comes to the CVC, our Capitol Visitor Center, knows how that statue got up there and that they know the story of Philip Reid and the other enslaved African Americans who played such a critical part in the building of this Capitol--our symbol of freedom in this Nation. In closing, I thank Chairman Schumer and Ranking Member Bennett of the Rules Committee for their help and guidance on this resolution. I also certainly cannot finish my remarks without offering my tremendous thanks to my colleague and friend, Senator Chambliss from Georgia, who, along with Senator Schumer, was an original cosponsor of this resolution. Senator Chambliss has done a tremendous job. He is a delight to work with, and I am not only grateful for the hard work he has put in on this issue but other issues we have worked on, but without a doubt for his friendship in working on so many issues. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues for again adopting this resolution in the Senate. We look forward to being able to add many other of those recommendations of the task force as we move forward and as our Capitol Visitor Center continues to grow. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Susan Kalasanas, who is a fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of my remarks.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise to thank my colleagues for their support of my amendment to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act with respect to the preemption of certain interest rate limitations that are applicable to the State of Arkansas. The adoption of this provision in the 2009 Supplemental Appropriations Act will aid in the economic recovery of Arkansas as demonstrated in the various letters from Governor Beebe, the Arkansas congressional delegation and the related data and communications that are to be printed in the record after my remarks. With regard to the amendment itself, it is the intention of the drafters and the Senate, that despite the ordering of its paragraphs, the language concerning the uniform accessibility of provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 are to apply to all bonds and obligations issued under that act for all purposes for which bonds under the act may be issued and are not limited to matters associated with housing. Without this amendment, Arkansas may not have ready access to the same Federal programs to which our sister States have access. Again, thanks to my colleagues for recognizing that the economy of and commerce in Arkansas affects and is affected by every other State and their respective commerce. I ask unanimous consent that the following documents be printed in the Record as supporting documentation of the intent and reasoning behind this important provision: (1) a letter from Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe dated May 14, 2009, (2) a letter from Arkansas Governor Mike Beebe dated March 14, 2008, (3) a letter from the Arkansas Congressional Delegation dated May 14, 2009, (4) a letter from the Council of Development Finance Agencies dated May 29, 2009, and (5) Presentation to the Arkansas House Committee on State Agencies and Governmental Affairs regarding a proposed State constitutional amendment to deal with this issue. The inclusion of these documents serves to make clear our intent regarding this important provision.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.