Blanche Lincoln

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, on Saturday, June 24, one of the finest public servants that my State has produced was honored in his hometown of Benton, AR. Joe Edward Purcell was many things to many people. He was a devoted family man. He was a loyal friend. He was also a dedicated public servant whose reputation for integrity and professionalism brought honor and respectability to every public office he held. Joe Purcell was born in the small southeast Arkansas town of Helena. Shortly after graduating from Little Rock Junior College, he enlisted in the U.S. Army for service in World War II. Upon his return from service, he entered law school at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville and graduated in 1952. Later that year, he opened his law practice in Benton and quickly earned the reputation throughout the community of a trustworthy advocate of the people he represented. ``Honest Joe'' carried that reputation with him through what would become a distinguished career of public service at both city and State levels of government. Beginning in 1955, Joe served as Benton City Attorney and later as Benton Municipal Judge. In 1967, he was elected as attorney general for the State of Arkansas. During his tenure, his leadership led to a number of reforms and innovations, including the establishment of the consumer protection office which to this day provides consumer education and promotes the principles of fair business practices and honest balloting. After an unsuccessful gubernatorial campaign, Joe was elected three times as Lieutenant Governor beginning in 1975. In that capacity, he also became the acting Governor of our State for 6 days in early 1979, when he filled the unexpired term of former Governor and Senator-elect, David Pryor, in the days prior to the gubernatorial inauguration of Bill Clinton. It was Clinton who would later describe his predecessor as ``a self-made man who represented honesty and integrity in public service.'' Joe would serve as our State's Lieutenant Governor until his retirement from public service in 1981. The Benton sidewalk memorial that was recently unveiled in honor of Joe Purcell is fittingly located just in front of the old Federal building downtown. I am hopeful that it will serve as a reminder to generations of Arkansans not just of the numerous accomplishments that Joe Purcell compiled over his political career but also of the legacy of integrity and public service that he has left us all. The genuine compassion he held for those around him led him to a life dedicated to making his community and his State better places to live for all of us. It is truly a selfless principle for those of us in public service, and those of us in our personal lives, to embody each and every day. I am proud to have on my staff a young man named David Hogue. David is the grandson of Joe Purcell and it was at his suggestion that this tribute in Benton came to fruition. David has been a tremendous asset to my office, and I am appreciative of all of his hard work and dedication on behalf of our State and its citizens. This fall, he will be headed to law school in Fayetteville, just like his grandfather so many years before, and I wish him the very best. It is often said that a community reveals itself, not only by the men it produces, but also by the men it honors and remembers. Joe Purcell embodied the best in all of us and because of people like him, the community of Benton and the State of Arkansas are such wonderful places to live today.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I rise today in honor one of our Nation's fallen, Army SPC Bobby West. He died defending this Nation so that others might have the same freedoms we cherish as Americans. For those who knew Specialist West, he will be remembered for the laughter he brought to the lives of those around him. He will also be remembered for acting on his conviction of defending and fighting for the values and liberties we hold so dear as Americans. At 17, after graduating from Beebe High school, Bobby enlisted with the Arkansas National Guard. Like so many of us, he was deeply affected by the terrorist attacks that took place on September 11, 2001. However, he felt that the burden to defend our country rested squarely on his shoulders and shortly thereafter he enlisted in the Army with his older brother Patrick. Specialist West served our country in Egypt's Sinai Peninsula before being sent to Iraq. Tragically, he was serving his second tour of duty in Iraq and was killed when a roadside bomb detonated while he was on foot patrol with his unit in Baghdad on May 30. His unit was scheduled to leave Iraq in the fall. I am honored to stand here today and pay tribute to a great soldier and more importantly a loving son, brother and friend. His loved ones remember how much laughter he brought to their lives with his quick wit and sense of humor. His fellow soldiers will remember him not only for the burden he carried with him to defend this Nation and bring freedom to others, but also for the competitiveness he brought to everything he did in life. His fellow soldiers tell the story of the fierce competitiveness he brought to a pickup basketball game while stationed in Egypt. Regardless of the fact that they were playing in a tin building in 125-135 degree heat, Bobby wouldn't let his opponents leave until they could beat him. It is this sense of commitment and dedication that he brought to his military service. He also believed in what he was doing and loved being a soldier. It is people like Bobby West who make our military the strongest in the world. I am grateful for the service of Bobby West. I am also reminded of the tragic human cost of war and am saddened at the death of another Arkansas soldier. In the words of his brother, Bobby ``was born to defend the greatest Nation on Earth.'' He gave his life defending the greatest Nation on Earth and we owe him and all others who have made that sacrifice an enormous debt of gratitude. Our prayers are with his father Ricky West, his mother Linda Wiggins West, and his older brother Patrick West, and we all pray for the safe return of Patrick who is serving in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Washington for her incredible focus on educating our children and making sure our families can afford higher education, and certainly focusing on energy independence, which is critically important to all of our households. I am proud to be here today with all of my Democratic women colleagues to talk about the things that are so important to America's families, the working families who are the fabric of this Nation, who make us strong, who make us proud as Americans to look at the Nation and see what the foundation of our country is really all about. Mr. President, I know that you and many of our other colleagues probably think this is just a honey-do list. Well, we all have our honey-do lists. For myself, as a mother of twin 10-year-olds and certainly a wife who wants to be supportive and caring for my husband, and as a daughter who is looking at aging parents and in-laws, and all of the many responsibilities in my life, I know that keeping a list to make sure I am actually accomplishing the things that are important to the people I love is critically important so that I know I am doing what I need to do. I have a list on my refrigerator. I have a list on my desk. I carry a list in my car and in my purse to make sure that I can keep up with the things that are important, the responsibilities I have as a person not only for the things I want to do not just for my family but for my neighbors and for all of the people I report to and am responsible to. At home, my husband and I have a honey-do list that we share the responsibility for. Just last night, we were making sure we changed the air filters and the batteries in our smoke detectors which are critically important to the safety of our children and our home. We were making sure that we adjusted our budget to deal with the unbelievable increase in energy costs. Don't think that every household is not looking at how important that is. Or making sure that our children get their health checkup and that they are up to date on their immunizations. How blessed I felt when I walked into that pediatrician's office to know that through the Federal employees, I have insurance that will cover that. But it is important to make sure the things on my list get done so that the people in this world whom I love so dearly are as safe and as healthy as they possibly can be. On that list is also setting aside dollars each year and every quarter in order to know that when my children become college age, they are going to have at least some kind of a nest egg, perhaps not enough to cover all that they need in order to get that education that I know is so critically important to their success and to the success of this country. These are the things that we want to challenge and to encourage our colleagues in the Senate to take up. These are the issues that American families see on their checklist every single day. These are things that we can do--we know that we can do. These are issues that affect every American family. My good friend and colleague from California, Senator Feinstein, is going to talk about a humane and moral solution to stem cell research, on which she has worked for over 8 years now. There was a wonderful event in Arkansas for the Diabetes Association where I met a young woman with a daughter who talked about the transition, the complete change in life for their family in order to deal with a disease like diabetes in a child who is only 12 years old. Mr. President, we plead with you, take a look at this list. Look at the reasonable items we are talking about that mean so much to the American families of this country. I am here to talk about the keen awareness that we have of the challenges that are faced by working families who want nothing more than the security that health insurance offers. We, as Federal employees, enjoy a tremendous security. For over 40 years, the Federal Government has figured out that if it pools all 8 million of the Federal employees across this great country, it can provide greater choice at a lower cost. We, too, can do that for the small businesses of this country. If we look around, we realize that nearly 46 million Americans lack health insurance, including 456,000 of my own Arkansans. Small businesses are the No. 1 source of jobs in Arkansas and in most parts of our country. Yet only 26 percent of businesses with fewer than 50 employees offer health insurance coverage today. Workers at these businesses are most likely to be uninsured. Yet they are the engine of our economy. They are the jobs that are not going to go offshore. They are the companies and the businesses in our communities that support our Little League and that sponsor our scouting events. These are the fabric of our country. Yet fewer than 26 percent are insured. Small businesses need innovative ways to offer affordable, accessible health care to their employees. Recognizing that need for a new direction, Senator Durbin and I proposed the Small Employers Health Benefit Program. It is a comprehensive solution to our small business insurance crisis. It is based on 40 years of success with the Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan. It will create affordable private health insurance choices for small employers, and it will give working families the security and the comfort of mind that they need. We challenge--we encourage--we plead with our Republican Congress and leadership to pass the Small Employers Health Benefit Program this session. It is something we can do that will make a tremendous difference in the lives of Americans. We are going to keep fighting because we believe that working families should have the comfort of knowing that they can take their children to the doctor--whether it is for just a common cold or a broken arm or, heaven forbid, something much more serious--and be able to afford and access the care that they need. We believe that expanding coverage for small businesses will go a long way toward making sure that the millions of Americans should and would have access to medical care. We believe that providing that kind of security is worth fighting for, and that is why we have joined together today to point out to the American people, particularly to our colleagues, the list that we carry around every single day in our pocketbooks, on our desks, and on our refrigerators at home. It is no different than the list that we present to you, and it is no different than the list that every American family has in their home. We ask you, Mr. President, take a look at what we propose. Look at the time that we have remaining and know that we can make a difference in the fabric of this country by looking at the list of what America's working families need the most in their households. I am proud to yield for my good friend and colleague from California, Senator Feinstein.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, today I rise to speak on passage of the Safe and Timely Interstate Placement of Foster Children Act. This legislation seeks to expedite the interstate placement of foster children into the safe and nurturing families they so desperately need and deserve. In doing so, it encourages and provides incentives to States to help expedite the completion of home studies, which are all too often the cause or delays in interstate placement cases. Nationwide, there are currently over 500,000 children in foster care, and more than 2,500 in my home State of Arkansas. On trips back home and in meetings with my constituents, I have listened to the many heartbreaking tales of children who continue to suffer needlessly because of barriers to their timely placement. While a recent increase in the number of adoptions has allowed many of these children to spend less time in foster care homes, an unacceptably large number still encounter barriers that delay their timely placement. This is particularly the situation for children placed across State lines. In fact, recent reports indicate that interstate placements take an average of one year longer than placements within a State. The situation is unacceptable, and I am grateful that we are addressing this issue by taking a step forward. Although we are taking that step here today, we must also recognize that we are improving a process, not fixing it. In cooperation with our State child welfare agencies and State court systems, we need to continue working to finish the task before us by carefully evaluating improvements that result from passage of this legislation and looking at other ways Federal and State agencies can work together in the future to make interstate placements work even better. We must work together to provide both better guidelines for the process of gaining approval for sending children across State lines while allowing States the much-needed flexibility to cater them to their specific circumstances. We must work together to find a way to set deadlines that expedite the processing of home studies yet does not set unrealistic timelines on our States. We must work together to find better ways to ensure more efficiency in the process while also taking each State's circumstances under consideration. In short, we must continue working together to ensure that no more of our children are unnecessarily stuck in foster homes because of bureaucratic inefficiencies, unnecessary delays, and red tape. We can do better by these children. The opportunity to grow up in a nurturing, loving, and stable family is something that none of us should take for granted. It is our duty in this Congress to ensure that these children are not denied this opportunity, but given timely placement with the home and the family that each and every one of them deserve.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, today I offered an amendment on behalf of the brave men and women of our National Guard and Reserve who have sacrificed so greatly for our freedom. This amendment would allow members of the Selected Reserve who have been activated for extended durations to utilize some of the educational benefits they have earned once they separate from service. Since World War II, providing educational benefits to returning servicemembers has served an invaluable role in stimulating recruitment and retention for our armed services. In assisting veterans readjusting to civilian life, these educational benefits have also enhanced our Nation's competitiveness through the development of a more highly educated and productive workforce. When the Montgomery GI bill was signed into law in 1984, members of the Selected Reserve--members of the National Guard and Reserve on active status or performing initial Active Duty training--were seldom mobilized. Consequently, standard Montgomery GI Bill benefits reflected that reality. That is not the same reality today. More than 500,000 members of the National Guard and Reserve have been called up since the terrible events of September 11, 2001, and more than 70,000 have pulled two or more tours of duty. In my State of Arkansas, nearly 3,400 of our National Guard's 39th Infantry Brigade were called to serve in Operation Iraqi Freedom. These citizen soldiers served with distinction and did so in some of the worst conditions imaginable. While their families and their communities have welcomed them home with open arms, our Nation should do the same by ensuring they receive the benefits and services they need as they transition back to their civilian lives. The rising price of higher education, increases in the interest rates on student loans, and the limited earnings ability of those who return from the service with only high school credentials make educational benefits a primary means of helping members of the Selected Reserve make that transition. In addressing this issue, Congress took a step in the right direction in October 2004 with creation of the Reserve Education Assistance Program. This program provided enhanced Montgomery GI bill benefits for members of the Selected Reserve who were activated since September 11, 2001, and mobilized for more than 90 days in response to a contingency operation--a war or national emergency as declared by the President or Congress. Although increasing benefits was a step in the right direction, it did not address the lack of a readjustment or transition component to these educational benefits. As a result, Active-Duty servicemembers have up to 10 years after their separation of service to utilize their MGIB benefits, while members of the Selected Reserve must forfeit all of the educational benefits they have earned once they separate from the Selected Reserve. Montgomery GI bill benefits continue to be the only benefit that those who have served Selected Reserve activated duty in the war on terrorism may not access when they eventually separate or retire. For example, a young man enlists in the Arkansas National Guard for a 6-year commitment after graduating from high school in 2001. He is mobilized in June 2005 and will return home from Iraq in September 2006, a 15-month mobilization. He plans to complete his service in June 2007 and use the Montgomery GI bill benefits he earned during his mobilization to attend the University of Arkansas. Under current law, he would forfeit all of these benefits once he leaves the Guard. I believe our young men and women who have fulfilled their service obligations deserve better than that. Specifically, my amendment would allow members of the Selected Reserve to have portability of their chapter 1607 Montgomery GI bill benefits for up to 10 years from their last date of service. To clarify, this amendment applies only to their chapter 1607 benefits-- those they have earned through activated service--and not their standard Selected Reserve educational benefits, chapter 1606 benefits. Some have raised concerns that this amendment would have an effect on retention because it would provide a post-service portability of benefits. I disagree. There are many valid personal and family reasons that influence a volunteer's decision to serve. Military analysts have consistently noted that reenlistment bonuses in lump-sum cash payments have been effective in meeting or exceeding reenlistment goals in the Active and Reserve Forces, not the educational benefits that are deferred over time. Further, there is a built-in incentive to continue serving in the Selected Reserve because reenlistment or extension in the Guard and Reserve enables the servicemember to retain their standard Selected Reserve Montgomery GI bill benefits under chapter 1606 with the potential to acquire more chapter 1607 benefits through successive activations. If they reenlist, they would also remain eligible for any other educational ``kickers'' such as Federal tuition assistance and state Guard or Reserve educational benefits. Young high school graduates thinking about furthering their educations and whether to join the Guard or Reserve should know that they will earn Montgomery GI bill benefits by joining the Reserves and even more if they are called up. When it is time to reenlist, they can keep all earned educational benefits by staying in or can take with them into civilian life the benefits they earned when they were called up to defend our Nation. As the daughter of a Korean war veteran, I was taught from an early age about the sacrifices our troops have to make to keep our Nation free and have been grateful for the service of so many of our brave men and women from the State of Arkansas and across the Nation. On behalf of them and their families, I will continue to fight to ensure they are provided with the benefits, pay, and health care that they have earned. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. It is the least we can do for those whom we owe so much and to reassure future generations that a grateful nation will not forget them when their military service is complete.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, first of all, I compliment my colleagues from Hawaii, Senator Inouye, and Senator Akaka especially, for sharing his time and for the incredible work they have done on behalf of the people they represent in the State of Hawaii. I wanted to take this opportunity to----

Mrs. LINCOLN. Yes. I ask unanimous consent to proceed for 5 minutes.

Mrs. LINCOLN. If there is an objection, I will certainly yield.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity to spend a few moments to talk about the 36 million Americans, including 13 million children, who live on the verge of hunger. I want to divert our conversation a little bit. I have actually waited quite some time to be able to speak about it. I started yesterday trying to get just a few minutes on the floor to bring about an awareness because today is National Hunger Awareness Day. I often think about the children and the working American families who struggle to make ends meet. But I focus my thoughts and prayers on them today because today is National Hunger Awareness Day, 1 day out of our year. I started yesterday trying to grab 5 minutes where we could bring our attention to something so incredibly important and something so easy to fix. There is a time when Americans are called to remember the hungry children and adults living across our great Nation. Most importantly, it is a day when we are called to put our words into actions and to help end hunger in our communities and across America. I guess the realization that I have come to in these last 24 hours is, I have searched just to capture 5 minutes on the floor of the Senate. I suppose I could have submitted my comments for the Record. And maybe I am foolish to think by coming to the floor I could spark just a little bit of interest in my colleagues or others across this Nation to think about an issue that affects all of us--an issue where our fellow man is hungry, or another mother has a child out there that is suffering from hunger, that we can't stop for just a moment and realize that hunger is a disease that has a cure. It has a cure--a cure that we can provide, a cure that we all know about. And, if we took the time to think about it, to address it, we could actually cure this disease. It is hard to find 5 minutes, it is hard to come down here and really make the difference that we want to make, but I believe this day and this issue are far too important to miss again the opportunity to talk about 36 million Americans living in food insecurity. Two years ago today, I joined with my friends and colleagues, Senator Smith, Senator Dole, and Senator Durbin to form the Senate Hunger Caucus. At that time, we pledged to raise awareness about the hunger experienced by millions of Americans, a majority of which are children and elderly, and to forge a bipartisan effort to end hunger in our Nation. I am proud that we are working with local, State, and national antihunger organizations to raise awareness about hunger, to build partnership, and develop solutions to end hunger. An example of a bipartisan initiative to end hunger is the Hunger Free Communities Act which I introduced along with Senators Durbin, Smith, and Lugar. This bill calls for a renewed national commitment to ending hunger in the United States by 2015. Yet we find it hard to find 5 minutes to focus our attention on such an incredible issue. It reaffirms congressional commitment to protecting the funding and integrity of Federal food and nutrition programs, and creates a national grant program to support community-based antihunger efforts in fighting the disease on the battlefield, right there at the line of attack in our communities. I am also proud to be a cosponsor of the FEED Act, the bill that would award grants to organizations that effectively combat hunger while creating opportunity by combining ``food rescue'' programs with job training--not just feeding a fish but teaching a man or a woman how to fish so that they do not just eat for a day, that they feed themselves for a lifetime. Close to one-third of the food in this country that is processed and prepared goes to waste--one-third, whether it is in places such as Washington where there are multiple receptions going on at one time, banquets and other events that happen across the country. One-third of that food goes to waste. This bill would help organizations safely recover unserved or unused food while providing culinary skills training to unemployed individuals. Two birds with one stone--using something that otherwise would be thrown away. How simple that seems and yet how hard it is to bring it forward into the light of day and talk about making that effort a reality. I urge my colleagues to support these worthy and commonsense pieces of legislation. If it is so hard to find 5 minutes just to talk about it, I wonder how long it is going to take us to pass these commonsense pieces of legislation. Some people may ask: What can I do to help end hunger in America? I want to talk about some of the ways Americans can help join the hunger relief effort. Acting on this call to feed the hungry is important, and I urge all Americans who are able to take part in ending this disease. One critical component of this effort is the willingness of Congress and the American people to support the Federal food and nutrition programs. These programs provide an essential safety net to working Americans, preventing the most vulnerable among us from suffering and even dying from malnutrition. Our continued investment in these programs is vital to the health of this Nation. Why does it come to mind right now? Think about all of those children across this great country who have received the nutrition they need in school during the school year as school lets out for the summer. Where will they go for that nutritious breakfast? Where will they go for that lunch that they need to sustain them because there is no dinner waiting at home? These are critical and important programs. Without spending the time and the effort to not only make them a reality but properly fund them in a way where they can actually meet the needs of the children across this country will take our attention. The most significant of these programs is the Food Stamp Program. It provides nutritious food to over 23 million Americans a year. More Americans find themselves in need of this program every single year. As their wages are stagnant, as they have less and less opportunity to climb a ladder of opportunity because they may not be getting the education they need, they are finding more and more dependency on programs like this to be able to feed their families. I understand our current budget constraints. I know we all do. Yet I didn't create this mess. The spending that has been freewheeling in this Congress over the last several years has been unbelievable. Yet as my colleagues mentioned, we failed to adequately support and fund issues such as our veterans' benefits; issues like educating our children and providing them with the skills they need to be competitive. I come here to talk about the main sustenance of life. I understand these budget constraints, but I believe as one man to another, as one woman to another, one human being to another, food, simple nutrition, is something we cannot turn a blind eye to. Even in these tight fiscal times, I believe that we have to maintain our commitment to feed the hungry among us. We must first protect programs such as the Food Stamp Program, the National School Breakfast and School Lunch Program, the Summer Feeding Program, the WIC, and the Children and Adult Care Food Program. These are all critical programs that keep Americans who are on the verge of hunger and destitution from finding themselves there permanently. Another important tool for local organizations is the Community Food and Nutrition Program, and with support from this program, the Arkansas Hunger Coalition has sponsored a Web site, a quarterly newsletter, an annual conference, a mini grant program, along with many civic, school, and community presentations on hunger which raise public awareness and promote innovative solutions. Organizations such as the Arkansas Hunger Coalition operate on limited budgets. Yet they are a vital source of information for food pantries, soup kitchens, and shelters that together work to share the importance of food security to the people of our home State of Arkansas. I urge Americans to contact their congressional representatives to voice their support for these nutritional programs. This critical issue of ending hunger, the unbelievable number of hungry Americans is something that we have to bring greater awareness to not just today but every day. I urge my colleagues to protect them from cuts and structural changes that will undermine their ability to serve our Nation's most vulnerable citizens. In addition to the Federal food programs, eliminating hunger in America requires the help of community organizations. Government programs provide a basis for support, but they cannot do the work alone. Community and faith-based organizations are essential to locating and rooting out hunger wherever it persists. We rely on the work of local food banks and food pantries, soup kitchens, and community action centers across America to go where government cannot. The reason I have stayed so persistent in coming to the floor of this Senate to talk about this issue on a day that we have designated for awareness is because I tried so desperately to put myself in the shoes of other mothers who are not perhaps as lucky as I am. When a child looks into your eyes and says: Mommy, I am hungry, they have no response, whereas I do. This is a critical issue for us as a nation. It shows where the fabric of our community and our country lies. It shows where our priorities are, and it shows who we are as Americans and what values we truly grasp for our fellow man. Recently, I have been so proud as my twin boys have gotten invitations to birthday parties. There is a note at the bottom of the invitation. It says: Please don't bring a gift, but in lieu of a gift would you please give to a worthy organization, our local food bank or shelter. My children with their birthday coming up soon said: Mom, we don't need those gifts again this year. Let's add something for those people who need it the most. Let's make sure that we have fun at our party but that we don't take the gift that we don't need and instead ask our friend to help us in feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless. I will try, and I know my colleagues will, too, to work as hard as we can to provide the resources these community organizations need to continue with the difficult but necessary work they perform, to encourage our neighbors, our children, our schools, and others to be as actively involved as they possibly can. Private corporations and small businesses also have a role to play in eliminating hunger in our great Nation. Our corporations and small businesses generate most of our Nation's health and have throughout history supported many of our greatest endeavors. Many corporations and businesses already contribute to efforts to eliminate hunger. I hope others will begin to participate as opportunities to do so present themselves in the future. A couple of great examples of how business and nonprofits can partner to feed hungry people occurred these past few months. Together with America's Second Harvest, Tyson Food, in my home State of Arkansas, donated 6 million pounds of protein--one of the more difficult elements of nutrition to get into food banks is protein--6 million pounds of protein from one corporate citizen. Wal-Mart raised $10 million to support food banks all across this country. I am so grateful to these companies and to nonprofit organizations for their leadership in this effort to feed those who have limited access to food and nutrition. I have also seen some of the important work being done by organizations in the local Washington, DC, area. We see it all around us. All we have to do is open our eyes and make sure we are aware. The Arlington Food Assistance Center works to provide food to those in need in the Arlington, VA, area. I have supported some of their efforts through the local school drive. Not only is it important in terms of providing the needs of food assistance through the Arlington food bank system and the assistance center, but think what it does for our children. It gives them a learning experience of how they, too, can give back not just to their community or their school but to their fellow man, someone desperately in need of a nutritious meal, a family who needs a nutritious breakfast. Think of what it teaches our children. Despite the fact that Arlington County is one of the wealthiest areas in the country, plenty of local residents do not have enough to eat. The Arlington Food Assistance Center seeks to remedy the problem by distributing bread and vegetables, meat, milk, eggs, and other food items. Our church group routinely goes for a ``gleaning'' program where local farmers allow us to get into the fields and collect part of their crops that have been left in order to provide fresh fruits and vegetables in our area food banks. Lastly, this effort needs the commitment of individual Americans. Our greatest national strength is the power that comes from individual initiative and the collective will of the American people. I believe we are called by a higher power to care for our fellow man and our fellow women. As a person of faith, I feel I am called to serve the poor and the hungry. I know many of my colleagues agree. If we believe in this call, we must live it every day in our schools and in our homes, in our workplaces and our places of worship, in our volunteering and in our prayer. This personal responsibility is a great one, but it holds tremendous power. As we have seen throughout American history, when individuals in this Nation bind together to serve a common cause, they can achieve the greatest of accomplishments. By sharing the many blessings and resources our great Nation provides, I am confident we can alleviate hunger, a disease that we know there is a cure for, both at home and abroad. I ask all of my colleagues to take a moment to honor on this day of awareness the very brave men and women and children who live in food insecurity and whom we have an opportunity to serve.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Absolutely, I yield to my good friend from Illinois who has done so much on the issue of hunger.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I come to the Senate today to discuss the issue of estate tax with a little bit of a different perspective from some of my Democratic colleagues who have spoken so very passionately on this issue already today. I respect many of their approaches and concerns, but I come to this issue from a little bit of a different perspective. That perspective is because I believe the estate tax in its current form is unfair. Outright repeal of the estate tax for family-owned businesses and farms has been a goal of mine since I entered Congress 14 years ago. I have grown up on a seventh generation Arkansas farm. I have watched as small communities and family-owned businesses have dwindled from their inability to maintain their competitiveness in the ever-growing global community, but also with the unbelievable challenges they face of the cost of health care, the cost of doing business, real estate costs, and others. I have seen too many small business owners and farmers in my home State restrict the growth of their enterprises in order to avoid facing the impossible choice of leaving their families with an up to 55 percent Federal tax burden or the other option of selling off portions of their assets when they die in order to pay that tax. However, because of our current budgetary constraints, I do recognize outright repeal is not feasible. Not at this time. With that said, it is more important than ever that we do what we can now to provide some certainty and relief for those who are so drastically impacted by this tax. Last week, I received a phone call from a constituent who owns a family trucking and farming equipment business. The business was started by the family in 1927. Over the years and through much hard work they have grown from a small dealership into a thriving family business that now employs more than 450 Arkansans. I hope many of us will continue to focus on the issue that small businesses are the No. 1 employer in this country and are the least likely to send their jobs overseas. They are the foundation, in many instances, of our communities. Whether it is the sponsor of our Little League teams or the group that is sponsoring the Cub Scout campout, we know they are the heart of our communities in rural America. Seeing this business grow, we all are thrilled to hear these stories. I am particularly thrilled to hear stories of families, families who have invested their capital, their hard work, ideas, and their lives in their trade, and are ultimately successful in realizing that American dream we all talk about. This same story is repeated all over our great State of Arkansas, whether it be the jewelry store owner in Fayetteville, the meatpacker in Morrilton, the car dealer in Springdale, or the timber farmer in Monroe County. Indeed, these stories can be heard across our entire Nation. Family businesses are the engines of our small communities. It is the family- owned businesses that provide the jobs, the wages, and the health care, in most instances, for our constituents. It is the family-owned business that sponsors our Little League teams or pays our local State and Federal taxes. They are an intricate part of the community. They live in our rural communities. They care about what happens to them. Yet because of the estate tax, we are forcing them to spend valuable assets on estate planning and life insurance rather than creating more jobs by investing and expanding their businesses. We are putting them at a disadvantage with their publicly traded competitors. What kind of risk do major publicly traded corporations have to mitigate against with the death of a CEO? None. But a family-owned business has to spend tremendous amounts of resources in mitigating against that risk. I, for one, intend to fight for these family businesses, fight for these communities, and fight for these jobs in rural America. Unfortunately, as this businessman from my State was quick to point out to me, we in Washington have left far too many of these family businesses in a quagmire as a result of the erratic estate tax policy we set in 2001. Under the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001, the estate tax will be phased out in 2010 only to come back in full force in 2011 at a 55-percent rate. For the family-owned business and farms which comprise more than 80 percent of all business enterprises in America, and which spend tens of thousands of dollars each year in planning for this tax, the status quo is unacceptable. It is not acceptable because many of our mom-and-pop shops are having to lock a significant portion of their capital resources into estate planning that may or may not be needed down the road. For small businesses with very limited liquidity, the uncertainty is paralyzing at a time when we should be giving them every opportunity to expand. At the expense of our family businesses, this issue has been used by some as a political football for far too long. It should end now. It can end now. Since current policy was set in 2001, we have revisited this issue in the Senate on multiple occasions. However, each time we have had the opportunity to act, we have failed to reach a reasonable solution, a compromise, which is what most people in this country want Congress to do, to come together to bring results for the problems they experience, not an end-all-be-all solution but a compromise that gets them some results. In this Congress, interested parties on both sides of the aisle have been at the negotiating table since early last summer. We have the information we need to form a compromise solution. We have that opportunity now. It is my understanding from leaders on the other side of the aisle that should a true compromise be forged on this issue prior to tomorrow's vote, a vote on that compromise would be allowed. Let me emphasize again, the time for a solution is now. Our economy is yearning for the investment of these small businesses, these family- owned businesses, that can help regenerate what we need in our economy, the jobs in our community that we need them to expand on. The time for the solution is now, not later. We have told these family businesses now is not the time far too many times already. I am so very hopeful this time we will do better. We know we do not have the perfect solution. But we also know if we do not seize the opportunity to provide them the certainty they need to continue their businesses, to take the money they are now spending on estate planning and reinvest those dollars into the job creation and the expansion of their businesses, we will have missed a great opportunity. We have the opportunity to come together, to provide some certainty for these family businesses through the estate tax reform by raising the estate tax exemption, reducing that tax rate to a reasonable level. Let's not let that opportunity slip away. I encourage my colleagues, come to the table. Look at what we have to work with. We have enthusiastic American family jobs and businesses that want desperately to be a part of making this country strong. We have an opportunity to offer them some solutions, some certainty, in order to be able to do just that, to give back to this great country that has given them the opportunity to create and build a family and a family business they are enormously proud of. Let us not let this opportunity slip away. I encourage my colleagues to please take seriously this issue--not politically, but seriously, the issue of the relief that we can provide by coming together on a compromise. I yield the floor.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I was so excited when we came to work this week with the opportunity to focus our Nation and the debate of this body toward health, the health of our Nation, the health of our people, and the health of our businesses, the fabric of this country, the fabric of our Nation. It is such an important thing for so many of us--certainly, each of us in our own families. I have small children and aging parents. All of us have responsibilities in our own lives and responsibilities to our constituencies. We have different constituencies such as the elderly who live in our communities and the small businesses that are striving hard to keep our economy going; children, and those with chronic diseases and illnesses who desperately need to make sure that the coverage they have is sufficient for what they may have or may not have, but want to make sure that they are protected against in case, unfortunately, something might happen. So as we came to the Senate this week to talk about health and how we could make health a very real part of the discussion in this Nation, a real part of what it meant to our economy and to our people and the quality of life, the real value of who we are as Americans, I was excited. Yet I saw so much of it cut short. The discussion that started on Monday ended with a line in the sand that said: My way or the highway, not let's work a deal and let's figure out what will make health care real in this Nation and sustainable and that will make sense in our communities. Then we moved to talking about how we deal with small businesses. To me, the most important thing we can do for our small businesses is to make available to them affordable, accessible health care but quality health care, the same kind of benefits that we ourselves as Members of Congress are blessed enough to be able to experience for our families and for ourselves. As we proceeded into this debate, way too much of the debate centered around not what we could work hard to do that was right but what people wanted. Then, all of a sudden, we leave abruptly this incredibly important debate. We leave behind this incredibly important debate to talk about a tax bill for tax cuts that don't even expire until January of 2009, instead of looking at something real and new, such as a new tax cut for small businesses to engage in the health insurance marketplace for their employees and for themselves or looking at how we could extend tax cuts that had expired, such as research and development and for education and tuition and so many more things that have been productive in our economy and in our communities. We go through this debate, and we come back now to finalize debate on the health care of our Nation. And what have we done? We have missed an opportunity to say to our seniors they are important enough that we are going to extend a deadline, a deadline that means so much for them to be able to take the time and the opportunity to understand this new prescription drug component of Medicare that we have passed. I voted for it, Mr. President, and I want it desperately to work. I have been out in the field in Arkansas, and I have made sure I met with seniors. We have hosted meetings and tried to educate, but there simply has not been time enough to get to the complexity of what is offered out there. We look back at what efforts have been made. The GAO has reported that one-third of seniors' calls to Medicare operators resulted in flawed or no information. Think about that for a moment. One in three seniors who called CMS for help were given bad or no information. Now those seniors must make difficult, sound decisions about their health care by Monday of next week. I wish we had been given the opportunity to make a difference in that. I wish we had the ability to make the difference for small businesses, offering them again the same opportunity we have, to enjoy quality health insurance at a low cost, with many choices for the variety of Federal employees who work in this great Nation. We can do the same. We could allow employers and small businesses and self- employed individuals--think about that, a one-man shop--to reap the benefits of group purchasing power and streamlined administrative costs as well as access to more plan choices. The proposal we had looked to present would create all of that, without any new bureaucracy. How about not reinventing the wheel? For once, we in Government would use something that was time tested for 40 years, has a 1-percent administrative cost, that we could implement for small businesses and bring to them again the same quality of product we enjoy as Members of Congress. On top of that, we could have incentivized it and brought them a new tax cut, a new tax benefit in order to be able to invest in themselves and in their employees and provide the kind of health care they deserve. It is hard for me to believe that we have missed all of those opportunities: to be progressive, to be thoughtful, to invest in our country, to make sure we are taking care of the fabric of this Nation and who we are. About 53 million Americans work for businesses with less than 100 employees. That pool is bigger than the Medicare population, which is about 42 million. Think of what we could do in offering those small businesses that type of a pool, to be able to bring down their costs, increase their choices, and maintain the quality they have demanded, the types of services they may need now or that they may need in the future, whether it is diabetes or cancer screening, making sure that immunization and child well care are all in there. We had an opportunity to do this and many things and we have missed that opportunity. Working families and small businesses need help. Our seniors need help. Our community providers need help. Mr. President, I ask for an additional minute.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Thank you, Mr. President. I encourage my colleagues to look at the missed opportunities and pull together to make a difference for the people of this country.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for an additional 1 minute.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I, too, would like to echo the Senator from North Carolina, that this is a debate which is extremely critical. It is an issue which is--particularly from my standpoint--one that I get most consistently when I return home to Arkansas. I don't think the debate is whether it is a critical issue for us to discuss and come up with a solution; the critical question here is, Are we really doing our best? Are we really working hard to produce the best product we possibly can for the constituency that really needs us the most? Small businesses are our No. 1 employer in Arkansas. They are the engine of our economy all across this great Nation. There is no doubt that they deserve the same quality of health care we have here as Members of Congress. The Senator mentioned that, as he left small business and came to Washington, his premiums went up. The statistics show us that the premiums for Federal employees rise at a disproportionately lower percentage rate than the premiums rise in the small business market. We have seen drastic increases in the premiums in the small business market over the last several years. However, while we also, as Federal employees, have seen increases in our premiums, they have not been anything compared to the increases that have been seen in the small business marketplace. So there may have been some changes, but the point is that we have a good product that we enjoy as Members of Congress. The quality control on what we have is tremendous because we adhere to the State mandates and what States have seen in their States to be important to their constituency. All States are different, but most of the States are consistent when it comes to things such as diabetes, maternity care, well baby care, immunization, cancer screening--things that have really made a difference not only in people's quality of life but also in terms of the cost of health care. States such as Connecticut actually cover anything--or mandate the coverage of Lyme disease because in Connecticut you actually see a prevalence of that. States have the choice. It is the State's right to be able to make sure that what their constituency wants in that product is going to be there. I believe that has worked very well. It is something we want to maintain. It is a quality control we enjoy, and there is no reason small businesses should not, also. Madam President, I wish to comment and lend my voice to the fact that this is a critical debate, one about making sure we are providing for every other American out there, particularly in small businesses, the same opportunities and the quality of health care we enjoy. I wish to address some of the issues that have been brought up in this debate that I have heard about the bill that I have worked hard on over the last 3 or 4 years--a bill Senator Durbin and I helped each other put together after realizing what a great job the Federal Government had done in bringing the best of what Government can do in its oversight and the best of what private industry and competition in the marketplace can bring. It brings it to us as Federal employees and Members of Congress, and has for over 40 years, and it keeps down an administrative cost that is drastically lower than private plans out in the small business marketplace. At some point, it is somewhere around 25, or plus, percentage points lower in terms of administrative costs, which is practical in this day and age and something that is essential. I applaud Senator Enzi in his effort and hard work at bringing about this issue and focusing on how important it is. I hope that the debate and our willingness to work to produce a good product is genuine and that we can actually do what is best for the American people and that we don't get caught up in a lot of the details of procedure here so that we miss the forest for the trees. On the other side of the aisle, they have argued that our bill is just another costly Government program, which will cost taxpayers a ton of money. We are getting ready to spend a ton of money tomorrow in extending tax cuts that haven't even expired and don't expire for several years. We are going to spend a tremendous amount of money--$50 billion plus--on extending those tax cuts which don't even come up for expiration for another couple of years. Here we have an opportunity to provide a tax cut to small business that could actually make an immediate impact on bringing down their cost of health insurance for themselves and their employees. This is kind of the first time I have ever noticed my colleagues on the other side, who all of a sudden don't want to provide a tax cut to small business because it costs. Yet we are going to have multiple tax cuts brought before us that come at a tremendous cost to the Government and to the deficit, and we don't even need them yet. Yet here is an opportunity to provide a direct tax cut, a credit, to small businesses to engage in the health care marketplace, encourage them to provide much needed health insurance for their employees, for themselves, and for the self-employed, and all of a sudden it is a cost that is just out of control. But if you look at that cost, it is amazing. It is maybe a third of the cost of the HSA that the President has been proposing. Yet we have the possibility and capacity under this plan to serve millions more Americans with health insurance--health insurance that is backed by the State mandate and the Office of Personnel Management, a proven negotiator, that negotiates for us, Members of Congress. So I just have a real problem with that argument. The fact is that SEHBP won't create any new bureaucracy. Our plan will be run by the same agency that runs the health care program for all Federal employees and Members of Congress. The administrative costs are less than 1 percent. There is no new bureaucracy created. It already exists in the Office of Personnel Management. We might have to increase some of those people in that office, but we don't know what is going to happen at the Department of Labor, which is charged with implementing Senator Enzi's plan. There is no one in the Department of Labor who has ever done that. There is no part of that agency designed or created in order to do that. We would have to reinvent the wheel to provide a section of the Department of Labor that would be able to institute the Enzi bill. In fact, most of the costs, as I have said, of our benefit plan for small businesses come in the form of a tax cut. So our costs are not administrative. We actually bring those down. Our costs are not an implementation. Our costs are providing the assistance to small business to actually get into the marketplace because we know that the more small businesses that get into the marketplace, the greater the pool. I doubt there is anyone here who will argue with the fact that the real key to providing good, quality, low-cost, consistent health insurance is in the volume of the pool because we all want to make sure that competition in the marketplace is what is driving the issue here. When you have a larger pool to negotiate with private industry, you are going to be able to negotiate a better deal. It is a better deal for everybody. Forty-six million Americans are not getting health insurance now. Disproportionately, the largest percentage of those 46 million are working in small businesses. They are not getting health insurance. Health insurance companies should love the idea of being able to increase their market share with those numbers of people. In fact, we have worked hard over the last 2 or 3 years with the insurance industry to make sure that what we were creating was improvement on what was already in existence other than the Federal plan.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Madam President, I believe it is so important that we heed the words of most of our parents, I am sure, when we were growing up, and those are: If it is worth doing, it is worth doing right. We enjoy, as Federal employees, an incredible opportunity to provide health insurance for ourselves and for our families which provides real, substantial quality. It is not something we buy into with the idea that we will never get sick; we buy into it knowing that maybe we are just one automobile accident or one chronic illness away from needing comprehensive health insurance. The increases my colleague from North Carolina talked about in terms of the number of people who would be added, those are immediate and they are temporary. They are mostly young, healthy people. The fact is that if we don't include everybody and we don't make sure all of the different chronic illnesses that exist out there are going to be offered, those who are less healthy are going to be shut out, they will become more costly, and the first time one of those young individuals, healthy individuals, has an accident or reaches a chronic condition, they too are not going to be covered under this plan. So I hope we will heed the idea that it is important to do what is right. We have an opportunity here, at no additional cost. We could eliminate it, if the other side doesn't want to provide a tax cut to small business, that is OK. But we should maintain the quality, and I hope my colleagues will join me in that.

Mrs. LINCOLN

Mrs. LINCOLN. Yes, absolutely.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Absolutely.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Thank you, Mr. President. I ask unanimous consent to continue until other Members arrive.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Delaware.

Mrs. LINCOLN. How about if I just go ahead and yield to the Senator from Delaware because as a former Governor, he has some incredible stories to tell, and I think they really add to this debate. I will simply say to my colleagues that I hope they follow this debate very closely and certainly appreciate how important this is to the working families of all of our States.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Thank you, Mr. President. I will be glad to yield the floor when others are ready to speak. I would like to add that the experience of many of our colleagues, whether they are former insurance commissioners, former Governors and others, brings to this table the understanding what the American people want, what our working families want. I think the debate is that small businesses definitely want more affordable health care. They also want to make sure that what they are providing for themselves and their families and their employees is quality service, quality coverage. That is what they deserve. That is what they want. Even for those who feel so young and invincible, we also know that they may be one car accident or one diagnosis away from needing more comprehensive health insurance for the rest of their lives. That is why we want to make sure--as I said in the beginning--that whatever we do is right, that we don't move forward on something that is going to be less productive and in the long run, unfortunately, put more people at risk. My goal is to help small businesses while not jeopardizing the quality of health care for the 68 million Americans in State-regulated group plans that are already out there. We don't want to do harm there. The fact is if we move forward on what Senator Enzi wants to do, which is preempting those State regulations and State mandates, we could do tremendous harm for those who are currently insured and the 16.5 million Americans with individual health insurance coverage who would probably lose some quality of coverage which they have. If it is good enough for Federal employees, and if it good enough for Members of Congress, I think it should be good enough for millions of small business employees who are the economic backbone of communities throughout this Nation. I applaud my colleagues for coming to the floor for this debate, and I hope we will have a serious debate so we can move forward and actually do what is right for the American people.

Mrs. LINCOLN. Mr. President, I am so happy to come to the floor today because the Senate is finally debating how we can help small businesses across our country afford health care for their employees. Just as Senator Gregg has mentioned how important it is to provide benefits to groups who want to invest, and to individuals and companies who want to invest and grow the economy, so too it is critically important that we provide small businesses the ability to invest in themselves. That is what I want to talk about today. Small businesses are critical to this country. They are critical to rural States such as mine in Arkansas, but they are the engine of our economy in this great Nation. They are the No. 1 employers. That is why it is so important that we get this right, that we provide them with a tool that will allow them to reinvest in themselves and their employees and their communities, so that we can keep that engine going. I applaud my colleague from Wyoming, Senator Enzi, for all he has done in bringing about this debate. He has worked hard and genuinely on this issue, and I appreciate very much what he has put into this. He has helped us make sure this is not a debate about whether this is a critical issue. This reminds me of something I was taught by my father who said: If it is worth doing, it is worth doing right. It is worth doing correctly. That is what we are here to talk about today. I believe very strongly that our small businesses are so important to us--our self-employed individuals in this country have the greatest spirit in the world--and it is so important that we should not offer them a second-rate opportunity. We should offer them the same opportunity we have as Federal employees and Members of Congress: The opportunity to build a pool that will offer them greater access, greater choice at a lower cost, by pooling all of themselves together across this great country, while maintaining the quality, which is what we do for ourselves. We maintain the quality of the product of the health insurance we receive or have access to as Federal employees and Members of Congress, and we should do no less for the small businesses and the self-employed individuals in this great country. So I hope, as we continue this debate, we will remember those hard- working American families who are depending on us not just to do something, but to do what is right and fair, and offering what we see as fair tax policy and offering what we see as fair access to the same quality product of health care and health insurance that we as Members of Congress get. The small business health care crisis is undoubtedly one of the issues I hear the most about when I return home to Arkansas. In fact, in every community in our Nation, as well as millions of working families across this country, we are seeing the difficulty of having access to quality health care and health insurance and the ability to pay for that. There are approximately 46 million Americans currently without health insurance, including 456,000 Arkansans whom I am responsible for in terms of producing a product that is worthy of those individuals. Small businesses are the No. 1 source of our jobs in Arkansas. Yet only 26 percent of the businesses with fewer than 50 employees offer health insurance coverage. Workers at these businesses, which again are the engine of our economy, are most likely to be uninsured. In fact, 20 percent of working-age adults are uninsured in Arkansas. This number is alarming, and addressing this problem should be a national priority, and we should approach it as if we are going to do the best job that we are capable of doing. That is why we are here today, to talk about that. Mr. President, 224 major organizations are opposed to the proposal that Senator Enzi has brought before us. Two hundred-and-twenty-four is a huge number: everywhere from diabetes to mental illness to hospital federations. These individuals understand how important the years have been in allowing State insurance commissioners to be able to set mandates in order to cover what is important to individuals in their States, and what is important to small businesses and everyone in those States. Those States have the right and the ability to figure out what is important to them, and the majority of them have agreed on many of these major issues. Those who lack health insurance do not get access to timely and appropriate health care. We know that, and we see it. We see it in the cost of Medicare when people don't get health care for 20 or 25 years when they are in the working marketplace as a small business owner or employee, and then they become more costly to us when they hit Medicare age because they haven't received the screenings, the timely visits to the doctor, and they haven't been getting the kind of health care they truly need. They have less access to these important screenings. They don't have access to the state-of-the-art technology that exists or prescription drugs, which is another piece of what can help keep down the cost of health care. Working families need help with this problem. The Institute of Medicine has reported that 18,000 people die each year because they are uninsured. The fact is, being insured does matter. It makes a big difference. It makes a difference in our health care costs. It makes a difference in whether you are going to survive--longevity, the ability to care for your family. It makes a big difference. We have reached a juncture where we are going to debate how we deal with those who are uninsured, whether we are going to give them substandard coverage or whether we are going to give them the coverage that we have. Again, I commend my colleagues, Senator Enzi from Wyoming and Senator Nelson from Nebraska, for their leadership. I appreciate their hard work on this issue. But I do disagree, because I believe that the devil is in the details on this issue, and I am deeply concerned about the very harsh and unintended consequences that will occur if S. 1955 were to become law. Senator Durbin and myself have been working together for several years to come up with what we believe is a better health care plan for America's small businesses. What we have done is looked to a 40-year- old tested delivery system, and it is the one that we ourselves use. It is a Federal plan that takes the best of what Government can do and combines it with the best of what private industry can do. The private marketplace and the competition that it can create allows the Government to pool all of its Federal employees and use that pool as a negotiating tool to bring us greater choice at a lower cost. About 3 years ago, I suppose it was, my staff and I were discussing the way we could help small businesses, and I thought about the way my Senate office operates. It operates much like a small business in my home State and here. As I looked at my employees, I saw that I had two employees, one with 26 years with the Federal Government, another with 30 years with the Federal Government. I had two women who had delivered babies and were on maternity leave. I had some, such as myself, with small children and a husband that is on my plan, and then I had a host of young, healthy staffers who were single. But I had a whole array of different individuals who needed a tailor-made insurance plan for their needs. While there are similarities in our Senate office and small businesses, there are also some obvious differences. One of the most glaring contrasts is access to affordable and quality health care. I saw what my office went through and realized that is what small businesses are going through. I knew we could do better. I knew we could take the plan of what we have and apply it to small businesses. Last year, more than 8 million people were banded together in the Federal employees purchasing pool, and that gave us choices among 10 national health insurance plans and a variety of local insurance plans, and a total of 278 private insurance plans from the private marketplace. Not government-run--not government-run health care at all--but health care from the private industry, health insurance from the private industry that was created by competition of the multiple Federal employees across the country. It offered us greater access, greater choices at a lower cost. So I am here to ask this question: Why don't we try to give small businesses access to that same type of private health insurance option that Members of Congress and Federal employees enjoy today? Rather than reinvent the wheel, why don't we create a program for small businesses that is based on our Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan, through the FEHBP, by pooling them, the small businesses, together in one nationwide pool. That is exactly what Senator Durbin and I have proposed in our Small Employers Health Benefit Program. By pooling small businesses across America into one risk and purchasing pool similar to the FEHBP, our program will allow employers to reap the benefit of group purchasing power and streamline administrative costs as well as access to more plan choices. The SEHBP, as we have introduced, lowers costs for small businesses in two key ways: It pools them into one national pool across the country, therefore spreading the risk between the healthy and the sick, the young, the old, those who live and work in the remotest parts of this great land and those who work in the most urban areas. Second, our plan significantly lowers administrative costs for small businesses. Two economists have estimated that SEHBP would save small businesses between 27 and 37 percent annually, even if they don't take advantage of the tax cut that we offset costs with by insuring lower income workers. We provide a tax cut to small businesses, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why those on the other side of the aisle, for the first time I have ever noticed, will fight a tax cut for small businesses. Providing small business a tax cut to be able to engage in what is such an important tool in getting themselves and their employees insured makes good sense. What a great investment. Senator Gregg was talking about balancing all of that and the economy. What a great way to balance what corporate America gets and their ability to deduct health insurance costs that they have and small business getting a tax cut for investing in their employees and health benefits for them. Under our bill, employers will receive an annual tax credit for contributions made on behalf of their workers who make $25,000 per year or less. And if the employer contributes 60 percent or more to the health insurance premium of an employee making $25,000 or less, the employer will receive a 25-percent tax credit. And the tax credits increase with the number of people covered and the proportion of premium the employer chooses to cover. Also, the employer receives a bonus tax credit for signing up in the first year of the program, because we know from the example of the Federal employees that the more employees who are in the pool, the greater advantage to everyone concerned. Small businesses will save thousands of dollars--even more-- under our plan. Segmenting the market into different association pools, as S. 1955 does under Senator Enzi's bill, will not achieve these savings that would be created by instituting one large pool with all of those small businesses and self-employed individuals. Each association will be administering to a separate group with a different administrative structure and different costs, obviously. More funds would be going to administrative costs as opposed to serving the people with a quality health plan. Our SEHBP would have one administrative structure and could pool approximately 53 million workers together, therefore balancing the risk of sick and healthy, young and old, rural and urban, for affordable rates for everybody. Why wouldn't we want to make our pool as big as it possibly could be, as we do with the Federal workers? I believe our plan takes a real moderate and balanced approach that combines the best of what Government can do with the best of what the private sector can do, and preserving important coverage for preventive health care treatment such as diabetes supplies, mammograms, prostate screening, maternity and well-baby care, immunization, things that States themselves have decided are important enough to mandate coverage for and ensure that the people of their State are going to get the safe and important coverage of illnesses that are critical to them in their State. Like the FEHB Plan, our program does not promote Government-run health care, but it harnesses the power of market competition to bring down health insurance costs using a proven Government negotiator in the Office of Personnel Management, OPM, which is the negotiator for our plan. We, once a year, as Federal employees, can choose among 270-plus plans. We are able to actually benefit from that proven Government negotiator and the harnessing of that power. Our legislation, S. 2510, has been endorsed by many organizations-- the National Association of Women Business Owners, Small Business Majority, the American Medical Society, the American Diabetes Association, the National Mental Health Association, the Cancer Society, and many more that have realized how important it is to use a proven example, a proven structure that maintains quality but helps by pooling and bringing down those costs. The Mental Health Liaison Group, representing over 35 national mental health organizations, wrote to us and said about our bill: S. 2510 does not sacrifice quality of coverage for affordability or allow the offering of second class health insurance to small businesses. Within the FEHBP program, small business owners, employees and their family members would be covered by all the consumer protections in their home states--including hard-won state mental health parity laws and mandated benefit laws. The American Academy of Pediatrics, writing to us on behalf of over 60,000 primary care pediatricians and pediatric specialists, wrote: Through the benefits of pooling small businesses and providing tax cuts to small employers, small pediatric practices will be assisted in the health insurance market without sacrificing health care services for children. The American Diabetes Association wrote to us and said: While other proposals seeking to provide health benefits for small businesses . . . have exempted or eliminated coverage for important diabetes care protections, [our bill,] S. 2510, will allow individuals with diabetes to receive the important health care coverage they require to remain healthy and productive members of the workforce. This is not just about quality of life, although many of us believe that is very important. We as Members of Congress enjoy a quality of life because of the very healthy health insurance program we are offered. We want our small businesses that are vital to our economy to enjoy that same opportunity. But it is also about economics. It is about making sure we keep our workforce, particularly our small businesses and their workforce, healthy and thriving and productive and in the workplace. It is about making sure America's working individuals and working families get the health care they need before they reach 65. When they hit 65 in the Medicare Program, then they are going to be more costly to Government because they are not going to have gotten the health care they needed and deserved in their working years. I believe our plan is better in so many ways. I am proud we are having this debate, and I hope so many people will realize we can do better. We can do better and make sure we truly elevate small businesses and self-employed people to the same level we hold ourselves, in providing them the access to the same quality type of health care. Our SEHBP bill offers tax cuts for small employers. Senator Enzi's bill does not. SEHBP relies on a proven program. It is based on the successful Federal Employees Health Benefit Program which has efficiently and effectively provided extensive benefit choices at affordable prices to Members of Congress and Federal employees for decades. For decades, we have had a proven program out there that proves you can harness the competitive nature of the marketplace, and with the oversight of Government and the State mandates, you can actually provide that quality of health insurance at a lower cost. By pooling small businesses together and allowing OPM to negotiate with private health insurance companies on their behalf, they, too, could have access to this wide variety. On the other hand, Senator Enzi and Senator Nelson's bill establishes a new set of responsibilities at the U.S. Department of Labor, to administer an untried and an untested program. We don't reinvent the wheel. What we do is use what already exists. To invent a new section of the Department of Labor to administer Senator Enzi's bill is going to take time and money. We are not going to know how it needs to be administered through the Department of Labor. They have never done it before. Even the Department of Labor employees currently enjoy benefits from the health insurance program that is negotiated by the Office of Personnel Management. So it is hard to believe they are going to want to go to another system. SEHBP offers individual self-employed workers the same access to health insurance that is offered to group businesses. SEHBP defines small businesses as groups of 1 to 100, so an individual self-employed person will be treated exactly as a business with 2 or more people. Any business with 1 to 100 employees is eligible to participate in what we are trying to do. Under Senator Enzi's bill, the self-employed people are not pooled with the small businesses, unless they are mandated by State law. And there are not that many State laws that actually mandate that. But the self-employed people in 36 States, including Arkansas, will not have access to the same negotiated rates of businesses with 2 or more people. They will be pulled out of that pool and rated on their own. That means, if they are younger women of childbearing years or perhaps they are older workers at 50 or 55 and are diabetic, they will be rated completely separate from the pool, which means they will be segregated and treated differently. They don't get to enjoy the benefit of a larger risk pool which could bring down their costs and offer them greater choice. Our bill also ensures access to health care specialists. Many States have passed laws requiring insurers to cover certain health care providers, including dentists or psychologists or chiropractors. All three of these and many more are required by our State of Arkansas law. I know the people of my State enjoy the assurance they have of knowing that their State regulator, their State insurance commissioner, is looking out for their needs. They can do that better on a State level. That is why we have always left those types of regulatory issues up to our State--because they know and can work. Can you imagine being a small business, or better yet an employee of a small business, having to call some big, huge, Federal bureaucratic office to request or to complain or to have your concerns heard about what is not covered under your insurance plan? No, they call the State insurance commissioner today, and that is the way it should be. The State insurance commissioner can then respond to the concerns of their constituency and has done so very well over many years. The coverage for diabetes supplies, mammography, and other important screenings are mandated by State law which would be preempted by what Senator Enzi is trying to do. Many States have passed laws requiring health insurance companies to cover these benefits because insurers simply were not doing it. It did not happen because the insurance commissioners just decided on a whim to do it; it is because the insurers were not covering it. Why do we have to go back and relearn that lesson? For 40 years, the Federal Government has used the effectiveness of the pool of the 8 million Federal employees and been able to enjoy the protections that are there, guided by State insurance commissioners. Our bill also prevents unfair rating on gender and health status. Under our bill, health insurers will be prohibited from ratings based on health status--whether you happen to be diabetic, whether you happen to have eating disorders--your gender, or the type of industry in which the employees are working. Under Senator Enzi's rules, that will be all preempted, even for the 15 States that don't allow ratings on these factors. Our bill also frees employers to focus on running their businesses. They don't have to go and negotiate these plans through their association or with their association. They are going to get sent a booklet just as we do, once a year, to review all that is available to them, and choices, and then figure out what is best for them. My employees--each of them picks something different. I pick coverage for a family with children. Some of them pick a PPO or an HMO. Some of them pick all different kinds of State plans and others that are offered to them in that process.