Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I want to thank the Senator from Delaware for raising these important issues. I agree with his understanding and description of the land acquisition provisions for the First State National Historical Park within H.R. 3979, that the language does not permit condemnation, so that the only way a specific property can be acquired by the Federal Government is through a voluntary sale by the landowner.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I want to thank Don Cravins, again, as my chief of staff; Liz Craddock, Staff Director of my energy committee; and Stephanie Gupta, head of homeland security. I know I am leaving them in good hands with what they are going to be doing in the future and with the great leadership that remains here. I only have a few minutes, so I will just run through a couple of the highlights of some of the accomplishments that I am most proud of and really take this opportunity to thank so many who helped, because the one thing I have learned that most certainly is true, is that if you want to accomplish really big things here--really great things, generational things--you most certainly cannot do that alone. So the first thing you need to do is look for a really good partner--and I mean a partner that will be with you through thick and thin. Sometimes you are lucky enough to find those kinds of partners, and I found them on both sides of the aisle. The first major piece of legislation I introduced was something that was in my heart for so long, and that was the Conservation and Reinvestment Act. The cosponsors of that bill, amazingly, were Frank Murkowski from Alaska, Trent Lott from Mississippi, John Breaux from Louisiana, and Senator Dianne Feinstein from California. Chris Dodd joined me a few days later after we introduced it--and Ron Wyden, Chris Bond, John Warner, and Thad Cochran, just to name a few. At the end of this effort--although this particular bill didn't pass; we missed it literally by inches, and I will describe what that was in a minute--we had 4,500 organizations throughout the country, from the Sierra Club to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and everyone in between in a broad coalition to fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund--and Lamar Alexander knows more about this than I could ever know, and he will tell you one day the details about the Land and Water Conservation Fund. The Udalls and the Udalls' fathers were very instrumental in the creation of the Land and Water Conservation Fund. It was a promise made but never kept--that this country would set aside about $900 million a year to purchase land, to build our parks, and to secure recreational opportunities. This country is so blessed--more than any on Earth--with the amount of natural resources we have, and we have not lived up to that promise. So I introduced this bill as a young legislator. John Breaux said you don't even know what you are doing; how are you introducing a bill like this? I said: I don't know, but I am just going for it because I believe in it. So we never passed it, but it has been in part of almost every piece of energy legislation--in pieces and parts since that day we introduced that. I am very hopeful that war will go on under Senator Murkowski, the daughter of Frank Murkowski, and Maria Cantwell, who in many ways got to the Senate because she defeated one of the gentlemen who opposed us on this bill and used it as a platform to get here. So I know she will be committed to finishing the work. The bill did three things. It fully funded the Land and Water Conservation Fund, a trust fund that will go on for generations. It would fully fund coastal restoration, which is so important not just to Louisiana, because we are literally falling away into the Gulf of Mexico, but it will help Sheldon Whitehouse in his work. It will help Dick Durbin along the Great Lakes, and it will help Cory Booker in New Jersey. If you allocate the funding correctly, it will be grants that these coastal communities can use until we figure out how to clean our atmosphere and how to stop the tremendous pressures that are coming on our coast. Louisiana knows this. We have experienced the worst disasters literally in the history of our country, and they are only getting worse. I will talk about that more in a minute. But it was because we had laid the groundwork for CARA, Pete Domenici literally felt so sorry for me--he knew how hard we had worked and the coalition was so disappointed when we lost--that he directed, literally with the stroke of a pen, $1 billion to the gulf coast in the energy bill for 2005. That money was divided 50 percent to Louisiana and 50 percent to the other States. Now, I can promise everyone here that for the $500 million that went to Louisiana, we can account for every penny of it. We know exactly where it went, and we put that down as a downpayment to restoring our coast, which doesn't just belong to us--it belongs to the whole Nation. This is the greatest, the seventh largest delta on the planet. It is what Thomas Jefferson leveraged the whole entire Treasury of the United States to purchase. It is something worth fighting for. We would not be a country without the Mississippi Delta, and we could never have found our way west if we couldn't have supplied the great center of this Nation with the commerce they needed. Every State along this river--19 of them--use this river and understand what I am talking about. Amy Klobuchar understands this. She is at the top of this river, and I am at the bottom, and we have talked a lot about how important that corridor is. That needs to continue. Then there was the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, which I finally passed with Pete Domenici's help, who was my dear friend and one of the most wonderful leaders I have ever worked with. He came from a family with eight children. We had nine, and we are both Catholic and came from the same sort of background. He served with such passion. So he joined with me in passing the Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act, which finally secured a permanent stream of revenue for coastal restoration and protection. But as Lamar Alexander knows, it left out the land and water, and it left out wildlife. We just couldn't lift it all, so that needs to be corrected. Finally, there is the RESTORE Act, which I worked on with my colleagues when the BP oil spill killed 11 people in the gulf and spilled 5 million barrels of oil in the gulf. Thanks go to Barbara Boxer, this extraordinary woman who has been a partner with me. We think very differently about the world. We see things very differently. California is very different from Louisiana. But I will say one thing about Barbara Boxer. If I had to be in a foxhole with someone, I would want to be with her because she never stops fighting. She and I are very much alike in that regard. Once we set our minds to something there is no dividing us. People asked why did I send her money for her reelection? Why did I raise so much money from Louisiana? I said that I would do it again because when no one would stand up--well, not no one, but if she hadn't stood up when that BP oil spill went down, and said, I am chair of this committee and I believe the gulf coast deserves this funding, we just wouldn't have had it. It is as simple as that. People do not know how powerful a chairman is here. When a chairman makes up their mind and they say this is what we are going to do, the rest of the committee, for the most part, goes along. And so Barbara said that. With Senator Vitter, of course, who is the ranking member on that committee put his shoulder to the wheel, and we were able to get--well, it is still in court, but we think--a serious downpayment to recover from one of the great ecological disasters of our State, of our country, which is the loss of the gulf coast. This just isn't in Louisiana. This is Texas and Mississippi, and it is going to affect parts of the whole country. But we are on the mend. I came here to do that work. I came to find money. I found it, and we are going to continue that work. I am thrilled to work with so many of you to get that done. On education--Lamar has to leave, but I am glad he is here because I found a great soulmate in Lamar Alexander--former Secretary of Education, former Governor, a Presidential candidate, and absolutely extraordinarily committed to finding a better way for our children in America to be educated. As proud as we are of the public school system, at the turn of the century, when people in the world were wondering how to build the middle class in the world and lots of countries were struggling with how to do that, America knew. America knew that if you educated your citizens--women, boys, and girls; not just boys, which is what half the world still does, which is a tragedy--if we open up our schools for universal, free education, along with other things, it would lift your country to greatness unsurpassed in the history of the world. What breaks my heart is to walk into schools today--and Mark Warner knows this because he was Governor of Virginia--and see children's eyes just completely dulled, sitting there completely bored, teachers who are just sort of going through the motions. It breaks my heart because I know that not only does it limit their lives but it limits the potential of our Nation. With Lamar Alexander and a handful of Democrats, I was proud to work with Presidents Bill Clinton and George Bush to pass a series of laws. Evan Bayh comes to mind, Joe Lieberman, John Breaux, and a group of us stood up and said: It is time to stop sending money to the States without accountability. If we need to send money, we need to hold States accountable, and we need to give opportunities for choice to parents and public charter schools. I am reluctant to go too far on vouchers. You have heard my speech on that. You heard Senator Feinstein's speech on that. But both of us have agreed to support some kinds of strategic vouchers that help poor kids get out of failing schools until we can fix them. Most importantly, I support high-performing public charter schools, and I will continue to fight that for the rest of my days. I thank all of you who helped on that and particularly Tom Carper on the Democratic side and Lamar Alexander. Cory Booker has been an amazing leader and will hopefully continue on that. I thank Dick Durbin, who is on Appropriations. I had to twist his arm a little bit on some of it, but he ended up coming around and has been an amazing fighter for the right kinds of public schools that serve the children first and the bureaucracy and administration second. I respect teachers. I respect administrators. But our schools should work for the children and their families who so desperately want them to have a great education. The third issue I wish to speak about, which is a legacy issue, is adoption. I hope I can get through this without tearing up. I don't know why I have always had such passion for this issue. My mother had nine children without one single problem. As a young child, I remember my aunt adopted two children. I think it might have been that; I can't remember exactly. I started to think about all the children in the world who don't have parents. Maybe I was just always so proud when I filled out those forms in Catholic school. I can remember sitting there filling them out: Are your parents divorced or married? I loved checking ``married.'' How many siblings do you have? I loved putting ``eight.'' I was always so proud of my family. I thought, what do children without parents do? I just could not imagine. So I got very passionate about it. I ended up, of all things, marrying an orphan. My husband was adopted out of an orphanage. So I thought, yes, this is going in the right direction. I thought I would adopt children. I thought he could not say no since he himself was adopted, and so this would work out. Sure enough, we ended up adopting two children. But this was my passion before I met my husband and before I even thought about adopting. It was as if God put this in my heart, so I have taken it and carried it. I thank Dave Camp; Jim Oberstar, who is deceased; Tom Bliley from Virginia, who is a great leader among us; Larry Craig, who is no longer here, who served as my cochair; and Senator Jesse Helms. Amazingly, I didn't know to be afraid of Jesse Helms; I thought he was a really nice guy. Later, everybody had to tell me how hard he was to get along with. But I went up to him, and I thought he would surely want to help because he had adopted a child. I don't think a lot of people realize that. Sure enough he did, and we passed a great treaty together that serves as the model for international adoption today. Joe Biden was the ranking member on the committee. With Jesse Helms's and Joe Biden's support, we passed a great treaty years ago, and we are still in the process of making that possible and working it through. The accomplishments are really quite long, so I am going to submit them for the Record. I will only say that the adoption tax credit which Bob Casey worked on and took up that cause when he got here--I am thrilled and hope we can keep it. I would like to say to Amy Klobuchar how much I appreciate her agreeing to step in and take over the leadership of the adoption caucus on this side and Roy Blunt, who I think will take it up on the Republican side and continue this great work. There are over 100,000 children who are waiting for families in the United States. There are over 500,000 children in foster care. These children think it is their fault they are there, and it is not. It is not their fault that their family disintegrated around them. It is not their fault that they got pregnant at 11 and were kicked out of their house. Instead of the family wrapping that child in their arms and helping them to grow, they just kicked them out on the street. It is not their fault. We need to realize that God does not make trash. He never has, and he never will. Everybody he has made has a purpose and dignity, and we need to honor that and do better work. I have spent a lot of time here on it. I am going to continue to do so. I will never stop working on it. I am very proud of the work we have done. I will put the rest into the Record. On energy very quickly and then finally disaster recovery, I couldn't have been prouder when I became the chair of this committee. It was quite a miracle. I didn't expect it. I never thought I would last long enough to become the chair because there were so many people ahead of me. It kind of worked out when Max Baucus left to go to China and Tim Johnson was retiring that it fell to me. It has been my great joy for 9 months to serve as chair, with Lisa Murkowski as my ranking member. Of course, I worked with her father. I didn't sit next to him because I was a junior member, but I worked with him closely, and it has been wonderful working with her. I am so proud that Maria Cantwell will step up and take that leadership. I know the two of them work beautifully together. They do see the world differently, but they are two women who know how to compromise and who will be respectful of each other and find a way for our country to move forward. I can tell you all that in my whole life--which isn't that long, but it has been a pretty good run in public office--there has never been a time when America has been closer to energy independence. What that means to our country is beyond description. We don't have to listen to parts of the world that don't hold our values. We can lift up our country. We can move forward. And it has to be with a combination of fossil fuels, weaning our way to a greener, cleaner environment, and manufacturing right here in America. I hope you all will put down the swords and pick up the plow and really plow together because this is an amazing opportunity for our country. I sure hope we don't miss it. It is going to benefit and make the whole country, not just our part of the country, more prosperous. People desperately want to move up into the middle class and stay there and not feel so fragile and feel as if they can have the manufacturing jobs and good energy jobs and really eliminate some of the geopolitical nightmares we have been in, fighting wars for oil. It has to come to an end. Finally, I will say a word about disaster recovery. When I got to the Senate, my husband and I were looking at each other saying: How did we even end up here? We had no idea. When Katrina hit, it became very clear that this is why I needed to be here. I had been an appropriator since I was 23 years old. I knew a little bit about budgets. I knew a little bit about how the system worked. I knew how the State and local governments depended on the Federal Government so much funding. I understood the power of HUD and the power of housing and the power of building schools and levees and the Corps of Engineers. So I was perfectly positioned to be able to lead the effort for my State, and they desperately needed a leader. I wasn't perfect. I made lots of mistakes. But I wasn't afraid to try because that is all you can do. The devastation was so great and it was so unbelievable. Eighty percent of the east bank of the city and much of Jefferson Parish--not quite as bad as New Orleans--and all of St. Bernard--67,000 people in St. Bernard lost everything. Everyone in the Lower Ninth Ward lost everything, which is like a small city unto itself. In New Orleans east, which is like a small city unto itself, 60,000 people lost every school, every house. It was unbelievable. I say to my colleagues: Thank you for being there for us. I know I aggravated you to death. I know I never stopped asking. But you were the only hope because there was just no way these communities could recover. New Orleans has been there for 300 years. You have heard me say this: We didn't move down there recently to go sunbathing or to build condos; we have been down there for 300 years. The city is going to stay there. The region is going to stay there. And had this government just invested a little bit of the money back that we have given it over time--from our energy resources, from our manufacturing, from the wealth we have created along that great mouth of the river--if the country had just given us a little bit of money--$500 million here, $500 million there--and built levees that wouldn't have broken in 52 places, we wouldn't have had $140 billion in damage. So when I came to Robert Byrd because President Bush was not that forward-leaning--I will just leave it at that. There will be a lot more in my book about it, but I will just leave it at that, not very forward-leaning. The person I went to was Robert Byrd. In his old age, he was so wise. He just looked at me. He didn't say much at that time, but he just took my hand and he said: I will be there with you. He was the chair of the Appropriations Committee, so that meant something. Boy, he was. He helped me write things in a bill that could probably never be possible today. That was when chairmen understood the power to help people to heal wounds and to bring hope and to be compassionate. That is what government is there to do. If government is not there when you have lost everything, then what in the heck is the use of having it? So we hope we will be able to repay this country for the investments that have been made, and we will. We will do our best. With all of the people who come to New Orleans and all the conventions that come--and we hope we bring joy and happiness when people come--we hope to pay our way and to pay this back over time for what you have done to help us. We are doing a good job of helping ourselves by planning better, doing more smart-growth, sustainable development, building our levees to the point where they won't break again, and we will continue to do that. So those are some of the legacy pieces I have worked on. It is kind of amazing that these were the things that were in my heart when I was a little girl. I didn't learn this when I was a Senator. I can remember taking a bus when I was in the eighth grade down to the coast and looking at LaFourche Parish for the first time, and for a girl from the poor part of uptown, I kept looking at the nuns who took me, and I said: What world is this? I had no idea about Bayou LaFourche. When I got to be a Senator, I remembered LaFourche, the bayou, and I remembered how fragile it looked to me even as a child, and I thought, if I can do anything to save this place, I will. I have spent a lot of my time saving it, and it is stronger now. It is still not completely safe, but it is much stronger now. I tutored in public school. My passion started when the nuns of Ursuline sent me to tutor in a public school, and the little girl whom I tutored, who was my age, couldn't read. I can remember going home to my mother and saying: This is the strangest thing. I just met a little girl. She is my age, and she can't read. Mama, is that possible, that children don't know how to read? I can remember her sitting me down and explaining to me why some children couldn't read, and I said: That doesn't seem right to me. I made up my mind then that I would work. The reason I say this is because there are a lot of young people listening to this, and I just want you to know, just listen to your heart because God puts these things in your heart at very young ages. If you don't block it out, if you are not cynical and if you hope and live openly, those dreams can come true. Then you can make a profound difference in rebuilding a school system, which I am continuing to work on, or make sure every orphan in the world knows that they are loved and that we are going to work hard to find them a family; to build this great gulf coast, where I spent my life growing up as a child and knowing that it is worth saving. It may not be as sexy as the west coast or as prosperous as the east coast, but the gulf coast is really worth fighting for. It is a very special place in our country. I learned to love it as a child, and I will fight for it as an adult. Finally, let me just say a few thank-yous in closing. A thank-you to my mentor Lindy Boggs, who coached me every step of the way; to my mentor John Breaux, who got me into this gig in the first place. I thank Bennett Johnston, who taught me about being a proud member of the Energy Committee; Senator Tom Daschle, who saved my skin more times than I can tell you; Kent Conrad, who taught me about the budget; Chris John and Jim McCrery and Richard Baker in my delegation, who were Democrats and Republicans--we worked together to do amazing things. I also thank Cedric Richmond, who still works closely with me, and Charles Boustany, whom I admire a lot. I thank other Members who are no longer here: Olympia Snowe--we were the first two women to chair a major committee--well, actually a minor committee, the small business committee; and Lisa and I were the first to chair and be a ranking member of a major committee. I couldn't have worked with two more remarkable women. I thank Senator Joe Lieberman, who was a leader of the DLC and a great mentor of mine on foreign policy issues; Senator Ted Stevens, who was as grumpy as could be but really did take me under his wing and teach me a lot; Senator Danny Inouye; Senator Robert Byrd. And I am going to put others into the Record: Senators Mikulski, Carper, Heitkamp, Manchin, Cantwell, Begich, Pryor, and Hagan. I want to say a special word to the Black Caucus. I represent 30 percent African Americans in my State. You know, all groups of people are hard to represent, and my State is so diverse, and I have tried so hard to be respectful of all the different groups in my State. I thank the Black Caucus--both the local elected officials and the National Black Caucus--for being such a great partner with me and helping me to understand about compassion, forgiveness, faithfulness, and for trust. Their spiritual strength is so amazing. I thank them very much for coming down to help me. I thank labor, who brought me here. They encouraged me to run when I was 23 years old, and I tried to never leave them. Only 8 percent of my State is now organized. I have never left them. I think you should leave with the people who brought you to the dance, and they most certainly did. I thank Harry Reid, who has been an amazing friend to me and who, most importantly, has been a great friend to my family. He has honored us in so many small ways, and I just love him for his tenacity and his leadership. I thank you all. I hope I didn't leave anyone out. It has been a joy, but I know God is calling me to a different place. I am not the least bit sad and I am not the least bit afraid because it has been a remarkable opportunity to serve with all of you, and I thank you very much. (Applause, Senators rising.)

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, it is my pleasure to take a few minutes on the floor to give a farewell message, and I thank you for your courtesies. I begin with a Scripture, Philippians 4:7, New American Standard Bible, that reads: ``And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.'' Truly for the first time in my adult life I have felt that extraordinary peace about something that was unexpected, but is certainly something that I accept. It has really been amazing as a Christian, as an adult, and as a leader to find myself in this place in a time that should be a time of sadness, but all I can feel is actual joy. It is quite amazing. It has never happened to me before, so I thought it would be wonderful to share--with so many of my friends, supporters, family, staff, and colleagues listening in--for a few minutes to say that it is absolutely true, and I am a testimony to this extraordinary peace since just a few days before the election and since then. I think it is because I feel and know that God has called me to another place. Before being a Senator, a wife, and a daughter, I am a Christian, and my faith really is central to my life. My parents always taught me to put my faith where it belongs--in God himself. So it is really with that sense of gratitude and joy that I have been given an opportunity to serve my State, my region, and my country for now almost 34 years-- which is quite amazing--having started at a very young age and still being relatively young. So let me just share some remarks about that time, and particularly the time here in the Senate. I want to begin by thanking my family, and particularly my extraordinary husband Frank, who has been a partner and, as I said on election night, not only an encouraging and supportive partner but one who has literally egged me on. When I wanted to quit, he would say: No, you have to continue to serve. He is not only an accomplished lawyer and professional, but also an elected official in his own right, he came from a family that was dedicated to public service, having both of his parents being very active in party politics--first the Republican Party and then the Democratic Party. But that is a whole other story. They are both strong civil rights leaders--my husband as well--and always encouraging me and being willing to share the burdens of public life as well as sharing in the great joy. Our son Connor is now 23 years old, and our daughter Mary Shannon is now 17. The reason I mention that is because Connor was 5 when we were elected to the Senate. Mary Shannon was adopted the first year we were here. On election night, she looked at me--and she is just so beautiful at 17--and she said: Mom, it is going to be a little strange. I have only known you as a Senator. So I warned her that now that I am going to be a full-time mom this is going to be a real problem for her. She is not looking forward to it. To our new daughter-in-law Emily, and especially to our precious little Maddox Parker Snellings, who many people saw on election night-- now, Maddox gets the distinction. He is 10 months old, but he gives me the most joy, and I used to keep a picture of him during all my debates. There were only three, as you all will remember, but I would keep a picture of him because my staff kept telling me: You have to smile more. I kept saying: But I can't, because I am really aggravated. They said: No, you have to smile. So my solution was to put a picture of Maddox on my podium and, of course, I then smiled through the whole debate. That is a trick for those who will be continuing to debate. To my mother and father, who are the light of not only our family but the light of our community, the light of the Nation in many ways--they had 9 children, 37 grandchildren, and now 6 great grandchildren. They are in wonderful health, they are watching right now, and I can only say they are two of the most extraordinary individuals I have ever known. Our family is truly blessed by their sacrificial leadership. Let me also mention my eight siblings--eight brothers and sisters: Mark, Melanie, Michelle, Mitchell, Madeleine, Martin, Melinda, and Maurice, Jr.--all m's. That is another story. There are all of our spouses, my nieces and nephews, who campaigned with me up until the last day. My godchild Sasha literally knocked on doors with me. I was teaching her how to knock on doors before the campaign was over so the tradition could carry on in our own neighborhood where we have lived since I was 5 years old--Broadmoor in New Orleans. When I first got here 18 years ago, I literally could not find the side door. I didn't know anything. I wasn't even expecting to be here. It was kind of like a dream that I got here, because I had run for Governor, wanted to be the Governor, and served 16 years in my State. I knew that was what I was being called to do--and I see Lamar Alexander--to change our education system, to do some coastal work, and then I landed here. But I literally knew nothing of how to be a Senator. I stumbled a great deal in my first years. But I want to thank my chiefs of staff, Norma Jane Sabiston, Ron Faucheux, Jason Matthews, Jane Campbell, and Don Cravins. I had five of the most remarkable chiefs of staff, who, with me, learned how to do this job and to do it well. We never forget where we came from, and they are still--all of them--with me, and all of us are still working to make our State the very best that it can be and to make our country the very best that it can be. To three staffers who have been with me for almost 20 years--Alicia Williams is the longest serving office manager, I think, in the Senate. She was here when I arrived and stayed with me. She was with Bennett Johnston. T. Bradley Keith has been with me for 22 years as a former staffer in a former life, before I was a Senator, and now as my long- time State director. And Shannon Langlois has been, I think, with the Senate for almost 30 years. She is a caseworker. She was, again, with Bennett Johnston and stayed with me. She has literally given her life to thousands, hundreds of thousands of cases in Louisiana and trained every caseworker that I had for 18 years, and they just did phenomenal work. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record my current staff, all of whom are here--my personal staff, my energy staff, and my homeland security staff.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I rise to say a word about my dear friend Mark Begich and to add some words on behalf of him. We saw, when he presented himself in his final remarks to this body, his compassion, his heart, and his emotions were clear in relation to his family, his son, and to us--because he was truly an amazing friend to many. He is always in a good humor, always upbeat. As the Senator from Virginia said, we could never quite understand it, but he was--and still is--an amazingly optimistic and positive person. Having served as mayor, as a small business owner, as a passionate champion for Alaska, what he didn't mention--I thought I might because it might be too hard for him to remember today--but I want this body to remember that Mark comes from a distinguished line of public service. A lot of us say that, but in Mark's case his father literally gave his life to Alaska. His plane went down on October 16, 1972. The plane has never been found. So when Mark walked in the first day I met him, I don't know what I was expecting, but I was expecting someone to have a heavy burden on his shoulders because of that. As the eldest daughter of nine children, I take responsibility so much for my brothers and sisters, and I don't know how I could have gotten where I have gotten without both parents literally lifting me up every day. So as I have sat across from Mark all these years in very close leadership meetings on Tuesday mornings--and he has walked in with such optimism, such extraordinary confidence in himself, in what he is doing, and in encouraging us--I was always just so struck by the fact that he grew up with a large family, six children. His mother was widowed at a young age. He took on so much responsibility, and yet he came to the Senate ready to serve. I know his father is truly honored that he didn't get bitter, he wasn't angry. He grew up to be a man who accepted that as God's will, which is a hard thing to accept. He did so much for the community that his father loved and the State that his father loved. I wanted to add that to the Record because a lot of people watching us think we are one-dimensional robots and that there are no other dimensions to our lives and our family. But it always struck me, Mark, that you have been such a man of courage, such a great inspiration to your family, and truly an inspiration to all of us. I know your parents are very proud, both of them.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I ask unanimous consent that Jonathon Burpee, a National Park Service fellow on the staff of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, be granted floor privileges for the duration of the 113th Congress.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Rhode Island. I am so happy to follow him on the floor today and to see him again. We have worked together on so many important issues. It is wonderful to see the Presiding Officer to be back on the floor. I come today for a very special reason. I am so proud to present to the Senate a package of lands bills that have been included in the Defense Authorization Act. What is significant about this particular package is it is quite large, and it is the first package in almost 6 years and almost three Congresses, which is quite an accomplishment for our committee. I am so proud of the staff of our committee, Energy and Natural Resources. I made this a priority when I took over as Chair 9 months ago. It was a long shot to see if we could put any package at all together that had eluded us for several Congresses, but I worked very closely with my counterpart, Congressman Hastings, in the House. We met on several occasions with our top staff and committed to do all we could to see what was possible. One of the important principles that made this grand compromise possible--and there are Republican bills and Democratic bills; it is very well balanced as between the parties, but also geographically in projects and expansions of parks, creation of new parks, and land transfers. The principle that we followed is it is revenue neutral. Some of these bills raise money, some of these bills spend money, but the lands package is revenue neutral. I think the taxpayer is going to get some extraordinary value in the package being presented today. In addition, one of the principles I pushed very strongly is to make sure that this package included opportunities for the development of our natural resources. We are very proud of our wilderness areas. We are very proud of our parks. We are very proud of our areas that are off limits to economic development. But there are parts of the Federal landscape of public lands that should be developed--whether it is forests, or oil and gas, or hard-rock mining, for the benefit of the taxpayer and for our overall economy. That was a very important principle for me and of course for Congressman Hastings. We also wanted to make sure that we expanded our national park system. Again, this has been a 6-year hiatus, almost three Congresses. We have not been able to make any progress on adding to the beautiful heritage areas and special national park system that America is known for and helped to pilot for the world. Next year will be the 100th anniversary of the founding of the National Park Service, and we are excited about the additional eight new national parks that will be created by this lands package, and it expands the boundaries of six existing national parks. One of the expansions I want to note particularly is in Texas, in San Antonio. It expands the San Antonio Missions National Historical Park. The reason I am excited about this is because the San Antonio missions are next on the list in the United States sites to be designated as world heritage sites. I had a great opportunity to help our only site in Louisiana, Poverty Point, achieve that designation just a few months ago. What an extraordinary action it was to be there when we cut the ribbon on a site that is going to continue to be excavated that we believe is over 3,500 years old, with a very sophisticated Native American settlement on these beautiful raised mounds in one of the highest points in the Louisiana-Mississippi delta area. I was excited to see that San Antonio missions will be next. This puts these sites on the same level as the Grand Canyon and other really extraordinary international places of cultural significance. So that is one example. In the new national parks, it has only taken us 200-something-plus years, with Senator Carper and Senator Coons, to get a national park in Delaware. They were the only State without a national park. Although they are small in size, they are very important as they are the first State in the Union. So as it would be appropriate, the name of their park is the First State National Park. So now every State in the United States has at least one national park. Of course, some States have many more. Our commitment is to continue this great heritage for our Nation for generations to come. This package represents a major milestone in our work to reach a consensus across party lines. We will clear much of the backlog of the public lands bill that has built up in the Senate, last passed in the omnibus package 5 years ago. It is worth noting the Congressional Budget Office has again scored this as revenue neutral. Let me speak for a minute about a few Louisiana priorities. Although most of these bills do not have anything to do with Louisiana--we did not have any major expansion efforts of any of our parks to present--I did wish to discuss two meaningful impact on the economy of my State. The first provision will ensure the economic vitality and viability of the Toledo Bend hydroelectric project located on the beautiful Sabine River on the Louisiana-Texas border. Toledo Bend provides power to thousands of Louisiana homes and serves as an economic engine for our western border with Texas. The project was first licensed in 1963. Russell Long and our congressional delegation were very instrumental in getting this dam for hydropower established in our State. Although we are known for oil and gas, we do have some hydropower in our State. It was relicensed in August--I am proud of, with my support and leadership--for an additional 50 years, which is a terrific certification on the part of the Federal Government that this project is fulfilling its original goals and objectives. Not only is it generating power, it is providing an extraordinary recreational opportunity. This project includes a dam which impounds a 185,000-acre reservoir, the largest manmade body of water in the South, and a powerhouse capable of generating 81 megawatts of electricity. The project is operated primarily for water supply purposes, secondarily for hydropower, and thirdly for recreation. But it has become an extremely popular recreational site both on the Texas side and on the Louisiana side. It is an interesting project, because we have joint jurisdiction. The Texas Commission runs its side, the Louisiana Commission runs our side, and it occupies about 3,800 acres of Federal land in a narrow 3- foot strip along the shore of the reservoir where it borders the Sabine National Forest and Indian mounds. Under current law, just because of that 3-foot strip, the forest, land, and other Federal agencies were claiming jurisdiction just because of this very narrow edge around the Toledo Bend. So we eliminated their jurisdiction. It gave the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission the basis to impose annual charges. We didn't think that would be fair, so we carved out a much-needed exemption that would prohibit undue regulation, and allow the local governmental structures and appropriate Federal agencies to determine the best use of this land. Local zoning ordinances will apply, local rules about what areas can be developed privately and publicly. There is plenty of public access to this reservoir. We hope, and I anticipate, that it will be another momentum builder for the economic development in this region. Significantly for me--I have worked on it for many years, because I have been aware of this since I was a legislator years ago and the real need to develop this as a really first-class destination for resorts, hotels, marinas--not only for the people who live and have property there, but for visitors who may come from all over the region. In addition, Fort Polk is situated only about 40 miles away. So it is within driving distance for soldiers and their families for recreation. It is really quite beautiful. It is isolated. We don't have quite enough highway infrastructure I think for us to develop it in a way that we really should, but that will come with time. But this was a very important step to get the 50-year certification to move forward. And now our local communities--the parishes of Sabine, DeSoto, and Vernon--can lean forward and dream and plan for how this area can be developed. The second Louisiana-related provision authorizes the National Park Service to study areas along the Lower Mississippi River in Plaquemines Parish for the potential addition to the national park system. It is just a study, but this Lower Mississippi area is of course rich in cultural history. It was first traveled by Spanish explorers in the 1500s and later, in 1699, became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi River known as Fort Mississippi. The area to be studied includes several other historic fortifications, including Fort St. Philip, which played a key role during the Battle of New Orleans and was the final major battle of the War of 1812. While Andrew Jackson's forces were successful on land, it was William Overton's 10-day defense of the back door to New Orleans that helped seal the American victory. Fort Philip, and its companion fort located across the river, Fort Jackson, also played a pivotal role during the siege of New Orleans during the Civil War. These two forts, with their withering crossfire, held the Union Navy at bay for 12 days. And the history goes on and on. These special places are tangible links to the dramatic stories of our Nation's history and deserve to be studied for inclusion in our national park system. Let me underscore again how important I think is the principle of developing our public resources in the right ways--preserving what we can, conserving what we must, but developing what we can for the benefit of the taxpayer. That is one of the underlying principles of this grand compromise. I recognize that to break the logjam, particularly with the House of Representatives, we needed to find a way to address both the development of natural resources and conservation and preservation, as well as the expansion of our public lands and public parks. This package reflects that balance. Let me mention a couple of the economic development provisions. We will convey 70,000 acres in the Tongass National Forest to Sealaska, an Alaska Native corporation, to complete its land settlement under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act. This legislation has been a longstanding priority for Senator Begich and Senator Murkowski. I thank them both for their extraordinary leadership in working on this land transfer. This bill has been considered in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee for years, and the final language was carefully negotiated with the Department of Agriculture. So I thank the Department for helping us work out this extraordinary land transfer. Another provision which was included at the request of Senator McCain and Senator Flake and which has been worked on by the Arizona delegation is a land exchange in Arizona between the Forest Service and the Resolution Copper company to allow development of a major copper mine. My friend Trent Franks has been a leader in this area as well in the House and in his legislative district, and I have had good conversations with him. This may be the deepest copper mine in the United States of America. It is going to be one of the richest in the world. There was some original language in this legislation that was perhaps not as responsible as it should have been--or as sensitive maybe is a better word--to some of the needs or requests of some of the nearby tribes. We tried to address some of their concerns in the final language. We haven't, of course, settled all complaints, but we have settled as many as we can. This is an extraordinarily valuable asset for the people of the United States, and the people of the United States own this land and right now own the potential copper that would come out of this mine. I most certainly, through my staff, have insisted and negotiated that the taxpayers get a fair exchange, that they are not underpaid in any way in this transfer and this development. I am very hopeful that the Forest Service, which will continue under the authorization in this bill to negotiate, will make sure the taxpayers of the United States are paid fairly for the exchange of this very valuable property, which will create many jobs in Arizona and which will create opportunities for economic development in our whole country and around the world, as copper is a very valuable substance. One of my overriding conditions for approval was to make sure the taxpayers get a full benefit. While the Sealaska and Resolution Copper provisions have drawn most of the attention in this bill, in total the package includes many other prominent Federal land conveyances, all which will allow for community services such as cemeteries and schools, provide land for development by local communities, allow for outdoor recreational opportunities, and increase management efficiencies for both public and adjacent private land. The package also wonderfully includes almost 250,000 acres of new wilderness designations, including in Washington State. I thank Senator Cantwell and Senator Murray for their advocacy for their State and for our Nation. Senator Tester has been a strong proponent for the State of Montana, Senator Reid in the State of Nevada, and in the State of Colorado, Senator Bennet and Senator Mark Udall, and, of course, in New Mexico we have had some expansion of wilderness areas. Each of these bills was the product of years of discussion among stakeholders and each State's congressional delegation. In addition to wilderness designations, the package will protect the watershed of over 360,000 acres of natural forest lands adjacent to Glacier National Park and will designate 200,000 Forest Service and BLM lands in Montana as the Rocky Mountain Front Conservation Heritage area and protect 70,000 acres of the Hermosa Creek Watershed in Colorado. Among the eight new national parks are two in Maryland and New York that celebrate the life of Harriet Tubman, known, of course, for her great role in civil rights and developing the Underground Railroad and for so many other things she did as a leader at that time. Our new national parks will protect 80,000 acres of forest land and volcanic peaks in New Mexico; designate the first national park in Delaware; protect fossil resources outside of Las Vegas; and interpret the story of the World War II Manhattan Project in Washington State, which was so important to Representative Hastings. Tennessee and New Mexico are, of course, also included in that history and the Colt firearms company in Hartford, CT, which is an unusual kind of park to celebrate, but it is part of the American development of manufacturing, and the Colt firearms company played a major role. So we have that included in this bill. The individual bills that are included have been developed with local support and in many cases have been priorities of Senators for years. I am pleased to have played a pivotal role in building this comprehensive package, and it took a lot of compromising and an awful lot of hard work. I thank the lead Senator on the Defense bill, Mr. Levin, for allowing us to be part of the Defense authorization bill, along with Senator Jack Reed, whom I spoke with on many occasions along with Senator Levin, because without their support I don't know if this bill could have survived standing alone with one or two strong objections still out there. But they can't fight the Defense authorization bill. Tucking it in a bill that is going to pass and will not be vetoed is a way to move these bills forward. It does enjoy broad and deep bipartisan support from literally hundreds of Members of Congress, and hundreds of staffers have spent hours and hours, and the executive branch--particularly Interior and Agriculture--has spent hours negotiating the fine details of this package. I thank David Brooks, who is a lead staff member with our committee, Energy and Natural Resources, who has been a magnificent staffer here in the Senate for many years. He is known as the Senate expert on public lands, and that title certainly is appropriate for a man who knows so much and cares deeply about our public spaces and finding the right balance between preservation, conservation, and development. I thank Liz Craddock, who is my staff director for the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, who was absolutely tireless. Not only running the committee in my absence, sometimes when I was on the campaign trail, but also taking appropriate time to come and work with me for reelection and in addition putting together, with David, this package while all this was going on is really a testimony to their professionalism. I thank them very much. I thank all the Members of my side particularly for their patience and their understanding as we worked through this package of almost 80 to 90 bills and the subcommittees that worked so well moving them forward. I will submit this for the Record. There may be other Senators, I am sure, who want to put in individual remarks for the parks and projects and land swaps, but I think it is pretty remarkable that we have cleared up 6 years of backlog at zero expense to the taxpayer with extremely broad and deep bipartisan support. I will only say as one of my last remarks on the Senate floor that it is possible to find common ground if we are willing to look for it and work hard enough to find it. We need to have our eyes open a little wider. We need to put our shoulder to the wheel a little bit stronger, and if we can do that, we can move a lot of significant legislation through that benefits generations of our citizens and taxpayers for years to come. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Wednesday, December 10, 2014, at 10 a.m., room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The purpose of the business meeting is to consider the nomination of Colette D. Honorable to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record should send it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by email to sam_fowler@energy.senate.gov. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Thursday, December 4, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, DC. The purpose of this hearing is to consider the nomination of Collette D. Honorable to be a member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Sam_Fowler@energy.senate .gov. For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 or Sallie Derr at (202) 224-6836.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I wish to recognize and honor Dr. Norman Christopher Francis, who has devoted much of his life to increasing access to, quality of, and affordability of postsecondary education for students. Dr. Francis recently retired from his remarkable tenure as president of Xavier University, a renowned Historically Black University and one of Louisiana's most cherished institutions of higher education. He has left behind an indelible mark of impressive leadership and results. On behalf of the U.S. Senate and the State of Louisiana, I applaud Dr. Francis for his devotion to Louisiana's higher education system and thank him for his many years of service. Dr. Francis began his journey in the field of higher education country more than 60 years ago as a student at Xavier University and grew into a cherished leader who later served as the university's president for 46 years. This makes him the longest tenured leader of any university in America--quite a remarkable achievement. He is one of the most admired and respected leaders not only in New Orleans and Louisiana but in our Nation today. In an extraordinary career, he took an active and vital leadership role during the tumultuous decades of civil rights battles in Louisiana. Decades later, he helped Governor Kathleen Blanco guide our State out of one of its darkest periods following the devastating impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita as chairman of the Louisiana Recovery Authority. His leadership and expertise played an important role in the rebuilding of a world-class quality, State public higher education system. On a personal note, Dr. Francis is one of our family's closest and most cherished friends, and he has most certainly earned his retirement. And as a devoted family man, I know he is looking forward to more time with his dear wife Blanche, children and growing grandchildren. I am proud that Louisiana's higher education system, especially our valued Historically Black Colleges and Universities, have had the strong leadership and guidance of Dr. Francis over the years and I am grateful for his service. Dr. Francis' leadership as the president of Xavier University will be missed; however, I have full faith and trust that he will continue to lead in improving the educational prospects and outcomes for Louisiana's students in whatever role he pursues next. Once again, I am privileged and honored to formally recognize Dr. Norman Christopher Francis for his commitment and efforts to strengthen higher education in Louisiana and the Nation.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, yesterday we had a very different topic--the Keystone XL Pipeline--on the floor of the Senate. That fight is over for now, but the fight for adoption, foster care children, and all children in the world who are in desperate need of parents to love them and to nurture them goes on. I could not be surrounded with a better team than Senator Grassley, who has been fighting for this in the Senate since before I arrived-- and 18 years ago when I got here, I quickly joined with him to continue the fight--and then Amy Klobuchar joined us a few years ago and has become an extraordinary, effective, and willing soldier to go to the frontlines of this battle. I can't thank the Senator from Minnesota enough. She brings tremendous experience as a former prosecutor, which I didn't have and I don't think Senator Grassley had, and she really understands the inner workings of the court systems in a way that has brought a lot of value to our coalition. In addition, as she said, we are so proud of Minnesota as the State in our Union that has the highest per capita rate of international adoptions. So the leaders in Minnesota of all political parties and stripes as well as the faith-based community really understand this issue and have stood up time and time again. I wish to recognize Minnesota's leadership and particularly Senator Klobuchar. This month is November. It is a great month. It is Thanksgiving month. We give thanks for so many things in our country. It is a wonderful celebration--I think in some ways even better than Christmas because we are not so much focused on gifts; we are focused on really understanding the blessings we have received. One of those great blessings is a family. I am so fortunate to have been born into one of the most remarkable families--not rich when I was born into my family and still not rich, and when I was born into my family we were not at all famous either, but we have two extraordinary parents, and to this day they continue to teach all 9 of us, 37 grandchildren, and now 5 great-grandchildren the value of family. I have said many times, and Senator Klobuchar has shared this with me, governments do a lot of things well, but raising children isn't one of them. I will repeat that. Governments do a lot of things well, but raising children isn't one of them. Actually, we were created and wired for one human to raise another. It just doesn't happen any other way. Our faith tells us that. But now, interestingly, some really extraordinary science is being done by some of the most brilliant scientists in the world and sociologists, and one of them is from my State, Dr. Charlie Zeanah. I want to give him a shout- out. When the terrible tragedy happened in Romania and Ceausescu fell-- that crazy man who starved his country and put millions of children in orphanages--Charlie was one of the Americans who got on the plane with me and went to Romania, and he has never left. He stayed--not physically the whole time, but his colleagues stayed and did the most extraordinary science on the planet of what happens to a child who is detached from their birth parent or from a loving caregiver--just detached. They also did the leading study in the world on institutionalization. The findings are remarkable in such a way that if they can't make us change the way we think--group homes are not sufficient. No matter how well run, they are not sufficient. No institution, no matter how beautifully it is run, no orphanage in the world, no matter how magnificently it is run, how clean and brightly painted--nothing can substitute for what an infant and a toddler and a young child and a teenager and an adult, amazingly, but particularly an infant need when they are born. They actually need it before they are born, and that is a whole other story. But when they are born, it says that the brain literally reacts physically to the fact that there is no caregiver who is consistent, and that is what happens when a child is abandoned. They go through what they are calling now this toxic stress. The way I like to describe it--and I know maybe I only have 10 minutes, but it is worth talking about. Every adult in this world within the listening of my voice knows what stress is to an adult. We can literally feel it. Some people go out for a run. Some people have a couple of glasses of wine. Some people have long talks with their friends. We can feel that we have to do something. An infant feels that but in multiples, and an infant can't go out for a run, and a toddler doesn't know what to do. So that toxic stress goes right inside of them and they cannot release it. They don't know how. So it begins to affect the development of their brain. These scientists are saying that when a child doesn't have, from the moment it is born, a constant, caring, confident touch and talk the way that loving parents demonstrate--as we know, as we hold our infant children in our arms, we give them strength. I used to think they just needed food and warmth, but that is not what the science says. The science says it is so much beyond that. We should have known this by our faith, but sometimes we doubt. So now the science is stepping up and saying exactly what we know by faith, which is that it is imperative that children have a loving, safe place. I have been to orphanages all over this world, and I will never forget some of the visions I have seen. This is the most common vision we will see in an orphanage anywhere, particularly an orphanage where they have infants who are in cribs who are let's say around 1 year old. We walk into a room as big as this--sometimes smaller, but I have been in ones as large as this--with cribs everywhere, and the infants just sit there, those who can sit up, and they stare into space and they just rock themselves. The scientists say that is their last desperate attempt to console an inconsolable emptiness. So they just rock and they stare. They don't cry. The reason they don't cry is because they cried incessantly for the first 30 or 60 days of their lives, and then when no one came they just stopped because little babies are really smart. Contrary to popular belief, they are literally born with an exceedingly brilliant brain, but the more toxic, the more distorted it gets. So by the time a child is 3--not 13, not 30, but 3--their brain is like a muscle that kind of--it just doesn't function. It doesn't form correctly. And we can see this on this new imaging. I know there are those who think this is a soft issue. People look at Amy and they look at me and they look at Chuck Grassley and think, why do these people keep talking about this? It is like nothing. Well, it is a lot. It is not nothing. It is very serious science, and it is very serious community development, and it is very important for this world to get this and get it quickly. We wonder why prisons are filled. We wonder why psychiatric wards are filled. It is not because people are born bad because even though--I won't even go into mortal sin and my Catholic background. Let's just say forget that. Children are actually born beautifully made because God made them, and it is what we do to them in the time of their birth and the few years after that really shapes what they are going to be. So, in my view, as a leader, that is why I have spent a great deal of my time on this subject. It is not a soft issue. It is as hard and as important as any Army or any trade policy, and I am never going to stop talking about it because it is so clearly the truth that I just can't stop talking about it. So, again, this is National Adoption Month. We have put a resolution on the floor. We always get a remarkable amount of support from our Members. I want to also give a special shout-out to Senator Blunt, who has a child and who is very engaged in this issue, and he has really stepped up. He has a child who was adopted, as do I and as do other Members who have adopted children or grandchildren. Rosa DeLauro has been a remarkable leader in the House. Her grandchild was adopted from Guatemala. She has become an extraordinary voice. Susan Bonamici, the Congresswoman from Oregon, has also been a great leader. And I just can't say again how happy I am that Amy Klobuchar has been here to help. I have some amazing photographs to share, and I thank the Huffington Post because that is where they came from. This is National Adoption Month. The Huffington Post has a great picture--and my colleagues can go online and see this--of many of the most remarkable adoption stories on Adoption Day. These are all children I am going to show you, and I am going to tell you a little bit about them. This is a domestic adoption out of foster care. This is the Michael family. The parents are Tiffanie and Adebayo Michael from New York. The couple fostered two siblings, a boy and a girl who are pictured here. After 2 years and 4 months, the couple adopted these two children out of foster care on National Adoption Day. You can see the smiles. It is so amazing to see these stories that happen all over the country. On National Adoption Day, this Saturday, many of the judges-- this was started by a judge in California. I want to give him credit. His name is Judge Nash. Judge Nash started this 20 years ago because he was in his courtroom. He was so frustrated--as Amy has been as a prosecutor--that no one was processing these adoption cases that he decided. This was how simple this was. He said: You know what. I am tired of the backlog. I am going to come in on Saturday. That is what he did. He said: I am just tired of it. So staff, we are coming in on Saturday. We are going to process 25 adoptions, 30 adoptions when we are not distracted and where we can get people in. This is how National Adoption Day started. Judge Nash is my hero. National Adoption Day was started 20 years ago by one judge in one courtroom, and then lots of other organizations joined in. Now it is really a big movement. This is a happy picture. This is a picture of parents from Baltimore who adopted an infant with a cleft palate from China in 2012. When this little infant was born--I know something about what happens in China and many countries. If an infant is born in almost any country in the nondeveloped world and they have anything wrong with them like a finger is missing or they have a cleft palate or, particularly, if they have something like spina bifida or a leg missing, in some countries they are literally put in rooms called dying rooms. They just leave them because they don't have the same understanding that we do in the United States about A, the dignity of every life, which our faith in this country teaches us; and B, in some countries they actually think it is a curse by God if a child is born with a defect, so they just sort of take it as if God never meant for this child to have a life. I don't know what would have happened to this little boy. Trust me; it would not have been happy. The only little problem with him is he had a cleft palate. This couple traveled a long distance. Under the law now, they would probably have to go back two or three times because we have made it harder, not easier, for these parents. I don't know how many times they traveled, but they probably took their own money, borrowed money--unless they are super rich--from their relatives and went twice to get this little boy and finally brought him home. The next picture is the Haden family. This is my favorite picture. They have two adopted children. Crew is a 1-year-old. He was adopted from Niger in 2013. Shepherd was 2 years old and was adopted from the DRC in 2012. The most amazing thing is the biological children, which you can see, were the ones who received the children when they came. I have hardly seen a more beautiful picture than this that represents what the future could be if we would do our jobs. The fourth picture is the Williams family. Jeff and Kelley Williams are from Nashville, Tennessee. Their faith called them to adopt in 2012. They brought daughter Haley home to Nashville from an orphanage in Ethiopia. This is how many relatives gathered to meet her. The most amazing thing about this picture is how tightly her father is holding her. The fifth is a picture of the Hardbarger family. They are angels this year. They are from Shreveport. They are an amazing family from Louisiana. Chad is a pastor of a church. He is the senior pastor at Emmanuel Baptist Church in Shreveport. They formed an adoption ministry because they became so moved by their own experience in adopting. They adopted all of these children. Monique is 19, Chris is 14, Bryce is 11, Jordan is 9, Bailey is 8, and Gavin is 7. He is a pastor of a really wonderful church. They have now taken this as a ministry and are developing--I see the leader on the floor. I will wrap up in 2 minutes. They are developing a wonderful ministry in Shreveport, and many of our churches in Louisiana are really stepping up to do this. You may not believe this because this is a very famous family. They are admired--or otherwise--depending on what circles, so I have a lot of respect for the ``Duck Dynasty'' family in this area of what they have done. Willie and Korie Robinson have five children, three biological, one adopted, and one fostered. The couple adopted Willie, often called little Will, through a private adoption agency when he was born. They have a foster daughter from Taiwan named Rebecca. Since becoming rich and famous, which they weren't always--just a little simple family making duck calls, but now they are one of the most famous families in the world. They were our national angel 2 years ago, and they have continued to promote adoption, both domestic and international. I wanted to just show a few of the most extraordinary families, both famous and not so famous, who are doing this great work. I want to thank my colleagues for supporting this resolution, calling on us all in every elective office--Governors, Presidents, Members of Congress, and then at home in our districts, our courts, our judges, our prosecutors--to do everything we can to help. I want to show you the last picture because this is our challenge. Domestic adoption--I am very proud to have moved this line. I want to give Secretary Hillary Clinton a shout-out--Senator Clinton--who helped to move this line. She really did remarkable work since 1999--basically 2000 to 2014. We now have more children being adopted domestically than ever before at all ages--infants, teenagers, et cetera. Our challenge is international adoptions have dropped precipitously. I am going to come back to the floor and give a speech about why this is happening and what we have tried to do--a few of us--to turn it around, but our voices are hitting the wall and bouncing off because the State Department is not listening. We will continue the fight. This number is going down dramatically. There are children such as that little boy in China with a cleft palate who will rot for the rest of their lives. If you want to wonder where terrorists come from, I will tell you where they come from. They come from families that are dysfunctional, and they come from places where there is no hope, no love, and no faith. That is where terrorists come from. If you want to stop it, I would suggest we start turning this line the other way. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank my cosponsor and lead sponsor on the bill, a former Governor and good Senator from North Dakota who has been a great leader and partner with me on this bill. As the American people have absolutely figured out, Democrats cannot do anything alone and neither can Republicans. It has taken us a while to figure this out in the Senate and in the House of Representatives, but the American people figured this out a long time ago, just as they figure out practical things such as how to keep a roof over their heads, food on the table, and how to keep their kids moving forward even through difficulty. The American people are very smart. I trust them. I always have. I have been honored to represent the people of Louisiana, 4.5 million people, and I have done my very best to represent them in the time I am in the Senate, and I hope to continue for years to come. One of the things they know that is not clear to people here is that it takes both parties working together, compromising, to get the job done for them--not for us, for them--and I think we forget that a lot. I am in a lot of meetings around here where people talk about what is good for the Democratic caucus, what is good for the Republican caucus, what is good for Leader Reid, what is good for Leader McConnell. It is kind of interesting to me because the family I grew up in was all about public service--not for ourselves but for the people we represent. That is why I am on the floor today. That is why I have actually been on the floor dozens of times on this bill and on similar bills. This is the Keystone bill, which I have supported with Senator Hoeven, literally for years. In fact, I have a letter from 2011 with Orrin Hatch, who was the lead signer with me. Senator McConnell's signature wasn't on the letter. Maybe he was busy that day and couldn't sign it. But about 15 of us sent a letter in 2011 urging Secretary of State Clinton--this is how far back it goes, and people can hardly remember she was Secretary of State because now John Kerry is Secretary of State--a long time ago saying it was very important for us to get this pipeline built for any number of reasons. The main reason is that it will signal a great sign that America understands that energy independence for our Nation is possible for the first time ever. When I mean energy independence, I mean energy independence for the North American continent. We might be able to do it in just the lower 48. We might. Hawaii can contribute some. Alaska, clearly, can contribute a lot. So we might be able to do it in the 50 States. But I know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that with our partners in Canada and Mexico, this can be done and North America can be the super energy powerhouse of the planet. Why is that important? There are so many reasons. I will name two, and then I am going to sit down and reengage in this debate because Barbara Boxer, who is the lead opponent, wants and has indicated her time on the floor, and I have more time later today. But one of the reasons this is so important is because what people in Louisiana want, what people in Texas want, what people in Mississippi want, what people in New Jersey want, what people in South Dakota, Illinois, Kansas, and Vermont want are good-paying jobs. When a country or a continent, as blessed as we are, uses its resources wisely to create wealth not only for those at the top, which is what is happening now--just at the top--and the people at the top are doing great. In the fancy restaurants I walk by I see--and sometimes I am actually in them myself--people are drinking champagne. They are buying new cars. I see Mercedes, and other people see that. But the people in the middle class in this country are really struggling, and our job as leaders is to have our eyes on them, providing for them. These energy jobs are not minimum wage jobs. They are not even $15- an-hour jobs. They are not even $30-an-hour jobs. They are $45-an-hour jobs. Our laborers--men and women who represent the middle class--some are unionized, some are not, but all are hard working. I am going to say that again. Some are unionized and some are not, but all are hard working. How would I know? Because I have stood in line with them at 4 or 5 in the morning during a shift change. I do that a lot during my elections. I do it regularly, but I do it a lot during election time. I have felt their hands. I know how cold they are in the morning and how rough they are because they work all day. Those people would expect us to work longer than we do here. We have very short weeks--Tuesday through Thursday. We take long lunch hours, long weekends. Most Americans think we have completely lost it because they work hard, from morning until night. Their hands are tough, and so they expect us to stand up for them. That is why I am standing here. I have been fighting for this because of energy independence for America. I would know something about that because Texas and Louisiana and Oklahoma--our area of the country--we are proud producers of energy. We produce mostly oil, mostly gas, and a little bit of coal. We generate a lot. Just an FYI to everybody who thinks this pipeline is the end of the world, we already have 2.6 million miles of pipe in America--2.6 million miles of pipe. We are only completing basically 1,000 miles. What is everybody upset about? We have been building pipelines in this country for a long time, and we need to build this one. This is about energy independence, it is about jobs, and that is why I am here. This is what the people want. I am going to close with this. For the 25th time at least I am going to say this because I want the record of the Congress to reflect the truth, whether people acknowledge it or not. The record of this Congress will reflect this to be the truth. Some of us, not just me, have worked to get this bill to the floor for years, and it was blocked by both majority leader Harry Reid and minority leader Mitch McConnell for their own political reasons. Those reasons cleared up after the election. They just cleared up. Mitch McConnell couldn't bring this bill to the floor without allowing a vote on the EPA coal regulation. Barbara Boxer knows this-- this is the truth--and she wouldn't allow the vote because she is adamantly opposed to having a vote on EPA. I respect that. I respect her. Everyone here knows that is the truth. Harry Reid didn't want this vote to come up because there were one or two Members of our caucus who had a serious issue with this being voted on. I knew that. As part of a team--and I try to be part of a team, but I am independent--I knew the results of the election, with Senator McConnell winning and some of our Senators, unfortunately, my dearest friends, losing, that we had an opportunity, and so I took that opportunity and I called for this vote--not Harry Reid, not Mitch McConnell, I called for it, and I think it is worth fighting for. The last thing I want to say is that Thanksgiving is coming up and Christmas is coming up, and it is a shame this Congress has not delivered more in the last 5 or 6 years for the middle class. We say we try. I am not sure we are trying hard enough. So I am going to lead by example. It is the way I was raised. We are going to truly try today. This is one of the first debates I have been in, in 8 years at least, where the outcome is uncertain. All the rest of the stuff we do here is preset, preordained. It is similar to theater for the American people. We usually know the outcome of the vote before we take it because the deals are all cut. So I brought this bill to the floor, knowing in my heart we have 60 votes. I sure hope we have the courage that supports that. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining as a proponent who was originally given 1 hour?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I would like to take 1 minute now and then we are going to ask for some additional time. I want to thank the Senator from North Dakota for her really clear and direct explanation of this and her practical approach to what we do here. It is so refreshing. It is so wonderful to hear her knowledge and the depth of her knowledge about this. I put this up again just to remind the American people that what she said is absolutely true. We already have 2.6 million miles of pipe moving oil and gas from where it is produced to where it is needed. This pipeline, which I have outlined in blue here, is just one of many pipelines that is going to be in our country. Our country needs this energy. We need oil. We need gas. We need clean coal. Yes, even when we build huge solar operations out West, where we have a lot of sun--we do not have sun down South--or we build windmills off of Massachusetts' border, you still have to move that power to the places that need it. This infrastructure is absolutely essential to the economic power of the United States of America. If the middle class is telling us anything, they want more economic power in America. The Senator from North Dakota is also right. When I speak about energy independence, I like to talk about Canada and Mexico as well, North American independence. We might be able to do it in just the 50 States and territories of the United States, but I am confident we can do it with Canada and Mexico. The added benefits are these: We do not have to be dictated to by Russia and China. Hooray. We can also create jobs not just in the United States but in Mexico. Hooray. You know, people who can work in Mexico and have good jobs in Mexico might stay in Mexico--hooray for that--instead of desperately looking for work in the United States. It can help to solve some of our immigration problems. What is wrong with this? We can create technology transfers from the United States to Mexico. So this is a win-win. I am sorry people have taken this Keystone Pipeline to be the beginning and end. It is just another pipeline. But it is a symbol of common sense. It is a symbol of infrastructure necessary for us to be energy independent. I do not want to hear one Senator coming down here to the floor to say: We are going to be energy independent without infrastructure. All they say is ``wind'' or ``gas'' or ``oil'' or ``coal'' or ``solar.'' Those are all the words people use. Lovely words. But unless you are talking about pipes, transmission lines, rights of way, highways, roads into rural areas, you are not talking about energy, you are just talking nonsense, absolute nonsense. This is an infrastructure bill, an important pipeline. It should have been built and given permission years ago. As I have said, people say: Well, Mary why are you circumventing the process? How long could the process possibly be? Six years is a long time. It should have taken 1 year or 2, and we have the report that is finished. We are not circumventing the process trying to shortchange it as some people have claimed. This is a final report. It was issued in January. I got this report in January. I got it, Senator Hoeven read it, and then we filed the bill in May. January, February, March, April, May--we drafted the bill carefully, giving 6 months after the report was given, thinking surely that is enough time for people to read this report. Someone could read it in one sitting, but we gave them 6 months. When it didn't happen, Senator Hoeven and I dropped our bill--not the House bill that had all sorts of bells, whistles, and a lot of messaging that wasn't going anywhere. We dropped a bill--clean Keystone. Now I would have liked to have tied it with something else. I tried tying it with energy efficiency, thinking that would maybe get us to a debate on the floor. We could maybe tie it to the minimum wage and get some votes on it. You could tie it to something else that might make sense but never could get the other side to agree to a piece to tie it to. I only have 2 minutes left, and I ask unanimous consent for another 5 minutes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I don't have any additional.

Ms. LANDRIEU. We waited for 6 months after the final report was done. So the final report has been done. It has been 6 years. It is clearly in America's interests. We have labor unions, business organizations-- the Association of Petroleum Institute, the American Chemical Association. Let me talk just 1 minute about their letter. Cal Dooley signed this letter to me today and said on behalf of the American Chemistry Council--which is all over this country, in Delaware, Michigan, Minnesota, Illinois, New Jersey: This project could add 407,000 permanent new jobs by 2023. He was not talking about the specific pipeline, but what Cal is talking about in the Chemical Council is the symbol that America is ready, willing, and able to be energy independent and all the blessings that would bring to our country and to our economy. We don't have to rely on China and Russia, and we can clean it as we go. We can make it cleaner as we move. So that is why I brought this debate to the floor today. I am excited for this debate--whatever side you are on. I think it has been a breath of fresh air for the Senate to actually talk about something that people can understand, and may we have the vote at the time allowed. I thank my dear colleague from California for allowing that 5 minutes and, of course, for our side I am the only one on the floor. So we will be happy to give those additional 5 minutes. I reserve the remainder of my time, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, how much time do the Republican proponents have remaining?

Ms. LANDRIEU. We only have 5 minutes remaining. How much time do the Democratic opponents have remaining?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Senator Hoeven is on the floor. Senator Boxer is also. I know our vote is at 6:30, and it is 4:30. Should we divide the time equally or how do we think this would work? If Senator Hoeven would say what he thinks, we could do one-third, one-third, and one-third or whether the Senator from California perhaps wants to do half and half.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Presiding Officer. First of all, let me associate myself with the remarks of my cosponsor, Senator Hoeven, who before he had to slip out the door to take a call relative to this vote was really very clear on so many important points that he made. The first and most important point I think in this debate--and I respect the opponents of this--but the most important point, the basic fact is this. This resource will be developed by Canada no matter what anyone in the United States and the House or the Senate of either party does. That is a fact. It is indisputable. How do we know that? Because the Prime Minister of Canada and the Premier of the Province have told us that--of all the different parties. It is the unquestioned truth. They are going to develop this resource, and they are going to send this resource through their avenues out to either China-- Excuse me. Could I get order? They are going to develop this resource. This debate isn't going to stop them or start them. No. 2, we have to develop partnerships for progress because no country, even as powerful as the United States is, can hardly do anything completely by themselves. We do lots of great things and have since the moment we were formed, but we have always had partners. Even in the Revolutionary War, France came to help us and the Netherlands lent us money--a tiny little country that could fit inside of Louisiana. We have always had partners. So the question for this debate is--the first point--this resource will be developed and will go on the market to the world--period. The second point is America needs partners in our energy production. Who is the best partner we could possibly have--the one that is close to us geographically, closest to us in terms of our democratic outlook, closest to us in environmental standards? Even the Senator from California would admit if I asked her--she is standing right here next to me--which country has one of the highest environmental standards in the world besides the Netherlands and besides one or two Scandinavian countries, it would be Canada. In some ways you can argue that their environmental standards are higher than our own. So I am sure they are feeling very offended being lectured to by U.S. Senators about a process where they have tighter environmental standards than we do. No. 3, contrary to the ranting of some people that this is for export, it is contrary to the facts. I am going to read from TransCanada, the pipeline. It says: ``Comments were received throughout the review process speculating'' whether this heavy crude oil carried by the proposed pipeline which passes through the United States would be loaded onto vessels ultimately for sale in markets such as Asia. As crude of foreign origin, Canadian crude is eligible for crude export license as long as it is not commingled with domestic crude. However, such an option appears unlikely to be economically justified for any significant durable trade given transport costs and market conditions. Keystone is not for export. It is actually to come to the refineries in the gulf coast which is why I know a lot about this and why I have been a supporter from the very beginning--because this is my home. Louisiana and Texas are kind of the epicenter for refining heavy crude. We transformed our refineries from light crude when we were kind of running out of it, when Venezuela was discovering its heavy crude. I took a trip down with Frank Murkowski 18 years ago when I was a freshman on the committee. He said: ``Go with me to Venezuela.'' I went. He said: ``You've got to see this heavy crude. This is what our future is.'' Our country doesn't have much. We would rather get it from Venezuela and the Middle East. I went to Lake Maracaibo. I went to Venezuela years and years ago. They don't need permission from us. These are business people making business decisions. They transformed their refineries to heavy crude. The heavy crude that comes from Canada has a great partnership with the refineries in the gulf coast. This is business, not politics, and business is good for this country, contrary to popular opinion. This was a business deal--a good deal for Canada, for the United States, for our economy, for jobs, and because it has a negligible impact on the environment. I know Democratic Senators will come down here and talk about the environment. This is the last of five environmental studies. It has been published since January of this year. Senator Hoeven waited to introduce our bill. He kept coming to me and asking: Should we introduce our bill? I kept going to him and asking: Should we introduce our bill? We decided to give them a little more time. We didn't want to rush it. It has been going on for 6 years. We tried to be patient. Finally, by May, after this had been published, it clearly says there is negligible environmental impact from President Obama's own State Department and EPA. They said it is much easier, safer, and cleaner to transport this oil by pipeline than it is to put it on barges going down the Mississippi River--and since we are at the end of it, we would know about this. It is safer than putting it on railcars that go through towns and could potentially blow up. That is what they say in here. I know people don't want to read it, but that is what this says. It is not for export. This is a partnership with one of our best and longest allies in the world, Canada, with the highest environmental standards. It is a high-tech, state-of-the-art pipeline that is going to put thousands of people to work, but more importantly than the people, building it is the signal it is going to send to chemicals, to our manufacturing base that has seen an extraordinary renaissance, and not just in the gulf coast. In some places, our unemployment rate is 2.5 percent. It is also in other States, such as Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania, the Midwest, and, yes, the west coast and the east coast. That is the third major argument. The fourth major argument is this has absolutely nothing to do with climate change. It simply has to do with smart partnerships--economic business partnerships to produce the resources North America has in the most environmentally friendly way. If we could vote on this today--which we finally will. We have been working for years to finally get a vote, and hopefully to passage--we can then move on to a broader discussion which should take place about climate change. I am not a denier of climate change. I am not. I understand there are impacts to the environment. This doesn't happen to be one of them. This does not happen to be one of them. This resource is going to be produced, either with Canada and the United States doing it in the cleanest, most efficient way possible, or it is it going to go in an inefficient way to partners that do not have oversight, do not have an EPA, and do not have standards. It is a no- brainer. After we finish with this, we can then get on with the big debate I have had with Senator Boxer, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, and others about what to do with the human impacts of the environment and start talking about real issues that can move us one way or the other by also maintaining our commitment to economic growth. That is why I have been fighting for a debate and a vote on the Keystone Pipeline. Madam President, how much time do I have remaining?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I wish to call attention to the bill itself. We talk about many bills, but we don't really debate many bills, so this has been a refreshing day on the floor of the Senate. I have not really seen a day like this in 8 years. I am encouraged by what the outcome will be, but I am really encouraged by the debate we are having on the floor of the Senate. There are a lot of businesses in America that are focused on this debate. There are a lot of labor unions and their leaders who are watching this. The pipefitters are watching, the boilermakers are watching, the engineers are watching, and the operating engineers are watching. They have been fighting for this pipeline for their members for 5 years, and their cries for help and support have fallen on deaf ears on this side of the Chamber. So they are watching. Unlike a lot of bills that we debate, this bill is a page-and-a-half. This is the bill. It is S. 2280. It was drafted to be very simple. The bill basically says that over the course of 6 years every study that is required by law has been completed. Every study has been completed, published, and made public. Since the process is finished and over with, the Congress is directing the President to build this pipeline based on his own studies that have green-lighted it time and time and time again. There is no study to be turned in. The only issue outstanding--and it is important--has to do with one portion of the State of Nebraska. There is an aquifer in Nebraska, and the people there did not want the pipeline to go through it, and so the leaders in Nebraska moved the pipeline away from the aquifer. When they did that, a small and vocal environmental group, which is against the Keystone Pipeline, filed suit to say that the way they did that was wrong, the process was wrong. They are in court now, and that is going to be resolved. The Supreme Court has already taken arguments. It will happen any Friday. It could be this Friday or next Friday or the next Friday. That is it. It is done. We could start building parts of it and eventually get to Nebraska because they have already approved it to go through the State. It is just a matter of exactly who had the authority to do it, and that will be resolved by Nebraska. Our bill acknowledges that and says nothing shall step on private property rights. As I have said over and over, Senator Hoeven and I carefully drafted this bill after consulting with Senator Tester from Montana about private property rights and talking to the Senators from Nebraska about respecting Nebraska. Enough is enough. Six years is long enough. Just like the Senator from North Dakota said, if a business wanted to get a permit to dredge a channel or build a dock or put up a big store in a mall and walked into city hall and they said, that is lovely, but you have to wait 6 years, no one in America can function that way. It is not right. It is wrong. It is so clear to the people of Louisiana that this pipeline should be built, and it is so clear to the people of Texas. Many Democrats in our part of the country--strong members of the Black Caucus have voted for this pipeline. Cedric Richmond, my Congressman, has voted for this pipeline, as has Bennie Thompson, the Congressman from Mississippi, and James Clyburn. The coalition is broad and diverse. The Republicans, Democrats, Black Caucus, labor, and business community are saying: What is wrong with the Members of Congress that they cannot understand that 6 years is long enough? The reports are in. The facts are what they are. This pipeline needs to be built for many good reasons. I wish to reserve my last 2 minutes. This is America's hour to become energy independent. We don't have to kowtow to Russia. We don't have to be held up by the politics of Putin and his bullying in Eastern Europe. We can help Japan, a strong ally of ours, to stand with us. We can help Europe, and most importantly, we can help ourselves and build a new energy renaissance that is all of the above--that is the cleanest and most environmentally sensitive that we can. Let's get on with doing this. I am so proud to have literally kick-started this debate. I hope this is the beginning of many important debates that take place. No more theater, no more positioning, and no more chess games that nobody understands, because if you are not at the chessboard, it is really hard to follow. Even when you watch chess on television, it is a real hard game to get excited about. Let's get back to what we do best: debating bills that have impactful outcomes. In my opinion, this bill does that in a positive way for the people of the United States. Let us build a middle class again. Most importantly, let's listen to them. Let's pay attention to them and use our common sense. I yield the floor and reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I just need 3 minutes to close.

Ms. LANDRIEU. The Senator from North Dakota can do his closing and then I will yield to the Senator from California. Would that be OK?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I wanted to ask the Senator to yield so I can personally thank him for his leadership. It has been a pleasure working with him to build the Keystone Pipeline. He and I have worked together now for several years. We have negotiated every step of the way--when to introduce the bill, what the bill should say. I want to personally thank him for his leadership. I have been pleased to work with him on it as an individual Member of the body as well as the chair of the energy committee, and I look forward to working with him on many projects in the years to come. Let me close by making a couple of points. First of all, I wish to read from a statement from the mayor of Port Arthur, Deloris ``Bobbi'' Prince, who is strongly in favor of Keystone. I know you thought there was some hesitation on the part of the mayor. She says: Our unemployment is very high. She represents the city of Keystone. The unemployment rate is 15 percent and a poverty rate of 25 percent. These are my closing points. One, to the opponents of this that have stopped it and installed it every step of the way, I will say this again. This resource will be produced. Nothing that we do on this floor, what they do in the House or what the President of the United States does will stop this resource from being produced. Two, this product will move to these refineries. It will move by rail or it is going to move by car or it is going to move by barge. The studies are in, done, signed, sealed, and delivered. It is less efficient and it is more dangerous to the environment, and we should use a pipeline that is state of the art. Number three, these heavy oils will not be exported. This is for energy to Florida, which doesn't produce an awful lot. This is energy to California. They do a great job of conservation--I will give it to them--not a great job of production. We actually do very well at both in Louisiana. This is for Americans, for American jobs, and to build an American middle class. It will immediately create 40,000 jobs. If the people of this Congress have not noticed, there are long unemployment lines in some parts of the country. The people at the very top might be doing really well, but the people in rural America, the people in smalltown America, and the people who don't have $1 million in their 401(k) plans could use a job. According to the American Chemistry Council, it is going to create 407,000 jobs in the next 9 years, and that is just the beginning. Finally, let us do more than send a message. Let us do more than talk. By our actions, let us send hope to the middle class. I wish to conclude by thanking Senator Mark Begich, who will no longer be with us, Senator Donnelly, Senator Hagan, who will no longer be with us, Senator Heitkamp, Senator Manchin, Senator McCaskill, and Senator Pryor, who will no longer be in our next Congress. I wish to also recognize Senator Tester, Senator Walsh, Senator Portman, Senator Carper, Senator Casey, and Senator Bennet for their great leadership. In the 30 seconds I have left, I specifically wish to thank the Industrial Union of Operating Engineers, who have fought for 6 years, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the Laborers' International Union of North America, the pipefitters and plumbers, and the North America's Building Trades Union, which represents all of them and has fought every day for 6 years to try to talk this administration and this Congress into acting on their behalf. The time is now to build the infrastructure necessary to make America energy independent. We can spend $6 trillion in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and we can't give a green light to a pipeline that has gotten five environmental reviews? The comment period is over, and the time to act is now. I yield the floor.