Mary Landrieu

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I had to slip away from the floor for a few minutes, and I understand that no one from the other side has come down to speak this afternoon. I cannot say I blame them because it is a very tough position to take. We are getting ready to take a very important vote in 5 minutes on whether we are going to provide disaster relief for the country, and particularly for the east coast, which has been so terribly hit with Hurricane Irene and then, of course, Tropical Storm Lee that came up through the gulf coast--and you know we have had our share of difficulty--but then it dumped additional rain in an area that was already saturated. We have wildfires raging in Texas. We have the destruction still in Joplin, MO, and other places throughout the Midwest. The question for Americans in all of these States--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, and some who are totally unaffiliated with the political process--is: Is Congress going to help? Our answer today needs to be yes. We need to fill the FEMA coffers that are empty. Our fiscal year ends this month. FEMA was given a certain amount of money in the earlier part of this year. The end of the year is coming up, and they are virtually out of money. I submitted for the Record only 30 minutes ago that in the last 11 days $387 million for ongoing construction projects for past disasters have been put on hold so FEMA can stretch those dollars to make sure people can eat in the shelters and at least have one set of clothes to wear in other parts of the country. This is unheard of in our Nation. We have never, ever gotten so low in our disaster account. There is plenty of money in the account to rebuild Iraq. There is plenty of money in the account to rebuild Afghanistan. There is money in accounts for refugee camps all over the world. But the account for Americans who are homeless, desperate, and without their businesses, their churches and, in some cases, their neighborhoods is empty, and Members are going to come to the floor today and vote no? I strongly suggest a ``yes'' vote. I said the reason we cannot budget exactly for these disasters is because we, A, do not know when they are going to happen, and we do not even know the amount of the damage. As I have shown in my arguments this afternoon, the amount wildly fluctuates. One year it was zero, over the last 10 years. One year it was zero. The next year it was $5 billion. One year it was $8 billion. The next year it was $43 billion. So I am saying, no one here--we are all very good, very powerful people, but we are not fortune tellers, and we do not have crystal balls on our desk, so there is no way we can know. When people say to me: Well, you don't know exactly, but could you budget something, the answer is, yes, we could figure that out, but we do not have to figure that out today. We do not even have to figure that out this month. We have this supercommittee set up to fix every problem in the world, it seems. We will just give them another one to work on because we have been working on this in the Appropriations Committee for some time. The White House is engaged. The Republican leadership, hopefully, will get engaged. The Democratic leadership is engaged. We will figure it out. But now is not the time to have the victims of these disasters and the survivors of these disasters worry about this. We need to refill FEMA's coffers, refill the Corps of Engineers that are stretched beyond imagination at this time. You can imagine with the Mississippi River. The highest flooding in 50 years occurred this year. Now they have other flash floods all over the country--a bridge here, several bridges there, dams and dikes bursting. One of the Governors, I understand, just shut down a major bridge because they found a structural fault. So the Corps of Engineers has more than they can say grace over. Now is not the time to cut their budget. Now is the time to give them additional funding and do some reform of the Corps of Engineers that my people are crying for in Louisiana. I think a picture is worth a thousand words. I know we are getting ready to vote, and the leader will come and, I guess, call for the vote. But a picture is worth a thousand words. These are people who are desperate. I have shown this picture this afternoon. This is Joplin, MO. This is somewhere along the Mississippi River and the great flood. How lonely is this? At least in Joplin you could find a neighbor to talk to or a group of people who worshipped at a church, and you could pray together. This family is isolated, as others are in many rural communities. They need a yes from us this afternoon. Here is Texas, and this breaks my heart. I think this is North Carolina. How sad are these pictures? They are real. Behind them are thousands of families and businesses. In addition, if this argument of compassion doesn't move people, maybe the argument of flat business will move people. We are ready for the vote; I think the time has come. I urge my colleagues to please vote yes on this motion to proceed. If we get 60 votes, we can proceed to the disaster bill and figure out how to pay for it sometime in the next month ahead. I thank the Chair. Cloture Motion

Ms. LANDRIEU. I understand that Senator Conrad is on the schedule to speak in just a few minutes, but with his permission I just wanted to say thank you to the Members who voted favorably to move forward with the discussion about how to fund disaster relief and to provide this emergency funding. The leader has laid down a very responsible $6.9 billion emergency bill for victims and survivors of the many disasters with which our country is struggling. These numbers were not pulled from the air. These numbers came through the appropriate appropriations committees. I think it is a solid amount to deal with the emergencies right before us for the next months and perhaps through the coming year. These numbers will be fine-tuned as we move forward. But it was a very powerful ``yes'' vote for thousands, tens of thousands of people who are waiting for us to say yes to move forward, filling the accounts that are now virtually empty, and giving a positive signal to Governors, both Republicans and Democrats; mayors, Republicans and Democrats; county commissioners, Republicans and Democrats, that help is on the way and that the Federal Government is not, and will not, turn its back on them at this time of need. So I thank the Members. We had a strong vote, 61 votes. We needed 60; we got 61. But it was a strong vote, and I am glad we were joined by several Members from the other side, and I thank those who said yes to move this disaster relief forward. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on an issue that is of great importance to my home State of Louisiana: disaster recovery. As you know, along the Gulf Coast, we keep an eye trained on the Gulf of Mexico during hurricane season. This is following the devastating one-two punch of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita of 2005; Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008; and more recently the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Our communities and businesses are still recovering from these disasters--some from a disaster that devastated the Gulf Coast over 6 years ago. For this reason, as Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship disaster preparedness is one of my top priorities. While the Gulf Coast is prone to hurricanes, other parts of the country are no strangers to disaster as we have seen recently. For example, we just saw an earthquake strike Washington, DC, and Hurricane Irene work its way up the East Coast. In general though, the Midwest also has annual tornadoes, California experiences earthquakes and wildfires, and the Northeast sees crippling snowstorms. So no part of our country is spared from disasters-- disasters which can and will strike at any moment. With this in mind, we must ensure that the Federal Government is better prepared and assist those businesses impacted by natural disasters. As I mentioned, everyone around the country is familiar with the impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on the New Orleans area and the southeast part of our State. Images from the devastation following these storms, and the subsequent Federal levee breaks, were transmitted around the country and around the world. This is because Katrina was the deadliest natural disaster in United States history, with 1,800 people killed--1,500 alone in Louisiana. Katrina was also the costliest natural disaster in United States history with over $81.2 billion in damage. In Louisiana, we had 18,000 businesses catastrophically destroyed and 81,000 businesses economically impacted. I believe that, across the entire Gulf Coast, some estimates ran as high as 125,000 businesses impacted by Katrina and Rita. While we have made significant progress in rebuilding infrastructure, housing, and our economy, I continue to hear from individual business owners who are struggling to fully recover. These business owners tell me that they have not been hit by one disaster but three: Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Hurricane Gustav in 2008, and the Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010. In order to help ongoing recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast, I am introducing today the Gulf Coast Disadvantaged Business Relief Act of 2011. This legislation is the Senate companion bill to H.R. 2808 introduced by my colleague Representative Cedric Richmond last month. I note that his legislation also had two original cosponsors from Alabama and Mississippi: Representative Terri Sewell and Representative Bennie Thompson. This bill focuses on assisting minority businesses in the Gulf Coast that were impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Everyone is familiar with the images and the cost of these storms, but they may not be too familiar with the impact on individual businesses. In particular, I am speaking about the affects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on minority firms in the Gulf Coast. As a result of these storms, many minority firms in the Gulf Coast were disrupted and thus lost valuable time for participating in the 8(a) program. The 8(a) business development initiative, created under the Small Business Administration, helps minority entrepreneurs access Federal contracts and allows companies to be certified for increments of 3 years. These contracts are vital to the revival of these impacted areas. However, as currently structured the program allows businesses to participate for a limited length of time, 9 years, after which they can never re-apply nor get back into the program. It is imperative that we provide contracting assistance to our local minority businesses. The bill includes a provision which would tackle this problem in three important ways. First, the bill extends 8(a) eligibility for program participants in Katrina/Rita-impacted areas in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama by 24 months. The bill would also apply to any areas in the state of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama that have been designated by the administrator of the Small Business Administration as a disaster area as a result of Hurricanes Katrina or Rita. Lastly, the bill would require the administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that every small business participating in the 8(a) program before the date of enactment of the Act is reviewed and brought into compliance with this act. This requirement would ensure that any eligible previous 8(a) participants will be allowed back into the program. As such, these key provisions would ensure that these businesses continue to play a vital role in rebuilding their communities. I note that I introduced a similar provision as part of S. 3285, the disadvantaged Business Disaster Eligibility Act during the 110th Congress and as part of S. 2731 last Congress. During the 109th Congress, this proposal passed the House of Representatives but we were unable to pass the legislation here in the Senate before we adjourned for the year. I look forward to renewing my fight this Congress as I believe that this is a commonsense proposal which would not cost a great deal. It would, however, make a huge difference for these businesses impacted by Katrina and Rita. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to speak on an issue that is of great importance to my home State of Louisiana: disaster recovery. As you know, along the Gulf Coast, we keep an eye trained on the Gulf of Mexico during hurricane season. This is following the devastating one-two punch of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita of 2005; Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008; and more recently the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Our communities and businesses are still recovering from these disasters--some from a disaster that devastated the Gulf Coast over 6 years ago. For this reason, as Chair of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship disaster preparedness is one of my top priorities. While the Gulf Coast is prone to hurricanes, other parts of the country are no strangers to disaster as we have seen recently. For example, we just saw an earthquake strike Washington, DC, and Hurricane Irene work its way up the East Coast. In general though, the Midwest also has annual tornadoes, California experiences earthquakes and wildfires, and the Northeast sees crippling snowstorms. So no part of our country is spared from disasters-- disasters which can and will strike at any moment. With this in mind, we must ensure that the Federal Government is better prepared and assist those businesses impacted by natural disasters. As I mentioned, everyone around the country is familiar with the impact of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on the New Orleans area and the southeast part of our State. Images from the devastation following these storms, and the subsequent Federal levee breaks, were transmitted around the country and around the world. This is because Katrina was the deadliest natural disaster in United States history, with 1,800 people killed--1,500 alone in Louisiana. Katrina was also the costliest natural disaster in United States history with over $81.2 billion in damage. In Louisiana, we had 18,000 businesses catastrophically destroyed and 81,000 businesses economically impacted. I believe that, across the entire Gulf Coast, some estimates ran as high as 125,000 businesses impacted by Katrina and Rita. While we have made significant progress in rebuilding infrastructure, housing, and our economy, I continue to hear from individual business owners who are struggling to fully recover. These business owners tell me that they have not been hit by one disaster but three: Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Hurricane Gustav in 2008, and the Deepwater Horizon disaster in 2010. In order to help ongoing recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast, I am introducing today the Gulf Coast Disadvantaged Business Relief Act of 2011. This legislation is the Senate companion bill to H.R. 2808 introduced by my colleague Representative Cedric Richmond last month. I note that his legislation also had two original cosponsors from Alabama and Mississippi: Representative Terri Sewell and Representative Bennie Thompson. This bill focuses on assisting minority businesses in the Gulf Coast that were impacted by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Everyone is familiar with the images and the cost of these storms, but they may not be too familiar with the impact on individual businesses. In particular, I am speaking about the affects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita on minority firms in the Gulf Coast. As a result of these storms, many minority firms in the Gulf Coast were disrupted and thus lost valuable time for participating in the 8(a) program. The 8(a) business development initiative, created under the Small Business Administration, helps minority entrepreneurs access Federal contracts and allows companies to be certified for increments of 3 years. These contracts are vital to the revival of these impacted areas. However, as currently structured the program allows businesses to participate for a limited length of time, 9 years, after which they can never re-apply nor get back into the program. It is imperative that we provide contracting assistance to our local minority businesses. The bill includes a provision which would tackle this problem in three important ways. First, the bill extends 8(a) eligibility for program participants in Katrina/Rita-impacted areas in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama by 24 months. The bill would also apply to any areas in the state of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama that have been designated by the administrator of the Small Business Administration as a disaster area as a result of Hurricanes Katrina or Rita. Lastly, the bill would require the administrator of the Small Business Administration to ensure that every small business participating in the 8(a) program before the date of enactment of the Act is reviewed and brought into compliance with this act. This requirement would ensure that any eligible previous 8(a) participants will be allowed back into the program. As such, these key provisions would ensure that these businesses continue to play a vital role in rebuilding their communities. I note that I introduced a similar provision as part of S. 3285, the disadvantaged Business Disaster Eligibility Act during the 110th Congress and as part of S. 2731 last Congress. During the 109th Congress, this proposal passed the House of Representatives but we were unable to pass the legislation here in the Senate before we adjourned for the year. I look forward to renewing my fight this Congress as I believe that this is a commonsense proposal which would not cost a great deal. It would, however, make a huge difference for these businesses impacted by Katrina and Rita. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, most of my Senate colleagues are aware of the rich culture and heritage that is on display in Louisiana during the days and weeks before Lent. Parties and parades mark the end of the Mardi Gras season and the beginning of fasting and sacrifice. But few outside of Louisiana are familiar with the unique tradition of the Mardi Gras Indians. I rise today to celebrate this unique Louisiana tradition and recognize the Mardi Gras Indians Hall of Fame Day to be celebrated at Oretha Castle Haley Elementary School in New Orleans, LA, on August 7, 2011. The history of the Mardi Gras Indians dates back to the late 1800s, but their origin remains a mystery. Because most of their history and practices have been passed from generation to generation orally, we may never know if the Mardi Gras Indians came about to pay homage to Native Americans for hiding runaway slaves or simply as a expression of the connection between Native Americans and African Americans. What we do know is that their tradition adds an incredible story to the history of New Orleans and Mardi Gras. Today, the Mardi Gras Indians consist of more than 40 individual tribes. These tribes compete against one another using chants and music along with their elaborately decorated costumes called ``suits.'' The suits are each hand sewn by the tribe members and typically take an entire year to complete. Ornaments on the suits can include feathers, ostrich plumes, beads, velvet, rhinestones, and sequins, all beautifully sewn together to tell the story of the individual tribe member and contribute to the tapestry of whole tribe. Native American, Aztecan, Caribbean, and West African cultures have all greatly influenced the work of art that is the Mardi Gras Indian suit. The traditions of the Mardi Gras Indians also include a hierarchy structure consisting of a ``big chief,'' a ``big queen,'' ``chiefs,'' ``spy boys,'' ``flag boys,'' and ``wild men,'' just to name a few. Every member of the tribe has a specific set of duties culminating in the big chief who represents the tribe against all other tribes. In addition to being a key part of Mardi Gras, Mardi Gras Indians are strong community leaders in New Orleans and the surrounding areas. The Mardi Gras Indians have worked to preserve, celebrate, and advance the cultural arts and music of their tribes and communities. By doing this, the tribes have also continued to encourage the younger generations to learn and embrace the tribes' histories. One tribe, the Guardians of the Flame, has established a nonprofit called Guardians Institute to educate New Orleans children on the importance of art, music, and history in order to keep these traditions alive. Dr. Roslyn Smith, former principal of Oretha Castle Haley Elementary School in New Orleans, summarized the Mardi Gras Indians best by saying, ``the Big Chiefs are community leaders, and in many ways they are social warriors, struggling to preserve traditions of beauty in the community while working to make the communities better places.'' Please join me in honoring and celebrating the Mardi Gras Indians and especially the Mardi Gras Indians Hall of Fame Day on August, 7, 2011.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Thank you, Mr. President. I am happy to come to the floor with two of my colleagues--my colleague from Minnesota and my colleague from Alaska--to speak about the damage created by the Republicans' insistence on looking at just one side of the equation and failing to understand what businesses need to move forward during the next 28 minutes or so. As my good friend from Alabama leaves the floor, I wish to say that I have enjoyed working with him on many issues. We have been shoulder to shoulder advocating for gulf coast restoration and many other issues. However, I have to strongly disagree with some of the points he has just made, and I will go into those in just a moment. Part of the problem with the Senator from Alabama and other Senators on that side is that when they speak to the American people on this issue, they only talk about one side of the equation; that is, spending. They never, ever talk about revenues. Anybody--any family, any individual, any business, any high school student, any college student--understands--like the commercial running on television now that talks about equations--equations have two sides, not one. There is a spending side and there is a revenue side. If a family's budget is out of whack--they are spending too much, and they are not taking in enough money--they could get a third job and fix that problem by bringing in more money to the budget or a second job or a part-time job and bring in more revenue, and that problem is solved or they could choose to not get another job and cut back spending all the way down to their income and solve the problem. The problem with the other side is they are disingenuous. They do not want to be truthful with the American people and say that not only do we have a spending problem, which all Democrats agree with, but we also have a revenue problem, and that is why we are on this floor fighting today. I wish to show beyond a shadow of a doubt the truth about what I am speaking. This is data from the Senate Appropriations Committee. This shows discretionary defense spending, all other spending, and mandatory programs for 10 years. In 10 years, from 2001 until today, 10 years later, defense spending has increased $364 billion--73 percent--and that is because we have had two wars and any number of defense and security issues. We can debate whether that is right, but we have spent 73 percent more money, adjusted for inflation. For mandatory programs, the increase has gone up 310 percent in 10 years. That is Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. This is the driver. This is the budget-buster. There are all sorts of solutions to that problem. Unfortunately, we are not talking about any of them today. But the push on the spending is coming from mandatory programs. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the charts I have been referring to.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, what the Republicans fail to tell people, which makes me so angry and should make everyone angry, is that all other spending in the Federal Government has remained flat. There has been a zero-percent increase in 10 years, if we adjust for inflation--zero, not a 2-percent increase, not a 3-percent increase. These are the facts. It is also true that we are spending more money--25 percent of GDP-- than at any time since World War II, but that spending is being driven by defense and mandatory. But what do they want to cut? What are they demanding to be cut today? They are demanding cuts from this line item, including agriculture, health, education, and respite care for the elderly. This is what they want to cut. This is why Democrats are saying: Wait a minute, take a couple of steps back. That is what this fight is really about. In addition to waging this fight--and one would think this is a big fight to have--we would have it in the safest place possible. Some would think we would be having it in the safest place possible. My colleagues know that in the old western movies, when two guys want to shoot it out, they say: Meet me on the edge of town. Do these guys meet you on the edge of town? No. Do you know where they meet us? Right on Main Street, where small business and big business and self- employed have been struggling for years, coming out of the greatest recession that in large measure they helped to create. Where do they want to stage this fight? On Main Street. That is what this fight is about. They could have chosen anyplace for this battle, but where do they choose it? They choose it over raising the debt ceiling, which, if we don't fix it in the next 72 hours, it is going to raise interest on every business. I am already getting piles of letters from Louisiana that I will include in the Record from small business owners pleading with us to come to a deal because they are holding the economy hostage. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letters I just referred to be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Has anybody read the newspapers this morning? It is full of cartoons: Republicans holding the economy hostage. They are not holding Barack Obama hostage. They are not holding Democrats hostage. They are not holding the Federal Government hostage. They have decided to fight the battle on Main Street, holding economic growth hostage, and they think that is a compromise or a fair fight. This hostage isn't strong enough to survive this siege. Do we ever hear any one of them say that perhaps we need to raise a penny or two or three? Absolutely not. Now, there are Senators who have agreed to do so, but they haven't been as vocal as they possibly could be. I am honored to serve with many good Republicans who understand this equation has two sides: both taking spending down in the right ways and raising revenue. Let me get one more fact out there, and I will turn it over to my colleague. I understand corporate tax rates are higher than some other countries in the world, and our corporations are having some tough times, as well as some businesses. But I am going to submit data for the Record which shows that the top 400 companies in this country are not paying a 35- percent rate, they are not paying a 34-percent rate, their practical rate is 17 percent. Why would that be the case? Because this Tax Code is full of loopholes for special interests that many of them on the other side think are justified. So we are not going to be able to solve all of these problems today, but I wanted to come to the floor on behalf of businesses--small businesses and large--and say that when the Republicans start talking about both sides of the equation, these Democrats, including myself, will walk up and negotiate. In the meantime, we are going to work hard to find a deal that works for the American people, and one solution that will work for the American people is not to have to repeat this 4 months from now. I am going to conclude with this. Just a few months ago, we were getting letters from the other side saying business needs certainty, business needs to know what taxes they are going to pay. They need to have certainty. And then, all of a sudden, today this side is arguing that we have to go through this debate 4 months from now. I am telling my colleagues that this hostage will not survive their siege. We have to fix this for the long term now. I am going to turn it over to my colleague from Minnesota, who is going to talk about the businesses in her State and what she is hearing from businesses in her State and why this is so grossly unfair from Republicans who want to bring this economy to its knees, and they are doing a really good job of it. I yield to the Senator from Minnesota.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, the Senator from Alaska is here to finish out this segment, which is focusing on the difficulties that businesses are going to have. I thank the Senator from Minnesota for joining us for this segment. I just want to get something in the Record before yielding to the Senator from Alaska. I said the spending is high, 25 percent of GDP. Everyone acknowledges that. We are working hard to get it down. But I want to put in the Record that revenues coming into the Treasury are the lowest since World War II, at 14 percent. We do not have revenues in this solution because Democrats have compromised and conceded on this point, which is a very difficult compromise for us to make when faced with the truth of the situation. But in trying to compromise, we have done that. We have not been met halfway. I hope the minority leader will reengage with the majority leader--having said last night he did not believe he wanted to engage with the majority leader to try to come to a compromise--because businesses are depending on it. Finally, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record an excellent column in the Washington Post today to capstone my remarks.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Senator from Alaska, who has been an absolutely outstanding champion for small business not only in Alaska but around the Nation, who will talk with us about this short-term, repeat, 6-month uncertainty and how damaging that would be to businesses in Alaska. I thank the Senator for joining us.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Alaska. Mr. President, how much time do we have in this segment?

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank the Senators, again, from Minnesota and Alaska for coming and making the point and underlying and scoring the point that this filibuster the Republican caucus is holding today--not allowing us to have a simple majority vote on the Reid plan--is hurting business. As the Senator said, this is a pattern, unfortunately, it seems like coming from the other side. We had to overcome their filibuster just last year to pass the small business bill that is now having a terrific effect throughout the country in some pockets. We still are not where we would like to be, of course, in job creation, and the recovery is slow. I am starting to think that maybe that is what they want--for the recovery to be slow. Then they filibustered the SBIR bill, which is the largest single research investment program for small businesses in America. We still cannot get that passed. They are filibustered. Then they filibustered the EDA bill, which is one of the most important programs to Chambers of Commerce, which is not a liberal stronghold in America. Now they are filibustering this bill and demanding a two-step solution, and no businessperson has written to Congress saying they think that is a good way to go. The opposite. They are saying: Get this over with now. The uncertainty is killing us. I will yield to the Senator from Alaska.

Ms. LANDRIEU. A simple majority.

Ms. LANDRIEU. It would be clear if we could get 51 votes that the Reid plan would pass, just like the Boehner plan passed. Neither one can get the other side to agree. But at least then we would have the basis for a compromise. But, no, the Republicans have decided we cannot have that vote. So this is getting strung out, and with every hour, with every day, businesses are hurting. Maybe that is what they want because, then, the President can be blamed for businesses not doing well, when they are the ones who are stepping in the way. The details from the budget summary that I stated: 14 percent of the revenues coming in--this is on the Web site for anybody who wants to know. I have letters from Louisiana that I printed in the Record from businesses that have written to me saying: Not a two-step process, a one-step process. Get a good solution and move on. I yield the floor and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, today I wish to remember a great man and a wonderful friend, Mr. Tom Williams, Jr. Mr. Williams passed away on June 21, 2011, in Scottsdale, AZ, and leaves behind his wife Gloria; son Tom Williams, III; daughter Nicol Williams-Pruitt; son-in- law Jason Pruitt; and grandson Nicolas Pruitt. To Mr. Williams' family, please accept my condolences for your loss. Mr. Williams and I met through a shared passion for the advancement of America's small businesses. In fact, Mr. Williams started his own small business in 1982 in Oakland, CA, an accounting firm called Williams, Adley & Company. In the beginning, Williams and Adley were the only two employees, but over the next few decades, they grew to be a three-office firm with two locations in California and one in Washington, DC. The firm now boasts over 100 employees. In addition to his professional success, Mr. Williams has been a champion for small business-friendly legislation. He was a leader in changing the size standards for the accounting industry and fought tirelessly to improve access for small accounting firms to government contracts. Similarly, my colleagues in the Senate may remember language in the Small Business Jobs Act mandating annual reviews of the accounting firm size standards, a provision suggested by Mr. Williams. Mr. Williams was also a pillar in his community. He helped establish the San Francisco Chapter of the National Association of Black Accountants, NABA, served in a number of NABA positions, including president, and was awarded their Small Business Entrepreneur of the Year Award. He was also an active member of the California Society of Public Accountants. But perhaps the best description of Mr. Williams comes from the motto of the very company he created: ``Good people, doing great things.'' Mr. Williams, you were indeed a good person who did great things. I sincerely thank you for all of your contributions.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation entitled the Lower Mississippi River National Historic Site Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in Plaquemines Parish along the Lower Mississippi River Area as units of the National Park System. This area in Southeastern Louisiana has contributed much to our Nation's history and there are many stories that have yet to be preserved for future generations. Unless Congress acts to preserve these historical assets, they will be lost forever. That is why I am again, for the third time, introducing this legislation. It is important that this legislation become law and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact it. In order to be designated as a unit in the National Park System, the Department of Interior must first conduct a special resources study to determine whether an area possesses nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources to be eligible for favorable consideration. This is exactly what my bill does. It asks the Department of Interior to take the first step in determining what I already know, that the Lower Mississippi River Area would be a suitable and feasible asset to the National Park Service. As many from Louisiana are already aware, this area has vast historical significance and is rich with cultural history. In the 1500s, Spanish explorers traveled along the banks of the river. In 1682, Robert de LaSalle claimed all the land drained by the area. In 1699, the area became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi river, known as Fort Mississippi. Since then, it has been home to ten different fortifications, including Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson. Fort St. Philip, which was originally built in 1749, played a key role during the Battle of New Orleans when American soldiers blocked the British Navy from going upriver. Fort Jackson was built at the request of General Andrew Jackson and partially constructed by famous local Civil War General, P.G.T. Beauregard. This fort was the site of the famous Civil War battle known as the ``Battle of Forts'' which is also referred to as the ``night the war was lost.'' Mr. President, as you can see, from a historical perspective, this area has many treasures that provide a glimpse into our past. These are treasures that have national significance and they should be maintained and preserved. In addition, there are many other important and unique attributes to this area. This area is home to the longest continuous river road and levee system in the U.S. It is also home to the ancient Head of Passes site, to the Plaquemines Bend, and to two National Wildlife Refuges. Finally, this area has a rich cultural heritage. Over the years, many different cultures have made this area home, including Creoles, Europeans, Indians, Yugoslavs, African-Americans and Vietnamese. These cultures have worked together to create the infrastructure for the transport of our Nation's energy, which is being produced by these same people off our shores in the Gulf of Mexico. They have also created a vibrant fishing industry that contributes to Louisiana's economy. I think it is easy to see why this area would make an excellent addition to the National Park Service. However, the longer Congress takes to act, the greater the opportunity for these treasures and their rich history to erode away. Unfortunately, this area has weathered the passing of several hurricanes, including Katrina, and is now suffering from the impacts of the BP oil spill. All of these events threaten to destroy these historical assets, but this need not be the case. These assets need protection and this is the first step in securing it. That is why I am reintroducing this bill to conduct a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of including this area in the system and ultimately to begin the process of adding this area as a unit of the National Park Service. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly enact this bill.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation entitled the Lower Mississippi River National Historic Site Study Act. This bill will direct the Secretary of the Interior to study the suitability and feasibility of designating sites in Plaquemines Parish along the Lower Mississippi River Area as units of the National Park System. This area in Southeastern Louisiana has contributed much to our Nation's history and there are many stories that have yet to be preserved for future generations. Unless Congress acts to preserve these historical assets, they will be lost forever. That is why I am again, for the third time, introducing this legislation. It is important that this legislation become law and I look forward to working with my colleagues to enact it. In order to be designated as a unit in the National Park System, the Department of Interior must first conduct a special resources study to determine whether an area possesses nationally significant natural, cultural or recreational resources to be eligible for favorable consideration. This is exactly what my bill does. It asks the Department of Interior to take the first step in determining what I already know, that the Lower Mississippi River Area would be a suitable and feasible asset to the National Park Service. As many from Louisiana are already aware, this area has vast historical significance and is rich with cultural history. In the 1500s, Spanish explorers traveled along the banks of the river. In 1682, Robert de LaSalle claimed all the land drained by the area. In 1699, the area became the site of the first fortification on the Lower Mississippi river, known as Fort Mississippi. Since then, it has been home to ten different fortifications, including Fort St. Philip and Fort Jackson. Fort St. Philip, which was originally built in 1749, played a key role during the Battle of New Orleans when American soldiers blocked the British Navy from going upriver. Fort Jackson was built at the request of General Andrew Jackson and partially constructed by famous local Civil War General, P.G.T. Beauregard. This fort was the site of the famous Civil War battle known as the ``Battle of Forts'' which is also referred to as the ``night the war was lost.'' Mr. President, as you can see, from a historical perspective, this area has many treasures that provide a glimpse into our past. These are treasures that have national significance and they should be maintained and preserved. In addition, there are many other important and unique attributes to this area. This area is home to the longest continuous river road and levee system in the U.S. It is also home to the ancient Head of Passes site, to the Plaquemines Bend, and to two National Wildlife Refuges. Finally, this area has a rich cultural heritage. Over the years, many different cultures have made this area home, including Creoles, Europeans, Indians, Yugoslavs, African-Americans and Vietnamese. These cultures have worked together to create the infrastructure for the transport of our Nation's energy, which is being produced by these same people off our shores in the Gulf of Mexico. They have also created a vibrant fishing industry that contributes to Louisiana's economy. I think it is easy to see why this area would make an excellent addition to the National Park Service. However, the longer Congress takes to act, the greater the opportunity for these treasures and their rich history to erode away. Unfortunately, this area has weathered the passing of several hurricanes, including Katrina, and is now suffering from the impacts of the BP oil spill. All of these events threaten to destroy these historical assets, but this need not be the case. These assets need protection and this is the first step in securing it. That is why I am reintroducing this bill to conduct a study to determine the suitability and feasibility of including this area in the system and ultimately to begin the process of adding this area as a unit of the National Park Service. I look forward to working with my colleagues to quickly enact this bill.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, this year we are celebrating the 100th birthday of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity Incorporated. Next week, thousands of members and guests from all over the world are coming to Indianapolis, IN, to participate in a week-long program of forums and seminars with a focus on leadership, brotherhood, and service, known as the 80th Grand Chapter Meeting and Centennial Celebration. Kappa Alpha Psi was founded on January 5, 1911, on the campus of Indiana University in Bloomington, IN. Led by the vision of Elder Watson Diggs, it was founded by 10 God-fearing, serious-minded young men who possessed the imagination, ambition, courage, and determination to defy custom in pursuit of college educations and careers during an oppressive time in American history for African Americans. Now, the membership has grown to more than 360 undergraduate chapters and 347 alumni chapters located throughout the United States and five foreign countries including 35 chapters in Louisiana. Today, the fraternity boasts a membership of more than 150,000 college-trained young men. Kappa Alpha Psi has been an instrumental group in raising the profile of African-American men and has worked tirelessly to knock down barriers to advancement in our society. The brotherhood has consistently encouraged achievement in every field of human endeavor. I also would like to take this opportunity to commend attorney Dwayne Murray. Professionally, Dwayne not only founded and continues to manage his own law firm but he became the first African American appointed to the District 7 Panel of Trustees for the U.S. Middle District Bankruptcy Court. He was recognized by the Louisiana Legislature as an ``Honorary State Representative'' and the Governor's Office as an ``Outstanding Citizen'' for his community service and efforts to bring lay and professional people into the political process. Today Dwayne currently serves as the 31st Grand Polemarch of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Incorporated, and is a resident of the great State of Louisiana. Under his extraordinary leadership, the organization has initiated several community service projects, including ``Sunday of Hope.'' Through this effort, Kappa Alpha Psi has raised well over $500,000 for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital during the past 2 years. Dwayne has also spearheaded the ``Greeks Learning to Avoid Debt'' or GLAD Program. This program will ensure that college students receive the necessary training to use credit wisely and remain financially stable through college and beyond. A final noteworthy accomplishment, Dwayne founded Kappa Kamp, a rigorous leadership institute for elementary and middle school aged young men. The Baton Rouge Alumni Chapter continues to raise money to support Dwayne's project through the annual Walter Banks Golf Classic. In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, Kappas from all over the country came to the aid of hurricane survivors along the gulf coast and helped with our recovery effort. Thus, it is with great pride that we not only congratulate all members of Kappa Alpha Psi Fraternity, Inc. on the occasion of their centennial celebration, but I would also like to recognize my constituent and friend, Dwayne Murray, as he approaches the end of his tenure as Grand Polemarch of this great organization.

Ms. LANDRIEU

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

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I rise to bring to the Senate's and the Congress's attention a great challenge that we have before us relative to the budget of the Department of Homeland Security and, frankly, it is a challenge facing the entire budget of the United States. That challenge is to make sure we have enough funding in the disaster emergency account to cover the multitude of disasters that have taken place this year since January, as well as those we are still recovering from in the past. I will put up a chart to show, in dramatic fashion, that this is an unprecedented situation we are facing. Since January of this year, 36 States have had disasters declared. This may be the largest number of States in the shortest period of time, at least in recent memory, and potentially in history. This is a challenge to the budget because, as you know, under our law the Federal Government is by law--it attempts to be every day--a reliable and trustworthy partner for cities, towns, and States that have been devastated by tornadoes, wildfires, hurricanes, et cetera. Most recently, our minds, our eyes, and our hearts have been focused on Missouri, with the terrible devastation to several of their cities-- most notably Joplin. But we remember a few weeks ago the tornadoes that ripped through the southern part of the United States--in Alabama particularly, in Georgia, and in some parts of Arkansas; and there was flooding in other parts of the country as well. This is what Mother Nature has brought to us. We cannot control that. But what we can control is how we respond to it. That is what I want to speak to today. I want to begin with a quote from David Maxwell from the Arkansas Department of Emergency Management. He said this in the Washington Post on April 30: Anything that we've asked for, they've gotten us. He was referring to FEMA. Gregg Flynn, a spokesman with the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency, said Fugate and FEMA ``are unbelievably proactive towards the states. They don't wait for things to happen. By the time the storm is out of the way, they want to know what we need.'' This is very good testimony, because many of us, including the occupant of the chair, have worked hard to make a better, stronger, more proactive FEMA. In large measure, we have accomplished that, although there are still challenges for that agency. The biggest challenge right now is that unless the Senate, the House, and the President do something differently, we are not going to have the money we need to take care of these disasters. So for people on the ground, like David Maxwell in Arkansas, and Gregg Flynn in Mississippi, and whether it is Paul Rainwater, a CEO from my State who is still struggling in the aftermath of Katrina and Rita 6 years ago, we are going to literally run out of money in the disaster emergency relief fund in January of this year. Let me put up a chart to show the challenge that is before us. The President requested $1.8 billion, which is a reasonable request based on past averages of disasters, which we are prepared to budget in the base budget of Homeland Security. Unfortunately, the estimate of the low end of these disasters--again, there were 36 since January 1, and disasters happen in all 50 States--the estimate is that we need $3.8 billion at the low end, and at the high end it is $6.6 billion. So between $3.5 billion and $6.5 billion is required. But we have budgeted only $1.8 billion in the base of Homeland Security. As chair of this committee, I can tell you that our committee cannot absorb in its base the entire weight and cost of these disasters. The Homeland Security budget has never in its history absorbed 100 percent. We do a rough and good-faith estimate of what it might be, but these are exceeding even our expectations of what the disasters would be. Of course, no one is in a position to be able to foretell the future. Our Secretary of Homeland Security brought a great deal of skill and expertise as a former Governor, an excellent manager, and all the prerequisite academic credentials, but she didn't show up on this job with a magic wand and a fortune teller's globe. She doesn't have those tools available to her to be able to see into the future every disaster and what kinds of disasters are going to happen to the country. All we can come forward with is a good-faith estimate, which we did, at $1.8 billion. The reason I come here today is to say there is a gap that must be filled. I am strongly recommending that this Congress fund this off budget in an emergency line item, which is what we have done 95 percent of the time in the last 40 years. Since 1992, $110 billion of the $130 billion appropriated to the DRF has been emergency spending. These events are unpredictable. You cannot plan for it. We must respond by law. If we don't, then projects all over this country will shut down. I remind everyone that they are projects that create jobs--not only do they restore hope and rebuild communities, but the projects create jobs. To list a few of them, there are the repairs for two very important roads in Hawaii, which could potentially be stopped; sewer line repairs at a pump station replacement in Gary, IN; the townhall in the village of Gulfport, which hasn't been rebuilt since the storm, for 6 years, which is under construction--that could be halted. That is a dozen or more jobs in that small town of Gulfport. Those are not big numbers nationally, but that is important to that city. There is an elementary safe room being built in Kansas now. That is a few jobs there, but it is important to the couple of hundred schoolchildren who were terrorized by tornadoes sweeping through that area. I can go on and on. In Missouri, the Polk County bridge collapsed, which is very inconvenient for people having to cross that every day. I am not personally familiar with it, but I can imagine the difficulty families are going through who were used to having access to the river. I can list hundreds of projects that literally stop in their tracks if we don't figure this out. My strong recommendation is that we do what we have always done, which is appropriate and fund real emergencies. It is not appropriate to do off budget things you should have budgeted for but failed to do it. That is not an emergency; that is bad planning. I think I am a pretty good chairman of this committee. I know Secretary Napolitano is an excellent Administrator of Homeland Security. There is nothing we can give her to make it humanly possible to predict disasters and the magnitude of their destruction. That is impossible. Again, we have to figure out a way to budget for this that is responsible and, I say, put a good-faith effort, or average in your budget, and then anything that occurs, do it in addition to that off budget, in an emergency. Another reasonable suggestion that has met with resistance--and I can understand why--would be to take a percentage decrease against all the budgets of the Federal Government and say we wanted to spend this money but we had these disasters and we absorb it governmentwide. I can promise you that the last and worst thing--and one that can happen because I will oppose it vigorously, and so will many others--is taking the entire amount of the DRF, the disaster relief fund, out of the Homeland Security budget, because then you put the country in a position where you are underfunding planning for the future, lowering your defenses against real terrorist attacks that could potentially happen to the country, because you are funding for disaster levels that we were unable to plan for--for obvious reasons. We cannot undermine the security of our Nation or weaken the entire Homeland Security Department budget because of an unusual natural occurrence over which we have no control and no foreknowledge of. There may be other solutions that I haven't thought of. Another would be very helpful if the President himself, knowing these numbers--they come from his own executive agencies, which are tabulating these numbers--were to send us an emergency supplemental. I have sent him several letters requesting that he send to the Congress an emergency supplemental to cover this gap. If he doesn't do that, Congress has the power to act, and I will be making a recommendation in the Appropriations Committee to fill this gap. What is not acceptable is to try to absorb this entire gap in the Homeland Security budget, which will leave our country in a very weakened position in terms of preparing for future disasters and potential terrorist attacks. Might I remind everyone that hurricane season just started on June 1. It is now June 15. We are 15 days into the hurricane season. We don't know what the season will bring. There may be other alternatives to closing this gap, but it is very, very important. I am going to start work on this vigorously with my ranking member, Senator Coats, to see what we can recommend, potentially jointly, I would hope. Again, I would like to put up this chart because this reflects just about every Senator's State, from Washington to Texas, to Nebraska, to North Carolina, to Florida, to Georgia, Arizona. Montana will be green shortly, and so will Vermont because there are disasters underway. So put your thinking caps on. We need to come up with a way to fund these disasters, and it is going to be a big challenge as we start our appropriations process. I am going to submit more technical information for the Record, but, again, we don't have magic wands and crystal balls in the Department of Homeland Security. We have a lot of tools there to protect our country and to build after disasters, but magic wands and crystal balls are not available. So we have to come up with a way to close this gap that makes sense. I trust that over the next couple of weeks and months we will be able to do that. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the period of morning business be extended until 3:30 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Would the Senator yield for a question? Is the Senator aware that there are at least four other bills--Senator Vitter, Senator Roberts, Senator Collins, and Senator Portman--and, in addition, that Senator Lieberman is developing a comprehensive bill on reg reform? Is the Senator aware of those other bills?

Ms. LANDRIEU. I thank the Chair.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Through the Chair, I understand Senator Coburn, under the UC, has the next 15 minutes. But, through the Chair, I would end my question by saying that I think the Senator is right. There are some regulations that are coming fairly fast and furiously. But I think the Senator would also understand that the normal process is reviewing the bills at the committee level, comparing and contrasting, and then bringing the best approach to the floor. And that is what some of us are objecting to. It is not the goal of reducing regulations; it is the process. Thank you.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I understand our side has about 50 minutes left in this debate on the Snowe amendment and we will vote at 2:15. I will speak for the next 15 or 20 minutes. There is nobody else on the floor on our side. I will continue to try to answer some of the issues raised in the last few minutes about this particular amendment. First of all, I have a great deal of respect for the Senator from Oklahoma, and nobody has worked harder on trying to bring more efficiency to the Federal Government. He has spent hours and hours and hours in meetings, official meetings, informal meetings, on budgets, efficiencies, and regulations. I have a great deal of respect for the Senator from Oklahoma personally. But I do take offense at some of the--not just the suggestions but accusations and specific attacks made on the floor against the government. Two or three were issued in the speech he just gave--statements like this: ``The bureaucracy never takes risks.'' I wish to ask him, what bureaucracy did he think supported the elimination of Osama bin Laden? Does the Senator from Oklahoma believe there were no risks taken by this bureaucracy that he so routinely wants to degrade--to no good end? I would ask him, if he were still on the floor, were no risks taken by anyone when they launched the strike against Osama bin Laden that eventually killed him? Would the Senator from Oklahoma suggest we have no regulations on Wall Street; that we should trust the big international bankers of the world to do what is right every day for the people of Oklahoma? I know the people on Wall Street wake up every morning and think to themselves while they are eating breakfast: What can I do today to help the people in Oklahoma or in Louisiana? Of course, that is absurd. There is a place for appropriate regulation, and bureaucracies aren't always bad. When George Washington led the creation of this country, he most certainly had in his mind a government that worked for the people, by the people. Let's fix the government. Let's not tear it down by statements that have no basis in fact, that do not uplift people, do not encourage people. They numb people. They make people angry. They make people think there is no hope, when there is. There are thousands of people who put on a uniform every day and go to work for this country. They are mothers, fathers, grandparents, aunts, and uncles. They work hard and they do not deserve the disparaging remarks that come too often from the other side of the aisle. If you don't like government--you have made it plain--then fix it. One of the ways to fix it is to take a bill--and this is not an amendment that Senator Snowe has, it is a bill. I have seen it. She asked me to cosponsor it, and I have declined. It is a bill--a major bill--that has jurisdiction that will find its jurisdiction not in one committee--the Small Business Committee--but in five committees that have jurisdiction over the aspects of Senator Snowe's bill. One of the reasons we should not vote favorably is not because we are not for regulatory reform but because this bill has ramifications that go far beyond the Small Business Committee, which I chair, and five or six other committees need to look at the provisions in her bill. That is one reason we have asked to go through the committee process. No. 2, there are, at least to my knowledge, four other bills that attempt to fix this overregulatory reach which, I agree with Senator Thune, with Senator Coburn, and I agree with Senator Snowe, needs to be tapped down and harnessed--not eliminated--and made less onerous for all business, not just small business. There are at least four other bills I know of that are attempting to do that. One is by Senator Vitter, one by Senator Roberts, one by Senator Collins, and one by Senator Portman. I have not had the opportunity to review in detail all of these other bills, but I am sure they have some very excellent points to them. The committee process allows a chairman such as Senator Lieberman, who is not here today, whose committee would have primary jurisdiction over this, to bring all five bills before his committee, hear the best aspects of each, potentially combine them into a bill, and bring them to the floor. Do you know what. Senator Lieberman, I know, has offered to do that in his committee. That bill could potentially come out of committee--potentially with Senator Snowe as lead author, with other cosponsors--a bill that both Democrats and Republicans can agree to, which could give relief to reg reform. This is not about finding a solution. This is about public relations, campaigns, and Republican rhetoric about the election. That is what I object to. If this were about regulatory reform and finding a solution, the five Senators who have bills, and other Senators--Senator McCaskill, for one, who is here today, is developing a bill, and Senator Carper, who has spent years on this subject and is quite the expert--they would all come before the Homeland Security Committee, on which I have the privilege of serving, and in a short amount of time-- just a few weeks--figure out something the majority could support. This is not about fixing the problem. This is about bumper stickers for elections, and I am very tired of it. I am not the only one. As chair of the Small Business Committee, I can promise you that our committee, with Senator Snowe as ranking member, has worked every day very hard through this recession to put forward bills on this floor that could help create jobs, bring relief. In fact, regarding one of the most burdensome regulations that the business community was screaming about, our committee was very aggressive in helping to eliminate that. That was section 1099, which would have required every business to report to the IRS any purchase they made for goods over $600. It would have brought many businesses to their knees, buried in paperwork. Did our committee sit around and twiddle its thumb? No. We worked hard. We had, I think, the only hearing in Congress on 1099, and we repealed it. It took us a while to find the right offset. The minute the business groups brought it to our attention, we said we made a mistake and it will take us a while to find the $20 billion to offset it, but we will look at it before it goes into effect and repeal it. We did that. When Republicans say Democrats don't care about regulatory burdens, I find that offensive. It is not helpful. This bill is not on the floor on regulatory relief. This bill is on a small but effective economic development program that has worked beautifully in my State. Contrary to what the Senator from Oklahoma and others have said, this program-- in Louisiana, as far as Louisiana is concerned--actually works. One of the reasons it works so well is because many of the decisions about the grants are not done in Washington but at the regional level. Our office happens to be in Austin, TX. When the Chamber of Commerce comes to visit me--and they are not always huge supporters of the Democratic caucus--they say to me: Senator, one of the best programs that our members like and feel the Federal Government does a very good job with is the EDA grants, because they are not that bureaucratic. They make quick decisions and help us fill gap financing in programs that make a meaningful difference to people in our communities. I didn't raise this subject to the Chamber of Commerce; they raised this subject to me. Maybe the Senator from Oklahoma is correct that some of these moneys were earmarked. But we don't allow earmarks anymore. So this program is going to go on without earmarks directed by Members. It is going to be done on a regional basis, and these programs have been--at least in Louisiana's experience--quite effective. Louisiana Tech, one of my universities, received a $2 million EDA grant. I will submit this for the Record: Our ongoing partnership with EDA has greatly enhanced the university's overall economic development efforts. We are creating the EDA University Center. This is from the mayors of both cities. You know, I do trust my local elected officials. I do trust the people I represent. When they say a program works, I like to believe them. There is a list of projects and recent investments in Louisiana--$1.2 million to Tulane University. Can I tell you one thing about Tulane University, since it was damaged significantly after Hurricane Katrina? We have over 45,000 applicants to this school. Why do people want to come to Tulane? They want to come because not only is it a great school, but it is in a great city that is rebuilding itself. An EDA grant--that some people wish to eliminate--is helping to rebuild our city. So $1.2 million to Tulane University. It is a microloan program. I believe the people at Tulane University. I have a great respect for Scott Cowen and their board. Everywhere I travel around the United States as a Senator I could not be more proud when people come up to me and comment what a great university Tulane is. I don't need somebody in Washington telling me how good this program is. I have the people I represent at home telling me. We have $75,000 given to the downtown development district which was underwater after Katrina for the Idea Village. You know where the Idea Village was recently advertised? Maybe on the front page of Enterprise Magazine; maybe in Time magazine. This Idea Village is one of the best ideas in the whole country. You know who funded it? The program Senator Boxer is trying to reauthorize. We have $400,000 for a startup fund for the creation and development of stimulus funds to support fledgling enterprises in the greater New Orleans region. Our seafood industry went completely--no pun intended-- underwater after the BP oilspill. This agency stood up, when no one else would--BP wouldn't give them a penny, Ken Feinberg wouldn't give them any money--and gave them $350,000 to keep their head above water-- the Seafood Promotion Board. That is why, in large measure, people are eating gulf coast shrimp today. So I don't know what report Senator Coburn is looking at, but the May 19 GAO report states they have not concluded that duplication exists among programs, and plans to address these issues in their future work on overlap and duplication. I don't know if the Senator has asked his Chamber of Commerce from Oklahoma, but I am going back to my office and I am going to call them myself, because I wish to find out. Maybe their program works differently in Oklahoma than it works in Louisiana. But when I call my people at home--and they will tell me: Senator, some of these programs aren't worth a hill of beans and you should eliminate them; these programs are too difficult. I have that all the time about some programs. Not all the time, but some programs. This isn't one of them. The reason I am a little exercised is because this is like deja vu. I came to this floor 4 weeks ago to try to get a similar program in size--a $1.2 billion program that has worked so well. Senator Warren Rudman had created it. It is a great program. It is the country's best venture capital program for all small business. It makes money. It doesn't lose money. We got the same thing done to us by the other side of this aisle that says we don't care about small business over here because we have to talk about X, Y, and Z. So this is the second time for one of our chairmen. I was the first, and now Senator Boxer is trying to bring to the floor a program that is not that complicated. It is a little program but it has big bang for the buck. It gets rave reviews from the people in my State--Republicans mainly but Democrats as well--and we can't seem to get this program approved until we take bills that Members want to put on this bill that have nothing to do with it and that haven't gone through committee. I am going to be voting against Senator Snowe's bill. But to make clear, I support Senator Snowe's efforts to reduce regulation. My people in Louisiana are screaming about this. I have tried to communicate this to the administration in many ways, whether it is EPA or the Corps of Engineers, or the more recent one coming out of one agency that wants all my oilfield workers to put on HAZMAT suits to go to work. If you put on a HAZMAT suit in Louisiana when it is 100 degrees, you won't get to the oil rig because you will faint before you get there. I am not unaware--I want the Senator from Oklahoma to understand--of some ridiculous rules and regulations that come flying out of some of our agencies. But the way to fix them is not to bring a bill to the floor that has not had a hearing when six different committees have jurisdiction, when Senator Lieberman, who has the lead jurisdiction as chair of Homeland Security has indicated a complete willingness to take this on. There are enough bumper sticker printing operations in America today. There is only one U.S. Senate. I suggest we start acting like the U.S. Senate and stop acting like a bumper sticker operation. I yield the floor.