Mary Landrieu

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-- Federal disaster preparedness. 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 as well as Hurricanes Gustav and Ike last year. Our communities and businesses are still recovering from these disasters-- some from a disaster that devastated the Gulf Coast almost 5 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. For example, the Midwest has 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 has the tools necessary to respond quickly, effectively following a disaster. 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 economic downturn. Louisiana was slow to feel the brunt of the credit crunch and economic meltdown but last year we began to see the drying up of investments and the shrinking of consumers' pocketbooks. One business owner that I have met with is Charles R. ``Ray'' Bergeron. He and his wife own Fleur de Lis Car Care Center in New Orleans, Louisiana. Small Business Administration, SBA, Administrator Karen Mills and I toured Mr. Bergeron's business during a visit to New Orleans on June 30, 2009. As a result of Hurricane Katrina, Mr. and Mrs. Bergeron found themselves having to take out two loans, one for their house and another for their small business. Pre-Katrina, Fleur de Lis Car Care Center had 8 employees. As of our visit in June, they were down to 2 employees not including Mr. Bergeron. They have a $225,000 SBA disaster loan with a standard 30-year term. According to Mr. Bergeron, he will not pay it off until he is 101 years old. The business was back at about 40 percent of pre-Katrina sales, due in large measure to the population not being back. Their neighborhood is mostly empty homes. He attributes part of slow population recovery to high flood insurance premiums, high property taxes and high homeowner's insurance. These are the type of businesses that we must ensure keep their doors open: businesses that took the initiative to re-open right after the disaster. These ``pioneer'' businesses serve as anchors to the community in the early days of recovery. If residents see their favorite restaurant open or the local gas station, they are more likely to come back to rebuild their homes. In order to help ongoing recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast, and to give the SBA more tools to respond after a future disaster, I am introducing the Small Business Administration Disaster Recovery and Reform Act of 2009. This legislation builds off of SBA disaster reforms enacted last year and also provides targeted assistance for Gulf Coast recovery. My bill also includes an important provision authorizing SBA to help families impacted by defective drywall manufactured in the People's Republic of China. In terms of immediate recovery assistance, Title I of the bill includes three provisions which I believe will help both Gulf Coast businesses as well as families nationwide dealing with toxic drywall in their homes. First, this bill amends Section 12086 added by SBA disaster reforms in the 2008 Farm Bill. This provision created a Gulf Coast Disaster Loan Refinancing Program. The intent of the program, as I understand it from my colleagues in the House of Representatives, was to allow Gulf Coast businesses and homeowners to defer for up to 4 years, payments on SBA disaster loans. This provision certainly had good intentions, however, we are a year on and the program has yet to be implemented. That is because in practice the program would likely be re-amortizing the same debt and, under the Credit Reform Act, to refinance a $1,000,000 disaster loan would require $1,000,000 in additional funding. To try to salvage this program, my bill would require SBA to report back to Congress in 30 days with recommendations on improving this program. These recommendations could include such additional options as modifying the end of the deferment date of loans, reducing interest payments on loans, extending out the term of loans to 35 years or other changes to the program that might make it more workable. I believe this program is on the right track, Congress just needs advice from the SBA on how we can make it work better to actually help people in the Gulf Coast. The next provision in Title I relates to 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 three 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. My 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. Last Congress, the 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. The last recovery-related provision in Title I of the bill is focused on families impacted by defective drywall manufactured in the People's Republic of China. Since 2006, more than 550 million pounds of drywall have been imported to the United States from China. This drywall was used because at the time there was a shortage of product by domestic drywall producers and there was increased demand due to recovery from the 2004/2005 hurricanes and the housing boom. In the last 20 months, however, countless homeowners across the country have reported serious metal corrosion, noxious fumes, and health concerns. Reported symptoms have included bloody noses, headaches, insomnia, and skin irritation. Preliminary testing has confirmed that imported defective drywall is the problem, but these tests have not been able to pinpoint the problem substance in the drywall. Just last week, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, CPSC, released additional preliminary results of this drywall which did not identify the exact cause but did outline areas for concern. First, CPSC tested Chinese drywall and compared it with U.S.-made drywall. Chinese drywall contained elemental sulfur and higher levels of strontium--both not in domestic drywall. These findings are similar to May 2009 test results from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. Strontium and sulfur, in increased levels, have been linked to possible health problems. CPSC also carried out chamber testing on emissions from samples of Chinese-made and domestic drywall. Early results show that Chinese drywall emits volatile sulfur compounds at a higher rate than U.S. drywall. Further testing is underway to determine the specific compounds being emitted. Lastly, Federal officials analyzed indoor air results from 10 homes in Florida and Louisiana. This study led to a preliminary finding of detectable concentrations of two known irritants: acetaldehyde and formaldehyde. The concentrations were at levels that could worsen asthma or other conditions, especially when air conditioners were off/not working. Later this month, the CPSC is expected to release more comprehensive information on Chinese drywall. This includes results of a 50-home air sampling project and a preliminary engineering analysis of potential electrical/fire safety issues related to metal corrosion. Key to any results would be Federal recommendations on testing and remediation protocols for Chinese drywall. This would be crucial for homeowners who currently have no definitive way to prove they have Chinese drywall in their homes or procedures to remove the product for good. In total, as of last week the CPSC had received 1,900 incident reports from 30 States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The majority of these reports, 1,317, came from Florida, with Louisiana next, 339, followed by Virginia, 69, Mississippi, 63, and Alabama, 32. These figures demonstrate that this problem is not just an obstacle to Gulf Coast recovery efforts but may also pose a threat to homeowners across the country. To help homeowners struggling with this defective product, I have worked closely over the past few months with my Senate colleagues from Florida and Virginia. This summer, Senator Bill Nelson and I were successful, along with the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Committee, in pushing the CPSC to allocate $2,000,000 in unobligated funds to help the Chinese drywall investigation. Senator Nelson and Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb from Virginia also wrote to the Internal Revenue Service inquiring if they could assist homeowners. The IRS indicated in July that homeowners may be able to claim a casualty loss on their tax returns if they have Chinese drywall that emits an unusual or severe concentration of chemical fumes that causes extreme and unusual damage. We have also written to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, inquiring if the agency could provide emergency rental assistance as it has done in the past. In July, my Senate colleagues and I wrote to the SBA asking what they could do under existing authority to help these families. In its October 29, 2009, response to this letter, SBA indicated that it did not currently have the authority to assist homeowners impacted by drywall. This is because, under the current law, SBA's definition of a disaster only includes typical natural disasters such as tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires, or snowstorms. However, it is my understanding that for previous disasters, there is a precedent in Congress authorizing SBA to respond to a specific disaster and one instance where Congress tasked $25,000,000 in existing funds to help ongoing recovery efforts. Manufacturers of this product should bear the majority of the financial burden for remediation but I believe there is a limited role for SBA to play in assisting homeowners with toxic drywall. For this reason, the legislation I am introducing today includes an authorization for the SBA Administrator to provide disaster home loans in States in which a Governor declares a disaster because of defective drywall. The provision would cover drywall which entered the United States from China from 2004 to 2008 and is demonstrated to cause corrosion or property damage. I note that this provision would not provide SBA funds for losses or damage covered by insurance or other sources. This authorization also caps the funding at this program at no more than 25 percent of the funds appropriated for SBA disaster assistance. In a normal Appropriations cycle, this would equate to about $25,000,000 in funds or $250,000,000 in actual disaster loans. If enacted, this provision would go a long way towards helping these struggling families. While it is important to respond to ongoing recovery-related needs across the country, we must also ensure that the SBA is better prepared for future disasters. To these ends, my committee held a field hearing in Galveston, Texas on September 25, 2009. This hearing focused on the initial Federal response and ongoing recovery efforts from Hurricane Ike in 2008. The hearing was the first Congressional hearing held in Galveston since Hurricane Ike struck the Texas Gulf Coast last year. With this in mind, we were able to hear firsthand Federal, State, and local officials on the progress of rebuilding Galveston Island. My committee also heard from business owners on the challenges that emerged in the year that passed since Ike made landfall. This hearing highlighted improvements in SBA's disaster programs since the 2005 storms. For example, after Katrina and Rita, the Federal response was slow; planning was insufficient, and staff and funding came up short. Following the 2005 storms, it took SBA 90 days to process a home loan and 70 days to process a business loan. After this woeful performance, I pushed for a change in SBA leadership and changes in the way they respond to disasters. In 2006, a new SBA Administrator, Steve Preston, took over and, at my request, he implemented a new SBA Disaster Response Plan in time for the 2007 hurricane season. This plan was a major improvement over the unwieldy, bureaucratic procedures that guided SBA post-Katrina/Rita. SBA will also be submitting to Congress in the next few weeks 2009 revisions to the Disaster Response Plan. I look forward to reviewing these changes in the event that additional improvements are needed. Last year, as part of the 2008 Farm Bill, Congress also passed legislative reforms to SBA's disaster programs. These reforms, along with other key improvements: Increased SBA loan limits from $1.5 million to $2 million; created new tools such as bridge loans or private disaster loans following catastrophic disasters; required coordination between FEMA, SBA, and the IRS; and allowed nonprofits, for the first time, to be eligible for SBA economic injury disaster loans. Earlier this year, our committee heard testimony from local officials in southwest Louisiana that SBA was better prepared and more responsive following Gustav and Ike. As evidence of this, I note that it took 5 days to process a home loan following Ike, compared to the 90 days after Katrina and Rita. Business loans averaged a little over a week to process, compared to the 70 days in 2005. However, although we heard about improvements to SBA's disaster response at the Galveston hearing, we also learned of additional areas that SBA could further improve its operations. While SBA is processing loans faster, there are still complaints from disaster victims on paperwork and bureaucracy. For example, as of August 31, SBA had received about 2,400 business applications for disaster assistance in Galveston County. 536 of those applications were approved for $84 million but, to date, only $24 million has been disbursed for 280 of these loans. In light of these facts, I am concerned that 2008 disaster reforms might not have gone far enough in giving SBA the tools it needs to help businesses and homeowners after a future disaster. Title II of my legislation dovetails upon the reforms from last year to improve SBA coordination with other disaster response agencies. This section also makes SBA disaster loans more effective in reaching disaster victims most in need of assistance. As indicated above, when Katrina hit, our businesses and homeowners had to wait months for loan approvals. I do not know how many businesses we lost because help did not come in time. Because of the scale of this disaster, what these businesses needed was immediate, short-term assistance to hold them over until SBA was ready to process the tens of thousands of loan applications it received. That is why in last year's SBA disaster reforms, I included a provision--the Expedited Disaster Assistance Loan Program--to allow the SBA Administrator with the ability to set up a program to make short-term, low-interest loans to keep them afloat. These loans will allow businesses to make payroll, begin making repairs, and address other immediate needs while they are awaiting insurance payouts or regular SBA Disaster Loans. This provision also directed SBA to study ways to expedite disaster loans for those businesses in a disaster area that have a good, solid track record with the SBA or can provide vital recovery efforts. We had many businesses in the Gulf Coast that had paid off previous SBA loans, were major sources of employment in their communities, but had to wait months for decisions on their SBA Disaster Loan applications. I do not want to get rid of the SBA's current practice of reviewing applications on a first-come-first-served basis, but there should be some mechanism in place for major disasters to get expedited loans out the door to specific businesses that have a positive record with SBA or those that could serve a vital role in the recovery efforts. Expedited loans would jump-start impacted economies, get vital capital out to businesses, and retain essential jobs following future disasters. While I am proud of this provision, I believe that with a few additional revisions, this program could be more successful. For this reason, Section 201 of this bill increases the loan limit from $150,000 to $250,000 and allows the SBA Administrator to utilize this program, as needed, in either a catastrophic or a major disaster. Currently, the program is limited only to a catastrophic disaster, despite the fact that another bridge loan program from the 2008 Farm Bill--the Immediate Disaster Assistance Loan Program--is available for both catastrophic and major disasters. I realize that every disaster is different and could range from a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina or 9/11, to an ice storm or drought. The modification in my bill would allow SBA additional options and flexibility in the kinds of relief they can offer a community. When a tornado destroys 20 businesses in a small town in the Midwest, SBA can get the regular disaster program up and running fairly quickly. You may not need short-term loans in this instance. But if you know that SBA's resources would be overwhelmed by a storm--just as they were initially with Katrina--these expedited business loans would be very helpful. This section also changes the name of the program to the ``Pioneer Business Recovery Program'' as the intent of the program is to help ``second responder'' or ``pioneer'' businesses that want to reopen immediately following a storm. The next provision of my bill, Section 202, increases SBA disaster loan limits. In particular, it is my understanding that SBA's disaster home loan limits have not been adjusted since the 1990s. The current limit for SBA disaster loans to replace personal property is $40,000, and the limit for SBA disaster loans to repair damaged homes is $200,000. My legislation would increase the limits to $80,000 and $400,000, respectively. The bill also increases the SBA disaster business loan limit from $2,000,000 to $4,000,000. I believe that these increases would allow SBA to better address the needs of disaster victims in the future. Section 203 of the bill authorizes SBA to create a State Bridge Loan Guarantee Program. This program would enhance existing partnerships between SBA and States which administer bridge loan programs following disasters. Currently, SBA consults with States pre-disaster on the structure of their program. This is to ensure that these programs run effectively and do not duplicate assistance provided by the SBA disaster assistance program. There are various States, including Louisiana and Florida, which have successful bridge loan programs, and other States which would consider this type of program if there was better Federal-State coordination. Section 203 would allow the SBA Administrator to issue guidelines on an SBA-approved bridge loan program. After issuing these guidelines, SBA could then review State applications and, if necessary, guarantee bridge loans from approved States following a disaster. I would note that this provision was part of S. 3664, the Small Business Disaster Recovery Assistance Improvements Act of 2006 which I introduced in the 109th Congress. Another provision which I would like to highlight in this bill is Section 205. This section amends the Small Business Act to make aquaculture businesses eligible for SBA Economic Injury Disaster Loans. Currently, such businesses, including crawfish farmers, oyster farmers, shellfish farmers, are excluded from eligibility for these loans. In Louisiana, our aquaculture businesses in the southern part of the State were hit hard by both Hurricane Katrina and Rita. These businesses, many crawfish far ers or those with fish farms, were ineligible for U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, disaster assistance, but were also ineligible for SBA disaster loans. We also learned that similar problems followed Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008. I believe that the commonsense fix in my bill will give these businesses the help they need to recover from future disasters. I am concerned about the larger problem which was raised by aquaculture businesses in my State being caught in limbo between USDA and SBA disaster programs. SBA for example provides physical and economic injury disaster loan assistance to businesses that are victims of a declared disaster. However, the Small Business Act excludes agricultural enterprises from eligibility. The act defines ``agricultural enterprises'' as ``those businesses engaged in the production of food and fiber, ranching, and raising livestock, aquaculture, and all other farming and agricultural related industries.'' Thus, if a business is an agricultural enterprise, SBA is prohibited from providing disaster loan assistance. Prior to 1976, agricultural enterprises were covered by USDA only, and between 1976 and 1986, several statutes allowed agricultural enterprises to be eligible for SBA assistance under certain conditions. As a result of a couple of factors though including duplication of benefits, disparity of service between SBA and USDA and loan shopping, Public Law. 99-272 repealed agricultural eligibility for SBA disaster loans. Since then, all agricultural enterprises have been referred to USDA for disaster loans. Though USDA has several disaster programs, most are related to production loss of crops. The Farm Service Agency's Emergency Loan Program covers some agriculture related disaster losses, but operates under different eligibility rules from SBA. They are limited to production on agriculture operations and restrict eligibility to ``family farm'' operations. The disparity between eligibility requirements for the SBA and USDA has resulted in many agricultural businesses being ineligible for disaster assistance at all. Included in that category are horse-related businesses, feedlots, animal breeders and sellers, nurseries, floriculture, tree farms, fish or shellfish business, seed producers, along with others. That is because, to currently be eligible for an SBA disaster loan, a primarily agricultural enterprise must have a separable non-agricultural component, which may be eligible for physical disaster loan assistance provided that it is a separate part of the agricultural enterprise, with separate income, operations, expenses, assets, etc. For economic injury disaster loan assistance, the Small Business Act limits eligibility to small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, producer cooperatives, and private non-profit organizations. Therefore, the business must meet the eligibility requirements for a small business, and for purposes of EIDL eligibility, the activity of a business must be nonagricultural. To try to identify some of these gaps between USDA and SBA disaster assistance, Section 209 would require SBA, in consultation with USDA, to report to Congress within 120 days. This report would identify gaps in assistance and provide recommended legislative/administrative changes to fix these problems. For my part, I would like to get these agencies on the same page to ensure that businesses in need--whether they be small businesses or agricultural businesses--are not deprived of assistance if a disaster happens in their area. In closing, the legislation I am introducing today is an important first step for the Small Business Administration. That is because I am hopeful that, at the appropriate time, my committee can send to the full Senate legislation which will both reform SBA's disaster programs and address ongoing recovery needs across the country. With that goal in mind, I plan to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the coming months to identify their priorities on these issues. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support 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-- Federal disaster preparedness. 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 as well as Hurricanes Gustav and Ike last year. Our communities and businesses are still recovering from these disasters-- some from a disaster that devastated the Gulf Coast almost 5 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. For example, the Midwest has 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 has the tools necessary to respond quickly, effectively following a disaster. 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 economic downturn. Louisiana was slow to feel the brunt of the credit crunch and economic meltdown but last year we began to see the drying up of investments and the shrinking of consumers' pocketbooks. One business owner that I have met with is Charles R. ``Ray'' Bergeron. He and his wife own Fleur de Lis Car Care Center in New Orleans, Louisiana. Small Business Administration, SBA, Administrator Karen Mills and I toured Mr. Bergeron's business during a visit to New Orleans on June 30, 2009. As a result of Hurricane Katrina, Mr. and Mrs. Bergeron found themselves having to take out two loans, one for their house and another for their small business. Pre-Katrina, Fleur de Lis Car Care Center had 8 employees. As of our visit in June, they were down to 2 employees not including Mr. Bergeron. They have a $225,000 SBA disaster loan with a standard 30-year term. According to Mr. Bergeron, he will not pay it off until he is 101 years old. The business was back at about 40 percent of pre-Katrina sales, due in large measure to the population not being back. Their neighborhood is mostly empty homes. He attributes part of slow population recovery to high flood insurance premiums, high property taxes and high homeowner's insurance. These are the type of businesses that we must ensure keep their doors open: businesses that took the initiative to re-open right after the disaster. These ``pioneer'' businesses serve as anchors to the community in the early days of recovery. If residents see their favorite restaurant open or the local gas station, they are more likely to come back to rebuild their homes. In order to help ongoing recovery efforts in the Gulf Coast, and to give the SBA more tools to respond after a future disaster, I am introducing the Small Business Administration Disaster Recovery and Reform Act of 2009. This legislation builds off of SBA disaster reforms enacted last year and also provides targeted assistance for Gulf Coast recovery. My bill also includes an important provision authorizing SBA to help families impacted by defective drywall manufactured in the People's Republic of China. In terms of immediate recovery assistance, Title I of the bill includes three provisions which I believe will help both Gulf Coast businesses as well as families nationwide dealing with toxic drywall in their homes. First, this bill amends Section 12086 added by SBA disaster reforms in the 2008 Farm Bill. This provision created a Gulf Coast Disaster Loan Refinancing Program. The intent of the program, as I understand it from my colleagues in the House of Representatives, was to allow Gulf Coast businesses and homeowners to defer for up to 4 years, payments on SBA disaster loans. This provision certainly had good intentions, however, we are a year on and the program has yet to be implemented. That is because in practice the program would likely be re-amortizing the same debt and, under the Credit Reform Act, to refinance a $1,000,000 disaster loan would require $1,000,000 in additional funding. To try to salvage this program, my bill would require SBA to report back to Congress in 30 days with recommendations on improving this program. These recommendations could include such additional options as modifying the end of the deferment date of loans, reducing interest payments on loans, extending out the term of loans to 35 years or other changes to the program that might make it more workable. I believe this program is on the right track, Congress just needs advice from the SBA on how we can make it work better to actually help people in the Gulf Coast. The next provision in Title I relates to 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 three 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. My 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. Last Congress, the 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. The last recovery-related provision in Title I of the bill is focused on families impacted by defective drywall manufactured in the People's Republic of China. Since 2006, more than 550 million pounds of drywall have been imported to the United States from China. This drywall was used because at the time there was a shortage of product by domestic drywall producers and there was increased demand due to recovery from the 2004/2005 hurricanes and the housing boom. In the last 20 months, however, countless homeowners across the country have reported serious metal corrosion, noxious fumes, and health concerns. Reported symptoms have included bloody noses, headaches, insomnia, and skin irritation. Preliminary testing has confirmed that imported defective drywall is the problem, but these tests have not been able to pinpoint the problem substance in the drywall. Just last week, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, CPSC, released additional preliminary results of this drywall which did not identify the exact cause but did outline areas for concern. First, CPSC tested Chinese drywall and compared it with U.S.-made drywall. Chinese drywall contained elemental sulfur and higher levels of strontium--both not in domestic drywall. These findings are similar to May 2009 test results from the Environmental Protection Agency, EPA. Strontium and sulfur, in increased levels, have been linked to possible health problems. CPSC also carried out chamber testing on emissions from samples of Chinese-made and domestic drywall. Early results show that Chinese drywall emits volatile sulfur compounds at a higher rate than U.S. drywall. Further testing is underway to determine the specific compounds being emitted. Lastly, Federal officials analyzed indoor air results from 10 homes in Florida and Louisiana. This study led to a preliminary finding of detectable concentrations of two known irritants: acetaldehyde and formaldehyde. The concentrations were at levels that could worsen asthma or other conditions, especially when air conditioners were off/not working. Later this month, the CPSC is expected to release more comprehensive information on Chinese drywall. This includes results of a 50-home air sampling project and a preliminary engineering analysis of potential electrical/fire safety issues related to metal corrosion. Key to any results would be Federal recommendations on testing and remediation protocols for Chinese drywall. This would be crucial for homeowners who currently have no definitive way to prove they have Chinese drywall in their homes or procedures to remove the product for good. In total, as of last week the CPSC had received 1,900 incident reports from 30 States, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The majority of these reports, 1,317, came from Florida, with Louisiana next, 339, followed by Virginia, 69, Mississippi, 63, and Alabama, 32. These figures demonstrate that this problem is not just an obstacle to Gulf Coast recovery efforts but may also pose a threat to homeowners across the country. To help homeowners struggling with this defective product, I have worked closely over the past few months with my Senate colleagues from Florida and Virginia. This summer, Senator Bill Nelson and I were successful, along with the leadership of the Senate Appropriations Committee, in pushing the CPSC to allocate $2,000,000 in unobligated funds to help the Chinese drywall investigation. Senator Nelson and Senators Mark Warner and Jim Webb from Virginia also wrote to the Internal Revenue Service inquiring if they could assist homeowners. The IRS indicated in July that homeowners may be able to claim a casualty loss on their tax returns if they have Chinese drywall that emits an unusual or severe concentration of chemical fumes that causes extreme and unusual damage. We have also written to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, inquiring if the agency could provide emergency rental assistance as it has done in the past. In July, my Senate colleagues and I wrote to the SBA asking what they could do under existing authority to help these families. In its October 29, 2009, response to this letter, SBA indicated that it did not currently have the authority to assist homeowners impacted by drywall. This is because, under the current law, SBA's definition of a disaster only includes typical natural disasters such as tornadoes, hurricanes, wildfires, or snowstorms. However, it is my understanding that for previous disasters, there is a precedent in Congress authorizing SBA to respond to a specific disaster and one instance where Congress tasked $25,000,000 in existing funds to help ongoing recovery efforts. Manufacturers of this product should bear the majority of the financial burden for remediation but I believe there is a limited role for SBA to play in assisting homeowners with toxic drywall. For this reason, the legislation I am introducing today includes an authorization for the SBA Administrator to provide disaster home loans in States in which a Governor declares a disaster because of defective drywall. The provision would cover drywall which entered the United States from China from 2004 to 2008 and is demonstrated to cause corrosion or property damage. I note that this provision would not provide SBA funds for losses or damage covered by insurance or other sources. This authorization also caps the funding at this program at no more than 25 percent of the funds appropriated for SBA disaster assistance. In a normal Appropriations cycle, this would equate to about $25,000,000 in funds or $250,000,000 in actual disaster loans. If enacted, this provision would go a long way towards helping these struggling families. While it is important to respond to ongoing recovery-related needs across the country, we must also ensure that the SBA is better prepared for future disasters. To these ends, my committee held a field hearing in Galveston, Texas on September 25, 2009. This hearing focused on the initial Federal response and ongoing recovery efforts from Hurricane Ike in 2008. The hearing was the first Congressional hearing held in Galveston since Hurricane Ike struck the Texas Gulf Coast last year. With this in mind, we were able to hear firsthand Federal, State, and local officials on the progress of rebuilding Galveston Island. My committee also heard from business owners on the challenges that emerged in the year that passed since Ike made landfall. This hearing highlighted improvements in SBA's disaster programs since the 2005 storms. For example, after Katrina and Rita, the Federal response was slow; planning was insufficient, and staff and funding came up short. Following the 2005 storms, it took SBA 90 days to process a home loan and 70 days to process a business loan. After this woeful performance, I pushed for a change in SBA leadership and changes in the way they respond to disasters. In 2006, a new SBA Administrator, Steve Preston, took over and, at my request, he implemented a new SBA Disaster Response Plan in time for the 2007 hurricane season. This plan was a major improvement over the unwieldy, bureaucratic procedures that guided SBA post-Katrina/Rita. SBA will also be submitting to Congress in the next few weeks 2009 revisions to the Disaster Response Plan. I look forward to reviewing these changes in the event that additional improvements are needed. Last year, as part of the 2008 Farm Bill, Congress also passed legislative reforms to SBA's disaster programs. These reforms, along with other key improvements: Increased SBA loan limits from $1.5 million to $2 million; created new tools such as bridge loans or private disaster loans following catastrophic disasters; required coordination between FEMA, SBA, and the IRS; and allowed nonprofits, for the first time, to be eligible for SBA economic injury disaster loans. Earlier this year, our committee heard testimony from local officials in southwest Louisiana that SBA was better prepared and more responsive following Gustav and Ike. As evidence of this, I note that it took 5 days to process a home loan following Ike, compared to the 90 days after Katrina and Rita. Business loans averaged a little over a week to process, compared to the 70 days in 2005. However, although we heard about improvements to SBA's disaster response at the Galveston hearing, we also learned of additional areas that SBA could further improve its operations. While SBA is processing loans faster, there are still complaints from disaster victims on paperwork and bureaucracy. For example, as of August 31, SBA had received about 2,400 business applications for disaster assistance in Galveston County. 536 of those applications were approved for $84 million but, to date, only $24 million has been disbursed for 280 of these loans. In light of these facts, I am concerned that 2008 disaster reforms might not have gone far enough in giving SBA the tools it needs to help businesses and homeowners after a future disaster. Title II of my legislation dovetails upon the reforms from last year to improve SBA coordination with other disaster response agencies. This section also makes SBA disaster loans more effective in reaching disaster victims most in need of assistance. As indicated above, when Katrina hit, our businesses and homeowners had to wait months for loan approvals. I do not know how many businesses we lost because help did not come in time. Because of the scale of this disaster, what these businesses needed was immediate, short-term assistance to hold them over until SBA was ready to process the tens of thousands of loan applications it received. That is why in last year's SBA disaster reforms, I included a provision--the Expedited Disaster Assistance Loan Program--to allow the SBA Administrator with the ability to set up a program to make short-term, low-interest loans to keep them afloat. These loans will allow businesses to make payroll, begin making repairs, and address other immediate needs while they are awaiting insurance payouts or regular SBA Disaster Loans. This provision also directed SBA to study ways to expedite disaster loans for those businesses in a disaster area that have a good, solid track record with the SBA or can provide vital recovery efforts. We had many businesses in the Gulf Coast that had paid off previous SBA loans, were major sources of employment in their communities, but had to wait months for decisions on their SBA Disaster Loan applications. I do not want to get rid of the SBA's current practice of reviewing applications on a first-come-first-served basis, but there should be some mechanism in place for major disasters to get expedited loans out the door to specific businesses that have a positive record with SBA or those that could serve a vital role in the recovery efforts. Expedited loans would jump-start impacted economies, get vital capital out to businesses, and retain essential jobs following future disasters. While I am proud of this provision, I believe that with a few additional revisions, this program could be more successful. For this reason, Section 201 of this bill increases the loan limit from $150,000 to $250,000 and allows the SBA Administrator to utilize this program, as needed, in either a catastrophic or a major disaster. Currently, the program is limited only to a catastrophic disaster, despite the fact that another bridge loan program from the 2008 Farm Bill--the Immediate Disaster Assistance Loan Program--is available for both catastrophic and major disasters. I realize that every disaster is different and could range from a disaster on the scale of Hurricane Katrina or 9/11, to an ice storm or drought. The modification in my bill would allow SBA additional options and flexibility in the kinds of relief they can offer a community. When a tornado destroys 20 businesses in a small town in the Midwest, SBA can get the regular disaster program up and running fairly quickly. You may not need short-term loans in this instance. But if you know that SBA's resources would be overwhelmed by a storm--just as they were initially with Katrina--these expedited business loans would be very helpful. This section also changes the name of the program to the ``Pioneer Business Recovery Program'' as the intent of the program is to help ``second responder'' or ``pioneer'' businesses that want to reopen immediately following a storm. The next provision of my bill, Section 202, increases SBA disaster loan limits. In particular, it is my understanding that SBA's disaster home loan limits have not been adjusted since the 1990s. The current limit for SBA disaster loans to replace personal property is $40,000, and the limit for SBA disaster loans to repair damaged homes is $200,000. My legislation would increase the limits to $80,000 and $400,000, respectively. The bill also increases the SBA disaster business loan limit from $2,000,000 to $4,000,000. I believe that these increases would allow SBA to better address the needs of disaster victims in the future. Section 203 of the bill authorizes SBA to create a State Bridge Loan Guarantee Program. This program would enhance existing partnerships between SBA and States which administer bridge loan programs following disasters. Currently, SBA consults with States pre-disaster on the structure of their program. This is to ensure that these programs run effectively and do not duplicate assistance provided by the SBA disaster assistance program. There are various States, including Louisiana and Florida, which have successful bridge loan programs, and other States which would consider this type of program if there was better Federal-State coordination. Section 203 would allow the SBA Administrator to issue guidelines on an SBA-approved bridge loan program. After issuing these guidelines, SBA could then review State applications and, if necessary, guarantee bridge loans from approved States following a disaster. I would note that this provision was part of S. 3664, the Small Business Disaster Recovery Assistance Improvements Act of 2006 which I introduced in the 109th Congress. Another provision which I would like to highlight in this bill is Section 205. This section amends the Small Business Act to make aquaculture businesses eligible for SBA Economic Injury Disaster Loans. Currently, such businesses, including crawfish farmers, oyster farmers, shellfish farmers, are excluded from eligibility for these loans. In Louisiana, our aquaculture businesses in the southern part of the State were hit hard by both Hurricane Katrina and Rita. These businesses, many crawfish far ers or those with fish farms, were ineligible for U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA, disaster assistance, but were also ineligible for SBA disaster loans. We also learned that similar problems followed Hurricanes Gustav and Ike in 2008. I believe that the commonsense fix in my bill will give these businesses the help they need to recover from future disasters. I am concerned about the larger problem which was raised by aquaculture businesses in my State being caught in limbo between USDA and SBA disaster programs. SBA for example provides physical and economic injury disaster loan assistance to businesses that are victims of a declared disaster. However, the Small Business Act excludes agricultural enterprises from eligibility. The act defines ``agricultural enterprises'' as ``those businesses engaged in the production of food and fiber, ranching, and raising livestock, aquaculture, and all other farming and agricultural related industries.'' Thus, if a business is an agricultural enterprise, SBA is prohibited from providing disaster loan assistance. Prior to 1976, agricultural enterprises were covered by USDA only, and between 1976 and 1986, several statutes allowed agricultural enterprises to be eligible for SBA assistance under certain conditions. As a result of a couple of factors though including duplication of benefits, disparity of service between SBA and USDA and loan shopping, Public Law. 99-272 repealed agricultural eligibility for SBA disaster loans. Since then, all agricultural enterprises have been referred to USDA for disaster loans. Though USDA has several disaster programs, most are related to production loss of crops. The Farm Service Agency's Emergency Loan Program covers some agriculture related disaster losses, but operates under different eligibility rules from SBA. They are limited to production on agriculture operations and restrict eligibility to ``family farm'' operations. The disparity between eligibility requirements for the SBA and USDA has resulted in many agricultural businesses being ineligible for disaster assistance at all. Included in that category are horse-related businesses, feedlots, animal breeders and sellers, nurseries, floriculture, tree farms, fish or shellfish business, seed producers, along with others. That is because, to currently be eligible for an SBA disaster loan, a primarily agricultural enterprise must have a separable non-agricultural component, which may be eligible for physical disaster loan assistance provided that it is a separate part of the agricultural enterprise, with separate income, operations, expenses, assets, etc. For economic injury disaster loan assistance, the Small Business Act limits eligibility to small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives, producer cooperatives, and private non-profit organizations. Therefore, the business must meet the eligibility requirements for a small business, and for purposes of EIDL eligibility, the activity of a business must be nonagricultural. To try to identify some of these gaps between USDA and SBA disaster assistance, Section 209 would require SBA, in consultation with USDA, to report to Congress within 120 days. This report would identify gaps in assistance and provide recommended legislative/administrative changes to fix these problems. For my part, I would like to get these agencies on the same page to ensure that businesses in need--whether they be small businesses or agricultural businesses--are not deprived of assistance if a disaster happens in their area. In closing, the legislation I am introducing today is an important first step for the Small Business Administration. That is because I am hopeful that, at the appropriate time, my committee can send to the full Senate legislation which will both reform SBA's disaster programs and address ongoing recovery needs across the country. With that goal in mind, I plan to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the coming months to identify their priorities on these issues. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and letters of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I rise in support of the Department of the Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2010 and to speak on the conference report language regarding hydraulic fracturing. America's oil and natural gas industry is an important driver for the national economy. A recent study reveals this industry supports more than 9 million jobs and accounts for roughly 7.5 percent of the U.S. gross domestic product. Developing untapped resources could add further value to the U.S. economy and aid in economic recovery. According to a recent ICF international study, developing areas that are currently or were recently off limits could generate $1.7 trillion for Federal, State, and local governments over the life of the resource, as well as contribute 160,000 jobs by 2030. As our country moves towards a new energy future, oil and natural gas will continue to play a key role in our Nation's energy supply for years to come. According to the Energy Information Administration, energy demand will grow by 9 percent between 2007 and 2030. More than half of this demand is expected to be met by oil and natural gas, as is the case today. How will the U.S. meet this growing demand? There are significant resources available to recover here at home. The Bakken formation in North Dakota, Montana, and South Dakota is estimated by USGS to contain up to 4.3 billion barrels of oil--a 25-fold increase compared to government estimates from 30 years ago. In my home State of Louisiana, the recent development of the Haynesville shale formation will also contribute to supply the growing demand. Experts estimate that there is 250 Tcf of recoverable gas in the Haynesville shale. Last year, the U.S. consumed 23 Tcf, which means there is enough gas in just the Haynesville shale to supply the U.S. population for 11 years. On July 28, 2009, the New York Times reported: ``Nobody knows for certain how big an area the Haynesville Shale covers--no government entity has mapped it. But energy companies and experts say it is large, possibly the largest in the lower 48 states, with an estimated 250 trillion cubic feet of recoverable gas. It is up to 13,000 feet underground, extending into East Texas.'' In addition, a recent study estimates that primarily due to the recent shale gas developments across the country, the U.S. has roughly a 100-year supply of natural gas reserves. The study was conducted by the Potential Gas Committee--a group of academics and industry experts supported by the Colorado School of Mines. This represents a 35 percent increase in reserves versus a couple years ago--the largest increase in the history of reports from the Committee. However, these resources are not a guaranteed supply for the U.S. economy. Both the Bakken formation and the large new natural gas shale deposits--found in the Marcellus, Barnett, Haynesville, and other shale plays across the country--are developed using a combination of production technologies such as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. Unfortunately, some opponents of oil and natural gas production are attempting to prevent the use of hydraulic fracturing. This could have significant impacts on the future of shale gas and oil production. A 2006 government-industry study found that 60-80 percent of the wells to be drilled in the next decade will require hydraulic fracturing. This technology can be used safely in an environmentally responsible manner. Hydraulic fracturing has been around for roughly 60 years. Current industry well design practices provide multiple levels of protection between any sources of drinking water and the production zone of an oil and gas well. The conference report to H.R. 2996 proposes an EPA study of hydraulic fracturing's impacts on drinking water supplies. It is important to note that EPA studied this issue in 2004 and concluded ``the injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids . . . pose little or no threat to (underground drinking water).'' Any new study must be conducted in a comprehensive, scientific, credible, and transparent manner. It should include a review of other existing studies regarding hydraulic fracturing and its potential impacts, and it should involve interested stakeholders during key stages of the study. Hydraulic fracturing can play a major role in our energy future, and this technology can continue to be used in a responsible manner. I urge EPA to undertake this study in a responsible manner.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will be an important component in our efforts to rebuild Louisiana's vast wetlands. Today, the coastline of my home state is the site of one of the Nation's most pronounced ecological disasters: the massive erosion of Louisiana's coastal wetlands. Few are aware that the marsh and wetlands along Louisiana's coast comprise some 40 percent of the Nation's total salt marshes. Louisiana's coastline is a national treasure. Yet, this national treasure is disappearing at an alarming rate due to a number of natural and man-made factors, including the destruction of wetlands caused by non-native feral pig populations that are literally eating away the coast. The loss of our wetlands threatens not only our teeming wildlife, but also land, lives, energy infrastructure, and navigation. That is why I rise today, to introduce the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program Act of 2009, address the challenges these species pose to our efforts to reverse coastal wetland deterioration. Every 30 minutes, a portion of Louisiana's coast the size of a football field is converted from healthy marsh into open water. Since 1930, 1.2 million acres have been lost--an area roughly the size of Delaware. Scientists predict that Louisiana will lose another 700 square miles of coastal wetlands by 2050--an area the size of the greater Washington, D.C. and Baltimore metro areas. Louisiana's coastal land loss problems are caused by a number of natural and man-made factors. The primary factor has been the leveeing of the Mississippi River for purposes of flood control and navigation. Historically, the river would flood seasonally, taking silt from the Midwest and depositing it across the Mississippi Delta. Levees provided the needed flood protection, yet prevented vital land-building sediments and nutrients from replenishing and elevating deteriorating marshes. Additional activity added to the problem, including dredging thousands of miles of access canals for petroleum extraction and navigation. Those canals accelerated saltwater intrusion, further weakening the marsh. Another human activity that resulted in significant wetland loss was the introduction of two invasive species to the marshland habitat: the nutria and the feral pig. These non-native species are consuming our wetlands at an alarming rate. Nutria were initially introduced by those who wanted to raise them for their furs. Their population exploded in the wild and their appetite for marsh grass is boundless. Scientists estimate that nutria are currently affecting an estimated 100,000 acres of coastal wetlands. The feral hog is another exotic species which has expanded its range throughout most of Louisiana. Feral swine cause extensive damage to natural wildlife habitat. In Louisiana, the wild omnivores compete with native wildlife for food resources; prey on young domestic animals and wildlife; and carry diseases that can affect pets, livestock, wildlife and people. Scientists now believe that the feral hogs are not only wreaking enormous damage to the marsh, but are also negatively impacting native freshwater mussels and insects by contributing E. coli to water systems. According to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, the wild pig is the most prolific large mammal in North America and given adequate nutrition, its populations in an area can double in just 4 months. As I mentioned earlier, Louisiana's landscape has already been ravaged by the nutria rodent. In 2002, the first program was created to combat the increasing nutria populations. This program, the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program, CNCP, incentivized trappers to catch nutria in return for monetary compensation. This program has proven successful at decreasing nutria populations and significantly reducing their impact to coastal wetlands. However, more effort was needed to further reduce the nutria damage to wetlands, both in Louisiana and in other marshy environments, including Maryland's Chesapeake Bay. The Nutria Eradication and Control Act was enacted in 2003 to provide a critical supplement of funding to strengthen the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program. In July, I joined my friend and colleague Senator Cardin in introducing the reauthorization of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. These two measures have been instrumental in reducing the nutria damage to Louisiana's wetlands. Now, it is my hope that we can achieve similar success with the problem of feral hogs. Feral swine are listed by the World Conservation Union, IUCN, as one of the top 100 invasive species worldwide. If action is not taken to control the feral swine population, our biologists fear these animals will undo much of the progress Louisiana has made in controlling the nutria population. It is my hope that with the help of my colleagues, we can pass this bill to help eradicate these pests from our vanishing coastline once and for all. The bill I am introducing today authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to allocate funding to create a pilot program modeled off of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. This program will assess the nature and extent of damage to the wetlands in Louisiana and develop methods to eradicate or control the feral swine population, and restore the coastal areas damaged by this invasive species. It is a small program, but rewards it could reap are potentially vast. Consider this, Louisiana's wetlands are not only the home to our famed wildlife, they are also the most effective protection we have against future storm damage. Coastal wetlands are the last barrier between the sea and the land. Wetlands reduce high winds and absorb the deadly storm surges that often accompany hurricanes. Scientists estimate that every 3 to 4 miles of wetlands can absorb enough water to reduce the height of a storm surge by 1 foot. That protects the millions of hardworking men and women who live along Louisiana's coast. But I would also like to remind my colleagues of the vital strategic importance these wetlands serve to the Nation's energy security: Louisiana is one of the economy's largest producers of energy. Without wetlands as a buffer, storms could devastate the Nation's critical energy infrastructure. It is for all of these reasons that this legislation is crucial. I ask that my colleagues support its prompt passage.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill that will be an important component in our efforts to rebuild Louisiana's vast wetlands. Today, the coastline of my home state is the site of one of the Nation's most pronounced ecological disasters: the massive erosion of Louisiana's coastal wetlands. Few are aware that the marsh and wetlands along Louisiana's coast comprise some 40 percent of the Nation's total salt marshes. Louisiana's coastline is a national treasure. Yet, this national treasure is disappearing at an alarming rate due to a number of natural and man-made factors, including the destruction of wetlands caused by non-native feral pig populations that are literally eating away the coast. The loss of our wetlands threatens not only our teeming wildlife, but also land, lives, energy infrastructure, and navigation. That is why I rise today, to introduce the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Pilot Program Act of 2009, address the challenges these species pose to our efforts to reverse coastal wetland deterioration. Every 30 minutes, a portion of Louisiana's coast the size of a football field is converted from healthy marsh into open water. Since 1930, 1.2 million acres have been lost--an area roughly the size of Delaware. Scientists predict that Louisiana will lose another 700 square miles of coastal wetlands by 2050--an area the size of the greater Washington, D.C. and Baltimore metro areas. Louisiana's coastal land loss problems are caused by a number of natural and man-made factors. The primary factor has been the leveeing of the Mississippi River for purposes of flood control and navigation. Historically, the river would flood seasonally, taking silt from the Midwest and depositing it across the Mississippi Delta. Levees provided the needed flood protection, yet prevented vital land-building sediments and nutrients from replenishing and elevating deteriorating marshes. Additional activity added to the problem, including dredging thousands of miles of access canals for petroleum extraction and navigation. Those canals accelerated saltwater intrusion, further weakening the marsh. Another human activity that resulted in significant wetland loss was the introduction of two invasive species to the marshland habitat: the nutria and the feral pig. These non-native species are consuming our wetlands at an alarming rate. Nutria were initially introduced by those who wanted to raise them for their furs. Their population exploded in the wild and their appetite for marsh grass is boundless. Scientists estimate that nutria are currently affecting an estimated 100,000 acres of coastal wetlands. The feral hog is another exotic species which has expanded its range throughout most of Louisiana. Feral swine cause extensive damage to natural wildlife habitat. In Louisiana, the wild omnivores compete with native wildlife for food resources; prey on young domestic animals and wildlife; and carry diseases that can affect pets, livestock, wildlife and people. Scientists now believe that the feral hogs are not only wreaking enormous damage to the marsh, but are also negatively impacting native freshwater mussels and insects by contributing E. coli to water systems. According to the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, the wild pig is the most prolific large mammal in North America and given adequate nutrition, its populations in an area can double in just 4 months. As I mentioned earlier, Louisiana's landscape has already been ravaged by the nutria rodent. In 2002, the first program was created to combat the increasing nutria populations. This program, the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program, CNCP, incentivized trappers to catch nutria in return for monetary compensation. This program has proven successful at decreasing nutria populations and significantly reducing their impact to coastal wetlands. However, more effort was needed to further reduce the nutria damage to wetlands, both in Louisiana and in other marshy environments, including Maryland's Chesapeake Bay. The Nutria Eradication and Control Act was enacted in 2003 to provide a critical supplement of funding to strengthen the Coast-wide Nutria Control Program. In July, I joined my friend and colleague Senator Cardin in introducing the reauthorization of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. These two measures have been instrumental in reducing the nutria damage to Louisiana's wetlands. Now, it is my hope that we can achieve similar success with the problem of feral hogs. Feral swine are listed by the World Conservation Union, IUCN, as one of the top 100 invasive species worldwide. If action is not taken to control the feral swine population, our biologists fear these animals will undo much of the progress Louisiana has made in controlling the nutria population. It is my hope that with the help of my colleagues, we can pass this bill to help eradicate these pests from our vanishing coastline once and for all. The bill I am introducing today authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to allocate funding to create a pilot program modeled off of the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. This program will assess the nature and extent of damage to the wetlands in Louisiana and develop methods to eradicate or control the feral swine population, and restore the coastal areas damaged by this invasive species. It is a small program, but rewards it could reap are potentially vast. Consider this, Louisiana's wetlands are not only the home to our famed wildlife, they are also the most effective protection we have against future storm damage. Coastal wetlands are the last barrier between the sea and the land. Wetlands reduce high winds and absorb the deadly storm surges that often accompany hurricanes. Scientists estimate that every 3 to 4 miles of wetlands can absorb enough water to reduce the height of a storm surge by 1 foot. That protects the millions of hardworking men and women who live along Louisiana's coast. But I would also like to remind my colleagues of the vital strategic importance these wetlands serve to the Nation's energy security: Louisiana is one of the economy's largest producers of energy. Without wetlands as a buffer, storms could devastate the Nation's critical energy infrastructure. It is for all of these reasons that this legislation is crucial. I ask that my colleagues support its prompt passage.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, today I celebrate the retirement of Karen M. Eckert after 37 years of excellent service to the federal government. Karen, a remarkable public servant under both the legacy Immigration and Naturalization Service and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, and devoted resident of Buffalo, NY, retired on May 29, 2009. Karen began her career as an immigration inspector at Niagara Falls, NY, in 1972 and quickly became knowledgeable in all areas of immigration. Her work has touched the lives of thousands--giving hope to countless immigrants and new citizens in pursuit of their dreams, as well as uniting adoptive parents with children in need of a loving home, while striving to protect children and underprivileged birth parents from exploitation. Karen became a leading expert in intercountry adoption and child citizenship. In this role, she was invaluable in establishing the Child Citizenship Program in Buffalo, NY, drafting orphan regulations, and leading USCIS to take the steps necessary to implement the Hague Convention on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. Her outstanding and distinguished service has been recognized through numerous awards, including an Angel in Adoption Award from the Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute in 2003, the Department of Homeland Security Secretary's Meritorious Service Award in 2006 and the USCIS Director's Award in 2008 for her direction and participation in the Hague Implementation Working Group. It is impossible to count the number of individuals who have personally benefited from Karen's professionalism, insights and dedication and she will be sincerely missed by her colleagues worldwide. We congratulate Karen M. Eckert on her outstanding and distinguished career and for the inspiration she is leaving behind.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, since Congress passed and the President signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February, more than 33,000 loans--nearly $13 billion--have gotten into the hands of entrepreneurs, helping to give more small businesses the capital they need to stock their shelves and pay their employees while creating or saving 325,000 jobs at a critical time. But as President Obama said yesterday, we must do everything in our power to help our nation's innovators and job creators to ensure their success and our nation's economy and future competitiveness. Ensuring that small businesses have greater access to capital is the first, and perhaps most critical, step. In hearings, roundtables and other meetings with small business owners and lenders, I have heard time and time again that the current small business loan limits do not adequately meet their needs. To answer their urgent call for help, I am here today to introduce S. 1832, The Small Business Access to Capital Act of 2009. Senate Small Business Committee and Entrepreneurship members Senators John Kerry of Massachusetts, Tom Harkin of Iowa, Ben Cardin of Maryland and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire, along with Senators Barbara Boxer of California and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, have joined me as cosponsors of this bill. The Small Business Access to Capital Act of 2009 contains several of the initiatives President Obama highlighted in his speech yesterday, including raising the limits on SBA loans to as high as $5.5 million. Coupled with lower-cost capital available to community lenders, these higher loan limits will further spur small business growth and aid in our nation's continued economic recovery. I have made increasing access to capital for small businesses a top priority within my Committee since the day I became Chair, leading my first Committee event on this topic in January. Since that first roundtable, Senator Snowe and I helped pass the Recovery Act's small business provisions that eliminated SBA loan fees for borrowers to make capital more affordable, increased the loan guarantees on SBA's largest loan program to reduce risk for banks and encourage them to lend when the economy was at its worst, and created initiatives to help unfreeze the secondary market for SBA loans so that banks would have more capital to lend small businesses. These provisions, as I mentioned earlier, helped some 33,000 businesses receive $13 billion in capital, saving or creating 325,000 jobs. I have also held four additional hearings and roundtables focused on increasing access to capital for entrepreneurs. Most recently, an oversight hearing on October 6 focused on what in the Recovery Act has been implemented and what additional steps Congress needs to take. Increasing loan limits was a main focus. In addition to making greater access to capital a top priority since and prior to my becoming Chair, I have specifically supported increasing the loan limits for the past two Congresses, voting favorably for this increase in the last two SBA reauthorization bills out of the Senate Small Business Committee. My bill goes above and beyond these increases because in this recession small business needs are greater than ever before, and the programs have not been updated in many years. The bill I am introducing today increases the maximum 7(a) loan from $2 million to $5 million, increases the maximum 504 loan from $1.5 million to $5.5 million, and the maximum microloan from $35,000 to $50,000. These are all provisions that have been championed by my colleague and Ranking Member, Olympia Snowe, in S.1615, the Next Steps for Main Street Act. Additionally, the bill includes a provision to allow businesses to use 504 loan guarantees to refinance existing business debt and allows microloan intermediaries to have greater access to technical assistance grants. The bill also increases the amount that a New Market Venture Capital Company can invest in any one company, helping fast-growing businesses located in areas with chronic underemployment. The Recovery Act included a controversial provision that exempts the National Institutes of Science (NIH) from participating in the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and the Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. This provision could cost small businesses as much as $230 million in lost r&d work, impacting the development of needed military and medical technologies and therapies. In addition, it directly counters the goals of the Recovery Act to create high-paying jobs, spur innovation and boost America's competitiveness. This bill contains a provision to correct this unfair exemption by requiring NIH to obligate $150 million of the Recovery funds it received to be used for SBIR and STTR projects. Last, the bill amends the America's Recovery Capital (ARC) loan program, enacted as part of the Recovery Act, so that businesses with existing SBA 7(a) loans can access this financing. The temporary ARC program offers interest-free loans to viable small businesses, which carry a 100-percent guaranty from the SBA to the lender and require no fees paid to SBA. Loan proceeds are provided over a six-month period and repayment of the ARC loan principal is deferred for 12 months after the last disbursement of the proceeds. Repayment can extend up to five years. With small businesses making up the largest source of employment in this country, and the national unemployment rate still too high, changes like these are vital to the success of our small businesses and the competitiveness of our nation. I look forward to working with President Obama and his Administration, Ranking Member Snowe and my Senate and House colleagues to quickly pass this critical legislation and send to the President for signature.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate a defining moment in our Nation's history--the American Civil War. From 1861-1865, the U.S. was torn apart, engaged in the most deadly struggle that has ever befallen our great Nation. As we approach the War's 150th anniversary, we must remember the contributions of our forefathers, those many Americans who gave their lives to make America what it is now. Today I join my colleague, Senator Webb, in introducing the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009. We all studied the Civil War in school. We know that the opening shots of the Civil War were fired at Fort Sumter, South Carolina in April of 1861 and that Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant agreed to peace at Appomattox Court House, Virginia on April 9, 1865. We recognize those most horrific battles--Antietam, Gettysburg, Fredericksburg, and the 10,000 other sites from New Mexico to Vermont that were host to fighting. We celebrate the strength and bravery of individuals such as Frederick Douglas and Harriett Tubman who risked everything to combat the deplorable institution of slavery. Every February, we observe President Lincoln's birthday, a day to recollect his legacy. The Emancipation Proclamation and Gettysburg address are two of the most memorable documents in American history, and it is thanks to President Lincoln that slavery was eradicated. These are the most memorable aspects of the Civil War, but the influence and impact reaches so much further. I recently learned that on this very day, 148 years ago, work was underway on a revolutionary new technology--an innovation that would forever change the face of naval warfare. It was in October of 1861 that the keel of the USS Monitor was laid. For those who may not remember, the USS Monitor was the world's first ship to be entirely constructed from iron. It also featured the first rotating gun turret, allowing it to fire in any direction regardless of which way the ship was facing. Naval history recognizes this as the beginning of the end for wooden warships and the need to strategically position ships because their artillery could only be fired in one direction. I recognize this as an example of American ingenuity. This is just one additional example to show how the events of the American Civil War have reverberated through history. Every aspect of American life was affected whether economic, cultural, political, or otherwise. The most profound consequence of the Civil War was to end the legal edifice that justified the subjugation of people based on accidental characteristics such as race. We must remember what our forefathers sacrificed for us. More than 3 million men fought in the Civil War. They left their homes and their loved ones to fight for their beliefs, their families, their Nation. 620,000 of those soldiers gave their lives. We must remember the untold number of civilians who lost their lives or welfare because the battles were taking place all around them. No State, city, community, or family was untouched by devastation or loss. We must remember the legacies of the Civil War. The U.S. emerged completely altered after the 4 years of struggle, and as a testament of American resilience, grew stronger than it was before. The cultural and political ramifications still shape the American landscape today. It was in the era of Reconstruction that Congress adopted the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, acknowledging black Americans as free and equal citizens of the U.S. The Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009 is about preserving the memory. It will establish a Commission to ensure suitable National observance. Consisting of 25 members from government, business and academia, this commission will develop and carry out programs to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. It will work together with State and local governments, as well as various organizations, to assist with these activities and ensure that remembrance occurs at every level. Mr. President, 2011 marks the anniversary of a monumentally tragic time in American history, but also a time of intensive change, growth, and hope. We must use this opportunity to reflect upon the Civil War, the sacrifices, legacies, and changes in our Nation. I urge support of the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I rise today to commemorate a defining moment in our Nation's history--the American Civil War. From 1861-1865, the U.S. was torn apart, engaged in the most deadly struggle that has ever befallen our great Nation. As we approach the War's 150th anniversary, we must remember the contributions of our forefathers, those many Americans who gave their lives to make America what it is now. Today I join my colleague, Senator Webb, in introducing the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009. We all studied the Civil War in school. We know that the opening shots of the Civil War were fired at Fort Sumter, South Carolina in April of 1861 and that Robert E. Lee and Ulysses S. Grant agreed to peace at Appomattox Court House, Virginia on April 9, 1865. We recognize those most horrific battles--Antietam, Gettysburg, Fredericksburg, and the 10,000 other sites from New Mexico to Vermont that were host to fighting. We celebrate the strength and bravery of individuals such as Frederick Douglas and Harriett Tubman who risked everything to combat the deplorable institution of slavery. Every February, we observe President Lincoln's birthday, a day to recollect his legacy. The Emancipation Proclamation and Gettysburg address are two of the most memorable documents in American history, and it is thanks to President Lincoln that slavery was eradicated. These are the most memorable aspects of the Civil War, but the influence and impact reaches so much further. I recently learned that on this very day, 148 years ago, work was underway on a revolutionary new technology--an innovation that would forever change the face of naval warfare. It was in October of 1861 that the keel of the USS Monitor was laid. For those who may not remember, the USS Monitor was the world's first ship to be entirely constructed from iron. It also featured the first rotating gun turret, allowing it to fire in any direction regardless of which way the ship was facing. Naval history recognizes this as the beginning of the end for wooden warships and the need to strategically position ships because their artillery could only be fired in one direction. I recognize this as an example of American ingenuity. This is just one additional example to show how the events of the American Civil War have reverberated through history. Every aspect of American life was affected whether economic, cultural, political, or otherwise. The most profound consequence of the Civil War was to end the legal edifice that justified the subjugation of people based on accidental characteristics such as race. We must remember what our forefathers sacrificed for us. More than 3 million men fought in the Civil War. They left their homes and their loved ones to fight for their beliefs, their families, their Nation. 620,000 of those soldiers gave their lives. We must remember the untold number of civilians who lost their lives or welfare because the battles were taking place all around them. No State, city, community, or family was untouched by devastation or loss. We must remember the legacies of the Civil War. The U.S. emerged completely altered after the 4 years of struggle, and as a testament of American resilience, grew stronger than it was before. The cultural and political ramifications still shape the American landscape today. It was in the era of Reconstruction that Congress adopted the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, acknowledging black Americans as free and equal citizens of the U.S. The Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009 is about preserving the memory. It will establish a Commission to ensure suitable National observance. Consisting of 25 members from government, business and academia, this commission will develop and carry out programs to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. It will work together with State and local governments, as well as various organizations, to assist with these activities and ensure that remembrance occurs at every level. Mr. President, 2011 marks the anniversary of a monumentally tragic time in American history, but also a time of intensive change, growth, and hope. We must use this opportunity to reflect upon the Civil War, the sacrifices, legacies, and changes in our Nation. I urge support of the Civil War Sesquicentennial Commission Act of 2009.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am proud to honor a group of 92 World War II veterans from all over Louisiana who travelled to Washington, DC, on October 10 to visit the various memorials and monuments that recognize the sacrifices of our Nation's invaluable servicemembers. Louisiana HonorAir, a group based in Lafayette, LA, sponsored this trip to the Nation's Capital. The organization is honoring surviving World War II Louisiana veterans by giving them an opportunity to see the memorials dedicated to their service. The veterans visited the World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and Iwo Jima Memorials. They also traveled to Arlington National Cemetery. This was the second of three flights Louisiana HonorAir made to Washington, DC, this fall. It is the 19th flight to depart from Louisiana, which has sent more HonorAir flights than any other State to the Nation's Capital. World War II was one of America's greatest triumphs but was also a conflict rife with individual sacrifice and tragedy. More than 60 million people worldwide were killed, including 40 million civilians, and more than 400,000 American servicemembers were slain during the long war. The ultimate victory over enemies in the Pacific and in Europe is a testament to the valor of American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. The years 1941 to 1945 also witnessed an unprecedented mobilization of domestic industry, which supplied our military on two distant fronts. In Louisiana, there remain today about 30,000 living WWII veterans, and each one has a heroic tale of achieving the noble victory of freedom over tyranny. This group had 36 veterans who served in the U.S. Army, 14 in the Army Air Corps, 34 in the Navy, 4 in the Marine Corps, one in the Merchant Marines, one in the Coast Guard, and 2 were a part of Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Services, WAVES. Our heroes, many of them from South Louisiana, trekked the world for their country. They fought in Germany, Holland, France, Italy, Africa, Guam, Bougainville, Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Philippines, New Guinea, Japan, and Saipan. Their journeys included the invasions of North Africa, Sicily, and Normandy. One of our Army Air Corps was held as a prisoner of war after his aircraft was shot down over Germany. Three other Army veterans fought bravely in the Battle of the Bulge, all three receiving a Purple Heart and one receiving three Bronze stars for his service. One Navy veteran earned 10 medals for his service in the Pacific. An Army Air Corps veteran served in 20 combat missions in Europe between 1942 and 1955. Another Navy veteran was present for the surrender at Tokyo Bay in 1945. One Navy veteran was serving in Pearl Harbor during the infamous Japanese attack in 1941. Eight veterans received Purple Hearts and five of them were held as prisoners of war. I am also proud to acknowledge that of the 92 veterans who visited Washington this past weekend, 2 were women who served our country with honor and distinction during World War II. I ask the Senate to join me in honoring these 92 veterans, all Louisiana heroes, who visited Washington, and Louisiana HonorAir for making these trips a reality.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to introduce the Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act, a bill to improve cancer care quality by encouraging the development of written plans for cancer care. The U.S. has a system of cancer care that is the envy of all nations for its technical superiority and the sophistication of treatment offered to many patients. Unfortunately, not all Americans receive the best care the Nation has to offer. The Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act would take a step towards ensuring that all Americans have access to cancer care of the highest quality. The bill would authorize a Medicare service for cancer care planning and encourage the adoption of care planning as a routine practice in all cancer care settings. The Institute of Medicine, IOM, has identified as critical to high-quality cancer care the development of plans of care at the beginning of cancer treatment and at the transition to survivorship. Moreover, the debate on health care reform has highlighted care coordination to improve efficiency and reduce unnecessary utilization of health care resources. Care planning facilitates the coordination of cancer care. The need for this legislation was first brought to my attention in dramatic fashion in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, when cancer patients and their physicians scurried to recreate their records in order to minimize interruptions in care and to prevent any duplication of care. Some of the problems that cancer patients encountered could have been eliminated if they had possessed written care plans. In a moving statement at a Hill briefing in 2007, one of my constituents described her efforts to create her own care plan by grabbing various documents that had been supplied by her oncologist as she was being evacuated from her home. Although not as useful as a clear care plan, these documents helped that patient and her new physician chart her course of care. The experience taught us that key recommendations from the IOM related to cancer care--and especially the recommendation for cancer care planning should be taken off the shelf and put into action. There are many advantages of written cancer care plans for patients, physicians, and the entire health care system. Patients report that they are empowered by receiving care plans that spell out choices, facilitate the coordination of treatment and symptom management, and identify the follow-up services they will need post-treatment. Physicians say that communication with their patients is improved by developing and sharing care plans that are clear and concise, and some practices that have adopted care planning say that they are observing the identification and elimination of duplicative tests and procedures and an overall greater efficiency in care, all achieved while enhancing quality of care and patient satisfaction. The Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act, introduced in the House of Representatives by Representatives Lois Capps and Charles Boustany, establishes a new Medicare service for cancer care planning and authorizes programs that are aimed at increasing the utilization of care planning in all cancer care settings and ensuring access to care plans by underserved populations. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation to enhance cancer patients' access to quality care. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, it is my pleasure today to introduce the Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act, a bill to improve cancer care quality by encouraging the development of written plans for cancer care. The U.S. has a system of cancer care that is the envy of all nations for its technical superiority and the sophistication of treatment offered to many patients. Unfortunately, not all Americans receive the best care the Nation has to offer. The Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act would take a step towards ensuring that all Americans have access to cancer care of the highest quality. The bill would authorize a Medicare service for cancer care planning and encourage the adoption of care planning as a routine practice in all cancer care settings. The Institute of Medicine, IOM, has identified as critical to high-quality cancer care the development of plans of care at the beginning of cancer treatment and at the transition to survivorship. Moreover, the debate on health care reform has highlighted care coordination to improve efficiency and reduce unnecessary utilization of health care resources. Care planning facilitates the coordination of cancer care. The need for this legislation was first brought to my attention in dramatic fashion in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, when cancer patients and their physicians scurried to recreate their records in order to minimize interruptions in care and to prevent any duplication of care. Some of the problems that cancer patients encountered could have been eliminated if they had possessed written care plans. In a moving statement at a Hill briefing in 2007, one of my constituents described her efforts to create her own care plan by grabbing various documents that had been supplied by her oncologist as she was being evacuated from her home. Although not as useful as a clear care plan, these documents helped that patient and her new physician chart her course of care. The experience taught us that key recommendations from the IOM related to cancer care--and especially the recommendation for cancer care planning should be taken off the shelf and put into action. There are many advantages of written cancer care plans for patients, physicians, and the entire health care system. Patients report that they are empowered by receiving care plans that spell out choices, facilitate the coordination of treatment and symptom management, and identify the follow-up services they will need post-treatment. Physicians say that communication with their patients is improved by developing and sharing care plans that are clear and concise, and some practices that have adopted care planning say that they are observing the identification and elimination of duplicative tests and procedures and an overall greater efficiency in care, all achieved while enhancing quality of care and patient satisfaction. The Comprehensive Cancer Care Improvement Act, introduced in the House of Representatives by Representatives Lois Capps and Charles Boustany, establishes a new Medicare service for cancer care planning and authorizes programs that are aimed at increasing the utilization of care planning in all cancer care settings and ensuring access to care plans by underserved populations. I urge my colleagues to join me in cosponsoring this legislation to enhance cancer patients' access to quality care. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I thank our leader, the Senator from Maryland, Barbara Mikulski, for organizing this effort on the Senate floor this morning. I am pleased to join my sisters and colleagues in the Senate this morning to raise some specific and important issues relative to this reform debate that is moving forward. They are important facts as we press forward with our reforms. I would like to begin, just briefly, with reminding all of us that we began--as the President called for us to do--to focus on health care reform and to reduce cost--cost to our Nation, cost to our States, cost to individual businesses as they continue to see these premiums skyrocketing beyond their ability to either afford or to control, and cost to individuals. The Baucus mark in the Senate Finance Committee, which is pending, goes a significant step forward in terms of the cost issue. That is very encouraging to those of us who believe that health care reform is essential for several reasons. But one of the important reasons is to get cost under control and to begin to help balance the Federal budget and get us back on a sure financial footing, which--as has been stated by many experts, Mr. President--is impossible without fundamental insurance reform. So that is point 1. Point 2, the benefit of moving forward with reform will significantly improve outcomes for women, as the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, stated. It is going to help all Americans, but it is going to be particularly helpful for women of childbearing age, who are often discriminated against with insurance rates because they have to see doctors more often just by the very nature of pregnancy and the care they require. Because they have to see their doctors more often, their insurance is sometimes significantly higher. In fact, the records show that the cost of an insurance plan for a 40-year-old woman can be up to 38 percent more than a 40-year-old man in the same circumstance--same health, same geographic location. Our reform efforts will eliminate that bias and make health care more affordable for everyone but particularly for women. I wanted to take my last minute to talk about a letter I received from Denelle Walker, a 25-year-old woman living in Baton Rouge, who just graduated from school and went on to get a job. Mr. President, 20 percent of Denelle's modest paycheck--20 percent-- is going toward insurance. This bill will help young women such as Denelle, middle-aged women, and older women on the issue of affordability.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I am proud to honor a group of 90 World War II veterans from all over Louisiana who traveled to Washington, DC, on September 26 to visit the various memorials and monuments that recognize the sacrifices of our Nation's invaluable service members. Louisiana HonorAir, a group based in Lafayette, LA, sponsored this trip to the Nation's Capital. The organization is honoring surviving World War II Louisiana veterans by giving them an opportunity to see the memorials dedicated to their service. The veterans visited the World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and Iwo Jima Memorials. They also traveled to Arlington National Cemetery. This was the first of three flights Louisiana HonorAir made to Washington, DC, this fall. It is the 18th flight to depart from Louisiana, which has sent more HonorAir flights than any other State to the Nation's Capital. World War II was one of America's greatest triumphs but was also a conflict rife with individual sacrifice and tragedy. More than 60 million people worldwide were killed, including 40 million civilians, and more than 400,000 American service members were slain during the long war. The ultimate victory over enemies in the Pacific and in Europe is a testament to the valor of American soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. The years 1941 to 1945 also witnessed an unprecedented mobilization of domestic industry, which supplied our military on two distant fronts. In Louisiana, there remain today about 30,000 living WWII veterans, and each one has a heroic tale of achieving the noble victory of freedom over tyranny. This group had 25 veterans who served in the U.S. Army, 19 in the Army Air Corps, 29 in the Navy, 11 in the Marine Corps, 2 in the Merchant Marines, 2 in the Coast Guard, and 2 were Army nurses. Our heroes, many of them from South Louisiana, trekked the world for their country. They fought in Germany, Holland, France, Italy, Africa, Guam, Bougainville, Guadalcanal, Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Philippines, New Guinea, Japan and Saipan. Their journeys included the invasions of North Africa, Sicily, and Normandy. One of our Army Air Corps veterans was declared missing in action for 58 days in Yugoslavia after bailing out of his aircraft. Another Army veteran fought bravely in the Battle of the Bulge, while an Army Air Corps veteran made the Bataan Death March and spent 5 years in prison camps before being liberated on August 17, 1946. One Navy veteran earned a Gold star, Bronze star, and Hazardous Award for his service in the Pacific. An Army Air Corps veteran fought in Europe, Africa, and the Middle East where he received an Air Medal, three oak leaf clusters, and a Distinguished Unit Badge for his outstanding service. A Navy veteran earned seven campaign stars and was in Tokyo Bay the morning of the Japanese surrender. Another veteran served as part of the 101st Airborne, fighting in Holland, Bastogne, Alsace, Ruhr, and Berchesgarten. I am also proud to acknowledge that of the 90 veterans who visited Washington this past weekend, 5 were women who served our country with honor and distinction during World War II. Three brothers also made the trip together. I ask the Senate to join me in honoring these 90 veterans, all Louisiana heroes, who visited Washington, and Louisiana HonorAir for making these trips a reality.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I understand there are several colleagues wishing to speak on the underlying bill. I am going to speak for a minute on an event that happened last night to honor many of our constituents who were here in Washington for a special event. But before I do, and before the Senator from Minnesota leaves the floor, I want to thank him for bringing the amendment he just brought to the bill and to ask that my name be added as a cosponsor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I sincerely appreciate the work that has gone into that amendment and hope it will see a significant vote on the Senate floor and that it will help not only the individual he spoke of but perhaps hundreds, if not thousands, of other people who might find themselves in similar situations. Congressional Coalition on Adoption Madam President, I see my good friend, Senator Inhofe, on the Senate floor today. He and I have the privilege and honor of cochairing the adoption caucus, and I wanted to speak briefly and to thank the 43 Senators who participated in this annual event by honoring individuals in their States--and, Madam President, you participated as well--for something special they had done on behalf of adoption or foster care in the United States or abroad. This event is in its eleventh year. Collectively, the Members of Congress--Democrats and Republicans--have honored over 1,500 Americans-- some judges, some social workers, parents, advocates, lawyers in the system--who are helping to find permanent homes for orphans in America and around the world. We have approximately 500,000 children in foster care. That is a large number, but actually a small percentage if you think about all the children in our country--about 100 million. This represents less than one-half of 1 percent. But these children are in the custody of the government. Governments don't, by their nature, love children, human beings do, and parents particularly. So our job as Senators and Congressmen is to try to break down barriers, legal and otherwise, so we can find these orphans permanent homes. In the last 20 seconds that I have, I want to submit for the Record the names of the 43 Senators and their angels from a variety of States in the Union. I want to acknowledge the three national angels: Judge Michael Nash of California, nominated by the Senators from that State and from all of us who started National Adoption Day, where judges such as Judge Nash took the liberty to hold adoptions on Saturdays so we could move a backlog of children. Because of his action, 350 communities now hold adoptions on Saturday. Al Roker, who greets most Americans in the morning, an adoptive father, is now using his position of power to advocate on behalf of orphans. And Sean and Leanne Toohey, who adopted a young man at 16 years old, are a couple who had raised two biological children, then adopted a young man who was going nowhere, on a dead-end street. Because of their love and because of their mutual support, he now is the No. 1 draft choice and is going to play for the Baltimore Ravens--a young man with a great deal of potential who just simply didn't have any parents who believed in him. Now he does. That is the work we do. We honor all of our angels who were here for many days, understanding they are not alone in this fight to find homes for orphans. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the 2009 Congressional Coalition on Adoption Institute Angels in Adoption.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I thank my colleagues for the opportunity to speak briefly and to take the time from this important bill. I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Ten minutes.

Ms. LANDRIEU. I appreciate the leadership of the Senators from California and Tennessee, trying to move this important appropriations bill through the process. As we heard this morning, there are lots of important issues pending. I came to speak for a few minutes not about a pending amendment but about an issue bubbling up and brewing in a fairly significant way that we will have to address sometime soon, not necessarily on this bill today, not necessarily through an amendment process to the Interior appropriations, but a program that is in the Interior appropriations bill that is screaming for attention. That is the program having to do with the management of wild horses. It is not a major issue in all 50 States, but it is a big issue to a handful of western States and of interest to several of us in this body. Let me thank Senator Feinstein and her staff for the leadership they are providing in helping us shape policy. She has been extremely attentive over the last several months. I thank her. I acknowledge the interest of former Senator Salazar, now Secretary of Interior, and his top leadership. They have a tremendous amount of issues before them, issues that will take a lot of their time. For them to make this a priority because some of us have asked them to, I acknowledge that and thank them, all the assistant secretaries and staff from the Interior Department who are working on this. There are two aspects to this important issue. One involves the fiscal element which taxpayers are alarmed about. The wild horse program, because of its mismanagement and poor, old-fashioned way of operating, is chewing up or taking up about three-quarters of the budget of the Bureau of Land Management. From a fiscal perspective and a financial management perspective, it is crying out for reform. On the other hand, there is the view of the inhumaneness of some of the practices going on that also cries out for attention. I come to speak briefly about both. As to the big picture, at the turn of the century, we had about a million wild horses in the territory of the United States. It is sad, from the perspective of most people, that we are now down to 66,000 wild horses and burros basically forced, through policies developed in the 1970s, to stay in relatively small places, grouped in a few States, most notably the States of Nevada, Wyoming, and California, and a few other western States. We also are down to a few herds of horses. The reason I believe this is important not only to western States or ranchers or landowners or humane societies and others is because for the American people generally, the idea of wild spaces with wild horses is something that is part of our heritage. We want to make sure that heritage is not lost, that we are being responsible in terms of the way the land is being used for multiple purposes and, from the perspective of horse advocates, that the horses themselves are being treated well. None of that is now being done in the way that most people would appreciate or would be satisfied with. There have been any number of studies I will submit for the record. Most recently, the Congressional Research Service, as well as the Government Accounting Office, suggested major changes to the program. I am going to go through a few possible options. One is the creation of several public/private sanctuaries. This has been suggested by a few fairly high-profile individuals. The idea has merit. We are working with a variety of groups, along with the Department, to think about the possibility of creating public/private partnerships, large sanctuaries, maybe 500,000 or a million acres, where thousands of wild horses could not only roam freely in a healthy way but could potentially become ecotourist opportunities for some of the States and communities, as it would be an attraction that could potentially make money and attract people to some of the western areas or, for that matter, rural areas in other parts of the country. There is the possibility of making some smart investments to step up some of the adoption programs that might work. There are any number of scientific and new technologies that can be brought to bear in terms of breed management, reproductive issues that could help us to get a much more cost-effective, sane, and humane approach to this problem. I wanted to let the managers of this legislation know that while we will not have an amendment at this time on the Interior bill, I am looking forward to working with members of the Energy Committee who have jurisdiction over this matter to review in detail a bill that has come over from the House, the ROAM Act, by the chairman of that subcommittee, whom I commend for taking the committee's time, Congressman Rahall, who sent the bill over here to the Senate. As we begin to discuss the ways that bill could potentially be modified, working with the Department of Interior to find a long-term solution, one that is cost effective, one that is humane, and one that honors the great history of wild horses, not just pleasant to look at but helped us to settle the West, helped us to open transport and commerce for the Nation, have carried us into war, into battle, helped to feed and clothe this Nation in our history, needs a bit more attention than what they are getting right now. In conclusion, there was a disturbing roundup conducted not too long ago--just a few weeks ago--and I thank the advocates who brought this to my attention and commit to them to continue to work until we find a better way forward; again, a way that is good for the wild horses, that honors our heritage but is also very respectful of these Western lands and the ranchers who have multiple uses of this property. I am certain in the Nation God has bequeathed to us we can find enough space for everyone if we keep an open mind. I know the Senator from Tennessee would agree with that; that if we work hard enough, we can find some common ground solutions to this issue. I thank the Chair and yield the time. I understand my colleague from California is here to speak on a different issue.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I appreciate the chairman allowing me the opportunity to offer this amendment, and also working with Senator Bond, who I understand supports this amendment as well. I offer this amendment on behalf not only of myself but Senator Harkin, Senator Hutchison, Senator Grassley, and Senator Cornyn. So we have a strong bipartisan group of Senators who are coming to the floor to ask our colleagues to approve an amendment that has to do with a change and modification in the Community Development Block Grant Program that has been put in place to help communities prepare for and recover from disasters. This amendment is going to affect all communities in a positive way across the country that received community development block grant funding and in a very significant way. If this amendment is passed by this body today and continues in this bill, the communities that have received special allocations of community development block grant money will be able to use those funds to match other Federal funds available. This is the way the normal Community Development Block Grant Program has operated, I understand, since its inception. As my colleagues can see from this chart, in every single situation, except for two, in the last 17 years, that has been the case. So my amendment is basically allowing the floods and natural disasters of 2008 to be included in this effort; in other words, to say, if you received community development block grant funding, you can use those funds as a local and State match for other Federal funding. This is important for two reasons. One, it has been done in that way the last 17 years for good reason. For good reason because these communities, you could argue, have even greater challenges than normal, considering that in any time it is tough to provide housing or to build roads or to help their small businesses get back on their feet, but after a catastrophic disaster it is sometimes 5, if not 10, times harder. So why restrict their money at a time when they need the greatest flexibility? That is all this amendment does. Again, this is the way it has been done in general community development block grants since the beginning of the program. It is the way it was done with disaster community development in every case. Our amendment would simply make that uniform policy for the States affected by the 2008 disasters. This will be a great help to Texas that is still recovering from the storms of Ike. I will be visiting and having a field hearing through my Committee on Small Business as well as Disaster. Senator Hutchison will be attending that field hearing to visit Galveston just on Friday. So approval of this amendment would bring a lot of hope and encouragement to the people on the Gulf Coast, not just in Louisiana but, as I said, in Texas as well. California will be benefited as well as Iowa and some of the States that were affected by the floods. So, again, this is amendment No. 2365. I think my explanation is sufficient about what this amendment does and what a great help it will be to mayors and parish officials and county officials struggling to rebuild and what a smart way to use and to leverage moneys to get these communities rebuilt quickly in these very difficult economic times. I ask unanimous consent that the CDBG allocation chart to which I referred to be printed in the Record at this time.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I see my good friend, Senator Gregg. I yield the floor.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Yes, I believe I have, but if I have not, let me submit it at this time. It is amendment No. 2365.

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with. I suggest we don't have to read the whole amendment and we will leave it lying until we can vote on it later today.

Ms. LANDRIEU

Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, I come to the floor to speak about three amendments to the Transportation-HUD appropriations bill. I do wish to comment on the Afghan discussion and thank my colleagues who just spoke so eloquently. All three have been leaders on the issue of international engagements. I hope the Senators, particularly Senator McCain and Senator Graham, as we contemplate the right moves forward, will think about and be willing to fund nonmilitary programs as well. Many such programs have been shown, in front of the Armed Services Committee and the Appropriations Committee, through testimony given by Secretary Gates himself, as well as many military leaders, to actually help reduce violence by supporting development in Afghan villages, empowering individuals, particularly women in Afghanistan who, with a little bit of help and a little bit of support, can be the strength and cement that holds communities together. Educating girls is an important strategy. One thing we have learned from the failed policies of the previous administration is that we have to use both hard and soft power combined, to make it smarter so we can actually win some of these battles. That is probably what President Obama and his team are thinking about: How do we unite the Congress, get past partisan rhetoric, and come up with a smart strategy to win in Afghanistan. In that way we might not only protect our troops, but we might be able to get them home a little bit sooner. I am sure that is what the President is thinking about. I look forward to working with Senators Lieberman, McCain, and Graham as we move forward, hopefully, in a bipartisan fashion, to protect our troops and to win in a place that we most certainly need to and keep the Taliban at bay. I came to talk about three amendments. One is an amendment I have pending. It is amendment No. 2365. I see my colleague, Senator Hutchison, is in the Chamber. She is a cosponsor of the amendment. Although we are not going to vote on it tonight, I wished to speak for a moment about the amendment. Unfortunately, I will be away from the Senate tomorrow for a longstanding commitment. Tomorrow I will deliver a speech that I promised to give on behalf of Senator Domenici in New Mexico, so I will not be here for the vote. But I know my colleagues who are supporting this amendment will stand in and carry the torch. My amendment will help disaster-stricken communities in Texas, Louisiana, Iowa, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, Tennessee, Florida and California. Congress appropriated $6.5 billion in a Community Development Block Grant for the series of disasters that afflicted these states in 2008. The problem was, that in this particular allocation, we prohibited these communities from using that money to match other Federal moneys that might be available, which makes no sense. Congress has appropriated funds using the Community Development Block Grant to respond to 19 other disasters, and virtually never resorted to adding such a prohibition. What my amendment will do is revert to the regular language so that communities, such as Galveston--I see my colleague Senator Hutchison here. She and I will be together in Galveston on Friday to monitor recovery efforts there and she has been such a leader in this effort. However, there are still many communities in New Orleans and in southwest Louisiana and other parts of south Louisiana for which this amendment is crucial. It doesn't add money to the bill. It just allows us to use money more intelligently. For communities that are struggling not just because of disasters but because of the atmosphere of tough economic times, it gives local and State leaders a little bit more flexibility to pull down some of the Federal money that has already been allocated to communities that need it the most. It is amendment No. 2365. Senator Grassley is supportive, as are Senator Murray and Senator Bond. I thank them so much. We will consider that amendment tomorrow. Now I want to turn to a new topic and I wish to speak against an amendment offered by my colleague from Louisiana, Senator Vitter, that will be considered tomorrow. I will not be here to vote against this amendment but will submit a statement for the Record. I strongly oppose that amendment--amendment number 2359, which will be voted on tomorrow. This is an amendment I oppose for two reasons. No. 1, it is bad policy. The other reason I am against it is because this amendment only deals with public housing residents and other HUD-housing assistance recipients in the city of New Orleans. It doesn't address the problems of public housing residents right here in the District of Columbia, nor public housing residents in Chicago or New York, nor Baton Rouge, nor Lafayette. Only in New Orleans. That is perplexing to me, that it is focused on only one city in our State and only one city in the whole country. That is one reason to vote against the amendment, no matter what it says, because it does not include other communities. But the real reason to vote against the amendment is because it is mean-spirited and counterproductive. What this amendment basically says is that you can be evicted from public housing if anyone in your family commits a crime or gets in trouble with the law. I understand family members. I am one of nine siblings. I am married and now have two children. I have many brothers and sisters and 38 cousins in our extended family and two wonderful parents. The Presiding Officer has met many members of my family. I like to try to take responsibility for everyone in my family. But parents, no matter how hard they try, sometimes somebody in your family does something that is wrong. Should the entire family become homeless? That is what the Vitter amendment will do. It is such poor policy. It is so mean- spirited. It is so counterproductive. It will mean an increase in homelessness for a city that has already seen our homeless population quadruple. More than that, the nature of this amendment is so punitive. It penalizes grandmothers or great aunts or moms and dads, or siblings who are trying to do the best they can with very little. Children sometimes do very bad things. Sometimes you will have a family of five children. Four are wonderful and straight-A students. Then you have one child who gets in trouble with drugs or becomes an alcoholic, and causes trouble for the family. Senator Vitter has put in an amendment which he will ask this body to support that would do this: when one member of the family gets in trouble with the law, the whole family gets thrown out on the street. If this amendment passes, I would like for him to have to go to the sister in fourth grade, because, let's say, the teenage son who is 17 is the one who is causing the problems. I don't want people to think I just pick on boys, but I think people understand we have lots of trouble with this age group of all genders. I would like maybe for my colleague to be the one who has to knock on the front door and tell the mother and the fourth grade little girl, who got an A on her test, performed in the band and has straight A's, that she can pack her bags and spend the night on the street. If I could modify this amendment to make him have to do that, I would. This is not compassionate conservatism. This is mean, and it is nonsense. It needs to be voted down. To repeat the number, for my colleagues, both Democrats and Republicans, it is amendment No. 2359, only for New Orleans and only for people in public housing. I hope Members will vote no. Let me say one other thing about this. Unfortunately, my colleague and some people supported tearing down all the public housing units in New Orleans after the storm because some of them were destroyed. Some people took this as an opportunity to say: We never liked them anyway. They weren't run very well. Which was often true. So let's knock them all down and too bad for the people who used to live there, even though most of those people worked. I am going to remind my colleague and others, they don't live there for free. Under the law, they pay 30 percent of their income to live in that housing. He wanted to knock them all down. Some of us fought back and said: OK, we want to reform them. We want to build better communities. We will work with you here. So because I stepped in and a bunch of others stepped in, Catholic Charities and many activists from all walks of life, including the business community, we said: We are going to rebuild these communities. Well here is the most amazing thing about it: it is working. Shawn Donovan, our Housing Secretary, was just there. We had standing room only, with people from every different race and walk of life. We are patting ourselves on the back saying: It was bad 10 years ago. It was bad 5 years ago. But now we are all working together in the spirit of unity in a city that has been absolutely brought to its knees by flooding and by political bickering and bomb throwing. And we made things better. Then this amendment has to hit the floor. It is a disgrace. I urge my colleagues to vote no on amendment 2359. While I am here, I will say a word about another amendment that has been agreed to this afternoon by 73 votes, unfortunately. It was another Vitter amendment. It was amendment No. 2376. I voted no. There were 26 of us who voted no, but 73 Senators voted yes. I know I am in the minority, but that is what the Senate is about, giving the minority a voice. I wish to say something about this. This amendment reinstated a law that says that if you live in public housing, you have to do 8 hours of community service. That sounds pretty good. People think, we are providing housing for people. They should be grateful. The least they can do is community service. I am a big supporter of community service. I try to do it when I can. I support community service and I support calling all of our citizens to community service. What I don't support is making poor people and mostly minorities do community service, while other people sit on the sideline and never are required to do it, even though the largesse they receive from our government is much greater than a resident of public housing could ever hope to get even if they lived there for 50 years. If you lived in public housing for 50 years, you could not possibly benefit as much from the General Treasury as if you would if you were the executive of AIG to whom we gave a gazillion dollars. Did we ask them to do 8 hours of community service? We didn't even ask him to pay the money back. Somebody has to wake up in this Chamber. I am not fussing at my colleagues because I know people have a different view about this. But if we want to require law students to do 8 hours of community service for the loans they get, fine. But don't just pick on the poor because they can't fight back, and they don't have any lobbyists up here for them. Those are the two amendments my colleague could come up with today. I can't wait to see what he comes up with tomorrow. I yield the floor.