Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am on the floor, along with my colleague Senator Ben Cardin from Maryland, to advocate for Carolyn Colvin to be confirmed as the Social Security Commissioner, making her the chief executive officer of the Social Security Administration. I am very frustrated that her nomination has become a casualty of the Senate clock and unfair attacks by some Members of the Republican Party. We need a Social Security Administrator and we need a competent, qualified person to lead it and that is Carolyn Colvin. Ms. Colvin's nomination is important because the work of the Social Security Administration is important. Over 60 million Americans rely on Social Security--900,000 in Maryland. Seniors, individuals with disabilities, and children depend on the benefits and services of the Social Security Administration. It is a big agency with big responsibilities. It supports 63,000 Social Security employees; 11,000 are in the Social Security headquarters in Woodlawn. It is not about the numbers, it is about what they do. Guess what they do. They administer $950 billion in benefit payments, approximately 25 percent of all government spending. Last year over 40 million people came to its field offices, 47 million people called the 800 number, 5 million came for retirement, 2.8 million came for their disability. I go through the numbers because it shows an agency, with the magnitude of its responsibility, making sure we determine who is eligible for Social Security, that there is no fraud in Social Security, and that it is administered in a competent, careful way for the American people. That means you have to have a permanent Administrator; you cannot have someone acting. That is why we go to Carolyn Colvin. She is skilled. She is seasoned. She is experienced. She started out as a clerk at Social Security, and in her public service she has risen through the ranks in a variety of very important positions, being well known and well respected, and is an excellent public administrator. She is a problem solver, she is a reformer, and she has been the Deputy since December 2010 and Acting Commissioner since February 2013. I am frustrated at the attacks on Ms. Colvin. It is about a techno boondoggle that began under her predecessor, not under her. In fact, she commissioned the McKinsey & Company to study the problem. The minute she wanted to get to the bottom of the problem, she was accused of all kinds of things. Everything has been referred to the inspector general. They said let's wait for the inspector general. Guess what. The inspectors general keep recusing themselves for this reason or that reason. While they are recusing, the Republicans are using it as excusing, and we can't get to Carolyn Colvin. For those who need Social Security, as well as for those who want to make sure the benefits are administered competently, we need a permanent Administrator. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the following nomination: Calendar No. 1058, the nomination of Carolyn Watts Colvin to be the Commissioner of Social Security; and further that the Senate proceed to vote on the confirmation of the nomination; the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate; and that no further motions be in order to the nomination; that any related statements be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Ms. MIKULSKI. To be continued.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. First and foremost, I wish to thank the Senator from California for her efforts in negotiating the difficult issues within the Energy and Water portion of the omnibus bill. As the Senator knows, the original House language would have kept the Corps of Engineers from regulating the agricultural exemptions as well as essentially eliminating the recapture provision where permits are needed if an exempted activity impacts waters of the U.S. by impairing circulation of or reducing the reach of such waters. I was pleased that the language that we were able to work out with Chairman Rogers and include in the omnibus dropped the language in the original House provision. The compromise language does not change current law and preserves the current scope of agricultural exemptions. The simple fact remains that if you needed a permit before, you will need to get a permit under this provision; if you didn't need one before, you won't under this provision.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank Senator Boxer. As chairman of the Appropriations Committee and lead author of the fiscal year 2015 Omnibus appropriations bill, I agree with her understanding of section 425.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to reconsider the vote.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I note the Senator from Massachusetts wishes to speak and I will yield to her. But before the Senator from Vermont leaves, first I thank him for his leadership in chairing the Subcommittee on the State Department and Foreign Operations. What he has done is make sure that we continue to be able to conduct public diplomacy, to ensure money for embassy security. There are many here who pound their chests and call for investigations, but he actually puts money in the Federal checkbook, meets with the State Department and the embassy security people so that if you work for the U.S. Government, and you are in the embassies, at least you will have the security you need. The other is his work on foreign operations, making sure the poor, dispossessed, and the marginalized of the world have the assistance of the United States as a partner--whether it is curing malaria, fighting AIDS in Africa, fighting Ebola. Also at the same time I remember the great honor and how touched I was to visit Madagascar with him when we looked at the children who were the victims of land mines. This man has done heroic work, not only to prevent the ghastly consequences of the land mines, but to make sure that the children who have been injured by this ghastly weapon had the means to recover their limbs and in that way their livelihood. Really, we owe you a debt of gratitude and it is an honor to serve with you.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I yield to the Senator from Massachusetts.

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to give an update. The leadership on both sides of the aisle is negotiating the time and method by which we will continue to proceed with this bill, the omnibus spending bill for fiscal year 2015. But what I have been happy about is that people have actually come to the floor to make presentations on the substance of the bill, both pro and con and sometimes in the same speech. I think that has been both enlightening and informative. I thank all of my colleagues, including the Presiding Officer, for coming. I would like to make a comment about my Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government. This is a subcommittee that has been chaired by the very able Senator from New Mexico, Mr. Tom Udall. He has done an outstanding job. Much is being discussed about Dodd-Frank and Wall Street bailouts. Are we throwing our soul into the fires of greed? I can appreciate the passion and the concern because I, too, remember, as the Presiding Officer said, that grim day when the leadership in the Bush Administration kept telling us that fundamentally we are OK, fundamentally we are OK. Well, there was nothing fundamental about our American values being thrown under the bus, and more than that, really we were very concerned that the entire economy of the United States America could be at risk. Now, I come from a family who are Roosevelt Democrats. My dear father and mother opened a small neighborhood grocery store the year they were married in Baltimore. That year was 1935. It was the height of the depression, and this young couple--second generation immigrants--opened a business. Years later when I had the opportunity to have conversations with my father about the decisions made, what he did and why, I said: Dad, why did you open a business in the middle of the depression? We lived in a neighborhood where there were all these working class people, men who--it was at that time primarily men-- worked at General Motors, worked at Bethlehem Steel, making steel or at least hoping they would have jobs to make steel. The shipyards--we were a blue-collar manufacturing town, and all those jobs were at risk with high unemployment and the travesty of the Great Depression. So I said: Dad, why did you do it? How could you have the verve to do it? He said: I did it because I believed in Roosevelt. I believed Roosevelt was going to lead us forward, and Roosevelt was doing things with the banks where if you put a dollar in you could get a dollar back out--the famous FDIC. Roosevelt was leading the way, and I believed in Roosevelt, and Roosevelt believed in me. They believed then that a President believed in them. I went for it. Well, that wonderful grocery store was open to lots of people in good times and bad. When there were good times, we were there. When there were rough times in the community, my father dealt on credit. When my father passed away from the ravages of Alzheimer's, over 700 people came to his funeral. They all had a story for my two great sisters and me. So we are Roosevelt people. We do believe in the public institutions and the safeguards that were created so many years ago to protect the little guy and the little gal against gouging. I believe in this bill. By and large and far from perfect we have continued to do this. This bill does protect the public and consumers by focusing on five priority areas. It protects investors from fraud and manipulation of financial markets. I will elaborate on that. It safeguards the financial system from abuse and illegal practices, such as money laundering and deciphering complex Tax Code provisions so taxpayers can accurately file returns. It promotes a fair, safe, and robust marketplace by preventing fraud and enforcing against it and other unfair business practices. It works with small business by making sure that our agencies that are in charge of enforcing the rules to protect against abuse are funded. Let's go to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Without enforcement, you could have every law on the books, you could have every good intention on the books, you can say that we are going to stop it, but unless you fund the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and unless you also make sure that the now Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is protected against being defunded, you don't have a law. So what did we do? We actually worked on a bipartisan basis. It took a little shove from some of us Democrats, but both sides of the aisle want to look out for the little guy. So, guess what. This legislation that is being so scrutinized needs also to take a look at the fact that it includes $1.5 billion so that the Securities and Exchange Commission can actually do its job. This funding level is $150 million more than it was in fiscal 2014. This will help protect investors, promote capital formation, and maintain fair, honest, and efficient stocks and securities. We funded the Securities and Exchange Commission. Then there is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Farmers and businesses use the futures market to manage risk as well as pensions and endowments. They rely on the CFTC to properly monitor markets to guard against fraud, manipulation, and systemic risk. They work to bring more transparency and accountability into the futures and into that derivative market that everybody has been talking about for several days. So I don't want the derivative market to go wild. This is not the wild West. So we made sure we put money in the Federal checkbook so that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the CFTC, would have the money it needs for enforcement. The funding level is actually $35 million more than in fiscal year 2014. It is more money than 2014 to make sure the needed staffing and sophisticated technologies are in place to foster open competitive and financially sound futures and the swap markets. A lot has been said about that swap market, right? We are worried about it, too. We are absolutely worried about derivatives. We are worried about the exploitation and manipulation of derivatives. But you can have section 716, whatever that number is--and I am not trivializing it; people worked very hard to create that legislation-- but unless you fund the enforcement agency, what does it mean? Now, for whatever we did or didn't do, we actually put money in to keep these agencies functioning. I am really proud of that. I am absolutely proud of that. A lot has been said about backroom deals and secret negotiations: Why can't we do this out in the open? Guess what. Every single rider that we faced--98 riders that came over for us to deal with in our conference report--all passed the House of Representatives. They all passed the House of Representatives. They had mark-ups in full committee. They had debate on the floor. They passed them. The so-called 716 problem that has everyone concerned--and it has me concerned--passed the House of Representatives. They supported it by passing it 292 to 122. There was nothing secret about it when they passed it in the House. Seventy Democrats voted for it. It was dumped in our lap. It was also dumped in our lap with several other riders in that area, but we had a total of 98. So when people say in middle of the night, every rider that came over that was so controversial had come over from the House--very few came from the Senate, very few--and we had to deal with them. In the financial services subcommittee alone, where Mr. Udall was the subcommittee chairman, we had six of these--six. They were tough. But you know what. We were able to deal with them. There was a whole rider to make the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau weaker by taking away its mandatory funding. We stopped the weakening of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau that the wonderful Senator from Massachusetts had stood up for. We protected it. We protected the agency, and we protected its money. Also there was this whole attempt on a rider from the House to stop the IRS from implementing the Affordable Care Act. We were able to deal with that and eliminate that. Then there was the SEC. There was an attempt to make sure that legislation would have affected the investors by making sure we prevented the securities exchange with the fiduciary standard of care for brokers. We also prevented the Treasury from a rider that would have stopped the Treasury from designating certain insurance companies as too big to fail. So it was not like we were asleep at the switch here. It is not like we were all sitting around saying, oh, Wall Street, our dear friends--these were hard fights. So, what did we do? This is the Appropriations Committee. We would have preferred to do an individual bill, open a debate. But guess what. It wasn't meant to be. We had to fund it. We had to deal with all 11 committees and with Homeland Security on a continuing resolution, and we worked, we debated, we argued, we fought. We won some, and we lost some. One we did lose. This is the subject of great controversy and debate here. But I want everybody to know it was one out of six. It is a big one, but it is one out of six. And I want everyone to know we added 11 percent more for the Securities and Exchange Commission to do their job in enforcement. We added 15 percent more to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to do their job. Every one of those poison pill riders to shrink the effectiveness of Dodd-Frank was voted on in the House and came over, just like the controversial one on gutting section 716. I will repeat: That passed the House 292 to 122, with 70 Democrats voting for it. That doesn't make it right. That doesn't make it right, but it is not like we invented it. It is not like we brought this up in a secret backroom deal. So I want everybody to know, when they look at what we did in the financial services, we did what I think my father would have wanted me to do: Make sure that these institutions that were created to enforce the law against fraud and gouging investors, taking advantage of the taxpayers--I think we have done our job by making sure they were funded adequately to do the enforcement job we asked them to do. Second, out of six riders that would have really limited or handicapped the enforcement to protect investors or to implement other laws such as the Affordable Care Act, we were able to achieve, I think, some significant victories. So, I want the record to show this. Are we a quiet committee? Yes. Did we work? Oh, yes, we did work. You know the secret meetings everybody likes to talk about over the next several days, do you know when they occurred? They occurred this summer when we were trying to get the bill ready to come to the floor and we were stopped in September, when everybody worked on weekends, when we went out at Thanksgiving, when both that Senate Republican staff and the Senate Democratic staff worked through the weekend. So while everybody else was having a good time eating pumpkin pie, they worked all the way up to Thursday night and were back on the job Friday so we would not have a government shutdown and so the government would not be on autopilot. If you don't like what we did and the way we did it, then let me and Senator Cochran--for whom I have so much respect--get back to regular order. I need everybody who is cranky about this--and I don't dispute the validity of their concerns because I share them myself, but I have won some, I lost some, but I sure fought for them all--and don't like the process, then why did they stand for this process? I wanted to bring up individual bills. The vice chairman--the gentleman from Alabama, Senator Shelby--wanted to bring up individual bills. We were bringing them up. We held 60 hearings in 60 days on these topics so that we could have regular order and the Senate could consider them one at a time. So for everyone who is concerned, I am ready for a new process. I have been trying to do this for a couple of years now. Now we will be under Senator Cochran's watch, and I will talk more about the process later. I know there are other Senators waiting to talk, but I would like to say a word to Senator Cochran. I have been informed that his beloved and dear wife of so many years, Rose, has passed away. I personally want to express my condolences, and I want to do it for several reasons: one, just as a Member of the Senate, we should be concerned about one another and what other Members are going through. I also wish to express my gratitude to Rose herself. When I came to the Senate--now many years ago--there were only two women in the Senate, Senator Nancy Kassebaum, a wonderful Republican Senator from Kansas, and myself. When I came, I was welcomed in the Senate. As the Democratic woman, I often said although I was by myself, I was never alone. I had Senator Paul Sarbanes, Senator Ted Kennedy, and Senator Bob Byrd, who helped me learn the ropes of the Appropriations Committee that I now chair. I also had some other special help from the women of the Senate--the spouses of the Senate. There were only Senator Nancy and myself in those days, but the spouses of the guys in the Senate really reached out to me, and the Southern women were particularly gracious to help me learn the ropes--even learn about the building and how to maneuver here in so many ways. Senator Howell Heflin's wife, Mike; Sam Nunn's wife, Colleen; and then there was Rose. She was vivacious, charming, fun, and savvy. We often took trips together. Thad and I were on the NATO Committee, and it was always Rose who said, come on, Barb, come with us. Not only did she make sure I was included, she made sure that I was welcomed. It was the sense of hospitality that made me think, my gosh, what a wonderful institution. We are not Democrats or Republicans, we are working together. The Senators were working together, the spouses were welcoming. It was not so much a club as it was a family. I wish we could get back to that. Rose died from Alzheimer's. I spoke earlier about my father. My father died from Alzheimer's, so I know what Senator Cochran went through. Even when an illness is so ravaging, so cruel, where you hope that death is either anticipated, or part of your heart even hopes for it, when it comes, you just can't believe it. I know he is going through his own grief, but I want him to know that in his grief. I not only want to express my condolences, but I want to express my gratitude to Rose, who made me feel so welcome and made me feel like the Senate was a family. I hope we can get back and honor her memory and act more that way. Mr. President, as chairwoman of the Commerce, Justice, Science, CJS, Appropriations Subcommittee to discuss funding in the 2015 omnibus bill, I am pleased to have worked with Senator Shelby on this bill. He is a true partner. The CJS bill totals $50.1 billion in discretionary spending. That is $1.5 billion below the 2014 level of $51.5 billion. Our bill focuses on two priorities: jobs and the Economy and keeping communities safe. We used those priorities to guide all our funding decisions, from Federal law enforcement to space exploration. The bill provides $8.5 billion for the Department of Commerce, which is $286 million more than 2014 level of $8.4 billion. The Commerce Department keeps America open for business--helping businesses to keep the jobs they have, and helping entire industries to create new jobs. The department works with business to promote business. Protecting patents, promoting trade, and providing economic development projects in every state. The bill includes strong support for manufacturing. The National Institute of Standards and Technology is funded at $864 million, creating the standards that drive new technologies and new industries and make household products safer and more reliable. The Omnibus also includes the ``Revitalize American Manufacturing and Innovation Act'', which creates public-private partnerships that revitalize U.S. manufacturing in areas such as nanotechnology, photonics, microelectronics. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is funded at $3.4 billion in this bill, which is $434 million more than last year's level of $3 billion. This funding means the USPTO will hire 1,000 new patent examiners, reducing the patent backlog, resulting in shorter wait times for companies seeking patents and sending new ideas out to markets. USPTO protects American ideas. The Economic Development Administration is funded at $250 million, providing funding for local projects like, water infrastructure for new hospitals which support thousands of local workers. Funding for EDA also provides grants for projects, such as those through the Trade Adjustment Assistance for Firms, that promote infrastructure and innovation, setting our small businesses up for success. Every $1 issued in EDA grants leverages $10 in local investment and creates jobs in our home States, not in DC. Commerce Department also promotes American goods and services around the world, supporting more than 11 million jobs in the U.S. I support President's pivot to Asia, but I believe that if we can put guns in Southeast Asia, we can put Commercial Service Officers there too to create new markets for American products and create American jobs. So this bill puts more Commercial Service Officers on the front lines getting products from American small businesses into the hands of buyers around the world, including markets like Asia and Africa where it's difficult for new companies to do business. Commerce doesn't just promote American business, it also protects communities. The National Weather Service warns Americans to get out of the way when hurricanes, tornadoes and other severe storms threaten our communities. Accurate weather information is important to every mom trying to get a kid to school, every school superintendent trying to decide whether to close school, and every state emergency coordinator trying to decide when to deploy snow plows. Deploy too early and communities waste money. Deploy too late and roads and highways become commuting catastrophes. However, reliable weather data doesn't come from an App. That is why our CJS bill includes more than $3 billion for keeping flagship weather satellites on-track and on-budget, and keeps our weather forecasting offices fully staffed and ready to make sure it gives citizens the weather predictions they need. The Omnibus provides $28 billion for the Justice Department. That is $393 million more than 2014 level of $27.7 billion, and $156 million more than the President's request. The Justice Department's mission is to keep America safe from crime and terrorism, to protect communities and families, and to administer justice fairly. The bill funds key law enforcement and prosecution agencies including: FBI; Drug Enforcement Administration; Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives; U.S. Marshals Service and the U.S. Attorneys. We can't have strong, vibrant communities unless they are safe. I have heard from Senators from every state about the rise of heroin. Heroin is relatively inexpensive--$10 a hit. It is readily available and highly addictive. The Department of Health and Human Services reported that heroin use rose 79 percent nationwide between 2007 and 2012. We need to take action now so the bill funds several programs that tackle the heroin problem. That is why the bill funds a new anti-heroin task forces with $7 million of grants for State and local law enforcement to investigate distribution of heroin in an effort to keep these drug dealers off of our streets. The bill also funds residential drug treatment with $10 million so that when drug offenders are released from jail, they don't relapse. Finally, the bill provides $11 million for Prescription Drug Monitoring that helps States monitor and prevent those who ``doctor shop'', getting real time info to police and doctors to prevent overdoses and showing where overdoses are occurring so police can see patters and stop drug rings. I am proud to include $430 million in this Omnibus for Violence Against Women Act programs. This is a record funding level for VAWA grants to prevent and prosecute rape, and help women escape their abusers. Too many women are being doubly assaulted, first by a predator, then by a broken system that fails to test DNA evidence. A Justice Department investigation found 400,000 rape test kits sitting on shelves and in police lockers. This bill tries to break the back of the backlog by funding proven grants to test DNA in crime labs, such as $125 million for programs like Debbie Smith DNA Grants, and $41 million for new grants to test rape kit in police storage. These new grants will not only test kits but also reform the system so rape victims aren't victimized twice. The bill also triples funding for the Crime Victims Fund to $2.36 billion, which will go to help victims of violent crime. This is an increase of $1.5 billion over the fiscal year 2014 level of $745 million. States can help more victims pay their medical bills and get counseling and legal assistance The Science portion of the CJS bill supports jobs and the economy by driving innovation. The bill provides $25 billion for science agencies: NASA and the National Science Foundation. This funding for innovation, research and discoveries creates American ideas, American products, and American jobs in the private sector. The National Science Foundation is funded at $7.3 billion in this bill, $172 million more than the 2014 level. NSF will be able to fund 290 more competitive grants in 2015, supporting 4,100 more technicians, scientists, and students. NSF research and education programs provide scholarships to the next generation of Cyber warriors, bridge and building engineers, and chemistry laboratory technicians. STEM education builds jobs and builds an opportunity ladder for students. NASA is funded at $18 billion. This will provide for a balanced space agency with reliable space transportation, cutting-edge aeronautics, and strong Space science. This funding directly supports NASA's high tech workforce at Goddard Space Flight Center, Wallops Flight Facility and other NASA facilities around the country: machinists grinding precision parts for spacecraft exploring the galaxy; computer operators compiling data used to make forecasts or understand the big bang; engineers designing rockets that expand our reach to other planets; and scientists rewriting the textbooks and inspiring our next generation of explorers. NASA funding also supports NASA's Turbo Contractors who build rockets and satellites and design computer systems, providing jobs. The Omnibus is not just a spending bill, it is also a reform bill. Appropriators are shrewd stewards of federal funds, getting value for every taxpayer. The CJS Subcommittee puts a premium on oversight, inviting Inspectors Genera to testify at every hearing. The CJS bill includes robust funding for IGs who help us root out waste, fraud, abuse, and mismanagement. IGs give us good ideas for how to save money in areas like addressing growth in the prison population and improving management of the Census. CJS has dealt with its share of techno- boondogles, such as 2010 Census handhelds, satellite costs, and IT systems that never worked. To prevent techno-boondoggles, the bill includes early warning systems when costs begin to escalate, audits of grants and contracts, specific IG and GAO oversight of costly items like the 2020 Census, weather satellites, the James Webb Space Telescope, the patent backlog, and Crime Victim Fund spending. This Omnibus is a good bill, with balanced spending. It protects community safety, keeping the thin blue line from getting thinner and making our weather forecasts better. The bill invests in jobs and the economy, generating new ideas through research and discoveries and creating markets for more American products throughout the world. I urge my colleagues to support the omnibus. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to speak on the consolidated and further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2015. Every year we have a particular responsibility that is mandated by the Constitution, which is that the Congress of the United States shall pass an annual revenue bill to fund the government. The power of the purse is vested in the Congress. It is not vested in the executive branch. Our subcommittee on appropriations is a constitutionally mandated committee. The reason for that is, if one reads the Federalist Papers, it says that if the leader of a country controls the purse, they tend to be kings. But if the executive branch has to share power with the legislative branch controlling the purse, you have checks and balances. Tonight is the night we talk about what is in our annual bill. It had been the hope of myself and my vice chairman, Senator Shelby, that we could file something here called regular order, where the 12 subcommittees in Appropriations would have brought up one bill at a time. For a variety of reasons--mostly deep partisan politics--we were not able to bring up 12 individual bills, and I regret that. As a new party takes over, I hope we listen to the message of the voters--end gridlock, end deadlock, end the partisanship that is crippling our country. One way to correct that is to return to regular order. I look forward to continuing to work with both sides of the aisle to do that. Tonight we are where we are. We are bringing the consolidated bill to the Senate floor which represents the work of 12 subcommittees: Defense, Interior, Labor, Education, Health, Foreign Operations, the State Department, and Homeland Security will be on a continuing resolution. I could call all their names. We will be looking at a $1 trillion expenditure, which is the discretionary funding of the United States of America; $550 billion of that is in defense--DOD only. The remaining amount is in domestic agencies which is also considered the State Department. We need to pass this bill tonight so we can show that there is no government shutdown. The funding for the Government of the United States of America expires at midnight. We want to be sure there is no government shutdown, but we also don't want to be on a continuing resolution. A continuing resolution simply says take what you have done in 2014 and put it on autopilot. If we pass the continuing appropriations, which I hope we do, the government will be able to show that we have exercised thought and set national priorities and worked on this. I hope today we will be able to do our job. The House passed the bill on Thursday night by a vote of 219 to 206. We will now take up that bill. It is remarkable in today's era of slam-down politics, that those of us who have been working on this committee have been able to set aside our differences, work across the aisle, and work across the dome to find a way to compromise without capitulation on principles. The American people said they wanted us to do that, and that is the job we have done. My wonderful colleague from Maryland, Senator Ben Cardin, explained a good part of the bill. We are so close and we think so much alike, we could have given each other's speech. He kind of gave my speech. I will reiterate what is in this bill. This agreement provides for our national security. It ensures readiness for our troops. It funds training for the troops, as well as our maintenance facilities, so that our military assets, such as aircraft carriers and ships, are ready to go and our soldiers receive the training they need. Military leaders say readiness is our top priority, and the bill will provide $162.5 billion for readiness. It also includes important funds for our National Guard and Reserve so our units are ready for the job we ask them to do, and we have included $200 million more for our national. We also included a 1- percent pay raise--a 1-percent COLA, cost of living for the Defense Department's 3 million employees. We worked very hard on a variety of issues, one of which of course has been the way we serve our veterans. One of our greatest accomplishments is this bill is what we do for them. Veterans service organizations came to me and many of the members this evening and said: We not only need funding to implement the reforms that were passed by the Congress, but we also want you to do it for this year and a year in advance. We said: We don't do that. And they said: You have to do that because we are concerned that often with the dysfunction and delay as a strategy in Washington, it creates chaos for veterans and their survivors. Guess what. We were able to do it. For the first time ever, we provide funding for this year and 1 year in advance. It means that no matter what happens to the government, veterans can count on their disability check, their pension check, a check to help fund the GI bill, and their health care will be paid for. We also deal with the incredible problem of veterans backlog, and we put in the money to able to do that. For the VA backlog process, over $2.5 billion, adding another $40 million to do that. I have been horrified--in my own home State of Maryland--that the claims backlog at one point took more than 125 days. We are doing our reform. I also wish to talk about compelling human needs. We know that one of the most able Members of the Senate, Senator Tom Harkin, is retiring. But during the years he has served, he has never let up in championing the little guy and the little gal to make sure we had access to health care, access to education, and truly looking out for our constituents. I am so proud that--working with him--we were able to fund the child care development block grant, which passed the Senate overwhelmingly, by adding over $75 million. That means they will able to ensure that thousands more children will be able to qualify for daycare, and it will be safe and affordable. I wish to talk about college affordability as well--a great passion of Senator Harkin, myself, and I know many Members of the Senate. We increased the maximum Pell grant by $100, we reformed the Pell grants to give students a chance to be able to go to college and get their GED. This has been a tremendous problem for many single mothers and they would drop out. They now know they have to earn, and they are ready to learn. But in order to be eligible to go to community college, they had to have their GED, and they are now able to do both. It also restores the community colleges' efforts to be able to fund scholarships from their own endowments. I will take a moment to speak about jobs. We need to create jobs in the United States of America, and what we did when we focused in on jobs was to fund the infrastructure. Guess what. We put in money in the Federal checkbook for the highway trust fund and the harbor maintenance fund so our harbors could be dredged, our roads and bridges would be safe, and also included more money for dam safety. In my own home State, we funded the Metro and made a big downpayment on the Purple and Red Lines. These are jobs to improve our infrastructure and are absolutely crucial. I know there are others who wish to speak, and I am going to show that we looked at trying to fund jobs and infrastructure. I will talk about what we did in the commerce committee and how we came up with a way to end the backlog on patents in the area of intellectual infrastructure. There were over 400,000 patents pending. We wanted to make sure in this America, that if you invent something, you get to protect your idea so you can move it into the marketplace. We also funded these regional innovation centers in manufacturing. We promoted 3D manufacturing and made it local. In many of our States where we lost it, we had major advances. I will talk more about it, but I see my colleague, Senator Udall, is on the floor. I will yield the time and allow him to speak. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I urge the Senate to schedule an immediate vote on the nomination of Dr. Vivek Murthy to serve as the next Surgeon General of the United States. One year ago, President Obama nominated Dr. Murthy to serve as our next Surgeon General. Ten months ago, Dr. Murthy's nomination was approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, HELP, Committee. Since then, his nomination has stalled. I, along with many of my colleagues, have written to Senate leadership, requesting an immediate floor vote. Yet-- here we are--still no vote. The Surgeon General serves as ``America's Doctor.'' He ensures Americans are receiving the very best scientific information available in order to improve their health and reduce risk of injury or illness. The Surgeon General also oversees the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, a group of 7,000 men and women who are uniformed public health professionals working throughout the federal government to protect, promote, and advance our Nation's health. Finally, the Surgeon General is responsible for chairing the National Prevention Council. The urgent need to have a Surgeon General in place and at-the-ready is never more evident than when we are confronted with a public health crisis, as we are now. Over the past many months, our global community has struggled to respond to the Ebola epidemic plaguing West Africa and threatening communities nationwide. The United States has been rightly focused on dealing with the epidemic at its epicenter in West Africa, protecting our ports of entry, and protecting America's public health. Yet, our response has been hindered because we do not have a confirmed U.S. Surgeon General in place. Households across our nation were flooded with misinformation and confusion when Ebola was first diagnosed in the United States. If Dr. Murthy had been in place as Surgeon General, he would have been responsible for increasing public understanding about Ebola; providing accurate, important, and timely medical information; and helping to ease fears. As ``America's Doctor'' he would have provided an additional trusted voice that could have communicated with the public and helped address their concerns. Instead, ``America's Doctor'' was sitting on the sidelines awaiting a Senate vote on his nomination. Like so many of us, Dr. Murthy is the son of immigrant parents. He completed his early education in Miami, FL, and attended college at Harvard University where he received a bachelor's degree in biochemical sciences. He went on to receive an MD from the Yale School of Medicine and an MBA in Health Care Management from the Yale School of Management. He completed his residency in Internal Medicine at Brigham and Woman's Hospital. As a physician at Brigham and Women's Hospital, Dr. Murthy has cared for patients with a range of illnesses from diabetes and cardiovascular disease to cancer and infections. As a researcher, he has worked on vaccine development and he has studied the inclusion of women and minorities in clinical trials. As a teacher at Harvard Medical School, he knows what issues face our next generation of doctors. As a public health educator, Dr. Murthy created HIV/AIDS education programs for thousands of young people through an organization he cofounded. He built a rural community health partnership in India to train young women to be health care educators and leaders. As an organizational leader, Dr. Murthy cofounded a national medical organization, Doctors for America, to improve communication between physicians, patients, and policy makers. Finally, as a leader in prevention, he served on the Advisory Group to the National Prevention Council and helped develop the nation's first National Prevention Strategy. I think it is pretty clear that Dr. Murthy has the background and the boots on the ground expertise to serve as our Nation's 19th Surgeon General. Doubts about his ability to serve as Surgeon General are not the problem holding up his nomination. I fear that policy matters outside the scope of this position are actually to blame. I hope that my colleagues do not let public policy debates unrelated to the position in which he would serve stall his nomination any longer. Dr. Murthy's nomination has received widespread support from local, State, and national public health organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Cancer Society, American Diabetes Association, American Heart Association, and American Public Health Association. It is time to confirm Dr. Murthy as our Nation's 19th Surgeon General. It is time to take ``America's Doctor'' off the sidelines and put him into the game. Thank you.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I rise to speak on the omnibus spending bill for fiscal year 2015. I wish to thank the Democratic leader, the majority leader, for his kind words. But it is not only about his kind words about me, it has been his advocacy to make sure that as we look at the need for funding for the entire government that there would be no government shutdown and no government on autopilot. Just a few minutes ago, the House of Representatives did their part. They passed the omnibus spending bill, passing it 219 to 206. It was well debated and the vote speaks for itself. It now comes to the Senate, and I am here tonight to kick off that debate. For hours after hours after hours in the past several days, I have heard what is wrong with this bill. I don't dispute my colleagues' analysis, I will debate it, but now we have to start talking about what are the good aspects of this bill and why we did this bill in the first place. Tonight I want to remind people what we are doing. First, we are funding the entire U.S. Government's discretionary spending. We have $550 billion in the bill for national defense, to stand for America, to make sure our troops have the best weapons, the best support, and the best medical treatment--$550 billion, for more money for peacekeeping, for money to fight ISIL, to refuel an aircraft carrier. We did our job. You will hear more about that. We wanted to also fight Ebola, which had the American people near panic this summer. We said we have a plan, working with the administration, and some of the best scientists and thinkers in our own country, and brave and gallant people such as Doctors Without Borders over there. While they make the cover of Time magazine, they are now going to make the Federal checkbook in the United States of America. We have $5.4 billion to deal with Ebola, a huge sum of money to fight it in Africa. It is also to make sure we are ready for any pandemic in the United States. We also have a Samaritan set of money to deal--that is my word--with the Samaritan communities who were willing to take the Ebola patients, care for them, treat them, and make sure there was security for them and their surrounding communities. Millions of dollars were spent, whether it was in Nebraska, whether it was in Georgia at Emory. My own home State is home to the National Institutes of Health, where a patient flew in to a small rural airport. They were ready to accept and provide the security down route 270 to get them to the beds at NIH. Those communities need to be recognized. We do that. We have money in the bill for national security, but we also have money for veterans. Oh, we love our veterans. We love to sing songs, we love to wear yellow ribbons, we love to go to concerts. We even love to vote for an authorizing bill. I did it. But without money in the Federal checkbook, it is a hollow opportunity. So guess what. Your Appropriations Committee, on a bipartisan basis, said we are going to do something that was never done before. We are going to put in the money not only to meet what we said we would do--to reform health care. No more wait lists, no more backlogs. No more them being a victim of the dysfunctional Congress if there is a shutdown or a gridlock. We then did something. We, working with the veterans service organizations and the authorizing committee, by Senator Sanders, we have advanced appropriations. So even if there is a shutdown or delay, our veterans will be taken care of. There is more money in there for research. There is more money in there for care. There is an extra $40 million to add to the close to $2 billion to deal with the backlog. These numbers are mind-numbing, but the results are not. We have that money and we also increased the DOD defense money for medical research for prosthetic devices, for stunning achievements such as in my own Johns Hopkins where they did a limb transplant. Working with Department of Defense dollars, our gifted and talent surgeon was able to take a veteran and reinstitute limbs, muscle, and nerve endings. This enables them to also come up with a technique to prevent the rejection that often comes with transplants. It is stunning. That man will be able to have the use of his arms because of this type of work that we do here and what we do to help him will be able to help hundreds, and one day we will be able to help thousands. That is what we do in appropriations. We take good intentions and make them as big dreams as possible. We are very proud of that. The other item we are proud of is on a bipartisan basis we passed the child care and development block grant. Working with Senators Risch and Burr of North Carolina, I led that. With the superb help of Senators Alexander and Harkin, we passed it. But we also wanted to reform our quality standards, regulation without strangulation. We now know that we are going to have fire and safety inspection facilities, better training for providers, and background checks to make sure our vulnerable populations are protected. But for everything that we ask, we put in $75 million to be able to deal with this. I think that is pretty impressive. The other issue we worked out was how we worked out the college affordability. In this program that we passed, we will increase the maximum Pell grant by $100 for a total maximum of $58,530, $100 more. That means you will be able to buy a book, you will be able to pay that lab fee if you want to be a nurse or an inhalation therapist, a surgical tech, and so on. But we also reformed the Pell grants, so any student who simultaneously is working on a GED and a college degree would be eligible for Pell grants. As part of the listening tours that Senator Cardin and I had, we found out that there were many people who at a certain point in life dropped out of school. They made a particular choice that they now are trying to compensate for. So they are working on their GED, making great progress. They have to show that, but simultaneously they are eligible for that Pell grant so they don't lose time. We have been able to do that. There are other aspects related to college affordability, but we also wanted to focus on safety issues. We have money now for the 149 air traffic control facilities in rural communities. Those 149 air traffic controllers--we have the Maryland 5: Salisbury, Easton, Frederick, Hagerstown, and Baltimore County. I know the Presiding Officer has them in Wisconsin. That is taken care of. We also wanted to look at other areas of safety such as food safety. Thanks to what we have done in this bill, we have funded the FDA so they can meet the new food safety standards we are concerned about. I am also particularly happy and proud of what we did for women. I won't go into all the discussions on ObamaCare, the usual provocative topic such as funding for abortion and very special circumstances. Yes, we will talk about that tomorrow. Do you know what I am happy about? What we did for victims of violence. This legislation has $430 million for the Violence Against Women Act. It is at an all-time high. Again, taking what the authorizers wanted--but they all do conference calls in their home State. We actually put money into the Federal checkbook. We also paid special attention to the situation of what happens to rape victims. Very often--and I know you talk with the rape victims in your own State or those who are their advocates--they feel doubly victimized. They often feel there was a violent attack on them--so repugnant I don't want even to talk about it on the Senate floor, which is horrible enough. But when they turn to the system, they often find that the very forensics that are needed to go after the perpetrator are either stuck in a crime lab somewhere in a backlog or, even worse, sitting in a police locker instead of being tested. So they wait days, weeks, months, and even years. We have gotten into this, thanks to our Vice President, Joe Biden, who was the originator of the Violence Against Women Act. He asked the Justice Department to go to police departments and say where is this evidence and why isn't it being processed? They found there were over 400,000 sexual assault kits sitting in police lockers instead of getting tested. Can you imagine? Four hundred thousand. Thanks again to the advocates, the best ideas come from the people--I think somebody is calling me now about it. What we have now is we have added a $40 million grant program, again a bipartisan effort, to go work with local police departments to bring down--where we already know where they have gotten underway with existing funds, they are finding that some of these predators have been serial rapists. Some of their cases go back 5, 10, 15 years because of the DNA things we can do. We can do this. We are going to change it. There are other issues I can talk about, droughts, forest fires, all of these kinds of things. I will talk about them more tomorrow, but I just wanted to show the American people tonight, as we kick off this debate, while we focus on three items--and I don't minimize their importance, I don't minimize the value to debate them. I want people to know what is in this bill. When we had to deal with the omnibus, we had to deal with $1 trillion because we were stiff-armed, and also we couldn't bring up the bills one at a time, so we have to bring all but the Homeland Security up now. We faced 98 riders, some of which were highly controversial. We did the best we could with them, and I will have more to say about those tomorrow. But while everybody talks about one item or this item, I wanted to talk about some of these items. I really hope we pass this omnibus bill, because when we do, our country will be safer because of threats over there. We will be safer because of threats at home. But I believe the biggest threats we face are gridlock, deadlock, and the way we paralyze ourselves by making the perfect the enemy of the good. No piece of legislation is perfect. I will be the first to say that in this bill. By the way, people might say: Boy, this is a big bill, Senator Mikulski. It really is. It is discretionary funding for our entire Federal Government, but it is also on the Web site. People can go to our individual subcommittees in Defense, Labor-HHS, Interior, Transportation and Housing, and read about what we did. I had to summarize here. I was prepared to read them all night, but I know we are anxious to bring this evening to a close. But I wanted to open the debate today to talk about how we tried to govern on a bipartisan basis. We have reached across the aisle and we have reached across the Capitol dome. The House has done its job. Now I hope we do our job and that within the next 24 hours we pass the omnibus spending bill and show that we can govern, that we will not have a government shutdown, we will not have government on autopilot, and we will be able to fund our responsibilities, protect America, and really prepare America for both today and the rest of the 21st century. I look forward to working with my colleagues. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I come to the floor today during the consideration of the national defense authorization to bring my colleagues up to date on the appropriations bill. As we know, the continuing resolution expires on Thursday at midnight, but I am here to talk about some good news. The Appropriations Committee on both sides of the dome--the House Appropriations Committee and the Senate, working in a conference committee--has completed its work. This legislation is now as we speak heading to the Rules Committee and to the House. Hopefully it will head to the House for tomorrow, on to the Senate tomorrow night and into Friday. This means no government shutdown, no government on auto pilot, and we fund the government through the rest of the fiscal year for 2015, except Homeland Security, which will be a continuing resolution. What we are talking about here is a monumental achievement. It is a monumental achievement showing how we can work together, we can govern, and we can get the job done. Working on a bipartisan basis in the Senate, we worked in our subcommittees, and we held our hearings. We held 60 hearings in 60 days and did a good bit of our markups. We were able to work on our Senate appropriations. Over in the House, they did the same thing. But then, alas, when we got to September, we had to go on a continuing resolution until December 11. I, as a rule, don't like continuing resolutions. We have 12 subcommittees, and I had hoped, under the time I chaired the committee and held the gavel, that we could consider one bill at a time and bring it to the Senate floor. Alas, partisan politics, gridlock, deadlock, gamesmanship, and showmanship prevented all of that. But you know what, we on the Appropriations Committee, working with our vice chair, Senator Shelby of Alabama, kept ourselves on track. Then we met in the conference committee, first our subcommittee chairs and then Chairman Rogers, Senator Shelby, Congresswoman Lowey, and myself. We worked together on a $1 trillion spending bill. That number is breathtaking, but we need to remember that over $550 billion is in national defense. The rest is in domestic discretionary. That means everything from veterans, to foreign aid, to school aid, and also funding innovation. I will talk more explicitly about the bill when it comes to the Senate floor. But for today I wanted everyone to know we are keeping the process going. We actually made the process work. We showed that we could govern. We worked across the aisle. We worked across the dome. We practiced civility. We argued. We debated. We fought. You know, sometimes you give a little, you take a little, but you stand for them all. And I want everyone to know we were able to concentrate and compromise what I call capitulation on principle. So I wanted to say to my colleagues: Stay steady, stay strong. We expect that the House will pass its rule sometime after 3 o'clock today. That is the framework that enables them to go to the floor tomorrow. They will follow their own rule and hopefully that bill will pass. If it does pass, it will come to the Senate, and we will immediately take it up under the rules the two leaders will have worked on and established. So we look forward to completing the job on the Appropriations Committee within the next 72 hours. I hope this update is of value to my colleagues as they plan their schedule and wish to participate in the debate and in the discussion. But it is not whether it is of value to us, it is whether it is of value to the Nation. I think what the voters in the last election said was: We have lost confidence in your ability to govern. I hope over the next 72 hours, by the way we will bring this bill to the floor, we will take a significant step in regaining that confidence and getting out of this whole game of government by crisis, government by artificially imposed deadlines, where all it is, is more drama than debate. We would like to get back to the regular order. Hopefully, though, we now can move forward on our bill. I thank the Chair for his attention, and I yield the floor. I note the Senator from Arizona is on the floor so I will not ask for a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to speak on the release of the declassified Senate Select Intelligence Committee report on the CIA's past rendition, detention and interrogation practices. As a longtime member of the committee, I strongly support today's release of the declassified Executive Summary, Findings, Conclusions and Additional and Minority Views of the committee's report. With the release of this report, the American people finally have the information they need to understand the CIA's interrogation practices that spanned 2001 through 2009, when President Obama put an end to the Bush-era program. The CIA's practices went against our values as Americans and damaged America's global reputation. The committee's report shows not only that torture did not extract the ``otherwise unavailable'' intelligence that some CIA officials claimed, it did not work as a policy or in practice. I have consistently opposed the repugnance, legality and efficacy of torture. I supported FBI Director Robert Mueller's directive saying FBI agents may not participate in torture. I have repeatedly and publicly expressed my frustration about being lied to and manipulated by some CIA officials over many years. As I said during the Intelligence Committee's hearing confirming John Brennan as CIA Director, ``I'm going to be blunt and this will be no surprise to you, sir--but I've been on this Committee for more than 10 years, and with the exception of Mr. Panetta, I feel I've been jerked around by every CIA Director.'' My views against torture have been consistent with those of Senator John McCain, whose stance against torture is particularly compelling given his own experiences as a prisoner of war. I have also supported the use of interrogation techniques as laid out in the Army Field Manual and have decried the use of contractors by the CIA in the torture of detainees. Some people have raised concerns about the timing of the release of this report and that our enemies could use it as a pretext for violence. Long before the release of this report, however, terrorist groups made their violent intentions towards America clear. They hate America and our freedoms. They use violence for the sake of violence. No public action is without risks, whether by President or Congress, but we also risk who we are as Americans by suppressing the facts in this report. I would like to reiterate that this report was reviewed and redacted in conjunction with the CIA and White House, and the Director of National Intelligence approved its declassification. It was a difficult process that took over a year, but we finally got to a place where the narrative of the report was adequately preserved while ensuring that CIA personnel and operations were not compromised. The DNI weighed the risks and ultimately certified the declassification of the report. To be clear, my support for this report in no way diminishes my respect for the men and women of the CIA, who are faithfully and legally doing their duties. The CIA's intelligence professionals put their lives at risk for our country. They deserve our support and respect. I would like to thank Select Committee on Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein for her leadership, as well as my committee colleagues from both sides of the aisle who supported this investigation. Throughout the frustrating and sometimes contentious process of producing this report, we never gave up on pursuing the truth. Thanks also to the committee staff who worked tirelessly on this report at great sacrifice to themselves and their families. This report sheds light on a complicated episode in America's history, but it is also a testament to the value of never giving up on the search for truth and accountability. I hope that future generations will read it, study it, learn from it and make sure that torture is never again used by the U.S. government.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today, I join with my colleague, Mr. Kirk, in introducing a resolution honoring the heroic life of Jan Karski. Jan Karski was born in Lodz, Poland, on April 24, 1914. He began his life of service in the Polish diplomatic service before he enlisted in the military, serving in the Polish army when German soldiers invaded Poland in 1939. He was subsequently captured and sent to a prisoner camp. In 1940, Jan Karski fled to Warsaw and joined the Polish underground resistance movement, where he served as a courier delivering messages detailing the horrific brutality of the Nazis to the Polish government- in-exile. Mr. Karski played a key role in providing some of the first eye witness accounts of the Holocaust to governments of other nations. In July of 1943, Mr. Karski came to the U.S. and met with President Roosevelt to describe the horrors of the Nazi genocide he had witnessed. He became a U.S. citizen in 1954. Throughout his life, Jan Karski remained committed to providing global awareness of the atrocities committed during the Holocaust. After World War II, Mr. Karski became a student at Georgetown University, where he earned a Ph.D. in 1952. He went on to teach, calling on his own experiences, at Georgetown's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service for 35 years until he retired in 1984. Jan Karski has been honored on multiple occasions for his courageous efforts to open the world's eyes to the atrocities of the Holocaust. In 2012, President Barack Obama posthumously awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, and more recently, the Parliament of the Republic of Poland designated 2014 as ``The Year of Jan Karski.'' One hundred years after his birth, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the courageous life and lasting legacy of Mr. Karski, a truly honorable Polish American, by celebrating the centennial year of Jan Karski's birth.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the fifth anniversary of the unfair arrest and imprisonment of an American citizen in Cuba from Maryland, Mr. Alan Gross. I stand with his wife Judy, and their two daughters in calling for the immediate release of Mr. Gross by the Cuban government. In 2009, Mr. Gross went to Cuba as a contractor for the U.S. Agency for International Development. On this visit to Cuba, he wanted to assist Cuba's Jewish community by improving their access to the internet. With a background in social work, he dedicated his career to helping others around the world. The Cuban government arrested Mr. Gross on December 3, 2009. He was held for 14 months without being charged with a crime. He was eventually charged as a spy and sentenced to 15 years in prison. At 65 years old, Mr. Gross' physical and mental health has suffered severely over the past 5 years. He has lost a significant amount of weight and developed several painful medical conditions. His contact with his family is extremely limited, compounding his anxiety. On his birthday, May 2, 2014, Mr. Gross made several statements that demonstrated the mental strain and anguish that he feels daily. Following the death of his mother in June, he was visited by his wife Judy and said his goodbyes to her. Mr. Gross's current physical and mental state is at a critical point. The Cuban government must allow him to come home to the United States. Judy Gross has never given up. She continues to put pressure on the Cuban government, speaking out against the poor treatment of her husband. She is a true inspiration, continuing her fight despite the health and financial challenges that her family has felt. Every day I think of and pray for the Gross family. I pray that they are reunited soon. If Cuba wants to improve relations with the United States, they need to release Mr. Gross now. I thank my colleagues for standing with me and calling for the release of Alan Gross. I look forward to the day that we welcome him home to Maryland, and most importantly, to his family.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to commend Senator Landrieu for her work on the bill to approve the Keystone XL Pipeline. Since coming to the Senate in 1997, Senator Landrieu has worked tirelessly to reach across the aisle and get things done for her constituents. She has been by my side as a member of the Appropriations Committee as we rolled up our sleeves to break through the gridlock to keep the government open and functioning. She has done outstanding work as chairwoman of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, along with her Ranking Member Senator Murkowski, and I am so proud to have her as a colleague and a friend. I am a blue-collar Senator. I grew up in a blue-collar neighborhood in Baltimore during World War II where my father had a small neighborhood grocery store. We were the neighborhood of mom-and-pop businesses and factories. We made liberty ships. We put out turbo steel to make the tanks. Glenn L. Martin made the seaplanes that helped win the battle of the Pacific. We were in the manufacturing business. So I know the value of good, blue-collar jobs. Estimates show that the Keystone XL Pipeline could create 3,900 direct construction jobs over its 2-year construction period. But only fewer than 50 would be permanent. I recognize the need for jobs in construction, but I can't ignore the environmental and legal concerns surrounding the pipeline that still won't be resolved if we pass the bill today. First, I am worried about the safety of our water supply. The corrosive, thick sludge that would travel through Keystone makes the pipeline more vulnerable to leaks and accidents and endangers the drinking water of the more than 1.8 million Americans who get their water from the Ogallala Aquifer. Second, I am worried about the increased carbon in the air as a result of this project--the equivalent of Americans driving their cars 60 billion more miles per year. This means more of the devastating impacts of climate change which could harm jobs in aquaculture and seafood that are so important to the coastal economy of Maryland. Finally, there is a lawsuit pending in the Nebraska Supreme Court on the route of the pipeline. The route cannot be finalized until this lawsuit is complete, and no construction will begin before then. For these reasons--at this time--I will oppose the approval of the Keystone XL Pipeline. There are too many environmental concerns that still need to be addressed, and the pipeline cannot be constructed until the lawsuit in Nebraska is decided. We should take this time to work on addressing the environmental concerns, and come back to make a decision once we have all of the facts. In the meantime, there are plenty of other jobs bills Congress can pass that will put people back to work. I am for creating a national infrastructure bank to finance new construction projects. I am for closing the loopholes that allow businesses to make money off of moving jobs overseas--let's pass the Bring Jobs Home Act. And finally, I am fighting to pass an omnibus appropriations bill that funds TIGER grants that support State and local construction projects. All of these bills would create good jobs and would have real and lasting benefits on American workers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, a parliamentary inquiry: What is the pending business?

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I wish to speak on a legislative matter on which we will be voting later on this evening. I yield myself 10 minutes.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, in a few minutes we will be voting on the child care and development block grant reauthorization bill. I am here to urge my colleagues to vote for final passage. This bill is authored by myself, working shoulder to shoulder with Senator Richard Burr of North Carolina, under our chair and ranking member, Senators Harkin and Alexander. On this bill we showed that we can actually work together to get things done. We worked across the aisle and across the dome with our counterparts in the House. Today we have an opportunity to pass a bill that will actually help American families with one of the biggest challenges they face--affordable childcare. Everywhere I go in Maryland I hear young mothers and not-so-young mothers and grandmothers and actually dads saying that we need childcare that is affordable, accessible, reliable, and safe. This Child Care and Development Block Grant Act will meet those compelling human needs. It focuses on families of modest means--parents who want to work or get ready for work by going to school but can't afford childcare. I wish to take a second to talk about the process and where we stand. This is a bipartisan bill. It is the result of more than 2 years of work, three hearings on the HELP Committee, hundreds of meetings of stakeholders. The House unanimously passed the bill, and last week the Senate voted 96 to 1 on a cloture vote. It is time now to take the bill over the finish line and vote tonight. This bill began in 1990, when we created the childcare program as part of our first step towards welfare reform. Eligible families received vouchers to pay for childcare of their choice, whether it is a large daycare center, a small in-home daycare center or faith-based. This program is important because childcare for parents is significantly expensive. Childcare is the highest household expense faced by dual-income families. The average childcare for two children is about $15,000 a year. In some places that is tuition at a prep school--$15,000 to $20,000 a year. It is expensive whether you are a two-parent household or a single-parent household. For middle-class families it is really tough, and for those earning the minimum wage it is out of reach, and the costs keep increasing. Last year, the cost of childcare actually grew eight times faster than the average family income. It is not that childcare alone increased, but of course we believe family income has been stagnant for 8 years. So we have to do something about raising the income as well as raising childcare standards and the ability to provide childcare. Childcare is important because it helps people. In my own State this bill will give parents the kind of childcare vouchers needed, helping 1.5 million children be able to have childcare. In my own home State of Maryland this bill will help as many as 19,000 families get childcare. This is really a pretty big deal. In Maryland, childcare costs about $13,000 a year. I held roundtables across the State. I sat in classrooms, at conference tables, and meetings listening in Baltimore County and Allegany County. I heard from parents struggling to pay childcare in this age of scrimp and save. I have heard from teachers worried about children not being prepared for a lifetime of learning. I heard from the American Academy of Pediatrics that is concerned about children staying healthy. I heard from the good folks at the Maryland Family Network, who are worried about quality, safety, and the certification of childcare. I believe that many of the best ideas and recommendations come from the people, so I brought those ideas to Washington and sat down across the table with my colleague Senator Richard Burr to really talk about these issues and how we could hammer out a bill that was affordable to the taxpayer and yet reliable for parents. One size doesn't fit all when it comes to our kids. What I heard over and over again were concerns about availability, about quality, and also affordability. My bill--the Mikulski, Burr, Harkin, Alexander or whatever order we can put it in--makes childcare better. It makes it safer, it makes it more reliable, and it also focuses on helping children to be school-ready, to be learning-ready. It requires, first of all, in terms of safety, comprehensive background checks. Only 13 States require comprehensive background checks for childcare providers. We require more background checks for mall security guards than we do for our own children. This is unacceptable. Parents deserve peace of mind knowing that their children are safe from anyone who could possibly have a criminal record. Under our bill, 50 States will be required to do this. It also strengthens health and safety standards. Listening to both concerned parents and the American Academy of Pediatrics, we will have health and safety standards. Childcare providers will be trained in first aid and CPR, in the prevention of sudden infant death syndrome, and also how to respond to food allergies. This is big. Our children come and some of those little guys and girls really have some significant health challenges. It also requires inspection of facilities. Currently, many States do not require inspection of all childcare facilities. The Washington Post recently found that 43 children have died since 2004 in unregulated childcare centers in Virginia. We have now corrected that where facilities will actually be inspected to make sure they are safe. It also will make sure that inspectors will be looking for anything that presents a danger to a child--an unsecured swimming pool, unsafe sleeping arrangements, and fire hazards. It will improve reliability and stability of care. Now, we really focused on improving quality of child care. What that means is we have significant sums, which means that States have to invest in training and professional development of childcare workers. It also will evaluate what is working and what isn't. We developed an improved quality rating system to give parents--the consumer-- information to pick the right care. This bill will provide vouchers to people who are at the minimum wage or lower. In my own State, to qualify for this type of voucher subsidy, it is income-based. In Maryland, for a family of two to be eligible for the CCDBG, their incomes cannot exceed $24,000. A family of four cannot have an income that exceeds $35,700. The children must be less than 13 years old, and the children must live with parents who are working or enrolled in an education program that is leading to a job. This is really good. But this bill--as good as it is--it is only the first step in childcare. It can't be the only step. So while we are looking for how to help parents be able to work, particularly those at the minimum-wage level, we have to be able to look also at our middle- class families. That is why I was happy to join Senator Kirsten Gillibrand in introducing the childcare tax deduction bill, S. 1975. This bill would allow all families to deduct the cost of childcare as a business expense. Imagine that--to actually be able to do this. So many women in the middle class also find that the cost of childcare is so expensive. With this bill families can deduct up to $14,000 in child care expenses from the amount of taxes they owe. We have to show that we are on the side of families, that we are on the side of the middle class, by offering a substantial tax deduction for childcare; and we have to show that we are on the side of the people who want to be middle class, who are working harder, going to school to be able to move ahead and move into that middle class, and that they have the childcare bill. This legislation, the Child Care and Development Block Grant Act, will make a significant step forward. I urge my colleagues to help and support this. When I worked on this bill, to me it is not about numbers and statistics--19,000 or 1 million children or so on. It is about people in my own home State--whether it is the single mom in Baltimore County who, due to some major changes, found that she was needing to work full time instead of part time but was barely above the minimum wage. She wondered how she was going to have that job at the minimum wage but have childcare that was safe. When she went to the department of social services, she found a childcare subsidy that could help her be able to work today, have her children in daycare today, and lay the groundwork for a better job tomorrow. Then there was Theresa, a single mom in Prince George's County. She has four children. They were enrolled in a childcare program while she worked in another. She was making $23,000 a year--again, below the minimum wage. Thanks to the voucher program, she was able to provide her children with childcare, actually work in the field, and begin to get the kind of training that could enable her to move on up to being a childcare worker. It is about these people who want their child to be safe and secure. They want to make sure they are going to do the best and be able to continue to work in our society, make sure their children are taken care of, and also that we are able to provide this important step. I hope we pass this bill tonight. I also hope that we develop a comprehensive childcare approach so that we are helping those at the minimum wage and slightly above tonight, but we also want to be able to help the middle class. Remember what our goal is. We need to focus on the day-to-day needs of our constituents. What does that mean in terms of national policy? What we need to look at is for those who are middle class--through their hard work, their education and determination, however they get to be there--that they have a government and a Tax Code on their side, and for those who are trying to get to the middle class, that they have an opportunity ladder and the self-help tools that enable them to move ahead. I really hope my colleagues vote for this bill and we move it to the President's desk for signature. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that a CCDBG fact sheet be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, The language calls for procedures to permit enrollment of homeless children, after an initial eligibility determination, while required documentation is obtained. To implement this language and its intent, States will need to implement procedures to make abbreviated initial eligibility determinations of homeless children and enroll them immediately, while required documentation, including some documentation to prove eligibility, is obtained. For example, a State could adopt a procedure that a child referred by a local educational agency McKinney-Vento homeless liaison would be determined to be initially eligible and enrolled in services immediately, while required documentation is obtained. The family then would have to take necessary steps to provide standard documentation to establish eligibility.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I thank the Senator for raising the issue of local educational agency McKinney-Vento homeless education liaisons. Given their central role and responsibility in identifying homeless children and ensuring they receive education and early childhood education services for which they are eligible, liaisons are important partners in coordinating childcare services. The Senate- passed version of this legislation had called for coordination with McKinney-Vento homeless education liaisons. It is indeed our intention that State plans include a description of how the State will coordinate childcare services with McKinney-Vento homeless education liaisons.