Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I would like to compliment the Senator from Montana on his deeply moving and so personal reminiscences. It was both touching and manly. Thank you very much. It was inspirational. Hurricane Sandy Madam President, I come to the floor--and I am so glad the Senator from New York is the Presiding Officer--because here we are, the Chamber is vacant. It looks like the Senate is not moving. The Presiding Officer is a Senator from New York, along with Senator Schumer. I am a Senator from Maryland, and we have been hit by a hurricane. We have been hit by Hurricane Sandy. I come to the floor to say, as we reflect on the life and times of Senator Danny Inouye, we should also reflect on his work, which is to move appropriations bills in a timely way--and particularly when that appropriations bill deals with the supplemental appropriations to meet the compelling human needs of our communities and our people when they have suffered a natural disaster. The clock is ticking. We have businesses that need to restart. We have homes that need to be rebuilt. In my own State of Maryland, we had a double whammy. As the hurricane came forth on our coastal areas along the beloved Chesapeake Bay and the Atlantic Ocean, we were hit by the hurricane. Then up in western Maryland, Garrett County, called the Switzerland of Maryland, we were hit by a blizzard--a blizzard. Where are we now? It has been days. The TV cameras have left, but the compelling human need has not. What is the Senate facing? Inertia, parliamentary roadblocks, and we are fussing about the budget. I believe we need to have a more frugal, sensible government, but these are the American people. Sometimes I am for helping other nations around the world, but after a natural disaster, while we have been busy rebuilding Afghanistan, how about if we rebuild New York, New Jersey. How about getting my communities up and running along the coast of the Chesapeake Bay and communities such as Crisfield. These people are not asking for a handout; they are asking for a hand up. These are the American citizens who pay their taxes on time. Then why doesn't the Senate act on time? I am deeply frustrated by the inertia and the parliamentary roadblocks for nothing. Look what this would mean. We could show hope and help. Actually, along the way, the very things we will do will be creating jobs in the local community because this is physical reconstruction--and, I might add, the reconstruction of human lives. The Senator from New York knows so well; she told me the moving stories of the firefighters themselves, our gallant first responders who suffered terrible fires in their own home communities. What a horrible thing. I know if the Presiding Officer came over with me to the Eastern Shore and went down to the community of Crisfield, she would be touched. This is a wonderful community, but they have had some hard times. They have a 94-percent unemployment rate. Our agriculture and our seafood industries have been hit by drought and declining species. Our industries have been hard hit. In these rural areas, these homes have been in these communities for generation after generation after generation. The western shore lobbyists who come in or appraisers who are looking for Gucci waterfront property might value these small, tidy, well- maintained homes for appraisal value, but the appraisal was in the hearts of my people of Crisfield. Generations have lived there. Generations have worked there. Generations have sent their sons to fight the wars--and now their daughters. All they want is for their country to help them rebuild, get the mold out, get some assistance coming in so they can buy their crab pots and get back to work. They want their homes. They want to get their lives back, and they want to get their livelihoods back. What do we have here? Inertia. When all is said and done, I am very tired that more gets said than gets done. This is the time to act. My constituents truly need help, and we have been here. I am going to congratulate Senator Murray and Senator Landrieu, who chair the subcommittees in Appropriations on FEMA and THUD because it will be FEMA money and community development block grant money that will help these communities. Now we are going to need the Corps of Engineers for beach replenishment, public investments that will protect private property. It has been 2 months since Sandy, 2 months. Surely, we can act. The President has made a request. Yes, it is a hefty $60 billion. But look at who was hit, a big city that is one of the heartbeats of America, New York, and a little community such as Crisfield. But no matter whether someone lives in New York City or in Crisfield, MD, they deserve the help from their government. I say to my colleagues, let us think of the people we were sent to represent. We weren't sent to represent a bottom line; we were sent to represent people. I would hope we would put into place, that we would pass the President's request. We have great policies that were arrived at--and if you truly want to honor Senator Inouye, let us honor his own code of conduct, a gentle way, a civil way, a consensus builder, a bipartisan builder, and a worker to move this bill. Senator Inouye chaired the full Committee on Appropriations these last couple years. His own staff shared a story with me, and it is relevant today. He said: I chaired the Defense subcommittee, and that is how the Federal budget defends America. But my other committees, like Labor- HHS--and I might add housing, Federal disaster assistance--is how we define ourselves. So those who say let us make sure we defend America, let us also make sure we put the money in the Federal budget on how it defines America. The way we define America is when one community is hit, all communities are hit. If New York is hit, Crisfield or Ocean City, all communities have been hit. We need to act like the United States of America because the disaster the Chair and I faced 2 months ago could be somebody else's disaster tomorrow. And the real disaster should not be in the Senate because we failed to act. I call my colleagues to the floor, and I call them forth to pass these appropriations. I look forward again to working on both sides of the aisle to have a safer country from either a defense or a disaster perspective, and I also look forward to moving this bill in a way that we will define our country, that we are a country that helps, neighbor helping neighbor. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Senators from New England, and I am happy to answer the question and join here with my fellow coastal Senators. First, I would like to respond in my official responsibility in the Senate, which is to chair the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science. It is in that subcommittee that the NOAA--the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency--is funded. It is there that the fisheries money is spent. Any fishery disaster, in order to qualify for Federal assistance, must be certified by the Secretary of Commerce. Every single fisheries disaster in this bill has been certified by the Secretary of Commerce to meet compelling human need, economic necessity, and be within the criteria established by law. The Senator from Oklahoma, well-intentioned, is asking us to violate the law. He wants to make fisheries disasters under the Stafford Act. The Stafford Act, named after the Senator from New Hampshire--a wonderful Republican--was for FEMA. If you think you have a FEMA disaster, you go to the Governor. There has to be data collected. It has to go to the President. If you think you have a fishery disaster-- which we coastal Senators experience these days all too often--it has to go through the Secretary of Commerce. I assure those of you on the floor, all those Senators, all taxpayers listening, that every one of these fisheries disasters has been certified, has been vetted to really say that in each and every State where we respond, it meets this criterion. As to the money in the bill, in a $60 billion bill, this is $150 million. Listen to the jobs, listen to the economy, listen to people who go out in really cold weather and put their hands in that icy water, and they all risk their lives. Everybody wants to go see the movie ``Triple Storm.'' We can't have a triple storm here in the Senate, which is this amendment, rejection of the urgent supplemental, and the inertia of the Senate. I say to my colleagues, your words are well-spoken in defense of your State, but you are also exactly following the law. I urge the Senator from Oklahoma to withdraw his amendment because it would make it out of compliance. I say to each and every one of you as a fellow coastal Senator, I know our fishing industries--you call them fishermen, we call them watermen--whether it is oysters, crab, or rockfish, it is part of our economy and it is part of our identity. They asked for help. I will oppose the amendment of the Senator from Oklahoma. I actually would ask him to withdraw it because it is not a matter of debating policy, how to be a smarter and more frugal government, it is actually in violation of the current law. I thank Senators for standing up for their own communities, and I hope this clarifies this bizarre situation.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I yield to the Senator from New Hampshire.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes, the Senator is exactly right. And it happened under both Democratic and Republican Senates. So this has been declared under President Bill Clinton, and we worked with his Secretaries of Commerce. This was done under George Bush, and Secretary Gutierrez, himself from a coastal State of Florida--we worked very well together because the appropriators and the Governors and the economy people have to work together with Senators. The answer is yes. Again, you cannot get fisheries disaster assistance unless it has been certified by the Secretary of Commerce in compliance with the criteria in current law.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, may I draw the distinction between a fishery disaster and an earmark? Because there is an undercurrent here from the amendment of the Senator from Oklahoma, who has said on many occasions that he has been the defendant of the taxpayer. Well, so am I. The difference between an earmark is a congressionally designated project that meets the criteria that Senator deems appropriate to help his State. That is not what this is. When he says it has to be certified by the Stafford Act, he is implying that these are uncertified, unneeded, unwarranted, and are earmarks. Once again I will say that these are certified by the Secretary of Commerce. They meet the criteria for compelling economic and human need as required by law. This is not an earmark, it is certified disaster assistance. Let's get rid of this phony-baloney nonsense that somehow or another that would undermine this bill of $150 million that could restore livelihoods for people who are willing to work out there and risk their lives to feed America.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I too rise to pay tribute to the great Senator Daniel Inouye. First, I want to express my deep and most heartfelt condolences to Senator Inouye's family, his wife Irene, his daughter Jennifer, his son Ken, Ken's wife Jessica, and their lovely little granddaughter Maggie. And to the people of Hawaii, also our condolences, because he loved them dearly, and they reciprocated by sending him time and time back to the Senate. I also want to express condolences to his very able and capable staff, the other Inouye family, many of whom were among the longest serving staff in the Senate, who were devoted to helping him help the people of Hawaii and helping the people of America. Hawaii and the Nation have lost a great hero and a true patriot, and I have lost a real good friend. Senator Inouye was one of the great men of the Senate who welcomed me and helped me get started when I first came to the Senate. It is well known that I was the first Democratic woman elected in her own right. When I came to the Senate there was only one other woman, Senator Nancy Kassebaum of Kansas. But I said this, and I say today, though I was the only Democratic woman, though I was all by myself: I was never alone because I had great men in the U.S. Senate who helped me get started and mentored me and taught me how to be an effective Senator. Senator Inouye was in a group of those men who in the warmest, most generous, most helpful way welcomed me to the U.S. Senate. He helped me get on the powerful Appropriations Committee. He was my teacher. He was my mentor. He also had a wonderful way of communicating with all of us. And as each new class of Senators--and each new class of women Senators arrived--he welcomed each and every one of us with the same warmth and generosity he showed to me. We have a saying among us, the women of the Senate, which is that men of quality always stand up for us women fighting for equality. And Dan Inouye was there every step of the way. When we wanted equal pay for equal work, he was there. When we wanted to be included in the protocols at NIH and establish an Office of Women's Health, he was there, issue after issue. Last year, I had the wonderful honor of traveling to the Middle East with Senator Inouye, and he admired the pin that I have on today. It is an eagle that many of the women in the Senate wear. There are those of various styles, of which we have a little collection. This one is from the Smithsonian. He said, I love it. It is so pretty. I want to get one for my wife. Well, I don't know if Senator Inouye ever got it for his wife Irene, but I say to my colleagues today, at an appropriate time, on behalf of the women of the U.S. Senate, I will present this pin to Mrs. Inouye in honor of her husband, our gift to her, because he gave so many gifts to us. He was a lion in the Senate, a real American hero. Although gentle in style, he was a fierce warrior when it came to fighting for his Nation or standing up for Hawaii. When he received his Medal of Honor, he was rising to the call of the sirens of Pearl Harbor, volunteering to serve his country, putting aside his own dreams to be a physician. But he went on to be a healer of many wounds. He was decorated in World War II for saving his fellow soldiers. My experience with Senator Inouye as a friend was that he was a devoted, dedicated public servant. He was Hawaii's first representative of the Nation's newest State. He was the first person of Japanese heritage ever to be elected to the Senate. Imagine, he himself knew what it was like to break barriers and to break boundaries. When he came to the Senate, he cherished his love for Hawaii and its people. He fought tirelessly to improve their lives. His style was one of absolute civility. He was the one who believed that the decorum of the Senate enabled the Senate to do the people's business. He was the essence of civility, and he showed that often good manners was good politics, and that led to good politics. He did not argue the loudest; instead, he worked diligently. He marshaled his arguments and with quiet determination won the day. As a fellow appropriator, I saw that he loved his earmarks. He liked earmarks. And what did he do with those earmarks? I can tell you. He made sure that we looked out for Indian tribes. He made sure we looked out for the poorest of the poor in Hawaii. He cleaned up a superfund site that had been left by an old agricultural legacy. And he made sure that children who needed help were able to get the education they needed in a small community setting who might not have been able to do it. Yes, he was the old school. And it was the old school that should teach us a lesson or two. As a member of the Appropriations Committee for 41 years, he led us by example. He came in 1971 and became the chairman in 2009. Leading by example, he showed how we can accomplish great things by working together. He saw we could have a stronger country, a stronger economy, and yet have a sense of frugality. He treated the minority party with great respect. All have spoken about his legendary friendship with Senator Ted Stevens, another World War II hero. But now, as Senator Cochran, serving as the ranking member--he called him his vice chairman, and I know he was ready to reach out to Senator Shelby who assumed the role. He knew we needed the input of all Senators to not only enact our bills but to craft our bills. He also served as chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, the Indian Affairs Committee; he was the very first chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence. There will be those who will read his resume. But when the history of Hawaii and this man is written, I hope they say he didn't come here to gain fame, he didn't come here to do press releases or to be on talk shows. He came here to govern. He came here to the U.S. Senate, having fought for his country in World War II while even members of his own family had been held in an internment camp because of their Japanese heritage. But he was loyal and faithful from the day he took his oath to defend the Constitution as a young private all the way to the day here now. He was a fierce defender of our military. For him, it was always about the troops. And he never forgot what it was like to be fighting in a foreign land. That is why he was devoted to our veterans and to our health care. And we are devoted to the memory of Senator Inouye. So to an old-school war hero, let us give our final salute and a fond aloha. But let's take the lessons learned from his great life and incorporate them in our very day here today. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Would the Senator from Oklahoma yield for a question?

Ms. MIKULSKI. I have a section of this bill, and I wonder if that amendment is relevant to my bill, and I would extend some courtesy.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I appreciate the Senator's advocacy for Oklahoma.

Ms. MIKULSKI. But what I am wanting to say to the Senator from Oklahoma is that my subcommittee deals with coastal impact, so the issue the Senator wishes to raise is with the Subcommittee on Homeland Security. If it dealt with my part of the bill, I would say--because I know what the Senator is trying to do, and I appreciate it, which is trying to move the Senate forward in an expeditious way.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to speak as the chair of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, and Science, to talk about the aspects of my bill, the parts of my bill that are in the supplemental. But before I do, I want to join with other Americans in extending my deepest condolences to the families in Connecticut, those 26 families who faced a tragedy of such enormity that it is impossible for the mind to comprehend and the heart to endure--the murder of 20 sweet, innocent children and 6 teachers who died protecting their children. When we look at the photos of the children, we see in many of them the faces of our own families. We can only imagine the agony they are facing right now. I wish to extend my heartfelt support to them and also to all those who responded to the tragedy: those on the scene, the school principal who literally put herself in the line of fire to protect her students and tried to alert them through the intercom system; to teachers in the classrooms and a teacher's assistant who literally shielded them with their own bodies and their own know-how. Then there were the police and other law enforcement who went into the school, not knowing what danger and horror they would face or how they could rescue the children. There were the ambulance drivers who raced to the scene, paramedics, and even grief counselors needed counseling at one point. In this situation, the families bear this incredible grief, but we all do too. Whether for those people on the scene, for those who have the permanent wounds of the bullet or those in Connecticut or those families who will bear the permanent impact of this tragedy, we lift our hearts in prayer for these victims and we lift our voices to end violence in America. We must look at ending violence in our country. We need to be able to look at the issues around gun control and ammo control, but that is only one aspect of it. We also have to look at issues related to mental illness because for those who suffer mental illness--whether it is those who have the illness themselves or their families who try to cope with it--they are often alone and helpless. That is not by way of explanation or excuse for what happened in Connecticut or Colorado--what happens now all too frequently in our society. But there is a pattern, particularly of young men over the age of 18 and below 30 who seem to fall between the cracks, missing the help they need to be able to deal with those demons inside themselves. We need to be able to focus on that. I agree with the President who said last night: No single law--no set of laws can eliminate evil from the world, or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society. But that can't be an excuse for inaction. Surely, we can do better than this. We must do more to protect our children and our communities, not only with words, prayers and vigils but actually with the deeds here. So know I will join with my colleagues to reinstate the assault weapons ban. I plan to work with Senator Feinstein to introduce a bill that will deal with military-style weapons and high-capacity bullet clips. Weapons of war have no place on our streets, in our schools or in our homes. For those who cry: Oh, it is regulation--we regulate food for our safety. We regulate cars for our safety. We need to now look at regulating guns. But know that, as I also said, we must also look at the issue of mental illness, particularly in young adults. Our colleague Senator Lieberman is proposing a commission on violence. I am often skeptical of commissions, but I believe if Joe Lieberman headed up that commission and we looked at it, it would come out with an action plan. If there was a pledge to support the recommendations of that commission, I would also be able to support it. We need to look at guns, mental health, and those things that glorify violence in our society or glorify that somehow or another guns are a solution to every problem we have. Today, the funerals in Newtown begin. Our mourning will go on for a long time, but our work as well must continue over the days and the weeks ahead. I intend to work with my colleagues to change the law and change the culture of violence. I also rise to speak on my commerce and justice bill. I want to focus on my national responsibilities as the chairperson of the Appropriations Committee on Commerce, Justice, and Science. I also wish to point out that Maryland was hard hit too, especially the communities in the lower shore and in particular the community of Crisfield. I will speak more about Maryland and what we faced during Hurricane Sandy tomorrow. It was ironic that when the hurricane hit, we faced hurricane winds in one part of our State and a blizzard and nor'easter in another part of our State. So we had State troopers on snowmobiles trying to go in to rescue vulnerable populations in Garrett County. We also had our State troopers and guards on rafts and on swiftboats going in to rescue vulnerable populations being hit by the flooding waters and the horrific hurricane winds. Although we were not hit in Maryland the way New York and New Jersey were, we face damages too. Up and down the Atlantic coast, there was tremendous damage. I am here to talk about the CJS portion of this urgent supplemental. It provides $513 million to repair, replace, restore, and rebuild our communities and our critical assets. In our case, the CJS bill is about restoring critical assets for Federal law enforcement, our weather prediction and weather facilities, NOAA, and what was damaged in our fisheries program. Even NASA's spaceport Wallops facility was damaged by Hurricane Sandy. When a storm such as Sandy hits, it devastates everything in its path, including Federal facilities, such as the offices and equipment of our law enforcement agencies. Our Federal law enforcement agencies-- the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms--were also hit. We need to make sure we maintain support for these law enforcement agencies, and therefore we have in this appropriation $15 million for the Department of Justice to repair these facilities by replacing equipment and operational tools damaged by Hurricane Sandy. This will also help FBI facilities in New York and New Jersey that were hit. The New York field office, resident agencies, and even labs and case record storage facilities were damaged. They are all important in dealing with fighting crime, whether it is terrorism, organized crime, or financial fraud. Sewage and mud destroyed the New York field office mobile command center, specialized laboratory trucks, and evidence response team vehicles. This appropriation also has $1 million to restore the tools the Drug Enforcement Agency needs to go after drug traffickers. Radio communications and the antennas to stay connected were damaged. The New York division's information technology system needs all the help it can get to be able to replace those 15 vehicles used for important kinds of forensic detection and wiretap that were lost to flooding or crushed by falling trees. Also included in the appropriations is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which will get $25 million. Flooding swept through the ATF offices in Brooklyn and Manhattan. It damaged communication, security systems, and other tools Federal agents need to detect crime, fight crime, identify the perpetrators of crime, and gather the evidence. We have $10 million in here for the Bureau of Federal Prisons. Ten Federal prisons were affected by Hurricane Sandy, located in four States: New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. We need these repairs to meet safety and security requirements to make sure the inmates are kept secure and the prisons are fit for duty. They will need $10 million to be able to do that. Let's talk about the science side. Our Federal science facilities along our coast were also damaged. Repairs are needed in Federal laboratories, research facilities, and monitoring equipment. NOAA needs $15 million for ocean and coastal equipment damaged by Hurricane Sandy. For example, 45 tide stations and data buoys were damaged. What does that mean? It is absolutely crucial for these buoys to give us the navigational information for safe navigation into and out of affected ports. The Presiding Officer knows, as the Senator who represents Washington State, how important access to a port is and how important the NOAA facilities are to help our ship captains and our port pilots have accurate and reliable data. They were damaged up and down the coast. They will need $63 million to repair and improve weather forecasting equipment and capabilities. Nine NOAA weather radio sites were damaged, including broken transmitters and antennas. Repairs are needed so they can be able to give us the right weather forecast even during a storm, to be able to give us the right information to protect our communities. For every mile we can be accurate, we will save $1 million in evacuation costs by the State, local, and private sector. Every dollar we spend that can provide accurate forecasting saves lives and saves money. In addition, even the NOAA hurricane hunter planes were damaged. We have three of them. Only one plane was able to work during the 2012 hurricane season. Two other planes desperately need repairs, and we are going to do it. Also, we need to repair NASA facilities that were damaged along the coast. Beaches were washed away near the NASA launch pad at Wallop's Island. The launch pad sits steps from the beach, and workers had to stop testing the rocket that will be used to take cargo to the space station. After Hurricane Sandy, they said they had not seen this much damage in over 6 years. This is a very important facility. There were other NASA facilities that were damaged because of the impact and their closeness to the beach. We also need cleanup. Entire coastal communities were washed away. The magnitude was amazing. Right now we have debris from storm damage that can be dangerous to fishing vessels, public health and safety, and to marine life. This funding is important for the communities hit by Hurricane Sandy and also for the west coast communities that are still struggling with debris. I understand in Oregon, Washington State, and in California they are still dealing with debris from the Japanese tsunami. I know the Senator from Washington State as well as Senator Murray have spoken to me about it. We need to clean up what was washed up. It is important not only for the safety of our beaches but also so that ships have clear navigation. We are also going to be looking at coastal habitat. Due to the hurricane, not only were people displaced but fisheries were destroyed as well. I am not equating the two, but for many of us who are coastal Senators, we know that the fisheries are an important part of our identity, an important part of the economy, and an important part of jobs in our communities. We call them watermen in Maryland. Our colleagues from New England call them lobstermen or fishermen. I know the Presiding Officer calls them fishermen. Whatever name we use, those men and women who work and harvest the sea depend on their fisheries. There were several fisheries which were damaged because the storm created such an aquatic and habitat upheaval. Assistance is needed for our fishermen and our fishing communities which depend on this for their livelihoods to get help. We will be focusing in this bill on New England groundfish; Mississippi's--which was hit by another hurricane-- oysters and blue crabs; as well as Alaska and its salmon. Those who were affected at the salmon fisheries will benefit from this bill as will New York and New Jersey. At the same time we will provide assistance to legal aid for mobile resources and disaster coordinators. There is a tremendous demand for their services to help people sort out many of the aspects of this. They help them with their benefits and their insurance. They need help just sorting things out when they don't have the documents they need. We are going to have lawyers on the ground to work with the community. Legal aid will be doing this, and they will be also coordinate pro bono orders. We see this bill not just as spending on these items, we see this as helping the communities get back on their feet and ensuring they have vital Federal services in law enforcement and the safety and protection of their community. We need to maintain the safety of our Federal prisons and make sure there is safety and access to our ports in order that safe navigation will be provided. For every dollar we spend, we are going to be creating jobs. It is going to take jobs and human beings to replace and replenish our beaches. This is important. It is a jobs bill. When we talk about going in and stabilizing our prisons or helping with the New York field office, and so on, these are going to be jobs in construction, in office space restoration, and mold mitigation. Item after item will help provide an opportunity that even men and women whose jobs were displaced because of this storm will have the opportunity to be able to participate in these Federal contracts to rebuild the very communities that they are from. I know we hope that happens. After all of this, we are going to have safer beaches and safer navigation. We are also going to continue the excellent work that has been done by NOAA and weather forecasts. They gave us plenty of warning so that we were able to save as many lives as we could, but unfortunately we could not save those homes and we could not save those livelihoods. This supplemental helps people get back in their homes, get those communities back, and hopefully we will restore those livelihoods. I look forward to ensuring that my aspect of the bill moves in an expeditious, speedy, and smooth way. I thank the the ranking member, Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. She worked with me on a bipartisan basis to put together my part of the supplemental. This will probably be the last bill she will help move. I appreciate her help. I hope my colleagues, as they look at the overall aspects of this bill, will move it. Tomorrow I will be talking more about the FEMA and HUD aspects, particularly as they affect Maryland. I hope that as the lameduck moves along, we move in a bipartisan way to get our people back into their homes, back to work, and get back the faith that the Federal Government is on their side and responds to them. The Senator and I thank President Obama for his leadership and giving us the right framework. We have it all lined up here, and we are ready to go. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, yesterday I had the honor of addressing the full Senate to pay a more amplified tribute to the gentlelady from Maine. I will miss her dearly and deeply. We have served both in the House and the Senate together. We have done real good things, including one of our finest bipartisan efforts in the area of women's health in getting women included in the protocols appropriately, the scientific way at NIH when we were excluded. We helped to advance the whole issue of more money for research for breast cancer and other diseases that are generally specific to women. I will never forget the day when Good Housekeeping called and said that Senator Snowe and I were going to get an award. I immediately called my family and told my sisters that I had won the Good Housekeeping Award. Well, they thought that was hilarious. I have many awards for speaking, longest serving, but not Good Housekeeping. When I told them I was getting the award with Senator Snowe, they knew it had integrity, credibility, and was well deserved. So I just want to, from the bottom of my heart, not only thank the people of Maine, who will express their gratitude for her service. She has a duty-driven approach, an uncommon sense to get the job done in a way that is inclusive and has benefited our entire country whether they be small business or the little people whose voices are never heard. So we wish her God bless, Godspeed, and we hope to see her speaking out exactly on what she did today, a call toward citizenship and more bipartisanship and less partisanship. God bless you, Senator Snowe.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I wish to take a few minutes to speak about another sad situation in the State of Maryland. Today we got the terrible, sad news that it looks as though Bethlehem Steel, our biggest, largest, most famous steelyard, is going to close, and it is going to close forever. Throughout the entire 19th and 20th centuries and through to today, Bethlehem Steel hired people, making it one of our largest employers, to build steel for our great iconic projects and to help build America. In its heyday in 1957, 30,000 steelworkers were there. They thought they had lifelong jobs in helping build steel. It was the largest single employer in Baltimore for decades. It made steel for everything from Campbell Soup cans to National beer cans. It built steel for refrigerators, toasters, and thousands of other products. During the war, Bethlehem Steel was part of the arsenal of democracy in which it built Liberty ships. I am very close to the people at Bethlehem Steel. Members of my own family worked in this steel mill and they worked very hard. People who came into my father's grocery store worked at Bethlehem Steel. They thought they had a job that would last forever because America would need steel. It doesn't look that way, because even though those workers thought America would always want American steel, we looked the other way when foreign imports began to drive down our prices and drive down our steel mills. We have to begin to rethink what we are doing in this area. America's steel and steelworkers protected the United States and our freedom. At Sparrows Point they rolled gun barrels, made steel for grenades, shells and landing craft for airplanes and ships. We have to remember whose steel it was that truly built America. But do my colleagues know who the last owner was; not the most recent but the ones before that? The Russians. I am not against Russia, but I am against Russia owning America's tools of production. What will happen to America if we need more steel to go to war? What about needing steel when we build our infrastructure? When American steelworkers built the great new Golden Gate Bridge with American taxpayers' dollars, the steel came from China. What are we doing to America and what are we doing to our manufacturing? I think we need a wakeup call. We are busy holding up the entire Congress protecting tax breaks for billionaires. When are we going to start looking out for American jobs? When we are talking about this fiscal cliff, we are not talking about having the jobs component in it. When are we going to start talking about tax breaks so we can have an infrastructure bank, so we can rebuild America using American products? Why is it when we say we want it made in America, some call us protectionists? I welcome the label of ``protectionist.'' I am going to protect American jobs. I don't want them on a slow boat to China or a fast track to Mexico. I might not ever get my steel mill back and Baltimore might not ever have those jobs back, but we have to get serious in our country. What are our priorities? We have to start rewarding those industries that make products in this country. Right now, our whole code is oriented to protecting people who make money off money. Let me tell my colleagues, we are already getting a big wakeup call in America. I have fought for more than 25 years to reverse this tide against American manufacturing and for American steel and I am going to keep on fighting. But right now, as we go on debating this fiscal cliff, we have to make sure we protect the safety net. If my colleagues went with me to Dundalk and to Sparrows Point, people would tell us they want their job, and if they can't have their job, could they please have a safety net that protects them in terms of unemployment insurance and health care benefits so they have a bridge to get their family over this very hard time. I worry that during this fiscal cliff debate we are going to lose those benefits, but I will tell my colleagues that I will fight to not go over the fiscal cliff. In the meantime, I say to the men and women at Bethlehem Steel: Thank you for what you did. You built America. You helped save America. You helped save Western civilization. We are going to try right now to save your safety net benefits. Go to that hall where you can apply for those benefits. They are still there. We still want to make sure you are eligible, but we want not only a safety net to get you over the hard times, we believe the best safety net is jobs in American manufacturing. I am going to yield the floor, but I will not yield the fight for American jobs. I note the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise during this morning business hour to speak--particularly during this time of tension as we are looking at the fiscal cliff--to really use a few minutes to pay a tribute to two wonderful, outstanding Senators with whom I have served and who will be leaving us at the end of this term. They are wonderful women named Senator Olympia Snowe of Maine and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas, dear friends across the aisle. Although they were on the other side of the aisle, there was no great divide between us. We have known each other for many years. I would like to say a few words about my very dear friend, Senator Olympia Snowe. I served with Senator Olympia Snowe in the U.S. House of Representatives and then in the U.S. Senate. Wow. What an outstanding Senator and Congressperson she has been, and I know we will continue to see Senator Snowe in some type of role in public service because that is just the kind of person she is. She is deeply, in her DNA, a public servant. Senator Snowe has served her State of Maine and our Nation so well. She is one of our most respected Members of Congress, known for her civility, her sensibility, and her mastery of the issues. I might add that she brings that New England sense of a more frugal government but at the same time shows that you can do it in a compassionate, smart way. I know her as a cherished friend, a dear colleague, and a crucial partner on so many issues. As I said, we served in the House and the Senate together. We worked on those issues I talk about, the macro issues and the macaroni-and-cheese issues. We fought for a better economy, particularly in the area of small business; a safer country, as we worked on the Intelligence Committee together; and a more efficient government. Also, we worked together on many issues pertaining to women. In the area of small business, she is currently the ranking member on the Small Business Committee, with our other colleague, Senator Mary Landrieu. She knows the backbone of Maine's economy is small business, and she also knows it is the backbone of the American economy. I have watched her day in and day out being concerned about her fishermen who were out there working in the cold waters off of Georges Bank for lobsters and the small shop owner on Main Street. From the potato fields and lumber yards to L.L. Bean, Olympia Snowe has stood for them but also for the big issues in terms of jobs in the Bath shipyards. In national security, we have worked together to look out for our troops over there and to protect our communities from predators back here. She has been steadfast and true. It is a committee that meets often behind closed doors, but I will tell you, this is a Senator who continually looks after the safety of the American people. One of the areas in which I have worked the closest with her is the area of women's health. You might be interested to know that Senator Snowe and I received the Good Housekeeping Outstanding Achievement Award for what we did to advance the cause of finding a cure for breast cancer. Now, when I called my sister and told her I was getting a Good Housekeeping award, she thought it was the funniest thing she had ever heard. When I told her I was getting it with Olympia Snowe, she knew it had credibility. I say that because what we did in working together was in medical research and in clinical trials. You might be interested to know that when I came to the Senate, the only other woman Senator was Nancy Kassebaum--another wonderful person across the aisle. Women were not included in the protocols at NIH. Can you believe that? That famous study--take an aspirin a day, keep a heart attack away--was done with 10,000 male medical students. Not one woman was there. They regarded including women in research as presenting deviant results. We were known as the deviant results. Well, Pat Schroeder; Olympia Snowe; another Republican Congresswoman, Connie Morella from Maryland--we said this couldn't continue. So we organized across the dome, across the aisle, and we went across the beltway to NIH. We pulled up and we demanded answers, scientific answers, on why we weren't included. The day we pulled up in our cars on a bipartisan basis, George Bush the elder appointed Bernadine Healey to head NIH. Then, again working together across the aisle and across the dome, working with Senators Kennedy and Harkin, we established the Office of Research on Women's Health at NIH. The famous hormonal replacement therapy study was done. It resulted in massive change in the way doctors treated women, and it has reduced breast cancer rates 15 percent. So I say to all, when you ask, what did Olympia Snowe do, she would say: I worked on a bipartisan basis. And because of what she did, we did, we all did working together, men and women, House and Senate, we have saved the lives of women 1 million at a time. I think that is a terrific accomplishment. And no matter what Senator Snowe does, she can cherish in her heart that she did that. But while we were busy doing the big picture, she helped me with an individual picture. We went to the refugee camps of Cambodia together, along with the Congresswomen. It was when the killing fields were at that time the highest. We saw the horrible consequences of war. We worked together to feed the children. We worked together to feed the children and care for the children. I met a young girl in a refugee camp, in the Catholic Relief feeding camp. Working with Senator Snowe, we brought that little girl to the United States of America. She is alive here today, married and living as an American citizen. So what did Olympia Snowe do? She saved jobs and she saved lives. I am proud to work with her, and we are going to miss her. Then there is my good friend Kay Bailey Hutchison, who has just come to the floor. I am glad she is going to be here to hear what I am going to say about her. I hold her in such enormously high esteem. Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison is known for her competence, her strong character, and being an outstanding champion for Texas, an advocate for women, and a real patriot dedicated to serving our Nation. I too know her as a dear friend, someone deeply committed to creating that zone of civility among the women in the Senate. When Senator Hutchison arrived in the Senate in 1983, there were prickly politics beginning to emerge. She came from the Texas Legislature and knew the dynamics of a rough-and-tumble legislative body. But as we worked together on something called the homemaker IRA, we said: Why don't we just get together to see if we can create a zone of civility? That was when we brought the women together for those monthly dinners. The rules were no staff, no leaks, and no memos. We talked about everything from hairdos to the hair-raising and how we could stop the global war on terror and fight the deadly scourge against breast cancer. We worked together, again across the aisle. In 1992 we also worked to hold these power workshops to make sure every woman would know how to get started in the Senate, and we worked together on that. The other thing Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison and I helped establish was that we could disagree without being disagreeable. We, the women of the Senate, do not have a caucus because we represent States. That is what the Constitution says is our job--we are here to represent States. We also have different philosophies and viewpoints on governance. But we also know we can disagree without being disagreeable. A story I like to tell is that during debate on the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, Senator Hutchison and I agreed on absolutely the same goal: equal pay for equal or comparable work for women. However, we disagreed on the means. Senator Hutchison had about nine amendments, and we duked it out here. We went earring-to-earring in terms of our debate, and the Senate commented on what intellectual rigor it had, what a sense of comity and exchanging of ideas. At the end of the day, we not only passed the legislation, but we did it in a way where everybody could feel proud of the process. Why can't we do that every day? Gee, I wish we could. Then working with Senator Hutchison--and this is how we got started, was on the homemaker IRA. This was Senator Hutchison's idea. She came to me and she said: You know, Senator Barb, they are stay-at-home moms, and they are limited to only $500 that they can contribute to an IRA. If they have the money and if they have the will and the wallet, we should give them the same tax opportunities as if they were working in the marketplace because their work at home should be valued as well. Absolutely. We changed that legislation. I have pending here legislation to permanently change the name of that homemaker IRA to the Hutchison IRA because she really did lead the way. I was an able ally, and we made a difference. So I could go through item after item--the way we have worked on breast cancer together, the way we have worked on appropriations. She was my ranking member on Commerce-Justice-Science. We have worked together on the space program. We have worked together to keep our areas safe. From the start, we shared a personal commitment that technology and space could help America remain exceptional, a belief in supporting research and science, leading to new ideas that would be not only new areas that we would explore but new technologies for new products and new jobs. Yes, I visited her down at mission control, and I have been there during the great research we were able to see being done in that area. Remember, the home of the Komen foundation is in Texas. Senator Hutchison was very clear that she wanted to be sure that she too was an advocate for women's health. We worked together on mammogram quality standards. Were you aware that in the early days--and I know that sometimes we sound like we built the Pyramids together when I tell these stories; it is both ancient history and a recent reality. If you went into a doctor's office 10, 12 years ago for a mammogram, you might have gotten a chest X ray and they would have called it a mammogram. It was often given by untrained technicians. There were no standards for the equipment that it would really work the way it was supposed to work, and it was often uncalibrated and ineffectual. Senator Hutchison and I worked using sound science, thorough hearings, working with the Institute of Medicine, FDA, and the National Institute of Standards. Now if you go into your doctor's office for that mammogram, you will see a certificate from your government that says this is a place where you know the technology will work and the people who will be giving it will be trained. You know, once again, this is early detection and screening, saving lives a million at a time. Isn't that fantastic? Again, across the aisle, we were able to do that. We also did a book together. She was the leader in helping us publish our famous book, ``Nine and Counting.'' Maybe there will be time for another book, but when the chapter of the history of the Senate is written, we want to be sure that the chapter really includes a big statement to the work of Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Again, in this institution it is the personal relationships built often on policy. I went to Texas to tour the space program with Senator Hutchison. That is where we heard about the National Space Biomedical Research Institute at Baylor. When I was there, I met Senator Hutchison's brother, who faced the same blood cancer disease Geraldine Ferraro faced. Gerry and her brother became fast friends, so Kay and Barb teamed up. Again we pushed research at NIH. You know, cancer knows no party. It knows no ZIP Code. It knows no ideology. But it knows that we need to work together to be able to do it. On that wonderful day of friendship, where we learned the best ideas that will come out of our work in the space program to deal with the dread cancer word, the kinds of things that we study in space will help us be more effective here on Earth. Kay invited me to the Houston livestock show and rodeo. Now, I grew up in Baltimore, and you have been there many times yourself. You know it is a city known for its row houses, not for its rodeos. Kay invited me to come to the rodeo in the Astrodome. Well, I showed up, to her surprise. I had little boots, a cowboy hat, and a vest. She put me in a buckboard, and, to ``Deep in the Heart of Texas,'' we circled the Astrodome together. I was in a buckboard, and she was on a palomino next to me. The American flags were waving, and so was I, yelling ``giddy up, little doggie.'' At the end of the evening, I was there munching on barbecue, affectionately called Buckboard Barb--and I have the pictures to show it. They are locked up. I don't widely distribute them. But it was a heck of an evening. I say that because, again, out of that comes great friendships that also lead to paving the way to where we put our heads together to solve our national problems and to do it in a way where we get the best ideas from a variety of government approaches. And at the end of the day, we feel better, but America is better off. I am pretty emotional, actually, when I think about Olympia and Kay. We have been together a long time. We welcome the Acting President pro tempore and your generation, but for those of us who maybe didn't build the pyramids--and I hope Senator Hutchison can say the same--there is a lot of meaning in a Latin phrase I learned in Catholic girls school many years ago: Exegi aere perennius: We will build a monument more lasting than bronze. When Senator Hutchison returns to Texas again to find a new way to serve the people of this country, she will know that here in this institution, along with Senator Olympia Snowe, they built monuments to last far longer than any statues made of bronze. They made a difference in the lives of people, and they have done it in a way they can be proud of and for which we can all be grateful. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise to comment about some wonderful men in the Senate who are retiring on both sides of the aisle. Earlier today I spoke about my deep affection and sorry-to-see-go friends Olympia Snowe and Kay Bailey Hutchison, but I want to rise as the dean of the women in the Senate to say some very special words about very special men on both sides of the aisle. Because when I came to the Senate, it was only Nancy Kassebaum and myself, and yet we worked on so many issues together. There are really wonderful men here who supported me, supported our issues, but really stood up for those States and their communities. Danny Akaka I want to say goodbye, aloha, to my very good friend Danny Akaka, a wonderful man with whom I have served in both the House and the Senate. He has been a real advocate not only for the people of Hawaii but, wow, the way he stood up for the Federal workforce, the civil servants who do such a great job, the outstanding job he has done on the Veterans' Committee. Lives are better off, particularly for our veterans. I want to say a wonderful goodbye and give a hug to him because he demonstrates that you do not have to be loud to be powerful. Dick Lugar I also wish to pay tribute to someone on the other side of the aisle, my very good friend and someone I admire tremendously, Senator Dick Lugar from Indiana. Who does not admire Senator Lugar, a gentleman, a scholar, I might even add a Rhodes Scholar, a definite advocate for Indiana, an incredible thought leader on foreign policy. I am so proud of him and the work he did and the way he reached across the aisle to work with our colleague Senator Sam Nunn on their famous Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program. They truly worked together to begin to end the threat of weapons of mass destruction in the former Soviet Union and made the world a better and safer place. We want to wish Senator Lugar a fond farewell and let him know he will be deeply missed. I certainly will miss him. I valued his thought, his counsel, his observations, particularly in the area of foreign policy. He taught me a little bit about foreign policy too. Jeff Bingaman I also want to say a goodbye to our friend Jeff Bingaman of New Mexico, someone who has also brought intellectual rigor, a lawyer's insistence on thoroughness, and a real commitment to people. It has been an honor and a pleasure to work with him on the HELP Committee, especially on the Affordable Care Act. I was proud to support all that he did, particularly in developing and focusing on the health workforce for the future. I knew I could count on Jeff in the committee and on the floor as one of those men whom I refer to as a Gallahad, where men of quality always supported us women as we sought equality. Our initiatives to end discrimination against women in health care and in the workplace were some of our proudest achievements in working together. Jon Kyl I also wish to comment about Jon Kyl. I have worked across the aisle from Jon Kyl and I have been seated across the table from him at everything from Bible study groups to the Senate Intelligence Committee. We studied the words of the Bible together to make ourselves better, and we worked in our committees to make the world better. We lived through September 11 and the terrible attacks that occurred in our country and the anthrax attacks in our offices. With his steady leadership, his resourceful mind, his can-do know-how, we worked together to get the job done. I was delighted to be able to work with him in a way that called forth our highest and better selves to look out for our country. I wish him the best in his journey. Kent Conrad I wish to comment too about Kent Conrad. Wow, what a numbers guy. Those charts--I loved those charts. But we have many other things in common besides a love of charts. We love baseball. We love the Baltimore Orioles and, I might add, an occasional polka at Blob's Beer Garden in Maryland. Now you know Kent. He looks like Clark Kent. And he is a Superman when it comes to the budget. But, wow, when they played ``Roll Out the Barrel,'' he was quite a hoofer. Most of all, what I admired about him is the way he breathed life into the numbers. He not only wanted a more frugal government, but he was also passionate and compassionate about how we could use the power of the purse to improve the world and at the same time maintain sensible spending standards. I am going to look forward to seeing him with or without his charts and maybe in a dugout. Ben Nelson I wish also to say goodbye to Ben Nelson of Nebraska, a brother appropriator. We salute him for his work for the people of Nebraska and the Nation. Using those committee assignments on Appropriations, Agriculture, and Armed Services, he looked out for rural communities and he stood up for men and women in the military. I knew he took it as a personal responsibility, the issues around personnel for our military, that they had the right pay, the right equipment, and we protected their benefits. Herb Kohl A comment about Herb Kohl, another brother appropriator, the very essence of civility. He brought a businessman's savvy with a deep compassion and commitment to the people of Wisconsin. Now we all know the Kohl family. They own basketball teams, they own department stores. I tell you, that Herb, he understood retail, whether it was in politics fighting for the people and their day-to-day needs or the national policy of looking out for working families as they build their lives. He stood up for Wisconsin cheese, the Green Bay Packers, his basketball team. But most of all, he stood up for the people. With Herb, what a sense of honor. His handshake was always good. You could count on him. It was a binding contract. Scott Brown I wish also to say a word about Senator Scott Brown. Many of you know that I was a social worker and a child abuse worker. I want to say personally, I so admire Senator Brown's candor and being forthcoming when he shared with the world his own child abuse experience in his book, ``Against All Odds.'' He not only experienced the terrible thing that happened to him, but he went on to talk about how he handled this terrible tragedy. I must say, I compliment him. It was a model, that as a young boy this terrible event would not hold him back. I am sure his powerful words helped many others come into the light. As a former child abuse social worker, I want to thank him publicly for what he has done not only in this institution but to help other boys--and even girls--who also faced a terrible tragedy and refused to be a victim but went on to do well. I wish him well. Jim Webb Senator Jim Webb, the Senate's own marine and former Secretary of the Navy, I have known him for more than 20 years, since he was Secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Well, in the beginning we fought on many issues, particularly gender equality. When Senator Webb was the new Secretary of the Navy and I was a new Senator, we had a different view on where women should be in the military, and we duked it out. But you know what. Over the years we came to know each other, respect each other, and appreciate each other's views. I so appreciate the fact that he is an unabashed, unrelenting fierce fighter for our men and women in uniform, fighting for them when they are on the front lines and when they return to the homefront. I am so proud of the fact that I could vote for the 21st century GI bill for those serving in the military, to make sure that when they are on the front line, they get the education here so they will not be on the unemployment line. His bill was the most significant legislation for veterans since World War II. So I say to Senator Webb, semper fi, and God bless you. Joe Lieberman Then to my good friend, Joe Lieberman--my friend Joe, a true Independent. We have worked together on issues related to the Middle East and the safety and security of Israel. We worked to bring character education into our schools because we do believe that character counts. Working with Joe--whether it was to help create national service, move national legislation, or to say that in our schools we should come to understand the need to teach respect, responsibility, fairness, caring, and citizenship--wow, these were values that should be not only in our schools but throughout our country. Joe has been so faithful to his religious beliefs. He has also been faithful to the Constitution he was sworn to uphold and to the people of Connecticut. I want him to know we so appreciate his service to Connecticut and to the country. I wanted to be sure that the day would not end without me acknowledging these wonderful people who have given a big part of their lives to making this country a better place. I want to, in the most heartfelt way--I am so sorry we did not have a bipartisan dinner or party to be able to express this. I would have liked to have been in the same room, breaking bread with them, in order to be able to tell them how much we appreciate them, across party lines, across those lines that ordinarily divide us. They came from different parts of the country, they arrived in the Senate with different objectives, they will leave under different circumstances. But I want to again let them know that each and every one of them had a positive impact on me and I think a wonderful impact on the future of this country. So I wish them well. God bless and Godspeed. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to rename the section of the tax code that is currently known as the ``Spousal IRA'' so that it carries the name of its champion--my friend and colleague from Texas--Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Senator Hutchison has been an excellent partner to work with on the Commerce, Justice, and Science subcommittee watching over the nation's checkbook for investments in research, discovery, innovation, and law enforcement. We have sought to find the sensible center in addressing issues like cancer research, building a balanced space program at NASA, and most recently--on legislation to stop inmates from using cell phones in prison. Senator Hutchison must be recognized for her long-standing advocacy for women. Her advocacy has been steadfast. We have worked together on the women's health agenda. We have mammogram standards in this country because of the Hutchison-Mikulski amendment. We have helped with breast cancer research funding because we have worked together, and I could give example after example. But what I rise to discuss today is the very first issue that Senator Hutchison and I took on together--expanding the availability of Individual Retirement Accounts, IRAs, for spouses who work at home. Along with Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, I am the author of the Spousal IRA bill. I have always said that one of my principles is to listen to the people and the stories of their lives. My best ideas come from the people. The Spousal IRA bill was one of those kinds of ideas. This bill was a product of Senator Hutchison's personal experience before joining the Senate. After putting aside money for her retirement as a single working woman, Senator Hutchison found that she could only put aside $250 in an IRA once she married her husband. This kind of policy, that discouraged women from saving for retirement, was completely backwards. Women tend to live longer than men. Women are more likely to take years off of work outside of the home because of family responsibilities. And women are more likely to work in jobs that don't have a pension. When Senator Hutchison joined the Senate in 1993, she came to me to sign on as the lead Democratic sponsor for her idea to help women save for retirement. Together we worked to build support for this bill and after 3 years and 62 cosponsors, the Spousal IRA bill became the law of the land. Suddenly, women weren't limited to $250, they could put away $2,000. All women--single, married, working outside the home, or working at home--could set aside the same amount for retirement. Over time, that amount has grown, and so it is not $2,000, but it can be $2,500 or $3,000 or $5,000, depending on a woman's age. This law is important because it reflects the values of our nation, it rewards good parenting and families, and it recognizes that not all work is done in the marketplace. American families feel the pressure from all sides, paying for their children's education, their homes, taking care of elderly parents, and being prepared for unforeseen emergency medical care costs. What the Spousal IRA law finally said was, ``Moms and dads are struggling to do the right thing for their family, and they should not be penalized for staying at home.'' Earlier this year, an interviewer on PBS asked Senator Hutchison what she's most proud of in her Senate career, and she said the Spousal IRA. Senator Hutchison has a lot to be proud of, but we must recognize her work in fixing federal policy to help women save for retirement. We should amend the tax code so that women in America know that they're benefitting from the Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to introduce legislation to rename the section of the tax code that is currently known as the ``Spousal IRA'' so that it carries the name of its champion--my friend and colleague from Texas--Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison. Senator Hutchison has been an excellent partner to work with on the Commerce, Justice, and Science subcommittee watching over the nation's checkbook for investments in research, discovery, innovation, and law enforcement. We have sought to find the sensible center in addressing issues like cancer research, building a balanced space program at NASA, and most recently--on legislation to stop inmates from using cell phones in prison. Senator Hutchison must be recognized for her long-standing advocacy for women. Her advocacy has been steadfast. We have worked together on the women's health agenda. We have mammogram standards in this country because of the Hutchison-Mikulski amendment. We have helped with breast cancer research funding because we have worked together, and I could give example after example. But what I rise to discuss today is the very first issue that Senator Hutchison and I took on together--expanding the availability of Individual Retirement Accounts, IRAs, for spouses who work at home. Along with Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, I am the author of the Spousal IRA bill. I have always said that one of my principles is to listen to the people and the stories of their lives. My best ideas come from the people. The Spousal IRA bill was one of those kinds of ideas. This bill was a product of Senator Hutchison's personal experience before joining the Senate. After putting aside money for her retirement as a single working woman, Senator Hutchison found that she could only put aside $250 in an IRA once she married her husband. This kind of policy, that discouraged women from saving for retirement, was completely backwards. Women tend to live longer than men. Women are more likely to take years off of work outside of the home because of family responsibilities. And women are more likely to work in jobs that don't have a pension. When Senator Hutchison joined the Senate in 1993, she came to me to sign on as the lead Democratic sponsor for her idea to help women save for retirement. Together we worked to build support for this bill and after 3 years and 62 cosponsors, the Spousal IRA bill became the law of the land. Suddenly, women weren't limited to $250, they could put away $2,000. All women--single, married, working outside the home, or working at home--could set aside the same amount for retirement. Over time, that amount has grown, and so it is not $2,000, but it can be $2,500 or $3,000 or $5,000, depending on a woman's age. This law is important because it reflects the values of our nation, it rewards good parenting and families, and it recognizes that not all work is done in the marketplace. American families feel the pressure from all sides, paying for their children's education, their homes, taking care of elderly parents, and being prepared for unforeseen emergency medical care costs. What the Spousal IRA law finally said was, ``Moms and dads are struggling to do the right thing for their family, and they should not be penalized for staying at home.'' Earlier this year, an interviewer on PBS asked Senator Hutchison what she's most proud of in her Senate career, and she said the Spousal IRA. Senator Hutchison has a lot to be proud of, but we must recognize her work in fixing federal policy to help women save for retirement. We should amend the tax code so that women in America know that they're benefitting from the Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to honor the Holy Rosary Church of Baltimore as it marks its 125th anniversary. Holy Rosary Church was consecrated on December 8, 1887. From the beginning, the church provided a spiritual home for new Americans who emigrated from Poland. My own family were parishioners from the beginning. The church was the center of the community. It was the school. It is where new Americans came to practice their faith in their new home. While facing all the challenges of life in a new country, Holy Rosary provided a place of comfort and spiritual guidance. The Church provided a place to practice the beloved traditions of their Catholic faith. It became one of the largest Polish parishes in Baltimore. Its priests were beloved in the community. The church also had a parochial school staffed by the beloved Felician nuns. They not only taught the three R's--religion, reading, writing--they helped young people get on the path of citizenship. They were a bridge between the old world and the new. My great grandmother was one of those immigrants who worshiped at Holy Rosary. Like so many, she came with little money in her pocketbook, but big dreams in her heart for a new and better life. And that life was nurtured by the Polish American community at Holy Rosary parish. In the 1920s and 1930s, Holy Rosary parish was the largest of six Polish parishes in Baltimore and the largest in the Archdiocese. Over time, my family continued to attend Holy Rosary Church. My parents were married there. Holy Rosary Church played a part in Baltimore's history. It is where we prayed through two World Wars and the Great Depression. It is where we prayed that the Iron Curtain would be lifted and Poland would be liberated. It is where we organized to help the Solidarity movement. It is where we welcomed Pope John Paul II to Holy Rosary when he was the Bishop of Krakow. That was the first time I met the Holy Father. Holy Rosary was also where a stunning miracle occurred. It was where the Vatican recognized the healing of Fr. Ronald Pytel as a miracle through the intercession of Blessed Faustina Kowalska, one of the miracles that led to her canonization in 2000. Today I honor the past, celebrate the present and have high hopes for the future of Holy Rosary parish. The members continue to live their faith of charity and hope. One hundred and twenty-five years ago the people of Holy Rosary came together to forge a parish community anchored on the beliefs of Roman Catholicism and the values of hard work, neighbor-helping-neighbor and patriotism.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the pending nomination of Judge Paul Grimm on which we will vote shortly. I am so proud to be here to support the nomination of Judge Paul Grimm. He is a stellar Marylander, he has an outstanding legal mind, and he has been nominated to serve on the District Court of Maryland. Senator Cardin and I recommended Judge Grimm to President Obama with the utmost confidence in his abilities, talent, and competence for the job. The ABA agreed with us and gave him the highest rating of ``unanimously well qualified.'' I wish to thank Senators Reid and McConnell for breaking the logjam so that we could bring this to everyone's attention, and I commend Senator Leahy for the swift movement through the committee process. I have had an opportunity to recommend several judicial nominees and I take my advise-and-consent responsibility very seriously. I have four criteria. My nominee must have absolute integrity, judicial competence and temperament, a commitment to core constitutional principles, and a history of civic engagement in Maryland, so the nominee is familiar with the life and times of the people they will adjudicate over. I mention these standards often because I mean it. Judge Grimm does exactly that. He brings the right hard-working values to the bench, and the necessary experience, having sharpened his legal skills for many years as a litigator, a Judge Advocate General, a lawyer, a JAG officer, an indispensable asset to the District Court of Maryland, and as a chief magistrate judge. Judge Grimm knows what it means to be of service to the legal profession, to Maryland, and to the country. He is a public servant first and foremost. His father was in the military. Judge Grimm started very early prosecuting courts martial while attending law school on an ROTC scholarship. He then served in the JAG Corps for 3 years beginning at Aberdeen Proving Ground and later at the Pentagon. But it didn't end there. He went on to serve as a Reserve JAG officer for 22 years, ultimately retiring as a decorated lieutenant colonel. His life and resume are a display of civic engagement, from his service on numerous bar associations in Maryland, professional organizations, and, at the same time, he was a Boy Scout leader. He also helped young students in high school learn how to do a mock court. Let's go, though, to his being a good lawyer. Judge Grimm is known as a trailblazer in the Maryland community. He is well respected not only for his extensive writing and teaching but his commitment to the improvement of the practice of law and the administration of justice. He has spent his entire legal career in Maryland, and he is absolutely prepared for service on the court and for the court. He has already served 16 years as a magistrate judge in the District Court of Maryland, and for 6 of those years he has been the chief magistrate. Prior to taking the bench, Judge Grimm served 13 years as a litigator in private practice and handled primarily civil cases. He was an assistant attorney general for Maryland and a prosecutor in Baltimore County. Also, as my colleagues can see, his experience and service are unparalleled. Most recently, he served on the advisory committee for the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure since 2009 and was later designated as the chair of the Discovery Subcommittee. He has been honored by the ABA, the Maryland Daily Record, which is a kind of legal paper in Maryland, and he has been twice recognized by the University of Maryland Law School. By every index of what makes a great judge--absolute integrity, judicial temperament, legal experience, well regarded by peers and all who appear before him--I think this is a nominee we want to maintain a constitutional imperative of an independent judiciary, where judges come from the best background and have the best values. It is critical that we have judges who are able to do that, and I hope my colleagues join me in voting for Judge Paul Grimm. I also hope with the other 19 nominees on the calendar, many of whom have been voice-voted through the committee, we also confirm those during this lameduck session. Mr. President, I have completed my presentation on the outstanding qualifications of Judge Paul Grimm. I now yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, Monday, December 3, will mark the third anniversary of the imprisonment of Alan Gross by Cuba as a political prisoner. In 2009, Mr. Gross went to Cuba on a USAID contract to assist the Jewish community in improving access to the internet by installing wireless equipment. He was arrested by the Cuban government and held for 14 months before being charged as a spy. After a sham trial, Mr. Gross was sentenced to 15 years in prison. Alan Gross a Maryland native, is a former social worker who spent a quarter of a decade working in international development--helping people around the world. A graduate of the University of Maryland, Mr. Gross has lived in Potomac, MD for many years. I've met his wife on numerous occasions and her continued strength and focus inspires me. While her husband has been held in a Cuban prison, she has held down the fort and held the pressure on the Cuban government for its poor treatment of her husband. Despite facing severe health problems and complications caused by his imprisonment, Alan Gross has remained strong. He has developed a daily routine to maintain his strength. Yet he has lost more than 100 pounds, has difficulty walking, and has a large mass behind his shoulder that has gone untreated. The information shared by the Cuban government about Mr. Gross's medical condition is incomplete and raises new concerns for his family. Mr. Gross's family has also encountered substantial health problems of their own over the past 3 years and they are facing significant financial hardship. His mother has inoperable lung cancer and the family is concerned they will not have a chance to be together to say goodbye. The family's contact with Mr. Gross remains extremely limited. I have been hopeful that America and Cuba could move closer together--in trade, in community connections, and for the individual families that have been separated. Yet, concern over the detention of Alan Gross has put a hold on efforts to improve relations and the case shows that Cuba is not serious about moving forward and has stalled any effort in the Senate to move towards normalizing our relationship. President Obama has stated that until Cuba's current government improves human rights and freedoms, the embargo against Cuba remains in our Nation's national interests. What had become a yearly effort to modify the embargo was halted in the Senate this year because of the continued detention of Alan Gross. The Cuban government needs to heed what it has heard from Senators and now hears from me: if you unjustly imprison our citizens, we cannot and will not improve the relationship between our countries. In a recent letter to the Cuban government, I and several of my Senate colleagues called for the release of Mr. Gross on humanitarian grounds. The government's response has called our request illegitimate. This is not the way to move forward. That is why I will join with Senators Cardin and Moran to submit a resolution that will apply additional pressure on Cuba to let Alan come home. I want to close by sending my continued thoughts and prayers to Mr. Gross, his wife Judy, and their family. I think of the challenges you are facing daily and I remain hopeful that you will all be reunited soon. Your strength and determination inspire me as you face difficult challenges. I urge the government of Cuba to release Alan Gross immediately. I promise I will continue standing up for Alan and calling for his return home to Maryland.