Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I wish to express our deep gratitude for the inspirational leadership and outstanding service to our nation by the U.S. Naval Academy class of 1970. It has been an honor to support the Naval Academy in my capacity as a Senator from Maryland and as a member of the U.S. Naval Academy Board of Visitors for over 20 years. The Naval Academy has a proud history of developing excellence in education and personal character of our past and present, and continues to prepare and train the future leaders of our nation. I am so proud of the class of 1970 for exemplifying the high quality standards of the academy. The Naval Academy class of 1970 started their journey as midshipmen in 1966, during the height of the Vietnam war. They volunteered for the job knowing that after graduation their roles as Navy and Marine Corps officers would be during difficult and demanding times for the U.S. military. That it was such a challenging time for our nation and our military did not deter them, it made them more determined. Their service and extraordinary spirit has enriched and sustained our Nation. I come to the floor today to ensure that their sacrifice and patriotism is remembered and celebrated. From their graduation day on, the class of 1970 set a very high standard. Their accomplishments and careers are impressive. Members of this class fought valiantly in the Vietnam war, the gulf war and other conflicts during the last 40 years. They served in the air, on land and at sea. Members of the class of 1970 have served at the very highest level of our military. They served as commanding officers of warships, combatant commanders, and as the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Twenty-four members of this class achieved flag or general officer rank. Since their early years as midshipmen, they have given of themselves not just on the battlefield but also in their communities on the home front. Whether volunteering at the Boys Club and Big Brothers programs as midshipmen, teaching at our nation's military colleges or volunteering in their community they have generously contributed to the support of academics, ethics, character development, and leadership of our next generation. Even more extraordinary than their time in uniform is the amount the members of this class have continued to give back since their military service ended. This remarkable class has continued to lead by example. They have worked to educate our children, support defense agencies, and to promote community services. Their accomplishments and achievements have reached the highest levels of government, industry, science, law, medicine, education, and religious vocations. Many have continued to fight for our freedom in their roles as leaders of corporations that are vital to our national defense. I admire the spirit of service and dedication to making our country and the world a better place. The U.S. Naval Academy class of 1970 exemplifies the Navy ethos of ``Honor, Courage, and Commitment.'' These values have defined their commitment and dedication to the United States. Like many others before and after them, they have sacrificed long deployments, separation from loved ones, tests and trials that most Americans can't imagine. Some even sacrificed their life doing their duty. I know that new generations of midshipmen and future Naval and Marine Corps officers will be inspired by the rich heritage of service they have passed down to them. As the U.S. Naval Academy class of 1970 gathers to mark forty years of service to our nation and to the U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, Army, and Naval Academy, it is with great pleasure that I offer my gratitude for their service to our country.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business for no more than 5 minutes on the occasion of the passing of Senator Byrd.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I stand today with my colleagues with a very heavy heart to express my condolences to the Byrd family and to the people of West Virginia for losing a great American patriot. It is a very sad day for America, for West Virginia, and for the Senate. For all of us who knew Senator Byrd, we knew he had five great loves: this country, the Constitution, the Senate, the people of West Virginia, and his beloved wife Erma. Senator Byrd was my mentor and my teacher. When I arrived in the Senate, I was the first Democratic woman elected to the Senate in her own right. He took me under his wing and taught me the rules of the Senate. He said to me: Senator Mikulski, he or she who knows the rules will rule. And you will know how to do it. His advice to me--when I asked him how to be successful in the Senate--was this: Senator Mikulski, stay loyal to the Constitution and stay loyal to your constituents and you will do okay. From the very first day, he wanted me to succeed. He was so welcoming. He made sure I became a member of the Appropriations Committee, and he helped me learn how to use my position to meet the day-to-day needs of my constituents and the long-term needs of our Nation. Senator Byrd's career was remarkable. We all know the facts: the longest serving Member of Congress in history, the majority leader in the Senate, chairman of the Appropriations Committee, President pro tempore of the Senate, elected nine times to the Senate. Yet he never, ever forgot where he came from. He represented the people of West Virginia. Born in poverty in the coalfields of West Virginia, raised by an aunt and uncle, he was born with four great gifts: a deep faith, a love of learning, a strong work ethic, and always saluted the fact that he was born in the United States of America, where someone who was, by all intents and purposes, an orphan could become a U.S. Senator. He worked as a gas station attendant, as a meat butcher, and a welder--I might add, a welder in the Baltimore shipyards. He went to night school for college and law school while he was in the Senate. Senator Byrd wrote and passed many laws, but most important to him was that he was an appropriator. He used his position to help the people of West Virginia, and he did not apologize for that. He brought jobs, roads, and opportunity to one of the poorest States in the Nation. He did not call it pork; he called it opportunity. And this Senator would certainly agree with him. But Senator Byrd also voted his conscience and encouraged other Members to do the same. In his 18,000 votes, he was most proud of his vote against the Iraq war. He was one of 23 Senators, and I joined him in that vote. At that time, it was deeply unpopular. Those of us who voted against the war were vilified. But we did the right thing, though it was not easy. If you love the Senate, you love Bob Byrd. He often reminded us that the legislative branch is a coequal part of the government. He fought hard against those who wanted to give up Senate prerogatives, such as the line-item veto. No one understood Senate procedure better and no one protected Senate traditions more than Senator Bob Byrd. He wanted to pass it on. With the new Senators, he gave each one of us a lecture on the Constitution and gave us a copy of the Constitution. He wanted us to know it and to love it in the way he did. He also taught us the decorum of the Senate--yes, the decorum of the Senate--and how, through our processes and procedures, it was meant to promote civility among us. To me, as I said, he was a wonderful teacher. I remember going to him when I was ready to offer my first amendment on the floor, and I asked for his advice on how I could present it and how I could not, quite frankly, be rolled. He gave me good, concrete advice. On the day I offered my first amendment, there was Senator Byrd in the background. He was always there. As I said, Senator Byrd always had my back. I was so grateful for having his advice and having his encouragement. He lived an extraordinary life and left an extraordinary legacy. He stood for citizenship, not partisanship. And maybe that is what we should all do. Follow the Constitution. Stay loyal to our Constitution. Stay loyal to our Constitution and our constituents. Use the rules of the Senate to promote civility and good government. And also make sure that at the end of the day, we respect the opportunity and greatness of the United States of America. I mourn the passing of Senator Byrd, but his legacy will live on in the rules and the traditions and the many bills he sponsored. The people of West Virginia have had great Senators. Senator Rockefeller is a great Senator. And Senator Byrd will always be remembered, that he built a ``bridge to somewhere'' for all of the people of West Virginia.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to support the passage of the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions conference report. Mr. President, you know me. I am a plain and a straight talker, so I am not going to use the flowery language of diplomacy or Senate speak on a lot of the language. I am going to say this in plain English. Today, if you want to improve the safety and security of the United States of America, you want to pass this bill. If you want to make sure we ensure the safety and security of our allies in the Middle East, you want to pass this bill. If you want to identify who is one of the major enemies of the United States and our allies, it is Iran. If one looks at the world, peace in the Middle East lies not through Jerusalem but lies through Tehran. What does Tehran do? Tehran funds Hamas, which is causing untold heartbreak and bloodshed in Gaza. No. 2, it funds Hezbollah, funding untold terrorist activity in the north of Israel and in Lebanon. No. 3, it is also working to develop nuclear weapons. We do not want Iran to have nuclear weapons. What has Iran been doing over the last several years? They have had a record of denial and deception in developing nuclear weapons, in processing weapons-grade uranium. They have also been developing the method for delivering nuclear weapons, the so-called Shahab-3 ballistic missile. It is capable of striking Israel, U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even parts of Europe. We do not want Iran to continue to develop nuclear weapons. We have been down this road before. And people say: Right, let's stop them, let's go to the U.N., hoo-ha for the U.N. We have done hoo-ha with the U.N. We have had several sanctions. We had one most recently passed that our administration worked very hard on, and we thank our allies for that. But the U.N. sanctions, though a good first step, are quite tepid. They are tepid because there are other members of the Security Council who want to keep doing that business with Iran. You might want to do business with Iran, but Iran has no business developing nuclear weapons. The United States, therefore, has to pass these unilateral sanctions. That is why I support them. It is the United States, the indispensable Nation, that can come up with the muscle to be able to do this. This is a very serious matter. If Iran continues to develop these weapons, it is going to destabilize the world. First of all, it emboldens the regime that is currently in power. That regime is no friend to peace, it is no friend to stability, it is no friend to us or our allies. Second, a nuclear Iran would destabilize pro-western Arab states. Those states with strong ties to the United States are apprehensive about Iran continuing to develop nuclear weapons capability. Also, nuclear arms and missiles could pose a major threat to the United States. A nuclear Iran would spur in the region a nuclear arms race, and it would end a lot of our antiproliferation efforts. These sanctions are absolutely important. I think they are very creative, and I think they go right to the heart of the Iranian leadership's pocketbook. One of the most creative aspects of this legislation is the sanctions on Iran's petroleum industry. Iran has oil wells, but it does not have a major refining capacity. It imports over 40 percent of its gasoline. This legislation in this bill that targets refined petroleum products I believe could have a crippling effect. With its importation of 40 percent gasoline and the need for them to have enormous subsidies to keep gasoline low with their population will be very effective. It also targets Iran's banking system. Essentially, it says it requires foreign financial institutions to choose between doing business with Iran or doing business with U.S. banks. Make your choice. If you think the future lies with doing business with Iran, that is one view. But if you see your future doing business with U.S. banks, I think the path is clear, and they will choose the safety and security and reliability of doing business in the United States. I also like the fact that it strengthens the prohibitions on activities on the nuclear program. What was also spoken about--and I salute my colleague from Arizona for also insisting on this--is the support for human rights in Iran. We all remember that awful day when this wonderful, heroic young woman who wanted to engage in the civic activities in her own country-- Neda--was gunned down in her own country by her own people. Recently, I watched a very telling and poignant documentary about Neda and the dissidents in Iran. What a wonderful group of young people there is in that country. Wow, wouldn't we like to see them flourish? Wouldn't we like to see a modern Iran that joins the community of nations, promoting peace, stability, increased literacy, and opportunity in that country? I am for those human rights' people. I am not only going to mourn Neda as a symbol, but I think the way we can mourn Neda is to back the people like her in Iran. And I really do support this human rights activity by imposing travel restrictions and financial penalties on those who crack down on human rights in Iran. Some countries on the Security Council, as I said, are more concerned about their relationships with Iran for investment purposes. We have to start thinking about investing in the safety and stability of the world. I urge the passage of this Comprehensive Iran Sanctions Act, and I say this is a good and important step. And those who vote for it--and we are going to do it on a bipartisan basis because when we do that, we govern the best--are also going to have to stand ready to really have a very muscular and aggressive approach to the enforcement of these sanctions. I look forward to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to minimize the opportunity for Iran to continue to get its nuclear weapons and to practice its denial and deception, to promote a free and open Iran, to stand with the dissidents, and to promote human rights. Let's look for a more modern Iran in the 21st century. They have a great history. I want them to have a great future and to join the community of nations in a nonproliferation environment and work for the good of us all. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

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

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. What morning business this is. For those of us in the National Capital region, this is indeed a very solemn day. One year ago today, nine people died on Washington's Metro. We were shocked and horrified when a red line Metro train struck another train. Eight passengers were killed, including one Marylander from Hyattsville. A train operator also died, and over 50 passengers were injured. Those men and women died not as a result of a terrorist attack or of sabotage, these deaths happened because of Metro. It was a failure of management, it was a failure of technology, and it was a failure of the culture of safety at Metro. Today our hearts go out to those families, those who lost loved ones and those who bear the permanent injuries of that fateful day. Since that day there have been 4 more deaths at Metro. This brings the total to 13 deaths in the last year. Let me repeat that--13 people died by Metro in the last 12 months. After that June 22 crash 1 year ago, four Metro employees died on the job. One last August was a track repairman from Silver Spring who was hit by maintenance equipment. In September, another employee died. A communications technician was hit by a train. In January, two more Metro employees died. They were automatic train control technicians when they, too, were struck by a maintenance truck. Well, in December, I said enough is enough. We always say a grateful nation will never forget after a terrible accident and we go to a memorial service. Well, for me what happened at Metro was not a memorial service, it was a call to service and for action by us. The best way we can honor the memory of those who died and those who were injured is to reform Metro. I have called for that reform. In December during my testimony on rail safety legislation I introduced, I spoke out and said it was time for change at Metro. They needed new leadership. They needed a fresh approach. They needed to adopt a culture of safety that was unrelenting in terms of their focus on the details to protect the people who work on the Metro and the people who ride the Metro. I was shocked to learn there are no Federal safety standards for any Metro. So whether we are talking about the National Capital region Metro or New York's subway system or California's subway system, there are no Federal safety standards. That is why I worked with NTSB and the Federal Transit Administration to develop legislation that would do two things: give our own U.S. Department of Transportation the authority to establish and enforce Federal safety standards so we would have uniformity, conformity, and metrics for measuring safety on the Metro that we help fund. It also would require the U.S. Department of Transportation to implement the National Transportation Safety Board's recommendation list which includes requiring that railcars have crashworthy standards, emergency entry and evacuation standards, and regulations for train operator shifts. We have safety standards for commercial airplanes. We have safety standards for buses that carry passengers. But we do not have safety standards for railcars that are used in subways. I think that is wrong. What we also found was that safety inspectors that are part of a unique governing system were denied access to the Metro tracks. That is when we said we needed to find out what was going on. I called for a Federal audit of Metro, a Federal investigation of just what was going on there. Thanks to Secretary LaHood and FTA leader Peter Rogoff, well known to those of us in the Senate, they did an outstanding audit which was indeed an outstanding service for us all. Their findings were shocking, hair-raising, and chilling. What did we find out? Supervisors and train operators did not exactly know where Metro workers might be doing maintenance on the tracks until they actually saw them. Can you imagine? People driving the train had to see with their own eyes their workers to make sure they did not hit them. There was no technological warning system. Operators weren't given the exact location of workers on the tracks. Information was generalized and workers were often in different locations than what operators were told. So the Metro itself was a lethal tool. Metro did not have the manpower to implement its own safety programs. It did not have a list of the top ten safety hazards and concerns. The list goes on and on about the audit. I held a very vigorous oversight hearing, both Senator Cardin and myself. We pushed Metro to come up with a checklist for change. We insisted that they come up with this checklist. I demanded that they give it to us right then and there. They told me they were going to be working on it, and I said: Look, tell me what you are going to do. Well, listen to how ground shaking it was: Replace the oldest railcars on the fleet, develop a realtime automatic train control redundancy system, strengthen the expertise of the safety department, complete the roadway worker protection program, develop a training and certification program for bus and rail personnel, strengthen employee knowledge of rules and rules compliance, develop an accident and investigation database, create a strong internal training tracking database, fill vacancies in the safety department, and improve the agency's safety culture. Imagine, it took a Senator holding a public hearing to get a must-do list on the safety list for change. This is unacceptable. We have to make sure we have Federal legislation. We need to do two things: We need to have Federal legislation, and we need to have Federal funding. I want to make sure we save lives on the Metro. This is why I introduced safety reform legislation. I understand the Banking Committee is considering it. Well, the Banking Committee needs to pass it, and the Banking Committee needs to pass it before the July 4 work break. I know the Banking Committee has a lot on their plate. I know they are trying to regulate Wall Street. Good for them. Three cheers for them. We want that. But while we are making sure people do not lose their money on Wall Street, we have to make sure they do not lose their lives on Metro. So I ask our friends on the Banking Committee, could we kind of get this done this week, next week, before the July 4 break? The bill does three things: It gives the Secretary of Transportation the authority to establish and enforce safety standards, including those standards for railcars and making sure there is an employee safety certification training program; it also requires oversight of the agencies monitoring safety to be independent; it funds federally approved State oversight agencies to make sure they have the rules of the road and the resources to do it because we regulate so much of this at the State level. I am pretty worked up about this. I hope we move the bill. I hope we move it before the break. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, America is facing a catastrophe in the gulf. I rise today to speak about the President's address to our Nation last night and my recent trip to the gulf. I agree with the President that BP must stop the leak, clean up the oil, and end the economic hurricane they have caused on the gulf coast. I agree that BP--not the taxpayers--must be liable for costs of cleaning up the mess, for compensating businesses, fisherman and families, and for their economic losses. BP must set aside a fund of $20 billion or more today that they don't control to pay all economic claims in a fair and timely way. I like that the President focused on the Nation's long range energy needs. We do need to move our energy policy forward. And I am so pleased the President picked Dr. Don Boesch for the new National Commission to prevent and respond to future spills like this one. Dr. Boesch has strong ties to Maryland. He has been president of UMD Center for Environmental Science since 1990 and serves as Governor O'Malley's science adviser. He's also a man of Louisiana, born in New Orleans and a graduate of Tulane. He knows the issues of Louisiana and he's got a special place in his heart in looking out for Maryland. I also agree with Billy Nungesser, president of Plaquemines Parish, LA. He believes we should bring every asset we have to fight this thing. The people of Louisiana need to see more action on the ground and we can't just rely on BP's word to get the job done. We need to organize and mobilize our own government. Right now we are acting like a bureaucracy rather than a fighting force to protect the beaches and the people from the consequences of the oilspill. I hope in the coming days, the President will insist on defining what success is. This administration needs goals and metrics for shore clean up that will be adequate. They must establish a mechanism for monitoring, oversight and relentless follow-through. Right now, no one but BP knows what is going on. There has been a lot of reporting on inputs--but not enough on outcomes. We need structure for oversight and we need to know the outcomes of our actions. The President also needs to insist on expediting permits. When I was on the gulf coast last week, I heard from locals that their ideas on how to protect coasts are stuck in bureaucracy. We need to unstick the bureaucracy. This is a national emergency that needs an aggressive national response. We are all in this together. I went to the gulf coast as chair of the Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee, which funds the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA. NOAA is in the gulf right now telling us where this oil is going, helping to cleanup the shores and marshes and assisting fishermen who are hurting. I also went as the Senator from Maryland. I wanted to talk to scientists first hand to find out how the spill could impact Maryland. Will it affect our beaches and treasured Chesapeake Bay? Last week, I saw the catastrophe in the gulf. We met the people, we saw the beaches, and we saw the impact on the wildlife. And everywhere we went, we saw oil and the consequences of oil. I spoke to people whose livelihoods depend on the gulf. When we talk about what we saw-- words like ``Louisiana,'' ``Grand Isle'' and ``Pelican Island''--I also think of words like ``Ocean City'' and ``Assateague,'' Maryland's own barrier island. What we saw was the good, the bad, and the ugly. First, we met with the people, and I saw just how resilient they are. They have real grit and are determined to do something to save their communities. We coastal people need to be on their side. We saw communities where they would ordinarily have thousands of visitors with busy fishing charters. Now, it's like a ghost land. The beach looked more like a military base than an ocean resort, with trucks going up and down, carrying booms and all kinds of response equipment. And when you go out to sea, on a boat or in a helicopter, you see this oil creeping closer and closer to the shoreline. We are concerned about the environmental impact, but we are also concerned about the human impact on lives, livelihoods, and safety. Next, we asked--is the oil going to come up the east coast in this so-called ``loop current or loop stream?'' We were told the beaches of Ocean City will be safe. Even in the worst case scenario, the oil won't get beyond the Carolinas. Second, we were told that the seafood is safe. It is being inspected locally by NOAA and the FDA, so what is coming to the American marketplace is safe. That's what we were told, but I believe what Ronald Reagan said: ``Trust, but verify.'' Maryland's economy is tied to the Louisiana economy. Our seafood restaurants and markets rely on what's caught in the gulf. I am holding a Maryland delegation meeting to make sure that we bring in ocean scientists and seafood inspectors to verify that our Atlantic coast beaches and our Chesapeake Bay will stay oil free and our seafood will be safe to eat. That was the good news. The bad news is BP. The BP people have to fix this. BP is cutting corners, minimizing the situation, and now here we are. The oil will continue to gush, and it will gush until August. But the oil coming out of the well will take 6 weeks to get to shore, so we are going to feel all of this well into September. And that is the best case scenario. I support our President in calling for an escrow account for BP to put $20 billion aside for economic damages. I fear the hoarders will take charge. I fear BP will file for bankruptcy and will want the taxpayers to bail them out. The American taxpayer will not bail out the oil companies. The oil companies must put aside the money to pay damages and cleanup costs. Our own bureaucracy needs reform. We saw the can-do spirit there among the people, but the permit process is slow--whether it is the EPA, Corps of Engineers or NOAA. This needs to be reformed. And this stuff, called dispersant sounds like if you pour chemicals on the oil the oil will disburse and everything's fine. I am concerned that dispersants could be causing more problems than they are solving. I am concerned about the toxic impact on human beings and marine life creating dead zones off the coast of Louisiana. That is why I plan to hold a hearing. To learn more about the effects of these dispersants--what do we already know, what do we need to know, and what research needs to be done--because I don't want dispersants to turn out to be the DDT or Agent Orange of the oilspill. It is our job in Congress to push the bureaucracy, to push BP to get the job done and protect the American people. Then, we saw the ugly. The so-called protective booms were dysfunctional and in disarray, saturated with sticky smelly oil that had been there for days and no one had come to pick them up or clean them up. They were breaking loose and some washed up in marshes, causing far more damage than the oil. If they couldn't protect the few miles around the pelicans areas, how can they protect the beaches? They have got to do a lot better job. It took four Senators going to Louisiana to get the booms cleaned up near Grand Isle. There are no performance standards to make sure BP or the government are doing what they say they are doing and that it is working. There must be relentless follow-through by the government. The Coast Guard is treating BP as if it were another government agency, when the Coast Guard needs to take BP to task. They need to make sure that they have performance standards and they need to make sure that there is follow- through. After witnessing the catastrophe in the gulf and seeing the way the oil is impacting the people, the communities, and the environment, I am so glad that we in Maryland opposed offshore drilling. No matter what is the energy policy I will always oppose offshore drilling off of the Mid-Atlantic coast. We can never let what's happening in the gulf happen to any other communities. Our first responsibility will be to the Nation's taxpayers, not to the oil companies. Our second responsibility is to the people of the gulf, to do all we can to protect them. We need to make sure that we contain the oil and can clean it up so they can get on with their lives and their livelihoods. I was honored to be able to go and represent Marylanders there because we are coastal people too. When I talked to the people down there who fish and crab, we talked about how we use the same kind of bait, we use the same kind of line, the same kind of ways. We cook them a little bit different--but we eat them all the same. And when they held our hands, they said when you go back to Maryland and Washington, don't ever forget us. And we won't. We are all Americans, we are all coastal people, and we are all in this together.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the resolution of disapproval offered by Senator Murkowski. This resolution is a stunning departure from the science of climate change. It jeopardizes our ability to address a continuing threat to our national security and public health by overturning EPA's science-based finding that global warming pollution endangers the public health and welfare. The United States is making progress--in solar, wind and other alternative energy sources--job creators that will sustain our future. We are also making progress in reducing the harmful pollutants in our air which threaten future generations. But this resolution would not continue this progress--it would take us back by weakening the Clean Air Act, a proven tool in addressing air pollution. But what would taking away EPA's ability to protect the health and welfare of Americans from greenhouse gas pollution mean in our day to day lives? For the people of Maryland, who are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change because of the state's expansive coastline, it would mean our coasts would be eroded at an accelerated pace---many areas losing more than 260 acres a year. It would also mean steadily rising sea levels in Ocean City, which could lose billions of dollars in tourism. And, it would lead to a rise in asthma and lung disease rates, which already disproportionately hits our urban areas, like Baltimore. With these clear threats to our livelihoods, now is not the time to take a major tool out of the toolbox that could help combat the prevalence of greenhouse gases in our daily lives. This is politics as usual in a time where we need solutions. The resolution being considered today sends the wrong message to the American public, to our businesses and to the world. It sends the message that the U.S. Congress is not taking the threats to our environment seriously. It sends the message to our businesses that it is okay to continue with the status quo. And in a time where we need the innovation, the technology, and the workforce that is committed to transitioning the United States to a clean energy society, this is not the message that we want to send. The message that we need to send is that we are committed to a national energy policy that protects our families, protects the quality of our air and water, and creates jobs for the 21st century. The timing of this resolution is also very concerning. In recent weeks, due to the crisis in the gulf, we have seen what our unhealthy addiction to oil can do. This resolution will prevent progress that we have made in breaking this. Without these regulations in place, Americans will use 455 million more barrels of oil, which equals the amount of oil that would be in the gulf if the spill raged on for 65 years. We must break this cycle. The U.S. Senate must make it clear how we will deal with the reality of climate change. Stripping the authority of the EPA to address the issue is not the way to make progress. Instead it is a serious and counterproductive step backwards. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this resolution.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the following statement by Patrick Corvington, chief executive officer of the Corporation for National and Community Service, printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, the Restoring American Financial Stability Act is supposed to regulate Wall Street, not Main Street. It is Wall Street whose greed brought us the economic crisis. That is why I am voting for the Brownback motion to instruct conferees to support the House provision regarding the regulation of auto dealers. We need a tough financial reform bill that focuses on the abuses that led to the economic crash. This bill is intended to primarily regulate major institutions that deal nationally and globally and to improve government coordination to ensure that there is an early warning and an early response system in place to prevent a future crisis like the one we were faced with in 2008. Automobile dealers were not part of the problem that led us to where we are today and therefore should not be subject to this legislation. We must make sure that laws that are already on the books are being implemented and enforced. Under current law, car dealers are subject to extensive Federal regulation. Dealers' retail financing activity is regulated by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Trade Commission, and car dealers are subject to tough Federal laws, including the Truth in Lending Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Those laws must be enforced. Predatory lending practices must be stopped, and there are tools in place to do so. I believe that auto dealers are best regulated by State and local consumer protection agencies. Main Street should be regulated by people who are closer to its daily activities. Governors and attorneys general must make sure that consumers are protected from bad actors. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should focus on Wall Street, not Main Street, and should not be used to increase unnecessary regulations on small businesses. During debate on the Brownback amendment, it became clear that the men and women of our military have been targeted by unscrupulous auto dealers. This is an outrage. I never want to see our military personnel being taken advantage of. Our service men and women have dedicated their lives to this country, and we have a responsibility to make sure they, and their families, are treated with respect and that we do everything we can to reduce their increasing stress. That is why I voted to create an Office of Service Member Affairs within the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to educate the men and women of our military, and their families, to make better informed financial decisions and to strengthen coordination of consumer protections for members of our military. We must crack down on those who are taking advantage of our military families and communities. However, I do not think we need a new regulatory structure to do so. A Washington regulatory agency is not the best suited to regulate outside of military bases in Maryland or North Carolina. As I said on the floor when we began debate of this bill, now is our opportunity to pass real financial reform that puts in place the strongest consumer financial protections and ensures the greed of Wall Street doesn't trump the needs of Main Street. That is why I support the House provision on the regulation of auto dealers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, the Restoring American Financial Stability Act is supposed to regulate Wall Street, not Main Street. It is Wall Street whose greed brought us the economic crisis. That is why I am voting for the Brownback motion to instruct conferees to support the House provision regarding the regulation of auto dealers. We need a tough financial reform bill that focuses on the abuses that led to the economic crash. This bill is intended to primarily regulate major institutions that deal nationally and globally and to improve government coordination to ensure that there is an early warning and an early response system in place to prevent a future crisis like the one we were faced with in 2008. Automobile dealers were not part of the problem that led us to where we are today and therefore should not be subject to this legislation. We must make sure that laws that are already on the books are being implemented and enforced. Under current law, car dealers are subject to extensive Federal regulation. Dealers' retail financing activity is regulated by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Trade Commission, and car dealers are subject to tough Federal laws, including the Truth in Lending Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Those laws must be enforced. Predatory lending practices must be stopped, and there are tools in place to do so. I believe that auto dealers are best regulated by State and local consumer protection agencies. Main Street should be regulated by people who are closer to its daily activities. Governors and attorneys general must make sure that consumers are protected from bad actors. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau should focus on Wall Street, not Main Street, and should not be used to increase unnecessary regulations on small businesses. During debate on the Brownback amendment, it became clear that the men and women of our military have been targeted by unscrupulous auto dealers. This is an outrage. I never want to see our military personnel being taken advantage of. Our service men and women have dedicated their lives to this country, and we have a responsibility to make sure they, and their families, are treated with respect and that we do everything we can to reduce their increasing stress. That is why I voted to create an Office of Service Member Affairs within the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to educate the men and women of our military, and their families, to make better informed financial decisions and to strengthen coordination of consumer protections for members of our military. We must crack down on those who are taking advantage of our military families and communities. However, I do not think we need a new regulatory structure to do so. A Washington regulatory agency is not the best suited to regulate outside of military bases in Maryland or North Carolina. As I said on the floor when we began debate of this bill, now is our opportunity to pass real financial reform that puts in place the strongest consumer financial protections and ensures the greed of Wall Street doesn't trump the needs of Main Street. That is why I support the House provision on the regulation of auto dealers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud today to recognize one of Maryland's native sons, Dr. Earl S. Richardson, who will retire later this month after a quarter century at the helm of one of Maryland's finest institutions of higher education: Morgan State University. Situated in the northern part of Baltimore City, Morgan State University has been designated as Maryland's Urban Public University. It is also one of four exemplary public historically Black universities, HCBUs, in the State of Maryland, each of which has been offering students a chance and a choice when it comes to higher ed for more than 100 years. Institutions like these across the country have been accruing an incredible benefit to African Americans and the communities they serve. Historically Black colleges and universities produce nearly a quarter of our Nation's African-American public school teachers. They also produce almost 40 percent of African-American graduates in physics, math, biology, and environmental sciences. Morgan State has been no exception. During Dr. Richardson's tenure, the university has seen enrollment increase by 35 percent--margins that exceed any other public college or university in the State. But the quality of applicants has not suffered; Morgan State was able to swell its student ranks while attracting top-notch students. Morgan State now offers 14 doctoral programs and is known nationally and internationally for its doctoral programs in engineering and the sciences. Morgan consistently graduates a majority of all African Americans in Maryland with Ph.D.s in engineering. These graduates are among the most sought after by American industry. In addition, Morgan's patriotic tradition through its strong Army ROTC program is exemplified by the fact that it has produced more four-star African-American generals in the U.S. Army than any institution in the Nation except West Point. Over the last 10 years, Morgan State has graduated 10 percent of the Nation's African-American undergraduates pursuing a degree in physics. Also, under Dr. Richardson's leadership, Morgan State currently leads all other public institutions in the State in bachelor's degrees earned by African Americans. The university also leads the State in graduating math, science and engineering undergrads--a critical achievement given our country's need to cultivate graduates ready to enter a 21st century workforce, where mastery of math and science is the name of the game. Morgan is also one of the leading producers of Fulbright Scholars in the Mid-Atlantic region. Dr. Richardson's vision and leadership didn't end there. He also found time to sit on President Clinton's advisory board on HBCUs, serving as its chair in 1998; was chairman of the National Association for Equal Opportunity in Higher Education, NAFEO; and participate as a member of the American Council on Education, ACE. I have no doubt that his contributions will benefit current and future students from across the Nation for years to come. But more than all of these accolades, Dr. Richardson's tenure as president of Morgan has been about fighting for opportunity for young people from often economically challenging backgrounds and neighborhoods, many the first in their family to attend college. His steadfast commitment to provide them with an urban university that provides them with the means to a better way of life and a career in the sciences or business or engineering, is a testament to his belief that a college degree is often the helping hand young people need to achieve success and realize their full potential. I have been a member of the Senate nearly as long as Dr. Richardson has been president at Morgan State, and over the past two decades I have had the pleasure of enjoying this great man's support and friendship. On behalf of myself, and speaking for the thousands of students who have matriculated at Morgan over the past 25 years, I would like to recognize and thank my friend, Dr. Earl Richardson, for a lifetime of extraordinarily distinguished service in the field of education. Well done!

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to a distinguished scholar, accomplished leader, and a treasured member of the Maryland family, Dr. Richard Roca, director of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab, who will soon step down after a decade of distinguished leadership and service in that position. The Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Lab is a national treasure. Since it was created in the early days of the Second World War, APL has helped maintain our Nation's military, our intelligence agencies, our space community, and our medical profession on the cutting edge of technological achievements. Now the largest university affiliated research lab in the Nation, the dedicated scientists, engineers, technicians, and researchers at APL have time and again solved the problems no one thought possible, and in the process kept us safe and secure. Since 2000, Dr. Roca has led this uniquely talented and diverse team of world renowned scientists as they rose to the challenges of the post-September 11 world. Dr. Roca was the right leader at the right time to guide APL through these fast-paced and challenging times. Like many visionary leaders in his field, Dr. Roca understands that for a forward-leaning, high-tech institution like the Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab can never be static. He knows that in order for APL to play its role solving the problems of the 21st century and helping our Nation's national security apparatus adjust to an ever-changing world, that APL itself must continually be updating and reinventing itself. Dr. Roca's leadership over the last 10 years has embodied that mindset on continual improvement and self-reinvention. During his tenure, APL adapted to a changing world by expanding its roles and capabilities into homeland security, cyber defense, space exploration, and information-centric operations. After September 11, under Dr. Roca's leadership APL established the Electronic Surveillance System for Early Notification of Community-Based Epidemics--ESSENCE--at APL to monitor the threats from new diseases in the United States. That system is now on watch across the country to provide early warnings against new epidemics created by nature or by terrorist activity. Dr. Roca was also one of the first to recognize the threat from cyber attacks and call for comprehensive cyber defenses. It was under his leadership that APL established major partnerships with the National Security Agency to develop and test new cybersecurity tools. These are just a few examples of how Dr. Roca saw the world changing and mobilized APL to meet the new challenges. We are safer for his leadership in keeping APL on the cutting edge of helping counter new and emerging threats to our national security. Dr. Roca also kept APL on the cusp of new explorations in space and science. During his tenure, APL helped design, build, and send satellites into space that have explored the Eros asteroid; that are enroute to explore Mercury and Pluto, and which play valuable roles in understanding the Sun's impact on Earth's atmosphere. These contributions to understanding and exploring our universe cannot be overstated. They are major achievements that will lead to decades of scientific study and achievement. So as Dr. Roca comes to the end of his tenure, I want to thank him for his tireless service, his devotion to excellence, his dedication to the mission of the Applied Physics Lab, and for his inspired leadership in keeping APL at the cutting edge of keeping our Nation safe and advancing valuable science in hundreds of different areas. We wish you the very best, Dr. Roca, in whatever the next chapter in your professional life holds for you. Wherever that takes you, know that you will always and forever be a member of the Maryland family.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak on the issue of financial services. Before I do, I wish to say to the Senator from Massachusetts, Mr. Brown, that we in Maryland express our condolences to him and his loss. We have suffered many of our own. We are comrades in arms in this moment of grief. We salute him and respect the family.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to talk about an issue about which I care very deeply and have fought for all of my life. That is financial services reform. I am not a Janie-come-lately to this issue. In 1999, I opposed the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act which led to the crisis we have today. I was one of eight Senators to vote against the repeal of the Glass- Steagall Act which tore down the walls between conventional banking and investment banking. Had that bill been defeated in 1999, we would have not had the crisis that faced us in the last 2 years. My family, too, has fought over generations to protect consumers and expand access to credit. At the beginning of the old century when the downtown banks would not lend to people such as my family, whom they regarded as on the other side of the tracks, my grandfather, along with other small business people in the area, got together and started a savings and loan to serve that community. They lent to people who did not have access to credit. They lent to small business owners, such as my father, who opened a grocery store. They lent to women, such as my grandmother, who opened a bakery. When tough times came during the Great Depression, this savings and loan wanted to make sure that people would not lose their homes. If you paid a nickel a week on your mortgage, you were current. I was raised in that sense that financial institutions should be on the side of the people and they should have access to the American dream to buy a home, to start a business. As a young social worker working in Baltimore's African-American community, I saw, once again, there was no access to credit. The African-American community was sidelined and red-lined. What we saw were these local payday vendors who had names such as Happy Harry. Why was Harry so happy? It was because he was charging 18 to 20 percent interest for a loan. I got together with the people in the community at the parish council and we were able to start a credit union so there would be access to credit and end the scamming and scheming and gouging of those hard- working people. I continued that fight in the Senate. I helped create a task force in Baltimore to end that scheme and scam. I also worked as the Chair of the Commerce-Justice-Science Appropriations Subcommittee. I made sure in 2009, working with Senator Shelby and listening to the comments of Senator Dodd, that we put extra money in the Federal checkbook so the FBI could come after the financial fraud crowds, the mortgage fraud, the securities fraud. It sure was not the Securities and Exchange Commission. They were too busy sitting on their wingtips while money was flying out the door with these terrible lending practices. As we deal with this bill pending before the Senate, the Restoring American Financial Stability Act, I want you to know I support this bill. I have been a reformer and a watchdog all of my life. I have a deep suspicion of how big banks treat the little people and what they do with the little people's money. Time and time again, we see the consequences of loose regulations and wimpy and tepid enforcement. Yes, I said it, wimpy and tepid enforcement. Time and time again, I voted for more teeth and better regulation and more enforcement. I always wanted to be sure it was Main Street that got access to credit, and I was against the unfair and abusive practices of Wall Street. Here we are again in this financial situation where we bailed out the big banks. We bailed out the whales, we bailed out the sharks, and we have left the people in the community, the little minnows, to swim upstream and be on their own. Now is the time to right this reform. Now is the opportunity to pass real financial reform that puts the strongest consumer protections in financial reform and to ensure that the greed of Wall Street does not trump the needs of Main Street. We need to put government back on the side of the middle class. If we can bail out the banks, how about we make sure we protect the middle class against fraud, duplicity, and gouging? People with limited access to credit are being victimized, abused, and defrauded. It is both a crime and a shame. Since the people who do it have no shame, maybe we have to make it a crime. In fact, I think we ought to make it a crime. When they get out of their pinstripes and start wearing orange jumpsuits and stand out in the crowd on visiting day, rather than cruising parents' weekends, maybe they will have some remorse, and maybe they will be ready to change the nature of their practices. When I travel around my State, whether it is in diners or grocery stores, there is anger and frustration in people's voices. They are mad, and they are scared. They have watched Wall Street executives pay themselves lavish salaries while they are worried about their job and being laid off. They have watched Wall Street mortgage brokers profit off irresponsible lending while their husbands work an extra shift to make sure they can make the monthly mortgage payment. And they have watched big firms take very risky gambles with their money without any regulation. It essentially was casino economics. This is why people are mad, and they are losing trust in government. People they counted on to protect them did not. What infuriates the people of Maryland and of this country and me is there is no remorse by Wall Street about what they did. Nothing about their behavior suggests they have learned or even care what is wrong. Look at what happened with AIG after receiving $170 billion in taxpayer money. They paid themselves $165 million in bonuses. I stood on the floor and said ``AIG'' stands for ``ain't I greedy.'' I do not want to have catchy phrases. I want to have concrete, enforceable, tough regulations. Again, what bothers me is the lack of remorse and a commitment to reform. Right or wrong, if you are in a 12-step program, people usually say that one of the ways to right those wrongs is to say ``I am sorry'' and mean it. I did wrong and I will never do it again. I want to make amends by making it right. Not these guys. They need us to have a tough approach to this situation. They say: We will never do anything like that again. Actually they do not even say that. What we need to do is to make sure we have the strongest regulations. We have an opportunity now to choose between real reform or business as usual. Consumers need protection in regulation to guarantee the safety of their deposits and the availability of basic banking services. Small business needs credit to grow so that they can create a job for themselves and for those in their community. And we need to hold Wall Street accountable. We need to make sure there are no taxpayer bailouts ever again and to ensure when banks take risks, they do it with their own money, not with money out of the deposits of hard-working people. The bill before us is an excellent bill. It provides a 21st century regulatory framework for the financial system. No more scheming, no more scamming, no more preying. It is time to pass this bill. There are amendments pending that I think will also help to improve the bill, but I think it is time that we pull the sharks out of the tank, make sure the whales do not crush the little guy, and to make sure that the minnows get a chance and that we have an economy that is swimming. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, if there is one thing that we should all be able to agree on, it is that the American taxpayer should never again have to bail out a Wall Street firm. We need to be fighting for Main Street, not Wall Street, and the Boxer amendment is a step in the right direction on that path. This amendment sends a clear message to Wall Street firms that they can no longer take risks with our financial security and then expect the taxpayers to be there to prop them up. Wall Street must be held accountable. It is time to end to taxpayer bailouts once and for all. When I talk to people in Maryland, I hear their frustration and I feel their anger. They want to know, why should AIG receive a bailout, when nobody is bailing out them from this economic crisis? They wonder, who is on their side? Who is going to bail out their stagnant wages? Who is going to bail them out when they are trying to pay their utilities and put gas in the car? And, seniors wonder who will bail them out as they try to make sure they do not lose their income. This amendment shows that we heard their concerns and we are on their side. It sends a message to Wall Street that their time of running around acting like masters of the universe--with irresponsible lending practices and risky investments--has come to an end. And, it sends a message to American families and small businesses that their government is looking out for them. We are here fighting for them--fighting so that consumers can be sure that their deposits are safe; fighting so that small businesses have access to the credit they need to create and retain jobs; and fighting to make sure that taxpayers' money is protected. We teach our kids at a young age that they will be held responsible for their own actions. When they make a mess, they must take responsibility and clean it up. We must pass this amendment so that corporate America can see that the same lesson applies to them, and to show the taxpayers that we are serious about being stewards of their money. This amendment makes sure that if a Wall Street firm gets in trouble, they will be required by law to clean up their own mess. If a company gets in trouble from this point forward, the responsibility will be placed where it belongs--on the financial sector. No longer will taxpayers be standing by. I support the Boxer amendment because I believe it is time to put an end to all taxpayer bailouts.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, it is with great sadness that I rise to commemorate the life of a great woman and civil rights pioneer, Dr. Dorothy Height. Her passing this morning is a great loss to our country, but each day her legacy lives on, in civil rights, women's rights, and addressing the social problems that face our Nation. Dr. Height was present at every turn when it came to advancing and pushing for social change. Born in Richmond in 1912 and raised in Rankin, PA, Dr. Height faced her own struggles for equality, none of which slowed her drive for social progress and change. She earned a scholarship to Barnard College, only to be denied admission when they had reached their quota of Black student admittees that semester, two. After completing college at New York University, she began her career as a social worker, working to help the poorest citizens. She worked for the YWCA in 1937, which brought her to Washington. She became the president of the National Council of Negro Women in 1957, and held that position for 40 years. She played a key role in every aspect of the civil rights movement. A favorite phrase of Dr. Height's was that ``if the times aren't right, you ripen the times.'' She was a crusader for justice, and never stopped fighting for an empowerment agenda. Dr. Height was an instrumental voice in making this country a better place for people of every race, faith, and gender. From school desegregation to fair pay for women, Dr. Height was there, breaking down barriers to equality. Dr. Height was a sister social worker. Like me, she believed that real change must come from the local community. I was proud to recognize her life's work by introducing the Dorothy I. Height and Whitney M. Young, Jr., Social Work Reinvestment Act, to expand the number of social workers to combat the social problems facing our Nation. Today we honor the life and legacy of Dorothy Height, a tireless fighter for social justice and the empowerment of all people.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to bring attention to Equal Pay Day. It is today, April 20, that represents how long women had to work into 2010 to earn what men made in 2009. It is an unfortunate occasion. Women make this country run--we are business leaders, entrepreneurs, politicians, mothers and more. But we earn just 78 cents for every dollar our male counterpart makes. Women of color get paid even less. As a U.S. Senator, I am fighting for jobs today and jobs tomorrow. I am on the side of a fair economy and I am the side of good-guy businesses. We need an economy that works for everyone. I was proud to sponsor the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act in the Senate, and even prouder to stand next to President Obama as he signed his first bill into law. This law overturns the Supreme Court's decision in Ledbetter v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. so that the laws against pay discrimination apply to every paycheck or other compensation a worker receives. This protects victims of discrimination and allows them to file a lawsuit any time that they find they have been treated unfairly. But more needs to be done. The next step is the Paycheck Fairness Act. This bill will help close the wage gap between men and women. It will help empower women to negotiate for equal pay, create strong incentives for employers to obey the laws already in place, and strengthen enforcement. It is time to recommit to closing the wage gap. From the day I first entered Congress I have worked hard to guarantee equality to everyone under the law. I firmly believe that all forms of discrimination should be prohibited. I believe people should be judged by their individual skills, competence, unique talents and nothing else. And once you get that job because of your skills and talents you better get equal pay for equal work. It is time to tell all of those who have suffered wage discrimination--it is a new day.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I, too, join with my colleagues to rise to express my deep and heartfelt condolences to the people of Poland on this unbelievable and tragic loss. I thank my colleague Senator Durbin for organizing this time, joined by Senator Johanns of Nebraska. As one who notes the Senate floor today, I see we stand here not as Democrats and not as Republicans but as Americans who want to extend our heartfelt sympathy to the people of Poland. I thank my colleague for organizing this resolution and for all of his efforts in support of Poland--from the years of trying to get the truth out about the Katyn Forest, to his very able and unstinting efforts to bring Poland into NATO and to advance Polish democracy. I thank him. I rise here today as a granddaughter of a woman who came from Poland over 100 years ago, when women did not even have the right to vote. When she got off of that boat at Fells Point in Baltimore she was a 16- year-old girl in search of the American dream. Little did she dream that less than 100 years later, her granddaughter would stand on the floor of the Senate, advocating for democracy in Poland, righting the wrongs of World War II. And little did I realize, with the great honor the people of Maryland have given to me, that I would stand on the floor of the Senate and express sympathy at this tragedy of unimaginable magnitude. Poland has suffered a loss where the wounds might not ever heal. The facts are now well known. Poland lost their President, Lech Kaczynski, a great leader with a lifetime of service to this country. The Polish people lost their First Lady, Maria, beloved by the people for her good works and her good deeds. More than 90 other dedicated Polish patriots perished that terrible Saturday morning--esteemed and decorated military officers, the equivalent of our Joint Chiefs; experienced diplomats; elected leaders; the head of their central bank, and citizens who have put their lives on the line for Poland. All were Polish patriots. My heart weeps for the terrible loss and for the people of Poland. We know the terrible story of the Katyn massacre that brought them to this site, this unbelievable site for the last 70 years saturated with incredible melancholy. In the spring of 1940, the Soviet secret police executed over 20,000 Polish prisoners of war--20,000 Polish military officers. Then there were other intellectuals from law, from science, from medicine. A whole generation of Polish patriots and lenders was murdered in that terrible place, people who died for Polish freedom. Part of Stalin's efforts to destroy the Polish people was to destroy its leaders. The Nazis then continued what Stalin had begun. Then the world--after a brutal war, the terrible death camps--at Yalta and Potsdam the West abandoned Poland, and Poland, against its will, was forced behind the Iron Curtain. What do we know about the Polish people? Their nation never dies because their nation does live not only in a government, not only now under a rule of law and a constitution that is serving them so well at this troubled time, but Poland lives within the hearts of its people. No massacre, no Iron Curtain, could ever take it away from them. During those dark years when Poland continued to be under Soviet domination, there were those who worked to tell the story of what happened at Katyn. Joining with my colleagues in the Congress, I fought for many years to release the information about that horrific massacre, even contacting President Gorbachev, as part of his glasnost and perestroika, to at least release all the information. Finally, in 1990 they began to do it. But it was only now, last Wednesday, 1 week ago, at the site where the massacre occurred, the Prime Minister of Poland, Mr. Tusk, with Mr. Putin, met in that forest where Putin issued a formal apology to the Polish people and said all information and archives would be open. We were so filled with joy. It was a time of great reconciliation. That is what Saturday was about, it was the continuation of a great and grand reconciliation between these nations. Kaczynski traveled to bring the leadership there. In the leadership were people who had been trail blazers. Mr. Kaczynski himself had been a member of Solidarity, his wife solidly at his side. And now, as he was President of Poland, forging new relationships, mending the wounds with the Jewish community, it was a time of Polish leadership reaching out to the world in efforts of reconciliation. In this case, Russia reached back. One of the people who died--it was so poignant--was a woman named Anna Walentynowicz. She was in many ways the Rosa Parks of Solidarity movements. She was a crane operator in the Gdansk shipyard. They fired her for trying to form a union and when Anna stood up, so did Lech Walesa, and Solidarity was born. When he leapt over that wall he took the whole world with him. Down it came, after years of martial law and occupation. We had Solidarity and then ultimately a free Poland. At this time of great tragedy as we honor those who died in the forest in 1940, and those who died in the forest on Saturday, we can see that hopefully some good would come out of this. It has been a triple tragedy--the massacre of 1940, the coverup by the Soviet Union, and now the Saturday airplane crash. But out of this we hope would come a new sense of cooperation. I acknowledge that the Russian Government has been working with the Polish Government to recover the bodies and send them home with dignity and honor. Their promises of a complete investigation seem to be unfolding and they have invited Polish officials to join with them, side by side. We hope out of this tragedy might further come other acts of great reconciliation. That is what we need to think about, how Poland continues to move the world to peace and to reconciliation. I want to acknowledge the people from Poland and what they did for the United States. Pulaski helped fight in our Revolution. Kosciuszko built West Point, was one of the architects of the American Revolution. When he went back home to help Poland be free, he left money with Thomas Jefferson to fight for the abolition of slavery. Through all of the wars, Poland has always been on the side of the West. During World War II, those who would escape from Poland led the armies in exile. They were at Monte Cassino, they flew in the Kosciuszko Squadron with the RAF, they have been at our side in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wherever there is a fight to be made for freedom, the Poles are there and they need to know, when they make those fights, the United States of America is with them. For those who died on Saturday in that terrible, melancholy forest, our hearts go with them. To the people of Poland we express our sympathy, but we also express our pride in their stalwart, unrelenting, unflinching commitment to peace and justice in their own country and in the world. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak in favor of the TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act. Last month, President Obama signed the health care reform bill into law. It was a historic day. For the first time in American history we committed to ending the abuses of the insurance industry. We committed to covering every single American. It extends the solvency of Medicare for nearly a decade. It ends the punitive practices of insurance companies that deny coverage based on gender, age, or race. It expands universal coverage to 32 million Americans who have been without insurance. And we pay for it with an emphasis on wellness and quality. We say goodbye to quantity medicine by emphasizing quality medicine. It was a very big deal. But there is more to do. I voted for health care reform because I listened to the people of Maryland at diners and in the grocery store, at roundtables, tele-town halls, in hearings, and in letters and emails. Time and again I heard, ``Save my Medicare.'' I heard, ``Don't take my mammograms away.'' I heard, ``They turned me down for health insurance because I had a C- Section.'' I voted for health care reform because I listened to the stories of the people. I know that the best ideas come from the people. Over the recess I heard from another group in Maryland. I met with my wonderful Veterans Advisory Board. They represent Vets from World War Two to Desert Storm. They are my eyes and ears in the veterans' community. One of my board asked me a question. He said, ``We think health care reform is great but we think there is a problem.'' The part of the health care bill that extends parents' health insurance to kids age 26 and younger left out military families. I promised him that if there was a problem, that I would fix it! Wow was he right. Military families in the TRICARE system were left out. TRICARE is a critical benefit for our military and their families. It covers active duty military, retired military, Coast Guard, National Guard and Reservist in a certain status, and the uniform corps of the Public Health Service and the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. They were all left out. That is why I am here today--to right this wrong. I am proud to join Senator Udall and my colleagues in introducing the TRICARE Dependent Coverage Extension Act. This bill says that if military children can't get insurance through an employer that their parents can keep them on their TRICARE insurance until they reach age of 26. This is the right thing to do. If the kids of a hedge fund manager can stay on their parents' health care until they are 26, then kids in military families should be able to be covered to age 26 too. I am so proud of the men and women of our military. I stand here today saluting them for their honor, courage, and commitment to our country. Make no mistake. I have my marching orders. I commit to making this right for them. I will fight to see this bill signed into law. Because promises made must be promises kept.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this is indeed a great day because we are passing real health care reform for American families, for American workers, for American small business, for seniors, and our communities. Health care reform will save lives. No longer will dreams and lives be endangered because people lost their health care insurance when they got sick, lost a job or had an accident. I listened to the other side which says they listen to the people. You heard the old saying, ``Men are from Mars, women are from Venus.'' I think that party is from Mars and we are from planet Earth. I think they have been out in orbit. The planet Earth that I am on tells me to pass health insurance reform. One of the reasons I am voting for this bill, the main reason I am voting for this bill, is the stories I heard from my constituents in Maryland--roundtables, townhalls, hearings, lots of letters, phone calls, e-mails. They told me about the situation in their lives, where they were terrified that one big health care incident could lead them into bankruptcy. They were terrified that if they had changed a job to one in our new high-tech communities that would have offered great opportunity for them--they didn't take it because they were not going to have health insurance. When I listen to people, I think about the lady in Cumberland who works full time, but her employer does not provide health insurance and she is terrified that she is one sickness away from a catastrophic situation, or from Karen, in Kensington, whose father had to quit work because he had Crohn's disease. He was making payments on his insurance. He was two payments short, and they canceled his insurance. It took him 6 months to try to get it back. He lost his coverage, and he was only 59 years old when he passed away. Then there were the breast cancer survivors, the wonderful women and the men they love who are out there raising money for the cure. But even in a prosperous community such as Annapolis, a woman told me how she lost her job and with it her family's health insurance, and when her insurance ran out, she was terrified she would lose her cancer treatment. Walking around the diners--and I love diners. I see myself as a diner Democrat. In every diner it is usually multigenerational people. What do they tell me? Barb, don't forget the old people. Senator Barb, no matter what, keep Medicare stable. If you are 50 years old, you are terrified your parents can lose their Medicare and it is going to fall on you. The sandwiches they are eating are eaten by the sandwich generation, worried about the oldtimers' health care, worried about keeping their own, and then trying to figure out how they were going to pay for college. Medicare has multigenerational implications. This is why in this bill I am so proud of the fact that we are going to stabilize Medicare for another 10 years and do very important reforms in Medicare. I am also pleased to respond to the people who said no matter what, make health care available and affordable. For every parent who has ever worried about covering a child with a chronic illness, whether autism or cerebral palsy or juvenile diabetes, they will always be able to get health insurance. The small business owner, such as my own father who once had a grocery store or my grandmother who had the best bakery shop, worried about how they were going to provide individual health care for themselves--this generation will not have to worry about that. This bill is an exceptional one. We save Medicare, expand its solvency for another nearly a decade. We end the punitive practices of insurance companies. We expand uniform access, and we pay for it with an emphasis on wellness and quality, saying goodbye to quantity medicine and emphasizing quality medicine; goodbye to volume medicine and getting value for our dollar. For our seniors, one of the most important things we will do is close that doughnut hole. The doughnut hole has been hard to swallow ever since this bill was passed. We are going to provide a $250 rebate for seniors who hit the gap in the prescription drug benefit and also offer a better discount on prescription drugs. I am also very excited and honored because of the role I played in making sure we ended the punitive practices of insurance companies toward women. For too long, in too many ways, they treated simply being a woman as a preexisting condition. First of all, they charged us 30 percent to 40 percent more just simply to be able to get insurance. Then they would have the punitive practices of denying us health insurance for a preexisting condition. In eight States, domestic violence was viewed as a preexisting condition. You talk about being abused--you were abused by your husband, then you were abused by your insurance company. We are not going to be battered anymore by these companies. We ended that in this bill. Then there was the hearing that shocked and chilled me, a hearing on gender discrimination in insurance. A woman told a compelling story, Peggy from Colorado, that after she had a C-section and a premature baby, the costs were high. She lost her health insurance and when she went to apply they told her in order to get health insurance, because she had a premature baby, because she had a C-section, they would not give her health insurance unless she was sterilized. I couldn't believe it. That is what fascist countries do. That is what authoritarian regimes do. It was not the Taliban in Afghanistan, it was an insurance company in Colorado. We took up that fight and ended those abusive practices in this bill. Never again will a woman be able to be denied health insurance because of any preexisting condition. We ended gender discrimination in charging women more. But as the debate went forward, they wanted to take the mammograms away from us and they didn't want to put mammogram and preventive services for women in the bill. They said it costs too much money. I didn't want to hear that. I asked the women to suit up and come to the floor and we offered an amendment. The good men of the Senate also joined us. Many remember we wore pink that day. Today we are in the pink as well. We offered our amendment to ensure preventive services for women so that if your doctor says you need a mammogram, you are going to get one. If you need screening for cervical cancer or a Pap smear, you are going to get one and you are not going to have to pay a copay and a deductible. But like the old song ``Bread and Roses,'' we fight not only for women, but we fight for men too. Because for us it is not gender, it is about the agenda, and the biggest agenda is to make sure we provide health care to as many Americans as we can in the most affordable way, with value, quality, and prevention as their underpinnings. We were able to make significant changes in this bill. But affordability is an issue. I believe we dealt with that by emphasizing quality. At Senator Kennedy's request, I led the quality task force. Because of proven ways that we are going to be able to offer in these initiatives, we are going to be able to increase the affordability of this bill to make people healthier. We want to prevent disease and manage chronic disease. By the emphasis on the management of chronic disease, we are going to save lives and save money. First of all, we are getting more value for the dollar. Yes, we will be looking at comparative effectiveness, so when you go for a treatment or you buy a drug, you know we are getting value for the dollar. The other is, we are going to emphasize the reduction of medical errors and also medical infections in hospitals by introducing quality initiatives that reward hospitals for being able to do that. But I also listen to the providers. I represent iconic international institutions such as Johns Hopkins medical institution and the University of Maryland. I listen to my primary care doctors as well. They said: Senator Barb, please reduce the hassle factor; too much paperwork and not enough time to be with patients; too many contradictory rules from the insurance companies and not enough of a clear path on what we can do to be able to help people. So we made sure we are going to save money by reducing the hassle factor by simplifying administrative costs, by emphasizing medical health information technology. We are going to promote evidence-based medicine through this comparative effectiveness research. We are going to also reward, following the recommendations of the Finance Committee, the encouragement of medical homes in order to be able to manage chronic disease. These are the many reforms that are in this bill and that I am very proud of. I am also, as the daughter of a small business owner, excited about how we are going to be able to help small business be able to provide health care to their employees. The fact that we are going to offer tax breaks for small business and be able to have health exchanges where they can buy those health care policies at a better cost is indeed important. So, again, the other party might be Mars, but I am glad my feet were planted in planet Earth, by listening to the people I represent, by listening to their concerns and then listening to the excellent ideas that came from both the people themselves and, I must say, the people who are the providers who could help us lead the way. I am going to vote for this bill. I know there is much to reform in it in the years ahead. But this is more than a beginning, this is a leap into the future. It is a leap we can take with confidence that when this bill passes with reconciliation, we will have won a major historic advance for the American people. Our job is about creating opportunity and opportunity to have health care is one of the greatest benefits we can provide. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud today to support the student loan reform provisions in the Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010. I've said this often, we in this country enjoy many freedoms: the freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, the freedom of religion. But there is an implicit freedom our Constitution doesn't lay out in writing, and its promise has excited the passions, hopes, and dreams of people in this country since its founding. The freedom to take whatever talents God has given you, to fulfill whatever passion is in your heart, to learn so you can earn and make a contribution--the freedom to achieve. When I was a young girl at a Catholic all-girls school, my mom and dad made it clear they wanted me to go to college. But, right around graduation, my family was going through a rough time because my dad's grocery store had suffered a terrible fire. I offered to put off college and work at the grocery store until the business got back on its feet. My dad said, ``Barb, you have to go. Your mother and I will find a way because no matter what happens to you, no one can ever take that degree away from you. The best way I can protect you is to make sure you can earn a living all of your life.'' My father gave me the freedom to achieve. And the provisions in this bill will give millions of Americans that same freedom without adding a dime to the deficit. For too long, banks have gotten a free ride from the U.S. Department of Education by offering federally guaranteed student loans. The provisions in this bill will stop wasteful and unnecessary subsidies to lenders and put that money where it is needed most--in students' pockets. By reforming the Federal student loan program, we will save over $60 billion in the next 10 years. Many of those savings will go to increase the Pell grant, which has made college a reality for students of modest means for nearly half a century. But we also make critical investments in institutions that help our most underserved students: community colleges and Minority Serving Institutions, particularly Historically Black Colleges and Universities, HBCUs. I have fought alongside my colleagues for years to increase funding for these programs and there was a point where Democrats had to fight tooth-and-nail just to keep Pell funding from being cut. Now we are in a position where we can guarantee increases in the Pell grant, which helps more than 90,000 students in my home State of Maryland. My colleagues have spoken eloquently about the importance of the much- needed investments in this bill, but I would like to take a moment to highlight the investments in HBCUs. I am the only senior Democrat on the HELP committee that has HBCUs in their State, and I have been a long-standing champion for these schools in both my work as an authorizer on the HELP committee and as an appropriator through my chairmanship of the Commerce, Justice, and Science Appropriations Subcommittee. I am proud that Maryland has four public HBCUs which provide an incredible benefit to African-American students and the communities they serve. Few people know, but HBCUs produce nearly a quarter of our Nation's African-American public school teachers. They also produce almost 40 percent of African-American graduates in physics, math, biology, and environmental sciences. Some of my colleagues might argue that HBCUs shouldn't be getting Federal funding based primarily on the racial makeup of their student bodies and, further, that there is no longer any place for these institutions in this day and age. What I would tell them is that Congress has been providing direct Federal support for HBCUs for more than 50 years mainly for two reasons. First, Congress recognizes the historical and cultural importance of HBCUs and their benefit to students who are often the first in their families to go to college. Second, the emergence of these institutions was a direct result of Federal action permitting the segregation of students in public education based on race. During those dark days, HBCUs were often the only pathways to college for African Americans; they were able to open the doors of opportunity that were so often shut. But these institutions are historically under- resourced, and their students are by and large underserved. For that reason they have had to fight for representation, respect, and recognition since they were established. They've had to urge lawmakers to act ``now'' on behalf of their students when so many have told them to ``wait.'' So I am here to make sure that the more than 20,000 students at Maryland's HBCUs get the resources they deserve by supporting the $850 million investment in HBCUs over 10 years enabled through this reconciliation bill. Maryland is slated to get $65 million, and I am confident that the presidents of Morgan State University, Coppin State University, the University of Maryland Eastern Shore, and Bowie State University will be good stewards of this landmark Federal investment. Our work isn't done when it comes to equity in access for higher education, but this bill helps us get there.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to vehemently oppose Senator Lieberman's amendment to reauthorize the District of Columbia Opportunity Scholarship Program. This amendment would extend a program that impacts fewer than 5 percent of the District's public school children, and, after more than 5 years in operation, has proved to be little more than an ineffective exercise in ideologically driven education reform. The DC Opportunity Scholarship Program has minimal impact and scant evidence of any academic benefit to the students who participate in the program. It also siphons vital Federal money away from DC families that enroll their boys and girls in public schools. I would rather see that money invested in research-driven, high-impact education initiatives that benefit public schools open to all children. Let's invest more in DC's early education programs, so that moms and dads have kids ready for kindergarten when they get there. Let's boost funding for teacher recruitment to bring the best teachers into DC's most challenged schools, which can have a tough time recruiting top talent. Let's invest in the renovation and modernization of DC's oldest school buildings, so students and families are guaranteed safe, clean, and healthy learning environments. Let's ramp up funding to improve DC's special education programs, so that parents aren't forced to send their children to costly, private special education providers. I can understand why parents would be excited about the opportunity to send their child to a private school. I myself am the product of a Catholic education. But I cannot reconcile that potential benefit to parents with the fact that certain members of Congress believe they can act like DC's school board. I believe the District of Columbia should have a voice and a vote in Congress; that they should receive statehood. I believe they should control their own money. And, I believe that if DC would like to have a voucher program the DC School Board should vote for it and pay for it with local, not Federal, tax dollars. I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing Senator Lieberman's amendment.