Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today as an original cosponsor of a bipartisan bill to award the Congressional Gold Medal to the Women Airforce Service Pilots--the WASP. We are introducing this bill in March, which is Women's History Month. It is time to honor and recognize women who have made a difference in our Nation's history. It is a time to honor women who serve as role models. That is exactly what this legislation does. The WASP were women pilots from across the Nation who volunteered to serve in World War II. They flew America's military aircraft during the war, risking their lives in the service of their nation. They came from all walks of life, but they came together to serve our country as the first women trained to fly American military aircraft. They faced overwhelming cultural and gender bias, received unequal pay, did not have full military status, and were barred from becoming military officers, even though their male counterparts performing similar duties all received officer rank. In 1943, General Arnold combined two women flying organizations and formed the Women Airforce Service Pilots. Within months, these women paid their own way to Texas to enter training. Each woman was already a licensed pilot, a requirement not imposed on men to apply to flight school. The WASP were still required to learn to fly ``the Army way.'' The WASP were assured they would be militarized and become part of the Army. These promise were not kept. The WASP took the same oath of office, they marched, but as pilots, they received less pay than men. They did not receive benefits. No VA benefits, no GI bill, no burial rights for the 38 WASP who were killed in service to our Nation. Fellow WASP had to ``take the nickels out of the Coke machine'' to help send their bodies home. Over 25,000 women applied to be part of the war effort in the WASP. Many volunteers received a telegram asking for their service. Ultimately, 1102 women earned their wings as pilots. Thirteen of these brave women were from Maryland: women like Barbara Shoemaker, who joined from the Women's Auxiliary Flying Squadron; Elaine Harmon, who as a WASP trained male pilots in instrument flying; Iola Magruder, who flew the B-18 ``Bolo''; Jane Tedeschi, who stretched all night before joining the WASP so she could meet the minimum height requirement; and Florence Marston, who flew the B-26 ``Widowmaker,'' notorious for its number of early accidents. These brave women flew over 60 million miles in 2 years. They flew every type of aircraft and every type of mission as the men, except combat missions. They towed aerial targets while being shot at with live ammunition. They transported cargo. They tested repaired aircraft. They ferried aircraft from factories like Fairchild in Hagerstown, MD, to points across the country. They were stationed at 120 air bases throughout the country. The WASP were not established to be a replacement for the men; instead, they enabled men to fly the combat missions. They found and fulfilled the service they could. These women were committed and they believed they could do what our country needed at the time we needed it. The WASP were disbanded in December 1944, when they were told they were ``no longer needed.'' Just as they paid for transport to training, they paid their own way home. For 33 years their military records were classified. For 33 years, their contributions were hidden from historians and textbooks. For 33 years, these brave women were denied veterans benefits. These women were trailblazers. They displayed honor and courage and flew the most complex aircraft of the age. They are patriots. They are an inspiration to today's women in aviation. They opened the door for today's women to fly in the military in aircraft ranging from cargo and trainers, to fighters and bombers, and even the space shuttle. They inspire young girls to pursue technical fields and aviation. They are role models who deserve to be honored. We owe the WASP our ``thank you''--not in words, but in deeds. For their courage, service and dedication to our Nation, they deserve the most distinguished honor Congress can give: the Congressional Gold Medal.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, as if in executive session, I ask unanimous consent that the nomination of Thomas L. Strickland to be Assistant Secretary of Fish and Wildlife, sent to the Senate by the President on March 12, 2009, be jointly referred to the Committees on Environment and Public Works and Energy and Natural Resources.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 10 a.m. tomorrow, Tuesday, March 17; that following the prayer and the pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there then be a period for the transaction of morning business for up to 1 hour, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the second half; further, that following morning business, the Senate resume consideration of the motion to proceed to H.R. 146, the legislative vehicle for the lands package; and, finally, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess from 12:30 p.m. to 2:15 p.m. to allow for the weekly caucus luncheons.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, tomorrow the Senate will resume postcloture debate on the motion to proceed to the legislative vehicle for the lands package.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it stand adjourned under the previous order.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize the 10-year anniversary of the expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO. During the debate on whether to expand NATO, I said that this debate holds special resonance for me. Growing up as a Polish American in east Baltimore, I learned about the burning of Warsaw at the end of the Second World War. The Germans burned Warsaw to the ground--killing a quarter of a million people--as Soviet troops watched from the other side of the Vistula River. I learned about the Katyn massacre--where Russia murdered more than four thousand Polish military officers and intellectuals in the Katyn Forest at the start of the Second World War. The tragedies that Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary experienced in the aftermath of the Second World War are etched on my heart. That was the one reason I fought so long and so hard for Poland and the others to be part of the western family of nations. Despite the importance of history, my support for NATO enlargement was based on the future. My support was based on what is best for America. Thankfully when we voted to bring Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary into NATO, the yeas carried the day. Since that day, those three nations have exceeded every expectation as strong allies of the United States, and the naysayers' fears during the debate on the NATO expansion have also been shown as unwarranted. The NATO expansion nations of 1999, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary have more than lived up to their obligations under the NATO alliance. Poland has made enormous investments into all areas of its military. As a result, over the last 10 years the number of Polish troops serving on NATO missions has steadily grown from 1500 to over 3500. Another 300 Polish military personnel serve in prestigious academic and administrative positions in NATO institutions around the world. Polish naval vessels also operate as part of NATO standing reaction forces all over the world, providing cutting edge mine detection and countermeasures expertise. Poland has also emerged as one of the United States' strongest allies in the war against terrorism and extremism around the globe. Polish troops accompanied American soldiers into Iraq when they invaded in 2003, and maintained a mission that grew as large as 2500 troops up until the end of 2008. Nearly 30 Polish soldiers gave their lives in Iraq. Poland also has one of the largest contingents in Afghanistan. Over 1600 Polish soldiers fight every day to stabilize the Afghan province of Ghazni. Nine Polish soldiers have been killed and dozens wounded in Iraq. In closing, I wish to speak a bit about history. My colleagues have heard me speak about Poland's history many times in the past. For 40 years, I watched the people of Poland live under brutal, communist rule. They did not choose Communism--it was forced upon them. Each ethnic group in America brings our own history to our wonderful American mosaic. Bringing these three nations into NATO family of nations 10 years ago was one of the best decisions we made in the post- cold war era. Of all the things I have done in my years in the Senate, this is one of those for which I am most proud.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, as chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies, I rise today to clarify for the Senate the sponsorship of three congressionally designated projects, recipient name of one congressionally directed project, and locations of three congressionally designated projects included in the Joint Explanatory Statement to accompany H.R. 1105, the fiscal year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act. Specifically: Senator Bill Nelson should be listed as having requested funding for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, RAINN, Washington, DC, for national anti-sexual assault programs funded through the Department of Justice; Senator Ben Nelson should not be listed as having requested funding for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, RAINN, Washington, DC, for national anti-sexual assault programs funded through the Department of Justice; Senators Ben Nelson and Crapo should not be listed as having requested funding for the National Police Athletic League, Jupiter, FL, for National Police Athletic League Programs funded through the Department of Justice; ``Union Springs YMCA'' should be listed as ``Union Springs Recreation Program'', Union Springs, AL, for youth mentoring and juvenile justice programs funded through the Department of Justice; Location of the Citizenship Trust at American Village should be listed as Montevallo, AL, for youth mentoring and juvenile justice programs funded through the Department of Justice; Location of the Scottsboro Police Department should be listed as Florence, AL, for the Scottsboro Police Department funded through the Department of Justice; and Location of the Alabama 4-H Foundation should be listed as Columbiana, AL, for juvenile justice prevention programs funded through the Department of Justice.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I support the aim and intent of the Kyl amendment that prohibits any omnibus funding being spent on new contracts with companies that do business with Iran's energy sector. Iran's energy resources provide massive amounts of petro-dollars to this regime. In 2008 alone, Iran made over $65 billion in profits from exporting oil. Make no mistake where these dollars are spent--these profits directly contribute to Iran's ability to arm, train, and fund Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist groups that seek to do Israel, the United States, and our allies harm. Although I support the intent of the Kyl amendment, I oppose it today because it is legislating in an appropriations bill and it would further delay the delivery of $2.48 billion in urgently needed security assistance to Israel which is contained in the bill. Tough, targeted, and enforceable sanctions against Iran must be implemented. I look forward to working on a comprehensive Iran sanctions policy with the Obama administration this Congress.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I am tired of the naysayers who come up with these quirky little congressionally designated projects and make them a subject of ridicule. Our country, our ship of state, right now is leaking. We can right that ship and President Obama is righting that ship. This CJS bill is the right tool to be able to do that. What are the consequences of not passing this bill? I will tell you right now. Let's go to law enforcement. If we do not pass this bill and we put it on something called a continuing resolution, that is essentially keeping it barely afloat. The FBI will get a half billion dollars less to run their agency for this year. If Director Mueller were here, he would say this means 650 fewer FBI special agents. It means less analysts and other people fighting crime on U.S. soil. It means we cannot hire 100 new FBI specialists in forensic accounting to go after the mortgage fraud people. Remember them--the scammers, the bums? We would not be able to do that. Let's talk about drug enforcement. There will be $52 million less for DEA. What are some of the biggest threats facing us right now? Let's talk about Mexico. Mexico is on the verge of a state of siege because of the drug cartels that are running rampant. If you watch the news and listen to the Ambassador of Mexico and to their compelling issues down there--look at what was on ``60 Minutes,'' where the drug cartels are roaming streets with assault rifles, shooting police chiefs, shooting elected officials, kidnapping--that is on our border. We need the DEA. Then there are the narcotraffickers in Colombia--in that long, steadfast fight where we are making progress. Then there is Afghanistan, which provides 85 percent of the world's poppy. We are going to send thousands of more troops into Afghanistan. I am not too excited about that part, but that is a debate for another time. But what is going on in Afghanistan? They are growing poppy like Iowa grows corn. It is an enormous drug crop. What does the money from that do? First, it corrupts Government and elected officials. It corrupts the judiciary. It has a corrupting influence. So we are going to send American troops to fight and die for something that could be bordering on a narcostate? I say, before we send in more marines, let's send in more DEA agents to work with the Karzai government to do something about the growth of poppy and the funding of the Taliban. Let's send in DEA agents. Under this, we are going to have a hiring freeze. Agents would have to take furloughs. But that is OK, that is just in law enforcement. Let's talk about the national space agency, NASA, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency. If we don't do this appropriation, NASA will be funded close to a half billion dollars below what is in the omnibus. This would be a major setback to developing a reliable transportation system to continue our human space flights. We are already going to go dark in space, where we are going to rely on the Russians to get us up to our very own space station. But what this could mean is the loss of several thousand jobs in Florida, Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Utah, and Louisiana. If we don't pass this by the end of March, layoff notices will begin. Aren't we for jobs today and jobs tomorrow? Aren't we for building rocket ships and spaceships? We have to pass this bill. Then when we look at NOAA. We all love the weather reports. We rely upon them for early warnings of tornadoes and hurricanes and, at the same time, to be able to give us traffic. Weather reports don't come from the Weather Channel. The Weather Channel gets its information from the weather services provided by our Government at NOAA. We ought to rename it the ``National Oceans Atmospheric and Weather Administration.'' Right now, they are weathering their own storm. If this continuing resolution hits them, it means more layoffs. We won't be able to develop the right technology to predict and give the early warnings that are so important to our people. Then I wish to talk about education. Through the National Science Foundation, and other science agencies in here, we work to promote education, to get our young people excited and participating in science and technology, so that they want to come into these exciting new possible careers, where they are going to come up with new ideas and inventions. This makes a major downpayment so we can coordinate with our new Secretary of Education and our President, who is such a strong advocate of this. If you wish to have a country that is meeting the day-to-day needs of our own people, yet looking ahead to the long-range needs of our country, you want to vote for this appropriation. You want to vote for the subcommittee portion of this appropriation. The other reason, for those who are concerned about the issue of bipartisanship, is we developed this jointly and collegially and civilly with my colleague from Alabama, Senator Richard Shelby. This bill has his endorsement and it will have his vote. Senator Shelby and I have worked together for many years, and we believe that good people can find common ground, find an accessible center in the rough and tumble of politics that enables us to come before the Senate with a bipartisan approach to the Commerce, Justice, Science bill. I want to thank Senator Shelby and his staff for their cooperation and collegiality in crafting the CJS portion of the bill we are considering. The CJS Subcommittee's top priority is keeping Americans safe from terrorism and violent crime. To that end, our bill provides $26.1 billion for the Justice Department, which is $3 billion above the previous President's budget request. We fund the FBI our domestic counterterrorism agency with mission of dismantling terror cells and weapons of mass destruction on U.S. soil at $7.3 billion, which is $155 million above the previous President's budget request. The CJS bill is the major Federal funding source for our State and local police departments. The previous President's budget request proposed dramatic cuts totaling $2 billion to State and local grant funding. We reject those cuts and instead provide a total of $3.2 billion to support our thin blue line. Among those funds, the CJS bill provides $550 million for COPS grants, which pay for gear and technology--such as bulletproof vests and crime scene analysis--to keep our cops safe, and to help them catch criminals. We also have $546 million for Byrne-justice assistance grants, a formula-based program that is the main Federal funding tool for State and local police operations, which was zeroed out by the previous administration. For juvenile justice and delinquency prevention mentoring and antigang programs we provide $374 million, which is $189 million more than that the previous President request. Lastly, we provide $415 million to prevent violence against women, which is the highest level ever allocated for Violence Against Women Act programs. In addition to helping our State and locals keep our communities safe, the CJS bill funds our major Federal law enforcement agencies. We provide $1.9 billion for the DEA to fight international narcoterrorists and drug kingpins. There is also $1.1 billion for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, ATF, to combat violent gun crime and gangs and investigate arson. The CJS bill contains $954 million for the Marshals Service to apprehend fugitive sex offenders and other violent criminals. We included $1.8 billion for our U.S. Attorneys to prosecute gang leaders, gun traffickers and drug dealers. Lastly, we provide $6.2 billion for management and construction of Federal prisons to ensure our Federal prisons are safe and secure. These agencies are the backbone of our criminal justice system. They enforce our laws, catch criminals and keep our communities safe. Most importantly, this bill protects the most vulnerable among us: our children. We provide over $234 million to keep our kids safe from predators and violence. The CJS includes $5 million to hire 20 new U.S. marshals to track down and arrest fugitive sex offenders, $47 million for the FBI Innocent Images program to catch deviants who use the Internet to prey on children, $5 million to hire 25 new assistant U.S. Attorneys to prosecute sex offenders, $70 million for state and local law enforcement efforts to find and apprehend child predators, and $16 million for grants to school districts to keep kids safe at school. I am proud to report that the CJS bill follows the framework of the America COMPETES Act and makes investments to improve America's competitiveness. The bill provides $819 million for the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which includes $65 million for the new Technology Innovation Program and $110 million for the manufacturing extension partnership, MEP. This is important funding to develop new technologies and new products and make American manufacturers more competitive. We also provide $6.5 billion for the NSF, including $845 million dedicated for education. These funds focus on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and will develop our next generation of scientists and engineers. For the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, we provide $4.4 billion, including: $945 million for our weather service to predict and warn us about severe weather, and $758 million for our fisheries service to protect our marine resources. The bill also provides $17.8 billion for NASA, which is $200 million more than the previous President's budget request. We meet our obligations to fully fund the space shuttle at $3 billion, the space station at $2 billion, and the next generation space vehicle at $3.1 billion this year. Finally, the CJS bill supports an innovation friendly government by providing full funding at $2 billion for the Patent and Trademark Office, PTO, to reduce backlogs of patent applications and protect our intellectual property; and $430 million for the International Trade Administration to enforce our trade laws. The CJS bill also makes important investments in America's future. We provide $240 million for economic development grants--$140 million more than requested by the previous administration--to help communities create jobs and opportunity. We also provide $20 million for public television infrastructure grants. The CJS bill funds the science we use to monitor and predict changes in our weather and climate, and make policy decisions on actions we should take to save our planet. In fact, the CJS bill funds 85 percent of all Federal climate change science. Specifically, we provide $1.4 billion for NASA Earth science for satellite missions that tell us how much pollution is in our atmosphere, our rainforests and ice sheets are shifting, and the height and chemistry of our oceans are changing. Funding for Earth science includes $150 million for new NASA earth science missions, which is $50 million above the previous President's request. This funding is recommended by the National Academy of Science to measure our ice sheets, climate, and atmosphere so we can better predict changes to our planet. We provide $606 million for NASA science into how the sun affects the Earth. This helps predict and warn about events like solar flares that can knock out our communications and power grids. The CJS has $966 million for NOAA weather satellites, which are important early warning tools. If we can better predict and warn when tornadoes and hurricanes are coming, we can save lives and save money. We provide $74 million to restore critical climate sensors that had been deleted from our next generation polar satellites because of cost overruns. We also include $420 million for NOAA research to help us better understand our oceans and atmosphere and how they interact and change. Finally, the CJS bill continues to emphasize congressional oversight, accountability and fiscal stewardship. We meet our constitutional obligations for a timely and accurate Census by providing $3.1 million for the 2010 Census. This will keep the Census on track, despite the previous administration's mismanagement of an information technology contract. The CJS Subcommittee continues its oversight role by cracking down on cost overruns or mismanagement of taxpayer dollars. The bill insists on discipline and vigorous oversight by requiring each agency to notify the committee when costs of projects grow by more than 10 percent, thereby creating an early warning system. We also require that inspectors general conduct random audits of grant funding to ensure compliance. Finally, the bill complies fully with legislative transparency and accountability rules. Again, I want to thank Senator Shelby and his staff--Art Cameron, Goodloe Sutton, Allen Cutler and Augusta Wilson--for their cooperation and collegiality. The CJS bill meets the day to day needs of our constituents by keeping them safe from terrorism and violent crime. It looks out for the long-term needs of our Nation by making investments in America's physical and intellectual infrastructure to create and sustain jobs for today and jobs for tomorrow. For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support it. Amendment No. 608 Mr. President, I rise to oppose the amendment No. 608 offered by the Senator from Oklahoma. Simply put, this amendment is a solution in search of a problem. The CJS portion of the omnibus does provide funds for the Department of Justice to solve civil right cold cases. This amendment is a distraction. Before I speak about why I oppose this amendment, however, we must first talk about Emmett Till. Emmett Till was a 14-year-old African-American boy from Chicago who was murdered in Money, MS, on August 28, 1955. He was dragged from his uncle's home and shot in the head. His body was dumped in the Tallahatchie River, tied to a 70-pound cotton gin with barb wire, and found 3 days later by fishermen. Emmett's mother demanded an open casket to show the world the brutality of his murder. The murder of Emmett Till was a key event igniting the civil rights movement. Emmett's two killers never served a day in jail for their heinous crime. An all-White jury acquitted them in 67 minutes. The killers later admitted to murdering Emmett Till, but could not be prosecuted for the crime because they had already been found innocent by a jury. In May 2004, 49 years after the murder, the Department of Justice reopened the case to finally determine if anyone else was involved in the killing. The FBI exhumed Emmett Till's body and performed an autopsy. Two years later, the FBI determined no one else was involved and officially closed the case. On October 7, 2008, President Bush signed a law named after Emmett Till. The purpose of the legislation is to make sure Justice Department has the necessary resources to investigate civil rights cold cases. Cold cases are extremely difficult to solve. Investigators run into many dead ends, as witnesses are hard to find and evidence can be easily misplaced, mishandled or destroyed. Additionally, investigations use up a lot of time and money resources. However, solving these cases is important. This is about more than just bringing killers to justice. Solving these cases is about letting victims' families get on with their lives, about moving beyond racial hatred, and reconciliation. I want to be clear I support funding for investigating cold cases. That is why I fought hard to make sure there is money in the Federal checkbook for fiscal year 2009 to support the Emmett Till law. The CJS portion of the omnibus provides the Department of Justice with the resources it needs to investigate civil rights cold cases. To boost resources for civil rights cold case investigations, the CJS bill provide $123 million for the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, which is $7 million more than 2008, and charged with heading up the investigation and enforcement responsibilities set forth in the Emmett Till bill. We include $151 million for funding to reduce enormous backlog of untested DNA evidence. There is a backlog of 500,000 unsolved cases with untested DNA evidence sitting in evidence lockers today. So that State and local law enforcement have the means to carry out their roles in investigating civil rights cold cases, we provide $30 million for competitive funds for State and local government to investigate and prosecute civil rights violations. There is also $25 million for competitive grants to State and locals to reduce forensic evidence backlogs. The CJS bill provides $9.8 million for the Justice Department's Community Relations Service to train local law enforcement how to mediate racial tensions in communities. We also have $75.6 million for the inspector general at Department of Justice, which is $5 million more than 2008. Under the Emmett Till law, the Inspector General has the authority to investigate missing children cold cases. In addition to cold case investigations, the CJS bill provides robust funding to enforce our Nation's civil rights laws. It includes $1.84 billion, which is $88 million more than 2008, for the U.S. attorneys office at Department of Justice. These are the attorneys who investigate and prosecute civil rights violations. The bill also has $9 million for the Commission on Civil Rights, which is responsible for making agencies are complying with Federal civil rights laws and raising public awareness on civil rights. Lastly, we include $343 million for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, whose mission is to end workplace discrimination. This is $14.8 million above 2008 and will help reduce the current backlog of EEOC cases. I urge my colleagues to oppose amendment No. 608 and support the omnibus. The omnibus gives Department of Justice the resources it needs to investigate civil rights cold cases and enforce our country's civil rights laws. I have a letter from Attorney General Eric Holder stating his support for the goals of the Emmett Till Act. Attorney General Holder is committed to the goals of the Emmett Till Act, and this letter gives his personal commitment to continuing to use funding to pursue these serious crimes. If the Senate does not pass the omnibus, the Department of Justice will be forced to operate at 2008 levels. This means we will have to lay off investigators and prosecutors, and civil rights enforcement and investigations will be compromised. For all these reasons, I urge a ``NO'' vote on this amendment. I ask unanimous consent that the letter to which I referred be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI. It is time to move the appropriations. We have to make sure our Government can function so our economy can function. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I know the Senate is on a tight timeframe because there will be a joint session of Congress to welcome the Prime Minister of England, our greatest ally. I rise today as the chairperson of the Appropriations Commerce, Justice, Science Subcommittee and to lay out for our colleagues what is in this appropriation and why it is needed and what compelling human needs it meets. No. 1, why do we have to do this since we passed the stimulus? Actually, we should have done this before the stimulus. We should have done it in October. Why didn't we? We didn't do it in October because we were facing a hostile White House and an OMB Director who was hostile to the very agencies this funds. We didn't want to send this appropriations to the Bush White House because all we would have faced was one more back-and-forth parliamentary quagmire. This appropriation keeps the U.S. Government going. What my subcommittee does is fund those agencies that are critical and crucial to the economic growth of the United States of America, that will protect the communities of the United States, and will also work to protect our planet. In terms of economic growth, this is the subcommittee that funds all science agencies with the extension of the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy. It comes up with the new ideas. It follows the recommendations of the National Academy of Sciences about how we can rise above the gathering storm to be competitive today and be able to be competitive tomorrow. In English, and in the diners around Maryland, that would mean jobs today and tomorrow. It is in basic research that we come up with the new ideas that lead to the new products, that lead to the new jobs. That is what this CJS funds. At the same time, it funds the Patent Office. Our colleagues on the Judiciary committee will be giving us a new framework for the protection of patents. That is a geek word that means if you invent it, we are going to protect you, and you will be able to harvest the benefits of your new idea. We are going to protect intellectual property because it is right now, in the knowledge-driven economy, the property of choice to be protected. This subcommittee funds research, innovation, the development of technology. It also funds the Department of Justice--gosh, a Department of Justice that even remembers what the name means. I am so excited about working with our new Attorney General. In addition to the work of the Justice Department, it funds local law enforcement through cops on the beat and Byrne grants, and our national Federal law enforcement agencies--the FBI, Bureau of Alcohol and Firearms, and the Marshal Service. So if you want to know, why should we support the CJS? If you want jobs today and tomorrow, you want to vote for this appropriation. If you want to keep neighborhoods safe, you want to vote for this appropriation. If you want the marshals going after sexual predators so there are no more Adam Walshes, vote for this bill. If you want to protect violence against women, victims of domestic violence, and have the shelters and community interventions, you want to vote for this bill. If you are so proud of the great genius of the United States of America and its entrepreneurship that comes up with these new ideas, these new products, you want to vote for this bill because you want a Patent Office where you don't want to stand in line for years to be able to protect your ideas so they are not stolen or hijacked or pirated around the world. You want to vote for this bill. If you want to protect our planet--global warming is a real threat, from the standpoint of our Director of National Intelligence, who says global warming could destabilize populations, and it is a national security issue. It is not only about protecting the polar bears; it is also about protecting the Port of Baltimore, Chesapeake Bay, our coastline, and those around the world. If you want to protect the planet and our homeland, you want to vote for this bill. In summary, these are the top 10 reasons to support CJS in the 2009 omnibus bill: I ask unanimous consent to have them printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, as chairwoman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies, I rise today to clarify for the U.S. Senate the sponsorship of six congressionally designated projects included in the Joint Explanatory Statement to accompany H.R. 1105, the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act. Specifically: Senators Mark Warner and Webb should be listed as having requested funding for the Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Glouchester, VA, for the Virginia Trawl Survey funded through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; Senator Murray should be listed as having requested funding for the city of Vancouver, WA, for a new records management system funded through the Department of Justice; Senator Cantwell should not be listed as having requested funding for the city of Vancouver, WA, for a new records management system funded through the Department of Justice; Senators Reid, Ensign, Reed, Schumer, Sessions, Smith, Voinovich, Whitehouse, Wyden, Bennett, Biden, Hatch, Kennedy, Kerry, Landrieu, Lautenberg and Leahy should be listed as having requested funding for the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, Reno, Nevada, for the Child Abuse Training Programs for Judicial Personnel: Victims Act Model Courts Project, funded through the Department of Justice; Senators Kohl, Leahy, Reed, Crapo and Whitehouse should be the only Senators listed as having requested funding for the National Crime Prevention Council, Arlington, Virginia, funded through the Department of Justice; and Senator Murray should be listed as having requested funding for the Safe Streets Campaign, Tacoma, WA, for the Pierce County Regional Gang Prevention Initiative funded through the Department of Justice.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I rise in support of the DC Voting Rights Act. I rise from a new seat, a new chair in the Senate. My desk is now moved to the center aisle. I rise from this desk for the very first time to speak about a new opportunity to expand democracy. That is what the DC Voting Rights Act is--it is about democracy, about fairness, and about empowerment. The DC Voting Rights Act simply gives the District Representative full voting rights in the U.S. House of Representatives. I also want to point out to my colleagues that this is not only about the District of Columbia, but this is also about Utah. What this legislation does, in a sense of fairness and parity, is grant a seat to the District of Columbia and an additional seat to Utah. What we are doing is trying to adjust, without amending the Constitution, wrongs that need to be righted. The DC Voting Rights Act gives the District Representative full voting rights in the House of Representatives. Right now, the District of Columbia is represented--and I might add very ably--by Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, a distinguished public servant. She is called a Delegate to Congress. We call her Congresswoman. When she moves around her great area, she is also called that. What is she allowed to do? One, she is able to have a voice. That is important. So the people of DC do have a voice. But in Congress, a voice also usually means a vote. That is where it doesn't work the way we think it should. She is able to vote in her committee, but she is not able to vote on the House floor. We think that is wrong. We think she should have a voice and we think she should have a vote. The residents of the District of Columbia are the only residents in a democratic country in the capital city who do not have a vote in determining the fate and direction of the Nation. What we have essentially done is disempower the over 600,000 residents of the District of Columbia. Yet we do not disempower them when we call them to serve for war. The District of Columbia, through its National Guard, has served ably and willingly. Yet even though they go to fight for the entire United States of America and they are sent to war by the Congress of the United States, they have no voice, no vote in the direction of their own country. This is not right. DC residents go by the same rules and laws as the United States of America. They pay taxes. They pay, by the way, Federal taxes because they see themselves as part of the Federal Government. But the Federal Government does not see that they have full representation. I wish sometime we could have those DC residents who fought in wars in the balconies. They fought through the National Guard, and they fought through the regular military. They have fought and they have died, most recently in Iraq and Afghanistan. But when they come home, they are treated like second-class citizens. I don't think that is right. I also happen to believe if you pay taxes--there was a famous patriot who said: If you pay taxes, you should have representation. If it was good enough for Patrick Henry and Patrick Kennedy, it should be good for us. If you pay taxes to the Federal Government, your representative should have a vote in the Congress of the United States. That is what we want to do today. When we think about all the major issues that are debated in Congress--the economy, health care, education, the direction of our national security--these issues affect the residents of the District of Columbia the same way they affect Maryland or Virginia or Texas or Alabama or North Carolina. Yet the DC residents do not have a vote on these issues. How would you feel, Madam President, if you did not have anyone representing you on those issues or if your Congresspeople could have a voice but not a vote? I think the District of Columbia deserves this, and they have been waiting a very long time. The District of Columbia has been waiting for this for 200 years. Last year when we tried, we fell three votes short. But we are in a new day in Washington, and I hope this new day will be new democracy, the expansion of democracy. We love to expand democracy around the world. Let's expand democracy to the District of Columbia. The District of Columbia has been made the target of congressional pet projects. We often shove ideas at them. We undo what they often want to pass for themselves. We think they should be able to have a vote to exercise the direction both for themselves and for the Nation. Currently, DC residents are represented by a delegate. This would give full voting power in the House of Representatives. It would give Utah one additional representative. This solution is fair, it is nonpartisan, and it will enfranchise 600,000 District of Columbia residents and also enfranchise the State of Utah to have one additional representative that they barely missed in a census that was flawed in many ways. I stand today as a friend and neighbor to the people of the District of Columbia. We in Maryland live next door to the District. Many of the constituents I represent, the sons and daughters live in Maryland, the moms and dads continue to live in the District of Columbia. I know their fierce devotion to this country, the fact that they are proud to be residents of the Capital of the United States of America. They love doing their duty by participating in their community, by paying their taxes, and going to war, if necessary. But they believe participation and taxation should have representation. I believe like they do; we should give it to them and give it to them this week in this Senate. The time is now. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I would say to the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, that is what we intend.

Ms. MIKULSKI. The Senator from Minnesota is right that this is an issue in Maryland, as well as nationwide. As the economic recovery package moves to conference, we will work to ensure mechanisms are in place for this critical program to be quickly and effectively implemented and accessible to those in need of assistance.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I thank the Senator from Vermont working with me to restore funding for this important program. We have worked together in the fight to turn back the cuts made by the previous administration to Federal resources that assist State and local communities in fighting violent crime. I know all too well the importance of the COPS Hiring Program and share your concerns about the effect of the economic downturn on our neighborhoods. We need to make sure those on the blue line have a full team to combat increased crime in communities. My subcommittee recognizes that need, which is why we put $3.5 billion total for State and local law enforcement activities. This includes $1 billion for COPS hiring grants, for which we waived the salary cap for hiring or rehiring career law enforcement officers and civilian public safety personnel.

Ms. MIKULSKI. That is correct as well. The funding I included in the CJS portion of economic recovery package for crime victim compensation programs will be in addition to their annual VOCA grants, and will not be deducted from their annual VOCA grants.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, thank you very much. Then I will get right to it. I have a lot to say in support of this bill. Let me start off by saying we have inherited a terrible mess, but the Senate is taking a major step forward to turn the country around by passing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. By standing with President Obama, we stand for America, to create jobs for people who have lost them and to help those who have jobs keep them. This bill is about jobs, jobs, jobs. Through the rough and tumble of the legislative process, I do believe the Senate has found a sensible center. I compliment all of both sides of the aisle who chose to work with each other to accomplish this. This bill balances spending on the public investments and targeted tax credits that create jobs without exacerbating the Federal deficit. There is much to commend us about the spending bill. The focus on physical infrastructure is absolutely crucial to my own State of Maryland. If one takes something that is not very jazzy to talk about, such as sewers and water grants, I can only bring to the Senate's attention that this stimulus would bring $123 million to Maryland for these projects. But if Governor O'Malley were here, he would say: Thank God. If the people of Montgomery County, Prince Georges County, and Baltimore city were here, they would say: Cheers. Over the weekend, we had a terrible water main break in Maryland, in Baltimore. It went through Madison Street, near one of our most famous Catholic Churches. That church runs a school by the Jesuits, which focuses on giving a Jesuit prep school education practically free to poor boys, helping them to find their way. It closed not because of a lack of funds but because of a water break. Iggy's, one of our most delicious pizza parlors, was flooded with water not with business because of the water main break. Most recently, a big water main break occurred on River Road in Montgomery County. There was a dashing rescue by the brave people, first responders, of the Montgomery County rescue team, snatching people from waters that cascaded through like it was a Maryland ``Niagara Falls.'' We have the money and the will to pay for the daring rescue, but we want to fix essentially what was a tsunami, a local tsunami in Montgomery County. Every time we do this, you have to have jobs for the people who will actually build the water and sewer programs. I could take you on a tour throughout Maryland. But what we are doing is creating jobs, improving the environment and public safety and public health. I could go item after item on these spending issues. Education would be one of the others which is very important. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act creates jobs by investing in our infrastructure. It fixes aging physical infrastructure, like roads, bridges, and water systems. Water mains are aging. Roadways are turning into rivers. Small businesses have to shut their doors. Hospitals can't take care of the sick. A recent water main break in Baltimore closed St. Ignatius, a school that provides a Jesuit education for poor kids. It closed Iggy's pizza parlor, a local Baltimore landmark. It was shut down after the water main break. The owner is not sure when he can reopen his doors. The stimulus provides $123 million for Maryland water and sewer projects. The formula funding to the States is to make low-interest loans to localities and utilities. This means local governments won't have to raise rates or cut services. But not all jobs require a shovel to be ready to go. Some need microscopes and telescopes. High-tech jobs like maritime charting help keep Maryland's economy afloat. There is $80 million to update nautical charts. There is a backlog of 20,000 square miles. Some nautical charts for the bay have not been updated in decades. The channels have changed naturally. So have the boats that go down the channels. Ships are bigger and weigh more. We need accurate charts to make sure boats don't run aground, halting the flow of goods in Baltimore Harbor. It could cause an environmental mess and costly clean-up. Maryland can't afford a maritime accident. It makes major investments in education so families and local school districts can help special needs children. By giving money to the Governor to fill budget gaps in State aid, Prince George's County won't have to consolidate 12 schools, increase class size, or cut 900 positions in central administration. By providing funding for Early Head Start, officials in Baltimore City can start serving the 95 percent--7,600--of low-income infants who are eligible but do not receive nutritional, health, and education services due to a lack of funding. By providing a surge in title I dollars, Carroll County won't have to cut 33 teaching positions that otherwise would be slashed because of tight budgets. It provides a social safety net that helps distressed families. It helps with food stamps and nutrition for seniors. It supports Meals on Wheels so seniors stay in their communities and age in place. Last year, Meals on Wheels of Maryland delivered 780,000 meals to almost 3,000 seniors. Putting food in people's mouths, about 317,000 Marylanders rely on food stamps each month. It expands Medicaid so States can continue to cover those already on Medicaid and expand the program to cover new individuals. About 854,000 children and adults rely on Medicaid in Maryland. For families of three who make about $52,000 this means elderly won't get dropped from nursing homes and children will have health care. It invests in the techno infrastructure, like broadband to expand small businesses. Rural Maryland will be able to sell agricultural products or crafts and antiques on e-Bay, running e-based businesses out of their homes. Or if they lose a job, they can look for a new job online. And telecommuting is an option, so they may not have to move to a city to be near a good job. And it has targeted tax breaks to help families and small businesses, like expanding the child tax credit, helping at least 100,000 poor children in Maryland. It eases the ability to qualify for the refundable child tax credit, and provides up to an additional $2,000 for a family with two children making less than $30,000. Last week we learned that 598,000 people lost their jobs in January. This bill is a victory for America. This bill stimulates the economy today and lays the groundwork for a stronger economy tomorrow. In addition to what was done the other night and what will pass in this stimulus--and I intend to vote for this stimulus--I am so heartened my automobile amendment is included in this bill. It makes interest payments on car loans and State sales or excise car tax deductible for new cars that would be purchased this year. What does it do? It actually gets people in the showroom. It does what Senator Hutchison talked about. I got 71 votes: 41 Democrats and 30 Republicans. What does it do? It saves jobs because it gets people in the showroom to buy a car; and that means for the people who sell the car, for the auto mechanic who fixes it, for the manufacturer who makes it, and, most of all, for the consumers. They get a chance to buy a car that will be far more fuel efficient and also lower carbon. Now, that is what both sides of the aisle have talked about. My amendment makes interest payments on car loans and State sales/ excise car tax deductible for new cars purchased from November 12, 2008 to December 31, 2009. How does this amendment help our economy? It saves jobs. If the domestic auto industry goes bankrupt, the U.S. would lose 3 million jobs, in manufacturing, repairs and service, car dealerships, and science and engineering. It helps consumers. A family would save about $1,553 on a $25,000 car, such as a Dodge minivan. Cars are most families' biggest purchases after their homes. It supports States and local governments. States rely on car excise taxes for their infrastructure projects. More car sales means more revenue for struggling State and local governments. It is urgently needed. To reach viability, the Big Three need U.S. new car sales to be at 13 million a year at a minimum. Sales in December were more than 20 percent below that minimum--10.3 million a year. This is the only proposal that will stimulate demand up the supply chain so that the Big Three's restructuring plans will work. Who would qualify for this tax deduction? Families who make less than $250,000; $125,000 for individuals. The deduction is ``above-the- line''--meaning it can be taken advantage of by itemizers and nonitemizers. It only applies on cars that are less than $49,500. I have a statement from someone whom I never thought I would be in alignment with, the economist Martin Feldstein. He is on the conservative side, and everybody knows you kind of cover me blue. He says what we should focus on is providing incentives to households and businesses to increase current spending. Why not a tax credit to households to purchase cars or other consumer durables? I will quote from his article, dated Thursday, January 29, 2009, in the Washington Post: As a conservative economist, I might be expected to oppose a stimulus plan. In fact, on this page in October, I declared my support for a stimulus. But the fiscal package now before Congress needs to be thoroughly revised. In its current form, it does too little to raise national spending and employment. It would be better for the Senate to delay legislation for a month, or even two, if that's what it takes to produce a much better bill. We cannot afford an $800 billion mistake. Start with the tax side. The plan is to give a tax cut of $500 a year for two years to each employed person. That's not a good way to increase consumer spending. Experience shows that the money from such temporary, lump-sum tax cuts is largely saved or used to pay down debt. Only about 15 percent of last year's tax rebates led to additional spending. The proposed business tax cuts are also likely to do little to increase business investment and employment. The extended loss ``carrybacks'' are primarily lump-sum payments to selected companies. The bonus depreciation plan would do little to raise capital spending in the current environment of weak demand because the tax benefits in the early years would be recaptured later. Instead, the tax changes should focus on providing incentives to households and businesses to increase current spending. Why not a temporary refundable tax credit to households that purchase cars or other major consumer durables, analogous to the investment tax credit for businesses? Or a temporary tax credit for home improvements? In that way, the same total tax reduction could produce much more spending and employment.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, is there a time limit on the speaking time at this time?

Ms. MIKULSKI. My time has expired. Madam President, I ask for 2 minutes to conclude. All I say is this: I thank the Chair for allowing me to offer the amendment. But if you want a car at your house, call the White House or call the House of Representatives. The problem now is not the idea but it is the politics. Let's get the White House on our side. Let's get the House of Representatives on this side. Flood not the streets but flood them with the phone calls. Call these numbers. Let's get America rolling again. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce a bill that is needed by small and seasonal businesses all over the nation. In 2005 I introduced and the Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation to keep these small and seasonal businesses alive. For many years they have relied on the H-2B visa program to meet these needs, but this year they can't get the temporary labor they need because they have been shut out of the H-2B visa program. That program lets them hire temporary foreign workers when no American workers are available. So today, I join with my colleague Senator Specter to introduce legislation that provides a quick and temporary fix to the H-2B problem. The Save our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act of 2009 will help these employers by extending the H-2B returning worker exemption for three years. It does not raise the cap and keeps the limit at 66,000. I urge my colleagues to work with us to pass this legislation quickly to save these businesses and the thousands of American jobs they provide. Many in this body know about the H-2B crisis--a real crisis to thousands of small and seasonal businesses who face a shortage of workers as they approach their seasons. These small businesses count on the H-2B visa program to keep their businesses afloat. But this year, because the cap was reached so early in the year, many of these businesses will be unable to get the seasonal workers that they need to survive. Hitting the cap so early will have a great impact on Maryland. We have a lot of summer seasonal businesses in Maryland on the Eastern Shore, in Ocean City or working the Chesapeake Bay. Many of our businesses use the program year after year. They hire all the American workers they can find, but they need additional help to meet seasonal demands. Because the cap will be reached so early this year summer employers face a disadvantage. They can't use the program, so they can't meet their seasonal needs and many will be forced to limit services, lay-off permanent U.S. workers or, worse yet, close their doors. These are family businesses and small businesses in small communities in Maryland. If the business suffers the whole community suffers. For seafood companies like J.M. Clayton, what they do is more than a business, it's a way of life. Started over a century ago and run by the great grandsons of the founder, J.M. Clayton works the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, supplying crabs, crabmeat and other seafood, including Maryland's famous oysters, to restaurants, markets, and wholesalers all over the nation. It is the oldest working crab processing plant in the world and by employing 70 H-2B workers the company can retain over 50 full time American workers. But its not just seafood companies that have a long history on the Eastern Shore. It's companies like S.E.W. Friel Cannery, which began its business over 100 years ago when there were 300 canneries on the Eastern Shore. But now those others are gone and Friel's is the last corn cannery left. Ten years ago, when the cannery could not find local workers, it turned to the new H-2B visa Program. It has used the program every year since, and many workers are repeat users who come each year and then go home after the season. What's important is that having this help each year has not only allowed the company to maintain its American workforce, but it has paved the way for local workers to return to the cannery. Now these employers can't just turn to the H-2B program whenever they want seasonal workers. First, employers must try to vigorously recruit U.S. workers. These businesses try to hire American workers--they would love to hire American workers. In fact, the H-2B program requires these businesses to prove that they have vigorously tried to recruit American workers. They have to advertise for American workers and give American workers a chance to apply. They have to prove to the Department of Labor that there are no U.S. workers available. Only after that are they allowed to fill seasonal vacancies with H-2B visa workers. The workers that they bring in often participate in the H-2B program year after year. They often work for the same companies. But they cannot and do not stay in the U.S. They return to their home countries, to their families and their U.S. employer must go through the whole visa process again the following year to get them back. That means an employer must prove again to the Department of Labor that they cannot get U.S. workers. This legislative fix keeps that visa process in place. It's a short- term legislative fix to solve the immediate H-2B visa shortage. It does not take the place of comprehensive immigration reform. This legislation is a temporary 3 year fix. It exempts returning seasonal workers from the cap. These are workers who have already successfully participated in the H-2B visa Program. They received a visa in one of the past 3 years and have returned home to their families after their seasonal employment with a U.S. company. Everyone must still play by the rules. Employers must go through the whole visa process, prove they need the seasonal help and only after that are returning employees exempt from the cap. Employees must be those who have left the U.S. and are requesting a new H-2B visa to come back for another season. This new system rewards those who have played by the rules, worked hard and successfully participated in the program. The bill gives a helping hand to businesses by allowing them to retain workers who they have already trained to do their seasonal jobs. This is a quick and simple fix. It lasts three years. And it does not get in the way of comprehensive immigration reform. I worked with my colleagues to get a bill with strong bi-partisan support. A bill that would work. This bill is realistic. It provides a temporary solution because immediate action is needed to help these small and seasonal businesses stay in business. Yes--we need to help them now. Their seasons start soon. If they don't get seasonal workers this year, there may not be any businesses around next year to help. Every member of the Senate who has heard from their constituents-- whether they are seafood processors, landscapers, resorts, timber companies, fisheries, pool companies or carnivals--knows the urgency in their voices, knows the immediacy of the problem and knows that the Congress must act now to save these businesses. I urge my colleagues to join this effort, support the Save our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act, and push this Congress to fix the problem today. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to introduce a bill that is needed by small and seasonal businesses all over the nation. In 2005 I introduced and the Senate overwhelmingly passed legislation to keep these small and seasonal businesses alive. For many years they have relied on the H-2B visa program to meet these needs, but this year they can't get the temporary labor they need because they have been shut out of the H-2B visa program. That program lets them hire temporary foreign workers when no American workers are available. So today, I join with my colleague Senator Specter to introduce legislation that provides a quick and temporary fix to the H-2B problem. The Save our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act of 2009 will help these employers by extending the H-2B returning worker exemption for three years. It does not raise the cap and keeps the limit at 66,000. I urge my colleagues to work with us to pass this legislation quickly to save these businesses and the thousands of American jobs they provide. Many in this body know about the H-2B crisis--a real crisis to thousands of small and seasonal businesses who face a shortage of workers as they approach their seasons. These small businesses count on the H-2B visa program to keep their businesses afloat. But this year, because the cap was reached so early in the year, many of these businesses will be unable to get the seasonal workers that they need to survive. Hitting the cap so early will have a great impact on Maryland. We have a lot of summer seasonal businesses in Maryland on the Eastern Shore, in Ocean City or working the Chesapeake Bay. Many of our businesses use the program year after year. They hire all the American workers they can find, but they need additional help to meet seasonal demands. Because the cap will be reached so early this year summer employers face a disadvantage. They can't use the program, so they can't meet their seasonal needs and many will be forced to limit services, lay-off permanent U.S. workers or, worse yet, close their doors. These are family businesses and small businesses in small communities in Maryland. If the business suffers the whole community suffers. For seafood companies like J.M. Clayton, what they do is more than a business, it's a way of life. Started over a century ago and run by the great grandsons of the founder, J.M. Clayton works the waters of the Chesapeake Bay, supplying crabs, crabmeat and other seafood, including Maryland's famous oysters, to restaurants, markets, and wholesalers all over the nation. It is the oldest working crab processing plant in the world and by employing 70 H-2B workers the company can retain over 50 full time American workers. But its not just seafood companies that have a long history on the Eastern Shore. It's companies like S.E.W. Friel Cannery, which began its business over 100 years ago when there were 300 canneries on the Eastern Shore. But now those others are gone and Friel's is the last corn cannery left. Ten years ago, when the cannery could not find local workers, it turned to the new H-2B visa Program. It has used the program every year since, and many workers are repeat users who come each year and then go home after the season. What's important is that having this help each year has not only allowed the company to maintain its American workforce, but it has paved the way for local workers to return to the cannery. Now these employers can't just turn to the H-2B program whenever they want seasonal workers. First, employers must try to vigorously recruit U.S. workers. These businesses try to hire American workers--they would love to hire American workers. In fact, the H-2B program requires these businesses to prove that they have vigorously tried to recruit American workers. They have to advertise for American workers and give American workers a chance to apply. They have to prove to the Department of Labor that there are no U.S. workers available. Only after that are they allowed to fill seasonal vacancies with H-2B visa workers. The workers that they bring in often participate in the H-2B program year after year. They often work for the same companies. But they cannot and do not stay in the U.S. They return to their home countries, to their families and their U.S. employer must go through the whole visa process again the following year to get them back. That means an employer must prove again to the Department of Labor that they cannot get U.S. workers. This legislative fix keeps that visa process in place. It's a short- term legislative fix to solve the immediate H-2B visa shortage. It does not take the place of comprehensive immigration reform. This legislation is a temporary 3 year fix. It exempts returning seasonal workers from the cap. These are workers who have already successfully participated in the H-2B visa Program. They received a visa in one of the past 3 years and have returned home to their families after their seasonal employment with a U.S. company. Everyone must still play by the rules. Employers must go through the whole visa process, prove they need the seasonal help and only after that are returning employees exempt from the cap. Employees must be those who have left the U.S. and are requesting a new H-2B visa to come back for another season. This new system rewards those who have played by the rules, worked hard and successfully participated in the program. The bill gives a helping hand to businesses by allowing them to retain workers who they have already trained to do their seasonal jobs. This is a quick and simple fix. It lasts three years. And it does not get in the way of comprehensive immigration reform. I worked with my colleagues to get a bill with strong bi-partisan support. A bill that would work. This bill is realistic. It provides a temporary solution because immediate action is needed to help these small and seasonal businesses stay in business. Yes--we need to help them now. Their seasons start soon. If they don't get seasonal workers this year, there may not be any businesses around next year to help. Every member of the Senate who has heard from their constituents-- whether they are seafood processors, landscapers, resorts, timber companies, fisheries, pool companies or carnivals--knows the urgency in their voices, knows the immediacy of the problem and knows that the Congress must act now to save these businesses. I urge my colleagues to join this effort, support the Save our Small and Seasonal Businesses Act, and push this Congress to fix the problem today. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I was here when the Senator from California spoke. She didn't realize it was on my time, but the very gracious Senator from Mississippi has yielded me a few minutes of opposition time. I think we all know the arguments, and I thank the Senator from Kansas for arguing because it shows that this amendment is a bipartisan amendment. What it does is actually create jobs or save jobs in the automobile industry. The amendment is simple and it is targeted and it is timely. My amendment simply says if you buy a passenger car, minivan, or light truck between November of last year and December 31 of 2009, you will get a tax deduction for your State sales or excise tax and the interest on your loan. For the average consumer buying a vehicle of approximately $25,000, it would mean a $1,500 incentive. Now, this is good for several reasons. First of all, No. 1, it really is prudent from a fiscal standpoint. The money does not leave the Federal checkbook or the Federal Treasury unless it goes to a person who has actually bought a vehicle. So no money is spent or put into the economy unless it is actually used in the economy to buy a car, minivan, or light truck. It stimulates jobs because when you buy a car, it means, No. 1, somebody had to make it; No. 2, somebody had to sell it, service it, and process the paperwork to do it, and there had to be suppliers to also make sure that vehicle was fit for duty. We have in our automobile industry 3 million people who are dependent on it up and down the chain, from manufacturing to sales to maintenance. In my own home State, let's take the automobile dealer. There are approximately 700 dealers, and there are close to 3,000 dealers nationwide. Each dealer employs about 50 people, again, from the people who sell them to the people who fix them. I have talked to people in my own State. The automobile dealers are, in some instances, the major employer in rural parts of my State. If you talk to someone such as the auto mechanic, as I did in Bethesda, and other automobile mechanics, they are proud of what they do. They fix those cars. They have them road-ready. They see it as helping the environment, making sure people are safe in their vehicles and getting value for their dollar. We want these small businesses to stay afloat. That is why I think the Mikulski amendment is so specific. It only applies to the automobile industry. No. 2, it is timely because it would immediately go into effect, and it is targeted and limited because it will only last until December 31, 2009. If you really want to get America back on its wheels again and really help America get rolling again, supporting the Mikulski amendment will go a long way to do that. Now, there are those who say: How much will this cost the Treasury? I just wish to bring to their attention that doing nothing will cost our Treasury: more expenditures on unemployment; the possibility that one of our manufacturers could go bankrupt and throw this into pension guarantee, which would be a disaster; and in our local communities, the heartbreak that would result from a shuttered dealership in a small town on the Eastern Shore or in western Maryland would really be devastating. It would hurt the consumer and hurt consumer confidence. If you vote for the Mikulski amendment, supported by people on the other side of the aisle, I believe we can really get our economy going again. Mr. President, I yield the floor.