Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I continue to ask that the pending amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment No. 3227.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3227

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this amendment provides additional funding of $5 million for juvenile mentoring programs. The Senator from New Jersey has an appropriate offset. We have no objection to the amendment. It has been cleared on both sides. Therefore, I ask for the adoption of the amendment. As I said, it has been cleared on both sides.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask that the pending amendment be set aside, and I call up amendment No. 3220 on behalf of Senator Menendez of New Jersey.

Ms. MIKULSKI. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 3220

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I concur. I thank the Senator from Alabama for bringing this to our attention. I urge adoption of the amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, we are trying to clear amendments that have been cleared by Senator Shelby and myself. Others are looking at them, so we are proceeding. While those amendments are being cleared, one of the issues I wanted to bring to our colleagues' attention is how we are making America more competitive with this bill. Earlier in my presentation in which I gave an overview of the bill, I emphasized what we were doing in law enforcement, which I am so proud of, and of course the Presiding Officer himself as a former attorney general knows how important the Federal and local law enforcement agencies are. But this bill is called Commerce-Justice-Science. We focused, in our subcommittee--myself and my ranking member, Senator Shelby--on three issues this year: security, competitiveness, and accountability--the stewardship of the taxpayers' dollar. We focused on competitiveness because it is our subcommittee that funds the major science agencies that come up with the new ideas that help come up with the new jobs, the research that enables the private sector to take value and add to it to come up with the new products and very high-end technology. That provides jobs right in our own country and enables us to be competitive. We based a lot of our work on legislation called the America COMPETES Act. I know the Presiding Officer was part of that. This year, it was a bill that was passed by the House and the Senate to ensure our Nation's competitive position in the world through improvements to math and science, both a commitment to research and math and science education. It follows through on a commitment to ensure U.S. students, teachers, businesses, and workers are prepared to continue to lead the world in research and then taking that research to the private sector so it can come up with those products. In our bill, we don't do anything that picks winners and losers. We are not industrial policy people. What we are, though, is American policy people, to do this. This America COMPETES Act was based a lot on recommendations that came from the National Academy of Science report called ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm.'' That report was done at the request of three leaders: Senator Domenici, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Alexander. Then I, after it was published, became part of the group to implement it. Well, this is a great day for our colleague from New Mexico. I know last night our colleague from New Mexico, Senator Domenici, announced that he is going to retire from the Senate. He is in his home State of New Mexico today sharing his plans for his own future with his constituents. But while he is talking about his own future with his constituents, I want to acknowledge that he worked very hard on a bipartisan basis to ensure the future of the Nation. He and Senator Bingaman and Senator Alexander, again, working together, showed that we can do better so that we can compete in the world and that we compete in the world not only to win Nobel prizes--and we will continue to do so--but we will also win the markets, for which we must to have a stronger economy. So ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm,'' which was promoted by those three excellent and wonderful colleagues, led to, with the help of people such as Senator Lieberman and others, the America COMPETES Act. It keeps research programs at the National Science Foundation, the National Institute of Standards, and DOE on a path for doubling the money for research in these key areas. But, in addition to research, we wanted to make sure we have the scientists, the engineers, and the technology experts to do so. We are falling behind in the number of people who choose science as a career or people with a science education to go into our classrooms. The America COMPETES Act puts an emphasis on that into action. They wanted to prepare thousands of new teachers and provide current teachers with teaching skills in the area of NSF's Noyce teacher scholarship program. They also wanted to enhance undergraduate education for the future science and engineering workforce. They also wanted to authorize new competitive grants at the Department of Education to increase the number of teachers, so grant programs also help do that. So we passed the America COMPETES Act. But, as my colleagues know-- what is authorizing legislation? It sets the policy, sets the direction, and puts national goals into the Federal lawbooks, which is a great first step. But now, the legislation we bring before the Senate, the Commerce-Justice-Science bill, the Mikulski-Shelby bipartisan bill, following on the tradition that sparked us, we are actually putting money in the Federal checkbook to do that. One of the areas, of course, where we do that is we increase funding for research. We are going to talk later on today about NASA, on the anniversary of sputnik, where that little round ball weighing 180 pounds shook up the cosmos and even the galaxies. But little known is something called the National Science Foundation. This was an agency which was created during the Eisenhower administration and has now withstood the test of time. President Eisenhower responded, a warrior-- and we all saw the great miniseries of Ken Burns on the war. We are so proud of Senator Inouye, who was featured in it. But Eisenhower, the man who led us in Europe, knew that when sputnik went up, we were in a race for America's future and we could either respond militarily or we could respond in a way that would have many uses. Eisenhower created two things: One, the National Science Foundation, and two, something called the National Defense Act. The National Defense Act was to get our young people involved in science and in technology so that they could come up with those new ideas to make sure that we not only beat the Russians in space but that we beat the Russians in everything--an idea with currency today, I might add. And then, the National Science Foundation. His brother was president of Johns Hopkins University, Milton Eisenhower. Later, what did the National Science Foundation do? We could have put a lot of money into the military so we could shoot those satellites down, but we said we were going to develop our own and be better at it. We became the premier country in satellites. Satellites defend the Nation. Satellites also give us information on weather. Satellites give us information and early warnings on things such as solar flares that can take out our power grid. Satellites were one of the greatest inventions ever created. America led the way. Eisenhower created this, where we would fund--we, the Federal Government, working in a unique partnership with universities, not Government doing the research but the Government putting money out in almost intellectual venture capital to come up with new research in physics, chemistry, biology, and the basic sciences; and then to give stipends so young, smart people, such as the people who wanted to do the ``October surprise,'' could come out of the hollows of West Virginia and the streets of Baltimore, our communities, to go on to do this. What did we fund? We funded programs that then we're able to do. In our legislation, we have now increased our research to $6.5 billion. In this, we have focused on education, K through 12. We have also funded other important programs in research, our science programs. We help with minority education. By the way, this is one of the most important agencies that helps historically black colleges, to make sure they have the financial resources they need. An example would be the increased funding for the Louis Stokes Alliance for Minority Participation. We provide $75 million for math and science partnerships in education. We estimate that our program will have an impact upon over 140 math and science teachers. We also have a talent expansion program to begin to recruit them. We are bringing teachers into internships. Over at Morgan University and down at the Eastern Shore, we have something called the Chesapeake Consortium, where our young people are getting paid internships to work on rocket ships that go off--small rockets that go off from down on Wallops Island. If you came with me to the Eastern Shore, to Somerset County, where primarily the lifestyle is that of watermen and agriculture--these people work hard and have dirt under their fingernails and big dreams. One of the largest employers is our prison. This is an area the Senators from Virginia share, where the facility is called Wallops Island. Our young people at the Chesapeake Consortium are working at Wallops to develop these small rockets and also work with UAV research. If you went down there with me to that county that has one of the highest poverty rates, in terms of cash income, in my State, and you saw these young men and women with the Chesapeake Consortium shirts on, where they had worked at historically black colleges with our talented science team instead of flipping hamburgers, they had a paid internship, they are flipping ideas. Each and every one of them is a graduate and they have jobs in major technology agencies in our country. This is what we are doing. I want my colleagues to know we are increasing funding in research. We are investing in education. We are investing in and implementing the America COMPETES Act, and we are making sure we are truly rising above the gathering storm. I hope Senator Domenici will be here today. I will personally pay my respects to him for being the leader he is. When he returns, he will find we passed this bill. It is a tribute to what bipartisanship means, finding that sensible Senator, and we are going to build a stronger country because of this. I wished to bring this to our colleagues' attention as we clear these amendments. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the substitute amendment, which is at the desk, and the text of the Senate committee-reported bill be considered and agreed to; the bill, as amended, be considered as original text for the purpose of further amendment; and that no points of order be considered waived by this agreement.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I seek recognition in these 2 minutes seeking support on this amendment, joined by my colleagues, Kennedy and Akaka, who spoke Friday about why this amendment is important. It is important that this amendment be on this bill because we all remember the Walter Reed scandal. Remember the Walter Reed scandal, mold in the hotel and all that? I spoke on this floor more than a year and a half ago, with Paul Sarbanes, for an amendment that tried to deal with the contracting out at Walter Reed. I lost that amendment on the floor by two votes. We went from 300 employees to 50 employees, and we only saved money after they had 6 different attempts to make sure they had contracting out. Let me tell you, if you want no more Walter Reeds, you want the Kennedy-Mikulski-Akaka amendment. This amendment saves taxpayers money. It says that any attempt at contracting out must save $10 million or 10 percent, so we meet the taxpayer mandate. It eliminates privatization quotas. If you are against quotas and OMB bounty hunters, this amendment is for you. If you want to make sure our contractors have healthy retirement benefits as part of the contract, this amendment is for you.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Madam President, I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I commend my colleague from Maryland for addressing this issue. I am a member of the Appropriations Committee and I, too, understand that the Committee intends to continue EAS funding under the continuing resolution to airports in Maryland, South Dakota, and Pennsylvania that currently receive it.

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 several congressionally designated projects included in the report accompanying S. 1745, the Departments of Commerce and Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2008, S. Rpt. 110-124. Specifically: The report should indicate that funding provided through the Department of Justice for the Presidential Candidate Nominating Conventions for 2008 was requested by Senators Allard, Coleman, Klobuchar, and Salazar. Senator Levin should be listed as having requested funding for Grand Rapids Public Schools, Grand Rapids, MI, for an academic prevention and workforce skills program funded through the Department of Justice. Senator Stabenow should be listed as having requested funding for the Ruth Ellis Center, Highland Park, MI, for an outreach program funded through the Department of Justice. Senators Schumer and Bill Nelson should not be listed as having requested funding for Regional Climate Centers funded through the Department of Commerce. Finally, Senator McCaskill has withdrawn her request for the following activities funded through the Department of Justice: Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, RAINN, Partnership for a Drug Free America Meth360 Program, and Big Brothers, Big Sisters.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak on behalf of the Kennedy-Mikulski amendment, as amended by the distinguished majority leader. I know the hour is late so I will not speak at length, but I will speak with passion about what this amendment is all about. This is about contracting out. I am here to join in an amendment that protects our Civil Service, protects our taxpayers, and protects Government workers. I think we would all agree that America needs an independent Civil Service and that our Federal employees are on the front lines every day working hard for America. This administration's plan for privatization is a quota-driven plan that costs money, morale, and the integrity of the Civil Service. It forces Federal employees into unfair competition and forces them to spend time and money competing for their jobs instead of doing their jobs. The administration has stacked the deck against Federal employees with their A-76 competitions, but I am here to level the playing field along with my colleagues. This amendment is simple. It helps Federal employees compete for their jobs and at the same time, makes sure the Federal Government saves money. My other colleagues who are cosponsors will focus on different pieces of this amendment, but I am here to talk about three specific parts. First of all, this amendment saves taxpayers money. When the administration passed these new quota-driven bounty-hunting A-76 rules, contractors were not even required to show they would save the Government any money--but we thought that was the point of it--so we had some private contracts that actually cost the Government more money than if Federal employees were doing the work. Now, the amendment that is pending would require that all contracts save $10 million or 10 percent. You must save money: $10 million or 10 percent. So Federal workers will not be losing their jobs to contractor bids that do not even save the Government or the taxpayers money. Second, it deals with the issue of health and retirement benefits. Right now, a private contractor can win a bid on Federal work simply because they provide either no health and retirement benefits or skimpy or Spartan benefits, this is bad for Federal employees and bad for the contractors doing the work. This amendment would prohibit contractors from winning a bid if the only cost savings are from bad or no benefits. This is to prevent bagging benefits in order to win the contract. This helps level the playing field for Federal employees who have to submit their own best bids, but they have to include these health and retiree benefits. Number 3, really, this is what I think is crucial, and I hope my colleagues from the other side of the aisle will hear this. This amendment eliminates privatization quotas. Remember, the new Bush rules are quota driven. It makes those who are pushing the A-76 in an agency the equivalent of a bounty hunter. Now, let's deal with the word ``quota.'' I have heard a lot about quotas in my day, usually from the other side in a very pejorative way. Hey, what happened to goals and timetables? I thought we did not go for quotas in this Senate. I thought we were for goals and timetables. Remember discussions on affirmative action? ``We don't want no quotas.'' Well, I do not want quotas in privatization. Quite frankly, I do not even want goals and timetables in privatization. But OMB imposes privatization quotas on all Federal agencies, forcing them to conduct A-76 competitions on as many as 150,000 jobs each year. What a huge waste of money. These quota-driven bounty hunters force these wasteful A-76 reviews, even on agencies that do not want to do them or in categories that give them pause to pursue. It wastes time. It wastes taxpayers' dollars. This amendment would stop OMB from using quotas to force agencies to conduct these privatization reviews. This would not prevent agencies from contracting out work. It would simply allow Federal agencies to make their own decisions about when to use the A-76 process. Now let me be very clear. I am not opposed to contracting out. I am not opposed to privatization. In my own State it has worked well. Look at Goddard Space Flight Center. We have 3,000 civil service jobs, but 9,000 private contractor jobs. In this way, we get incredible value for our space dollar. I am proud of them both, and they work well together. They serve the Nation well. But the way this administration is going about privatization does not work. We need this amendment because the way contracting is being pursued is irresponsible. It even puts our Nation's security at risk. I want to give one specific issue--contracting out at Walter Reed. Before my dear colleague Senator Paul Sarbanes left, we were on this floor fighting an A-76 contract for contracting out facilities management for people who handle the grounds and so on at Walter Reed. We challenged that A-76 because there had been over three to six appeals. Each time the Federal employees won. However, the administration pushed and pushed and pushed. As we were battling it out on the floor, I read a letter from the colonel who said: If you contract this out, I am concerned there will be a degradation of service at Walter Reed. Well--guess what--we lost the amendment. Walter Reed contracted out its facilities management. We went from 300 employees, who kept Walter Reed tip top for our wounded warriors, down to 50 people, and we ended up with a national scandal. Now, you tell me, what did we gain from that contracting out? How could you look in the eyes of a wounded warrior at Walter Reed and at a hospital that was ridden with mold and rot, for which we all had to go out and pound on the table and pound on our chest about the outrage? We could have stopped the scandal at Walter Reed if we had stopped that contracting out--300 people to 50. Why did it take 300 people at Walter Reed? Because it is an older building. It is several buildings. Our wounded warriors were in hospitals that made international headlines because we could not take care of our own. Well, I am now taking care of this contracting out. So this amendment is the ``remember the Walter Reed scandal'' amendment. I hope my colleagues will join with me. Yes, we will privatize where appropriate. Yes, we will privatize where we will get value for our dollar. But I don't want any kind of privatization that ends up in a national scandal and a national disgrace. I urge my colleagues to vote for this amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am proud to cosponsor Senator Biden's amendment calling on the United States to actively support a Federal system of government in Iraq. The brutal reality is that Iraq today is being torn apart by sectarian violence. The Maliki government in Baghdad is too weak and too corrupt to lead Iraq's Sunni, Shia and Kurdish communities to the political reconciliation they need to end the fighting. Iraq is being torn apart by civil war, and U.S. military forces are caught in the middle. It is clear to me that President Bush has no strategy for ending the war in Iraq. It is up to Congress to provide the way forward to bring stability to Iraq and to bring our troops home. Our military has done everything we have asked them to do, valiantly and skillfully. But the experts all agree: there is no military solution in Iraq. We need a comprehensive political settlement that gives the Iraqi people control over their own fate and allows our troops to come home. Senator Biden has proposed a plan to maintain a united Iraq by decentralizing it. Rather than putting our troops between warring factions, this plan would give the Kurds, Sunni and Shia control over their own land and people, while leaving a central government in Baghdad responsible for protecting common national Iraqi interests. This plan has five major parts. Step one is establishing three autonomous regions in Iraq with a functional central government in Baghdad. Each region would have authority over its own domestic laws, administration, and internal security. The central government would control border defense, foreign policy, and oil revenues. This would give Iraq's sectarian groups control over their own destiny and ensure that Iraq does not splinter into pieces, creating regional chaos. Step two of the Biden plan is to secure the cooperation of Iraq's Sunni minority. The Sunni Arabs in Iraq do not have access to the same oil wealth enjoyed by the Kurds in the north and the Shia in the south. Under this plan, Iraq's central Government would guarantee the Sunni's economic viability by pledging 20-percent of Iraq's oil revenue. It would address Sunni political concerns by allowing former members of the Baath party to join Iraq's national Government. Iraq's Sunnis must have confidence that they can prosper and thrive in a peaceful Iraq, so they will lay down their arms and end their destructive insurgency. Step three of this plan is to call on the international community and Iraq's neighbors to help stabilize Iraq by accepting this federal arrangement and respecting Iraq's borders and sovereignty. Iraq will need strong support from the international community to ensure that its neighbors do not try to expand their influence into any of the three autonomous regions created under this federalist system. Step four calls for the withdrawal of most U.S. military forces from Iraq. We would leave a small but effective residual force behind to help Iraq's security forces combat terrorism and protect Iraq's borders, but most U.S. forces would be out of Iraq before the end of 2008. We know there is no military solution to Iraq's current problems, and we know the armed militias that are tearing Iraq apart will never lay down their arms as long as the U.S. military has a large presence in their country. Withdrawing most U.S. troops will demonstrate to the Iraqi people that they must take responsibility for building a peaceful, stable Iraq. A small but lethal contingent of U.S. forces that remains either in Iraq or nearby can help the Iraqis combat terrorism and deter mischief by Iraq's neighbors. Finally, the Biden plan calls for robust international support for reconstruction in Iraq. This economic assistance must be conditioned on respect for minority and women's rights. The international community has an interest in seeing a vital, healthy Iraq, but we should use our resources to help Iraq build a society based on equality for all. By providing economic opportunities for every Iraqi, we can help end the violence and build a strong, stable Iraq. We know that President Bush has no plan for stabilizing Iraq or ending the war. The Biden plan can lead to a lasting political solution in Iraq that stops the violence and allows our military forces to come home. I am proud to support it, and I am proud to cosponsor this amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise as a supporter of the Webb amendment. I want to compliment the Senator from Virginia for offering that amendment. Although he is a freshman Senator, he certainly is no stranger to war a combat veteran, a warrior's warrior, and he is fully aware of the stresses the men and our military are facing along with their families. I support the Webb amendment, and I support it for several reasons. One, I want to talk about the surge. I called it an escalation. The escalation was to send more troops to give the Iraqis more time to come up with a political solution. Well, I wish to salute our troops. For those who are on the ground, the basic number, for those who were part of the escalation, we want to support them for doing their duty, and doing their duty so well. I think by every account, regardless of how one feels about the war, one is very proud of the men and women who are part of our military, who have been on the ground, and have been on the job. They have done their part. And that is what the two reports we got last week are, that if you send in more people, the violence will temporarily come down. But what happens when you do not keep that level? Well, that is a point of discussion. Let's go back to why they went. They went this summer, in blazing heat, with blazing guns, to give the Iraqis more time. And what did the Iraqis do while our guys and gals were out there in 100-pound armor, trying to avoid IEDs? The Iraqis took a vacation. More time. More time. More time. What is wrong with this picture? So what did more time get us? It got us nowhere. With their 2-month break, they still did not go anywhere near a political solution. Now we are told we have got to keep this up, and we could be there indefinitely because of what? The Iraqis need more time. Well, I think we are out of time. I think we are genuinely out of time. This is why I support the Webb amendment, because I think we need a different direction. I think we need a different direction in Iraq to do what we can to contain the violence and also to move ahead with a political solution. I am going to support the Webb amendment because I am never going to vote to cut off money. I will vote to protect our troops, and the best way is at least to give them more time while we are giving the Iraqis more time. How about giving our troops more time to be at home? I am really hot about this. One hundred six degrees in July, they took a break; 110 degrees in Baghdad, our troops are there, they took a break--they, the Iraqis, took a break. I am also going to be supporting the Biden amendment, because if the Iraqis will not come up with a political solution, now with the so- called soft position, it is time to go to the international community and see if there needs to a hard solution. I am beginning to explore and believe that perhaps Iraq needs to be partitioned. Part of our solution, though, is while the Iraqis want more time, I want more time for our troops. I want more time for our troops to be at home. That is why I am supporting this brilliant amendment by Senator Jim Webb, for our men and our women in the military. We know what his amendment says is that they have to be at home for at least as long as the length of their last deployment. So if they were there for 15 months, they should be home for 15 months. Then, for the National Guard and for the Reserves, no one would be redeployed within 3 years of their previous deployment. Why is that important? It is not only important for the Guard and the Reservists, but as the Presiding Officer knows, when a National Guards person goes to meet their duty, their employer in many instances is required to keep that job open, or they at least have that as a commitment of honor. That used to be 6 months. Now it is 15 months, and home again, back again, while the Iraqis want more time. Our employers are wondering how they can keep those jobs open because they don't want to turn their backs on the military. We have to get real here. A $20,000 bonus for a quick fix, quickly trained military doesn't cut it. Jim Webb is really onto something. Our military is overstretched. Our troops are exhausted. Their families are living with tremendous stress. Every day they wonder what is happening. Every day a family that hears a news report about another attack wonders if their loved one was in it. Every time they are at home and they hear: CNN, breaking, 4 U.S. military killed, 10 killed, 4 killed, they first listen; is it in the zone where my husband or my wife or my son or daughter is? Then when they hear that, they think: Is it the Army or the Marines? They want to know because what they are doing is wondering how close to home it is. Then they hear that news. For some, it is unbearable news. But all of the news is unbearable for the families at home. We are crushing the very spirit these families have to keep them going. It is not that they went once; it is that they go again. And no sooner do they come back and say: Hello, honey, I think your name is Mary Beth, than they have to go back out again. What are we doing to our families? I want more time for the troops. I want to give them more time the way the Iraqi politicians want more time. When we think about our troops, we know what they are laboring under. You have heard me say it before. I check the temperature every day in Baghdad. Yesterday, it was 102 degrees. For us, it was 73, a beautiful day. What a day to be out on the bay. I know a lot of our National Guard already deployed would love to be there. I think about our troops, carrying 100 pounds of armor in brutal heat, being shot at, being attacked by IEDs, while we have a policy that is going to give the Iraqis more time, while they are there doing their duty. Let's talk about these families. In World War II, the military would say: If the Army wanted you to have a wife, we would have issued you one. It was primarily a single military. That is not true today. For our families, the stress of maintaining a family during all of this while a spouse is at war is an enormous stress. Not only are they facing traumatic stress, but so is the spouse at home. They are trying to protect their children. They are trying to shield their children. The children wonder: How is daddy doing; how is mommy doing? The children learn e-mail. They e-mail mom. They e-mail dad. I know how they communicate. Mom and dad will communicate by e-mail. The little guys and gals will often read the first paragraph, but the last two paragraphs are spouse-to-spouse talking about what is going on. The tension, the fear, the anxiety and, I might add, the financial stress as well is amazing. We are talking about 19-year-olds, 21-year-olds. We are talking about people with two and three children. But we have to give the Iraqis more time. Well, we are out of time. I know my time is up on the floor, but I will tell you, I am going to vote for this Webb amendment because I am going to give our troops more time. I am going to vote to give our troops more time at home. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to the life and legacy of Senator Daniel Baugh Brewster. I was a great admirer of Senator Brewster, and I hold the Brewster seat in the U.S. Senate. Senator Brewster was a true patriot. He was a hero at the age of 19 when he volunteered for the Marine Corps and was sent to the front lines of the war in the Pacific. There he served bravely--leading the 1944 assault on Guam and the 1945 assault on Okinawa. He bore the wounds of war like so many of our heroic veterans. He was wounded seven times and had a permanent scar on his forehead from a bullet that lifted his helmet and grazed his scalp while battling for Sugar Loaf Hill on Okinawa. For his bravery, he was awarded a Purple Heart, two Gold Stars, and two Bronze Stars. As with many World War II veterans, Senator Brewster came back a changed man. He was disappointed when some of his neighbors in Green Spring Valley voiced outrage at him for inviting African-American friends he had served with during the war to his home. This experience further fueled both his desire to run for office and his lifetime commitment to civil rights. Senator Brewster graduated from University of Maryland School of Law in 1949, and was elected to the Maryland House of Delegates in 1950. After serving two terms, Senator Brewster ran for and was elected to represent Maryland's Second District in Congress in 1958. In 1962, Mr. Brewster was elected to the Senate. He was just 39 years old. In the Senate, Brewster was a champion for civil rights. He cosponsored the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 and served as the stand-in candidate for President Lyndon Johnson's 1964 Presidential primary campaign in Maryland against segregationist candidate George Wallace of Alabama. The contest was seen as a crucial battle in the fight for civil rights. Despite threats to his family, he campaigned vigorously and won the primary for President Johnson. Senator Brewster served as a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee at the time the war in Vietnam was escalating. Publicly, he took a hawkish position on the war, but privately he expressed concerns about the war and shared those concerns with President Johnson. After leaving the Senate, Senator Brewster devoted his time to his family, farming, and volunteering. He was an original director and former president of the Maryland State Fair and chaired the Governor's Commission on Alcoholism and the Governor's Commission on AIDS. Senator Brewster's congressional legacy lives on today as two of his Senate interns from Maryland, Nancy D'Alesandro Pelosi and Steny Hoyer, went on to prestigious political careers of their own. I offer my heartfelt condolences to Senator Brewster's family and to his friends and to all those whose lives he touched. Senator Brewster's family is in my thoughts and prayers.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, our first goal as members of Congress is to protect and safeguard the American people against terrorist attacks. I take my oath to do so very seriously. That is why I support reform of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. As we approach the anniversary of September 11, this is a time for more intense vigilance. Real threats to our country remain. As a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, every day I see how terrorists want to harm the American people. Terrorists still have a predatory intent to harm the United States. Reforming FISA today provides the intelligence community the tools it needs to disrupt ongoing terrorist operations against the United States. We have two proposals to consider tonight. Both are temporary ways ahead. Each proposal takes important steps to secure the safety of our country by reforming this important law. The Rockefeller-Levin proposal is desirable, while the McConnell proposal is acceptable. Each proposal provides the intelligence community the key tools it needs to disrupt terrorist plans and intentions, while retaining the legal safeguards that protect the rights of every American. These proposals are consistent with the principles that the Director of National Intelligence requested to improve the FISA process: enhance intelligence collection against terrorist operatives communicating to each other overseas--foreign to foreign; provide legal safeguards to protect the rights of American citizens--consistent with law, a warrant is still required to monitor communications of American citizens inside the United States--provide prospective liability protection to private- sector companies assisting our efforts in keeping this country safe. These proposals are time limited. A more comprehensive and permanent solution is necessary. As a member of the Intelligence Committee, I will work with my colleagues on a more comprehensive and permanent solution to reforming FISA. Al-Qaida continues to want to inflict damage on our country. This proposal gives important tools to the intelligence community to disrupt the terrorists' plans and intentions, while safeguarding the rights and civil liberties of American citizens. When it comes to protecting America, we don't belong to a political party) we belong to the red, white, and blue party. We are Americans first. Mr. President, I am a member of the Intelligence Committee, and like all Members, I take my oath to defend this country against all enemies, foreign and domestic, very seriously. Real threats to our country remain. As we approach the anniversary of September 11, this is a time for more vigilance. We have two proposals tonight. The Rockefeller-Levin proposal is the most desirable, while the McConnell proposal is also acceptable. These proposals are consistent with the principles that the DNI requested to improve the FISA process. It enhances intel collection against terrorist operatives communicating overseas foreign to foreign. At the same time, it does provide legal safeguards to protect the rights of Americans, consistent with law. A warrant is still required. I think it is time to vote. I think it is time to protect America.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the Best Buddies Chapter from Walter Johnson High School in Montgomery County, MD, for being named ``Chapter of the Year'' by Best Buddies International. Best Buddies is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to enhancing the lives of people with intellectual disabilities by providing opportunities for one-to-one friendships and integrated employment. Founded by Anthony K. Shriver in 1989, Best Buddies focuses on the importance of social integration for a group that is often overlooked by society. They achieve their mission by creating ``buddy pairs'' in student-run chapters at middle schools, high schools, and colleges around the world. Every year, Best Buddies holds its international leadership conference at Indiana University in Bloomington, IN, where over 1,300 high school and college students are trained on how to run an effective Best Buddies chapter--skills that will serve them well throughout their academic and professional lives. During the conference the organization acknowledges certain chapters that have achieved a particular level of excellence throughout the past year. The Chapter of the Year is selected by the board of directors and is based on the quality of the one-to-one friendships, chapter leadership, and activities. For 2007, 75 chapters applied, and Walter Johnson High School was awarded this impressive distinction. This chapter exemplified the true meaning of team work. As a team they worked together and planned incredibly successful events, fundraisers, and group outings. Their great sense of spirit and enthusiasm showed in every activity they undertook and in the deeply rewarding friendships they created. Through the tireless outreach of the chapter members, the general student population at Walter Johnson learned first hand that the similarities between children with and without intellectual disabilities far outweigh the differences. I hope that you will join me in recognizing the importance of what these high school students are doing through their participation in the Best Buddies program and the excellence with which they do it.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I, too, rise to comment on the FISA situation in which we find ourselves, because we want to be very clear that patriotism, adherence to the Constitution to defend the Nation against all enemies foreign and domestic, is not a partisan issue; that as our distinguished colleague from Missouri has spoken to--and I know the Senator from Georgia will--we are all on the Intelligence Committee, and we know what the real deal is in the sense of a very dangerous time facing our country. We on this side of the aisle want to assure both our colleagues and the American people that we want to make the reforms in FISA before we go out as intensely as do our colleagues who are speaking tonight. We want to make those reforms so that we, too, give the intelligence community the power to go after and catch the terrorists and to be able to pump for the information they need to protect us, rather than a bureaucracy. As a member of the Intelligence Committee, I feel it is my first duty to make sure they have the tools they need to protect the Nation. That means not only the financial resources to hire the best people and have the best technology, but it also means they have the legal framework in which to operate. But, indeed, a legal framework is what we need. We believe that in functioning within a legal framework, we are able to bring to bear all of the very important resources that are needed, both from the private sector as well as from the public sector. I agree with my colleagues that as we come into August, we have a certain level of anxiety. All of us know, as we look back on 2001, that if in fact we could have done something to protect or stop what happened on that terrible day, September 11, we would have done it. We know that right now, this minute, we have another rendezvous with destiny and we will meet that. In meeting that rendezvous, we will arrive at a legal framework that is constitutionally compliant, that will enable the Intelligence Committee to be able to do what it needs, without being shackled by more bureaucratic mandates. There are many proposals. The details of why we would support them or raise a question are better discussed in a more classified forum. Should the approach be bipartisan? You bet. I have worked with the Senator from Missouri. I know how he brings pragmatism, common sense, and very sound legal analysis to the discussion. This is not about politics. This is about the people and protecting the people we were sworn to protect. So I believe we will be proceeding. I am prepared, if necessary, to cancel my plans. But I believe if we work hard and are inclusive and approach it with common sense, we will focus on what is the end game here, which is to do the right thing to protect us. Mr. President, I have fought for children's health care for a very long time, going back to my days as a social worker and also as a young House Member. This bill is what we hoped for and dreamed for--those of us who worked in social work and foster care and child abuse--to make sure kids had eyeglasses and hearing aids and so forth. And for all those adolescents who need to discuss things with doctors, this would be an open door. For all those handicapped children, this is what we need. I salute the chairman and ranking member on this bipartisan solution. We have done this in a way that we can pay for it. At the end of the day, over an additional 3 million children will have health care. I salute my colleagues. A few months ago, we had a little boy die in Maryland because he didn't have access to dental care. He had an oral infection that spread through his blood. So tomorrow when I vote, I vote for Deamonte, and for all others like him. I support the bill.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise with a great deal of joy and enthusiasm this morning, as the senior Senator from Maryland, to be a part of what all of Maryland is doing today. We are on the road to Cooperstown. We are literally in our cars or renting transportation to be heading to Cooperstown, and we are going to Cooperstown in our hearts, because on Sunday, our beloved all-around Marylander, all- around American hero, Cal Ripken, Jr. will be inducted into the Hall of Fame. We are so excited about this because we want the world to know Cal Ripken as we know Cal Ripken. What a great guy. The world knows him as a fantastic baseball player, and he certainly is. I will go into his record in a minute. But he is also a fantastic human being, a devoted father, a faithful husband, a man of the community, giving his time and energy to philanthropic work. When we call him the ``Iron Man,'' he absolutely is. Throughout his 21-year career, he has been the epitome of ``Iron Man,'' both on and off the field. I watched Cal going from being unknown to being the best known baseball player from Baltimore since Babe Ruth. I was there that last day at Memorial Stadium, when we closed the stadium down, and I was there on opening day at Camden Yards, and Cal was there, and I will watch him as he is inducted into the Hall of Fame. For we Oriole fans, it was never ``if'' Cal would go into the Hall of Fame, it was simply when. Now, all baseball fans know about something called ``the streak.'' We remember the victory lap he took around Camden Yards on that very special night. As we were heading into that record-breaking, show-up- at-every-game Cal Ripken event, there was a countdown that was going on all over. At Camden Yards every day, they had the number when Cal would come out on the field. In my own office in the Hart Building, I had a great big banner for our own countdown. There he was: 2,632 consecutive games. During that time, he hit 431 homeruns. He also started in 19 All-Star games. He won two American League Golden Glove awards, eight Silver Slugger awards, two American League Most Valuable Players, and the statistics go on. But statistics don't tell the real Ripken story. We remember not the numbers, but we remember the man--the strong, dependable presence of Cal Ripken, Jr. Night after night, day after day, sometimes through injuries, through the wide range of emotions and pressures experienced as a major leaguer, at every game there he was: at third base, at shortstop, smiling at doing his job and doing it well. I remember that fateful night when Cal broke the Lou Gehrig standing record. To see that banner drop from 2,130 to 2,131 and hear the admiration and the jubilation of the crowd in Baltimore is something I will always remember. The sustained cheers were never ending as Cal, urged by Rafael Palmeiro, took a lap around the field. It was a proud night for the Ripken family, for the Orioles, and for Maryland. Mr. President, I wish you had been there that night. It was a magical night. Families came from all over to that game. Now, when I walked into Camden Yards, I thought maybe it would be a raucous night. Maybe it would be a spirit of New Year's Eve that we have in the Inner Harbor. But when you walked into Camden Yards, it was a quiet night. It was a respectful night. It had an air of great dignity. People were bringing their children. They had come from all over. They knew that something very special was going to happen because of a very special man. That evening had as much dignity as the player himself. Cal's accomplishments transcend well beyond the baseball field. His character and demeanor are reflected in the successes he experiences every day on the field and off the field. He shows up and gives his maximum effort in every aspect. He puts his family above all. He is a community philanthropist and is committed to living something called the ``Ripken way.'' The Ripken way was something taught to him by his father, that very well-known baseball manager, Cal Ripken, Sr. Now, this Ripken way is something special. It isn't complex. Did the Ripkens hire a consultant or handlers to tell them about it? How did they do it? It came from their hearts, their experience, and their commitment to values. The Ripken way is a value-driven leadership way. Its wisdom is to build great players and bind generations together. Here is what it is: No. 1, keep it simple. No. 2, explain the why of what you are doing to the people who are affected. Celebrate the individual. Make it fun and sweat those details and learn the little things so the big things can be done the right way. It emphasizes clarity, simplicity and, most of all, personal integrity. I think the Ripken way is being used all over Maryland. It is used in our businesses and in our homes. It is in our hospitals, where Cal and his wife Kelly have contributed so much to children, and it is in our hearts today as we salute Cal Ripken and the wonderful honor he is receiving. He applies the Ripken way on the ballfield and off the ballfield. He has established a foundation in his father's name: The Cal Ripken, Sr. Foundation, which helps young people learn not only baseball but the values of sportsmanship and the values of integrity, honor, and fidelity, the things that do build iron in your character. This is the legacy which shapes Cal's life, and so he wants to pass it on. Cal may be the local boy, but he is now an international hero. There is no question that Cal has earned his way into the Hall of Fame. We congratulate him on his very stellar career. We so admire his work ethic and his commitment to community, to country, and for the well-deserved honor of being inducted into the Hall of Fame. While Cal has already achieved so much, I cannot help thinking about him that the best is yet to come. On behalf of Senator Cardin and myself, I will introduce to have referred to the appropriate committee a resolution commemorating Cal on his outstanding career in baseball and for his induction into the Hall of Fame. Mr. President, these are tough times in the Senate. So when we can talk about something that really does deal with honor, fidelity, a commitment to community, a commitment to country, and showing up every day and getting the job done, I think the way Cal would want us to tip our hats to him would be to step up to the plate and do our jobs and to do it the Ripken way. That is what I would like to do. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. I would be happy to respond, if the Senator would allow me to focus on the allied health professions of which I am quite familiar, that it affects, first of all, when you look at what you could owe, it affects your major. So if I want to major in nursing, or where there is another shortage, x-ray technology, and you look at what you are going to earn, and what you are going to owe, well, you will take perhaps an easier path, and something that will be more lucrative at the end of graduation. So it starts in the freshman year when they are looking at that. Second, let's go to another issue in nursing. As the Senator knows, we have a problem with having enough people to teach nursing. That requires graduate training, master's, plus doctoral. Well, if you come out and you owe this bucket of bucks, and you are trying to pay off your undergraduate loan, working the terrific shifts the nurses work, and you are thinking about graduate school, you are not going to go get a master's or a doctorate to teach nursing, and we have little in the way of helping you. So we are, No. 1, affecting the shortages we have in these areas, and we are also exacerbating the people who would then have to go on to graduate school to teach the very people we need to teach.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise to speak enthusiastically in favor of the Higher Education Access Reconciliation Act and to also speak against the Sessions amendment to eliminate the debt forgiveness program for entering public service. I can't tell you how happy I am today to be speaking on legislation helping our young people have access to higher education. Finally, after a very dark week, where we were gagged and muzzled from trying to deal with bringing the Iraq war to an end, we now have an open debate on how to achieve the American dream. This is what I came to the Senate to be able to do. This is what the voters wanted us to do when on November 7 they held a national referendum and put the Democrats back in charge so we could change the tone, have a civilized debate such as we are, and also to change the priorities--and changing the priorities Senator Kennedy has, by leading us in a direction where we can expand opportunity for our young people without expanding our deficit. We will not expand our Federal deficit and we will help families not expand their family deficit, as they try to help their kids achieve higher education. This legislation pending before us today should be passed in a swift, expeditious, uncluttered way. This bill is absolutely a great bill for students and it is a great bill for America. It gives our students access to the American dream. It gives our young people access to the freedom to achieve, to be able to follow their talents, and to be able to achieve higher education in whatever field they will be able to serve this country. We do it by providing an increase in Pell grants. But the bill is also fiscally responsible as well as socially progressive. It cuts subsidies--big, lavish, bloated subsidies--to banks. In eliminating these bloated, unneeded subsidies in today's era of cheap money, what we are able to do is put that back into student aid. So we up the student aid, but we don't create more borrowing in order to do it. The bill also has other reform elements to it. It reforms the application process. Anybody in here who is a mom or a dad--or an Aunt Barb--knows that, boy, is that process complicated. You almost have to have been to college in order to apply for student loans to be able to go to college. The other thing it does is it keeps an eye on those colleges and universities. We have seen tuition creep--we have seen tuition gallop-- to where now there is an ever-increasing escalation. We worry if we increase the Pell grants, are they then going to increase tuition? So there is reform methodologies in this, and we salute Senators Kennedy and Enzi for being able to do this. So this is why I am so enthusiastic about this bill. As I travel around my own State of Maryland and I talk about what we want to do with our Federal legislative initiatives, I often say to audiences--and I say here today to my colleagues--we in this country enjoy many freedoms--the freedom of speech, the freedom of press, the freedom of religion--but there is an implicit freedom our Constitution doesn't lay out but which brings people to this country and excites the passions and hopes and dreams and that is the desire and the ability to have the freedom to achieve; to take whatever talents God has given you, to fill whatever are the passions in your heart, to be able to learn so you can earn and make a contribution. That is what I call the freedom to achieve. The freedom to achieve should never be stifled in this country because of economic reasons. Your freedom to achieve should never be determined by the ZIP code you live in, by the color of your skin, or by the size of your family's wallet. It should be, in a democratic country, that everyone has access to be able to do that. That means affordable education. That means access to the opportunity ladder that students and families can count on, because we know a degree is something no one can ever take away from you. When I was a young girl at a Catholic all-girls high school, my father and mother encouraged me to seek higher education. My father's grocery store had a terrible fire, and I offered to not go on to higher education but to work in our little family grocery store. But my father said, no, Barb, you have to go, and your mom and I will find a way, because no matter what you do or what in life happens to you, no one can ever take that degree away from you. As your father who wants to help you and to protect you, the best way I can protect you is to make sure you will be able to earn a living all of your life. My father gave me the freedom to achieve. But tuition costs were different in those days, and now people rely upon student loans or student assistance. That is what we need to continue to do. We also know when we are helping our young people, or not-so-young people who return, the value of higher education doesn't only accrue to the individual, it accrues to the Nation as a whole. Every time we help someone be able to go on and have that freedom to achieve, we might be educating someone who is going to find the cure for cancer. We are going to be educating the cop on the beat who might save that old lady from being mugged. Whatever we do, that education lifts not only that person but it lifts the level of attainment of the Nation as a whole. That is why this is an important public investment. This is why on this day, this week, we finally have some light coming into the Senate. We know higher education is a great opportunity. As I said, this means there will be people who are young and not so young who will bless us for what we are doing today. Getting a college education is the core of the American dream, and I am going to be sure that every student has access to that dream and make sure that when they graduate, their very first mortgage isn't their student debt. My colleagues have spoken eloquently about how often that debt is $20,000 or more. I know in my home State college tuition is on the rise. The tuition at the University of Maryland, a land grant college, has increased by almost 40 percent since 2002. Financial aid is not keeping up. Pell grants now only cover 30 percent of what a 4-year public college costs, but 20 years ago those Pell grants covered 80 percent of the cost. We look at our families, our middle-class families, and they are stretched and they are stressed. Families in my State are worried about many things. They are worried about their jobs, worried about the cost of raising a family, gas prices are up, the cost of utilities is up, the cost of health care is up--you name it, everything is up but wages. They are racing from carpool to work and back again. While they might be taking care of mom and dad who need assisted living, they are also wondering how are they going to assist their kids to go to college so they are assisting their kids with learning how to earn a living. Our families need help. By gosh, I believe that help begins at home. This is what this legislation does. It will increase student aid by increasing Pell grants from $4,300 per year to $5,400 per year. It is a $1,100 increase. This is wonderful. That is already a $5,000 break over a 4-year program. If you are looking at a community college, this could help you pay for this. For so many of our young people, the community college is the first access to higher education. These families and these students will know exactly what this means. The simple expansion of Pell grants is going to take that opportunity ladder and take that first rung and make sure it is reliable and stable. There are other important aspects in this bill in addition to that. I am so proud we have extended our deferred loans for our men and women in the armed services. Under the old law, servicemembers could only defer their student loans for 6 months. They are fighting in Iraq. I think we ought to defer it indefinitely, but we will take what we can get in the law. That is an important step. I want to say a word about the comments about public service. Why is it every time we talk about public service jobs it is in a snide and snarky way? I am tired of people talking about public service jobs in a snide and snarky way. Somehow or other, in private sector jobs you work hard. I know for those hedge fund managers, walking down that rugged terrain of Wall Street, fighting their way to get a latte, is tough work. But why is it if you are an FBI agent we are going to talk about you in a snarky way? What about if you are a nurse in the VA helping fit that prosthetic device for that injured warrior coming back? We have to remember that civil service is honorable and civil service is hard work, and public service makes contributions to the public good. I hope we then in this debate also follow the kind of rubric that has been developed by our colleague from Ohio, Senator Voinovich. He is worried, too, about all the retirements that are coming in civil service. We are going to recruit, but let's talk about specifically what this does. This is debt forgiveness where we are facing shortages. We are talking about debt forgiveness in law enforcement. Law enforcement all over the United States is facing shortfalls in recruitment. There are people who no longer want to be cops on the beat because it is a dirty, dangerous job. We have a shortage of nurses. Let's talk about our teachers--oh, our most important asset is our children. We will not pay to recruit and retain, but we will overregulate our teachers. We have to be able to get them in. When we talk about the fact that if you are an elementary schoolteacher or you are that preschool teacher who gets our kids reading ready, often they are very poorly paid, paid less than if they had worked in fast food operations. We have to help our teachers. Then I want to talk about an area that is very near and dear to me, the nursing shortage. I have worked on a bipartisan basis with the Senator from Maine, Ms. Collins, on how to deal with the nursing shortage. It is now achieving a critical mass. Over 40 percent of our nurses will be retiring in a very short time. It is difficult also to retain our nurses. We need to be able to recruit and retain our nurses. When we hear about: Why don't they work their way through? Let's work our way through. Have you ever been to a nursing school? Have you ever been in a nursing school? I have. Nursing school is tough, demanding, unrelenting. If you are in a nursing college program, whether it is a community college or a 4-year college, you have to do your lab work, you have to do your clinical work. You can't take time off to go work to earn that tuition. You have to be there learning to be a nurse. There is practically no way that, if you want to be a nurse, an x-ray technician, an occupational therapist, a physical therapist--anything in allied health--you can take time off to work your way through. But you are mounting debt. This is a way that gives you a break. I believe in giving help to those who will be able to help us in our community. To finish my point and my momentum here, I believe the Kennedy approach on student debt forgiveness is wise and prudent, and I believe can be implemented in a way that does not create abuse. Let's respect public service. Let's try to deal with the fact that we are facing critical shortages. Let's also begin to work together to solve our Nation's problems. We are willing to spend thousands of dollars to recruit in critical areas in the military. I happen to support that, to keep that sergeant, to recruit that lieutenant and so on--I absolutely think we should. I urge the passage of the Higher Education Access bill and at the same time the defeat of the Sessions amendment. I yield the floor.

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. First, if I could respond to the Senator, that is exactly right. We are experiencing the same situation for that level of public indebtedness in our public universities. If one would then go on to a private university such as Johns Hopkins, it would also be substantially more.