Barbara Mikulski

Ms. MIKULSKI

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. The Senator from Massachusetts has accurately assessed what has created the crisis: that given the time of application and when they want the people to work, the winter needs then take up practically all 66,000. We acknowledge our colleagues who do need the winter help, but we need their help for the summer help. You are also correct that my legislation would create a more even playing field between the two and, again, this is a temporary legislative remedy while we assess the entire situation of the need for comprehensive reform, how we keep American jobs, how we keep American companies open, and yet retain control of our borders.

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I realize the Senator from Texas has been recognized to offer his amendment. I ask unanimous consent I be permitted to offer my amendment after the Cornyn-Feinstein amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I send my amendment to the desk.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Maine for her remarks, along with her and her colleague from Maine for their advocacy on behalf of Maine workers. We know Maine has been hard hit with many issues. I ask unanimous consent to add Senator DeWine of Ohio as a cosponsor.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Withholding the right to object, I have no objection to how long you wish to speak on your amendment, Senator. I wanted to be sure I got to offer my amendment this afternoon.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I hope the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations would take my amendment or, at the very least, have an amendment tonight. There needs to be a discussion on how we proceed. I note there seems to be no one here. I could speak on this bill, I have such passion, such fervor about the need for it that I could speak for an extended period of time, but I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, my amendment is pending.

Ms. MIKULSKI. My amendment is pending and I recognize the Senator from Oklahoma wishes to speak. The Senator from California has an amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes.

Ms. MIKULSKI. If the Senator wishes to speak on another matter, perhaps as if in morning business, I have no objection to that.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Perhaps I could clarify this, Mr. President. The reason I asked for a quorum call, reclaiming my right to the floor, is so the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Committee and I could discuss how we were going to proceed for the rest of the evening. Therefore, the Senator from California would know how to exercise her right as the next in line. So if the Senator from California could be patient for a minute to get clarification, he could be a time-filler. Would that be a good way to do it?

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

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I call for the regular order.

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. MIKULSKI. It is a klutzy way of talking about it, but it is, nevertheless, where we are.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I want to acknowledge the passing of a great Marylander, Frank Perdue, Sr., who helped build the poultry industry on the Eastern Shore, a leading entrepreneur, a philanthropist. He passed away of Parkinson's disease a few days ago. Born in Parsonburg, on the Eastern Shore of Maryland, Frank Perdue grew up working in his family's egg business--collecting and cleaning eggs from childhood. But Frank Perdue was determined to take the family business to another level--and it was his tremendous capacity for hard work that did just that. When Perdue said, ``It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken,'' America listened, and Frank Perdue became both a savvy businessman and a cultural icon. Today Perdue Farms employs more than 20,000 people across America and has annual sales of about $3 billion. I am proud to work have worked with Frank Perdue--and now with his son Jim Perdue--to fight for fair trade policies that enable Maryland chicken producers to export around the world. As Frank Perdue's business soared, he worked to bring Maryland with him. He became a great benefactor to Salisbury University, establishing the Perdue School of Business with a generous gift. Once a college baseball player and always a baseball fan, Frank Perdue brought the Delmarva Shorebirds to Salisbury in 1996, and then built the team and the Eastern Shore community a stadium. It is for both his business sense and his philanthropic heart that I salute him today. Frank Perdue and I came from different ends of the political spectrum. Yet we both believed that the best social program is a job-- and that we must give help to those who practice self-help. We joked that we should do an ad for a group we both support--we would say-- we're two tough birds from the right wing and the left wing--but we both support this tender cause. Today as we grieve the loss of one of Maryland's finest, Frank Perdue, we send our thoughts and prayers to his family and his many friends and colleagues.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, also part of the greatest generation is someone whom I rise to pay tribute to today and that is to Pope John Paul II. I was saddened at the passing of Pope John Paul II. The Holy Father was an inspiration to me as well as to millions around the world. His faith, his compassion, his eloquence, transcended religion or nationality. We so admired His Holiness because he stood for those who suffered, those who were oppressed, those who could not give voice through their own advocacy for human rights. He offered faith and hope and courage with his famous phrase ``be not afraid,'' as he reached out to young people to give them a moral compass that they needed--that we all need to guide our lives. Pope John Paul was the true people's Pope. Gosh, he traveled to over 100 countries. He didn't just speak from the pulpit; he reached out and touched people. He moved into the crowds, and he spoke the language of the people, often literally because he spoke so many languages. The Pope was the father of the church, but he was also a son of Poland, my own cultural heritage. I remember when I heard the news about the new Polish Pope, the first non-Italian in over 400 years. I live down the street from the Polish parish, St. Stanislaw's in Fells Point. We felt such pride and joy. The bells rang, the tugboats tooted. We closed the streets and had a fantastic party. We were so excited. In Baltimore we even knew him before he became Pope. He came to visit us as the cardinal from Krakow. He visited Holy Rosary Church, again one of the Catholic churches serving large numbers in the Polish community. I was so pleased to be there that day for this young, vigorous, athletic man who came from Poland to speak to us, wanting to know about our own country, speaking to us in English also about our own hopes and aspirations. But because he had grown up under Nazi fascism and lived under the boot of communism, he spoke to us about what it was like to live behind the Iron Curtain. As you so well know, he came from the captive nations. I was so proud then to be part of the American delegation when he was Invested over 2 years later. And even then we could see the hint of things to come. There was a mass for hundreds of thousands of people in St. Peter's Square, where His Holiness gave his first blessing and spoke the Word to the people in many tongues. Before he came over to greet the diplomatic corps, he went over to a special section of children, and not just ordinary children but extraordinary children--the mentally retarded, those with birth defects, cerebral palsy. And the first touch of the Pope was to those children. I think it touched us all. One of my best memories was taking my parents to meet the Pope at the White House when Jimmy Carter was President and Brzezinski was his National Security Adviser. I took my mother and father through the receiving line, and they had a chance to talk with him in both Polish and English. He turned and smiled with his wonderful humorous way and said: Don't forget to listen to your mother and father and to the Holy Father. Twenty-five years later, I joined my colleagues in the Senate to present the Pope with our Congressional Medal, the highest honor we can bestow. The Pope doesn't usually accept awards, but he made an exception because we wanted to thank him for his stand for human rights and for peace and justice around the world. After the presentation and the blessing, he said to us: God bless you and God bless America. The Pope visited this country seven different times, both as a bishop and as Pope. And during those times, he always spoke to us about the need for freedom. He knew what it was like to live under the occupation. During the dark days of communism, he led the church's support of the Solidarity movement. In 1979, after he became Pope, he made his very first visit to his own native land. In 9 days, he was seen by 13 million people, from Warsaw to Krakow to Czestochova. He touched every part of Polish society, and he encouraged them once again to be not afraid. One year later an obscure electrician working in a shipyard, named Lech Walesa, jumped over that wall. And when he jumped over the wall of the Gdansk shipyard, he took the whole world with him. That was the beginning of the end of Communism. The Pope forged a special relationship with President Ronald Reagan, and I believe helped bring about the end of the Cold War and pulled down that Iron Curtain. Pope John did more than any other leader of the church to reach out to different faiths. He was the first Pope to visit a synagogue. He was the first Pope to visit a mosque. He reached out to Anglicans and to Eastern Orthodoxy. But he didn't just reach out to different faiths; he reached also to the human heart. He reached back to the darker side of history. He was the first to acknowledge the Holocaust and to say that antisemitism was a sin and to officially visit Israel. He wanted the improvement of relationships. If we want to honor the Pope, we should do it not with words but with deeds: To be not afraid, to speak up for truth, to speak truth to power, speak about justice, speak about human rights, to speak about the marginalized and the oppressed. Today we grieve the death of the Pope. We express our gratitude for his remarkable life and his remarkable leadership and legacy of faith and freedom and the enduring promise of the Gospels calling us to feed the hungry, care for the sick, and turn our spears into plowshares.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I, too, wish to speak in morning business. What a passing of a great generation. I, too, want to pay my respects to Senator Heflin, an outstanding Senator, a wonderful Senator from Alabama. When I came to the Senate in 1987, he was one of the men of the Senate who welcomed me with graciousness. He introduced me to hand-pulled barbecue from Alabama. He also introduced me to the Marshall Space Program. I had the opportunity to work with him in terms of creating jobs in Alabama and also creating opportunity through the Space Program. He embodied the qualities of hard work, honesty, humility, and humor, and he left this earth with a great legacy. Senator Heflin died on March 29, 2005, last week. He is survived by his wife Elizabeth Heflin; a son, Howard Thomas Heflin, Jr.; a daughter-in-law, Corneila Hood Heflin; grandson Wilson Charmichael Heflin; and a granddaughter, Mary Catherine Heflin. Senator Heflin was devoted to his family, his State, and his country. As a World War II hero, he put his love of country above all else. He made remarkable contributions to Alabama and the Nation as a whole. His warmhearted personality will be remembered by all who knew him well. We will all miss him. We will certainly miss him in the Senate. I yield the floor.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, this amendment would increase the Hope credit to $4,000 and make it available for 4 years of college. The core of the American Dream is getting a college education and I want to make sure that every student has access to that dream. I want to help families who are trying to send their children to college and adults who are going back to school for their first degree or their third. Our middle-class families are stressed and stretched. Families in my state of Maryland are worried--they're worried about their jobs and they're terrified of losing their healthcare when costs keep ballooning. Many are holding down more than one job to make ends meet. They're racing from carpools to work and back again. But most of all, they don't know how they can afford to send their kids to college. And they want to know what we in the United States Senate are doing to help them. That's why I want to give every family sending a child to college a $4,000 tuition tax credit. This amendment would give help to those who practice self help--the families who are working and saving to send their child to college or update their own skills. College tuition is on the rise across America. Tuition at the University of Maryland has increased by almost 40 percent since 2002. Tuition for Baltimore Community College rose by $300 in one year. The average total cost of going to a 4-year public college is $10,635 per year, including tuition, fees, room and board. University of Maryland will cost more than $15,000 for a full time undergraduate student who lives on campus. Financial Aid isn't keeping up with these rising costs. Pell Grants cover only 40 percent of average costs at 4-year public colleges. Twenty years ago, Pell Grants covered 80 percent of average costs. Our students are graduating with so much debt it's like their first mortgage. The average undergraduate student debt from college loans is almost $19,000. College is part of the American Dream; it shouldn't be part of the American financial nightmare. Families are looking for help. I'm sad to say, the President doesn't offer them much hope. The Republican budget has all the wrong priorities. President Bush proposed increasing the maximum Pell Grant by just $100 to $4,150. I want to double Pell Grants. Instead of easing the burden on middle class families, the Republican budget helps out big business cronies with lavish tax breaks while eating into Social Security and creating deficits as far as the eye can see. We need to do more to help middle-class families afford college. We need to immediately increase the maximum Pell Grant to $4,500 and double it over the next 6 years. We need to make sure student loans are affordable. And we need a bigger tuition tax credit for the families stuck in the middle who aren't eligible for Pell Grants but still can't afford college. A $4,000 tax credit for tuition will go a long way. It will give middle class families some relief by helping the first-time student at our 4-year institutions like University of Maryland and the midcareer student at our terrific community colleges. A $4,000 tax credit would be 60 percent of the tuition at Maryland and enough to cover the cost of tuition at most community colleges. My amendment would help make college affordable for everyone. College education is more important than ever: 40 percent of new jobs in the next 10 years will require post-secondary education. College is important to families and it's important to our economy. To compete in the global economy, we need to make sure all our children have 21st century skills for 21st century jobs. And the benefits of education help not just the individual but society as a whole. To have a safer America and a stronger economy, we need to have a smarter America. We need to invest in our human capital to create a world class workforce. That means making a college education affordable.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in strong support of the Akaka amendment to increase funding for VA medical care. When America is at war, there should be no greater priority than to sustain our brave men and women in uniform. And just as we owe a debt of gratitude to those brave men and women that are fighting to keep us safe in Iraq and Afghanistan and the far corners of the world, we owe that same debt to the veterans who served before them. We need to get behind our troops and our veterans, and use this budget to support them. Our veterans need to know that America is behind them, and behind their families, 100 percent. As the former ranking member on the VA-HUD Appropriations Subcommittee, I fought to add more than $1 billion to last year's Presidential budget to make sure our veterans had the health care and benefits that they earned. Yet as Yogi Berra would say, we have deja vu all over again with this year's budget resolution. Once again the White House has sent us a budget that does not keep the promises we made to our veterans. At a time when private insurance is failing and the cost of prescription drugs is skyrocketing, the VA's 2006 budget request puts new toll charges and means tests on our veterans. It fails to fully cover the costs of medical inflation, and it cuts back on services for vulnerable veterans. And it fails to do enough to expand care for veterans returning from the Middle East--especially those with special mental health or prosthetics needs. Specifically, the budget proposes four things. First, the budget proposes to keep the VA closed to Priority 8 veterans. These are veterans who are not disabled as a result of their service, whom the VA considers to be higher income. Second, the budget proposes a new $250 enrollment fee for middle- income veterans in Priority Groups 7 and 8. Third, the budget proposes to increase prescription drug copayments from $7 to $15 for these same veterans. These two measures have been twice rejected by Congress, yet the administration included them yet again in the 2006 budget. Finally, the budget proposes to slash long-term care availability for veterans in Priority Groups 4 through 8 who are not ``catastrophically disabled.'' What does this mean? That means that VA won't provide long- term institutional care for many veterans, even some who are below the poverty line or have serious medical conditions that are not service- connected. The VA budget shifts the cost of paying for long-term care to Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance, leaving some of the most vulnerable veterans without a safety net. More than 2 years ago, the VA health care system stopped accepting new Priority 8 veterans. Manufacturing is fading and private health insurance is failing. And many of those affected are Priority 8 veterans. Many corporations involved in manufacturing had defined benefits plans that included health plans with guaranteed retiree coverage. For these veterans, VA healthcare is their last safety net, until they turn 65 and are eligible for Medicare. Many of my colleagues have heard me talk about the plight of veterans who worked for the former Bethlehem Steel Corporation--in Maryland there are nore than 10,000 Bethlehem Steel retirees alone. Their situation sums up the needs that too many of our Nation's veterans face. Many former Bethlehem steelworkers are Vietnam veterans. They came back from serving their country at war, and they continued to fight for America's national and economic security by working in our steel mills. But now, many have lost their health insurance because of Bethlehem Steel's bankruptcy. They are not eligible for Medicare yet. Under this budget, many will be turned away from VA--the safety net they counted on will not be there because VA will continue to shut out Priority 8 veterans. Bethlehem Steel's veterans, and other veterans who worked in manufacturing or for other businesses that don't offer health insurance, fought for their country and now they will have to fend for themselves on the open market for health insurance. I am deeply concerned that this policy and many other potholes in VA's budget leave our veterans paying toll charges, standing in lines, or without any health care at all. In the last 5 years, the VA-HUD subcommittee has provided large increases for medical care--$1.3 billion in 2001, $1 billion in 2002, $2.4 billion in 2003, $3 billion in 2004, and $1.2 billion in 2005. We did this to honor our commitment to our veterans, to give them the health care and benefits they have earned on the battlefield. We did it because our veterans didn't stand in waiting lines when they were called up or they volunteered to serve our country. So they shouldn't have to stand in line to see a doctor, and they shouldn't have to face toll charges to get the health care that is owned to them. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support our veterans in this budget by supporting the Akaka amendment.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr President, today I rise to ask for a clarification in the Congressional Record from yesterday, dated March 15, 2004. The Record mistakenly reported that I was to be added as a cosponsor of S. 379, the Firearm Manufacturers Protection Act. Apparently, my name was typed into the Record instead of that of Senator Mitch McConnell who had requested to be added as a cosponsor of that bill. I wanted the Record to reflect that I never requested to be added to the bill. As I hope my record reflects, I have been a strong opponent of the gun immunity bill because it puts one industry's bottomline ahead of the families and victims of gun violence. I opposed this bill and will continue to oppose it because it slams closed the courthouse door to those seeking justice for victims of gun violence, such as the victims of the horrific sniper who terrorized the citizens of DC, Maryland, and Virginia just a short time ago.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2005. To compete in this global economy, we need to make sure our students have 21st century skills for 21st century jobs. Vocational and technical education is an extremely important part of this effort. The Perkins Act, which provides $1.3 billion to help train more than 10 million Americans across the country, is a vital investment in our nation's high schools, community colleges, and our students. The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical program gives a boost to America's workforce development system by providing funds to schools that teach technical skills ranging from auto shop to computer programming. The Perkins Act also supports practical career programs and links between secondary and post-secondary education, helping students to move up the opportunity ladder and prepare them for high- skill, high-wage jobs. Students who have completed Perkins-supported programs are better prepared not only for higher education but for the workplace. The President has proposed eliminating funding for all vocational and technical education programs. This is the wrong way to go. If Perkins was eliminated, high schools, technical schools, and community colleges in every state would suffer. In Maryland, our schools would lose almost $19 million. Last year, we had more than 150,000 students enrolled in career and technical programs in Maryland. In the United States, 97 percent of high school students take at least one career and technical education course. One-third of college students are involved in career and technical programs. And almost 40 million adults attend short-term occupational training. If these schools had to close their doors or shut down their vocational programs, where would these students go to learn the skills they need to get good paying jobs? Vocational and technical education provides students across the country with opportunities to develop academic and technical skills that are critical for economic and workforce development. It is our job in the United States Senate to make sure these opportunities are there for the people who need them and to invest in our human capital to create a world class workforce. That is why I strongly support this bipartisan bill and I oppose any cuts to the Perkins Vocational and Technical Education programs.

Ms. MIKULSKI

Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, today I rise to oppose S. 256, the Bankruptcy Reform Bill. This bill is unfair to the little guy--to families who are struggling to overcome medical bills, unemployment, or divorce and find themselves forced to declare bankruptcy. Under the guise of reform it makes it tougher on families who have done the right thing. That's not what we should be doing in the United States Senate. Our job is to make sure we are protecting middle-class Americans and small businesses who are the lifeblood of our economy, not hurting them. While some of the reforms of the bill are good steps it goes too far to favor credit card companies and corporations over working families. This bill creates such strict standards that many of our nation's most vulnerable families are treated unfairly when they are forced to file bankruptcy because of the loss of a job, the high cost of health care or a divorce. This bill does nothing to address the problems these individuals are having, the problems that have driven them to bankruptcy and it provides virtually no discretion for courts dealing with these bankruptcy claims. I have supported bankruptcy reform legislation in the past--but it was not this bill and it was not this process. This bill was rushed through Committee with the promise that amendments would be considered on the floor, that there would be debate and an opportunity to improve the bill. Yet, none of the amendments were truly considered, most were opposed by Republicans marching in lock step to defeat every amendment to the existing bill. In short, there was no real opportunity to improve the bill. What came to the floor leaves the floor virtually unchanged and truly unfair to many of our citizens who are forced to file bankruptcy because of unforeseen circumstances like job loss, divorce or medical costs. Half of all families filing for bankruptcy have faced illness or high medical costs. Medical costs, especially for seniors, are one of the fastest growing causes of bankruptcy. These are not folks who use their credit cards to buy fancy suits, designer wares or other luxury goods. They are paying for the basic necessities of their lives with their credit cards. They are putting their food, clothing and medical bills on the credit cards. Nearly 9 out of 10 people file bankruptcy because of health care problems, job loss or divorce. These individuals don't want to file bankruptcy--in fact, they have tried to avoid bankruptcy. That's why they pay those medical bills with credit cards when they simply can't afford any other way. Or they skip going to the doctor all together because they know have no means to pay. And what happens--they get sicker, incur greater costs for catastrophic care and that sends them spiraling further into debt and forcing many into bankruptcy. We ought to be doing something to help those individuals--not creating a law that will make matters worse. The Senate should be on the side of those Americans who are facing hard times and hard decisions. We should be addressing the lack of health care and working to ensure that we are creating good, high paying jobs. I am opposing this version of the Bankruptcy Reform Bill because it creates needless and unfair hoops for these individuals to jump through and the rigid means test puts those in real need of relief at a disadvantage. It imposes new burdens on families already overburdened by the debt they must shoulder. Certainly we all agree that those who can afford to should pay their creditors back--that they should be responsible for their debt. Those debtors who charge thousands of dollars on luxury goods, new cars and the like, only to then declare bankruptcy, should be held accountable. Many of us can remember a mother or father who taught us about debt, taught us the dangers of getting into debt and to be responsible for paying all our debts back. But we need to be fair in how we calculate who can pay. And we need to make sure that the provisions are not so rigid that they allow courts no discretion to take into account the circumstances that lead to the bankruptcy. The legislation that the Senate considers today is different from past versions that I have supported. There is obviously the removal of the Schumer amendment which held those who block access to abortion clinics accountable for the court judgments that they have incurred. But it also gives women, single parents, families and those living in poverty less opportunity to overcome their hardships and get a fresh start. This bill punishes people, assumes that all those filing for bankruptcy have purposefully created their debt problems, imposes a strict standard that does not take into account the circumstances surrounding the bankruptcy and the real means of individuals to pay their debt back. That's not fair, it's not right, and it makes life tougher on working families. I urge my colleagues to join me in standing up for women, children and working families by opposing this bill.