Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, there is no question that our country's defense procurement process is broken. At a time when the American people are tightening their personal budgets, making sacrifices, and focusing on essentials, our defense acquisition program continues to run up huge bills. Just this year, the GAO reported that the major defense procurement program is $296 billion over budget. Not only are they over budget, they are behind schedule. In fact, 95 percent of DOD's largest acquisition programs are now an average of 2 years behind schedule. Every extra day, every additional dollar spent on these systems is a step backward for our Nation's other priorities. As we tackle the big challenges by getting our economy back on track or our health care system working again for all Americans or establishing a clean energy future, it is time that we focused on trimming the fat in our defense budget. I applaud our Armed Services chairman, Senator Levin, and the ranking member, Senator McCain, for introducing the bold plan that is now before the Senate, which will bring about reform. Their bill recognizes that making changes to acquisition starts at the beginning of the process, with the proper testing and the cost calculating and development procedures. It also returns discipline to the process by making sure the rules limiting cost are enforced. Those and other badly needed steps are going to help reform our system and return Federal dollars to meet the challenges we have on the horizon. Mr. President, that should be only the first step because the truth is that, while today's debate has been delayed for far too long, there is another hard conversation surrounding procurement that we have not yet even started, and that is the conversation about the future of the men and women who produce our tanks, our planes, and our boats. The skilled workforce our military depends on is a workforce that is disappearing today before our eyes. Our Government depends on our highly skilled industries, our manufacturers, our engineers, our researchers, and our development and science base to keep the U.S. military stocked with the best and most advanced equipment and tools available. Whether it is scientists who are designing the next generation of military satellites or engineers who are improving our radar system or machinists who are assembling warplanes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest strategic assets today. What if those weren't available? What if we made budgetary and policy decisions without talking about the future needs of our domestic workforce? It is not impossible. It is not even unthinkable. It is actually what is happening. We need to have a real dialog about the ramifications of these decisions before we lose the capability to provide our military with the tools and equipment they need because once our plants shut down, once our skilled workforce and workers move to other fields, and once that infrastructure is gone, it is not going to be rebuilt overnight if we need it. As a Senator from the State of Washington, representing five major military bases and many military contractors, I am very aware of the important relationship between our military and the producers that keep them protected with the latest technological advances. I have also seen the ramifications of the Pentagon's decisions on communities, workers, and families. As many here know, I have been sounding the alarm about a declining domestic aerospace industry for years. This isn't just about one company or one State or one industry. This is about our Nation's economic stability. It is about our skill base. It is about our future military capability. We have watched as the domestic base has shrunk. We have watched as competition has disappeared and as our military has looked overseas for the products that we have the capability to produce right here at home. Many in the Senate have spent a lot of time talking about how many American jobs are being shipped overseas in search of cheaper labor. But we haven't focused nearly enough attention on the high-wage, high- skilled careers being lost to the realities of our procurement system. That is why, today, I am going to be introducing an amendment that will require the Pentagon to explain to us in Congress and to the American people how their decisions affect good-paying jobs and the long-term strength of our industrial base. My amendment will help to ensure that our industrial base is capable of meeting our national security objectives. It took us a very long time to build our industrial base. We have machinists who have past experience and know-how down the ranks for more than 50 years. We have engineers who know our mission, know the needs of our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. We have a reputation for delivering for our military. But once those plants shut down, those industries are gone. We not only lose the jobs, but we lose the skills and the potential ability to provide our military with the equipment to defend our Nation and project our might worldwide. Preserving a healthy domestic base also breeds competition. That is good for innovation and, ultimately, for our taxpayers. So today, as we begin this very serious and necessary conversation on procurement reform, we cannot afford to forget the needs of our industrial base. We have to consider how we achieve reform while continuing to support the development of our industrial base here at home. It calls for thoughtful planning and projection about who our future enemies might possibly be and how they might possibly try to defeat us in this Nation. It is critical that our country and our military maintain a nimble and dynamic base. Once a new threat is identified, a solution has to be close at hand. The discussion we are having on procurement reform in the Senate is happening as our country faces two difficult but not unrelated challenges: winning an international war on terror and rebuilding a faltering economy. It would be irresponsible not to include the needs of our industrial base as we move forward because unless we begin to address this issue now, we are not only going to continue to lose some of our best paying American jobs, we are going to lose the backbone of our military might. I will be offering this amendment, and I would love to have the support of our colleagues to make sure we have a strong nation in the future.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 133, submitted earlier today.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank my colleague Senator Reed for his hard work on this bill. Unfortunately, our homeless shelters and our schools are seeing an increasing number of families and children experiencing homelessness and seeking services. This bill comes at an important time. And I am particularly pleased with the emphasis placed on prevention and rapid rehousing, and efforts to better serve homeless individuals, such as victims of domestic violence. Mr. President, I would like to inquire of my colleagues Senator Reed and Chairman Dodd regarding the definition of homelessness in HEARTH Act and amendment No. 1040.

Mrs. MURRAY. I look forward to working with my colleagues and the committee on improving services for students. Lastly, I understand that this amendment prohibits the Secretary from requiring that communities conduct actual counts of families and youth who are newly added to the HUD definition in HUD-mandated homelessness counts. Am I correct that this provision does not prohibit the Secretary from requiring communities to provide estimates of those who are newly added to the definition, so that communities may have a better sense of the shelter and housing needs of all families, children, and youth who will be considered homeless by HUD under this legislation?

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, by including language that acknowledges the various definitions of homeless in other Federal statutes, is it the Senators' intention that HUD funded homeless providers should be encouraged to engage with homeless providers receiving funds from other Federal agencies to utilize their assessments and counsel in making eligibility determinations.

Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Senator. As you know, this amendment contains a new definition of homelessness. Homelessness is an issue I have long been concerned about both the immediate consequences of not having housing, as well as the adverse effects it can have on the broader success of children and families. For example, children that experience homelessness are more likely to fall behind in school and to experience social and emotional difficulties that hinder their academic and workplace success. Therefore, the Federal Government not only helps provide housing services for youth and families, but also education services through the McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youths program at the Department of Education. I appreciate the efforts to broaden the definition of homelessness in the HEARTH Act. It is an important step forward. However, I want to ensure that this new definition of homelessness does not inadvertently cause a lapse in services or cause confusion with the definition of homelessness included in the McKinney Vento Education of Homeless Children and Youth program. Is it the Senators' intent that the definition of homelessness in the HEARTH Act, which covers homeless youth as well as families, should ever replace or change the definition of homelessness under the McKinney-Vento Education for Homeless Children and Youths program at the U.S. Department of Education?

Mrs. MURRAY. This amendment will broaden HUD's definition of homelessness to include a subset of children and youth who meet the definition of homelessness used by other federal statutes. I appreciate the inclusion of these children and believe it is a step in the right direction. In particular, it covers those children and youth who: (1) have experienced a long-term period without living stably or independently in permanent housing; (2) have experienced persistent instability; and (3) who are likely to continue to do so because of disability or other barriers. Since these concepts, such as the term ``long term period,'' are open to interpretation, is it the Senators' intent that HUD should consider the needs of children and the effects of instability on their developmental and academic progress when developing the regulations for this provision?

Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Senators. I have also worked hard on helping to encourage collaboration between the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Education to ensure the best services possible for homeless youth. Is it the Senators' intent that the Department of Housing and Urban Development should do everything in its power to coordinate with the Department of Education on serving homeless youth, and to ensure that no lapse in services under the Education of Homeless Children and Youths program occurs for students as any new HEARTH Act definition of homelessness is implemented?

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, rollcall votes in relation to the procurement bill are expected during tomorrow's session. Senators will be notified when the votes are scheduled.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the Senate now proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 135, which was submitted earlier today.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I further ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related to the resolution be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of S. Res. 134, which was introduced earlier today.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday, May 7; following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and there be a period of morning business until 10:30 a.m., with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the second half; further, I ask that at 10:30 a.m. the Senate resume consideration of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, if I may respond to the chairman of our committee, I appreciate his thanks and praise. But our colleagues should know, no one has spent more time and energy, not just for a few months but for a very long time, to make sure we have a responsible budget we can all be proud of to vote on today. I again thank him and his staff for their tremendous leadership, in calls late at night, when I am out on the west coast, and I know it is even later for him. I appreciate the tremendous amount of work he does, both policywise and making sure we keep the right fiscal balance. There is no one who is stronger in our caucus talking about how important it is to make sure we look at not just what we do today in terms of this budget but how we to do it in the future. Keeping that balance between spending and deficit is at the forefront of his mind. We would not be here today without him. I thank him.

Mrs. MURRAY. Thank you, Madam President. Let me start by commending Chairman Conrad for his leadership of our Budget Committee and especially for the hundreds of hours he and his staff have dedicated to getting this budget done and accommodating both the priorities and concerns of so many of us in this body. Putting together a budget is never an easy process, but I believe our chairman has achieved a very good balance that will set us on a course both to reduce our deficits and invest in the areas we know will make us stronger in the future: energy, health care, and education. A budget is a statement of priorities, and ours are very clearly in this budget. We put the middle class first, and we get our country back on track by investing in our future. There is no doubt that we have inherited great challenges at this time. We now face the worst economic crisis in generations. Since December 2007, we have lost 5.1 million jobs, including 3.3 million of those in just the past 5 months. So before we consider where we are going, I believe it is important today to talk a little bit about where we have been. Our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been bemoaning deficits and debt with not a moment of consideration for their own record on this issue. Back in 2001, Republicans controlled the full power of our entire Government. Under the leadership of President Bush and Republicans in Congress, record surpluses that were created under President Clinton became record deficits. Those Republican deficits grew and grew, and now today they add up to trillions of dollars in new debt that is going to be shouldered by future generations of Americans. So it was with this perspective, which I hope our Republican friends will start to acknowledge and own up to, that we know at this point in time we have two choices: Choice 1 is to continue down the Republican deficit path--no investments in the future, a widening gap between the rich and the middle class, and more massive deficits. Choice 2 is represented by the budget we present today. It improves the economy by investing in energy and education and health care reform so that we are stronger in the future, cutting taxes to the middle class, and addressing deficits so that our children do not continue to bear the burden of bad decisions well into the future. After 8 years of the Bush administration's very shortsighted budget and misplaced priorities, we are now working with President Obama to invest in our Nation's needs and chart a new course for America. We have chosen a new path with this budget. The American people deserve an economic plan that works for everyone in this country. Our budget makes responsible choices that will help get our economy moving again. I want to talk about a few of them. Let me start with education. We all know that education and training are the keys to our future strengths. In this new global economy, a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity, it is a requirement for success. We will not rebuild our economy and be competitive long term unless we can both create jobs and ensure that our American workers have the education and skills needed to fill those jobs. This budget before us invests strongly in education and in training. We also place a priority on making sure American students do not fall behind as they make their way into the global marketplace. Our budget helps to retrain American workers for careers in those new high-growth and emergent green industries, such as health care or renewable energy and energy-efficient construction, so that those workers stay in the middle class. This budget makes strong investments in early childhood education and home visiting programs to make sure that our young students are healthy and that they are ready for school. It also, importantly, invests in making sure college is affordable and accessible for more of our students. We want all of our students to achieve a postsecondary credential, whether it is through a registered apprenticeship, through a community college, or through a university. This budget helps point us in that direction. As a nation, we have to change the way we think about preparing our young people for careers, starting with making sure education works better. This current economic crisis has cost us dearly. Every weekend I go home to my home State of Washington, and I hear about another business that has closed or another family who cannot pay the bills. But we know that if we make changes and we make smart investments, we can move our country forward. Investing in education and investing in training is one of those smart investments. That brings me to our next investment. As we are all aware today, energy issues are some of the most pressing facing our Nation today. Our dependence on foreign oil has left us beholden to other nations, as middle-class families pay the price at the pump. By making renewable energy a priority, we can reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy in the future and help create green jobs here at home and leave a cleaner environment for future generations. This budget does that. On an issue that everyone knows is near and dear to my heart, I commend both the committee and President Obama for making veterans a priority in this budget process. Our men and women in uniform and their families have served and sacrificed for our Nation. After years of underfunded budgets and being overshadowed by other priorities, this budget finally does right by them. I commend my Budget chairman and our President and all of us for making sure that happens in this budget. This budget is honest with the American people about the cost of war, not just by paying for our veterans care but by paying for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan on budget for the first time since they started over 6 years ago. I also note that this budget meets our commitment to nuclear waste cleanup in my State and across the country. Workers at Hanford nuclear reservation and people of that community sacrificed to help our Nation win World War II. Hanford and other sites are now still home to millions of gallons of waste, and our Government needs to live up to our promise to clean them up. This budget does that. As is the case in many States across America, farming and ranching and agricultural production is my home State's largest industry. Protecting our agricultural sector is critical to the economy, the environment, and to our quality of life. We have to make sure our rural communities are strong. We worked to make sure we have a bright future for our farm families. Production agriculture, such as Washington State's wheat farming, is a very volatile business. A workable safety net such as in the farm bill is vital to the security of our family farms. I have also long supported the Market Access Program which provides funds for our producers to promote their products overseas and expand into those important international markets. Especially in these difficult economic times, when our foreign competitors are trying to limit our market access with tariffs, the last thing we should be doing is cutting programs such as MAP that will help growers in a competitive marketplace. I want my colleagues to know I will continue to work with everyone to make sure we find ways to support one of the staples of our economy, our agricultural community. We all know our health care system is broken. It needs real reform. Today we have an historic opportunity to finally tackle this challenge. These investments are not luxuries. They are essential to this country's future strength. That is why we have to prioritize the health professions workforce and access to quality care in rural areas. We have to work to ensure that preventive measures are given priority so American families are not left with giant bills for expensive care down the road. Some critics of this budget are saying now is not the time to tackle health care reform. I believe that is pretty shortsighted reasoning. There is a direct connection between our Nation's long-term prosperity and developing health care policies that stem the chronic bleeding in business and in State and national budgets. A recent editorial in the Everett Herald newspaper in my home State made this point very well. They said: Yes, the economy is the most urgent challenge. But our broken health care system and addiction to oil threaten to become our long-term undoing. They're all intertwined: Failing to find solutions to our long-term problems will likely stunt future economic expansions, creating longer and deeper downturns. Health care is an important priority in this budget before us. There has been a lot of talk over the past few weeks about the inclusion of reconciliation in this budget. Some following this debate are probably very surprised that our Republican colleagues, who were so adamant about using this procedural motion when it came to passing huge tax cuts for a very few while paying for it on the backs of many, would now be arguing against its inclusion in this budget. As I said earlier, there is a direct connection between America's long-term prosperity and improving our health care system. Today nearly 46 million Americans do not have health insurance. One in five working adults does not have good coverage today. There was a survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation this month that found 6 in 10 American families put off care because of cost, and 42 percent of those people said they relied on home remedies instead of going to see a doctor. Of course, just this week the covers of newspapers across the country are filled with photos of people wearing surgical masks. TV screens are filled with commentators talking about the possibility of a new strain of flu crippling the country and our economy. I can't think of a better time to be talking about the need to insure all Americans, to focus on prevention, and to make absolutely certain that when there is the possibility of a public health crisis, no one puts off medical care because they don't have the means to pay for it. But in order to do all that, we have to work together. Democrats would strongly prefer to address health care in a bipartisan manner and by going through the regular legislative process. It is our full intent to do just that. Democrats believe all Americans deserve high quality health care that reduces our costs, makes care more affordable, and creates jobs in the health care sector. We believe in protecting existing coverage when it is good, improving it when it is not, and guaranteeing health care for the millions of Americans who have none. We know the only way for our economy to fully recover is by making this critical investment in health care today. We are committed to working with Republicans to do that. But they have to demonstrate a sincere interest in legislating, because the stakes are too high and the cost of inaction is too great for us not to move forward. As long as Republicans want to be at the table, they have a seat. We welcome them. This is simply too important an issue not to have their voices. But it is also too important an issue to stall using partisan tactics. We have to address this crisis. We intend to move forward this year. I urge all colleagues to stop debating the process and, instead, join the conversation about how we move forward on this issue that is so critical to America's families today and to our Nation's future economic strength. America has paid dearly for the Bush administration's failure to invest in our Nation. We all know that. We don't have to tell the American people. They wake up to it every day: rising health care costs, pink slips, crumbling infrastructure, bills and mortgages they can't afford to pay. We tried it the other way for 8 years. It is time to invest in America again. It is time to give the middle class a break. It is time for honesty, and it is time to make bold decisions. This budget invests in our future and begins to get us back on track. I thank our chairman who is now in the Chamber and tell him I appreciate the tremendous work he and his staff and so many people did to make sure we now have a budget before us that begins to get America back on track. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY. Every day I pray for the health and welfare of the chairman of our committee.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I believe the next motion in order is the Ensign motion.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the amendment that is before us will freeze spending, nondefense and nonveterans funding, for 2 years and limit the growth of nondefense and nonveterans funding to 1 percent annually for fiscal 2012, 2013, and 2014. Now, I would remind all of us, we are in an economic crisis in this country. The investments we make in this budget that is before us are important for education, for health care, for energy, and for the other priorities that on which this country has asked us to move forward. I urge my colleagues to vote no on the motion before us so that we can have the flexibility to deal with these critical issues before us today.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Senator from New Hampshire has offered an amendment to the conference report that we not double the debt from the time President Obama took office through the end of 2019. Our budget does not go through 2019. It would not double the debt through 2014. The debt when President Obama took office was about $10 trillion. So this amendment is not necessary. I urge a no vote.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Senator from Nevada is correct. This amendment passed on the budget 98 to nothing. The Democrats are happy to support it. It is 8:25 at night. I suggest we take it on a voice vote.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, this is on an amendment many of us supported. We are happy to take it on a voice vote. If not, I will be supporting the motion, if the Senator insists on a vote this evening.