Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, there are a number of factors that caused the economic recession we are faced with today. All of us know that. We can blame executives on Wall Street, who made reckless choices and ignored long-term consequences to make a quick profit. We can blame the financial industry regulators, whose lax oversight failed to see the potential risks posed by the new, complex financial products that Wall Street was selling, and we can point a finger at those in the mortgage industry, who ignored that all bubbles eventually burst and that--in the case of housing bubble--the American taxpayers would be left to clean up the mess. But we also need to look a little closer to home as well. The reality is that one of the contributing causes of this recession is the fact that too many Americans made poor and very often uninformed financial choices when they bought homes in the last several years. Too many overestimated their own resources, didn't read the fine print, and didn't grasp the terms of their mortgages before signing on the dotted line. In fact, we need to recognize that too many Americans, from college students to senior citizens, are financially illiterate. The problem is not limited to mortgage holders. Too many Americans don't know how to budget their household expenses, manage their credit card debt, or even pay their bills on time. We need to ensure that we don't get into this situation again, by giving all Americans the skills to make sound financial decisions. We used to say the 3 R's of school are reading, writing, and arithmetic. Well, I think we need to add a fourth R--resource management. That is why today I am introducing legislation that will help ensure that all Americans get the skills they need to make financial decisions that will protect them and their families. The Financial and Economic Literacy Improvement Act of 2009 will require the Federal Government to step to the plate and become a real partner in helping Americans manage their finances and make good decisions about housing, employment, and education. This bipartisan bill, which is cosponsored by Senator Cochran, is aimed at helping people of all ages. Our goal is to ensure that high school and college students know the pitfalls of signing up for credit cards and can make informed decisions about student loans. All young people understand the importance of saving and making smart decisions to ensure a comfortable and dignified retirement and, most important, that we are taking steps to ensure we do not repeat the misguided and uninformed decisions that have contributed to the recession that we find ourselves in today. Under our bill, the Federal Government will become a strong supporter of making financial literacy education a core part of K-12 education. I believe that focusing this effort on young people is critical for two reasons: One, if we are going to avoid another crisis such as this one, we must begin by teaching the next generation to make smart financial decisions; two, because all signs point to another generation that is coming of age already saddled with debt, and we need to help them before it is too late. This past Sunday, this article ran on the front page of the Olympian newspaper from my State of Washington. I ask unanimous consent to have this article printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the article discusses the legislation I am introducing today. It also talks about the financial path that the next generation is currently on. The article pointed out that, right now, one-third of our college students have four credit cards when they graduate. More than half of our graduates have piled up $5,000 each in high interest debt. The number of 18 to 24-year-olds who have declared bankruptcy has almost doubled in 10 years. That article also points out that many of our young people are financially illiterate. They understand very little about concepts such as interest or minimum payments or credit reports and the financial reality of having to pay off their student loans for years to come. Today, with many of our schools struggling to pay teachers and maintain their current programs, a lot of our State and local governments cannot afford to ramp up financial literacy education right now. That is exactly where I believe the Federal Government needs to step up. We cannot afford for our young people to not understand their own finances. Our bill will authorize $125 million annually to go to State and local education agencies and their partnerships with organizations experienced in providing high-quality financial literacy and economic instruction. This funding we will provide will help make financial and economic literacy a part of core academic classes, develop financial literacy standards and testing benchmarks, and provide critical teacher training. This bill will also help schools weave financial concepts into basic classes, such as math and social studies. Importantly, this training will not end in high school. Our bill makes the same $125 million investment in teaching financial literacy in our 2- and 4-year colleges. That is critical. My constituents often write or tell me about the financial trouble they are struggling with. A lot of them are very desperate for help. They got into situations they didn't understand, and they don't have the resources to fix. For example, one woman from Olympia, who put off credit card bills to pay her mortgage, wrote to me and said: I am educated, but was unaware that by being late on a payment or by skipping a payment and trying to make it up, my interest rate could skyrocket to over 26 percent, and late fees could be exponential. Whether it is skyrocketing interest rates or credit cards or an adjustable rate mortgage that somebody can no longer afford or a retirement plan that they don't understand, I often hear the same thing from people: I wish someone had taught this to me in high school. This bill we are introducing ensures that we are teaching it in our schools, and it will help people learn the basic skills that will give them a leg up when they are dealing with their bankers. This crisis we are in cost us dearly. Every weekend when I go home I hear about another business that is closing or another family who cannot pay their bills. But we know if we make changes and smart investments, we can move our country forward. I believe this is one of those smart investments. In January, after President Obama took office, he called for an era of personal responsibility. I believe our bill helps Americans to usher in that era. I encourage my colleagues to take a look at the bill and cosponsor it and help us move it forward so we can make sure that we have a financially literate country.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for 7 minutes as in morning business.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, we have a lot of interesting landmarks in my home State of Washington, especially in Seattle. But one of my favorites has always been the globe that sits on top of the Seattle Post Intelligencer's building on Elliott Bay. The words, ``It's in the P.I.'' wrap around that globe, and it is more than just another quirky part of our skyline. It has symbolized the importance of the paper to generations of readers. For 146 years, the Seattle P.I., as everyone in Seattle calls it, has informed, investigated, enlightened, entertained, and, yes, sometimes irritated the people of our community. The P.I. staff has put politicians, businesspeople and bureaucrats to the test, and their work has distinguished the paper and won them well-deserved awards--from our cartoonist David Horsey's Pulitzers to a long list of prizes for public service journalism. But, today the P.I. published its last print edition. Its owner, the Hearst media chain, put it up for sale and hasn't been able to find a buyer. Hearst has said it will replace the paper with a smaller online edition, but it won't be the same. We have been lucky to live in a two-newspaper town. Two-newspaper communities used to be common, but they are rare these days. In Seattle, the Times and the P.I. had a Joint Operating Agreement for 26 years, but they were always rivals when it came to breaking news. Competition made both papers dig a little deeper and push a little harder. That competition meant everyone from corporate leaders to school officials to sports team owners were held to a higher standard. Our community is a better place as a result. Unfortunately, the P.I. is not the first major paper in our country to stop publishing this year. Last month, Denver's Rocky Mountain News closed its doors. And the P.I. may not be the last to close either. The reality is that newspapers have been struggling and cutting back for several years now. Many of the major papers across the country are worried about whether they will make it through the economic downturn. Like so many other companies, they are victims of the recession and a changing business environment. The depth of the problem hit home for me earlier this year when I visited the press in Olympia, our State's capital city. In 2001, there were 31 reporters, editors, and columnists covering the state house there. Now there are nine--nine. We have all noticed the shrinking press corps here in Washington, DC, too. Not too many years ago, we had more than a dozen reporters here covering the Washington State delegation. We have seen that number shrink to just a couple in the last year. This is really troubling to me because at the end of the day, newspapers aren't just another business. And if more close--and there is nothing to replace them--our democracy will be weaker as a result. For generations, newspaper reporters have been the ones who have done the digging, sat through the meetings, and broken the hard stories. A newspaper broke the Watergate scandal--and the story about horrible conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center. Newspapers have exposed graft and corruption at every level of government. They have uncovered environmental threats posed by strip mining, hog farming, and contaminated waterways. They have used the power of the press to expose injustice, prejudice, and mistreatment of people who don't have the power to speak up for themselves. And most importantly, newspaper stories have led to real change. In my community, the P.I.'s reports on asbestos led me to introduce my legislation to ban it and the P.I.'s investigation on the shortage of FBI agents in the Pacific Northwest has led to my work to increase the number of agents in Washington State. We need reporters to root out corruption, shine a light on the operations of government, and tell the people what is really going on in our communities. We need them to go to school board meetings, cover local elections, and attend congressional hearings. And, yes, we need them to push for information, to investigate, to request public records--and to fight when the government stands in the way. We are still working out what role the Internet will play in the Fourth Estate--and what role TV and radio have in the new media environment. There has been a lot of talk recently about whether online publications can--or will--adequately replace the paper editions. While there is something comfortable about the fact that we can pick up a paper, spread it out on the kitchen table, and cut out articles to stick on the fridge, what's most important to me is that if the media environment is really changing, someone will be there to step in and do the work newspapers do for our communities now. I really hope what we are seeing is just an evolution in the news business. I hope that when it all shakes out, the media will end up as strong as ever. I am going to miss the Seattle P.I., and I know all of Seattle and the Pacific Northwest will as well. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Chair. Madam President, for years, we have talked about the fact that the annual budget process is the truest test of priorities that the President and Congress engage in. For years, I was concerned about the last administration's budgets, and I was very vocal about that--too little investment in America, too many gimmicks, and too much focus on the few and not the many. It was those budgets and the policies they imposed that led us to the challenges we are now facing. President Obama inherited huge problems not of his own making. That is why his first budget blueprint is such a breath of fresh air. President Obama's budget is both a statement of priorities and a test of our commitment to making our country stronger for all Americans. Our Nation faces serious challenges now, but it is not a time to shy away from the investments that will ensure our prosperity and our competitiveness in the future. His budget builds the foundation that will make America stronger by investing in health care, energy independence, and education. The President inherited an economic recession and staggering deficits. The shortsighted budgets and policies of the past have left our infrastructure crumbling, our education system falling behind, and the debt of war in the pockets of our grandchildren. There is no doubt we have to take some serious steps to dig out of this hole. President Obama's budget takes steps to cut our deficit in half and to restore fairness to our tax system. Importantly, after 8 years of gimmicks, this budget is transparent and tells the American people exactly where we are spending our money. The President accounts for war spending and leaves room for natural disasters or other emergencies we might face. The President has been honest about the challenges that face this country, and now he is being honest about where we need to invest. He has warned Congress and the American people about the sacrifice we all have to make to move our country forward, and they are many. But he has also been clear that now is the time to continue to invest in health care and energy and education reform to ensure our long-term strength and prosperity. I come to the floor today to talk specifically about the need to invest in education. Investing in education is one of the most certain ways we can create jobs and strengthen our economy well into the future. Education means economic recovery, and in this global economy a good education is no longer just a pathway to opportunity, it is a prerequisite for success. Ensuring quality education for every American is essential to our future as a nation. The President and this Congress made a downpayment on that commitment in the Economic Recovery Act we passed last month. That bill meant help for students in Washington State--my State--who are struggling to afford and attend college and students across the country. It means serving more K-12 students' needs. It means the ability to restore the education cuts our States are facing. It means keeping teachers in their jobs and our class sizes down. Those investments we made in the economic recovery package are going to not only help create jobs, they are going to help our teachers and our parents in our communities keep their jobs while they modernize education for today's students. Those students are going to be tomorrow's highly skilled workforce, so we need to make this investment to stay strong as a nation. That economic recovery bill made a downpayment on our students' future. The next step we have to take is our budget, to help improve education for our kids and for all. The budget we are going to be seeing puts a long-needed emphasis on preparing students for the jobs of today and tomorrow, with the focus on science, math and technology skills and equipment. It focuses on 21st century skills and early childhood education. It talks about career and technical education and accessing and affording higher education, which includes 2-year colleges and technical training. So let me talk a minute about the budget and its details. The budget creates a 0-to-5 plan, which will continue to increase funding for Head Start, Early Head Start, and the child care development block grants. It encourages State and local investment in early education to help get information to parents about quality child care programs, including important home visiting programs for parents with young children. The budget will make important investments in preparing and supporting great teachers and school leaders for our schools. It will allow students to achieve their college dream by making critical funding to raise the Pell grant in this time of need, and it continues the new American Opportunity Tax Credit, which will help families across the Nation afford tuition. The budget also makes a 5-year, $2.5 billion investment in a new Access and Completion Incentive Fund to ensure that low-income students complete college. We know that only about 50 percent of our students who start a college education in this country complete it. We have to do a lot better than that because almost all of our good-paying jobs today require a credential beyond high school. I come to the floor today to say that now is not a time to sit back and just worry. Now is a time to be bold and make the critical investments in our country that are so long overdue. Nowhere is this clearer than in education. I applaud the President for making his commitment clear, and I pledge to work with him and every one of my colleagues who are willing to ensure that ours becomes the greatest education system in the world. Now let me say a word about some of the criticism we have been hearing from our friends on the other side of the aisle. I have heard a lot of talk about this budget ``taxing'' too much. Well, they must be reading a different budget than I am. President Obama's budget would not raise taxes on 95 percent of Americans. I think that is important, so let me say it again. Ninety-five percent of Americans will not see their taxes raised under this plan. In fact, too much of the tax burden in this country is being borne today by our working families, and President Obama is working hard to fix that. Nine of ten working families will see their taxes go down with his budget plan. The President's Making Work Pay credit--$400 for individuals and $800 for families--is extended under his budget plan. That credit cuts taxes for 95 percent of our working families. It cuts taxes for 95 percent of our working families. The American Opportunity Education Tax Credit is going to help our families pay for college by providing a $2,500 credit to offset the cost of tuition and related expenses, and it makes the credit partially refundable. Finally, the budget increases eligibility for the refundable portion of the child credit. Those are just three ways this administration is focusing on tax relief for those who need it most--our working families. So while we are hearing a lot--and we will continue to hear a lot, no doubt--from our friends on the other side about ``taxing'' too much, it is important that we all look at the facts and not buy into the rhetoric. After 8 long years of budgets that left our American families behind, I look forward to working with President Obama and a bipartisan group in Congress to move forward and invest in the future strength of this Nation. We have a lot of great challenges ahead, but I believe we can and we will overcome them by working together, making some tough choices, and investing in the best resource we have--the American people. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, what is the order?

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation that would make a tremendous difference in the lives of the millions of Americans suffering from neurological illnesses, injuries, or disorders. An estimated one in three Americans suffers from some kind of neurological condition, from Alzheimer's to Parkinson's to multiple sclerosis. An increasing number of our troops and veterans suffer from disorders such as Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD. Yet, despite this, we still have only a limited understanding of how the brain works, or how best to treat, diagnose, and cure neurological diseases and conditions. It is taking a terrible toll on our families and communities. I know from experience how devastating these brain injuries and disorders are for victims and their families. My own father developed MS when I was young, and when he became too sick to work, my family had to rely on food stamps for a time just to get by. Every day, we hear heart-wrenching stories of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans suffering from TBI and PTSD. Veterans with these disorders are more likely to struggle with joblessness, homelessness, substance abuse, and depression. Many are in pain, desperate for help, but unsure where to find it. And, tragically, an increasing number are taking their own lives as a result. A recent study by the Institute of Medicine, IOM, found that the long-term health consequences of TBI alone include dementia, Parkinson's-like symptoms, seizures, and problems related to socialization and unemployment. Clearly, TBI and related disorders will affect our servicemembers and veterans far into the future, and we owe it to them to develop better treatments and understanding of these injuries and disorders. The Neurotechnology Initiative Act of 2009, which I am introducing today, would coordinate our efforts to support new developments in research, speed up our understanding of the human brain, and help lead to treatments for all victims of neurological disorders. The legislation would make needed improvements to the research system in our country, which now is disjointed, often limiting the ability for life-altering research to reach patients in need. For example, it costs nearly $100 million more--and takes 2 years longer than average--to bring a drug that treats a neurological disease to the market. The combined economic burden of these illnesses and disorders is estimated at $1 trillion annually. The National Neurotechnology Initiative Act would increase funding to the National Institutes of Health, NIH; help remove bottlenecks in the system to speed up research; coordinate neurological research across federal agencies by creating a blueprint for neuroscience at NIH; and streamline the FDA approval process for life-changing neurological drugs--without sacrificing safety. The act also has economic benefits. It will help create jobs in the emerging field of neurotechnology. By developing better treatments, we can reduce health care costs for everyone. This research also has the potential to transform highly specialized areas of medicine, computing, and defense. Most importantly, it could save or improve the lives of millions of Americans. I am proud that this bill has support in the House, and I look forward to working on it with my colleagues here in the Senate.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation that would make a tremendous difference in the lives of the millions of Americans suffering from neurological illnesses, injuries, or disorders. An estimated one in three Americans suffers from some kind of neurological condition, from Alzheimer's to Parkinson's to multiple sclerosis. An increasing number of our troops and veterans suffer from disorders such as Traumatic Brain Injury, TBI, and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, PTSD. Yet, despite this, we still have only a limited understanding of how the brain works, or how best to treat, diagnose, and cure neurological diseases and conditions. It is taking a terrible toll on our families and communities. I know from experience how devastating these brain injuries and disorders are for victims and their families. My own father developed MS when I was young, and when he became too sick to work, my family had to rely on food stamps for a time just to get by. Every day, we hear heart-wrenching stories of Iraq and Afghanistan veterans suffering from TBI and PTSD. Veterans with these disorders are more likely to struggle with joblessness, homelessness, substance abuse, and depression. Many are in pain, desperate for help, but unsure where to find it. And, tragically, an increasing number are taking their own lives as a result. A recent study by the Institute of Medicine, IOM, found that the long-term health consequences of TBI alone include dementia, Parkinson's-like symptoms, seizures, and problems related to socialization and unemployment. Clearly, TBI and related disorders will affect our servicemembers and veterans far into the future, and we owe it to them to develop better treatments and understanding of these injuries and disorders. The Neurotechnology Initiative Act of 2009, which I am introducing today, would coordinate our efforts to support new developments in research, speed up our understanding of the human brain, and help lead to treatments for all victims of neurological disorders. The legislation would make needed improvements to the research system in our country, which now is disjointed, often limiting the ability for life-altering research to reach patients in need. For example, it costs nearly $100 million more--and takes 2 years longer than average--to bring a drug that treats a neurological disease to the market. The combined economic burden of these illnesses and disorders is estimated at $1 trillion annually. The National Neurotechnology Initiative Act would increase funding to the National Institutes of Health, NIH; help remove bottlenecks in the system to speed up research; coordinate neurological research across federal agencies by creating a blueprint for neuroscience at NIH; and streamline the FDA approval process for life-changing neurological drugs--without sacrificing safety. The act also has economic benefits. It will help create jobs in the emerging field of neurotechnology. By developing better treatments, we can reduce health care costs for everyone. This research also has the potential to transform highly specialized areas of medicine, computing, and defense. Most importantly, it could save or improve the lives of millions of Americans. I am proud that this bill has support in the House, and I look forward to working on it with my colleagues here in the Senate.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. My colleague and subcommittee ranking member, Senator Bond, is correct. This resulted from a clerical error involving confusion between two different projects in the city of Casper. Senator Barrasso should not be listed as a sponsor of the Civic Auditorium project.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I believe women around the world should have access to safe health care that will help them plan their families and stay free of diseases. These are basic rights. That is why I rise in opposition to the amendment being offered by Senator Wicker to block funding to the United Nations Population Fund. In the developing world, ``complications from pregnancy'' is still one of the leading causes of death for women. More than half a million women die each year--one every minute--from preventable complications of pregnancy and childbirth. Madam President, 201 million women can not get access to safe, modern contraception even w en they want it, and 6,800 new cases of HIV occur every day. With its mission ``to ensure that every pregnancy is wanted, every birth is safe, every young person is free of HIV/AIDS, and every girl and woman is treated with dignity and respect,'' the United Nations Population Fund is working every day to make things better. For nearly 40 years, UNFPA has provided more than $6 billion in aid to about 150 countries for voluntary family planning and maternal and child health care. They are helping more women survive childbirth. They are providing contraceptives to help women plan their families and stay free of HIV/AIDS. They are promoting access to basic services, including clean water, sanitation facilities, food, and health care for poor women and girls. Yet Senator Wicker and other supporters of this amendment would deny women around the world this basic care because they believe misinformation that has been spread by antichoice lobbyists who say this fund would pay for coerced abortions. The reality is that our government already prohibits any money from being used to fund coerced abortions. And, no U.S. money goes to China. This bill actually continues that policy. So all Senator Wicker's amendment would do is prevent women around the world from getting access to basic health care services--services that we take for granted here in the United States. All of us would agree that we want to see fewer abortions in the world. I certainly do not condone funding coercive abortion practices in China or anywhere else. And I cannot accept that we would deny women life-saving care because of a dishonest lobbying campaign. Not only is contributing to UNFPA the right thing to do--it is in our best interest. By helping to lift families out of poverty, and slow the spread of disease, we can reduce conflicts and bring stability and hope to some of the most troubled regions in the world. I am proud that President Obama is pledging to refund UNFPA after the previous administration consistently canceled funding for the agency. I urge my colleagues to vote down the Wicker amendment. So let me simply say that I believe that women around the world should have access to safe health care that will help them plan their families and stay free of diseases. These are basic rights, and that is why I oppose the amendment that is being offered by Senator Wicker to block funding to the United Nations Population Fund.

Mrs. MURRAY. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 635

Mrs. MURRAY. To the Senator from Wisconsin I would say, yes, that is our expectation.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, as chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies, I rise to clarify an error that we have found in the explanatory materials accompanying H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act. Included within the Transportation-Housing Division of the bill is an appropriation of $570,000 within the TCSP program for transportation improvement in the Antelope Valley in Lincoln, NE. The attribution table that accompanies the explanatory statement to the bill inadvertently omits the name of the Senate sponsor of that appropriation. Mr. President, the Senate sponsor of the project is my colleague, Senator Ben Nelson.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise this evening to address criticism that has been raised by some of our Republican colleagues about the Omnibus appropriations bill that is before us today. As I have talked about repeatedly, this bill that is in front of us now is very critical. At the end of this week, a few days from now, the continuing resolution we have been operating under is going to expire. At that time, the Government will shut down if we do not take action. This bill we are talking about keeps the Government running at a time when we desperately need Federal employees on the job working to help our economy recover. Our communities are counting on the money and the work in this bill. This bill fulfills the commitment we made to our communities back in June and July, when we marked up these appropriations bills. It ensures that the basic needs of Government, from housing to law enforcement, to transportation safety are met and that our agencies keep up with inflation. I have come to the floor because some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been raising questions about the 1 percent of funding in this bill that they call earmarks. I wish to spend a minute talking about that 1 percent of this funding. The fact is, this is money that is being directed to critical needs in our communities, projects that our local leaders say they badly need so they can keep people safe or help them fund housing or ensure that local businesses stay strong. Opposing that money means opposing new jobs, updating infrastructure and economic opportunity in local communities, including many in my home State at a time when communities across this country need all the help they can get to recover from this economic crisis. For example, this bill includes $3 million to help widen a very dangerous stretch of road between Walla Walla and Pasco in my home State of Washington. Now, in the last 18 years, there have been over 1,000 accidents on that stretch of highway. Over 400 people have been hurt and more than 30 people have died. It is so dangerous a stretch of highway that local officials formed a coalition just to fight for funding to widen that highway. I have been very proud to work with them to help make their community safe. The sooner we can get that highway fixed the better. This bill also includes $3 million to reimburse communities in Washington State for some of the cost of protecting our northern border. Now, most of the communities on our northern border are very small. But they bear the large burden of protecting our Nation from international criminals, including drug dealers and potential terrorists, and jailing international fugitives. In fact, in Whatcom County, in the northern part of my State of Washington, they spend about $2 million from their general fund, from the county's general fund, every year to process these border-related criminal cases. They shoulder, this poor little county, an unfair burden in return for keeping all of us safe. Those police and sheriffs along the border have made it clear to me that they need help. I was glad to work in this bill to help ensure that the Federal Government, us, is stepping up to support that local county. This bill includes over $700,000 to build 83 studio apartments for chronically homeless and mentally ill people in Seattle, with at least a third of the space designated for homeless veterans. Because of this housing money, they are going to have a stable place to live. It will prevent some of the most vulnerable people in our community from falling through the cracks and allow them the chance to focus on getting treatment and rebuilding their lives. Cascade Supportive Housing is a key part of King County's 10-year plan to end homelessness. Not only will this money help the people who live there, it will take a burden off the social safety net and ultimately save all of us money in services we would have had to provide. So like all of the projects listed, this might not have gotten Federal support if that community had not come to me as their Senator and if I had not been able to work hard, as my job is, to secure money in this appropriations bill. I am proud I can include funding for programs that help my constituents. We have heard these projects called insulting and wasteful. Tell that to the commuters in Walla Walla. Tell that to the families trying to keep their homes in Seattle. Tell that to law enforcement personnel in Bellingham in Whatcom County. Washington State is 2,500 miles away from this Nation's Capitol. When I come to DC, it is my responsibility to fight for my home State. I don't want to leave the decisions about what is best for Washington up to a bureaucrat in an agency who has never been to or even heard of Walla Walla or Pasco or Blaine, who has no idea who the people in those communities are or what their needs are. The Founders of our Constitution didn't want that either. In fact, our Nation's Founders made it clear that the administration has no right to spend money without congressional approval. They believed the people, through their representatives--and that is all of us--should make those decisions. Without congressionally directed spending, the President would have unprecedented power to determine where all of our taxpayer dollars are spent. It is easy for critics to pull out projects that may sound funny to them or make an easy cable news story. They do this and then try to paint every bit of congressionally directed spending with one brush. I reject those efforts. I reject the notion that each and every bit of spending we direct is correct or wasteful. My constituents do too. Additionally, unlike the pictures some of my colleagues are trying to paint, none of this spending is secret. Last Congress, Democrats led the most sweeping ethics and earmark reform in history. This year, the Appropriations Committees in both the House and Senate went out of their way to voluntarily bring that transparency to a new level. Last year, we reduced earmark spending by 43 percent. After President Obama won in November, we then went back and cut it by 5 percent more. Each and every earmark in this bill now has a name attached to it. Anyone who wants to can go online and find out who is asking for money and for what. That is the accountability and the transparency our constituents deserve and we have provided. Secondly, Democrats are not the only ones directing money in this bill. Nearly half of the earmarks Republicans object to were inserted by Republicans themselves. This bill directs $475,000 to build an emergency shelter at a Women's Bay in Alaska; $475,000 to Harbor Homes in Nashua, NH, to build housing for honorably discharged homeless veterans; $475,000 for the construction of a residential substance abuse treatment center for women and their children in Sioux Falls, SD; $617,000 for a new building for the Houston food bank in Houston, TX; and $190,000 to build low-income housing in New Orleans. These and dozens of other projects are going to help families who are hungry or veterans who are homeless. They will enable parents to get access to high-quality childcare and families to find safe, affordable housing. They are good projects, and I am sure the Republican Senators who put them in these bills did so because they know this money will make a real difference for people in their communities. They know that if they didn't fight for funding in this bill, it is going to be up to some DC bureaucrat who might not know that the Houston food bank needs a new roof or that there is a real need for an emergency shelter at Women's Bay, AK. All of these create jobs. They direct money to vital infrastructure needs. They help strengthen communities for the future. Senators who oppose this bill say it is full of waste. I doubt any of the Senators who asked for this money would say their project was money gone to waste. I bet neither would the communities that need the money to help shelter families or support businesses or keep people safe. The point is, just as I don't expect a Senator from Oklahoma or Arizona to know the needs of Walla Walla or Bellingham, I don't want to tell another Senator that I know their State better than they. We have huge needs in this country today. We cannot afford to tie this bill up any longer on petty, baseless arguments. We cannot afford to risk shutting down the Government at the end of the day. I urge colleagues, let's get this bill passed. Let's move forward. Let's get to work addressing the real problems Americans face every day. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY. I yield back our time.

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the amendment that has just been offered by the Senator from Nevada. I go home every weekend and I talk to families across my State. There is no doubt that people are hurting. Thousands of people have been laid off from their jobs, and thousands more are worried that this week they are the ones who are going to be laid off from their jobs. Since we first came into session in January, we have been working as hard as I have ever seen to address these challenges that are facing millions of Americans today--losing their jobs, losing their homes, losing their retirement. We are trying to get this economy back on track and instill some confidence in this country so we can move forward. We passed a major economic recovery package just a few weeks ago. It is being implemented as we speak and will be implemented over the coming weeks and months. Here we are today talking about a bill that basically is the responsibility of Congress, every single year, to fund the Government agencies that help make our country work. We should have had this bill passed 3, 4, 5 months ago. We did not. This bill was done. It was ready to go by the end of July. All of the appropriations committees had finished their work. They had passed them out of the Appropriations Committee, almost all of them on a unanimous vote, some of them with just a few negative votes in committee. But the responsibility of the Senate and House and Congress every year is to pass our spending bills. We pass these bills in order to make our agencies work, whether it is the Food and Drug Administration that makes sure our food is safe, whether it is our air traffic controllers who manage the flights out of our airports, whether it is our health care agencies that do research and important work for this Nation's health, whether it is Government agencies that fund agriculture or any of the other agencies we have. These are people who go to work every day whose function it is to make our economy and our country work so that average citizens do not have to sit at home and worry about whether the drug they purchase is safe or whether the agriculture they buy at the market is safe or whether their schools are funded or whether we provide individuals the basic health care Americans know they need in order to keep their families secure. It is too bad these bills didn't pass a few months ago. Why didn't they? Because we had an administration whose bottom line was to say no. The President at the time, President Bush, said: I will say no to these bills as they come to my desk. But here in the Senate and in the House, we said: These bills are important, but if this President is going to veto them, we are going to wait a few months for the election. That happened, we have a brandnew President, and, unfortunately a few months late because we were working on an economic stimulus package, we are here to pass these bills. I wish they were done a few months ago. I know all of us do. But we should not delay it any further. All of the people who worked with us to get these bills passed, everyone in the country, whether it is a YMCA that has a domestic violence center that is waiting for $100,000 that we marked up in committee and appropriated last year for them, or highway projects we marked up in this bill, or transit projects, across the board, whether it is law enforcement, whether it is consumer product safety, whether it is the numerous housing agencies that are funded in this--they have known for several months what they are going to get. They are waiting for us to finish our work this week, by this deadline, Friday, so we do not go back to a CR. It is our responsibility to pass these bills. The Senate had a very strong vote just a few hours ago to say we are not going to work off a continuing resolution. We are going to do a responsible job of funding these agencies, as we said. The amendment of the Senator from Nevada that now comes before us sends us into a tailspin. It says we are going to send these bills back to the Appropriations Committee to cut some $20 billion out of them and come back to us. First of all, just from a process point of view, this is not going to happen by this Friday, and if we do not get this bill passed by this Friday, the Government shuts down. I can talk about the consequences of that. I have been in this body before when the Government shut down. It is not pretty, and we do not want to be there for a million reasons that I am happy to talk about for some time, but we will leave that for another day. The fact is, to send this bill back to the Appropriations Committee and tell them to cut $20 billion out of it, that will underfund critical initiatives this Senate and this House believe are important. Let me talk for a minute about housing. We all know that one of the reasons our economy is in such trouble today is because of the housing crisis that has come before us. In this bill--if we do not pass it as it is written and before the Senate today, we have about 45,000 families who will lose their jobs on top of the thousands we have already seen. We cannot afford to put those families in jeopardy. Yet that is essentially what will happen if the amendment of the Senator from Nevada is agreed to. We are working hard to make sure our families do not go into foreclosure. The amendment of the Senator puts all of those families at risk. Single-family guaranteed housing loans are at risk under the amendment of the Senator. Federal law enforcement efforts through the Department of Justice are at risk through the amendment of the Senator. Antiterrorist enforcement programs through the Department of Treasury are at risk under the amendment of the Senator. U.S. attorneys are at risk. Food and medical product safety--right at a time when we are all worried about peanut butter--is at risk. Consumer product safety--the risk goes on. All of these priorities that we worked through our committee on a bipartisan basis and said we need to move these initiatives forward are at risk under the amendment of the Senator. I believe we have to all go back to our responsibilities. All of us wish the bill could have passed a few months ago. It didn't. It is in front of us now. We need to pass this bill, get it to the President's desk, and then we will have an opportunity to look at a budget for 2010. Our Budget Committee will look at that budget hard, we will pass the budget out--it will have to pass in the Senate and House--and it will set the parameters for next year's appropriations bills. Those appropriations committees will then, in the next few months, begin to work on their bill. For anybody who has issues, small or large, that is the appropriate place to begin the debate and amendment process and hopefully in regular order to pass those bills and move forward. But we should not jeopardize this bill at this point. That is not responsible. That is not what any of us should be doing at this point. Finally, let me talk about the debt issue we have been hearing so much about. None of us wants to operate this country in debt. All of us are fiscally responsible. I have heard every Member of the Senate come forward and talk about making sure we keep our house in order. Who got us to where we are today? The Republicans who came into power under George Bush turned historic surpluses into historic deficits by not being honest about the costs in front of us--whether it was the Iraq war or whether it was other costs that were paid off-budget, emergencies across the country--not coming forward and being honest about the fact that we do need to fund health care research or education for our kids. Why have these bills not passed before the election? Because even Republicans didn't want to cut education or to cut health care, which would have been what we had to do to meet the President's budget level. I take a backseat to no one when it comes to making sure our country moves forward in a fiscally responsible way and deals with the debt we have. But at the cost of laying off thousands of people because we are not being responsible and up-front about the job we have to do is irresponsible. I hope our colleagues will defeat the amendment by Senator Ensign, move on, pass this bill this week, and then we can have all the debate we want about the budget that will come before this body shortly, about the appropriations moving forward. Let me remind all of us that what we are talking about here is extremely important. No one wants to get a pink slip. No one wants to see their job lost. No one wants to see their health care at risk, their education at risk, or for that matter, within my appropriations bill, their flight from their airport at risk because we have not added air traffic controllers, which is in this bill. There are many other issues in this bill that are at risk under the proposal of the Senator, and I urge our colleagues to defeat this amendment and move forward, doing what we were sent here to do, and that is be responsible. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I modify my request and ask unanimous consent that Senator Coburn be allowed to speak for 5 minutes on the amendment, and following his remarks, the Senate move to a period of morning business, with the time equally divided in the usual manner with a 10-minute limitation.

Mrs. MURRAY. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I would ask the Senator from Alaska which amendment she is sending.