Patty Murray

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 2:30 p.m.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions be authorized to meet, during the session of the Senate, on May 15, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. in room SD-430 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Progress and Challenges: The State of Tobacco Use and Regulations in the U.S.''

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 10 a.m. in room SD-106, of the Dirksen Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``The State of VA Health Care.''

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Online Advertising and Hidden Hazards to Consumer Security and Data Privacy.''

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 2:30 p.m.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 15, 2014, at 10 a.m., to hold an African Affairs subcommittee hearing entitled, ``#BringBackOurGirls: Addressing the Threat of Boko Haram.''

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that all time be yielded back.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask to speak as in morning business.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, first of all, I wish to thank my colleague Senator Warren, who is joining me on the floor. We are here together to talk about a question that could not be more critical to family budgets and to our economy as a whole; that is, what can we do to break down the barriers that women still face in our workforce and make sure women and their families have the fair shot they deserve. This is a question I know Senator Warren cares very deeply about. She has brought an enormous amount of leadership and focus to this debate. I am very appreciative that she is here to speak. So I would yield to her first and then I will finish speaking when she gets done.

Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts again for all of her extremely hard and important work to expand economic opportunity and security for women and their families. She has been an extremely important voice in this debate, and I am delighted she is joining us today. Yesterday I held a hearing on this topic in the Senate Budget Committee. We invited a working mother, whose name was AnnMarie Duchon, to testify about some of the challenges that she had faced. AnnMarie told us that she loves her job at the University of Massachusetts- Amherst, but since the day that she started, she made a lower salary than her male counterpart who was doing the exact same job. They had the exact same responsibilities. Both of them had taken a pay cut to accept that job, and they both graduated from the same university in the same year. When AnnMarie found out that he was making more than she was--even though they had the exact same resume, qualifications, and years of graduation--she went in and asked for a raise. She was told that she couldn't have one. She stayed on that job and continued to work hard. It wasn't until her husband's job was at risk that she started thinking about how much those lost wages meant to her and her family. She ran the numbers, and she found out that over the years she had missed out on more than $12,000 in wages compared to her male counterpart who was doing the exact same work. AnnMarie and her husband are first generation college graduates. They have a 5-year-old daughter who is in full-time daycare because both AnnMarie and her husband have to work. AnnMarie told us yesterday that when she realized her lost income amounted to 1 year's worth of child care or 10 months of payments on their mortgage or student loans, she said that was heartbreaking. AnnMarie was ultimately able to go back and convince her employers--by showing them the math--to give her equal pay. But as we know, unfortunately, most women are not able to do that and many don't even know that they are earning an unfair wage. That is a real loss, both for our families and for our economy as a whole. We heard what $12,000 could have meant for AnnMarie's household budget, but women's contributions in the workforce have also made a huge difference to our overall economic strength. As working families have felt more and more strained by the rising costs for everything from college tuition to childcare and health care, and an economy in which the gap between those at the top and everyone else seems to be getting wider and wider, women's economic contributions have helped ease the burden. Economist Heather Boushey, who also testified yesterday at our hearing, found in a recent study that between 1979 and 2012 the U.S. economy grew by almost 11 percent as a result of women joining our labor force. As we think today about ways to support growth in the 21st century, it is absolutely clear our country's economic success and that of our middle-class families go hand-in-hand with women's economic success. So we have a lot more work to do because despite all the progress we have made and all the glass ceilings that have been broken, women still face barriers that are holding them, their families, and our economy back. Stories such as AnnMarie's--stories of women who received lower wages for the same exact work as men--are still far too common. Because women are more likely to be the primary caregiver in a family, the lack of paid leave at most jobs means women today experience higher turnover, lost earnings, and are more likely to be passed over for promotions that would help them advance. In addition, our outdated Tax Code works against married women who choose to go back to work as a second earner because their earnings are counted on top of their spouse's. They can actually be taxed at a higher rate, and that deters some mothers from choosing to re-enter the workforce, especially when you consider the high cost and lack of access to high-quality childcare. Those kinds of challenges are especially pronounced for women and, in particular, mothers, who are struggling today to make ends meet. We know that two-thirds of minimum wage earners are women. Their jobs are disproportionately unlikely to offer any flexibility when, for example, a child gets sick or needs to be picked up early from school. And their earnings are quickly swallowed by costs associated with work, such as childcare or transportation. It is also important to note that our outdated policies disproportionately affect women when it comes to their retirement security because, on average, women earn less than men, accumulate less in savings, and receive smaller pensions. Today nearly 3 in 10 women over 65 depend on Social Security for their only income in their later years. All of my colleagues and I should be alarmed that the average Social Security benefit for women over 65 is just $13,100 per year. Imagine living on that. That is not enough to feel financially secure. The impact of these barriers is increasingly clear. Over the last decade the share of women in the labor force has actually stalled, even as other countries have continued to see more women choosing to go to work. Experts believe that a major reason for that is that, unlike in many other countries, in the United States we have not updated our policies to reflect our 21st century workforce and help today's two- earner families succeed. At a time when we need to be doing everything we can to grow our economy and strengthen our middle class, that is not acceptable. Women have to have an equal shot at success. First and foremost, that means we need to end unfair practices that set women back financially. We took a very good step forward with the Affordable Care Act, which prevents insurance companies today from charging women more than men for coverage--which they did before that Act. But we need to do more to make sure women are getting equal pay for equal work. My good friend and colleague Chairman Mikulski has led the way on the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would provide women with more tools to fight paycheck discrimination. Giving the millions of women earning the minimum wage a raise--as Senator Warren just talked about--would also go a long way toward that effort. Of course, we have to update our Tax Code so that mothers who are returning to the workforce do not face a marriage penalty. In addition to expanding the earned income tax credit for childless workers, the 21th Century Worker Tax Cut Act that I introduced would provide a 20-percent deduction on the second earner's income for working families with young children to help them keep more of what they earned. As we get rid of these discriminatory practices, we should also recognize the challenges that working parents face, and we should put in place a set of policies that help them at work and at home. A big part of that is investing in expanded access to affordable, high- quality childcare. When parents go to work, they deserve to know that their child is safe and thriving while they are at work. There are many steps that this Congress could and should take through our Tax Code and by building on successful programs, such as Head Start, to help give working parents the peace of mind they deserve. Finally, we need to build on and strengthen Social Security with policies that make it easier for women and their families to build a secure retirement. There is, of course, a lot more that we can do in addition, but I believe any one of those changes would have a real impact. As the Presiding Officer knows from our Budget Committee hearing yesterday, AnnMarie testified and told us that she hopes when her daughter enters the workforce, pay inequity will be just as much of a relic as the days before the iPhone. I could not agree more. Acting to expand economic opportunity for women is the right thing to do. It is part of our ongoing work to uphold our country's most fundamental values. But as our country's recent history shows, it is also an economic necessity--both for our families and for our broader economy. That is why it is so disappointing to see that when it comes to issues affecting women. Some of our Republican colleagues are laser- focused on turning back the clock. We saw this just yesterday when the senior Senator from South Carolina came to the floor and tried to pass an extreme bill that would severely limit women's reproductive rights. Women today would much rather see Congress focusing on expanding opportunity and helping working families than on getting in between a woman and her doctor. Over the next few months, we are going to see Democrats continuing to fight for goals such as achieving pay equity, providing access to affordable childcare, and raising the minimum wage--all of which would move women, families, and our economy forward not backward. I hope that our colleagues on the other side of the aisle will be willing to join us in this very important effort. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the achievements of Ms. Vivian E. ``Bo'' Smith-Tallan. During her years of service, Ms. Smith demonstrated tireless dedication to her country, and specifically to Fairchild Air Force Base and the greater Spokane area. Ms. Smith-Tallan, who hails from Maryland, entered the Air Force in 1976 directly out of high school. She retired from the Air Force as a master sergeant after serving for 20 years on active duty. Ms. Smith- Tallan completed a degree in law enforcement and is a graduate of the Spokane County Police Academy. Prior to her present position, she was a police officer with the Medical Lake Police Department and bailiff for the Airway Heights courts system. While on Active Duty in the law enforcement career field, Ms. Smith- Tallan served in numerous capacities including gate guard, patrolman, investigator, pass and registration noncommissioned officer in charge, and flight chief. Her talent earned her a selection as the first female motorcycle patrolman. In 1992 she was assigned as the treaty compliance superintendent and finalized Fairchild Air Force Base's role under the START Treaty in which B-52s were removed from assignment to the base. From there she was assigned as the wing protocol superintendent until her retirement from Active Duty in 1996. Ms. Smith-Tallan then began serving at Fairchild Air Force Base as a Department of Defense civilian. Through the following 18 years she led an office of 12 airmen as the wing chief of protocol and public relations, consistently ensuring that Fairchild presented a welcoming and professional environment to visitors and the local community. As chief of protocol she planned, evaluated, and led the arrangements, protocol and coordination for dignitaries visiting the wing. She developed and executed itineraries compatible with the scope of the visit, to include social events, ceremonies, briefings, lodging, transportation, courtesy and office calls, and tours. She planned and supervised countless renderings of honors, awards, promotions, retirements, change of command ceremonies, dining outs, airshows, intra-service competitions, parades, and other recognitions. As chief of public relations, Ms. Smith-Tallan planned, organized and directed the activities of the 92nd Air Refueling Wing Public Affairs office to provide installation-level multimedia activities composed of media, community relations, photography and videography. She developed the community relations program and ran the Honorary Commanders and Eagles program to ensure continual outreach of installation commanders with civic leaders. Ms. Smith-Tallan also served as the wing foreign disclosure officer. Ms. Smith-Tallan consistently goes above and beyond, as exemplified by her multiple Civilian of the Year and Civilian of the Quarter awards, an Exemplary Civilian Service Award, and many more awards she received while serving on Active Duty. Her record of achievement would not have been possible without the love and support of her husband, Robert ``Bob'' Tallan. We thank her family for sharing her with us. Mr. President, I ask that you and my other distinguished colleagues join me in congratulating Ms. Smith-Tallan on her 38 years of outstanding service. For her commitment to the people of Fairchild Air Force Base and the greater Spokane area, she is worthy of the highest praise.

Mrs. MURRAY

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

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

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, one would think, now more than ever, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle would recognize the American people really want us focused squarely on jobs and the economy. It is what every poll says. It is what the vast majority of all of our constituents say, and it is absolutely what is needed at a time when families, especially working women, continue to struggle to make ends meet. But instead of working with us across the aisle to give every American a fair shot, it seems as though Republicans are focused on something else entirely: Politics. Today, the senior Senator from South Carolina came to the floor and attempted to pass a bill that not only undermines women's access to their doctors but restricts their rights to access reproductive health services. I am not sure what our colleagues think has changed since they last introduced this bill in November, but just as it was back then, this extreme, unconstitutional abortion ban is an absolute nonstarter. It is not going anywhere in the Senate and, as they know, it is a cheap political ploy. I would like to think that over the last 41 years, since the historic decision of Roe v. Wade, we have moved on from debating this issue. I would like to think that after four decades, many of those who want to make women's health care decisions for them have come to grips with the fact that Roe v. Wade is settled law. After all, many of the signs of progress are all around us. In this Congress there is a record 20 women serving in this body. In 2012 women's power and voice at the ballot box was heard pretty loudly and clearly. In fact, when Republican candidates for office thought that rape was a political talking point, that idea and their candidacies were swiftly rejected, thanks in large part to the voices of women. So sometimes it is tempting to think that times indeed have changed and that maybe, just maybe, politicians have finally realized that getting between a woman and her doctor is not their job, that it is possible rightwing legislators have a newfound respect for women. But the truth is that the drumbeat of politically-driven, extreme, and unconstitutional laws continues to get louder. In 2013 our Nation saw yet another record-breaking year of State legislatures passing restrictive legislation barring women's access to abortion services. In fact, in the past 3 years, more of these restrictions have been enacted across this country than in the previous 10 years combined. And anti-choice lawmakers here in our Nation's capital have filed 50 legislative attacks on reproductive rights in this Congress alone. By the way, these haven't just been attacks on a woman's right to choose, they have been an all-out assault on everything from shaming pregnant women to drafting politically-driven legislation intended to create geographical roadblocks for low-income and racial minorities wishing to access safe reproductive services. Not surprisingly, these States that have enacted some of the most extreme and archaic restrictions are also the same States that fail to achieve even mediocre standards when it comes to critical issues such as education and the economy. But despite these shortcomings, some Members of this body refuse to work with us to address those critical issues and instead want to distract the American public with these purely political bills until the small pocket of their extreme audience is satisfied. In fact, according to the Senator from South Carolina, debating a woman's access to her own doctor is a ``debate worthy of a great democracy.'' The fact is it is a debate we have already had. This is a directed attack on Roe v. Wade, and it is attack on what is already settled law. I wish to remind my colleagues today that real women's lives and the most difficult health care decisions they could ever possibly make are at stake. Let me share with my colleagues the story of Judy Nicastro. She is from my home State of Washington. She bravely shared her story publicly in the New York Times. I have told her story before, but it bears repeating now because we are under attack again. In an op-ed she wrote, just days before the House passed a bill that was virtually identical to the one that was introduced today, Judy talked about being faced with every pregnant woman's worst nightmare. In describing the news that one of the twins she was carrying was facing a condition where only one lung chamber had formed and that it was only 20 percent complete, Judy captured the anguish countless other women in similar positions have faced. ``My world stopped,'' she wrote. I loved being pregnant with twins and trying to figure out which one was where in my uterus. Sometimes it felt like a party in there, with eight limbs moving. The thought of losing one child was unbearable. She went on to say: The MRI at Seattle Children's Hospital confirmed our worst fears: The organs were pushed up into our boy's chest and not developing properly. We were in the 22nd week. Under the bill proposed today, the decision Judy ultimately made, through very painful conversations with her family and with consultation with her doctors, would be illegal. The decision to make sure, as she put it, that ``our son was not born only to suffer'' would be taken from her and given to politicians. I am here today to provide a simple reality check. We are not going back. We are not going back on settled law such as Roe v. Wade or the Affordable Care Act. We are not going to take away a woman's ability to make her own decisions about her own health care and her own body. Just as with the many attempts before this bill, there are those who would like the American public to believe that all of these efforts are anything but an attack on women's health care. They try to say it is a debate about freedom, except, of course, the freedom for women to access care. It is no different than when we were told attacks on abortion rights are not an infringement on a woman's right to choose; they are about religion or States rights. Or when we are told that restricting emergency contraception isn't about limiting women's ability to make their own family planning decisions, but it is somehow about protecting pharmacists. Or as demonstrated last month when a Republican State lawmaker in Missouri introduced legislation to triple the State's mandatory waiting period for abortion services, claiming it would give women more time to do their ``research.'' Not that we should be surprised, he went on then to compare this deeply personal and difficult choice to that of purchasing an automobile saying: ``In making a decision to buy a car, I put research in there to find out what to do.'' The truth is this is an attempt to limit a woman's ability to access care. This is about women. Instead of playing a game of political football with women and their health, Republicans should instead consider joining with us in working on what women truly want. Women today want to have a fair shot at success. First and foremost, that means not rolling back the clock or eroding the gains we have made. We took a very good step forward with the Affordable Care Act, which now prevents insurance companies from charging women more than men for coverage, ensuring preventive services such as mammograms and contraception coverage is covered and increasing access to comprehensive health coverage, thanks to the Medicaid expansion and the exchanges. There is no doubt we need to make sure women have access in this country to opportunities such as getting equal pay for equal work or giving the millions of women earning the minimum wage a raise, which would go a long way towards that effort. We need to update our Tax Code so that mothers who are returning to the workforce do not face a marriage penalty. There is much more we could be doing to address the issues of concerned women. Those are the issues we ought to be focused on--how to move our country forward, not backward. So if it wasn't clear the last time the senior Senator from South Carolina made this attempt, it ought to be clear now. Senators such as myself are not going anywhere. Advocates and doctors who treat those women every day and know their health must be protected are not going anywhere. And women who continue to believe their health care decisions are theirs and theirs alone are not going to go anywhere. By the way, the Constitution is not going to go anywhere. Therefore, this extreme bill that was offered today is not going anywhere. Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I come to the floor this evening, along with my colleague Senator Cantwell, to talk about a truly remarkable man from our own State of Washington whom we just lost last week. Billy Frank, Jr., was many things to many different people. To his family he was a loving husband and father, to the dozens of Native American tribes in Washington State he was a hero and a champion for hard-fought treaty rights, and to millions across our State, Billy Frank, Jr., was a marine who represented what the best of America is all about, fighting for what you believe in and never, ever giving up. I was back in Washington State yesterday for Billy's memorial service, and looking around at all the people there whose lives he had touched, I was reminded of what made Billy so special. Billy was the type of person who defined the term ``larger than life.'' He was the type of person who had so much personality and so much ability and so much passion and love in his heart that it was very hard to believe it could all be contained in just one person. When Billy believed in something, he didn't just make his argument, he held a fish-in. He built a movement. He did raise his voice just to be heard, he banged down the doors in Olympia and here in Washington, DC, until he got what he needed. Most of all, he never flinched in the face of opposition, and he faced plenty of it, from hate and discrimination to being arrested and abused. Over a lifetime that took him from the banks of the Nisqually River to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court, Billy made sure the rights of Native Americans were protected and honored by the United States of America. He led the fight to ensure tribal rights to Native lands and salmon harvest could never be stolen away and over time he became much more than an advocate. He became in many ways a face of so many Native American communities across this country. Now as we grieve and try to think about how to move forward without this larger-than-life man, I am reminded that while we have lost Billy, so much of his life's work truly remains with us because all he accomplished and all he achieved, whether it was power and influence or court decisions and new laws, it was never about him. It was always about his community, his tribe, and protecting treaty rights for all Native Americans. Billy was someone who did so much and worked so hard not so he could gain power or wealth but so the people, the land, and the fish he cared so much for would never be brushed aside or forgotten. That is a rare thing. Billy's life wasn't a job for one man or one woman, but somehow he pulled it off by himself. So now it is going to take everyone who knew him to fill his shoes together and fight with the tribes that call Washington State home. I wish to conclude by quoting something Billy once said: I don't believe in magic. I believe in the sun and the stars, the water, the tides, the floods, the owls, the hawks flying, the river running, the wind talking. They are measurements. They tell us how healthy things are. They tell us because we and they are the same, and that is what I believe in. Those who listen to the world that sustains them can hear the message brought forth by the salmon. That is Billy and we will miss him. I yield the floor.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 passed in December not only provided relief to families and the economy from the harmful effects of sequestration but also put an end to the recent fiscal crises and uncertainty by establishing a bipartisan congressional budget for 2 years. Specifically, the act authorizes the chairmen of the Senate and House Budget Committees to file allocations, aggregates, levels, and other enforcement mechanisms in the Senate and the House for budget years 2014 and 2015. On January 15, I filed the first of the two budgets in the Senate for fiscal year 2014. Today, pursuant to section 116 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, I am filing the budget in the Senate for fiscal year 2015. Specifically, for the purpose of enforcing the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, section 116 directs the chairman of the Budget Committee to file: allocations for fiscal years 2014 and 2015 for the Committee on Appropriations; allocations for fiscal years 2014, 2015, 2015 through 2019, and 2015 through 2024 for committees other than the Committee on Appropriations; aggregate spending levels for fiscal year 2014 and 2015; aggregate revenue levels for fiscal years 2014, 2015, 2015 through 2019, and 2015 through 2024; and aggregate levels of outlays and revenue for fiscal years 2014, 2015, 2015 through 2019, and 2015 through 2024 for Social Security. That authority to file allocations, aggregates, levels, and other enforcement tools exists from April 15 through May 15. In the case of the Committee on Appropriations for 2014 and 2015, the allocation shall be set consistent with the discretionary spending limits set forth in the Bipartisan Budget Act, which imposes limits only on the amount of budget authority and divides those limits on budget authority between the revised security category and the revised nonsecurity category. In the case of allocations for committees other than the Committee on Appropriations and for the revenue and Social Security aggregates, the levels shall be set consistent with the most recent baseline of the Congressional Budget Office. The CBO last updated its baseline on April 14, 2014. In the case of the spending aggregates for 2014 and 2015, the levels shall be set in accordance with the allocation for the Committee on Appropriations and the allocations for committees other than the Committee on Appropriations, as described previously. Pursuant to section 314(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the allocations to the Committee on Appropriations and the spending aggregates can be revised for certain adjustments specifically authorized by section 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985. The authorized changes include adjustments for overseas contingency operations and the global war on terrorism, disaster funding, emergency appropriations, and program integrity initiatives in the areas of continuing disability reviews and redeterminations and health care fraud and abuse control. These adjustments will be made after the reporting of a bill or joint resolution or the offering of an amendment thereto or the submission of a conference report thereon that includes language that qualifies for one or more of the authorized adjustments. In addition, section 116(c) of the Bipartisan Budget Act authorizes the filing for fiscal year 2015 of deficit-neutral reserve funds included in sections 114(c) and (d) of the act, updated by 1 year to match the new enforcement windows. Accordingly, I am hereby filing and updating by 1 year each of the reserve funds included in sections 114(c) and (d) of the Bipartisan Budget Act. The reserve funds are updated to cover the period of the total of fiscal years 2014 through 2024 in the case of the reserve fund authorized in section 114(c) and the period of the total of fiscal years 2014 through 2019 and the period of the total of fiscal years 2014 through 2024 in the case of the reserve funds authorized in section 114(d). In the case of section 114(d), the reserve funds filed and updated here include sections 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313, 314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 322, 323, 324, 325, 326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 338, 339, 340, 341, 344, 348, 349, 350, 353, 354, 356, 361, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, 371, 376, 378, 379, and 383 of S. Con. Res. 8 (113th Congress), as passed by the Senate. Section 114(a) directs the chairman of the Budget Committee also to reset the Senate pay-as-you-go scorecard to zero for all fiscal years. Pursuant to section 114(a), I am notifying the Senate and including the revised scorecard as part of the submission on revised enforcement for budget year 2015. Finally, section 112 of the Bipartisan Budget Act establishes a point of order in the Senate against appropriations bills that provide advance appropriations. That act includes limited exceptions to this prohibition including up to $28.852 billion in advance appropriations for programs, projects, activities, or accounts included in a statement submitted by the chairman of the Budget Committee in the Congressional Record. Pursuant to section 112, the list of allowable advance appropriations subject to the limit is as follows: Accounts Identified for Advance Appropriations-- Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education: Employment and Training Administration, Job Corps, Education for the Disadvantaged, School Improvement, Special Education, Career, Technical, and Adult Education. Financial Services and General Government: Payment to Postal Service. Transportation, Housing and Urban Development: Tenant-based Rental Assistance and Project-based Rental Assistance. Mr. President, my counterpart, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, Congressman Ryan, similarly has filed allocations, aggregates, and levels in the House. The two filings will allow the House and the Senate to extend budget enforcement measures for 2015, an important principle of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013. I ask unanimous consent that the following tables detailing enforcement in the Senate for budget year 2015, including new committee allocations, budgetary and Social Security aggregates, detail on discretionary spending limits, and the Senate pay-as-you-go scorecard, be printed in the Record.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. I ask unanimous consent that the time until 1:45 p.m. be equally divided between the two leaders or their designees.

Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, the Highway Trust Fund is a vital resource for States to tackle much-needed transportation projects. But right now that trust fund is running on fumes. States from Vermont to California and many in between are rethinking their plans for construction because of funding uncertainty in the Highway Trust Fund. One example is New Mexico. Their State officials are starting to ramp up construction plans for Interstate 25 in Albuquerque. That project has been a high priority for city officials for a number of years. Once it is completed, it is going to reduce traffic and improve safety. That is vital for that area. But right now State officials in New Mexico have said they are concerned about Federal funding for that project and it now might be in jeopardy. That is not an isolated case. The trust fund supports transportation projects across our entire country. It eases congestion for our commuters and for businesses that need to move their goods efficiently and quickly. It funds safety initiatives and construction that improves our roads and bridges. It sparks job creation for American workers. But the Department of Transportation now says that trust fund will not be able to keep up with its payments to States as soon as this summer. This crisis is right around the corner. Many States are now planning for worst-case scenarios. In fact, the State of Missouri has stopped planning for new projects. In Colorado, a State official has said: Without these funds, major projects probably will not be completed or ever get underway. Arkansas has begun planning several projects to replace old bridges and widen highways and repair roads, but now, their transportation officials have put 10 projects on hold because of this looming crisis. Construction is at its height during our summer months. So if the Highway Trust Fund hits a crisis in the next few months, we could potentially see a construction shutdown, meaning workers are going to be left without paychecks. That could add up to 10,000 jobs in Florida, according to the President of the Florida Transportation Builders Association. Across the country, failing to shore up our Highway Trust Fund could cost more than 180,000 jobs in fiscal year 2015. That is according to an analysis from the Center for American Progress. In Kentucky, Governor Steve Beshear summed it up by telling reporters: ``We can't afford for the Highway Trust Fund to go insolvent.'' States and workers are counting on us to solve this. I am hopeful that we can replenish the Highway Trust Fund in a bipartisan way. In fact, House Republican Dave Camp, who chairs the Ways and Means Committee, has proposed using corporate revenue to replenish the Highway Trust Fund. President Obama's Grow America Act also calls for corporate revenue to address this crisis and make important investments in our infrastructure. That approach makes a lot of sense. Closing wasteful loopholes so we can create jobs here at home would be good for our workers, good for our economy, and it would make our broken tax system fairer in the process. I am here today to say I am hoping that Republicans will come to the table willing to close just a few corporate loopholes so we can avoid an unnecessary crisis in our Highway Trust Fund, so that we can give our States more certainty to plan and we can help spark job growth in the summer. But if Republicans are not willing to work with us, they are going to have to explain why egregious corporate tax loopholes are more important than workers in our construction industry and more important than drivers and businesses that rely every day on safe roads and bridges. I am here to say and to warn that construction projects are at risk across our country. Another example happens to be in New Hampshire, where construction crews have been working on a major project to widen Interstate 93. That project was designed to ease congestion and improve safety. Last month the State transportation commissioner said the project could be stalled and thrown off schedule if Congress does not resolve the Highway Trust Fund crisis. He said, ``Any hiccup in federal funding could have a negative impact on the ending.'' For many States this looming crisis is already a reality. We have to act now. So let's show our States that together we will continue to invest in projects that help drivers and help businesses move their goods, and let's show the American people that Congress can work together to ensure vital transportation construction projects will move forward this summer. Let's shore up that Highway Trust Fund and avoid this unnecessary and totally preventable crisis. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. MURRAY

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 1, 2014, at 10 a.m., in room SR-328A of the Russell Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``The Importance of Regional Strategies in Rural Economic Development.''

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 1, 2014, at 2 p.m.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 1, 2014, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 1, 2014, at 11 a.m., in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``President Obama's 2014 Trade Policy Agenda.''

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on May 1, 2014, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct an executive business meeting.