Ben Nelson

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to a good friend and great Nebraskan, Jack Eberspacher, who passed away on July 5, 2009, at the tender age of 55 after a short but courageous battle with cancer. Jack was a very special friend to all who knew him, dedicating his professional life to the advancement and betterment of the agricultural industry and the agribusiness community. A native of Seward, NE, Jack received his bachelor of science degree from the University of Nebraska at Lincoln. After several years working in various agribusiness positions throughout the United States, Jack was named the chief executive officer of the National Grain Sorghum Producers Association, headquartered in Lubbock, TX. He is credited with growing that association by 300 percent and with developing balanced association programs on policy, plant science and utilization, and for placing the association on the national legislative and regulatory scene. In 1998, Jack accepted the position of chief executive officer of the National Association of Wheat Growers here in Washington, DC. Under his leadership, the organization experienced a financial turnaround, with Jack leading the group out of a negative budget in net earnings to a positive one in just over 2 years. Jack was appointed president and chief executive officer of the Agricultural Retailers Association in 2001, where he remained until his passing. In this capacity, he increased the annual association dues revenue by more than 100 percent. In February 2002, he was the only commodity leader invited to address the National Governors' Conference, where he discussed the importance of the 2002 farm bill and the state of the agricultural economy. Jack was also a political activist and volunteer; an active member of the Bennett Roundtable of the Farm Foundation of Chicago, Illinois; and a recipient of the Alpha Gamma Rho Fraternity Brother of the Century Award. I offer my most sincere condolences to Jack's wife Jinger and their family. Jack's passion for service, dynamic leadership, and unwavering dedication to the greater agribusiness community will remain a source of inspiration to all those who knew him.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Banking Committee be discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 175; that the Senate proceed to its immediate consideration; further, that an amendment to the resolution, which is at the desk, be agreed to; the resolution, as amended, be agreed to; that an amendment to the preamble, which is at the desk, be agreed to; the preamble, as amended, be agreed to; finally, that a title amendment, which is at the desk, be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I thank the Chair.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I object.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, if I might have a second to respond, I think this is something the good Senator from Tennessee and I might be able to work out. But until we have the details worked out as to how this would be considered in both cases, I object.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I ask for the clerk to report the bill.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, we are returning to the Legislative Branch Committee bill for further consideration today. It is my understanding that my colleague from Oklahoma has an amendment he would like to offer. He was here. Perhaps he will rejoin us shortly. To recap, this is the legislative branch bill, which has a number of different important issues in it, not the least of which is the fact that when you compare the percentage of increase this year with previous years, it is an effective 2.4-percent increase. We controlled the growing costs associated with the new Visitor Center, which were significant in the last budget. Let me, at this point, yield to the Senator from Oklahoma.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I know of no further debate on the amendment.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. There is no objection.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I make a point of order against the DeMint amendment that it is legislation on appropriations.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. My colleague from Arizona is right. It is a wonderful, an outstanding museum. As a quick refresher for my colleagues, this is a project that was requested by the Durham Museum in Omaha, NE. This is a well-respected, not-for-profit organization with a longstanding and close relationship with the Library of Congress. The $200,000 requested in this bill for the Durham Museum to begin the preservation and digitization of the museum's photo archive collection will preserve our history and improve access to these priceless treasures. The museum will provide a public service of Federal interest making it appropriate to promote a public-private partnership. This truly is a public-private partnership--the funding for the project in this bill is only 10 percent of the total cost. The Durham Museum will privately raise the remaining 90 percent and incur all ongoing operating costs. The Library of Congress is an expert in the area of digitization and preservation of fragile photos and images. Taking that into consideration with the fact that the library enjoys ``a remarkable long-term relationship with the Durham Museum,'' to use the words of the Librarian of Congress, Dr. James Billington, it makes this partnership worthy of support and further makes this funding appropriate in this legislation. To reiterate some of the points I made prior to the recess, this project is more than just a ``photo exhibit.'' In addition to making these images available to the public, the Durham will work with and assist the Library of Congress to establish conservation and preservation training programs, and on incorporating digitized primary source materials into school curricula. While I understand my colleague and I may disagree on the larger philosophical issue about the role of Congress to set spending priorities, I note that this project relates explicitly to the goals and purposes of the Library to expand access to our Nation's most treasured documents and artifacts. It will, through this partnership, make these historical images accessible nationally. It is funded here for that reason. Lastly, not all treasures are located inside the beltway. The Durham Museum seeks to preserve a significant collection of images and photos that document the western expansion of this great Nation. These images will include, among others, a number of wonderful images of Presidents Roosevelt, Kennedy, and others; growth and development of the transcontinental railroad--the Union Pacific is headquartered in Omaha, NE-- Native American tribes from across the country dating back to the 1880s; photographs taken by prominent early photographer William Henry Jackson, who lived and worked briefly in Omaha; stockyards and meatpacking industries, which brought many immigrants and settlers to that part of the country in the early and mid-20th century; early transportation, including steamboats, streetcars, and cityscapes. Again quoting Dr. Billington: Digitization of the Durham Museum's nationally significant collection of more than 500,000 images in prints, negatives, and glass plate negatives will greatly enhance citizens' access to these treasures and preserve them for future generations. The project will be moved significantly forward by the able assistance of the Library of Congress, and I thank Dr. Billington for his willingness to assist with this important project. I ask my colleagues to support its inclusion in this bill.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I respectfully urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, it is my understanding that there is an amendment already at the desk.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I rise today to present the fiscal year 2010 legislative branch bill. I want to start by thanking Senator Murkowski and her staff for their help in putting this bill together. I am very grateful for her support on this subcommittee. This was truly a bipartisan effort from start to finish. I thank her and I note that her health is improving because her leg is improving and she is getting to places on her own now. This bill funds the salaries of the very dedicated public servants who support the legislative branch of government. The legislative branch is home to not only all of us here in the Senate and the House, but the Capitol Police, the Library of Congress, the Architect of the Capitol, the Government Accountability Office, the Government Printing Office, the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Compliance, and the Open World Leadership Center. In crafting this bill, it was our firm belief that the legislative branch should lead by example, funding only the most critical needs of our agencies and being good stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. This proved to be quite a challenge when we were presented with a budget request that reflected a 15-percent increase over the fiscal year 2009 enacted level. However, after several hearings, many meetings, and countless hours of staff negotiations, I am proud to say that we did exactly what we set out to do in writing this bill. The bill before us today totals $4.6 billion, which is a 4.7-percent increase over the current year. The bill includes House-related items solely considered by that body which totaled $1.475 billion. It is important to note that the Senate Legislative Branch appropriations bill, which did not include House-related items, over which we had no control, represented only a 3.3-percent increase over fiscal year 2009 and was significantly below the budget request. If you include the $25 million that GAO received in the stimulus bill, then this is only a 2.4-percent increase over current year funding levels. The fiscal year 2010 bill provides $934 million for the Senate, which is an increase of 4.3 percent over the current year. This funding will provide for annual salary and operating increases for Senate offices, the Senate Sergeant at Arms, the Secretary of the Senate, and other agencies that support the operation of the Senate. The bill includes $331 million for the Capitol Police, which is an 8- percent increase over current year. This includes $15.4 million to fully implement the merger of the Library of Congress Police with the Capitol Police, providing seamless security throughout the entire Capitol complex. The bill also provides for 10 additional civilian positions to help resolve management issues, including the constant increase in the demand for overtime. The committee did not provide the 76 new officers requested in fiscal year 2010, but does direct GAO to work with the Capitol Police to ensure that they are getting the most efficient use of their nearly 1,800 officers currently on board, by far the biggest this force has ever been. The Architect of the Capitol is funded at $445 million, which is a decrease of $18 million, or 4 percent below current year. The amount includes $48 million in deferred maintenance projects, including $16.8 million for continued work on asbestos abatement and structural repairs in the utility tunnels. I am happy to say that the utility tunnel work is on schedule and significantly below original cost estimates. The bill also includes over $14 million in energy and sustainability projects across the Capitol campus. The Library of Congress funding totals $638.5 million, which is a 4- percent increase over the current year. This amount includes $8.5 million for technology upgrades to allow for increased digitization of the Library's collections and full funding for the Digital Talking Book for the Blind project. The Government Accountability Office is funded at $553.6 million, which is a 4-percent increase over current year, and provides all salary and inflationary increases for GAO's current staff level. The Government Printing Office is funded at $147 million, which is a 4-percent raise over current year, allowing for the continued implementation of GPO's Federal Digital System and other technology upgrades. The Congressional Budget Office is funded at $45 million, a 2-percent increase over the current year. Combined with the $2 million included in the supplemental, CBO will have adequate funding and FTEs needed to perform the critical work associated with health care spending, the current financial crisis, and global climate change. The Office of Compliance is funded at $4.4 million, an increase of 8 percent above current year to cover inflationary changes and to allow the Office to hire an Occupational Safety and Health Program supervisor. Last, but not least, the Open World Leadership Office is funded at $14.4 million, which is a 4-percent increase over the current year. I believe the bill before the Senate is sound, prudent, and fiscally responsible. Taking into account the calculations I have given, it is a 2.4-percent increase over the current with those calculations. I encourage my colleagues to support its passage.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I rise in opposition to the Vitter amendment to fund the legislative branch agencies at current year levels, which would result in a reduction actually of $101 million below the level that Senator Murkowski and I have proposed in the bill we are considering. The fiscal year 2010 bill reflects, as I have mentioned and said, only a 2.4-percent increase over fiscal year 2009 spending when you take GAO's stimulus funding into account. When we started drafting this bill, the budget request we received sought a 15-percent increase over fiscal year 2009. From the outset, my ranking member and I have been committed to holding this bill to the lowest possible funding level, and to lead by example in being good stewards of the taxpayers' money. My intention was to hold this bill at the rate of inflation, if we could, and it frankly pained me to even have to go as far as 2.4 percent over current year. But the reality is there are expenses in the legislative branch that we are responsible for. As a former Governor, I am used to hearing individuals assert the desire to make budget cuts without actually offering any specifics. So I am used to what we are seeing here tonight. I say to my colleague, if he has specific suggestions about what types of cuts would be prudent-- he has told us what not to cut, but if he has some specific suggestions about the types of cuts, I would be happy to talk about them. Speaking in generalities will not get the job done. I can appreciate the desire to keep spending restrained. However, if the Senator wishes to make specific suggestions of the $100 million cuts that he is, in fact, proposing, I would welcome it, as I would have welcomed hearing any of the Senator's suggestions during the weeks and months it took to create this bill. As a matter of fact, I have visited with my colleague Senator Johanns about the increases in this budget this year, and have suggested to him that if there are other areas we should cut, then we would take his thoughts into consideration and make any adjustments that would make sense. But, to my knowledge, I have not received any note of concern from the Senator, the sponsor of this amendment, about any of the items included in this bill while it was being created. We are all concerned about fiscal responsibility. Let's talk a little bit about this bill and what this amendment would mean. We now have a fully operating Visitor Center here in the Capitol that costs money to operate and to secure, recently completed. There are still costs associated with bringing it up and into the running process. The Visitor Center has provided increased amenities for our constituents when they make the trip to Washington to visit. But it does cost money. I have already outlined the bill in my opening statements, so I will not go through all of that again. This is the first time through this process as chairman of the Legislative Branch Subcommittee, and I must say I was honored when Chairman Inouye tasked me with the enormous responsibility. This committee funds the agencies Congress relies on to provide them with timely information pertaining to the oversight of the Federal Government. For example, last year the Government Accountability Office, the GAO, as it is referred to, received over 1,200 congressional requests and testified at over 300 congressional hearings. Their work produced hundreds of improvements in government operations and produced significant financial savings for the American taxpayer. The Congressional Budget Office, the CBO, also funded in this bill, actually received emergency funding in the supplemental that passed last week to further strengthen their workforce, allowing for timelier production of analyses for congressional offices. I do not know how a spending freeze can be proposed to an agency that desperately needed this kind of help to do their job here so we can do our jobs here in Congress. It does not make sense. I know for a fact that my colleagues depend on the CBO, that office, perhaps now more than ever before, for analysis related to health care costs, energy, and the current financial crisis. The agencies funded in this legislative branch work for Congress. Quite simply, if you reduce their funding, you will reduce the service we receive here in Congress at an important time when we are facing important legislation. So we are a little spoiled here. But that is because of the great service we are used to receiving from the Government Printing Office to the Congressional Research Service to the Capitol Police who maintain our security, and the security of those who are in our buildings and on our grounds. These are agencies and staff that also support Congress. That is their mission. I think we owe it to them to at least to fund the cost-of-living increase for these dedicated public servants. The vote will determine whether you think your staff deserves a cost-of-living adjustment in 2010, and whether you think our Capitol Police deserve to be paid overtime with the long hours they work, risking life and limb to keep us and the thousands of Americans who visit here each year safe in the Capitol complex. Every elevator operator, every construction worker, every plumber, every electrician, every maintenance person, every parking lot attendant, virtually every employee you encounter here in the Capitol complex, including staff present here today, is paid from this appropriations bill. I could go on and I could go on. But I have to admit, I did not realize what a lot of those folks did until I started working on this bill. But now I do. It is my responsibility, and the responsibility as well of the ranking member, to do what we think is right by these employees and these agencies. I respectfully urge my colleagues to vote no on this motion. How much time does the Senator need in response?

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I yield the Senator 3 minutes.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I move to table the Vitter motion and ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. 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.

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Madam President, I respect greatly my colleague from Arizona and his concern about spending. As was noted, the increase in the spending requested in the appropriations bill is about 2.4 percent. While $200,000 is a lot of money--and it certainly is a lot to people today--I think it is important to point out that this museum is associated with the legislative branch in the following manner. The Durham Museum is seeking to provide a public service of Federal interest making it appropriate to promote a public-private partnership. And this truly is a public-private partnership; the funding for the project in this bill is only 10 percent of the total cost. The Durham Museum will privately raise the remaining 90 percent and incur all ongoing operating costs. The $200,000 requested in this bill for the Durham Museum to begin the preservation and digitization of the museum's photo archive collection will create new jobs, preserve our history and improve access to these priceless treasures. This project will be moved significantly forward by the able assistance of the Library of Congress, and I thank Dr. Billington for his willingness to assist with this important project. It is important to point out that the Library of Congress has been a leader in digitization efforts, having digitized more than 15 million unique primary source documents. The library enjoyed a remarkable long- term relationship with the Durham Museum long before I came to the Senate and will undoubtedly oversee a quality project as the Durham Museum seeks to follow in our national library's footsteps. Mr. President, not all national treasures are located inside the beltway. This project is more than just a ``photo exhibit.'' In addition to making these images available to the public, as noted in the Legislative Branch Report, Durham will work with the Library of Congress to establish conservation and preservation training programs, and on incorporating digitized primary source materials into school curricula. Dr. Billington and I have worked together to ensure that the library's most impressive exhibits have traveled to the Durham Museum over the years, ensuring that my fellow Nebraskans, Iowans from the east, Kansans from the south, and South Dakotans from the north, have had access to some of our Nation's most treasured documents and artifacts. Some of the notable library exhibits that have traveled to the Durham Museum have included: ``Bound for Glory,'' showcasing the photographs of the Farm Security Administration in the late 1930s and 1940s, and ``With An Even Hand, Brown v. Board at Fifty,'' commemorating the 50th anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision in the case of Brown v. the Board of Education. In January of 2011, the library's most recent impressive exhibit on Abraham Lincoln, ``With Malice Toward None,'' will travel to the Durham Museum, showcasing some of our revered former President's most transformative speeches and eloquent letters. I urge that this not be considered just a local project. It is associated with the Library of Congress and, as such, has a tie that is an ongoing and longstanding relationship that will benefit both the Library of Congress and the Durham Museum. There is a nexus here and it is not an isolated incident. At this point, I ask my colleagues to support the inclusion of that funding within this budgetary request. OSHA violations

Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. I suggest the absence of a quorum.