Harry Reid

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to Mark Sullivan, who is retiring from his position as Director of the United States Secret Service on February 22, 2013. Serving as Director for nearly 7 years, and working for five Presidents, Mark Sullivan leaves his mark on the agency by achieving such benchmarks as the Secret Service Uniformed Division Modernization Act, and the Former Presidents Protection Act. He also oversaw the complete overhaul of the Secret Service IT Modernization and Operation Mission Support, which enhanced White House security. He led the effort to create the National Computer Forensic Institute in Hoover, AL, and established numerous overseas field offices to build partnerships between all levels of law enforcement. Mark Sullivan began his distinguished 30-year career with the Secret Service as a special agent assigned to the Detroit Field Office in 1983. In 1990, Mr. Sullivan was transferred to the Fraud Division in Washington, DC, where he coordinated and monitored multi-jurisdictional criminal investigations involving credit card fraud, bank fraud, and other criminal activity. In 1991, Mr. Sullivan received his first assignment to the Presidential Protective Division, where he served 4 years. In 1996, Mr. Sullivan was selected as Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the Office of Protective Operations. He returned to the field in 1997 as the Resident Agent in Charge of the Columbus Resident Office, which oversaw all Secret Service activities in Central Ohio. Twenty months later, Mr. Sullivan was promoted back to Washington, DC as Deputy Special Agent in Charge of the Counterfeit Division, where he managed the agency's investigative activities related to the criminal production and distribution of counterfeit currency and other financial instruments. In July of 1999, he returned to the Presidential Protective Division as an Assistant Special Agent in Charge. Mr. Sullivan was promoted into the Federal Senior Executive Service in July, 2000, when he was selected as a Deputy Assistant Director in the Office of Protective Operations. In 2002, he was reassigned to the position of Deputy Special Agent in Charge of the Vice Presidential Protective Division. A year later, he was reassigned to the position of Deputy Assistant Director of the Office of Human Resources and Training. He next served as Assistant Director for the Office of Protective Operations, where he oversaw all protective activities for the agency, encompassing 12 divisions and 2,300 employees. Mr. Sullivan was named Deputy Director in January, 2006 and on May 31, 2006, he was sworn in as the 22nd Director of the U.S. Secret Service. Prior to joining the Secret Service, Mr. Sullivan spent 3 years as a special agent in the Office of the Inspector General for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Mark Sullivan has received numerous awards for superior performance throughout his 34-year career in Federal law enforcement. In 2010 he was recognized by President Obama as the recipient of the Distinguished Presidential Rank Award, which he also received in 2005 from then President George W. Bush. Mr. Sullivan is to be honored for his dedication and commitment to public service, devoting his life to the safety of our first families, our Nation's leaders, and the general public. He has been a steadfast partner to the legislative branch, assisting with State of the Union addresses, Inaugurals and other joint partnerships. He will be greatly missed here in the Capitol and we wish him well in his future endeavors. A native of Arlington, MA, Mr. Sullivan, who is from a large Irish Catholic family, received his bachelor's degree in Criminal Justice from Saint Anselm College in Manchester, NH. He and his wife of 26 years, Laurie have three daughters, one of which, Lauren, has followed in her father's footsteps by entering public service after graduating from college. She has worked for the Senate Sergeant Arms for over 3 years. A former boss once said of Sullivan, ``If you were casting someone for the role of director of the Secret Service, he looks the part. He's a tall, handsome Irishman, with grey hair and the demeanor of a born leader.'' I join with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in thanking Director Sullivan for his outstanding service to our Nation.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of our Nation's disabled veterans to once again discuss an end to an unjust and outdated policy known as ``concurrent receipt.'' For the past 122 years, this practice has prevented veterans from receiving the full benefits earned through years of service and personal injury in defense of our Nation. The law requires that a retired disabled veteran reduce their retirement pay dollar-for-dollar by the amount of any disability compensation received, in many cases wiping out retirement pay altogether. This is simply wrong. I have worked over the past decade to fight to change this outdated policy and commend the progress Congress has made on behalf of our Nation's veterans. In 2002, I was pleased that Congress passed a measure known as combat-related special compensation, or CSRC, allowing for disabled retired veterans to receive payments that are the financial equivalent of concurrent receipt. In 2003 I was pleased that Congress enacted a 10-year phase-in of concurrent receipt for military retirees whose disability is 50 percent or greater, and in 2004, Congress eliminated the 10-year waiting period for those veterans with 100 percent service-related disability. Moreover, in 2008, concurrent receipt eligibility was expanded to include those who are 100 percent disabled due to un-employability and extended equivalent financial payments to those who are medically retired or have retired prematurely due to force reduction programs. Most recently, in 2012, I was pleased to offer an amendment to the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act ensuring that our combat-disabled military retirees receive proper combat-related disability and retirement benefits by eliminating the ``glitch'' in the CRSC formula that can actually cause a reduction in their compensation amount when the VA increases their disability rating. While I am proud that the 10-year phase-in period for veterans who are rated 50-90 percent will finally come to fruition this year, I still believe that Congress has fallen short of meeting the commitment of providing full concurrent receipt to all of our Nation's heroes. This is unacceptable and that is why we have to take care of the hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans who still need our help. For me, this is a simple matter of fairness. No other Federal retiree is forced to forfeit their retirement--only our disabled military retirees. Veterans' disability compensation is recompense for pain, suffering, and lost future earning power caused by a service-connected illness or injury. Few retirees can afford to live on their retired pay alone, and a severe disability only makes the problem worse by limiting or denying any post-service working life. There is no reason to deny veterans who have served their country honorably the right to the full value of their retirement pay simply because their service also led to disability. Today I reintroduce the Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2013 in order to eliminate all restrictions to concurrent receipt. I hope my Senate colleagues will join me in supporting this bill. We must take action now and support the veterans who have given so much to our grateful Nation. This is the right thing to do. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I rise today on behalf of our Nation's disabled veterans to once again discuss an end to an unjust and outdated policy known as ``concurrent receipt.'' For the past 122 years, this practice has prevented veterans from receiving the full benefits earned through years of service and personal injury in defense of our Nation. The law requires that a retired disabled veteran reduce their retirement pay dollar-for-dollar by the amount of any disability compensation received, in many cases wiping out retirement pay altogether. This is simply wrong. I have worked over the past decade to fight to change this outdated policy and commend the progress Congress has made on behalf of our Nation's veterans. In 2002, I was pleased that Congress passed a measure known as combat-related special compensation, or CSRC, allowing for disabled retired veterans to receive payments that are the financial equivalent of concurrent receipt. In 2003 I was pleased that Congress enacted a 10-year phase-in of concurrent receipt for military retirees whose disability is 50 percent or greater, and in 2004, Congress eliminated the 10-year waiting period for those veterans with 100 percent service-related disability. Moreover, in 2008, concurrent receipt eligibility was expanded to include those who are 100 percent disabled due to un-employability and extended equivalent financial payments to those who are medically retired or have retired prematurely due to force reduction programs. Most recently, in 2012, I was pleased to offer an amendment to the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Act ensuring that our combat-disabled military retirees receive proper combat-related disability and retirement benefits by eliminating the ``glitch'' in the CRSC formula that can actually cause a reduction in their compensation amount when the VA increases their disability rating. While I am proud that the 10-year phase-in period for veterans who are rated 50-90 percent will finally come to fruition this year, I still believe that Congress has fallen short of meeting the commitment of providing full concurrent receipt to all of our Nation's heroes. This is unacceptable and that is why we have to take care of the hundreds of thousands of disabled veterans who still need our help. For me, this is a simple matter of fairness. No other Federal retiree is forced to forfeit their retirement--only our disabled military retirees. Veterans' disability compensation is recompense for pain, suffering, and lost future earning power caused by a service-connected illness or injury. Few retirees can afford to live on their retired pay alone, and a severe disability only makes the problem worse by limiting or denying any post-service working life. There is no reason to deny veterans who have served their country honorably the right to the full value of their retirement pay simply because their service also led to disability. Today I reintroduce the Retired Pay Restoration Act of 2013 in order to eliminate all restrictions to concurrent receipt. I hope my Senate colleagues will join me in supporting this bill. We must take action now and support the veterans who have given so much to our grateful Nation. This is the right thing to do. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of H. Con. Res. 11.

Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. Res. 27.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, before I ask unanimous consent to pass this, I would just say it is extremely important this be brought to the attention of the Senate. Around the country we have about 1 school counselor for every 1,400 students. The Presiding Officer and I attended a number of meetings in the last couple days and that is the information we got there. That is terribly troubling, with all the problems we have with these boys and girls, to think they would have to win some kind of lottery before they could see a counselor. We know class sizes are too big, and we need to do something about that, but we truly should do something about mandating more counselors for our schools. I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed as a Senate document a compilation of materials from the Congressional Record in tribute to the retiring Members of the 112th Congress.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 2 p.m., Monday, February 11, 2013; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; and that following any leader remarks, the Senate resume consideration of S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act, under the previous order.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I haven't had an opportunity to speak to the Republican leader, but we are going to have votes, and we could have as many as seven rollcall votes on Monday. I am of the mind, after speaking to the Republican leader, that we may have a couple of those votes and put the other votes over until sometime on Tuesday or some reasonable time. I think that would probably be better, with some of the things I can see on the horizon. Everyone will need to be here for Monday votes, but we may not have all those votes Monday night. We may try to put some of them over until the next day.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that we adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am going to have to get used to the President pro tempore presiding over the Senate. That is not the script we have followed for quite a few years. I am very happy to see him here, as usual. Following leader remarks, the Senate will be in a period of morning business until 5 p.m. Following morning business, the Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 47, the Violence Against Women Act. At 5:30, the Senate will vote on the motion to proceed to the bill.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, there are two bills at the desk due for a second reading.

Mr. REID. Mr. President, with these two bills, I would object to any further proceedings.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, in the two decades since the Violence Against Women Act passed--it passed with a very strong vote, a bipartisan vote here in the Senate, and then in the House at the time-- incidents of domestic violence have fallen by more than half, by as much as 53 percent. The law has helped millions of women and children escape their attackers and get the justice they deserve. It is a landmark piece of legislation. That is why Congress twice reauthorized this legislation without a hint of controversy or a moment of delay. But despite the overwhelming evidence this legislation saves lives and protects women, House Republicans used every procedural trick known to Congress to block its reauthorization last Congress. Despite strong bipartisan support here in the Senate, Republicans in the House refused to join the effort to renew our national commitment to ending domestic violence. Allowing partisan delays to put women's lives at risk is simply shameful. If House Republicans believe domestic violence is no longer a problem in this country, they are wrong. Every day three women in America die at the hands of their abusers. Every day many women escape with their lives but with the physical and emotional scars of the abuse that exists. More than one-third of women in this country have been victims of violence, sexual assault, or stalking by a partner--one-third of the women in this country have been victims of violence, sexual assault, or stalking by a partner. It is in our power to help, and it is unthinkable that Republicans in the House would prevent us from taking action and again refuse to do anything, as they did last Congress. Victims of violence and law enforcement officials who support them have already waited too long for Congress to act. This week, the Senate will pass a strong bipartisan reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. This is something that was put forward by the chairman of that committee, the Judiciary Committee, Senator Leahy. He has worked hard on it. He did everything possible last Congress to get this done. Because of the House's intransigence, they refused to do anything in spite of his work. I thank Chairman Leahy, Senator Murray, and the women of the Senate for their leadership on this issue. I am pleased so many of my Senate colleagues have expressed support for swift action on this legislation, and especially so many Senate Republicans have supported this legislation. The Senate will not allow women to be denied the protection they need and deserve. We must ensure law enforcement has the means to stop these horrible crimes. We must guarantee communities have the resources to support victims regardless of sexual orientation, immigration status, or where they live, as they heal. Every victim of domestic violence deserves the same vigorous protections under the law. Because of the unique nature of the crime, combating domestic violence and protecting those affected also requires unique tools. Reauthorizing this act would help law enforcement continue to develop effective strategies to prosecute cases involving violent crimes against women. It would provide funding for shelters and transitional housing programs for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault and help victims become independent. It would make legal assistance available to victims of violence and safeguard children and youth affected by dating violence and stalking. Although the Violence Against Women Act expired in 2011, many of the programs established under the law have been funded by continuing resolutions. But not everything. A full reauthorization of this law is necessary to ensure authorities have all the resources they need to fight domestic violence. So I hope the Senate's bipartisan action this week will send a strong message to House Republican leaders that further partisan delay is unacceptable.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to S. Res. 24.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, the Senate will begin consideration of H.R. 325, the debt limit legislation. The time until 12:15 p.m. will be equally divided and controlled. At 12:15 p.m., there will be a rollcall vote in relation to a Portman amendment. Following that vote, the Senate will recess until 2:15 p.m. to allow for caucus meetings. At 2:15 p.m., there will be as many as five additional rollcall votes.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, just a brief comment on the statement of my friend, the Republican leader. He continues bad-mouthing the recovery. We are in a recovery. The moral of the fourth quarter is a repudiation of the Republican playbook. Growth went down in the fourth quarter because of reduced government spending and a reticence of the private sector, as Congress fought over the fiscal cliff. That fight came as a result of the Republicans being so unreasonable. When we were finally able to work something out that was a compromise, it was good for the economy. The economy was rejecting the austerity and brinksmanship. So let's hope the Republicans will understand that we have to move forward, that the Republican playbook of continually complaining about spending is something--we know we have to do something with spending. We understand that. But there is more to making our economy recover than just continually harping on what is going on with spending. Everyone recognizes we have to do something with spending, but we also have to do something to have a fair program. Is it fair that to this point all spending cuts have come from nondefense spending? The answer is no. Is it fair that the Republicans continue to want to go after Social Security, Medicare, even food stamps that hits the poorest of the poor? Let's start talking about fairness. Even Presidential nominee Romney said he had all these tax loopholes that he believed should be closed. We agree with Mitt Romney, and we would hope the Republicans would agree with their nominee for President. That is where we should be looking--to have a fair approach to what we do with sequestration and balancing the budget. The Debt Limit Mr. President, later today the Senate will vote on the House-passed legislation to suspend the debt ceiling until this summer and remove the specter of default hanging over the Nation's economy. I expect this legislation will pass on a strong bipartisan vote, sending the message loudly and clearly that while we are willing to negotiate, we will not engage in another irresponsible debate over whether the U.S. Government should pay its bills. I would remind my Republican colleagues that most of them voted to incur the debts now coming due. Suspending the debt limit will not authorize a penny of new spending, but it will ensure we pay the bills we have already incurred. What are some of those bills we have incurred? We have had two wars going on that have been unpaid for with real money. We borrowed the money. Every Republican voted for these wars. So we should pay our bills. I was reassured by the House Republicans' decision last week to back off their reckless threat to hold the debt ceiling hostage. Suspending the debt limit will not authorize a penny of new spending, but it will ensure we pay the bills we have already incurred. The legislation before the Senate sets an important precedent that the full faith and credit of the United States will no longer be used as a pawn to extract painful cuts to Medicare, Social Security, or other initiatives that benefit the middle class. A clean debt ceiling increase that allows the United States to meet its existing obligations should be the standard. Congress will continue to work to reduce the deficit but will do it without the threat of default. We have already made $2\1/2\ trillion in historic, bipartisan deficit reduction--$2\1/2\ trillion. Democrats believe we should do more. It is critical that we use a balanced approach that couples smart spending cuts with revenue from the wealthiest Americans and from closing the wasteful tax loopholes I have just talked about. Obviously, Democrats would prefer a longer suspension of the debt ceiling, which would provide additional economic security and stability as we continue to find ways to decrease the deficit. Raising the possibility that the United States could default on its obligations every few months is not an ideal way to run government. But a short- term solution is better than another imminent manufactured crisis. Every Republican admits that default would rock our financial system to its core. However, injecting uncertainty into the system every few months also has a chilling effect on the economy. This insecurity does not just affect big investment banks or wealthy investors, it costs jobs. All around the country, ordinary Americans with 401(k)s and college savings accounts are affected. I am glad Republicans set aside their plan to gamble with default. It was bad politics and even worse policy. Middle-class Americans remember the last time the Republicans put us through a protracted fight over the debt ceiling in an effort to force deep cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and other programs important to the middle class. Middle-class Americans remember how the tea party- driven Republicans forced the Nation to the brink of default in 2011, sending the stock market into a tailspin and prompting a historic downgrade of America's credit rating. Middle-class Americans remember how the economy suffered and our bottom line suffered with it. Middle-class Americans remember the consequences of the Republicans' willingness to threaten a national default. I am relived that this time Congress was able to reach a compromise and avert a fight so middle-class families can get the certainty they badly need.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, we have four more votes. They have all been ordered, just like this one was, as 10-minute votes. We are going to stick with that. If people are not here--whether you have been here for 30 years or 3 days--we are going to close the vote. People have a lot of important things to do this afternoon. We cannot delay these votes. This vote was 10, 15 minutes over what it should be. We are not going to do that this afternoon. The next vote will be 10 minutes, plus the 5-minute penalty period. That is it. Amendment No. 8

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I know that some have raised questions about whether Section 2 of the bill is constitutional under the 27th Amendment, though the legislation does not lower pay but rather withholds it temporarily. Of course, as members of the House knew by the time they passed the bill, Section 2 is largely moot since the Senate leadership previously announced our intention to take up a budget resolution, regardless of whether H.R. 325 is enacted. In any event, does my colleague agree with me that even if the law is challenged in court and Section 2 is found to be unconstitutional for any reason, the first section would remain in force? That is, does he agree that, in such a circumstance, Section 2 should be severed from the rest of the legislation, leaving the debt limit suspension unaffected?

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators allowed to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. REID

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

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to a period of morning business with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Madam President, I move to proceed to Calendar No. 1, S. 47.

Mr. REID

Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Natalie Beckman, a fellow in my office, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of calendar year 2013.