Debbie Stabenow

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise to express deep concern on behalf of families and students all across Michigan who are very upset at the vote earlier today where we did not get enough votes--the supermajority needed to be able to get beyond the filibuster that is going on on the floor by colleagues on the other side of the aisle, and therefore we can't actually get to the vote on the bill that would lower or maintain the lower student loan interest rates for students all across America and certainly in Michigan. We know what will happen July 1 if we can't get beyond this. We actually have a majority of Members, 53 Members. I am very proud that all of our Members on this side of the aisle voted, in fact, to support the effort to maintain the low student loan interest rate. We didn't have the supermajority because it takes bipartisan votes to be able to get there and overcome the filibuster on the other side of the aisle. But we have enough votes, and we just want to vote. We have enough votes to be able to pass this bill, the Stop the Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act. We have enough votes, and we just need to have the opportunity to be able to vote. What does this mean for middle-class families and students in Michigan and all across the country? We are at a time when middle-class families are struggling to make ends meet and no more so than in Michigan, where we have gone through the deepest recession for the last decade of anyplace in the country. We need to be making college more affordable for Michigan students and students across America and their parents, not less affordable. We ought to be doing what will actually add to what we have done to support lower interest rates, more access to student loans, not taking that away, which is what is happening right now on the floor of the Senate because of the filibuster. Higher education costs are already rising. Michigan students are graduating with mountains of student debt while high school graduates are being priced out of the opportunity to be able to go to college. In fact, the average Michigan student is graduating with over $25,000 in student debt. That is a heck of a place to start when you come out of college and you are looking for a job and trying to get started in a professional life or trying to continue your professional life and at the same time support your family. That is a lot of money. And we should not be adding to that, because we are talking about additional debt on top of that $25,000 average if, in fact, we can't pass this bill. We have right now more than 300,000 Michigan students--those who have borrowed money because they believe in themselves, they believe in the future, and they want to get the skills and the degrees they need to be able to go into the workplace, to be successful for themselves and their families--300,000 students who are going to see their Stafford student loan interest rate double if we don't pass this bill. We need a sense of urgency, like every single family feels right now that finds themselves burdened by loans. They made the decision, and we have been supportive of that, making loans available and lowering the interest rate over the last several years so more people can go to college and be able to get the skills they need and be able to be successful in the workplace. We should be continuing to support that and doing even more to help them lower the cost, not allowing the student loan interest rate to double come July 1. Folks in Michigan are scratching their heads right now. Let me share stories I have received. I have received a lot of input, a lot of stories from people not only throughout today but before today, but certainly folks who watched the vote this afternoon are horrified at what this means personally to them, for their children or for their families. We have received a number of e-mails to our office, and I am very thankful to people who are sharing their stories. I would like to share just a few of them on the floor of the Senate. Liz from Traverse City wrote: PLEASE, please don't let them raise the interest rates on student loans. I have two sons at MSU and I'm a single mom. I work a full time and 2 part-time jobs and they work, and without the Federal loans they wouldn't be able to go to college--even with the full MET I worked on all their lives. So she put money into a Michigan program to be able to save money and put money aside. But this is somebody who is working one job and two part-time jobs on top of her full-time job, and her sons are working, and they still have student loans to be able to piece it together to be able to go to college. She said: Please help--our 3 person family is working very hard to get through school. And I would suggest that they are. And, Liz, thank you for caring about your sons and working as hard as you are working. We need to make sure we don't add costs to Liz and her two sons in July. On top of everything they are doing to be able to create an opportunity for those two sons to be able to go to college, to be able to have a better life and a future for themselves, we shouldn't be adding costs to them. Lars from Ann Arbor wrote: As a student at the University of Michigan, I find it hard to keep up with current events, but I try in earnest, and this is an issue that affects me more than most others at this time. I'm footing the bill for my college education largely myself, as my mother and father--a high school art teacher and GM retiree, respectively--do what they can to help in the short term. I'd like you to work on behalf of keeping the interest rates lower. So Lars is going to the University of Michigan--a great university-- and he is footing most of his college bill himself. His mom, a teacher, and his dad, a GM retiree, are doing what they can to help, but he has to have student loans. Why on Earth would we be adding to his costs come July when he is working very hard, with the support of his family, to be able to create a great life with a great education from a great university? Kasondra from Grand Blanc wrote: I am not what they consider a `typical' student. I am a single mom of two obtaining my bachelor's degree in Social Work. As a student and as a mother, I am attempting to lift myself and my family out of poverty by doing the right thing, getting a college education. While it has been tough and there are days I wished I could give up, I am pursuing my dream, and I will be graduating with honors in one year. If the rate increase happens, I cannot afford paying back my student loans while raising two children. Please, do not let the interest rate expire on July 1. Kasondra, congratulations for all you are doing as a single mom of two, as you said, lifting your family out of poverty. We in Michigan are a tough bunch. We don't give up. But I know how hard it can be trying to hold it all together during these times, and I want to thank you for doing that. And you are absolutely right, it would really be outrageous to see the interest rate on your loans when you are graduating next year with honors--congratulations for that. But to be able to know that you are going to at least have the interest rate on your loans continue as they have been I know would be a relief and a help to you. Angelica from Ypsilanti wrote: My name is Angelica, I am a 40 year old mother of three who has returned to school to finally get my degree. I have recently been accepted at Eastern Michigan University and am starting classes in June. Without affordable student loans I would not be able to attend school. I want to make a positive difference. Getting my degree will give me and my family a better standard of living and get out of the terrible cycle of poverty. This bill is critical to making the dream of higher education a reality for Americans and ensuring our workforce is prepared to compete in a 21st century global economy. Angelica, again, congratulations. As a mom of three, 40 years old, making the decision to go back to school, getting accepted, creating a plan for how you are going to be able to use student loans and be able to hold it all together financially as you are moving forward, it is really outrageous to think that there is a filibuster going on right now to stop us from voting on something that would help you. We have the votes. This is not about whether we have the votes to maintain the low interest rate. We have the votes. We are being blocked procedurally from getting to the vote, and that is something that is very hard for me to understand. Michael in Mount Pleasant wrote: I am a student at Central Michigan University studying Information Technology and I am also putting myself through school by whatever means possible. The amount of student loan debt I will have to pay after a 4-year degree casts a looming shadow. We are always taught to look toward the future and to jump at any opportunity that presents itself as an opportunity to better oneself. We as students are now looking at a future filled with uncertainty. Please do whatever it takes to do what you know is right, and save our future from an impending financial defeat. Well, Michael, again working very hard, has a path, knows what he wants to do, puts a plan in place, like most students and most families, to figure out how he is going to be able to pay it both now in terms of the costs and paying back the student loans. And if we can't get a vote on this bill, we are pulling the rug out from under Michael. Jennifer in Michigan wrote: For me, it means I'll be very unlikely to finish grad school. We say the US (especially Michigan) needs to invest in technology, yet they want to do things like this that will result in an uneducated society. Jennifer, I am with you. This makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, at a time when we know we have to outeducate and outinnovate to be able to outcompete in a global economy. Doing things that add costs for middle-class families, working families, to add costs for loans? You are bearing the brunt. You are getting a loan. You are believing in yourself and your future. We ought to be doing everything we can to support that, not adding more costs. That is unfortunately what will happen if we cannot get beyond this filibuster on the floor of the Senate, to have a real vote, a final vote. We have the votes. We are just being blocked from getting to the vote by the procedures of the Senate. Kathryn in Michigan: When I heard the interest for student loans is going to double, my heart sank. How is this even possible? My daughter is 21 years old, a psychology major at Western Michigan University. That is another great university in Michigan. I am so very proud of her as any parent would be. With interest rates set to double, how can these students possibly even begin to think of paying these loans back? All this does is discourage kids from going to college at all and once again only the privileged will be allowed to succeed. Please once again we need your help. There has to be a light at the end of this dark tunnel for these kids and for our nation. ``There has to be a light at the end of this dark tunnel for these kids and for our nation.'' I could not agree more. We have to make sure the light they see is not from an oncoming train. We have to make sure the light they see is actually their way through the tunnel of debt that comes with college loans, and out into a future that is brighter for themselves, for their families. That is the hope, that is the promise of college education. We have a responsibility to make sure we are doing everything possible to support the hopes and dreams, the hard work, the sacrifice that is going on in college after college, in home after home, where people are making tough decisions in order to give their kids a brighter future. I was proud to help author the legislation in 2007 that cut the interest rate to where it is now, 3.4 percent. I was pleased to help lead the effort as well to reform the student loan program and expand college access. Those were good things to do--not bad things, good things. People have benefited. Three hundred thousand people in Michigan right now have benefited from that opportunity, the commitment we made to support young people, people going back to college, to have a brighter future through a college education. Now is not the time to turn that around. The Stop The Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act is commonsense legislation. It does not add a dime to the deficit. It is fully paid for. It is something that needs to get done now so that there is certainty for families across Michigan and across the country. Education really is the road to opportunity in this great country and Michigan is home to world-class universities and community colleges. They are conducting cutting-edge high-tech research to help transform the economy. Our schools serve to open doors and create opportunities for thousands and thousands of graduates every year. I am always honored when I have the opportunity to speak at a graduation, as I have done this year, and to see the pride and relief on the faces of students who have worked so hard--and their parents, their pride and the commitment they make to their children. I know how that feels as a parent sitting in the audience as your kids graduate and walk across that stage with their diploma. This is ingrained in us as Americans. It is the foundation of who we are, to create an opportunity for people to go to school K 12 and then be able to have a chance to go on to college so they can have the best shot at success. That is what we have had as a foundation in terms of our values as a country. This is not the time to turn it back. We need to be making it easier, not harder, for students to achieve a college education which greatly improves their chances of getting a good-paying job and being successful in life. We are at a moment where we had a vote today where it was very clear we have enough votes to pass this bill, to make sure that student loan rates do not double. We have enough votes to pass it. We just do not have support from across the aisle, we do not have the bipartisan votes we need to get to a supermajority to stop the filibuster. That is what is going on right now. We need to vote. Folks do not have to agree with it. They can vote no on the final bill. Let us vote. On behalf of the people we represent, let us vote on the bill. On behalf of 300,000 students and their families in Michigan, on behalf of hundreds of thousands of others who are looking for the opportunity to go to college, to be able to work hard and take all the risks that come with that to be able to have a better life, I ask we simply allow a vote. Let us vote on this bill. It is time to get on and let people know we get it, we understand what families are going through, we understand the squeeze middle-class families are going through on every front right now, and we will make sure that access to college, a higher education, is not just there for the wealthy and connected but that it is available to everybody because we are a stronger country because of that. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, it is the majority leader's intention to resume the motion to proceed to S. 2343, the Stop the Student Loan Interest Rate Hike Act, upon convening tomorrow. We expect to equally divide the first hour, with the Republicans controlling the first 30 minutes and the majority controlling the second 30 minutes.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 358, S. 743.

Ms. STABENOW. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported amendments be agreed to, the bill, as amended, be read a third time and passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any related statements be printed in the Record.

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 447, submitted early today.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 390, H.R. 2668.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time and passed, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any related statements be printed in the Record.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until Wednesday, May 9, at 9:30 a.m.; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and that the majority leader be recognized.

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Thank you very much, Mr. President. If the Chair would please let me know when I have used 5 minutes, I would appreciate that. We have a very important vote in front of us that goes to the question of whether consumers are going to continue to be held hostage by basically having one energy source at the pump or whether we are going to give competition to the oil companies and if we are going to give consumers choice. I believe we need to do everything; there is no question about that in my mind, but that doesn't mean having a Tax Code that has embedded in it for almost 100 years special tax breaks and subsidies for the oil companies, and the other new clean energy alternatives that are growing and creating jobs in our country do not have the same treatment. In fact, they limp along with a tax cut that expires every year, not sure if it is going to continue, which is what is happening right now. People are losing their jobs right now in the areas of wind production and other areas because they are not sure what is going to happen. Yet we give preferential treatment to an industry right now whose top five companies are making about $260,000 a minute--a minute. For people in Michigan, the average wage does not equal $260,000 a year, yet $260,000 a minute in profits for the oil companies, and we as customers, as consumers, have the great privilege of on the one hand paying whatever they want to charge at the pump because there are no alternatives and not enough choices, and at the same time out of the other pocket we get to subsidize them. One hundred years ago those subsidies probably made a lot of sense. I am sure I would have voted for them as we were starting the new industrial economy and incentivizing the production of oil certainly made sense. I still support the efforts for small businesses and local efforts, but the top five companies do not need taxpayer subsidies right now when they have the highest profits of any business in the world. So what are we talking about? We are talking about--in tough times and budget deficits and when we need to be focused on jobs and getting us off of foreign oil--making choices that make sense for the future and not the past. That means closing down these special subsidies for the top five companies that, again, are earning profits of about $260,000 every single minute, and turning those dollars over to new clean energy alternatives such as biofuels, wind, solar, electric batteries, and all of the things that need to happen--including natural gas, which my colleague from New Jersey has been a champion of--so that we actually have real competition and we can actually go look at the price at the pump and say, you know what, it is too much; I am going to do something else. We are beginning that process with new electric vehicles and I am proud that those are being made in Michigan. We have advanced biofuels right now. If we didn't have advanced biofuels at the pump in the few places we do, we would actually see prices a dollar higher on average than they are right now. So there is a little bit of competition, but we have a long way to go. This bill takes dollars from subsidies that are no longer needed, that don't make sense from the American taxpayers' standpoint or an energy standpoint, and turns them over to continue 19 different tax cuts for entrepreneurs, small businesses, and those who are creating the new clean energy alternatives in the future. Some of my colleagues on the other side have said that taking away government subsidies will increase prices. It is amazing to me that somehow Friday seems to increase prices; Memorial Day seems to increase prices. I think whatever the market will bear increases prices. But when the CEOs of the big five companies came to the Finance Committee I actually asked them--because folks are saying taking away government subsidies for them will increase prices. I said: How much do we have to pay you to bring down the price? Give me a number. How much do we have to pay you to bring down the price? Finally, one of the CEOs actually said: Well, I did not say we would be raising gas prices at the pump. I did not hear anyone else say that, either. So that is what they said. They were not willing to go on record as saying they would raise the prices at the pump. Instead of throwing huge government handouts at some of the most profitable companies ever, we should be paying down the debt and we should be providing tax cuts for the jobs and the new alternatives for the future, and I urge my colleagues to support this very important bill. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I join my colleagues in honoring the service of the Senator from Maryland, Barbara Mikulski, on becoming the longest-serving woman in the history of Congress. She is an inspiration, a mentor, and a friend, and I congratulate her on achieving this historic milestone. The story of Barbara Mikulski is the story of the American Dream. The daughter of a grocer in Baltimore, she learned what it meant to do a hard day's work. She got good grades, went to college, and eventually got her Master's Degree in Social Work. When she was in her 20's, she got involved in a fight to stop a highway proposal that would have cut through a working-class neighborhood. She stopped that highway and saved the homes of the families who lived there. Those families saw something that day that all of us would recognize today: a woman of passion, hard work, and determination. Throughout her years of service, she has reflected these values day in and day out as she has fought for America's working families. She understands that our country needs to make things and grow things if we are going to have a middle class and an American Dream. She understands the dignity of work, and how important that is to families who want to create a better future for their children, just as Barbara's family did for her. And in her many years of leadership and service, she has been fighting every day to create a better future for every little girl and boy in Maryland. She did not come here for the power; she came here to serve. And I think that is why the people of Maryland have chosen her, time and time again, to be their champion in the U.S. Senate. In the whole history of the United States, 1,931 people have served in the U.S. Senate. Of those, 39 were women. And of those, 17 are serving right now. And of those, only one--Senator Barbara Mikulski--is our Dean and our mentor. I want to thank my friend, Senator Mikulski, for all she has done for me and for all the women who will follow in her footsteps in the years to come.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to call up amendment No. 1812, as modified, and ask that the clerk report the amendment.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment to stop the tax increase on American businesses that are creating clean-energy jobs. Especially now when gas prices are going up and families are struggling more than ever to fill the tank, we shouldn't be raising taxes on innovators and job creators who are helping to lower America's energy bills. My amendment extends 19 different tax cuts for innovative businesses that account for 2.7 million jobs. Let me also say that the oil industry has benefited from special tax benefits for almost 100 years. The cost of this is not offset, it is part of the Tax Code. Yet the tax cuts that will create American jobs to get us off foreign oil have been extended only a year at a time, and they have been subject to different budget rules. This makes no sense. If we want to see ``Made in America'' again, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise to oppose the Roberts amendment No. 1826. My friend from Kansas and I work together in the Agriculture Committee, and I appreciate the great bipartisan work we have been able to do. But I stand to strongly oppose this amendment. I believe that when it comes to energy, we should do it all. We need more domestic production of wind, solar, electric vehicles, advanced batteries. We absolutely need to stop our addiction to foreign oil and create jobs here in America at the same time. Unfortunately, that is not what this amendment does. It includes the Hoeven language that we defeated earlier last week. We shouldn't be building a pipeline from Canada to China. If we build a pipeline, we should use the oil to lower gas prices for American families. It also includes dangerous requirements for drilling in the Arctic and in offshore locations without any safeguards. Worst of all, it ends tax cuts for wind and clean energy manufacturing at a time when families are paying so much at the pump. It doesn't make sense to raise taxes on the businesses that are trying to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and it pays for all these changes by adding redtape to working families when they file their taxes, adding more burdens to middle-class families. I urge my colleagues to vote no.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to support an amendment that will be coming up tomorrow for a vote--a very important amendment for the economy. It is my amendment No. 1812 that would stop a tax increase on American businesses that are creating clean energy jobs by extending the energy tax cuts. These energy tax credits have been so important to stimulating the diversity of opportunity for us in terms of energy sources, and things are beginning to move. It would be such an error to stop or slow this down at this point. We have right now over 26 different national organizations that have endorsed this, and more are coming, but let me just mention a few. The National Association of Manufacturers, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Wind Energy Association, the Solar Energy Association, the Alliance for Clean Energy, Biotech Industry Association, Renewable Fuels--it goes on and on. A number of folks understand that this means jobs, including the United Steel Workers, as well as the Propane Gas Association, the National Electric Manufacturers, the National Wildlife Association, the Sierra Club, the League of Conservation Voters. The list goes on and on. This has broad bipartisan support, including industry workers and those who care very much from an environmental standpoint about what is happening to our country. All have come together to support this amendment to stop a tax increase on our businesses that are creating jobs through clean energy technologies. All across the country businesses big and small are creating jobs and bringing manufacturing jobs back to America, building the technology that is powering our future. We all understand that part of the next round in terms of growing a strong economy really is around energy--all sources of energy. I am a let's-do-it-all person, but we have to make sure we have energy choices and opportunities for those businesses to grow. We have entrepreneurs inventing new technology, building plants, hiring workers, producing cutting-edge new products that save consumers money and, importantly, reduce our dependence on foreign oil. Especially now, when gas prices are going through the roof--and believe me, as I drive around Michigan looking at the gas pumps, it is outrageous what is happening right now--when families are struggling more than ever to fill their tanks, we shouldn't be raising taxes on the innovators and the job creators who are helping to lower American families' energy bills, and that is what the vote tomorrow is about. My amendment does a number of things. It extends current policy that puts in place this new ability to create jobs, energy, get us off the floor and going. It extends this extremely successful advanced energy manufacturing tax credit that has been called 48C. This is something I was proud to author, working with our chairman of the Energy Committee, Senator Bingaman. We have 43 States where businesses have been able to get a 30-percent tax cut for companies that expand, reequip, and build new plants in the United States to produce clean energy technology. I want to see ``Made in America'' again, and I know the Presiding Officer does too. This tax cut is what is helping to make that happen. In Michigan, a number of innovative companies were able to use this tax cut to create jobs, building amazing new products. Here are just a few examples. I was just with the Dow CEO today, someone who is so focused on sustainability and creating energy alternatives. Dow is building solar shingles, among other things, along with new advanced battery technologies. But the solar shingles are really something to see. They are called the ``Power Shingle.'' You put them on your roof just like regular shingles. You roll it out and install it just like regular shingles, and they generate electricity for your home or business. These are new technologies that are creating opportunities for suppliers and small businesses all around the Midland, Saginaw, and Bay City area in Michigan. Ventower Industries builds huge towers for wind turbines. They just opened their plant down in the southeastern part of Michigan, in Monroe, MI. They expect to build as many as 250 wind turbine towers-- the big towers--every year. On the west side of the State, Energetx Composites used to manufacture luxury yachts. They have turned their facility and their big bays that made those yachts--thanks to the 48C manufacturing tax cut--into a facility that is now producing wind turbine blades and other advanced materials. My amendment also extends the tax cut for companies that produce energy-efficient appliances; grants in lieu of tax credits; tax cuts for companies that install charging stations for our new, great electric vehicles; tax cuts for companies producing the next generation of cellulosic biofuels, and much more. It also extends the extremely important production tax credit, this tax cut for wind energy, which supports businesses and utilities that produce electricity from wind. There are more than 8 million households in the United States that rely on wind energy for their electricity. In South Dakota and Iowa more than 20 percent of their electricity is generated by wind. Nationwide more than a half million jobs are related to wind energy production so far. In my State of Michigan alone there are 31 facilities manufacturing components for wind energy and 6 more in the works. I might just add, one of those great big wind turbines has 8,000 parts, and we can manufacture every single one of those in Michigan. When I look at the opportunities around new clean energy manufacturing, I see jobs in every single part for wind, for solar, for electric vehicles. Any of the areas around clean energy creates thousands of jobs. It is about the future. Now is not the time to raise taxes on these companies. If we do not extend these tax cuts, that is exactly what is going to happen. Our economy is slowly coming back, as we know, and manufacturing and clean energy business owners have been leading the way. There are nearly 2.7 million people whose jobs depend on this new part of our economy--the clean energy economy. These are good jobs. This is part of moving our country forward so we can compete successfully in the global economy and keep jobs here. Right now we are in a race with China and Germany and other countries that want to lead the world in clean energy production. They have made clean energy manufacturing a top priority in their tax policy, in their investment strategy. We know, in fact, in China alone they are spending hundreds of millions of dollars every single day trying to beat us in the clean energy production business. We should not turn our back on the American businesses that are fighting to compete with countries such as China. We should not turn our back on the millions of people whose jobs depend on the strength of these businesses. We should not turn our back on the opportunity to truly diversify our energy sources so we can get off foreign oil and not have to worry about what that price sign is at the pump. I strongly urge my colleagues to join together on this amendment, to support it tomorrow, to provide certainty for our businesses and our job creators. This has wide backing from business, from labor organizations, from the environmental and clean energy community. It is a chance to come together and create some certainty for a very important and exciting new part of our economy that is critical for us as we climb out of this recession and create jobs for our American citizens. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, on Thursday I voted for the Collins amendment No. 1660 to send a message that it is extremely important that Boiler MACT rules be done right. I have heard from manufacturers, paper companies, and the forestry industry all across the State of Michigan who rely on boilers in their plants. While I strongly support efforts to limit air pollution, I am concerned about the impact of the proposed rules as they are now written on manufacturing businesses and jobs in Michigan. This amendment is certainly not perfect. I have serious concerns about certain provisions such as the changes to the health-based approach that EPA uses to set emissions rules. This amendment also did not reflect the positive changes that the EPA has already made to the proposed rules. It is my intent to continue working with the EPA as they write their final rules to address the concerns that have been raised by Michigan employers--large and small--and to give our businesses the time necessary to comply with these new emissions rules. It is critical that the EPA draft rules that protect our environment while also protecting our jobs and our economy.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, before I speak about an amendment I have on the Transportation bill, I wish to commend my friend, the Senator from Illinois, for fighting for his people. I understand what it is like to have devastation happen in a State, and I want to thank him and let him know the people of Michigan certainly stand with the people of Illinois and want to be supportive at a time like this because this could happen to any one of us. So I thank him for being such a champion for the people he represents.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, my colleague Senator Carl Levin and I would like to pay tribute to the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of its annual dinner. From the very first dinner held in 1912 to the present, the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce Annual Dinner has played a significant role in bringing business and community leaders together to celebrate exciting developments in the region. Although the format of the evening may have changed over the years, the mission remains the same: to serve as the premier business networking event of the year and to celebrate the contributions of individuals and organizations that make the region great. The group of Lansing area business leaders who formed the Lansing Business Men's Association certainly paved the way for the tradition that is celebrated today. After changing their name to the Lansing Chamber of Commerce, Ransom E. Olds, founder of Oldsmobile, addressed the first annual meeting at the Masonic Temple. The association had encouraged him to come back to Lansing from Detroit and build a factory, which he did. This clearly established the chamber as the community leader in fostering economic growth and creating jobs. I am very proud that the Lansing Chamber founded the now internationally known ATHENA Award in 1982. What started as a visionary way to support, develop and honor local women leaders, has now become a global movement with more than 6000 awards presented in 500 communities in the United States, Canada, Russia, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom. It is exciting that on February 22, 2012, the 100th Annual Dinner will be celebrated at the Lansing Center. This event will not only celebrate the chamber's history and the many people who made things happen over the past 100 years, it will include updates from current business leaders and the presentation of the 2011 Community Service, Outstanding Small Business and Legacy Awards. More than just a dinner, this event showcases the businesses and people who have helped make this region into what it is today and shape its future. We are pleased to congratulate the Lansing Regional Chamber of Commerce on this special occasion and wish them many more years of success.