Debbie Stabenow

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate Committee on the Judiciary be authorization to meet during the session of the Senate, in order to conduct a hearing on pending executive nominations on Tuesday, March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. Witness list Grace C. Becker, of New York, to be Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Department of Justice.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the Committee on Veterans' Affairs to be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, March 11, 2008 in order to conduct an oversight hearing entitled ``VA and DoD Cooperation and Collaboration: Caring for the Families of Wounded Warriors.'' The Committee will meet in room 418 of the Russell Senate Office Building, at 10 a.m.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on March 11, 2008, at 2:30 p.m. in order to hold a closed hearing.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I thank the Senator. That means a lot. Mr. President, I am going to take a few minutes because I expect to have multiple opportunities in which to participate and talk about various parts of the budget resolution that I believe reflect the values and priorities of the American people. That is what budgets are. That is what our own individual budgets are. When we look at our checkbooks and where we spend our money, we hope it reflects the values we want to project. Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn't in my own budget, my own checkbook. But the reality is, that is our job in terms of the Federal budget and where we invest that makes sense for American families. I have to say that listening to colleagues tonight, as I had the opportunity to preside--colleagues on the other side of the aisle--I heard more of the same, unfortunately, that we have seen for the last 8 years. Six of those eight years have been dominated by colleagues on the other side of the aisle, by a Republican President and a Republican Congress. Unfortunately, in my mind, when we talk about what they are going to propose, in totality what we see is more debt. We see more tax cuts for the wealthiest among us, more spending in Iraq and, at the same time, we see less investment in America. That is exactly the opposite of what we ought to be doing. Our budget changes that. It focuses on balancing the budget by 2012 and 2013. It provides middle-class tax cuts so we can make sure the folks who are trying to hold things together--everybody talks about middle-class families and middle-class people being squeezed, seeing gas prices and health care and childcare costs go up. Yet the reality is, unfortunately, the budget put forward by the President doesn't help them at all. I am proud to say we have a budget that, in fact, invests in America. I want to speak to one piece of that. Last year, we set up three main priorities for our budget, and I was very proud of those--one to fully fund veterans health care and make sure we are keeping the promises to the veterans of America. We did it last year, and we are doing it again this year. We will continue, as long as we are in the majority, to make sure that is the case. We want to make sure people have the opportunity to go to college. We passed the largest package since the GI bill after World War II. No. 3 was children's health insurance, which we passed on a bipartisan basis. It was an extraordinary effort. We actually had the votes to overturn a Presidential veto and could not do that in the House of Representatives. We added 10 million children to the Children's Health Insurance Program, which gives them the opportunity to make sure their children have health insurance. This year, we continue those things, but we have three more items we have picked. Mr. President, just to be simple, what I would say is our priorities are jobs, jobs, jobs. I can tell you, coming from the great State of Michigan, that is certainly what we want our focus to be on. We are talking about middle-income families who are struggling. And the best stimulus that you can possibly give somebody is a good-paying job so they can pay their bills, take care of their family, send their kids to college, and be able to have the American dream. I am very proud of the fact that our budget focuses on three priorities: jobs, jobs, jobs. How? We have three pieces in our budget. We focus on green-collar jobs. I am very proud of the fact that the initiative I put forward is incorporated. The Presiding Officer is passionate about pieces of this legislation as well. We know there is a new economy. We know that alternative energy and moving forward in ways that will address global warming and stop our dependence on foreign oil can create jobs as well. So we have a major new initiative in this bill for green-collar jobs. Secondly, jobs rebuilding America--water projects, sewers, roads, bridges. We are at a point in our country where we have an aging infrastructure. A lot of we baby boomers are aging but at the same time so is the infrastructure around us. The great thing about investing and rebuilding America is that these are not jobs you can outsource to another country; these are jobs right here in America--good-paying jobs. That is our second priority. Our third priority is to continue our focus on education and job training. We know we need to refocus on job training and on those who lost jobs because of trade by fully funding trade adjustment assistance for people to go back to school and gain new opportunities. Mr. President, we are saying jobs, jobs, jobs. I want to focus specifically on the piece in which I have been most involved. This is very exciting. We passed an energy bill last year with a number of programs in it that were not funded but that were great ideas. This year, we come back and say let's make those things a reality in this budget. Energy efficiency and conservation: Providing over $1.1 billion for State and local communities to not only focus on energy efficiency and conservation but buildings and weatherization. There is a huge amount of energy savings to be had by focusing in this area. It also creates lots and lots of jobs. It will put people to work weatherizing buildings and focusing on energy efficiency. Advanced batteries: For us to go where we want to go in terms of new alternative fuel vehicles, it involves focusing on advanced battery technology. We are doing that but not nearly as fast as other countries. In the American budget last year, there was $22 million. Yet you can look over to China, Japan, and South Korea where hundreds of millions of dollars are being spent. As a result of that, we see very tangible things happening. When Ford Motor Company came forward with the first Ford Escape hybrid, an American SUV hybrid, unfortunately, even though the brain power came from here and the engineering came from here, the battery came from Japan because we weren't making them here. We don't want to change from dependence on foreign oil to a dependence on foreign technology. So investing in the future in battery technology is incredibly important, not only for vehicles but battery storage is critical for such things as winds turbines, solar, and other areas where we need to be able to move forward with alternative energy. Battery storage is critical. I am proud that we put forward for the first time an aggressive investment in innovation and production here at home. Retooling older plants. As we have new standards for fuel efficiency coming into play, we want to make sure we are retooling our old plants to keep American jobs here, biofuel production and access, meaning infrastructure. I come from a State where we are growing the biofuels and making the automobiles. If you cannot drive up to the service station and fuel with E-85 or biofuel, it is not going to matter in the end. So being able to have that infrastructure and investment in infrastructure is absolutely critical. Finally, a green job training program to refocus on those jobs we know are there for the future. Again, the Presiding Officer has been a passionate advocate, and I know he believes strongly that jobs and energy and focusing on global warming and jobs can go together, and that is what this does. This says we are going to take this first step to focus on the American people. What I will say again, as we go forward, there are many items that are in this budget that are very important. But what I am very proud of is the fact that we have put forward a budget resolution with three very simple priorities: jobs, jobs, jobs. And that is right where the American people are. People want American jobs where they can care for their families, they can have the dignity of work, they can have good wages and be able to have an American dream. This budget resolution is laser-focused on that priority. I thank the Chair.

Ms. STABENOW. First, I thank our colleague from Vermont, who is passionate and cares very deeply about people in the country, about their future, and about the children. I could not agree more with him about what has been the underfunding of a very important investment, and that is special education. The Federal Government was supposed to pay 40 percent of special education and has never, I believe, gotten over 18 or 19 percent. So I thank the Senator for the amendment he will offer later. I thank the Budget Committee chairman also who is someone who does such an extraordinary job on a daily basis on such a wide range of issues. There is no one more committed to the long-term fiscal health of the country, no one more committed to getting our priorities right, no one who works more effectively across the aisle to bring people together to do the right thing. So I thank our distinguished colleague, the chairman of the Budget Committee, for all of his incredible leadership and pointing us in the right direction and creating a budget resolution that I am proud of.

Ms. STABENOW. Yes.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I will withhold my request for the distinguished Senator from New Jersey.

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

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, in listening to my friend from Missouri who just spoke, I was surprised that this is all being debated now in the context of the fact that yesterday our Republican colleagues stopped us from proceeding to the very measure everyone is now talking about and wanting to make changes and improvements to. There are ideas my friend from Missouri talked about that I think are worthy of discussion and debate. Some we may very well support. The reality is that we are here today because colleagues on the other side of the aisle stopped us from even proceeding to have a debate. So it seems to me it is a little disingenuous to say we want to be doing all these measures--and we agree there is an incredible sense of urgency about what is happening now to families--yet, at the same time, rather than proceeding to the bill and offering amendments, such as an amendment to remove a provision if there is concern on bankruptcy on which I happen to disagree--I think it is very difficult to explain to people why their vacation home, which I hope to have some day in beautiful northern Michigan, would be covered by bankruptcy provisions, but my home, my primary residence where my children grew up, where I raised my family, would not be protected. So I do not understand that difference. That is a debate worth having. If our colleagues had allowed us to go to the bill, we could have had that discussion, we could have had that debate about whether that provision should be in the bill. I come to the floor today to urge colleagues--and Senator Reid has renewed his motion to go to the bill--we cannot begin to deal with an issue which colleagues are saying on both sides of the aisle is incredibly important, which has a great sense of urgency to it, if we are not allowed to go to the bill. This reminds me of time after time in the Senate where we as a majority have brought forward urgent issues that affect American families and American communities and asked that they be considered, that we have an opportunity to debate and take action, and we have been blocked time and time again--in fact, a record 72 times now, which is more than the 2-year average of any Senate 2-year session. We now have 72 times that our Republican colleagues have blocked us from being able to proceed to do the American people's business on issues that are incredibly important. I welcome colleagues to come to the floor next week, to support Senator Reid's motion to go to the debate, and to look at a variety of ideas that need to be addressed on this critical issue. We all know that for a majority of Americans--Mr. President, I know in West Virginia as in Michigan--when folks want to get into the middle class, the first thing they do is go out and buy a home, to have that equity in a home, to be able to save equity in their home--no more renting; they are going to buy a house. I know in Michigan that is step 1 for people who are working very hard to get that home for their family, to be able to save for the future. That is the primary way that people, in fact, in this country do save for their future: build up that equity so they can use it to offset the cost of college for their children, to save for retirement, to use it in a medical emergency, which is happening way too often now in our country. Equity in the home, knowing that you can invest and have your home, is a basic part of what we all call the American dream in this country, and that is in great jeopardy right now for too many families. Mr. President, 87,000 people went into foreclosure in this last year just in Michigan, and we have one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country right now. That has happened for a variety of reasons. We talk a lot about the financial mortgage arrangements, ARMs--adjustable rate mortgages--that are coming due and interest rates going up. That is certainly part of it. We also have another piece that is very true in Michigan and my guess is around the country that relates to predatory lending practices. I have a very large number of great Michiganians who are African American or from other minority communities who could be in a prime- rate mortgage right now but were sold a subprime mortgage. They were put into a much more fragile situation with less accountability. We know of situations where senior citizens have been followed home from church in Detroit, forming relationships with our seniors where they have been talked into totally refinancing their home. They paid for their house, had no mortgage payment, but were told that if they wanted to refinance, they could get that new furnace they needed, they could fix the roof, or they could pay for those medical bills, and they were placed in a situation through predatory practices that has now jeopardized their ability to even have their home. Then we have another factor which I believe is the largest factor going on right now, which is the underlying fundamentals in the economy and the fact that too many people are losing their jobs or seeing their incomes go down. Certainly, for us in Michigan, it is different than these ARMs resetting. For us, it is about the fact that families are losing their jobs. Families are going from a middle-income job of $25 an hour to $14 an hour and trying to figure out how they are going to pay the bills and keep a roof over the heads of their family. I happen to believe the best stimulus is a good-paying job, and that is something also of great urgency on which we need to be spending our time. I am very proud of the fact that as we move forward in the next 2 weeks in the discussion of our values and priorities through the budget for next year, they will be laser focused on jobs and what we can do to help people keep and get the American dream by working hard and having a job and creating opportunities for themselves and their families. We have in front of us the opportunity to do something immediately to help people. We have a bill that includes a number of provisions. Some of them the President talked about in his State of the Union Address. That is a good idea; we incorporated it. We are talking about adding to the number of preforeclosure counseling offices. We have heard from lenders, we have heard from families and communities that the most important thing is to help people before they lose their house, before they are 90 days behind, when someone thinks they might be having a problem, or they know in 6 months they are going to be faced with this situation of their payments going up--start now and work with lenders. We also know that most people--not most but many--do not answer the phone when the lender calls. They are worried about what is going to happen and do not think they have any way out, so they just wait. By helping people with counseling, we can stop a lot of this on the front end and help people refinance. For people trying to do that, it is tougher now because we have this complicated situation going on where they go to a lender, they get their mortgage, and that loan is then sold, and they don't know who owns it. So who do you talk to when you are trying to figure out how to make some accommodation to refinance? So, having counselors will help. We put money in the budget this year because it was a priority for our majority, adding $200 million to help people on the front end, so they could work their way out of this. That is very important. Also, we allow State housing agencies to issue $10 billion more in refinancing bonds so State and local communities can help refinance homes. That is incredibly important, and something that has been widely supported on both sides of the aisle. We also have said that community development block grant money should be able to be used to purchase and rehab foreclosed properties, again, to help communities. We have to stop this. We have to stop this where it is. I think we can help create some certainty in the markets by helping families right now and creating also some confidence in the markets going forward. That can be done by using the CDBG dollars for communities to refinance and help families stay in their homes. Also, in a balanced approach, we have addressed what is happening on the business side for home builders. We agreed to include in our original package in the Senate--with the help of our distinguished Presiding Officer on the Finance Committee, one of our top leaders on the Finance Committee--a tax issue, net operating loss, to allow home builders to go back a couple of years to a better time and address some of their issues so there is not the pressure to sell their inventory, the unsold homes at the moment, and allow them a little breathing time. We have included that in this provision as well to support the industry itself. This is a very balanced package that took the input of the leadership on the Banking Committee and the Finance Committee which looked at proposals that were bipartisan--by the President, by a number of people--that had brought forward something that will help. We don't pretend it is a magic bullet. I wish there were one; I don't think there is. But it is a very reasonable approach that has been put forward. So here we are. We have this situation where colleagues now on the other side of the aisle, the leader on the other side of the aisle, comes forward with a package and says, this is what we want to do; we need to be able to pass these measures. Yet he has blocked us from even getting to the housing issue, to the bill itself. He has blocked us from getting there. I have to say, this reminds me of one other issue that is very related, and certainly is critical for me in Michigan, that has also been blocked time and time again, and which was a part of our original stimulus package we did in the Senate, of which I am very proud. I think it was a very good proposal, and I was proud of the work we did. In that proposal, we did something else that is very important right now for middle-class workers and families. We extended unemployment compensation benefits for families. It is viewed as one of the top two ways to stimulate the economy. If you are unemployed, you are going to take every dollar that comes in the door to pay the mortgage, to keep the lights on, the heat on, pay for food, and do the things you need to do for your family. We know it is stimulative. We also know, from a moral standpoint, it is the right thing to do to help families. That has been blocked as well. I see them related because we now have people who have been unemployed for longer periods of time than they ever wanted to be and who are in these situations. Maybe to keep going they did a home equity loan, and now that is not working and they find themselves in a situation of foreclosure. One of the ways we can help on housing is to give people some stability in their income. I heard colleagues, when we debated this on the other side of the aisle, saying, well, it is encouraging people not to work. I would love to have the President or the Secretary of the Treasury or colleagues come, if they have not talked to folks in their own State, to Michigan and talk to folks who want desperately to work, and are working at very minimal wage jobs right now to try to keep going. Nationally, we know there are 7.7 million unemployed people today who are competing for 4 million jobs, which is why I say the best long-term stimulus is a good-paying job. I am glad our budget is going to focus on jobs, but the reality is we want to help stabilize families right now because there are hundreds of thousands of people--millions, actually--in a situation where extending unemployment benefits for 13 weeks, and an additional 13 weeks for high unemployment areas, is exactly what needs to happen. I hope we are going to address that as part of what we are doing here as well. In 2002, there was an extension of unemployment benefits, and the national unemployment rate is roughly the same right now. It was 5 percent then, and it is nationally 4.9 now. We hear from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and from Goldman Sachs that by the beginning of next year the national rate is going to be 6\1/2\ percent--6\1/2\ percent nationally. I am in a unique situation because I will take that. Our rate right now is 7.6 percent in Michigan, so I would take 6\1/2\ percent. The reality is we are seeing a dramatic rise in unemployment, and more and more families are going to find themselves in a situation of not being able to pay the mortgage, not being able to do what they need to do for their families. I think this is a fundamental issue for families--for middle-class families. We are talking about people who work and who find themselves in a situation, because of a multitude of issues--where the job is not there anymore--where they need help to continue to keep their family together, and keeping their house is incredibly important. I have 72,000 people in Michigan who are scheduled to lose their unemployment benefits by June. I have over 10,000 people a month who are losing their unemployment benefits, and we don't have the jobs for them. This is incredibly serious. So I am, one more time, asking my Republican colleagues not to block that when it comes to the floor. It is a very important part of the economic picture for people, and it is time for us to get about the business of fixing the economy, of supporting efforts that are going on in the economy for businesses, for individuals, for families, and for communities. There is a great sense of urgency that we need to have, because that is what families feel every single day. I am hopeful that when Senator Reid brings the next motion in front of us to be able to go to a bill to deal with housing, colleagues will have that same sense of urgency and join us in being able to do that. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs' Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Friday, February 29, 2008, at 10 a.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Governmentwide Intelligence Community Management Reforms: Ensuring Effective Congressional Oversight and the Role of the Government Accountability Office.''

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about what is currently happening on the floor of the Senate and what I am hopeful will happen. Our leader, Senator Reid, has one more time brought us--and rightly so--to a point to debate and try to move forward on changing course in the war in Iraq. There have been 5 years of war, with the largest expenditure now of the Federal Government in terms of monthly expenditures, and certainly in terms of loss of life. It goes on every day, day after day. All you have to do is look at the newspaper and see that families continue to pay a huge price for this war. I stood on the floor of this Senate 5 years ago and was one of 23 Members who voted ``no'' on going into this war. But I have spent every other moment, every other vote, doing everything I can to support our troops, to make sure I do everything I can to make sure we honor them through our efforts to equip them and make sure they have the resources, and that when they come home and put on the veteran's cap that we are, in fact, providing the health care and the resources they need. I am proud to be part of a caucus, a new majority that has placed veterans health insurance, health care as a top priority to make that happen. But I often think back to the discussions before my vote, and discussions with my husband, who is a 14-year veteran of the Air Force and the Air National Guard, and him reminding me that the best way to support American troops, the best way to support our troops is to give them the right mission. The second thing is to make sure they have the resources they need. The third thing is to make sure there is a clear exit strategy for that mission. I did not support that mission and believe there was not the evidence that was needed to carry on that mission. I have supported those resources, however, that they need. Now it is important, it is critical, that we as a body, as a Congress, come together to support the exit strategy, the effort to change the mission that needs to occur in Iraq, to be able to bring our people home, to be able to stop the multiple deployments, redeployments that are going on, and that we refocus on those areas of the world and those groups such as al-Qaida that truly are a threat to us. That means Afghanistan, that means other kinds of strategies to be able to truly keep us safe. That is what we need to do. The most important thing is to keep us safe as a country, to be smart about our strategy. That is what we are debating, here: whether we are going to be smart about our strategy to keep us safe, whether we are going to pay attention to the daily loss of life in Iraq, and whether we are going to pay attention to the almost $15 billion a month that is being spent on that war, which is now a civil war, that is not being invested back home in America. That is what I want to speak about for a moment, understanding that the most important thing is the loss of life and what is happening to our troops and their families. As I said, I am extremely proud of the fact that we made a very top priority for us in the new majority coming in the full funding of veterans health care. We have done that. We have tackled the problems we have seen with Walter Reed and the inability for our troops, as they move between systems, to get the effective care they need by passing the Wounded Warriors legislation. We have continued to bring forward other efforts to be able to address what I consider to be the abuse of our troops by continual redeployment without enough dwell time, rest time, for them to be here at home, as the Army Manual would require. But we also have another very important piece of this which goes to what is happening when we have almost $15 billion a month that is being diverted from our economy, which from Michigan surely looks like a recession. I cannot speak to every other part of the country, but from our economy and our families and our communities, it is being spent on a war that a majority of Americans--not a majority of Democrats--a majority of Americans--Democrats, Republicans, and Independents--people of all persuasions in all States are saying: We no longer want to go in this direction. We want to change this mission. We want to bring our people home. But we are now getting ready to do a budget. The distinguished Acting President pro tempore today is on the Budget Committee. He has served with distinction in the House and now in the Senate. Mr. President, you know as well as I do that we are now grappling with very tough decisions about how to address the needs here in America. I think that on top of the issues of national policy and how to keep us safe, and the loss of life, and how to support our troops, we have to grapple with the fact that last year, for instance, when we passed, with overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, an effort to extend health care, health insurance to 10 million children of working families, the President vetoed it, saying it was too much money. Yet it was about half of the cost of 1 month of what we are spending in Iraq today. Investing in children, healthy children in our country, of working families who unfortunately are working in jobs where they do not have health insurance and do not have enough of a wage to be able to afford the $1,000 a month premium or more that they would have to pay--do we focus on supporting those families and change this direction or do we continue down this road of saying no to our children? We have the opportunity to create new jobs in the energy economy. In Michigan, we are moving full speed ahead on alternative energy, and not only in our vehicles. But windmills and solar and biofuels and all of these things take partnerships and investments. We have an energy tax provision--a measure for which we came one vote short of being able to override one of the multitude of filibusters that has gone on on this floor: a historic level of filibusters stopping us at every turn--we came one vote short. We are talking about having some resources to be able to put into tax incentives to be able to produce alternative energies and the infrastructures so the biofuels can actually get to the pump so you not only can buy a E-85 car but get E-85 at the pump. It takes some investments to be able to do that. We have been told no on being able to put dollars into that area. Yet the amount of money we are talking about is less than 2 months of spending in Iraq. Infrastructure, roads and bridges. We saw last year what happened in Minnesota in terms of a huge bridge collapse and what happened with human life and what happened to the community involved. We have roads and bridges across our country, water and sewer systems that are aging, that need a facelift, and we need to be able to get some additional dollars so we can bring ourselves into the modern age for much of our infrastructure. Yet we are told again: No, there are no resources to put money into our infrastructure. However, we are rebuilding roads in Iraq, we are rebuilding schools in Iraq. In fact, one of the original items I will never forget was to put wireless technology into schools. That was in the budget, but it wasn't the American budget, it was the Iraqi reconstruction budget. I have been working for years to get technologies in our schools, new technology, because every single student is going to face, at a minimum, working with a computer, whether you work at a gas station or whether you work at a high-tech company. Yet we can't do that in America. We have been told by this administration and by those who had been in the majority for 6 years: No. But at the same time, it was in the budget for Iraq. We now find ourselves in a situation with a tremendous housing crisis. In my State of Michigan, it has frankly masked a larger economic crisis, where people have been losing their jobs, they are losing their incomes, seeing all their costs go up, but they have had that equity in their home that was keeping them going. All of a sudden, all of the values go down, and we are seeing a collapse in the housing market which has rippled out way beyond housing now into our capital markets, into our entire economy. Yet when we come to the floor--and we are going to be asking shortly, after we vote to end this filibuster that is going on, on the change in the Iraq mission--we are going to be asking to come together around a housing proposal that, frankly, I think is pretty modest. It is important, it is good, it is the right thing to do, but it certainly is something within the realm of reasonableness. Yet I know it is going to be difficult to be able to get this passed. The cost of it, again, is about 2 weeks in Iraq, to be able to focus on one of the most devastating crises going on in America today. Most middle-class families save through equity in their home. That is how most people are able to get into the middle class. We are talking about people who have worked hard, played by the rules, done all the right things, got a job, saved up the downpayment, were able to get a home, and then find themselves in a situation where they are looking around saying: Wait a minute. What is going on here? What about me? What is happening in our economy? I need some help. We are trying to do that. I hope we are going to be able to come together and do that. But if we hear one more time: No, we can't do that, we can't afford it--we are talking about less than 2 weeks of what is being spent in Iraq. How many times have we heard all the comments about Leave No Child Behind, about the fact that we are not keeping our promises as it relates to education. We passed new high standards. We all support the high standards. What we promised was that with that would come resources to help children, help schools succeed. We have seen dramatic underfunding. Again, in this President's budget, he eliminates 48 different education programs, including efforts that focus on vocational education and other things that are important for the future--48 different programs. We will be told that if we try to invest in education, that it is too much. It is too much. We can't afford to keep the promise of Leave No Child Behind. We passed, on a bipartisan basis, something called the America Competes Act. I wish to congratulate my colleagues. This was a great bipartisan effort. I know the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. Alexander, was a real champion of that. It focuses on math and science and technology and investments in the future. I wish we had seen those investments fully authorized, fully funded in the President's budget-- health research to save lives, science research, the National Science Foundation, those things that will make us competitive for the future. Every other country is racing to invest in science. We see China is racing, along with Japan and South Korea and other countries around the world, to get to that next technology, whether it is advanced battery technology research, whether it is biotechnology, whether it is new cures in health care. Yet we, the greatest country in the world, are seeing those things cut, but $15 billion a month is being spent in Iraq which is, by the way, not paid for and goes right on to the deficit for our children to pay for in the future. These priorities don't make sense. They make no sense when we look to the future. I would like to ask the President: How about just 1 month for America? How about just 1 month? We will take 1 month of $15 billion invested to help us with jobs, keeping American jobs here, opportunity through education and innovation, helping our own families with health care, and people being able to keep their homes. How about just 1 month for America? This debate we are having on the floor about Iraq is incredibly important on so many different levels, and that is why I appreciate Senator Reid bringing us to this point. There are other pieces of this that we are committed to addressing such as a modern GI bill. My father went to school on the GI bill after World War II. We ought to be doing the same thing for our returning veterans. It will cost some dollars. Are we going to hear once again: Well, we can't afford it. We can't afford to invest in our veterans. I hope not. The reality is there is a great connection between what is happening now in terms of filibustering our effort to move forward, to change direction in Iraq--one more time, one more filibuster--and what we want to do next, which is focus on the incredibly serious housing crisis in America. There is a connection because we are saying that not only are we not doing the smartest thing to keep us safe from a strategic, from a national security standpoint, we are also using dollars--precious dollars, taxpayer dollars--in a way that is actually making us less safe at home by undercutting our ability to have a strong economy, strong families, to support those who are in the middle class, who are trying to work hard to get into the middle class, struggling to stay in the middle class. The majority of Americans find themselves in great jeopardy right now on a number of fronts. This is the time they look to their Government to play a role to help create opportunity, to be able to make strategic investments here at home that will make sure we can continue to have the American way of life of which we are so proud. So this matters. This matters. I am looking forward to the time when we are going to change that direction in Iraq, and I hope it comes soon. I hope we are able to say to our men and women who are on their third or fourth redeployment now: Job well done. Thank you for your service. You can come home now. Hopefully, they will come home to a veterans system that works for them, that they will come home to a GI bill of rights that creates a way for them to have opportunity, that they will come home to an economy that works for them and their families. That is our goal. We are going to keep focusing on this issue until we create that change. I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, first let me indicate that as my colleagues were speaking a moment ago, I think it is incredibly important to understand that, in fact, we are talking about a threat in 80 countries, and we do have a FISA law that, in fact, has worked, and no one is suggesting we do not have the need for strong intelligence and support for our intelligence operations. In fact, that is what all of us are willing to see happen. But what we are talking about in this resolution is whether we are going to continue to keep our focus on a country that is now in the middle of a civil war or whether we are going to redirect our efforts to address our real threats not only abroad but threats at home. When we talk about the threats to our families, I would suggest that if we are now spending somewhere around $15 billion a month, some say, that when we look at what could be done here at home to address the very real threats of job loss, people losing their homes, children walking into schools that are crumbling, the lack of health care, those are also very important threats. So we certainly want to make sure we are safe and address those threats abroad, but, more broadly, we have many threats affecting our families right now, and they expect us to use the very best judgment to keep them safe both from threats outside our country as well as from threats at home, including a huge economic cloud over many families. Madam President, I rise today to lend my strong voice of support for the Feingold legislation to provide the safe redeployment of U.S. troops from Iraq, and to refocus us on, in fact, those things that are threats to our country and to the families of this country. Tonight, 591 members of the Michigan National Guard will bed down after a long day of working and fighting and facing danger at every turn in the harshest physical conditions imaginable. For every single one of these men and women, a family will go to sleep in Michigan tonight worried that their son or daughter, father or mother, sister or brother won't make it home. The true cost of this war cannot be measured in dollars and cents. The real cost is measured in the sacrifices of our brave men and women and their families every day. This cost is more than just the possibility and the reality of physical danger. This cost includes the sacrifices that every single American family makes by being apart from each other time and time again. It isn't right what is happening; it isn't fair; it isn't safe. It isn't making us safer as a country, and we need to change this policy. That is why I am so grateful that, once again, Senator Reid has made it a priority for us to focus on the war in Iraq and what is happening to troops and families and people here at home, and the cost of the lost opportunity by spending upwards of $15 billion a month now in Iraq. Tonight 591 Guard members in Iraq, with 591 families at home, 591 will have missed birthdays, missed Father's Days and Mother's Days, missed high school graduations and children's first steps or anniversaries or family funerals or holidays; 591 will have missed paychecks, sidetracked careers, with small businesses and farms put in economic danger; 591 lives that will never be the same; 591 sets of missed opportunities that will never be replaced. And these members of the Michigan National Guard make up only a fraction of the 160,000 men and women in uniform currently serving bravely and honorably in Iraq, or the countless others who have served. In too many cases, these men and women are back in Iraq for their second, third, or fourth redeployment. In addition to the 591 who are already deployed, there are about 1,000 members of the Michigan National Guard who have been mobilized and who will deploy this year. Many of them will be doing their second, third, or fourth deployment to a combat zone. This year alone, there will be a thousand more missed paychecks, a thousand more missed birthdays and holidays and special occasions, and a thousand more lives that will never be the same. Our fighting men and women are the greatest single resource our military has, and this Government is abusing that resource. America puts our trust in our military to defend us. When our sons and daughters join the military, they are putting their trust in us to give them the tools, the resources they need, and to treat them with the respect they have earned. The current administration policies on redeployment have violated that trust. Those policies have let our troops down. Once again, I am proud to join with my colleague from Wisconsin in saying: Enough is enough when it comes to placing our armed services in harm's way by stretching them to the breaking point with redeployment after redeployment. Enough is enough when it comes to being in the middle of a civil war. And enough is enough when it comes to this administration taking its eye off the ball on the war on terror. We are all aware of the worsening situation in Afghanistan. However, this administration continues to focus on a civil war in Iraq. Our Armed Forces have traveled a tough road since we invaded Iraq. They have shouldered a heavy burden with pride, with confidence, and with honor. We have asked extraordinary things from them at every turn, and at every turn they have delivered. They have done us all proud. They have faced tough situations and have done their duty. Now we need to do what is right for them. It is time to face the tough situations. It is time to make the hard choices, to make them proud of us, and it is time to remove them from the civil war in Iraq, to change course, and to refocus, as this bill does, and redistribute our resources to those areas that truly address the threats facing our families and our country. America's soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines are always there when we call on them. The question is: Will we be there for them? What this legislation proposes is as simple as it is right. It requires our forces in Iraq to target operations against al-Qaida and other international terrorist groups. Why is this important? Because al-Qaida has declared war against us. We know that. The people in Iraq are in the middle of a civil war that is something they now have to address and come to terms with and bring their own resources to address. So while our troops are in Iraq, they should be targeting those who have said they wished to do harm to us. Also, our troops in Iraq would be required to focus on providing security for U.S. personnel, of course, and that is extremely necessary in order to bring them home safely. I understand the Iraqi security forces are still developing, still learning, as I have met with them in traveling to Iraq. We have heard certainly of the continual need to train, the need for them to continue to develop, and we know we have a role in supporting that, and this bill recognizes that fact. It would allow our troops to continue to train Iraqi security forces, but only if our troops are training the Iraqis who have not been involved in the sectarian violence or attacks against our troops. This bill will allow our troops to continue to train the Iraqi security forces, but only if that training does not result in our troops being in combat. Training, yes; but they need to step up at this point, after 5 years, and be the ones at the front line. This bill also brings our troops home safely. It specifically allows our military to train and equip itself to ensure its safety. Most importantly, it requires that we begin to bring our troops home. This administration said a surge was necessary; that the surge would give the Government of Iraq the time to reach the political solutions necessary to end their civil war and to end the violence. They said time was needed. Well, the Government has had time, and during this time our troops have continued to pay the price. Our troops have been caught in the middle of a civil war. They have been victims of IEDs. They have come home with post-traumatic stress disorder and other mental and physical ailments. The bottom line is, it is time for our troops to be placed first and to begin to bring them home. That is all this bill does, and it does that while allowing our troops to continue to focus on who we all agree is the real enemy: Al- Qaida. On October 11, 2002, I was proud to be 1 of 23 Members of this body who stood in this Chamber and said the war was the wrong choice. This administration, I believe, since that time has in fact failed our troops and the American people by committing our troops to a war without a clear reason or goal, and by squandering resources that are desperately needed here at home to rebuild America and to invest in American communities. This administration has failed our troops by not having a clear mission for our Armed Forces in Iraq, by not providing the proper equipment and body armor and logistical support for the troops, by poor planning on the invasion in Iraq and the lack of planning for how to secure the country and what would happen after the initial attack. I believe they have failed by sending our brave men and women back into harm's way over and over again without the proper rest between redeployments. History will be a harsh judge of this administration, because I believe they have failed the American people. This administration failed because they took their eye off the ball. This legislation is about putting our eye back on the target of what we ought to be doing together. In closing, let me reemphasize the fact that while the most important thing is to be supporting our troops, to be addressing the threats to them while they are in harm's way, to address the lives lost and the people who are coming home who will need help the rest of their lives, it is also important to look at this from the standpoint of the precious resources that have been lost at a time when so many American families are struggling. We always make decisions based on values and priorities, and it is shocking to me, as we have seen this war go forward, to see upwards of, some say $12 billion, some say now upwards of $15 billion a month--not part of the normal budget--going directly on the national deficit, the national debt, to be paid by our children and grandchildren. But let's say it is $15 billion a month. To see that continue month after month after month, and to see us work together on a bipartisan basis to pass a critically important piece of legislation to increase health care for 10 million children across this country, which costs only $7 billion a year, and yet that is vetoed--there is not a willingness to invest in American children to the tune of less than half of what it is costing per month in Iraq--these are the wrong values and wrong priorities. We see schools being rebuilt in Iraq, and yet I can go in too many schools in Michigan where there is a bucket in the corner to catch the water dripping from the roof, or we don't have the kind of computer technology in the classroom every single child will need to know how to use in any job they get, from working at a gas station to working at a technology company. We know we have crumbling roads and bridges here in America. We know every time we invest in and rebuild in America, those are jobs that aren't going to be outsourced to another country. Those are American jobs--rebuilding American roads and American bridges and water and sewer systems in America. We are told we can't do that, that there are not the resources to invest in America, but we are spending $15 billion a month in Iraq. We now have a whole new group of industries producing what are called green collar jobs, and I am very proud to have joined in working with many of my colleagues to focus on the new alternative energy technologies and other things we need to do--small investments with huge results for energy independence and creating more jobs and addressing global warming. And yet we consistently hear there are not the resources for any new investments in America. There are so many areas where we are told there is no money: for doing the bold research we need to solve Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease and to aggressively move forward on other health research; the desire not to help those who lost their jobs because of trade, to be able to go back and get the training they need to be able to move on to new kinds of jobs so that we have a middle class in this country; and that families can pay their mortgage and electric bill and heating bill and know that they have the opportunity to keep their standard of living in our country. There is a lot at stake. And this bill, while it focuses on what we need to do to change the mission, to refocus on ways to truly keep us safe, to begin to bring our troops home from Iraq, from a civil war where we need to leave and redirect our troops to those areas where, in fact, we will be focusing on the real threat to our country, that is, on the surface, what this legislation does. I would suggest it does more than that because this is about who we are as Americans, what our priorities are: No. 1, how to make sure we are truly smart enough to be focused on what keeps us safe; and, No. 2, understanding that we have much to do in our country. Our families are feeling squeezed on all sides. Communities need help, and we have an opportunity to not only redirect our troops and our focus but to redirect critical dollars to be able to make sure, in fact, we are finally putting the interests of America's families first. I urge my colleagues to support this important bill. I yield the floor.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Thank you, Madam President.

Ms. STABENOW. Thank you very much. Madam President, certainly we come here today supportive of what has been done to this point, congratulating the House for beginning this process, on which we can build. But I think it is very important we make it clear what has happened. We had the majority of the Senate that supported something that would have gone further, something that would have been better, in my judgment, and it was stopped by a filibuster and our inability to get one vote--one Republican vote--to join with us to stop the filibuster. So what does that mean? It means millions of unemployed middle-class Americans are left out. Unemployment benefits--one of the top two areas that economists have agreed upon to stimulate the economy--were left out because of one vote from our Republican colleagues. We just needed one more vote to include that. Jobs from alternative energy production--we literally have businesses saying they will bring jobs back from overseas to this country--we lost that by one vote. Those jobs will stay away. Plants, we are told, will not improve and may, in fact, close certain projects because of the lack of one Republican vote. Help for homebuilders and homeowners--at the heart of this crisis--help for other employers struggling to invest and keep Americans employed, we lost this by one vote. That is what is so unfortunate here today.

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 minute from the majority's time.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. So when we look at this package, we have a choice between including or excluding 20 million seniors, excluding or including 250,000 disabled veterans, including or excluding millions of middle-class Americans looking for a job and, in addition to that, create jobs through alternative energy production and efforts to help the home-building industry, which is at the heart of what has been happening in terms of our economy. I am very pleased we have addressed those businesses that have operating losses now, to help them through the tax system and be able to keep going and not find themselves in a vice this year in terms of having fire sales to eliminate their inventory. I am pleased we have been able to include a $10 million revolving loan fund for States and local governments to help with refinancing of subprime loans. We have a number of very important provisions, and it is very exciting to see the broad coalition that has come together, from business to labor, to seniors, to the environmentalists, to those creating energy jobs, to those in the housing workplace; and from homebuilders to those who are involved with State and local governments, and millions and millions of middle-class families all across this country who are counting on us to do more than provide a check but to create the ability for investments and for jobs that will grow the economy. So I am very hopeful we will come together with the necessary votes to stop the filibuster that is happening here. I wish we could simply have an up-or-down vote on this. We certainly have the votes. But because of the situation we are in, because of the Republican filibuster, it is necessary to get 60 votes to be able to stop the filibuster. So I am very hopeful we will have enough colleagues joining together on a bipartisan basis in order to be able to do that. Madam President, I thank the Chair.

Ms. STABENOW. Madam President, I first lend my voice to that of the Senator from Washington and the Senator from North Dakota, our distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee. I, too, am a member of the Budget Committee and am extremely disappointed that the President's budget this year is simply more of the same, in some cases worse-- higher deficits, more cuts in a number of areas, and certainly the wrong priorities for families in America. It takes us in exactly the wrong direction from where we need to be going. We are going to do what we have done in other years, which is put forward a very different vision for America, one that focuses on paying down the debt rather than increasing the debt, focuses on health care and education and investing in areas that will clean our water and our air and protect our lands and focus on the economy and good-paying jobs for middle-class families who are being hurt all across this country. We heard today a larger number than I have even been using about what is being spent on this war. The number now is $16 billion a month, $4 billion a week on this war, and yet at the same time, the President believes we should eliminate funding for the COPS Program for local police officers and firefighters, makes dramatic cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, health care programs, cuts 48 different educational programs, and the list goes on and on. I am looking forward, as a member of the Budget Committee, to put forward a very different vision. We intend to change the priorities of this country and put them back on those priorities that directly affect middle-class families and help them survive and thrive in an economy that is having a very tough time, where they are being hit on all sides with increased costs. I wish to take a moment to speak about the stimulus package. As a member of the Finance Committee, I am very pleased with what we have been able to do working together on a bipartisan basis to come forward, again, with something that reflects a stimulus in the short run and focuses on critical areas, and we make sure a number of folks who were left out of the House package are not left out. We start with 20 million seniors. I should also say we are going to have in this body two votes: a vote on whether to include 20 million seniors or a vote on whether to leave them out. That is the reality. Unfortunately, seniors on fixed incomes, whose only income is Social Security, have been left out of the House package. We, on a bipartisan basis, have put it into the Senate package. So the question will be: Do my colleagues support and join with AARP and all the senior organizations that have been pushing and advocating and sending cards and letters and phone calls and urging us not to forget them, will you join with them, 20 million seniors, or will they be left out? We also want to make sure our disabled veterans are not left out. I am proud of the fact that we, in this new majority, this Democratic majority, have put veterans health care at the top and last year included real improvements in health care funding for the first time since that war began--the largest funding increases to support our veterans since the war began. This is another step in supporting our veterans. Two hundred and fifty thousand disabled veterans will be left out if the House bill is passed. So we have a choice when we vote. We vote yes on 250,000 veterans-- our disabled veterans, who have given more than I will give or most of us will give for our country--250,000 disabled veterans get the rebates and are part of the stimulus or they are not. The Senate package puts them in, the House package leaves them out. There is another very important piece of this package, and that goes to the question of millions of middle-class Americans, who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves in a situation without a job. I have spoken many other times on the floor about the reasons for that--from not enforcing our trade policies and not investing in the technologies and the infrastructure and the things that we need to be doing to grow a 21st century manufacturing base and to be able to keep manufacturing jobs, middle-class jobs, all across this country. There are many reasons for the fact that we have millions of people who are currently unemployed, but the fact is we do. We have middle-class Americans who find themselves on unemployment insurance, which pays about 40 percent of the normal wage, while they are trying to keep the house, keep up the mortgage payment, put food on the table, keep the lights on, pay for the kids' clothes that they need, and to put gas in the car so they can survive until they can get that next job. Now, some have said, well, it is not that bad. I come from a State with the highest unemployment in the country. We have about 7.6 percent unemployment, and we are seeing not only in Michigan and a few States around the country that have been hit first, that this unemployment situation is beginning to creep out into millions of people, millions of middle-class families all across the country. So we are now hearing from Goldman Sachs and from the Bureau of Labor Statistics that while, as of January of this year, the unemployment rate was 5 percent, by next year the prediction is 6.5 percent. That is not Michigan, that is nationally. That is national unemployment. So one of the things that is important about the Senate package is that instead of being behind the curve--and economists talk about our being behind the curve on a stimulus--we actually are putting in place a way to respond quickly to be ahead of the curve; to be there to extend unemployment compensation for 13 weeks and an additional 13 weeks if you hit this 6.5-percent unemployment, which, unfortunately, too many are saying we will reach. I hope they are wrong. I hope it goes in this direction. I certainly hope it goes in this direction for the great men and women in Michigan who have been working so hard. But the reality is it is most likely to be going in the direction of the 6.5 percent. So for millions of middle-class families that have done nothing but play by the rules, care about their families, working for the American dream, proud to be Americans, sending their children or husbands and wives off to war, this package in the Senate will give them the dignity of knowing they can keep the household together while they are looking for their next job. Now, a lot of folks say, well, this is going to discourage--in fact, I heard this from the Secretary of the Treasury this morning in the Finance Committee--that this may discourage people from looking for a job. Well, let us look at the reality of this. Let us look at the reality of what is happening right now in an economy where we have not focused on making sure we have a strong middle class, where we have not focused on enforcing our trade laws, where we are exporting jobs, not just products. Let us look at what is happening right now. We have 7.7 million Americans--7.7 million Americans--competing for 4 million jobs. That is the reality in America today. So when we talk about the need to support and to help those 7.7 million Americans, this becomes absolutely critical as we look at our economy. The good news is that every economist, from the most liberal to the most conservative, as well as the Congressional Budget Office and so many others, has said that one of the best ways to stimulate this economy, in the short run, is to extend unemployment benefits. For every $1 in benefits, you generate $1.64. For every $1 that you put into unemployment benefits. Why? Because if you are unemployed, you don't have the option of saving. You are going to spend every single nickel you get. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent for 1 more minute to close.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today as a member of the Finance Committee, along with the distinguished Chair, to speak about what we did in terms of the Senate Finance stimulus package which I think is something that makes a tremendous amount of sense for people, for investment, for the economy. Before speaking about unemployment compensation insurance, which is a critical part of the package, let me say that I commend most sincerely our chairman, Senator Baucus, our ranking member, Senator Grassley, for again not only working together but producing something that is a balanced approach, that addresses both stimulus from the standpoint of helping people, puts money directly back into people's pockets, but also helping to stimulate and support businesses, small businesses, large businesses, those not only earning a profit and make investments but those that are not earning a profit and making investments. They had the vision to work with us in the area of alternative energy production, to extend production tax credits which directly relate to jobs. That is a part of this bill as well. I thank them for taking a look at the House package, and while we commend what was done--it was bipartisan, they did it quickly, it was a step in the right direction working with the White House--we found there were parts of what they did in structuring the rebate that needed to be fixed because we found that over 20 million seniors would be left out of getting a rebate because they do not have earned income; they are living on Social Security. They would have been left out, as well as about a quarter of a million disabled veterans, again, living on disability, not having earned income. Not only is it the right thing to do, the moral thing to do to make sure our seniors can get help, that we are helping disabled veterans, but economically it is the smart thing to do because we know those who are living on fixed incomes are spending the dollars because they have to be able to live, to pay the rent and the mortgage and the heating bill and the food and prescription drug costs, all of those. So immediately giving help to those who are struggling to make ends meet is not only right, it is smart in terms of the economy. The Senate package expands on what the House did to make sure we don't leave out people, that we don't leave out senior citizens and disabled veterans. We also make sure we don't leave out millions of Americans who have worked all their lives, middle-income wage earners who have built the American dream for their family, have a home, have had in the past the ability to send the kids to college, maybe they had, in Michigan, a cottage up north or a snowmobile; they had the ability to live the good life that we have all wanted for ourselves and our children and have found themselves caught in an economic downturn and, in fact, a recession. For the State of Michigan it looked like for too long a recession. A lot of middle-income families now find themselves in a situation where they are out of work. They want to work. Nobody wants to live on 40 percent of their income, which is what unemployment compensation provides, and try to make the mortgage payment, care for the kids, pay the heating bill and the food bill and do all those things that we need to do--pay the gas prices, and so on. Nobody wants to be unemployed, and nobody wants to find themselves in a situation where they have to live on unemployment benefits. But we have millions of people who find themselves in that situation. Our Finance package makes sure we can extend benefits, 13 weeks for unemployed individuals in every State and then an additional 13 weeks for those who are in States of high unemployment. This is the right thing to do. It is not only the moral thing to do, it is the smart thing to do when it comes to the economy. We had economists from President Reagan's time, economists from President Clinton's time. We had everything in between. We had the Congressional Budget Office tell us that extending unemployment compensation is one of the top two ways, along with food stamps, to stimulate the economy quickly. We don't have to wait until the IRS gets done with tax season, doing all the rebates and getting around to doing the additional rebates in May, June, and July; this can happen immediately. We go directly to those who, unfortunately, are not in a position to save but need to spend every single dollar that comes into their household in order to try to hold things together and not lose the house and to keep their family going. All the signs show this will be a terrible recession for American workers. We are moving in a direction that is extremely difficult. The national unemployment rate has shot up to 5 percent, and experts predict it is going to rise above 6 percent in 2009. We have never had such a dramatic jump in unemployment without having a recession. In many States the jobs picture is far gloomier. As I mentioned, in Michigan, we have an unemployment rate of 7.6 percent. That is one area where we don't want to be first. In fact, we are working very hard to turn that around in a number of ways. Other parts of this bill deal with alternative energy, and that is great for us because we are making those wind turbines and solar panels and the alternative fuel vehicles. We are working very hard to move ourselves out of that situation. But we have a lot of people who are working very hard who, through no fault of their own, have lost their job and have not been able to find another one in this economy. In addition to Michigan's 7.6 percent, Mississippi is at 6.8 percent unemployment. Ohio, Alaska, and South Carolina are all over 6 percent and expected within the month to meet the trigger that is in this bill of 6.5 percent. That is a possibility. The unemployment problem is, unfortunately, getting worse rapidly. We had more than half a million workers join the ranks of the unemployed in the last month; 500,000 people who have become unemployed in the last month alone. Workers who have lost their jobs are having more trouble finding work today than in past recessions. Today 17 percent of workers have been looking for a job for more than 26 weeks, compared to only 11 percent in 2001. Let me also stress that in the last package we had, the last stimulus package, we were looking at long-term unemployment of 11.3 percent, back in January 2001 when we were first talking about a stimulus and decided to include unemployment insurance. Now, as of December, this last December, long-term unemployment is 17.5 percent. It is 55 percent higher than it was when we started first talking about the last stimulus package in which we included unemployment compensation extension. I am very grateful to the chairman, the leadership of the Finance Committee, and our leader, Senator Reid, for speaking out about this and supporting our efforts to make sure this is in the package. This problem is affecting workers all across the economic spectrum, even those with a college education and years of experience. We have engineers in Michigan. We have talented, well-qualified, well-educated people who find themselves in this situation of losing their jobs. There are nearly two unemployed workers for every job opening across the country, which is also critical to talk about. We have right now 7.7 million Americans who are competing for 4 million jobs. Some people say: Well, if somebody is on unemployment compensation, they just don't want to work. If we extend that compensation for another 13 weeks or 26 weeks, people just don't work. That will be an incentive not to work. I welcome anyone to talk to a family in Michigan and say that. The reality is, we have 7.7 million Americans competing for 4 million jobs. That raises a whole other host of issues I will not get into today about how we need to start exporting products and stop exporting jobs and all the other things we need to do to tackle this issue of a strong economy. The reality is for too many folks, that debate is not going to help. They are looking at, right now: Am I going to be able to keep the lights on? Am I going to be able to keep the phone on? Am I going to be able to make sure I can make a mortgage payment so my family is not out on the street? Those are the questions that are being asked. No one is finding themselves in unemployment insurance living it up. It is just about trying to help them keep the family together, keep things together until they can find that next job. This is what they are competing against. Because it is becoming harder to find a job, more families are finding that our unemployment insurance system is not providing enough support because of the numbers. Mr. President, 37 percent of recipients, 37 percent of the people who are unemployed exhaust their benefits before finding a job, and more will follow as the recession deepens. And 2.6 million people ran out of benefits in 2007. Again, they were competing for jobs where there are not enough jobs. These aren't just numbers. There is a lot of numbers that can make this case. But it is about millions of people, millions of Americans, millions of middle-class Americans, millions of people who are working hard to be in the middle class or fighting like crazy to stay in the middle class. That is what this is about. They are willing to work hard. They are looking for a job. They want a job. They are desperately concerned about losing their chance at the American dream for themselves and their families. In good economic times, our current employment benefits are enough to tide families over for the few weeks that it takes to find another job. I remember those times. Somebody needs some temporary help, they lose a job, turn around, go out on a few interviews and, a few weeks later, they have another job. But these are not those times. These are not good times. Yesterday's alarming GDP figures show that economic growth has trickled to a near halt. Savings have plummeted. Debt is rising. Mr. President, 200,000 families each month risk losing their home. It is staggering, in the greatest country in the world. The Fed has cut short-term interest rates more rapidly than at any other time in history. It is clear that we are facing an economic crisis that will make it even harder to find a job in the coming months. Faced with these clear warning signs, we must act quickly. Anything that we pass--and I sure hope it is the Senate Finance proposal because I think it is balanced, it is effective, it is targeted, and it is the right thing to do--has to include extending unemployment compensation for these families who have found themselves in such a traumatic situation. It is wrong to abandon them when they need it the most. It is the smart thing to do according to all economists. If we want to say we have done something that is targeted, that is quick, extending unemployment is much quicker than a rebate check. I certainly support the rebate check, but it is going to take a while to get those to people. Unemployment extension is much quicker. It is one of the quickest things we can do. So from every angle, this is the right thing to do. Most importantly, though, I look at the families who are looking to us to do the right thing. In the past we have waited too long, and working families have suffered. In the wake of September 11, the unemployment rate rose to 5.3 percent in October of 2001. There was a bipartisan consensus we should do something, but political gridlock prevented us from enacting anything until the following March of 2002. By that time, unemployment was up to 5.7 percent and went to 5.9 percent in April. The 2001 recession proved devastating for our economy and, unfortunately, too many families have not recovered from that time. The bill passed by the Finance Committee yesterday is a crucial step forward for our economy and for our workers and their families. By extending unemployment benefits for 13 weeks and providing an additional 13 weeks of benefits in high-unemployment States, as I said before, we provide an immediate boost to the economy and at the same time help hard-working middle-class families weather this storm. All of the economists agree: Each $1 invested in benefits to out-of- work Americans leads to a $1.64 increase in growth--$1 equals $1.64 in growth. That is clearly one of the top two things we can do to be able to stimulate the economy. This compares to only pennies of stimulus in other areas. No stimulus package will be effective unless it provides real security for families struggling the most. We have to address this issue. We have to address this unemployment situation. Let me say, in closing, when we look at the coming year--in January of last year, average unemployment was 4.6 percent. At this time, it is 5 percent, although many areas are much higher than that. But it is projected that by next year the unemployment rate will go up to 6.5 percent. Now, granted, Michigan right now is at 7.6 percent. There are other States that are above 6 percent, above or close to 6.5 percent. But this is the direction in which we are going. One of the things about acting now with an unemployment compensation extension is we can help those families at this moment who need help now. We can actually be ahead of the curve rather than way behind in helping a family be able to keep their house or to be able to put their family at ease, knowing that at least there will be something available. The Senate Finance package makes sense. It is the right thing to do. On the business side, we not only focus on investments for those that are making a profit but for those that are not but are still making investments in important areas of the economy, such as manufacturing in Michigan. We extend critical tax credits for alternative energy production, which is critical. We make sure over 20 million seniors are not left out, that over 250,000 disabled veterans are not left out. We add a piece for State and local bonding authority for housing, which will help and support what the House did. Then we do what I have talked about today: We remember the faces of the people who have worked hard to make this country great, middle- class families across this country who through no fault of their own and, I would argue, too much of the time through action of the current administration or inaction on what we need to be doing on enforcing trade policy or changing the way we fund health care in this country or doing other aggressive actions in order to keep jobs and expand jobs, find themselves caught in this economic downturn. They are looking to us. If there ever was a time that they would expect their Government to act on behalf of middle-class America, it would be now. It is critically important. I am very pleased the Senate Finance package includes extended unemployment compensation. I hope when it is time to vote, we will see a very strong bipartisan vote on this issue. Mr. President, before stepping down, I see my good friend, the ranking member, the Republican ranking member of the Finance Committee, on the floor. I personally thank him for working with us on an approach that is good for people. It is good for families, individuals, for seniors, disabled veterans, good for business, looks to the future on energy. I appreciate his leadership, as always. I am hopeful we will see a bipartisan vote that says we get it and we are committed and we are willing to move in a way that supports the economy and the families of America. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Salazar.) Without objection, it is so ordered.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the Indian Health Care Improvement Act. I, first, wish to thank our chairman, Senator Dorgan, for his passion and commitment. I have had the opportunity to listen to some of the floor debate and opening comments and very much appreciate the way you have laid out the incredible need for this legislation and the fact it is long overdue. It is a promise that has not been kept, and hopefully today we are going to move forward in keeping that. Also, thank you to my friend and ranking member, Senator Murkowski, for her eloquence as well in laying out the legislation. It is wonderful to see the partnership that has happened on this legislation. I also wish to remember our colleague, former Senator Craig Thomas, who I know was a wonderful friend to Indian Country and cared very deeply about these issues. We certainly take a moment again to remember him and send our best wishes to his family in remembrance of his leadership on this issue as well. Just over 31 years ago, this bill, the original bill, was signed into law by the late President Gerald R. Ford, who I am proud to say resided and represented the great State of Michigan. It had the purpose of bringing the health status of Native Americans up to the level of other Americans. This program, the Indian Health Services Program, funds health services to about 1.8 million Native Americans from our Nation's more than 500 federally recognized American Indian and Alaskan Native tribes. I am proud to have many of them in Michigan. The Federal Government provides those health care services based on our trust responsibility to Indian tribes derived from Federal treaties, statutes, court rulings, Executive actions, and from our own Constitution, which assigns authority over Indian relations to the Congress. Reauthorization of the various Indian health care programs has languished for 15 years in this body, so our work today is vital. It is a vital component, it is long overdue, as our chairman has reminded us over and over again in bringing this issue forward for years. It is a vital component in improving and updating health care services in Indian Country. The Indian Health Care Improvement Act will modernize and improve Indian health care services and delivery. We know this is an incredibly important step. We know more needs to be done, but we know this is an incredibly important step. The bill will also allow for in-home care for Indian elders and will provide much-needed programs to address mental health and other issues related to the well-being of Indian communities. More importantly, the Indian Health Care Improvement Act will address many health care disparities in Indian Country. For example, infant mortality rates are 150 percent greater for Indians than for Caucasian infants. Those in the Indian communities are 2.6 times more likely to be diagnosed with diabetes. Tuberculosis rates for Native Americans are four times the national average. The life expectancy for Native Americans is nearly 6 years less than the rest of the U.S. population. What this bill, unfortunately, cannot do is mandate the necessary funding from our budget every year to uphold our country's trust responsibility to provide adequate health care to our tribal members. But we intend to make sure that happens. As it stands, the Indian Health Services annual funding does not allow it to provide all the needed care for eligible Native Americans. That is what we are speaking to today, that sense of urgency we have in making that happen. As of today, funding levels are only at 60 percent of the demand for services each year, which requires IHS tribal health facilities, organizations, and urban clinics to ration care so the most critical care and the needs are funded first and foremost, which, in turn, results in the tragic denial of needed services for too many men, women, and children, old and young in Indian country. As unbelievable as it may sound, health care expenditures to Native Americans are less than half of what America spends on Federal prisoners. Preventative health care is so important for Indian Country due to the high incidence of chronic diseases such as diabetes and obesity within these communities. IHS funding shortfalls for medical personnel have only further contributed to the severe gaps in health care delivery in Indian Country. In 2005, there were job vacancy rates of 24 percent for dentists, 14 percent for nurses, 11 percent for physicians and pharmacists, according to IHS data. I am very pleased and proud to be a cosponsor of this important legislation, as it establishes objectives to address these health disparities between Native Americans and other members of the American community. It will enhance IHS ability to attract and retain qualified health care professionals for Indian Country. As a government, I am also hopeful we will commit the additional resources to Indian health care for this year and every year in the future. The time has long passed for this reauthorization. I am very proud our leader, Senator Reid, has determined this to be a priority for the Senate. I am proud of the work that has been done. It is truly time to get this done now. I yield the floor and 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 thank my colleague from North Dakota for his graciousness. It is my understanding that there will be an objection to this unanimous consent request. At this point there is not someone on the floor to object, so I will briefly talk about what I am asking that we do, and then, as a courtesy to our colleagues on the other side, if we do not have someone here I will postpone the actual motion. But let me just say, because I want to make sure I am only taking a moment--I know Senator Dorgan has some important words--let me just say I will be asking unanimous consent that S. 2347, the Prevention Through Affordable Access Act, be discharged and the Senate proceed to its consideration and pass it. Due to an unfortunate drafting mistake in last year's Deficit Reduction Act, some safety net providers, such as family planning clinics and other health centers, cannot receive contraception from drugmakers at nominal drug prices without violating Medicaid's best price rule. These are drugs that in fact are donated. Since this law became effective in January, the provision has been a tremendous hardship for women across America and has driven up the cost of contraception, family planning, by some 400 percent in some cases. Because of this, many women cannot afford their prescriptions, and clinics are being forced to close because they can no longer receive the donations they have traditionally received. This is sure to result in an unintended series of pregnancies among low-income women and students. This is very serious for women and families across America. Hundreds of articles have been published documenting the impact of this mistake. We understand our Republican colleagues have indicated this was a mistake. This has affected low-income women and families on college campuses nationwide. Some clinics stocked up early, but their supplies are running out. For too many clinics, especially in rural areas and on college campuses, they simply do not have enough resources to overcome this provision which, it was indicated, in fact was a technical drafting error. According to one family planning organization, over 200 clinics across 34 States serving half a million patients are at imminent risk of closing, and therefore women and their families lose these important health care facilities. In my own State, women in rural parts of Michigan will have limited or no access to contraception. I have already heard from rural health clinics, as well as universities, student clinics, how this provision, passed last year, is hurting women and potentially causing these centers to close. Again, this is essential health care for women that is at risk. I rise today to express my strong support for the Prevention Through Affordable Access Act. This bipartisan bill, introduced by Senator Obama and myself and nearly 30 other Senators, is a commonsense solution to a major problem affecting our Nation's family planning providers. Historically, Congress has expanded access to affordable prescription drugs for vulnerable populations in America by permitting pharmaceutical companies to offer what is called nominally priced drugs, drugs that are either donated or provided at dramatically reduced prices, to certain health care providers. What we are asking for today is merely a technical correction, to do the right thing. The Prevention Through Affordable Access Act will not cost the Government anything and merely will allow pharmaceutical companies that are willing to continue to donate drugs to safety net family planning clinics to do that. This is invaluable in terms of women's health care. I urge my colleagues to join me in doing the responsible thing by passing S. 2347 now. Congress must act responsibly now to ensure that family planning services and birth control pricing are restored this year. For too many families across America, this is an urgent situation. Women cannot wait until next session to have this mistake corrected and affordable birth control returned. At this point we do not have someone, I understand, on the floor to address this from the other side, so I will delay actually asking for the unanimous consent until a later point. I do intend to do so. It would be my hope that, in fact, with such a large number of Senators supporting this effort we would be able to get this done today.

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, as we bring the session to a close, I want to spend a moment speaking about how far we have come this year. Our leader, who was speaking about accomplishments, is someone whom we should all be thanking for his leadership in bringing us to a point where we have been making changes that affect middle-class families all across America in a very positive way. There is a lot more to do. We are anxious, frustrated, pushing hard, because there is a lot more to do. But we have made a great start. We have made a downpayment on the change families are asking us to make. It has not been easy because we have seen an effort of continually trying to block change, of filibusters which are a way to drag things out, slow things down, stop things from happening. It is quite extraordinary. In the past, the highest number of filibusters was 61 over a 2-year period. Our Republican colleagues actually beat that in 1 year, 62 different times running the clock out, slowing things down. It was extraordinary to me as a member of the Agriculture Committee--and the distinguished Senator in the chair is also a committee member as well-- to see almost 3 weeks of filibustering on the farm bill, an effort to address food security and energy security and move us forward on farm policy. Fortunately, we were able to get beyond that. But we have been able to get beyond this extraordinary wall of objections over and over again because of the amazing and consistent and dedicated leadership of our leader and all of those in leadership, our committee chairs and others who have been so dogged and diligent about wanting change to happen. I did want to particularly recognize Senator Reid, who is more committed to our fight to maintain the American dream and quality of life for families and businesses and farmers and Americans all across the country than anybody I know. I thank him for that. We have achieved tremendous gains. We have seen change happen. We have raised the minimum wage this year. We have created open doors in a real way for people to go to college--for low-income families, we raised the Pell grant twice this year--but also to make sure that middle-income students can afford to borrow at lower interest rates, cutting interest rates in half in order make it possible to go to college and have the American dream. We have passed so many different bills that address our safety and security and opportunity for families. There is so much more to do. But we are focused. As we come to the end of this year and we think about all of what is affecting families today, all the pressures that families feel, it is important to say one more time that we understand, we get it. We are working very hard because time is of the essence. Frankly, there are things that should have been done that haven't been done. We are going to be right back at it in January. I am proud of the fact that we have addressed one of the major concerns for families in Michigan and all across the country who face the loss of a home because of the mortgage crisis, because of predatory lending practices or other circumstances in which they find themselves in a situation of losing their home. Last week on Friday we were able to pass FHA reform that will allow more people to get refinancing for their homes. This is an important step. I am pleased to have led the effort to make sure the law was changed so that if somebody loses their home or refinances below their mortgage value, they don't end up getting hit with another tax bill on top of losing their home. We have a lot of families right now who are coming up to Christmas. They don't have a place to put the Christmas tree. They don't have a home now, or they are worried about whether they will be able to have their home next Christmas. There are tremendous pressures that families are experiencing on all sides. We have been able to take two steps to address that: one, to make sure that if a family finds themselves in that situation, they don't also have the insult of adding a tax bill to their economic crisis. That is great. I am very proud of that. I am proud we were able to work together with colleagues on both sides of the aisle in the House and in the Senate and the President. I commend the President for working with us on that issue. I am hopeful he will do more of that. We need him working with us on hundreds of things that will make a difference in people's lives. But I am pleased in this one area where we were able to do that. People are feeling squeezed. As the distinguished Presiding Officer knows, people are feeling squeezed on all sides in their lives. Too many people are seeing their wages go down, if they have a job. They see their health care costs go up, their gas prices go up, their health care costs go up--all the costs--the costs of college going up. One by one, we are addressing those issues. We are focused on making change happen, to help families working hard every day who want to make sure the American dream is there for their kids and for their grandkids, who love this country. They are people who love this country and say: Hey, what about us? Is anybody paying attention to us? The majority of Americans who are working hard every single day, following the rules, who love their family, love their faith, and want to know somebody is paying attention to their needs and their lives and their desire to have that American dream and to have the American way of life. So we understand that. I am proud to be part of the majority that has made a commitment to address those things--whether it is bringing down the cost of college, raising wages, being able to address the costs of gas and energy; whether it is addressing food and nutrition and conservation and alternative fuels or the mortgage crisis. The common theme for us is: Making change happen for middle-class Americans and those who love our country and want us to help them be able to keep that American dream, by having the rules be fair and having it make sense for them in this country.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, in a moment, I am going to offer a unanimous consent request to pass H.R. 4341, which is a 3-month extension of something called the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act. We call it TAA. But first I wish to speak for a moment about this program, because when we talk about families, when we talk about middle-class families-- people who love this country, who play by the rules every day, and want to know that they can take care of their kids and have a job and a home and all those things we want for our children--we have a group of people in this country who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves losing their job because of this global economy we have-- something called trade, jobs being shipped offshore. Certainly, I support trade. We all support trade. But I want to export our products, not our jobs. Back when the free trade laws were passed, NAFTA and others, there was a commitment made by the Federal Government to help those who are caught in the middle, who lost their job because of trade policy. Their job goes away, and the Federal Government is the one passing these trade laws. So the Federal Government said: OK, we are going to help people transition to new jobs, to be able to get the help, the support they need--some help for health care in the short run and be able to go back to college, go to community college, go to trade school, whatever they want to do to be able to transition, to be able to keep their standard of living, and, again, to keep their way of life. We are in a situation right now where the Trade Adjustment Assistance Program will expire at the end of this year, and we have been pushing very hard for a simple 3-month extension. The House sent to us a simple 3-month extension of the current law until we can revise and update the law. Now, I have to also say, I am very pleased, as a member of the Finance Committee, to be working with our chairman, to have joined him in introducing a very important bill to improve trade adjustment assistance, to be able to expand what we can do to more adequately meet the needs of workers and families and communities and small businesses that are impacted by unfair trade situations or the loss of jobs through trade. But, right now, we have an immediate situation, an immediate situation going on that will affect thousands--tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands--of Americans across the country if this law expires. We have been doing everything possible to be able to simply get a 3-month extension. We did that once back in September--a 3-month extension. We are asking for another 3-month extension so we can pass this broader, more up-to-date law that will help more people. When I think about this issue, it is something that is shocking to me, to think we would even have to be struggling with our Republican colleagues about a 3-month extension. I think about Greenville, MI, on the west side of Michigan, a town of about 8,000 people, who saw their Electrolux plant--they made refrigerators--that employed 2,700 people-- they did a great job; they worked in three shifts; they were making a profit--but the company decided they could make a bigger profit if they moved to Mexico. After a lot of discussion with the State, myself, and others in the Federal Government--how could we help them be able to stay--they said: Do you know what. You can't compete with $1.57 an hour and no health benefits, no pension benefits in Mexico. So they left. The people in Greenville, MI, have been counting on the Federal Government to keep its promise through trade adjustment assistance, to be able to help them pick themselves up and continue their lives. This is not some theoretical debate. I know these people. I know people in communities all across Michigan who have been told: Gee, we are sorry this current race to the bottom in trade, where you go to the lowest wage around the world, is affecting you. We are sorry about this, but at least there is the thing called TAA, trade adjustment assistance, that can help you. Well, right now this is running out. It may not be there for new people who find themselves in a situation similar to the folks in Greenville. That is outrageous. When we think about the obstruction that has gone on, on this floor over and over and over again, the 62 different filibusters, the obstructions, the objections that have gone on, you would think, a few days before Christmas, the holidays--a time of charity and good will--we could come together, that our colleagues would join with us and simply allow a current law to continue for 3 months--just 3 months. That is it; just 3 months. Unfortunately, our Republican colleagues have held this issue hostage over a totally unrelated issue. They have wanted to tie this to a dispute regarding the FAA. Certainly, the FAA is important, but they want to tie it to a dispute there and are blocking our efforts to simply move forward on a 3-month extension of something that directly helps working people in this country--families, communities. It helps families be able to stay intact, be able to move into this new economy, new world that everybody is talking about that involves a different kind of trade policy. Our leader has offered that we will deal with trade adjustment assistance, a 3-month extension, but also address the unrelated Republican FAA proposal on its own, that both would be dealt with but dealt with separately. For some unknown reason, that was not acceptable. There has been a desire to tie them together and to object to proceeding on this very important effort to support families and to make sure nobody falls through the cracks come January 1. That is the least we can do in the Senate. If this program expires, unemployed men and women all around America are going to be in a position to be denied the help they need to be able to continue on with their lives. Those who are currently involved in the program will be able to continue to receive help, but I can assure you, coming from a State in great transition right now, with thousands of people falling into that situation, where they need trade adjustment help, we have people who have been waiting and waiting and waiting and will find themselves in a situation on January 1 with no help. This is not acceptable. This is absolutely not acceptable. It does not have to happen. There is absolutely no reason for this. We have a simple House bill in front of us--no secrets; very simple. Very simple: extend this critical program through Christmas, through New Year's. Get us into the new year so we can work out any other differences and let families be able to know we understand and we are not going to use unemployed men and women, who are unemployed through no fault of their own--the plant picks up and goes to Mexico, goes to China, goes someplace else. This is not their fault. They want to work. They are great workers. They are going to continue to find a way to work. But to hold them as pawns at this time is shameful. So, Mr. President, I am being told there is going to be a Republican objection. I received a note to that effect. I am told there is no one here who is able to object at this time. But due to the courtesies of the Senate, I will not ask, although I am very tempted, I have to tell you--but due to the courtesies involved in the Senate, and the rules of the Senate, I will not proceed to ask for unanimous consent because, in fact, I have received a notice that the Republicans will, in fact, be objecting one more time, one more time, one more time to our ability to support and help working men and women and their families for the next 3 months. I suggest the absence of a quorum.