Debbie Stabenow

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I rise with a brief question. I wish to say we would not be at this point, we would not have this bipartisan majority without the work of the Senator from Montana and Senators Grassley, Hatch, and Rockefeller. The chairman has been the person who reminds us every day that it is about the children. Isn't it true that we do, in fact, believe we have wonderful bipartisan support, enough to override a Presidential veto here and in the House of Representatives?

Ms. STABENOW. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak and to have that time allocated toward the majority time in morning business.

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, a colleague and friend of mine on the other side of the aisle spoke a few minutes ago about the budget process. I come today to specifically talk about children's health care, but I think it is important to respond to what was said as it relates to the budget process and adopting a budget by October 1. I was thinking as he was speaking, I have been here now--this is my seventh year, my seventh budget process. We have never met the October 1 deadline--never. In fact, I am not sure I remember having done it in the House when I was there for 4 years, either. We all know it is a nice political argument to make on the floor of the Senate, but it has no credibility because the reality is the October 1 deadline is something that is difficult to meet and we usually work through the fall on the budget. Everybody knows that. What I think is significant, though, is the fact that if we are going to hold to that test as the test of responsible leadership, 6 of the last 7 years the Republican majority was in charge and 6 times they did not meet an October 1 deadline. In fact, last year, they never got a budget passed at all--at all. We came in as the new majority and had to pick up the pieces and figure out how to keep the Government going for the last half of the year. So I find it disingenuous--and I would say this to my friend if he were here--to come to the floor and make great political speeches and great theater. The reality is we all on both sides of the aisle know that the appropriators are working together now, coming to the floor on a bipartisan basis, to do what we do every single year--every single year in October and November and, unfortunately, at times into December. But what I am very proud of is the fact that our leader, Senator Reid, and our leadership in our caucus take very seriously our responsibilities on the budget; not only putting a budget in place, but a budget with the right values, the right priorities. We are changing the priorities on behalf of the people of this country. We are changing the priorities as they relate to funding the troops and pay raises and making sure our troops have what they need. We are changing the priorities. We will be dealing with a bill later this week as it relates to the Commerce, Justice, and State appropriations where we are going to stop the cuts the President has made in law enforcement, in the COPS program, in the FBI, and in juvenile justice and drug enforcement. We will work to reinstate that and refocus us on those things that keep our communities safe, keep America safe. I am very proud of that. I am very proud of the priorities we have been putting in place as relates to this budget. On top of that, we are not digging a bigger hole as it relates to the deficit of this country, because we have returned to a policy that was in place under the former administration, under President Clinton, that simply says if you are going to spend dollars, you have to pay for it. You either have to cut some place in order to increase another or you have to raise revenue. It is a basic principle. It ought to be a no-brainer. But that has been suspended in the last 6 years, creating the largest deficits in the history of the country. I am happy to come to the floor and talk about budgets and process, and I am very proud of the direction we are going in. I am also very proud of what we have done as it relates to another absolutely critical priority, and that is children's health care. We have a health care system for low-income individuals called Medicaid. If you work, two parents or a mom may be working two jobs, maybe three minimum-wage jobs to try to make sure she pays the bills and has a roof over her children's heads and food on the table, chances are she is a low-income working parent, or a couple working together, a dad working for his children. Chances are health care is going to be too expensive--just too expensive to buy in the individual market if you don't have it through the place where you work. Ten years ago this Congress came together in a bipartisan way under a different President to say: We want to help families who are working hard every single day, who care about their children and who are doing everything they can to do the right thing--the values we should be supporting in this country, of hard work, family, and caring about our kids. We want to help them by putting in place a children's insurance program so that at least the children of low-income working families are able to get the health care they need. It has been a huge success. We have overwhelming support from Governors, Republicans and Democrats, and State legislatures. In fact, this is the ultimate in strange bedfellows. We have the U.S. Chamber and the business community, the labor community, health care providers, children's advocates, and consumer advocates; we have the broadest possible group of Americans with the broadest possible interests that have come together to work with us to be able to design an extension of children's health care and, in fact, to be able to include additional children who qualify under that program for working families. We passed that on a huge bipartisan vote in this Senate--enough to override a Presidential veto. The House of Representatives passed it with a very large bipartisan vote. Today, the President, we assume, will be getting this bill. There is only one thing standing between 10 million children getting health insurance in this country, the parents of 10 million children being able to sleep a little easier tonight--there is only one thing standing between that happening and those families and that is the signature of the President of the United States. So I am here today, as colleagues on both sides of the aisle have done, to thank our leadership--Senator Reid and the bipartisan leadership of Senator Max Baucus, Senator Grassley, Senator Orrin Hatch, and Senator Rockefeller. They have done a magnificent job of doing what we are supposed to do: bring people's diverse interests together, develop a true compromise, and get things done. I urge this President to look deep inside his heart, take a few moments to talk to some of these families before he puts his veto on this bill. This is one of the most significant things we will do in this Congress. It is one of the most significant moments for this President. He asked us, again, to fund a war that is not paid for. For 41 days of funding of that war, we could pay for 10 million children getting health insurance over the next 5 years. This is about values and priorities. It always has been. In my home State, I can tell you we have 90,000 children and parents--families who are waiting and hoping and praying that this President will join with all of us in doing the right thing. Too many families are struggling. Health care is skyrocketing. These same families are being squeezed on all sides. Gas prices going up, health care costs are going up, they have challenges in keeping their mortgages, and what will happen to their jobs? Will they be shipped overseas? Will they get a pay cut? What is happening in terms of preparing to send their children to college? Middle-class families are being squeezed on all sides. For a group of parents who are working very hard but don't have health insurance through their job, this Congress has done the right thing by passing a children's health care bill that will say at least your children will be able to get the health insurance they need and deserve. When this President was at the Republican convention in 2004 accepting his nomination for reelection for his second term, President Bush said: In the new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for Government health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need. Since that time, President Bush sent to us a budget that, in fact, as he funded it, would eliminate well over a million children who currently receive health care under the Children's Health Care Program. We have rejected that, and we have turned to see how the program was working and found there were millions more children eligible for this very same program as the economy gets tougher and tougher for families, but the funding wasn't there to make sure those children receive children's health care as well. So we worked together, and we are now including an additional 4 million children whose families are working but have not been able to get health insurance. That, all together, equals 10 million children under the legislation we passed. There is nothing more important we could do than to guarantee that children get a healthy start in life--whether it is the general practitioner they need to see, the dentist or whether they need mental health help. We have said the children of this country are a priority for our majority, for the Senate, for the House of Representatives. I simply ask today at this critical moment: President Bush, please join us and sign this bill. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. First, I thank the Senator for his comments on the floor of the Senate, debunking what has been inaccurate statements that have been made and also for laying out the realities of what is true about this proposal. I think the Senator has done it in a wonderful way. I appreciate the Senator's willingness to stand up and talk about what is real, important, and the fact that this is such a strong bipartisan bill. I wonder if the Senator might comment on the fact that aren't we talking about working families, low-income working families, trying every day to keep things together for their family, and they want to know that the children have health care? Isn't that what this is all about?

Ms. STABENOW. Will my colleague yield for a question?

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I also wish to thank Senators Specter and Casey for raising this issue. We have worked together to ensure the continuation of 508 while we work to ensure that Medicare reimbursement more adequately reflects our hospitals' true costs. Section 508 funding has provided crucial assistance to a number of hospitals in my State, although I note that there are still inequities in the reimbursement system that must be corrected.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise today to speak about a very important and very positive issue we are going to be addressing and sending to the President this week; that is, the reauthorization of the children's health care program. This is really a historic, bipartisan effort that has been put together, and it is something we have done together for all of our families and children across America. We urgently need to pass this bill in its final form and send it to the President of the United States. I know the House of Representatives is doing that today, and it will then come to us. There is no question that it is one of the most important things we will do this year, not only guaranteeing that some 6 million children who currently receive this children's health care program will be able to continue to get health care, but we will be expanding upwards of another 4 million children who will be able to have the health care they need and deserve. I wish to particularly thank leaders on the Finance Committee, including Senator Baucus, Senator Grassley, Senator Rockefeller, and Senator Hatch, for working together in such a wonderful way that has given us the opportunity in the Senate to come together, with the original vote on the bill being 68 Members of the Senate--68 Members of the Senate. In addition to that, we are so thrilled to have Senator Johnson back with us so that his vote will be added as well to this very important program. I also thank our leader, Senator Harry Reid, for making this a top priority and for personally engaging in the negotiations that took place to be able to get us to the point where we have something on which we can move forward in the House and the Senate in a bipartisan way. This really builds on the bipartisan spirit that created the whole program in 1997. I was in the U.S. House of Representatives representing mid-Michigan at the time and felt that as we put this program together then, it was an incredibly important statement of our values and our priorities. We are talking about working families, moms and dads who go to work every day to maybe one, two, or three jobs who are trying to hold things together and desperately want to make sure their children have the health care they need. That is what this legislation is all about. That is what this program is all about. Among many good things that have been placed into this bipartisan legislation, I am very proud to say that it makes important improvements in dental care and in mental health care for children. It looks at quality issues and health information technology. I am very pleased that language which I authored concerning creating an electronic medical record for children, a pediatric electronic medical record, is in this legislation so that we can bring children's information together around immunizations and other kinds of health care needs in one place so we can more effectively have them treated and have doctors and hospitals knowing what, in fact, a child's medical record is. I am also very pleased about another piece of the legislation I worked on in relation to school-based health centers and the importance of recognizing them as part of a continuum of care for children. This bill really does represent a very successful public sector and private sector partnership that helps our families and makes sure more children, children of working families, are able to get health care in this country. In my State of Michigan, a private insurer runs what we call the MIChild Program. Last year, nearly one-third of the children in Michigan relied on either Healthy Kids through Medicaid for low- income children or MIChild, which represents working families, for health care coverage. About three-quarters of the children have at least one working parent. I must say that oftentimes that is mom--mom trying to, again, work one job or two jobs or three jobs, desperately concerned about her children, needing to put food on the table, needing to buy them school clothes, needing to get them what they need to be able to survive and function every day, and knowing that when they desperately need to go to the dentist, they are able to get a dental checkup, or to be able to get basic kinds of health care. I know too many people who tell me they go to bed at night saying: Please, God, don't let the kids get sick. This program in Michigan, MIChild, and this program which we are now coming together on a bipartisan basis to expand says to those parents: Somebody is hearing you; that we as a country and as a Congress care about the children of this country and making sure they have their health care needs met. It is so important to stress that this is not a program for wealthy families, for rich kids. We have heard so much misinformation about what this program is all about. In Michigan, a family of four cannot make over $40,000 to qualify for MIChild. This is, again, a family of four. If there are two working parents, working just barely above poverty level, this allows them to be able to get the health insurance they need for their children. The Saginaw-based Center for Civil Justice shared a story with me about a young mother named Christie whose husband was laid off and the family income dropped to less than $2,000 a month for a family of five--less than $24,000 a year for a family of five. Nearly half of that goes to rent and utilities, like most families. The children's health care program in Michigan, MIChild, has helped their three children, who are 4 years old, 3 years old, and 8 months. Thankfully, they have been able to--in Michigan, we have had a dental benefit, which is something we are going to provide through this bill. Without that, Christie's children would not have what they need. Recently, one of the children needed to have their tonsils removed. I remember those days with my children. It would not have been able to be done--it could have turned into a much more serious situation for that child--if it was not for the children's health care program. It makes a difference in children's lives every day. Another mom, Pam, is a full-time preschool teacher and mother. Her monthly premiums of $384 per month, or over $4,500 per year, would have taken up a fifth of her pay if she was trying to pay through a private individual plan. But through MICild, she was able to get the specialized care she needed for her daughter, who suffers from a rare seizure disorder. She would not have been able to care for her daughter if it were not for the children's health care program. Like Pam, most working families simply cannot afford traditional health insurance and make ends meet--to be able to pay rent, utilities, a mortgage payment, or purchase food and school clothes, and, on top of that, find an individual policy that is affordable in the private market. According to the Commonwealth Fund, nearly three-quarters of people living below 200 percent of the poverty line found it very difficult or impossible to find affordable coverage in the individual market. Premiums for individual market coverage for families with incomes between 100 percent of poverty and 199 percent of poverty-- which is what we are talking about and what we have in Michigan--on average, one-quarter of the family's total income--25 percent--would be premiums for health care in the private market. Faced with these costs, many families just don't have the coverage because they cannot afford to do it and at the same time put food on the table. The situation is even worse for families with chronic conditions, such as asthma or juvenile diabetes. If they were able to purchase coverage in the individual market, costs would be much higher. The children's health program, it is important to note, is not just for kids in cities, it is not just an urban program. This program helps all children regardless of where they live. In fact, according to the Carsey Institute, they found that there were more children in rural areas who were benefiting from the Children's Health Insurance Program than in urban areas--32 percent of rural children versus 26 percent of urban children. So this really is something that touches every single part of the country, every single part of our States, and families all throughout America who are working hard every day and counting on us to help them to be able to get the children's health care they need. We are taking a huge step forward for our Nation's uninsured children, the vast majority of whom--78 percent--live in working families. Seventy-eight percent live in a home where mom and/or dad is working, but they are not making enough to be able to afford private premiums in the private individual market. Because the importance of the children's health care program is so critical for so many families, I urge my colleagues not to listen to inaccurate statements or negative attacks but to join together, as we have done, in a wonderful bipartisan effort in the Senate to send a very strong message to this President that we come together on behalf of the children and the working families of America to put our values and priorities in the right place. That is what we are talking about here. This is about choices, about values, about priorities. This bill is totally in line with what President Bush proposed at the 2004 Republican Convention. He said at that time: In a new term, we will lead an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children who are eligible but not signed up for Government health insurance programs. We will not allow a lack of attention, or information, to stand between these children and the health care they need. Well, Mr. President, this bipartisan compromise, this bipartisan victory which has been put together in the Congress is an aggressive effort to enroll millions of poor children into a successful public- private partnership. This bill before us is a chance to make a real difference in the lives of millions of children--millions of children who, without us and the children's health care program, will not have that chance. We need to do the right thing. Every day, as we wait, children are growing; they don't wait for us. They keep on growing whether we are debating, whether we are in committee meetings. Regardless of what we are doing, the children of America keep on growing. They keep on having needs--dental or broad health care needs or mental health needs. It is time to do the right thing. We have it within our grasp. A tremendous amount of hard work has gone into this. Let's remember the bipartisan spirit that created this great program in 1997. Let's remember that the Children's Health Insurance Program is truly a great American success story for which we can all take credit. We can join together in taking credit for it. Let's pass this bill and, most importantly, let's together urge the President of the United States to do the right thing on behalf of the children of America. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, on behalf of the leader, I ask unanimous consent that the time for morning business be extended to 11:45 a.m. today under the same conditions and limitations as previously ordered.

Ms. STABENOW

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

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I first thank my friend and colleague from Wisconsin for his foresight and his leadership on this very critical issue, the most critical issue facing our country. I rise today to support the Feingold amendment, as I have in the past. The American people want us to stop this direction we are going in and to, in fact, bring our military home so they can be effectively refocused, to redeploy to address the real threats that are facing America. We all heard during the Armed Services hearing the distinguished Senator from Virginia, Mr. Warner, ask what I think is the most important question to General Petraeus. After General Petraeus had laid out the strategy and what was happening on the surge, Senator Warner asked him: General, are we safer? Is America safer? He then first began to answer that question by talking about the fact that he was proceeding on the mission that had been given to him. Then he was asked again, and I believe it was the third time he was asked by the Senator. He was asked: Is America safer? The general said: I don't know. Three-quarters of a trillion dollars spent, lives lost--thousands of lives, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and innocent civilians--and the answer is: I don't know. I think the American people do know. I think the American people understand that when we are directing our forces--our brave men and women, the best trained, the most highly recognized and effective troops in the world--when we are placing them in the middle of a civil war in Iraq, and then we turn on our television sets and we see the man who has the organization that attacked us and killed over 3,000 Americans on American soil speaking to us through a video, commenting on American politics and what is happening here in the Senate, they are appalled. People understand we should be addressing ourselves to the people who attacked us and the real threats we have. We know where they are, at least close to where they are. We know the region, and we need to redeploy our troops to address the threats that have, in fact, been serious for America--not the middle of a civil war, but the people who attacked us, and those now who have joined them in their cause. My husband is a veteran of the Air Force and the Air National Guard; 14 years. He reminds me all the time that our men and women in uniform are doing their duty to complete the mission that is laid out for them in a democratic society by their civilian leaders, by their President, by their Congress. They look to us, they are counting on us to make sure it is the right one, to give them what they need, but to also give them a strategy that makes sense. They are counting on us to ask tough questions, to probe. They are there putting their lives on the line every single day. Their families are at home sacrificing every single day, and they are counting on us to get this right. As one of the people who voted no on going into this war in Iraq, I now join with colleagues in saying: Enough is enough. This has to change. There are real threats. We need to refocus and redeploy in the name of safety for Americans. But we need to make sure we are ending this civil war participation we have put our soldiers into. The Feingold amendment does this. It brings our troops home and refocuses them, redeploys them, as we should, in a way that will truly focus on the ways to keep us safe for the future, so that when the next general is testifying before the Armed Services Committee and that general is asked: Is America safer, we can join together and say yes.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I would be happy to.

Ms. STABENOW. Well, my distinguished colleague is absolutely correct, and I thank him for his comments. This is truly a question of values and priorities. That is what we are about in this business, in this Chamber, when we make decisions. The President has said the wealthiest among us are much more important than moms and dads, most of whom, by the way, are making much less than what we are talking about or the numbers the White House has put out. Those families ought to be able to, at a minimum, know that their children have health insurance when they get sick. But what adds insult to injury, I believe, for the American people, is to know that on top of that--on top of tax priorities for the wealthy versus families and their health care--is the fact that on the one hand we have put together something that is responsible, bipartisan, and fully paid for within the budget, and yet the President is going to be sending us a request for anywhere from $150 billion to $200 billion more for a war in Iraq that the American people want to change, a policy that is not supported by the majority of Americans. To add insult to injury, none of it is paid for. It will go directly on to the national debt. So this is a question of values and priorities. It doesn't matter, again as I said when I began, how much the President wants to spin it. We all know he has a very big megaphone, a very big bully pulpit. But that doesn't mean he is right. The spin machine cannot outweigh what is going on here in terms of American families. We have something that we have done together on a bipartisan basis. We should all be very proud of it. A basic for every single one of our families is the ability to know they can care for their children and they will have the health care they need. Far too many families today don't get help because they do not have a low enough income. They are working and putting it together. Maybe it is a single mom, maybe it is a single dad, maybe it is mom and dad. They are putting together the income in a way where they can pay all the increased costs that everybody is having to deal with--the gas prices that are going up and the possibility of losing jobs. Certainly in my State wages are going down, and health care costs going up--all of the things that are squeezing our working families. But we are saying, you know what, one of the things we can do together, and we have already done it here and we are going to be sending it to the President, is to allow for 4 million more children to get the health care they need for those moms and dads who are working but not making enough to be able to pay for health insurance. We, as a country, ought to be able to say we at least want the children to receive the health insurance they need. Health care, in my opinion, should be a right for the greatest country in the world, not a privilege. Too many things have been given to the privileged in this country while working families are trying hard every day to make ends meet. So I wish to thank all our colleagues who have worked so hard on this legislation. It is something we can all be very proud of, and I ask the President to take another look. This body together, 68 Members who voted, were not playing politics. We were coming together in a bipartisan way to be able to give more children, American children, the ability to get their health care needs taken care of. It is time we had the President join with us in the right set of priorities for American families. I yield the floor.

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I know we are in the middle of working on a very important bill, but I do wish to take a moment to respond to a press conference the President just held where he spoke about his intent to veto the bipartisan children's health care bill we will be sending to him. It is very important we indicate that just because the President has a bully pulpit does not mean he is accurate or right. It does not matter how much spin they want to put on this situation, the reality is the President of the United States gave us a budget earlier this year-- and the Budget Committee looked at this very carefully--this President proposed a budget that would cut, according to CBO, 1.6 million children from health care, current children. So when I hear the President at a press conference talking about the fact that he wants to make sure children are covered with health insurance, actions speak louder than words. The President asked us to put forward a budget that would cut 1.6 million children of working families who currently have health insurance from their health care. We rejected that request. We looked at the fact that there are from 6 to 7 million children who currently qualify to receive children's health insurance. Again, these are working families, folks who do not qualify for low-income help. They are moms and dads working one, two, maybe three minimum wage jobs, who are desperately concerned that at least their children have the health care they need. I am very proud the Senate came together and in a true bipartisan effort developed a health care program, an expansion that will not only make sure every child who currently has health insurance will keep that health care, but that 4 million more children will be able to have health care in this country. Their moms and dads will not have to go to bed at night praying: Please don't let the kids get sick. Sixty-eight Members of this Senate, not counting the fact that Senator Johnson who is now back with us would make that 69 Members, voted together in true bipartisanship to say that one of the basic values of this country is to make sure the children of working families have the opportunity to get the health care they need. It is pretty basic. This is a matter of values and priorities. Later today, in a few moments, I am going to be joining with Families USA to announce their new study that says that 90 million Americans sometime in the last 2 years did not have health insurance. One out of three Americans sometime in the last 2 years did not have health insurance. This is a national tragedy. And for us not to at least focus on children, at least say our value as Americans is to make sure that children of low-income working families get the basic health care they need, to me is something I find incredibly important and appalling, quite frankly, that the President of the United States says on the one hand he will veto a bipartisan bill to expand health care coverage to children of working families and then have--I hate to say what I was going to say--the amazing position to come to us shortly and to ask somewhere up to another $200 billion for the war in Iraq that the majority of Americans want to see changed.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I wish to thank my colleague from Michigan, whom we are so proud of, for all his efforts in supporting our troops and leading our efforts as it relates to the defense of our country and for once again leading this very important bill on the Defense reauthorization. It is time to put aside for a brief moment the overall debate of the war and focus on the troops. Regardless of whether you supported going into Iraq or, as I did, voted no on going into that war, we come together and we hear frequently from colleagues on both sides of the aisle that, of course, we support our troops. We want what is best for the brave men and women who are fighting in harm's way, who didn't take that vote and didn't decide the policy but who are, in fact, stepping up to defend that policy and defend our country. The question is, What is best for the troops on the ground right now, in the middle of these conflicts that have gone on now for over 4\1/2\ years? We are here today to talk about what is best for our military, our troops, and for their families. We are not here to debate the merits of the mission. I certainly am willing to do that and do that with other amendments. But this particular amendment, the amendment of Senator Webb, is an effort to determine what makes sense when it comes to deploying our armed services, what is best for those who have been willing to put their lives on the line for our country, who follow the leadership of the Department of Defense and operate under the policies that have been set by this Congress and this President. What is very clear is that the current system is broken for our troops. We are forcing our troops into longer and longer combat deployments and giving them shorter and shorter rest periods. We are demanding multiple combat deployments over very short periods, with many units on their second, their third, or even their fourth redeployment in the war in Iraq. We are denying the men and women who put their lives on the line for America the time they need off from the front lines to recuperate, to retrain, to prepare themselves physically and mentally to return to combat and, just as important, to spend time with their families, to be able to reconnect with the loved ones they have left behind when they have gone into this war. We are placing an unfair and unreasonable burden on those military families, families who are willing to sacrifice, who have sacrificed; families who count on us to be there for them, representing their interests and the interests of their loved ones who are on the front lines. They are doing all of it in the name of a policy that the military itself has indicated is not only unreasonable but unsafe. The Department of Defense itself has said that the conditions under which they are operating have been unreasonable and unsafe. Historically, the Department of Defense, as has been said, has mandated a combat-to-rest ratio of 1 to 2--1 month on, 2 months off as an example; 1 year in combat, 2 years at home--to rest, retrain, and prepare for the next deployment. In fact, the historic 1-to-2 ratio is currently the stated policy of the DOD. We are hearing from colleagues on the other side of the aisle as if this is some outrageous idea, that we put some parameters around the deployment and redeployment of our troops. Yet it is the stated policy of the Department of Defense: 1 month or 1 year on, 2 months or 2 years here at home. The Webb amendment merely sets a 1-to-1 ratio, a floor that only gets us halfway to the standard the Department of Defense itself has called for. The policies pursued by this administration have stretched our men and women in uniform to the breaking point. Our Armed Forces are getting the job done under the most extreme and trying conditions imaginable. Most of us have had an opportunity, firsthand, to see them in action, to see what they are doing and the conditions under which they are operating. They are getting the job done. No one is surprised because we have the best and the brightest, but they are under extreme and trying conditions. They face an enemy who often cannot be identified. They face an environment that is harsh and hot and unbearable. They do their jobs with pride, with honor, with dignity, and most certainly with excellence. The current deployment schedule places an unfair burden not only on our soldiers and sailors and airmen and marines but on the families they leave behind. Military families have, in their own way, been called to serve this country, been called to sacrifice. They demand our respect and support for the sacrifices they are making. What we are currently asking of them is simply unreasonable. When our troops go into combat, the people they leave behind shoulder the burden of keeping the family together while mom or dad--mother, father, sister, brother--is fighting in service to their country. They are left to face not only the practical problems that come with having a family member gone for long stretches of time but also the constant uncertainty and stress of simply not knowing what is happening to their loved one. Are they safe? Will they come home safely? Our troops and their families have done everything we have asked of them. They have been there for America. And now the answer to the question must be that we will be there for them. The young Americans who volunteer to put on the uniform and fight for our country are truly our best. They are the best-trained, the best- equipped, the bravest fighting forces in the world, and they are one of the Nation's most valuable assets and greatest resources. Current administration policy is abusing their willingness and desire to serve. This has to stop. By straining and stretching our military, we are undercutting our own national security. We are compromising everything we have done to build up a force that can defend America and properly respond to the dangers we face in today's uncertain world. Senator Webb has crafted an amendment that addresses the concerns of our military leaders. It includes reasonable waivers in the face of unexpected threats to America. It includes a transition window that will allow a shift in the deployment schedule without a disruption of our fighting forces. We have worked with the military to develop a policy that makes sense. I commend Senator Webb for his foresight and his willingness to work with the Secretary of Defense and others to make the changes, to make this even more workable. We compromised where it makes sense to strengthen the legislation, but we will not compromise on the safety of our troops or on the support for their families. This amendment is not about where we stand on the war. It is not about partisan politics. It is about doing the right thing for our troops and for their families. I urge my colleagues to stand up and vote for the Webb amendment. Stand with the people we have sent to war and their families waiting at home, and stand with all Americans who want us to have the right kind of policy to support our troops and to keep us safe for the future. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the SMA Treatment Acceleration Act. I also thank my colleagues, Senators Isakson, Warner, and Whitehouse, for joining me in sponsoring this important legislation. In April, I met with Malorie Fox, a beautiful 4-year-old from Ada, Michigan, and several other Michigan families about Spinal Muscular Atrophy, SMA, the number one genetic killer of children under 2 years of age. SMA is a degenerative disease that weakens the body's muscles until they can no longer function, that includes the ability to breathe. Sadly, Malorie was diagnosed with SMA shortly before her first birthday. Her parents were told by her doctors that most children diagnosed with SMA never reach this milestone. Thankfully, Malorie survived, and with her parents Michelle and James, she continues to fight this disease. On her homepage, Malorie wrote: ``My mommy & daddy focus on the things I CAN do, not those that I cannot.'' Malorie and her family are not alone. It is estimated that SMA occurs in about 1 in every 6,000 births. Approximately 1 in 40 individuals, 7.5 million Americans, carry the gene that causes SMA, making it the second most common autosomal recessive genetic disorder. This incidence rate shows neither racial nor gender bias. Presently, there is no known treatment for SMA, though there have been several exciting research breakthroughs over the past decade. In fact, the National Institutes of Health singled out SMA from more than 600 neurological disorders as the disease closest to treatment based on scientists' advanced genetic understanding of the disease. Private foundations and national nonprofit organizations dedicated to finding a cure for SMA have also made substantial financial contributions. To support the investigators and families who are working to find a treatment or cure, the SMA community, including Fight SMA, Families of SMA, and the SMA Foundation, has united behind this legislation. This bill will provide a roadmap and federal funding to better coordinate and facilitate SMA research and treatment. Additionally, the legislation will establish a program to provide information and education on SMA to health professionals and the general public related to advances in the diagnosis and treatment of SMA and the provision of care to SMA patients. Next Monday is Malorie's birthday, and I couldn't wish for anything more for her birthday than a cure for SMA. This legislation will be an important step forward in fulfilling that wish. I urge my colleagues to join with us in passing it. I ask unanimous consent that letter of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce the SMA Treatment Acceleration Act. I also thank my colleagues, Senators Isakson, Warner, and Whitehouse, for joining me in sponsoring this important legislation. In April, I met with Malorie Fox, a beautiful 4-year-old from Ada, Michigan, and several other Michigan families about Spinal Muscular Atrophy, SMA, the number one genetic killer of children under 2 years of age. SMA is a degenerative disease that weakens the body's muscles until they can no longer function, that includes the ability to breathe. Sadly, Malorie was diagnosed with SMA shortly before her first birthday. Her parents were told by her doctors that most children diagnosed with SMA never reach this milestone. Thankfully, Malorie survived, and with her parents Michelle and James, she continues to fight this disease. On her homepage, Malorie wrote: ``My mommy & daddy focus on the things I CAN do, not those that I cannot.'' Malorie and her family are not alone. It is estimated that SMA occurs in about 1 in every 6,000 births. Approximately 1 in 40 individuals, 7.5 million Americans, carry the gene that causes SMA, making it the second most common autosomal recessive genetic disorder. This incidence rate shows neither racial nor gender bias. Presently, there is no known treatment for SMA, though there have been several exciting research breakthroughs over the past decade. In fact, the National Institutes of Health singled out SMA from more than 600 neurological disorders as the disease closest to treatment based on scientists' advanced genetic understanding of the disease. Private foundations and national nonprofit organizations dedicated to finding a cure for SMA have also made substantial financial contributions. To support the investigators and families who are working to find a treatment or cure, the SMA community, including Fight SMA, Families of SMA, and the SMA Foundation, has united behind this legislation. This bill will provide a roadmap and federal funding to better coordinate and facilitate SMA research and treatment. Additionally, the legislation will establish a program to provide information and education on SMA to health professionals and the general public related to advances in the diagnosis and treatment of SMA and the provision of care to SMA patients. Next Monday is Malorie's birthday, and I couldn't wish for anything more for her birthday than a cure for SMA. This legislation will be an important step forward in fulfilling that wish. I urge my colleagues to join with us in passing it. I ask unanimous consent that letter of support be printed in the Record.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, this resolution designates September as ``National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month.'' I am pleased to be joined by my colleagues, Senators Dole and Clinton, to shed some light on this disease. This year alone, ovarian cancer will be diagnosed in an estimated 20,000 women, and approximately 15,000 more women will die of this disease. Unfortunately, ovarian cancer is usually caught in an advanced stage, meaning there is only a 29 percent survival rate over five years. We must acknowledge these statistics and overcome the challenges of diagnosing this deadly disease. Earlier this year, I was fortunate to have the opportunity to meet with nine-year survivor Carolyn Benivegna of Novi, Michigan. After being misdiagnosed by a number of doctors, Carolyn finally learned that she had ovarian cancer. However, Carolyn is not letting the cancer run her life. Instead, she has become an advocate for the Survivors Teaching Students program, which aims to enhance medical students' understanding of the symptoms and risk factors of ovarian cancer to facilitate early diagnosis and detection when they begin practicing medicine. I am proud that both Michigan State University and Wayne State University are starting Survivors Training Students programs for their medical students. While there is no definitive screening test, recent studies have shown common symptoms of ovarian cancer such as bloating, abdominal pain, and difficulty eating. However, we must take active steps to educate the community and medical providers of the newest discoveries in prevention, early diagnosis, and treatment of this disease. Mr. President, by recognizing September as National Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month, we can show our support for ovarian cancer survivors and their families and join the fight to conquer this disease.

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I rise to engage the distinguished Finance Committee chairman in a colloquy.

Ms. STABENOW. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to. Amendment No. 2620

Ms. STABENOW. I want to express my appreciation for the chairman's efforts, and those of Ranking Member Grassley, in working to ensure the health and well-being of our Nation's children. As the chairman knows, more than 1,700 schools offer on-site, comprehensive well care, illness-related care, and dental care to nearly 2 million students from rural, suburban, urban, and Native American communities where access to such care is limited or nonexistent. A recent article in the March issue of Health Affairs discusses the role of school-based health centers as an effective means of helping children get the care they need. I was prepared to offer an amendment to the pending Children's Health Insurance Program bill that would ensure that school-based health centers are recognized as a provider under both Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Program. While the vast majority of these centers receive Medicaid reimbursement, only one in four receives reimbursement under the Children's Health Insurance Program for the providing the exact same quality services that a child might receive at another provider. After discussing this with the chairman, we noted that my amendment is included in section 121 of the House version of the Children's Health Insurance Program reauthorization bill. Therefore, to finish the Senate reauthorization as quickly as possible, I am prepared to not offer my amendment. But before I do that, I wanted to ask the chairman if he would support the House provision recognizing school-based health centers in conference?

Ms. STABENOW. I thank the chairman for his support and assurance. I will not offer my amendment. diabetes

Ms. STABENOW

Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, again, as I said when we first took up this bill on Monday evening, I thank the chairman of the committee for his passion in bringing us to this point, he and the ranking member, Senator Grassley, as well as, of course, Senator Rockefeller with his deep commitment, and Senator Hatch as well. This is a truly bipartisan effort. It is the way we should be legislating--coming together. It is a compromise. If I were writing a bill by myself, I would add more dollars. There are Members on the other side of the aisle who would, in fact, do less. But it is a real compromise. I start out today speaking to the fact that it is a compromise. As a member of the Budget Committee, having worked with our chairman and members very hard to produce a budget resolution that really does reflect a new direction in values and priorities, I worked very hard to have us achieve a set-aside of $50 billion for children's health care in the budget resolution. In my heart of hearts, that is where I want to be. I also know that any significant expansion is a victory not only for us and for the Senate but, most importantly, for children and their families. I know there will be an effort to expand to the full amount that we all wish to do--I think on this side of the aisle, certainly, that is where we want to be, and our House colleagues have focused on that as well. But I also know that we have a President of the United States who shockingly has said that he will veto providing children's health care, an expansion of more than 3.3 million children to receive health care, children of working parents. The vast majority of them have a mom or a dad working one job, two jobs, maybe three jobs trying to make ends meet, but who can't afford health insurance, don't qualify for Medicaid, but find themselves desperately wanting to make sure their children have all that they need, as all of us want as parents. So we are in a situation where the President of the United States has indicated he does not share that view. His budget, in fact, is a budget that he proposed to us that would cut children. It would cut children who are currently being provided health insurance. It would eliminate their health insurance. So on the Finance Committee, we came together under very strong bipartisan leadership to find a common ground, the middle ground, to be able to increase the number of children who receive health insurance and be able to make sure that the 6 million children who currently have health insurance are allowed to maintain that insurance. We have come to a compromise, and it is a compromise I support. As we face a potential veto from this President, it is critical that we have the strongest possible bipartisan vote coming from the Senate. If in fact the President follows through and vetoes this, I hope we will have enough votes to override that veto in a strong bipartisan spirit, the spirit that brought us together originally when the Children's Health Insurance Program was originally passed. I urge colleagues to support the Finance Committee version and what we have done as the best way to get us real health care expansion for children. Then we will come back, and I will be right back as a member of the Budget Committee next year, proposing again that we expand what we are doing to make sure that every child who does not have health insurance, whose family is working hard but doesn't qualify for Medicaid and doesn't have the ability to get private insurance, has the health care they need. We have, I understand, another proposal in front of us, an amendment that would take us backward. I understand Senator Lott has offered an amendment that has actually been dubbed the CLIP amendment, instead of CHIP--Children's Health Insurance Program--CLIP meaning ``Children Losing Insurance Program.'' Again, we don't need anything that is going to take us backward and have fewer children receiving health insurance. I want to see us make a major commitment to universal health insurance in the greatest country in the world so that everyone has the opportunity to be able to receive the health care they need. We should be striving to achieve nothing less than that. The Lott amendment, first, will cut children's health care and take us down the road of debating the number of policies individually that Members may support, policies I find great concern about, and policies that will actually increase the number of uninsured, such as expanding the health savings accounts. I urge colleagues to oppose the Lott amendment because it takes us in absolutely the wrong direction if we want to cover children of low-income working families, and if we want to make sure they have what they need to be able to grow up and be successful in America. I have also heard debate about the cost of this legislation, and it is important to look at what we are talking about in terms of our values and priorities when we debate any piece of legislation. Everything we do here is about values and priorities. Right now, every month, we are spending $12 billion in Iraq--$12 billion. Regardless of how any one individual feels about the war in Iraq, we are spending $12 billion--not paid for, not a part of the budget--$12 billion a month. This bipartisan effort to provide health insurance for more than 3 million more American children in this country is a cost of $7 billion a year--a year; less than what we are spending in 1 month in Iraq. That is the right value and the right priority. This is paid for, it is responsible and, most importantly, it is the moral thing to do in the greatest country in the world, in my opinion. This is not too much to invest in the future generation of America. Yesterday, the chairman and I, a number of us, had an opportunity to be with a wonderful woman, Kitty Burgett, from Ohio, who spoke about the importance of children's health care in her family. I know it was a very moving experience to hear her, and I wanted to share her story. I have certainly other stories from Michigan as well, but Kitty came to the Nation's capitol to share what the Children's Health Insurance Program has meant to her and to her family. Kitty is a widow whose husband died in 1990, leaving Kitty and her two young children without income or insurance. She had Social Security survivor's benefits, but even that little income put her and her children over the Medicaid eligibility levels, so they didn't qualify for low-income health insurance because of their survivor benefits. She started working but earned very little. Nonetheless, she purchased insurance for her children, because like all of us who are parents, she wanted to make sure her children had what they needed. She wanted to make sure if they were sick, she was able to care for them with health insurance. So she purchased that insurance, but the cost rose every 6 months, and she finally had to drop it because of the cost. That is an uncommon story in America today. Then along came the Children's Health Insurance Program. Kitty immediately enrolled her children. She had a daughter who was 12. Her son was a bit younger. Her daughter then began to develop problems, and, ultimately, at age 15, was diagnosed with bipolar disorder. She was ill. She was hallucinating and she had major mood swings--as those of us who are familiar with that disease understand--from depression to highs and hallucinations. She couldn't concentrate at school. The Children's Health Insurance Program was there so Kitty could get her daughter some help. It covered her medications and therapy and eventually some new medicines that brought her illness under control. Her daughter is now 22 years old. She is married, she is working, and she is insured. She has an 18-month-old daughter named Scarlet. Kitty says the Children's Health Insurance Program kept her daughter from a lifetime of institutionalization, and, instead, she is a productive, contributing member of society and a loving mother to Scarlet. That is what this is all about, giving people in America--parents, the vast majority of whom are working--the ability to provide their children with the health care they need so they can go on to be successful, thriving, contributing adults in America. I might also mention I am very pleased that the bill in front of us expands the opportunity for what is called mental health parity, so that if there is insurance provided, mental health care will be a part of that. I congratulate Senator Kerry and Senator Smith, who have led that effort to expand us into the area of more adequately covering mental health care for children. This program covers children all over the country. It is interesting to note that there are more children uninsured in rural areas than in urban areas. This will make sure that, in fact, all of the children who qualify under this program are able to receive the health care they need. Right now, in Michigan, we have about 60,000 children who are on the Children's Health Insurance Program and another 90,000 who are eligible--who qualify right now under the program we wrote--but because funds aren't available for outreach, funds aren't available to do what is necessary, we are not able to provide those families, those children, with health insurance. This bill goes a long way to making that happen. I have heard so many stories from Michigan, and it touches your heart when you think about the way families are struggling to be able to care for their children at the same time costs are going up at every turn. We have folks who are working harder than ever: They turn around and gas prices go up; they turn around and their insurance premium goes up; they turn around again and look at the cost of college, and those costs have gone up. We addressed the cost of college last week. Those things go right to middle-income families--student loans and Pell grants and those programs that allow more people to have the opportunity to go to college and send their children to college. The reality is that on every side families are feeling squeezed-- working harder and costs going up and up and up. Children's health care is one way, another critical way, we can help families. I think of Chad, a gentleman in Michigan. He and his wife have two young children. He works for a small landscaping business with an ``off season'' of 3 to 4 months in the winter when he is not working. If the couple purchased insurance through Chad's employer, it would be an additional $300 a month, which for them is not affordable. Through MIChild, which is our children's health program, both his sons are able to get the inhalers they need for their asthma. How basic, in America, in the greatest country in the world, to make sure that children can handle their asthma. I also heard from Pam, who is a full-time preschool teacher and mother. Her monthly premiums of $384 a month, or over $4,500 a year, take up over one-fifth, or 20 percent, of her pay. Through the MIChild program, she was able to get the specialized care she needed for her youngest daughter, who suffers from a rare seizure disorder. I could go on and on, but I will not. We all have stories of families who are wanting the best for their children, who want the American dream. They do not want to go to bed at night and have to say, please, God, don't let the kids get sick, don't let something happen tonight or tomorrow because I don't know what I am going to do--we don't have health insurance. We are the greatest country in the world and there is no excuse for any family finding themselves in that situation. We have in front of us a bill that is a true bipartisan compromise. For me, it is a step in the right direction to universal care, and an opportunity to come up with a uniquely American way to provide universal health care for everyone in America. I believe health care is a right, not a privilege, in the greatest country in the world, and we should act like that. This important legislation is part of keeping that promise. We started down the road with covering children whose parents are working, who do not qualify for low-income help through Medicaid because they are just above that limit, but aren't able to get the insurance they need for their families. We have children who qualify today but, because the resources aren't there, they are not able to get the health insurance they need. This legislation will say that more than 3 million more children--families--in this country will not have to go to bed at night worrying about whether their kids are going to get sick tomorrow. Finally, I say again that this is about values and priorities. Always it is about values and priorities. This is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do. When we find ourselves in the situation of spending $12 billion a month on the war in Iraq, not paid for, and in front of us we have the ability with $7 billion a year to cover over 3 million more children with children's health care, the 6 million who have insurance now and over 3 million more in America, responsibly done and paid for, this is the right thing to do. It is the moral thing to do. This is a great success story, and I am very hopeful we will see a very strong bipartisan vote when this comes before the Senate for a vote. I yield the floor.