Ken Salazar

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. I thank my friend. I was trying to figure out a speaking order because a number of Senators want to speak. I ask my friend about how much longer he expects to go.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following the Senator's remarks, he be followed by Senators Alexander for 5 minutes, Wyden and Smith for 10 minutes, followed by Senator Casey for 5 minutes, and followed by Senator Salazar for 10 minutes, and Senator Casey following Senator Salazar for as much time as he may consume.

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I come to the floor of the Senate this evening to express my extreme disappointment that the Senate is not moving forward today to address the housing crisis which is causing so much pain for people all over this country, from the Presiding Officer's wonderful Sunshine State of Florida, to the western shores of California, to most of the States across the country. We know there is a lot of pain because of the housing crisis that America finds itself in today. To be sure, I am proud of the work that this Chamber did a few weeks ago when we pushed through the economic stimulus package to provide tax rebates and to provide some incentives for businesses to invest in equipment to make sure that we are keeping our economy from going into the ditch. But let there be no doubt, let there be no doubt anywhere in America today that the housing market is in crisis and American home ownership is becoming a nightmare to the homeowners of America. And so it is, in my view, incumbent upon this Chamber, incumbent upon the President of the United States, incumbent upon us, to try to move forward, to try to ease some of the pain and to make sure that what is the primary cause for us being in the kind of economic instability that we find ourselves in today, is something that we address, and that is the housing crisis that America faces. On this chart, you will note that the statistics indicate what is happening across America that is bringing so much pain to the people who own homes in all of our States. This morning in one of our Finance Committee meetings where we had a hearing, we heard from the real estate industry, including those who are owners of commercial real estate and those who build our homes across this country. Those who are building our homes, the National Association of Home Builders, their vice president and a witness today at our Finance Committee hearing said what they are seeing in the housing market is the worst they have seen since the Great Depression. Now, the Great Depression brought not only the economy of the United States, but the economy of the world, basically, to its knees, flat on its face. And it took that ``greatest generation'' to stand up this economy again. So they are telling us, these people who build our homes in America, that this is worse than anything that they have seen since that Great Depression. But Moody's, the economic group, in testimony that they provided to one of our committees in the Senate not long ago, talked about how we have not yet reached the trough, the bottom of the housing crisis that we are going into. Yet we have a filibuster underway that is keeping us from moving forward and addressing this housing issue. I do not get it. I do not understand it. If you look at where we are today in terms of what is projected to be the trough with respect to a number of these metrics that we have on this chart, the first of those is the decline in housing values across America. What this chart shows is that it is projected that housing values will decline, on average across America, by over 15 percent. Now, when you talk about that kind of decline in home values, it is not just a pain that is affecting those homeowners whose houses are in foreclosure, it is a pain that is being felt by the neighborhood, by the communities, by millions of people who own homes. It is a significant decline in home value. When you look at home sales projected, home sales will be down to a level of 40 percent across the country. So when we get down to the bottom of the trough in housing starts, there is no end to it. The blue line here shows what happened in the 1980s when we had a similar kind of drop in the housing industry, where housing starts went down to 55, 58 percent in that decline. The economists now project that it is going to be a 60-percent decline with no end in sight. So we do have a housing crisis on our hands. We have a crisis, a housing crisis on our hands. It is important that this Senate do something about it. So I would appeal to the Republican leader, to our own leadership, that we figure out a way of moving forward. I believe that the legislation that Senator Reid introduced, the 2008 Mortgage Foreclosure Act, was a very good step in the right direction, and we should have had an opportunity to move forward with that legislation and to try to figure out ways of improving upon that legislation. I am still hopeful that as this day goes on, as Friday goes on, as we come into next week, we will be able to pivot it over to address this very substantive and real issue that is causing so much pain to the people of America. It is causing pain to the people of my State. When you look at this chart, produced by the Center for Responsible Lending, it tells you what is happening in my State of Colorado. As to foreclosures which now are rampant across our State, 1 in 376 homes in Colorado is in foreclosure. We have not seen the end of it. By the time the teaser rates, the adjustable rate mortgages adjust themselves over the next 2 years, there is a projection that there will be 49,923 homes in foreclosure in the State of Colorado, 49,000 homes in foreclosure. So, yes, people who are losing their homes obviously are going to go through a lot of pain. To go from a point where you are a homeowner to a place where you are in the street, obviously, is going to create a hospital of pain to those families that are part of these 50,000 people who are going to be affected by foreclosure. This is not just a foreclosure issue. Because of what is happening, and every American homeowner is seeing this today, the pain spreads from those foreclosures to other homes in the area, and those people are also going to see significant declines in their values. The spillover impact in the State of Colorado tells us that 748,652 homes are going to have values that decline because of the foreclosure situation. So this spillover impact is going to affect almost 40 percent of all of the homes in the State of Colorado. So it is a problem that is causing pain to, let's say, 3 million of the people who live in my State. So it is not just a foreclosure problem, but because of the spillover impact that we are going to see. In my State of Colorado, when we look at the decrease in home values, when you accumulate that number, it is going to be a $3.2 billion impact. This is much more than about just foreclosure. It also is about the pain to homeowners who are seeing the price of their homes decline over time. It goes beyond those who are having their homes foreclosed upon and ending up in the streets. It goes beyond those people with the pride of home ownership who are seeing the values of their homes decline. It also goes to the industries and people who work in the home industry. This article which came out of the Rocky Mountain News talks about what is happening with construction in the State of Colorado and Metropolitan Denver. The headline says it all, ``Metro Home Building Drops 34 Percent in '07 Permits and May Cost Up to 10,000 Jobs.'' We have hundreds of thousands of people who work in the home construction business, not only in my State but throughout the Nation. Many of those people who work in that industry are finding themselves today unemployed because of the housing crisis, a 34-percent drop in the number of housing starts, so there is lots of effects going on in our State. My view is that Senator Reid did exactly what he should have done as our majority leader. He said we had moved forward, worked closely with the President and the House of Representatives to pass an economic stimulus package which was significantly improved over what the President and the House of Representatives had proposed. He felt, correctly, that we should now pivot from that issue to working on some of the longer term economic issues affecting our Nation. Certainly one of those top priorities should be housing. I believe we also should move on and deal with another aspect of a major national agenda, to make sure we are putting more into developing a new energy future for America. But today the issue is housing. That is what the majority leader attempted to pivot to today with the Foreclosure Prevention Act of 2008. That legislation had probably the support of most of the Members with respect to at least 90 percent of the substance included in the legislation, such as $10 billion over 3 years for mortgage revenue bonds to help families refinance their homes, $10 billion over 3 years. That was a bipartisan amendment that came out of the Finance Committee, sponsored by Senator Kerry and Senator Smith, a bipartisan amendment where I don't think there would have been people in this Chamber who would have stood up and said no. We could have helped the families of America deal with the housing crisis by providing them the refinancing opportunities with that kind of investment. There is $200 million for credit counseling. It seems to me that most people have said the best thing to do is to get the homeowner and the financial institutions together, find out for the homeowner what the options are, and then get them to do a modification of their loan so they can stay in their home. That is what this legislation would have provided, $200 million for credit counseling. I don't know who would have disagreed with that concept. This legislation would have allowed $4 billion for community development block grants, CDBG grants, because there are some places in our Nation where the number of foreclosures is affecting those communities in a very negative way. Just as in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, my good friend Senator Casey will know those areas where you can drive down the street, and you can see homes that are in foreclosure, block by block by block. What this investment would have done, $4 billion in community development block grants, is helped those communities, those neighborhoods that are suffering the most. This legislation also included other provisions that were good for the business community. Through the leadership of Senator Conrad, an amendment I helped cosponsor in the Finance Committee, we would have included in here a net operating loss carryback provision so that losses from 2007, 2008, and 2009 could be carried back for 5 years. That is an important provision for those who have been involved in the home building industry or those who are in other industries who are suffering the economic tough times we are in today. It would have given those businesses a kind of shot in the arm to create a robustness and a new future for them as they try to weather the difficult times. In addition, the legislation would have required simplicity and transparency in mortgage documents. It would be a furtherance of truth in disclosure documents so that consumers, in signing up for a loan, would know exactly what it was they were signing up for. Those provisions would have been relatively noncontroversial. Then what is it that has been raised as a reason to oppose us moving to address the housing crisis here in the Senate? The provision that says we should allow homeowners to modify their loans under very limited conditions with respect to home ownership. There was a sense from some Members on the other side that maybe that was going too far, maybe there were ways in which we could have worked to deal with that issue and some modifications that would address some of their concerns. But as written, as proposed, we tried to put some rails around it. We tried to say that the only ones who could take advantage of that provision were those who were home occupants. You had to be occupying the home before you could avail yourself of those provisions. You had to meet certain strict financial conditions so that there would be a showing of need before you could take advantage of that provision. You would have to be approved by the bankruptcy court. At the end of the day, you would have had a modification of a loan that would probably have been agreed to between the lender and the homeowner, if the homeowner wanted to stay in the home. I am not an expert in bankruptcy law. It seems to me that under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code, you can discharge almost any debt with certain limitations that are set forth in the code. There are other provisions of the Bankruptcy Code--as I recall, chapter 13--that say you can avail yourself of the bankruptcy court in order to modify your debt. If you want to pay back your debt in some way but you don't have the means, chapter 13 allows you to reorganize your debt by asking the bankruptcy court to allow you to pay your debt over a longer period under other terms that a bankruptcy court might impose with respect to the repayment of the debt. But it is not a debt forgiveness. If you are a homeowner today and you happen to own a vacation home and you have a debt on the vacation home, you can go to the bankruptcy court and modify your loan. If you happen to be a homeowner today and you own a recreational vehicle or some kind of a yacht and you owe a debt against that, you can go to the bankruptcy court and have the court modify your loan under a chapter 13 proceeding. You can do it with respect to any asset. But under the current Bankruptcy Code, you are not allowed to do that with respect to your home. It makes no sense to me in particular because of the kinds of rails and constraints that we put around this legislation as it was crafted. I hope that we as a Senate, in addressing the pain that homeowners are feeling today, can move forward to provide a solution to help us weather these tough times. That is our duty and our responsibility. We as a Senate need to be judged by a very simple reality: Results matter. Stalling or looking away from a problem and pretending it doesn't exist doesn't work anymore. There needs to be a focus on dealing with the problems the American people are carrying on their backs today. Certainly the housing crisis is one of those burdens they are carrying with significant pain. I hope the voices of the American public, the voices of those who are in home ownership, will rise so that tomorrow or on Monday we can figure out a way of moving forward to putting together a solution on the housing crisis that is affecting us in America today. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Environmental Improvement Act of 2008. This legislation will direct the Bureau of Reclamation to take action to eliminate the grave environmental threat posed by a collapse of part of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, or LMDT. Leadville sits at the headwaters of the Arkansas River, and thus the effluent into the river there is of paramount importance to millions of people. The LMDT is just over 2 miles long, and was constructed during the 1940s and 1950s by the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Mines to drain flooded mines in the Leadville mining district of Lake County in central Colorado. In 1959, the Bureau of Reclamation took ``full custody, accountability, and future responsibility'' of the LMDT to obtain water rights and under the condition that the Bureau would not spend its own funds to maintain or repair the Tunnel. In the early 1990s, however, litigation compelled the Bureau to take responsibility for the quality of the water discharged by the Tunnel. The Bureau constructed a water treatment plant, and Congress authorized the Bureau under P.L. 102-575 to treat the water discharged from the LMDT. In 1995, however, a major collapse of a segment of the tunnel was detected. Since that time, mine water has pooled behind the blockage. Today the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that close to 1 billion gallons of water contaminated with toxic levels of cadmium, zinc, and manganese, has collected. The citizens of Leadville, Lake County, and the area downstream of the LMDT are deeply worried that the building pressure from this voluminous quantity of water will cause the blockage to burst and flood the town, resulting in a public health and environmental disaster. This winter's heavy snowfall has some concerned that spring snowmelt will further balloon the quantity of toxic water and exacerbate the risk. Under intense scrutiny, this week the EPA and the Bureau have partnered to begin pumping some of the water to the treatment plant and I appreciate their response. But these actions are only a small piece of the puzzle in making sure the LMDT never becomes a disaster. In recent years the Federal Government's implementation of a long- term fix for the mine has been jammed up as badly as the mine tunnel itself. My bill focuses on making sure the long term solution for the LMDT moves forward as expeditiously as possible. My bill gives the Secretary of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation clear authority and responsibility to maintain the LMDT in a manner that protects human health and the environment. For many years the Bureau has maintained that it is not responsible for changed conditions within the LMDT. My bill eliminates any ambiguity on this point, and compels the Bureau to act. Specifically, the legislation directs the Bureau to participate in the long-term remedy for the LMDT that has already been approved by the EPA, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and has been vetted through public meetings. The bill also authorizes the necessary funds for implementation of the long-term remedy. The long- term solution for the LMDT, specified under the fully approved and vetted EPA superfund Record of Decision, is much more extensive than the pumping and water treatment activity now underway. It will involve construction of a bulkhead in the tunnel to isolate the contaminated pool, backfilling the tunnel, as well as several other actions. My bill also directs the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the State and the EPA, to conduct a study to determine whether any blockages in the LMDT have affected, or are affecting, water quality and aquatic life in the Arkansas River in the vicinity downstream of the LMDT. We must ensure that the problems with the LMDT blockage do not impact the water quality of the Arkansas River, which is the lifeblood of so many communities. This study will help improve our understanding of the conditions of the headwaters near the LMDT. For too long the inaction on fixing the LMDT has been a case study in Federal paralysis, with the citizens of Leadville and Lake County caught in the middle. This legislation will establish the conditions and authority necessary to make the long-term fix at the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel a reality as soon as possible.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, today I am introducing the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Environmental Improvement Act of 2008. This legislation will direct the Bureau of Reclamation to take action to eliminate the grave environmental threat posed by a collapse of part of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel, or LMDT. Leadville sits at the headwaters of the Arkansas River, and thus the effluent into the river there is of paramount importance to millions of people. The LMDT is just over 2 miles long, and was constructed during the 1940s and 1950s by the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Mines to drain flooded mines in the Leadville mining district of Lake County in central Colorado. In 1959, the Bureau of Reclamation took ``full custody, accountability, and future responsibility'' of the LMDT to obtain water rights and under the condition that the Bureau would not spend its own funds to maintain or repair the Tunnel. In the early 1990s, however, litigation compelled the Bureau to take responsibility for the quality of the water discharged by the Tunnel. The Bureau constructed a water treatment plant, and Congress authorized the Bureau under P.L. 102-575 to treat the water discharged from the LMDT. In 1995, however, a major collapse of a segment of the tunnel was detected. Since that time, mine water has pooled behind the blockage. Today the Environmental Protection Agency estimates that close to 1 billion gallons of water contaminated with toxic levels of cadmium, zinc, and manganese, has collected. The citizens of Leadville, Lake County, and the area downstream of the LMDT are deeply worried that the building pressure from this voluminous quantity of water will cause the blockage to burst and flood the town, resulting in a public health and environmental disaster. This winter's heavy snowfall has some concerned that spring snowmelt will further balloon the quantity of toxic water and exacerbate the risk. Under intense scrutiny, this week the EPA and the Bureau have partnered to begin pumping some of the water to the treatment plant and I appreciate their response. But these actions are only a small piece of the puzzle in making sure the LMDT never becomes a disaster. In recent years the Federal Government's implementation of a long- term fix for the mine has been jammed up as badly as the mine tunnel itself. My bill focuses on making sure the long term solution for the LMDT moves forward as expeditiously as possible. My bill gives the Secretary of the Interior and the Bureau of Reclamation clear authority and responsibility to maintain the LMDT in a manner that protects human health and the environment. For many years the Bureau has maintained that it is not responsible for changed conditions within the LMDT. My bill eliminates any ambiguity on this point, and compels the Bureau to act. Specifically, the legislation directs the Bureau to participate in the long-term remedy for the LMDT that has already been approved by the EPA, the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and has been vetted through public meetings. The bill also authorizes the necessary funds for implementation of the long-term remedy. The long- term solution for the LMDT, specified under the fully approved and vetted EPA superfund Record of Decision, is much more extensive than the pumping and water treatment activity now underway. It will involve construction of a bulkhead in the tunnel to isolate the contaminated pool, backfilling the tunnel, as well as several other actions. My bill also directs the Secretary of the Interior, in cooperation with the State and the EPA, to conduct a study to determine whether any blockages in the LMDT have affected, or are affecting, water quality and aquatic life in the Arkansas River in the vicinity downstream of the LMDT. We must ensure that the problems with the LMDT blockage do not impact the water quality of the Arkansas River, which is the lifeblood of so many communities. This study will help improve our understanding of the conditions of the headwaters near the LMDT. For too long the inaction on fixing the LMDT has been a case study in Federal paralysis, with the citizens of Leadville and Lake County caught in the middle. This legislation will establish the conditions and authority necessary to make the long-term fix at the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel a reality as soon as possible.

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR

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

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 580, S. 2450.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it stand adjourned until 9:30 a.m., Thursday, February 28; that following the prayer and pledge, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and that the Senate then proceed to a period for the transaction of morning business for up to 1 hour, with the time equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or their designees, with the majority controlling the first half and the Republicans controlling the final half; further, that the Senate then resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 2634 and that all time during any adjournment or morning business count postcloture.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation that will help us achieve swift and safe destruction of the chemical weapons stored at the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado. Congressman John Salazar and Congressman Mark Udall are introducing similar legislation today in the House. The Pueblo Chemical Depot is home to 780,000 munitions filled with over 2,600 tons of liquid mustard agent--around 8.5 percent of the original U.S. chemical stockpile. The munitions sit in 96 high security igloos as they await disassembly and destruction. The congressionally ratified Chemical Weapons Convention mandates that these munitions be destroyed by 2012. Unfortunately, the Department of Defense is woefully behind in fulfilling its responsibilities because it consistently underfunds a program that is essential to our national security and to the safety of nearby communities. Every year we have to fight to put money back into the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives, ACWA, program, the authority that is overseeing the destruction operation at Pueblo and at the Blue Grass Army Depot, in Kentucky. But, thanks to Congressional intervention, we have succeeded in getting the program moving. Last year Congress allocated over $400 million for weapons destruction at the Pueblo Chemical Depot and the Blue Grass Army Depot. I want to thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member McCain of the Armed Services Committee, Chairman Inouye and Ranking Member Stevens of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, and Chairman Dorgan and Ranking Member Hutchison of the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Subcommittee for all their help. If you visit the Pueblo Chemical Depot today, you will see that contractors have begun to lay the utilities and foundations for the processing facility that will treat the agent. And you will see that they have begun construction of the biotreatment facility, which will treat the hydrolysate that is the byproduct of the mustard neutralization process. It is a welcome sight to finally see earth moving. In addition to the funding that Congress restored in fiscal year 2008 for chemical weapons destruction, we also passed legislation to set a hard deadline of 2017 for the Department of Defense to complete all chemical weapons destruction activities. It is no secret that DOD is going to miss the 2012 treaty deadline for weapons destruction at Pueblo. That's what happens when you drag your feet and fail to put adequate resources behind a program. But the law we passed last year says that even if they miss the 2012 deadline, the Department of Defense shall complete work on the destruction of the entire stockpile of lethal chemical agents and munitions absolutely no later than 2017. Every six months, the department has to report to Congress on the progress they are making, what resources are needed, and how much funding is programmed to fulfill this requirement. For those of us who have been fighting this fight for the Pueblo site, the hard deadline of 2017 is a dramatic improvement. At the pace that we were moving under administration's funding projections last year, destruction activities there were expected to be completed sometime in 2021. 2021. This is absurd, especially with DOD's own admission that with higher funding levels they could complete destruction at Pueblo a full five years earlier than that. I am proud that this 2017 deadline has been signed into law and I look forward to working with the Department of Defense to ensure that the U.S. Government meets this legal obligation. Unfortunately, we still have more work to do to see that these chemical weapons are destroyed as swiftly and safely as possible. For one thing, we will have to continue to hold DOD's feet to the fire to ensure that they are devoting adequate resources to chemical weapons destruction. We will also have to work to help make the chemical weapons destruction process proceed as smoothly, safely, and expeditiously as possible. This means watching to make sure that DOD does not get bogged down in bureaucracy or red tape that could cause delays. There is a real danger of this at the Pueblo Site, where the Department of Defense is yet again studying whether it should ship hydrolysate, a byproduct of neutralizing mustard agent, to an off-site location for destruction. Hydrolysate is a hazardous waste that must be subjected to a biotreatment process to make it non-hazardous. At Pueblo, they have already begun construction of an on site biotreatment facility to neutralize the hydrolysate. This is great news. It is the simplest solution and, according to two recent studies, the fastest way to treat all the hydrolysate. These two studies, completed in 2007, both concluded that shipping hydrolysate off-site would yield few, if any, cost-savings and would likely result in litigation, strong public opposition, and potential delays to chemical weapons destruction. An analysis conducted by Mitretek found that ``a decision for off-site treatment will probably result in litigation of the CD at Pueblo, resulting in extensive delays. Every month of delay costs roughly $15-$16 million. Any delay over 6 months, regardless of cause, would be expected to erase all possible savings, even under the most optimistic assumptions.'' The report by Lean Six Sigma concluded that off-site destruction would actually cost more and could result in as much as a five-year delay in chemical weapons destruction at Pueblo. Given the conclusions of these recent studies on hydrolysate destruction, I am perplexed that the Department is conducting yet another study on the potential cost savings of hydrolysate destruction. It is unclear to me what questions remain unanswered. These studies clearly show that shipping hydrolysate off-site raises risks of permitting delays or litigation. With a 2017 deadline to meet, the Department of Defense can't afford a permitting delay that sets the project off course. The bill I am introducing today is very simple. It prohibits the Secretary of Defense from shipping hydrolysate at the Pueblo Chemical Depot off-site for treatment. This will ensure that DOD can continue to proceed on its current path toward treating hydrolysate on-site. It will help the U.S. Government meet its legal obligation to complete chemical weapons destruction by 2017. And it will provide some certainty to the communities that have waited so long for these chemical weapons to be safely destroyed. We need to put this potentially costly and dilatory issue behind us and proceed with the safe and swift destruction of our Nation's stockpile of chemical weapons.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the service and sacrifice of SSG Chad Barrett. Sergeant Barrett was assigned to the 64th Brigade Support Battalion, 3rd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division out of Fort Carson, CO. He died last Saturday in Iraq at the age of 35. A native of Jonesborough, TN, Chad grew up in a family with a proud history of service. By joining the Army, he followed in the footsteps of his older brothers, his cousins, and his grandfather, who earned the Purple Heart in World War II. Chad was in his 12th year of service and his third deployment to Iraq when he died. He took on one of the most dangerous jobs of the war: that of a gunner tasked with defending supply convoys. Those convoys see it all: improvised explosive devices, rocket attacks, explosively formed penetrators, ambushes. Protecting the convoys is a job that takes courage, but it also takes a toll. In his second deployment, Sergeant Barrett's unit was attacked 42 times. He put himself in harm's way and no doubt saved countless lives, but each day, each mission, and each fight has a cost that we often forget. However steely one's nerves or how strong one's will, the daily sacrifices of our soldiers do cause wounds and injuries of their own. These wounds are sometimes less visible than those of a bullet or a blast, but they are no less painful and certainly no less deadly. Mr. President, the daily heroics of Chad's service in Iraq will be remembered long after the words from this floor fade. This was a lesson of our 16th President, Abraham Lincoln, as he honored the tens of thousands who perished at Gettysburg. ``The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced.'' As we honor the life of Sergeant Barrett, may we embrace this charge and rededicate ourselves to our unfinished work and to the dream for which every soldier serves--that of achieving stable and lasting peace. To Sergeant Barrett's wife, Michelle, his sons, Guston and Zachary, his parents, Linda and Ronnie, and to all his family and friends, our thoughts and prayers are with you. I cannot imagine the pain and grief that you are feeling. In time, though, I hope your sorrow will be salved by the knowledge that Chad served his country with honor and that we are all grateful for his courage, sacrifice, and daily heroism. May his legacy always endure.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation--a companion bill will be introduced in the House by my colleague Representative Salazar--to ensure that the communities in northwestern Colorado most affected by the enormous recent increase in oil and gas drilling activities, especially those in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties, immediately receive their fair share of the surplus funds from the Anvil Points cleanup fund. Our legislation will direct Colorado's share of those surplus funds to land, water and wildlife protection and conservation efforts, and for repair, maintenance and construction of roads and other infrastructure affected by oil and gas development in those counties. Under the Transfer Act, Public Law 105-85, Colorado has not and will not receive any of the leasing revenues from oil and gas production on former Naval Oil Shale Reserve land until cleanup of the Anvil Points Superfund Site is complete. Normally these substantial revenues would be shared 50-50 between the State and Federal government under the Mineral Leasing Act. Today the trust fund set aside for the cleanup of Anvil Points is in surplus, and that surplus currently amounts to approximately $66.5 million. The Salazar-Salazar legislation amends the Transfer Act to immediately release Colorado's share of the surplus funds to Western Slope communities to mitigate development impacts in and around the former Naval Oil Shale Reserve in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties. The Anvil Points trust fund currently accrues approximately $1.5 million per month. Under this legislation half of those incoming funds will go to Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties and half will go to the Federal Government. After the cleanup of the Anvil Points site is complete and the Secretary of the Interior certifies that the Federal Government has collected enough money to pay for the cleanup, the Anvil Points trust fund will cease to exist and oil and gas leasing revenues from the area will be divided 50-50 between the State of Colorado and the Federal Government. The oil and gas industry provides Colorado with much-needed revenue that enables our State to flourish. We must ensure that some of those revenues go back to the communities from which they originated. Our bill will ensure that the oil and gas industry does not leave the counties of Garfield and Rio Blanco looking like a spoiled moonscape but instead allows the watersheds and wildlife there to prosper and continue to be a haven for sportsmen and recreationists from across Colorado. Yesterday, I along with Congressmen Mark Udall and John Salazar also introduced legislation that repeals the eleventh-hour money grab by the Federal Government in last year's omnibus appropriations bill that would reduce from 50 percent to 48 percent the share of total royalties paid to Colorado and other States. The core underlying principle of the Mineral Leasing Act--that our Nation and our States share equal claim of our precious mineral resources--should be maintained. Our bill restores each State's share to its full, coequal 50 percent of mineral leasing revenues. Together these bills restore Colorado's share of oil and gas leasing revenue to its full 50 percent. With respect to the excess funds now held by the Federal Government for the cleanup of Anvil Points, our legislation will direct Colorado's share of those surplus dollars to land and water conservation, wildlife protection, and roads and other infrastructure affected by oil and gas development in the local communities most affected by these activities.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation--a companion bill will be introduced in the House by my colleague Representative Salazar--to ensure that the communities in northwestern Colorado most affected by the enormous recent increase in oil and gas drilling activities, especially those in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties, immediately receive their fair share of the surplus funds from the Anvil Points cleanup fund. Our legislation will direct Colorado's share of those surplus funds to land, water and wildlife protection and conservation efforts, and for repair, maintenance and construction of roads and other infrastructure affected by oil and gas development in those counties. Under the Transfer Act, Public Law 105-85, Colorado has not and will not receive any of the leasing revenues from oil and gas production on former Naval Oil Shale Reserve land until cleanup of the Anvil Points Superfund Site is complete. Normally these substantial revenues would be shared 50-50 between the State and Federal government under the Mineral Leasing Act. Today the trust fund set aside for the cleanup of Anvil Points is in surplus, and that surplus currently amounts to approximately $66.5 million. The Salazar-Salazar legislation amends the Transfer Act to immediately release Colorado's share of the surplus funds to Western Slope communities to mitigate development impacts in and around the former Naval Oil Shale Reserve in Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties. The Anvil Points trust fund currently accrues approximately $1.5 million per month. Under this legislation half of those incoming funds will go to Garfield and Rio Blanco Counties and half will go to the Federal Government. After the cleanup of the Anvil Points site is complete and the Secretary of the Interior certifies that the Federal Government has collected enough money to pay for the cleanup, the Anvil Points trust fund will cease to exist and oil and gas leasing revenues from the area will be divided 50-50 between the State of Colorado and the Federal Government. The oil and gas industry provides Colorado with much-needed revenue that enables our State to flourish. We must ensure that some of those revenues go back to the communities from which they originated. Our bill will ensure that the oil and gas industry does not leave the counties of Garfield and Rio Blanco looking like a spoiled moonscape but instead allows the watersheds and wildlife there to prosper and continue to be a haven for sportsmen and recreationists from across Colorado. Yesterday, I along with Congressmen Mark Udall and John Salazar also introduced legislation that repeals the eleventh-hour money grab by the Federal Government in last year's omnibus appropriations bill that would reduce from 50 percent to 48 percent the share of total royalties paid to Colorado and other States. The core underlying principle of the Mineral Leasing Act--that our Nation and our States share equal claim of our precious mineral resources--should be maintained. Our bill restores each State's share to its full, coequal 50 percent of mineral leasing revenues. Together these bills restore Colorado's share of oil and gas leasing revenue to its full 50 percent. With respect to the excess funds now held by the Federal Government for the cleanup of Anvil Points, our legislation will direct Colorado's share of those surplus dollars to land and water conservation, wildlife protection, and roads and other infrastructure affected by oil and gas development in the local communities most affected by these activities.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. I move to lay that motion on the table. The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

Mr. SALAZAR. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be added as an original cosponsor of the amendment as well.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, this is a fine moment for the Senate because it is a group of Senators coming together and saying we need to jump-start the economy, we cannot delay, we need to move forward very quickly. Because of the action this Chamber will take later today, we will see 100 million Americans receive tax rebate checks in the mail that then will help us jump-start the economy. But as Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley have pointed out, we have taken a package from the House and have significantly improved it, significantly improved it in two major ways. First, the 21 million seniors who receive Social Security who were left out of the House package will now be receiving those tax rebates in the mail. So it is important to note this is a very important step in us standing up for the elders of America, for whom we have so much respect. The second major improvement in this legislation is we also have honored our disabled veterans, 250,000 disabled veterans, who were left out of the House package, out of the package negotiated by the White House. We have included those in this legislation. So in that way, this legislation represents a very significant improvement upon the package that came over from the House. Let me also say this is a business-friendly package because the product of the Finance Committee will put money in the pockets of small businessmen and women, as well as large businesses so they can invest in equipment, so they can create jobs and they can help start getting our economy from going further into the ditch and back on solid track. Having said that, I also think it is incumbent upon all of us to understand this is a short-term fix and that there are longer term economic and fiscal problems that face this country that need to be grappled with. It would be my hope, as one Senator, in the days ahead, we move forward and embrace a phase two of economic recovery for this Nation. I believe No. 1 on that agenda of this recovery program should be a focus on housing legislation that will help us address the major issues that are being faced across the country, including so poignantly in the State of California, where my good friend, Senator Boxer, was describing to us what is happening with the foreclosure rate, which is going to be six times higher than it was last year. In my State of Colorado, 1 in 375,000 homes is in foreclosure. In my State of Colorado, there is a significant decline in real estate values. Across the country it is projected that everyone's home is going to decline on average by 14 percent. So housing, I hope, is immediately on our agenda; that we move from there and get a good farm bill passed for our food and fuel security for our country; and, thirdly, that we embrace the Finance Committee package on energy legislation that will help us get to that new frontier of a clean energy economy for the 21st century. So while I applaud this package and support it 100 percent, our work has just begun. This is simply a first step. I yield the floor.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation--a companion bill will be introduced in the House by my colleagues Representatives Salazar and Udall--to restore Colorado's share of oil and gas leasing revenue. The 2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill includes a provision, requested by the Bush Administration, to reduce the share of mineral royalties paid to Colorado and other western states. Specifically, the administration's proposal to reduce the State's share of mineral revenues from 50 percent to 48 percent does not serve the taxpayers who fund the government nor does it serve the states that allow energy production to happen within their borders. Colorado is blessed with an abundance of natural resources, including its deposits of oil and natural gas. Our State's economy benefits from the production of these resources, and we deserve to continue receiving our fair share of the revenues. The administration attempts to justify this reduction as necessary to defray the administrative costs related to the management of onshore leasing activity. We believe this assertion is unfounded and oppose any attempt to take money that is rightfully owed to our State in order to pay for more Federal bureaucracy. This is money that our state could use to help mitigate the effects of increased oil and gas drilling activity and for other important state priorities, such as education and health care. Our legislation repeals the administration's money grab and restores each State's share to its full, coequal 50 percent of mineral leasing revenues. We cannot allow the Federal government to take oil and gas leasing revenues intended to help the communities of Colorado. This language was inserted late into last year's omnibus spending bill and must be corrected. Our legislation does just that.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation--a companion bill will be introduced in the House by my colleagues Representatives Salazar and Udall--to restore Colorado's share of oil and gas leasing revenue. The 2008 Omnibus Appropriations bill includes a provision, requested by the Bush Administration, to reduce the share of mineral royalties paid to Colorado and other western states. Specifically, the administration's proposal to reduce the State's share of mineral revenues from 50 percent to 48 percent does not serve the taxpayers who fund the government nor does it serve the states that allow energy production to happen within their borders. Colorado is blessed with an abundance of natural resources, including its deposits of oil and natural gas. Our State's economy benefits from the production of these resources, and we deserve to continue receiving our fair share of the revenues. The administration attempts to justify this reduction as necessary to defray the administrative costs related to the management of onshore leasing activity. We believe this assertion is unfounded and oppose any attempt to take money that is rightfully owed to our State in order to pay for more Federal bureaucracy. This is money that our state could use to help mitigate the effects of increased oil and gas drilling activity and for other important state priorities, such as education and health care. Our legislation repeals the administration's money grab and restores each State's share to its full, coequal 50 percent of mineral leasing revenues. We cannot allow the Federal government to take oil and gas leasing revenues intended to help the communities of Colorado. This language was inserted late into last year's omnibus spending bill and must be corrected. Our legislation does just that.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the memory of CPL Duncan Crookston, who died recently at Brook Army Medial Center in Texas from wounds he sustained when a roadside blast tore through his humvee on September 4, 2007. The attack killed three other soldiers in his vehicle. When he died on January 25, Duncan was 1 day shy of his 20th birthday. Corporal Crookston's friends and family gathered at Fort Logan National Cemetery in Denver on Saturday to share their memories of a young man of extraordinary energy and talent who chose to devote himself to the service of his country. His fellow soldiers say he chose the Army knowing the dangers and accepting the possibility of losing his life. He did his job and ``he met his calling,'' one soldier said. Duncan joined the Army shortly after graduating from Denver West High School. With his standardized test scores, any university in the country would have been lucky to have him, but he was committed to doing right by his Nation and by those with whom he served. In the Army, it became immediately clear that he had a mind for engineering and electronics, so he became the radio-tech operator in his unit. He could fix almost anything, and in the toughest conditions. For almost 5 months after the Baghdad blast, Corporal Crookston hung on. His wife Meaghun and his mother Lee stayed by his side at Brook Army Medical Center, helping him in his fight for recovery. His wounds, though, were simply too grave. He had burns over 50 percent of his body, lost both of his legs, his right arm, and his left hand. There was no limit, it seems, to Corporal Crookston's courage. On a mission, he always wanted to be out front. In the hospital, he fought the odds to the end. Corporal Crookston's courage is all the more admirable for the fact that he applied it in service to his country, fulfilling his duty with honor. ``You will never do anything in this world without courage,'' the Greek philosopher Aristotle once wrote. ``It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honor.'' It is hard to imagine a more powerful example of courage than that which Duncan Crookston and his family demonstrated over the last few months of his life. There are no words that can capture the pain or grief they must have endured as they battled for his life. To his wife Meaghun, to his father Christopher, to his mother Lee, and to his five brothers, our thoughts and prayers are with you. You have made a sacrifice that a grateful Nation can never repay. I hope that one day your sorrow will salved by your pride in knowing that Duncan served the Nation with overwhelming honor, courage, and dignity. He will never be forgotten.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I wish to thank my colleague from Michigan for her great leadership on the Finance and Budget Committees and raising these issues that are so important to America. I think particularly when you come from a State such as her State of Michigan, where they have an unemployment rate that is knocking on the door of 8 percent, she knows how hard it is for families in Michigan and the families across America as they see our economy spiraling downward and going into a ditch, which essentially makes what we are trying to do in the Senate today more important than at any other time. Madam President, I wish to start first by asking unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak on the Finance Committee stimulus package for such time as I may consume.

Mr. SALAZAR. Madam President, I wish to first comment on the Finance Committee and the way that committee works. First, we are on the floor of the Senate with a Finance Committee package in large part because we have two great Senators who have been a part of this Chamber, a part of this institution for a very long time and who make it their priority to get results. They transcend partisan politics for the public purpose for which they were elected. It is in that vein that time and time again the packages we have brought forth from the Finance Committee have had both Democratic and Republican support as we have tried to move forward to confront the challenges that face our country today. This economic stimulus package that is before us today is no exception. It was voted out of the Finance Committee, a committee I am very proud to be a part of, with a bipartisan vote, in a bipartisan spirit, and with the sense that we needed to give a flu shot to this economy before it gets sicker; and with the sense that we need to help this economy go into a positive direction as opposed to getting further and further stuck in the ditch of disrepair, where it has been headed for the last several months. So this is a very important package that comes before the Senate today, and we must remember its genesis in the Finance Committee is in fact a bipartisan genesis to respond to what the President has asked the Congress to do, not only in his State of the Union speech but even before that, when he said we need to have a stimulus package to help get our economy back on track. Well, we have done our level best to try to put together that package in the Finance Committee. I am proud to support it, and I hope that when we get to a vote on the Finance Committee package tomorrow, we are able to get Republicans and Democrats to stand together in a resounding positive vote for moving forward with this Finance Committee package. I hope the vote is not just a vote that gets us to 60 but hopefully gets us to 70 or 75. Now, why is it important that we move forward and jump-start our economy? Well, it is important for the American families whose lives are very much affected by the actions we take on the floor of the Senate. It is important to embrace what the President and the House of Representatives have done, which is to say we ought to put money back into the pockets of the American consumer so they can spend that money which then helps create jobs in America and helps to stabilize our economy. But what the White House and the House of Representatives did in their negotiations with Secretary Paulson and others is something that can be improved on, and certainly the bipartisan work of the great team on the Finance Committee, which includes the staff of that committee, has brought forth what is a significantly improved package over what came out of the House of Representatives. The first of those improvements has to do with dealing with those Americans who were left out: 20 million elders, 20 million seniors, 20 million people who have given their lives to give us the opportunities we have in America today. I am speaking about those who came before us and who now depend on Social Security. The package out of the House excluded 20 million seniors because it says you have to have earned income in order to qualify for this tax check that is going to go out from the Government to the people of America. Why should we exclude these 20 million seniors who are receiving Social Security? Because Social Security is not earned income. Therefore, they are excluded under the provisions that came out of the House bill. So if we are to honor what I believe is one of the fundamental values of America--that is to honor our elders, to respect our seniors--then it is important for us to make sure we change the package to include the 20 million seniors of America. The one thing we do know, from what all the economists have told us, is that if you put this money into the pockets of 20 million elder Americans, those 20 million elder Americans are going to spend that money, which means it is going to help stimulate our economy. So that is one improvement. Are there other improvements that could be made to this economic stimulus package? Well, the fact is there are other improvements that can be made. A second improvement we made in this package that we deliberated and worked out in the Finance Committee has to do with our disabled veterans. We have 250,000 disabled veterans in America today; 250,000 disabled veterans. Many of these veterans are veterans from World War II, some of them from the Korean conflict, some of them from the Korean war, and some of them are part of the 1.5 million veterans who have served in Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom. Why should these 250,000 veterans not receive the benefits we are providing all the rest of America today? It makes no sense, in my view, if we are trying to stimulate the economy. We put, probably for a family of four, $1,600 checks into their pockets. They are going to spend this money to help stimulate the economy. It is the right thing to do for us to uphold the American values and to support our veterans here in America. It is absolutely the right thing to do. It is also the right thing to do in terms of one of the objectives which we have, which is to help stimulate our economy. Third, when I ask the question, can we improve this bill--yes, we can improve it by adding 20 million seniors. We can improve it by adding the 250,000 disabled veterans. But we can also deal with the reality of unemployment. Maybe some people around here have not dealt with families that have been unemployed. But when you lose your job, you lose everything that creates a quality of life for you. Because you cannot take care of your family, you cannot take care of making your mortgage payment, you cannot take care of buying medicine for your children. And, yes, we have now States in America that are reaching an unemployment rate of 8 percent, and the economists are saying there are a number of States that are going to be up into 6 to 7 percent before too long. So extending unemployment benefits is also an important improvement in this package. But it is not that we can take care only of seniors and disabled veterans and extend unemployment benefits; there are other things, I believe, we can do to help make sure that we improve upon the stimulus package for America we are considering here today, and that is to help the business community of America, make sure that business community remains in a way where it can continue to create jobs for the people of this country. The incentive we have created in this legislation with the expensing provisions relating to small business, with bonus depreciation for businesses that expend money on equipment, will help keep America strong. Without those businesses creating jobs for America, we are going to continue to spiral downward. It is important that we do that. I want to point out one provision relating to our efforts to try to support the business community of America here today, and it has to do with housing. The other day when we heard from the many economists who have come before the Finance Committee, one thing was very clear. One of my colleagues, Senator Baucus, talked about how the housing crisis itself was a canary in the coal mine. It is a signal to us that our economy is in trouble. The housing sector of our economy demonstrates that perhaps in a way that very few other sectors of the economy do. So it is important that we do something for the housing issues facing our country today. The chart that is here by me demonstrates what is happening with housing across America. You look at what Moody's said would happen in terms of what they forecast to be, where we will end up as we move forward into these difficult economic times with respect to the housing market. They predict that housing prices will decline by 15 percent before we see bottom. How many people in America own a house, and how many people in America have most of their value tied up in that house? When you see these times of declines in housing values, you know the people of America, the people who are watching us debate here on the Senate floor, know there is pain in the economy here in America today. When you lose 15 percent of what is your most valuable asset, you know there is a major issue with the economy. So it is important that we address the housing issues of America, and we are doing that partially in this legislation by including revenue bonds. There are other things we are going that have to do with the housing crisis we face here in America. It is my hope one of the things we are able to do is to come back and address the housing issues, along with energy, along with the farm bill, in a chapter 2 of our economic agenda in the Senate. But it is also important, as you look at this chart, to look at what is happening with housing starts in America. We are in the worst shape today in housing starts in America than we have ever been. In fact, those who are associated with the home building industry will tell you we are in worse shape today than we have ever been since the Great Depression. There is no end in sight when this housing crisis is going to end with respect to the decline in housing starts that we see. The economists out of Moody's project that housing starts are down 60 percent, at the bottom of this trough, with no end in sight. Who knows how far that will go down? What we have done, spearheaded by Senator Conrad and with the help of Senator Stabenow and Senator Smith, is included in this legislation that will address the operating loss carryback provisions that apply to the housing industry. That economic injection will help the housing industry continue to stay afloat to weather the very troubled times ahead. Now, some people will say: Why are you bailing out the housing industry? Well, we are not bailing out the housing industry, we are trying to keep one of the sectors that is pivotal to a successful economy alive here in the United States of America. Across my State, I know how many people work in the housing industry, from the roofers to the plumbers to those who put up the drywall. We know how many of them work. There are 300,000 people in America who are working in the housing industry today. So if the housing industry continues to go downward, if it continues to spiral downward, we are going to see the bankrupting of one of the most important industries today. This stimulus package does include some legislation that will allow them to take their carryback losses in a manner that makes sense for them economically so that they will not be forced into the halls of the bankruptcy court. For a lot of reasons, I believe this stimulus package which is before us is a solid package. It is very significantly improved from what we were seeing come over from the House of Representatives. I would hope that the President of the United States, his Cabinet, Secretary Paulson, others, Secretary Gutierrez, join us in helping move this Senate Finance package through to the finish line. The final point I would make is that though we hope we will get this package through, we know that our work here on the economic issues of America is not yet done. A second and short-term phase, which I believe we should undertake here in the next month or so, is we need to deal more comprehensively with the housing issues that face our country. We need to deal with the 2007 farm bill and get that through conference and get that done to ensure the food and fuel security of America. We need to return to that Finance Committee-produced package on energy that would have fueled the clean energy future of America for the 21st century. We need to go to that as soon as we get the stimulus package through. I am hopeful that we will be able to move in that direction. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss the state of our economy and the need for Congress to pass the economic stimulus legislation that we reported out of the Senate Finance Committee yesterday, with my strong support. I urge my colleagues to embrace the urgency we should be bringing to this legislation. This is an issue that has understandably received significant attention over the past several weeks and continues to cause people in my State of Colorado and across the Nation a great deal of concern. I want to start by listing a few pertinent facts. After one of the worst holiday retail seasons in years, consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of the national economy, is experiencing a sharp pullback. Economists are now predicting that GDP growth for 2008 will barely exceed 2 percent for the year. Home values are plummeting in many areas, and foreclosures are on the rise. In 2007, Colorado ranked fifth in the Nation in foreclosures. Foreclosures were up 30 percent over 2006 and 140 percent over 2005. The December unemployment rate in Colorado was up nearly half a percentage point from November. A barrel of oil costs over $90. On average, a gallon of gas costs almost $3. The economy is on thin ice. But economic indicators are one thing, and the financial pressures that middle-class families are feeling is another. Families across Colorado and the Nation are feeling squeezed by the growing costs of energy, education, and health care. Savings are melting away, and disposable income is a thing of the past for many Americans. I know what it feels like to not know whether you will have enough money to provide your family with the things they need or the future they deserve. With that in mind, there is no better way we can start the important work of the second session of the 110th Congress than by providing some measure of relief to Americans who are struggling financially, and by doing whatever we can to reinvigorate the slumping economy. I believe that the central components of the Finance Committee package do an excellent job of meeting those objectives. I strongly support providing a one-time tax rebate to low- and middle-income families to help them pay their bills and make it through these tough times. This will help jumpstart consumer spending, because most of these rebates will get spent almost immediately. The Senate package will provide $500 per individual, $1000 per couple, and $300 for every child under the age of 17 for qualifying tax filers. I am pleased that the Senate rebate proposal includes upper income limits to ensure that the rebates are targeted, in addition to being timely and temporary. I also support tax incentives that provide relief for small businesses and encourage them to invest and create jobs. These businesses are the engine of the economy in my State of Colorado and across the Nation--helping them is an excellent way to get our economy moving again. I support extending unemployment benefits for an extra 13 weeks, and even longer in high-unemployment States. We have seen a lot of evidence about how effective these benefits are at targeting assistance to people who need it and will spend it, and I am glad we were able to get that done in the Finance Committee. Our bill also provides rebates to nearly 20 million seniors living on Social Security income and nearly 250,000 disabled veterans that were left out of the House bill. Our bill temporarily extends important renewable energy and energy efficiency tax incentives. These tax credits will spur investment and job creation in an industry that is critical to our economic future. Our bill temporarily raises the national cap on tax-exempt mortgage revenue bonds, which State and local governments may use to provide low-interest financing to low-income home buyers and homeowners. This proposal will help address another central contributor to our economic troubles--the fall-out from the subprime mortgage crisis, which has been especially severe in my State of Colorado. Lastly, our bill strengthens safeguards designed to prevent people from obtaining tax rebates they are not entitled to by requiring tax filers to have a valid Social Security number in order to receive a rebate. As a result of these important proposals, I believe the stimulus legislation currently before the Senate will go a long way toward meeting our primary objective: putting money as quickly as possibly into the hands of people and businesses who will put it right back into the economy. Having said that, I believe that once we pass this stimulus package we will need to take a second set of steps to bolster the Nation's longer term fiscal health. I believe we need to move quickly to pass a farm bill that will help revitalize rural economies in Colorado and across the country. I believe we need to boost investment in our Nation's infrastructure and do more to help address the crisis in housing and real estate. Also I believe we need to strengthen our programs that provide assistance to American workers, businesses, and farmers who are adversely impacted by our trade policies. Accordingly, I encourage my colleagues to do what we can now to put money right back into the economy by working quickly to pass the legislation before us, but also pledge to continue to work to enact policies that could make a real difference to our economy's long-term health. The American economy is hurting, but it is fundamentally resilient. I firmly believe that by working quickly to provide short-term stimulus, and by taking modest steps to provide stability in the longer term, we can get back on track. Just this week, we heard from the President of the United States on the need for us to move forward with an economic stimulus package because he recognizes, as do American families, that the economy is in trouble. It is remarkable that we have bipartisan movement moving forward, with the President working with Speaker Pelosi and others to try to get a stimulus package put together that makes sense for the United States of America. Yesterday, in the Finance Committee, there was another demonstration of what you can do when you work together. With the leadership of Senators Baucus and Grassley, we put together a robust package that should be considered on the floor here--hopefully, later today. I wish to say a few things about that package. It is important for us to recognize that what came out of the House has now been put into a Finance Committee package that is much improved that will help us stimulate the economy in a number of different ways. There are improvements that need to be made with the House legislation. Like any other legislation, as you get into the details, you find ways of making it better. That is what Senators Baucus and Grassley and the members of the Finance Committee did yesterday. I wish to simply address five key points that I believe make this package an improved one. The first point is simplicity. The House version has a rebate package, attempting to get money back into the pockets of consumers to stimulate demand in the economy. That package is a relatively complex formulation of how you provide those rebates. Our package coming out of the Finance Committee is not. It says that if you are a tax filer, you are going to get $500. If you are filing jointly, you and your spouse get $1,000. If you are filing jointly and you have two children, it will be $1,600. It is a relatively simple package to understand, and that is about two-thirds of what is included in the package. So the American public will be able to understand what it is they are going to get without having to go through an accounting exercise in order to determine what kind of tax rebates they are going to get. So the package out of the Finance Committee should be applauded for its simplicity. It improves significantly upon the House package in that regard. Secondly, there were groups of important Americans whom we have a moral obligation to stand up for who were left out of the package that came out of the House. Twenty million seniors in America, who are the ones who paved the way for all of us to have the America we have today, would be left out of the tax rebate in the House package. The reason they would be left out in the House package is because the way that formulation of the tax rebate was put together is based on earned income. If you are a retired senior on Social Security or on a pension, you don't have earned income. That means you don't qualify for the tax rebate. Therefore, what we did in this much-improved package out of the Finance Committee is said we are going to provide the tax rebate to these 20 million Americans. I hope that across the United States of America, those who care about seniors, and seniors themselves, are watching what the Senate does this afternoon and tomorrow and beyond with respect to this much-improved package that would add these 20 million seniors to the tax rebate. In addition, the House package that came over here also left out another very important group of people: disabled veterans. Mr. President, 250,000 disabled veterans are left out of the tax rebate because the benefits they receive are not characterized as earned income. I would bet, if you ask our colleagues in the Senate today-- Democrats and Republicans--they would say they want to stand for our veterans and honor our Nation's commitments to help them. They would say we ought not to leave 250,000 veterans behind. The Senate Finance Committee, in a bipartisan way, said: We are not going to leave 250,000 disabled veterans behind. We are going to get them the tax rebate they deserve. So our Finance Committee package, in my view, closes these gaps that were left in the House package that was passed last week. In addition, what we do in our Finance Committee package is move forward with the extension of unemployment insurance. Yes, we are seeing the signs of significant unemployment in many States. In my State alone, unemployment has gone up about half a percentage point in the last several months. If you focus on Michigan, Ohio, and Nevada, where you are seeing unemployment rates as high as 8 percent, when you see that, it is important for us to recognize that our unemployment insurance program should reach those people who don't have a job. At the end of the day, if you think about the quality of life for people in this country, if you don't have a job, you cannot have a quality of life. Extending those benefits is very important. In addition, our package takes some of what the House did with respect to incentives for job creation for small and big businesses alike--about $50 billion, more or less, is what would be used to incentivize job creation through both small and large businesses. It would do it by creating bonus depreciation and other mechanisms to incentivize businesses to invest in themselves. When you think about small businesses in particular, we know they are the economic generators of most of the jobs we have in America today. By providing a mechanism that gives the bonus depreciation, we will be able to make sure these businesses are able to invest in themselves. I know of one small business owner in Colorado who said that because of this package, he will be able to move forward and open a restaurant, where he will be able to hire somewhere between 20 and 35 people. So this stimulus package will do a lot for small business. It is something we very much appreciate. But we decided not just to leave it there because there are some other important aspects of the economy that need to be addressed in the short term. We did that through some improvements in that aspect of the stimulus package. First, we looked at the energy issue we are facing in America today. We know that in many States the new frontier of the energy revolution is coming our way. In Colorado, you see it in how we are capturing the power of the Sun and wind and the power of the biomass. But many of the production tax credits and investment tax credits are going to expire. This positive economic wave needs a short-term extension. We have done that in this package, thanks to the leadership of Senator Cantwell and others on the Finance Committee who pushed that amendment so hard. Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to support the Finance Committee package and get our economy up and running again. In conclusion, this is a stimulus package. That means it needs to be targeted, timely, and temporary. But this package isn't going to solve the economic problems that are facing our country today. There are longer term issues that are crying out for a solution, much of which we ought to be able to do in the Congress this year alone. I am throwing out just a few of those examples. First, the 2007 farm bill. As the Presiding Officer knows, food security is important in Montana. It is important for the Nation, and it is important for the world. As attorney general for Colorado and now as a Senator, I have had a sign on my desk that says ``no farms, no food.'' I wonder what would happen to America if we didn't have our grocery shelves stocked with food and have the most inexpensive and high- quality foods of any nation in the world. The 2007 farm bill, which we crafted out of the Agriculture Committee, which garnered the support of 82 Senators in this Chamber, needs to be brought across the finish line. So the administration--the President--should be asking us to move that farm bill through and get it done quickly. We need to be able to do it. We were able to get it through the Senate. We need to pivot off of the stimulus package and get the farm bill done. The food security of America requires us to do that. We cannot just stop, in my view, moving forward with the farm bill. There is also other work we need to do. We are in a housing crisis in America today. We are in a housing crisis in my State of Colorado. In Colorado, we have 1 out of 375 homes currently in foreclosure. These are families who lived in those homes who have lost those homes. One out of 375 homes is in foreclosure. But that doesn't tell the story of pain. Yes, those families are certainly suffering, but think about all of the other homeowners in Colorado-- probably 90 percent of them--who have seen a decline in home values. For most Americans, their home is essentially the majority of the equity they own. So when you see a decline in home values, you also see a taking away from the value most American families have built into their homes. When you look at the housing industry, the home construction industry, it is, as my friend Senator Conrad said yesterday in the Finance Committee, not in a recession; homebuilders are, in effect, in a depression because of what is happening in the housing market in the Nation. We try to do something in this bill, but there is other work we have to do to try to stand up the housing component of our economy because that is such a key indicator of the strength of our economy. So we need to do the farm bill, and we need to do additional significant work to try to right the housing crisis. But we cannot stop with the farm bill and we cannot stop with the housing issues. We also need to address other issues that are long term, which we have a historic opportunity to address, including the issue of energy and renewables, which we tried to get through the Senate last year. We must stop for a moment and say thank you that a part of the energy package we debated on the Senate floor is now law. We have CAFE standards that are going to bring about significant savings in oil that we currently import from other countries. That is a very good thing. We have a renewable fuels standard that has quintupled our goal where we want to go in growing energy independence. We created an energy package that says we as America have a vision that, by 2025, 25 percent of our energy will come from the power of the Sun, the power of the wind, and from the crops we grow in America. What was missing in that package was a part of the legislation the Finance Committee passed in a bipartisan way which would have given us the jet engine to power this clean energy economy for the 21st century. We must return to that energy legislation to complete a package that will help us move forward to address the fundamental values at issue. Those fundamental values are very simple. They are about national security, so we are not compromising foreign policy by our overdependence on foreign oil. Those values are about making sure we are taking care of our planet and addressing the issue of global warming, and those values are the economic opportunities for America from shore to shore to create economic opportunity from the new energy economy. While this stimulus bill is important and we must move forward with this bill in an urgent manner, let's all remember that this is but phase 1 of what we have to do to restore the foundations of a good long-term economy for the United States. This will be good work if we can get this work done in the Senate. But there is still much work in the days ahead. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SALAZAR

Mr. SALAZAR. Mr. President, when we looked back at the work of this Chamber at the end of 2007, we saw this Chamber coming together in a bipartisan way to garner what was 82 votes for the passage of the 2007 farm bill. It is an example of Republicans and Democrats working together to address a fundamental need of America, and that is the issue of food security. Last night, we heard the President of the United States address the Nation on the state of the Union, in which one of the things he talked about was the importance of moving forward with an economic stimulus package. That economic stimulus package, which has been negotiated at least with the House of Representatives on a bipartisan basis, is another example of when people are willing to work together, we can actually get some business done. That is what we should be doing in this Chamber today. We should be working through amendments with respect to improving the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act in order for us to get that legislation finally approved. What we are up against, frankly, is an unwillingness on the part of the Republican minority to allow us to move forward to get to final passage of this bill in a way that would consider relevant and germane amendments that would make it better, in a way that would address the absolute need to protect the cherished civil liberties of Americans. Those are the kinds of amendments with which we ought to be dealing. But instead, we are faced with a filibuster. I hope we can act on this legislation and then move on to the urgent needs the people of America have brought us here to work on, on their behalf. We heard the President last night talk about the economic issues that face America. In my view, when I look at my State of Colorado, I believe the economy is skating on very thin ice. We see it in a lot of different ways. We see it in rising gas prices. We see it in the extraordinary health care costs people have to pay. We see it with respect to the housing crisis we are facing in my State and across America. When I think about my State, maybe it is a small State in comparison to the great States of New Jersey, New York, and others, but there are 5 million people in my State who I believe are very concerned with what is happening with housing in Colorado. That is because 1 out of every 376 homes today in the State of Colorado is in foreclosure. If 1 out of 376 homes is in foreclosure today, I would venture that probably 90 percent of the homes in Colorado have seen a very significant decline in their value over the last 2 years. So, yes, the people of America are very nervous about what is happening with the economy, and it is our responsibility, therefore, to move forward with an economic stimulus package that will address that economic uncertainty. I am hopeful that with the leadership of Senator Baucus and Senator Grassley and my colleagues on the Finance Committee, we will be able to get to a markup of legislation that can reach the floor of the Senate tomorrow evening, perhaps the next day, that will be that jump-start to the economy we need. There is broad agreement on what that legislation will do. It will put money into the pockets of the consumers of America so it can help stimulate the economy. It will create initiatives for small businesses, which are so much of the economic engine of America, to go out and invest in equipment and growth so we can create jobs for people of this country. We will move forward with a package that will also include extending unemployment benefits and also include in that making sure 20 million seniors who were left out of the House stimulus package are also included. There will be other provisions that will come forward. So it is important we get beyond the legislation we are dealing with now with respect to FISA so we can work on those short-term economic issues. And having worked on those economic issues, which I hope we are able to do in a bipartisan fashion, then we will have the opportunity, hopefully, to work on the other legislation that addresses the longer term security needs of America. In that long-term economic set of issues I believe we have to address, we have to, first of all, get the farm bill which garnered, I believe, 82 votes in the Senate, across the finish line so we can guarantee the food security of America for generations to come. It is the best farm bill, in my view, that has come out of this Senate Chamber, out of Congress for a long time. I think my Republican and Democratic colleagues would agree with that characterization of the farm bill. We need to move beyond the farm bill to also address other long-term economic issues that face us. We must address the issue of the clean energy future for America. Yes, we can celebrate the fact that we came together in a bipartisan way to pass the Energy bill which the President signed in December, that we did a lot to move forward with efficiency and transportation and how we use electricity and other energy in our homes and buildings, a very significant step forward in embracing the new future with biofuels for America with the quintupling of the renewable fuel standards, and we took some steps to start dealing with the issue of global warming by putting carbon sequestration in that bill. But there is a lot more to be done on energy because what is missing in that bill, and still missing today, is a jet engine that will power us into the 21st century clean energy economy, because the legislation we passed out of the Finance Committee was one vote short to get to the 60 votes to stop the filibuster that was underway. We need to turn back to the energy legislation so we can build that long-term economic security for America. We also have to deal with the housing crisis. We will deal perhaps with it in some minor ways when we deal with the stimulus package, but there are other pieces of legislation which a number of committees have been working on to try to deal with the housing crisis. So we need to deal with both the short-term and the long-term economic challenges we face here in America, and yet we are wrapped around the axle in terms of moving forward on this FISA bill because the Republican minority has taken the view that we can simply stall, stall, stall until the time runs out. I think we ought to be working in good faith, consider the amendments that many of my colleagues have brought to this floor and which are being prevented from being considered so we can then get a FISA bill passed and we can move forward with the economic issues that we need to so urgently address. I will continue to speak more specifically about FISA and some of the very important work that both Chairman Rockefeller and Vice Chairman Bond have put together in this legislation, as well as the work of Chairman Leahy and Senator Specter on the Judiciary Committee, and I probably have another 10 minutes or so to go on the general legislation in support of the bill and moving forward with it, but because we are at this impasse, because we are wrapped around the axle, it seems to me a timeout is what would make sense for us then to be able to turn our attention, to pivot over to the economic issues which we have to address and which the President asked us to address last night. In that regard, Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of Calendar No. 564, S. 2556; the bill be read a third time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.