Jeanne Shaheen

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am here this afternoon to discuss the two concerns I have about the bill currently before the Senate--the regulation that would grant immediate approval of the Presidential permit necessary to construct and operate the Keystone XL Pipeline. First and foremost, I believe a thorough regulatory review process is critical for any major infrastructure project, particularly one that will cross our country's border. Regulatory review enables the identification of economic impacts from a major project and, more importantly, environmental impacts that infrastructure projects such as the Keystone Pipeline may bring. We shouldn't trade transparency for expediency when it comes to the construction of an international project that has such scope. I can't support a bill that sacrifices these important protections. That is why I voted in the past against legislation to allow the Keystone XL Pipeline to circumvent the normal review process, and that is why I intend to again vote against this bill. I also have a number of concerns about the impact of the Keystone Pipeline on our environment. In the past 2 weeks, we have had a spirited debate on this floor, and a number of my colleagues have come to the floor to talk about the pipeline oilspills we have seen in this country. Just a few days ago, an oil pipeline burst, leaking 50,000 gallons of crude oil into the Yellowstone River in Montana. Yet this spill pales in comparison to the 2010 Kalamazoo River oil spill where over 1 million gallons of oil sands poured into Talmadge Creek in Michigan. The cleanup has already cost more than $1 billion and taken over 4 years to complete. In fact, to date there has been no authoritative study on how the spills of oil sands crude may differ from those of conventional crude oil. This means we have no idea about the spill's long-term effects on the health of wildlife in that river. The other issue that has been raced onto the floor is the fact that right now, because of the way we define crude oil, TransCanada-- supporting and planning to build the Keystone Pipeline--is not required to pay into the federal oil spill liability trust fund, which would ensure taxpayers against any spills. So we have this out-of-state, out- of-country foreign company that is coming in to build this pipeline, and yet they are not required to pay, as any American company would be, into the oil spill liability trust fund. That, to me, doesn't make sense. Circumventing the regulatory process for Keystone prevents us from understanding the health hazards that we would face should another spill occur. I am also concerned that construction of the Keystone Pipeline will increase carbon emissions and undermine some of the most critical climate policies that we have in place. The pipeline poses threats to our environment that have already been identified. Tar sands greenhouse gas emissions are 81 percent greater than those of conventional oil. That is because the production of oil sands crude is more energy intensive, or more greenhouse gas intensive, than conventional crude production. Additional processes are required to extract the oil, remove the sand, and dilute the oil so that it can flow in a pipeline. In addition, if the pipeline is approved, much of the boreal wetlands in Alberta, Canada, which act as a carbon sink, would be destroyed, releasing 11 million to 47 million metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere. One of the reasons I am concerned about circumventing the regulatory process is because I believe this could set a precedent for a rushed approval of infrastructure projects currently under consideration in New Hampshire. In New Hampshire, we have two projects that really merit careful consideration and thorough review that could be affected by a precedent that says we should ignore the regulatory process. In New Hampshire, the Northern Pass transmission proposal, which proposes to deliver hydropower from Quebec into the New England energy markets and goes through northern New Hampshire, would bring power to southern New England, but New Hampshire wouldn't benefit. And any suggestion that we would circumvent the process is a real concern to people in New Hampshire who would be affected by that project. The other project is the potential reversal of the Portland-Montreal pipeline, which, if the determination were made to do this, would send oil sands through many New Hampshire communities, and that oil would then be shipped to foreign countries. So if we set the precedent of trading transparency for expediency with Keystone, without requiring the completion of a comprehensive approval process, local communities in New Hampshire may not have a meaningful voice in the process that deals with Northern Pass or reversing the Portland-Montreal pipeline. I think that is unacceptable. These three projects--Keystone, Northern Pass, and Portland- Montreal--have one important thing in common: They should undergo the comprehensive environmental and safety approval process required by existing law, and that should be done independent of politics. Circumventing the Presidential permitting process for cross-border pipelines and electric transmission facilities avoids the due process that is needed to determine whether these projects are in the best interests of the country. In New Hampshire, Northern Pass and the Portland-Montreal pipeline have raised serious concerns for people who live in areas impacted by these projects. That is why I worked with the entire New Hampshire congressional delegation in a bipartisan way to ensure that both projects undergo a transparent, thorough, and comprehensive review process. That allows the input of local communities who will be affected by these projects. Like people in New Hampshire and across the country, I share concerns about our Nation's energy future. Throughout my career I have fought for smart policies that will reduce energy costs in New Hampshire and across the country, that will help create jobs, and will protect our air and water from pollution. But I don't believe mandating a project that bypasses the approval process is a smart policy. We need to be smart and thoughtful about our energy future. I think it would set a dangerous precedent for other projects that could have serious consequences in New Hampshire and in other States around the country. I appreciate the debate we have had here on the Senate floor about the Keystone Pipeline, but I will be opposing this bill. I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Ariel Marshall and Kelley Sparrow, fellows in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the first session of the 114th Congress.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. I rise this morning to join our colleagues in discussing the need for a clean, full-year bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security. Just 30 days from today, funding for the Department of Homeland Security expires unless Congress acts. I know that sometimes in congressional time 30 days may seem like a long time, but with a scheduled recess in a few weeks and the certain fact that the House-passed bill cannot pass the Senate, we must act soon to prevent a shutdown and provide the resources to keep our country safe. Luckily, there is a path forward to prevent a shutdown. We should pass the bipartisan, bicameral, Homeland Security funding bill that was agreed to last December. Just a few weeks ago, Senator Mikulski, then Chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee, and Congressman Rogers, Chair of the House Appropriations Committee, negotiated spending bills for the entire government, including the Department of Homeland Security bill. This was a compromise measure. Not everyone got what they wanted, but the bill funded the Department at levels that would ensure the Department can fulfill its mission to secure the homeland. Then, unfortunately, politics came into play. Some House Republicans demanded the homeland bill be removed from the larger budget because of immigration issues, and now the entire Department is funded on a short- term basis through February 27. Now we face a fundamental question: Are we going to put the country at risk because of an ideological disagreement? Since Senator Mikulski and Congressman Rogers reached that agreement in December, we have seen many threats to our Nation and to our allies. The U.S. law enforcement community is on high alert for terror threats after attacks in Australia and Ottawa, Canada, and in Paris. Recently, an Ohio man was arrested when it was discovered he was plotting to blow up the U.S. Capitol in an ISIS-inspired plan. Now is not the time to be holding up funding for the Department of Homeland Security because of ideological reasons. Last week, I had the opportunity to visit the Department of Homeland Security's cyber security center in Arlington. The center is where officials are working every day to prevent attacks not just against the Federal Government or against State governments but against the private sector, against U.S. companies such as Sony, and against critical infrastructure such as nuclear powerplants and the electric grid. Last week, in the Armed Services Committee, former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft said that he views cyber security threats to be ``as dangerous as nuclear weapons.'' We must continue to make important investments in our cyber defenses. But if we fail to fully fund their budget--the clean budget that was agreed to by the House and Senate--their efforts to identify the newest technologies and strategies to protect our cyber infrastructure will be put on hold. One of the things they talked to me about when I visited the center includes two areas I think are particularly important to our national security. One is the effort to identify a secure emergency response line, which is very critical when we have national emergencies--even the snowstorm we are seeing in the northeast in New Hampshire, where we have several feet of snow that is being predicted. We also need a secure emergency response line so our first responders--the people there on the ground when an emergency happens--can communicate with each other. That is at risk if we pass a CR rather than a clean funding bill. The other thing at risk is the effort to identify the next generation of cyber threats. There are things being worked on that we don't even know yet, and unless we are ahead of that curve we are not going to be there to protect our cyber system throughout the country. So we need to give the Department of Homeland Security budgetary certainty so it can plan and prepare for these kinds of threats. That is why a short-term continuing resolution should be off the table. We need to pass a bill that funds homeland security for the rest of this fiscal year. A short-term budget means the Department is on autopilot. That would be extraordinarily bad for business and for our national security. If Homeland Security operates under a short-term budget, new projects and grants are halted, contracts and acquisitions are postponed, hiring is delayed, employee training is scaled back, and grants to our first responders--those people on the ground when something happens--are not going to be awarded, and congressionally targeted reductions--those reductions we want to make in wasteful programs--are also put on hold. Yesterday I had the opportunity to visit New Hampshire's fusion center. Every State has a fusion center. This is a network of centers designed to serve as a focal point in each State to coordinate terrorism-related information and threats to our national security, to our State security, and to our municipalities. It is a place where first responders, local law enforcement, and in New Hampshire's fusion center, in addition to our State and local folks being represented, someone from the FBI is there on hand, someone from the Department of Homeland Security identifies potential threats and relays that information up and down the chain of command. In New Hampshire, the fusion center has also been very critical in working to address drug interdiction and to help identify the heroin abuse epidemic that, sadly, we have seen not only in New Hampshire but in northern New England. If we have a short-term budget, new grants to our fusion centers, which are on the front lines of protecting our States and municipalities against security threats, and the security grants to State and local law enforcement will not be awarded. Why would we threaten this important public safety and security funding for unrelated ideological reasons? Secretary Jeh Johnson recently said: As long as this Department continues to operate on a continuing resolution, we are prevented from funding key homeland security initiatives. These include, for example, funding for new grants to State and local law enforcement, additional border security resources, and additional Secret Service resources to implement the changes recommended by the independent panel. Other core missions, such as aviation security and protection of Federal installations and personnel, are also hampered. That is a direct quote from the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Jeh Johnson. In addition to what he lays out there, I want to highlight a few specific examples of why a short-term budget--a continuing resolution-- is problematic for the Department and for our national security. Immigration and Customs Enforcement--ICE--could not fund all of its current detention, antitrafficking, and smuggling requirements under a short-term budget. Under a short-term budget, ICE will not have the funding they need to meet their legal mandate to have 34,000 detention beds in place for immigration detainees nor funding for a new family detention center. So for those people concerned about our border security, concerned about people coming into this country, why would we want to deny funding to address efforts to interdict people coming across the border, to interdict surveillance efforts, to build a new family detention center so we can find out who these people are and whether they should go back to the country they came from? It makes no sense. Under a short-term budget, there is no funding to hire additional investigators for antitrafficking and smuggling cases to combat the influx of unaccompanied children at the southern border. Under a short-term budget, no funding is provided to address Secret Service weaknesses identified after the recent White House fence- jumping incident. Yesterday we saw concerns about how the Secret Service operates. This time I think everybody acknowledged they could not have been expected to intervene in the drone that got dropped on the White House lawn, but it highlights again the threats that are there and why we need to ensure the Secret Service has the resources to reform itself and to make sure the President and officials are protected. A short-term budget would delay the contract for the Coast Guard's eighth national security cutter we need for maritime security. In New Hampshire, we have a border with the ocean, so we very much appreciate the work of the Coast Guard, but I think it is critical throughout the country. And one of the things that would be put on hold is upgrading the Coast Guard's ice-breaking fleet. Last winter alone, when the Great Lakes froze, $705 million in shipping was lost and 3,800 jobs because we didn't have a Coast Guard ice-breaker that can open a channel on the Great Lakes. Under a short-term budget, aging nuclear weapons equipment will not be replaced. That causes gaps in an area where mistakes are simply unacceptable and too dangerous even to comprehend. A short-term budget would delay upgrades to emergency communications for first responders--something I have already talked about--as we think about how they respond to local emergencies. The best way forward is to provide certainty and stability for the men and women who fulfill homeland security's mission to protect the United States from harm. To ensure our local communities and our States that we are providing the resources they need, we need to pass a clean bill--a clean bill that was agreed to last December. Lurching from funding crisis to funding crisis is a terrible way to govern. It is an especially terrible way to govern when our Nation is dealing with major threats. The clean bill that was agreed to by the House and Senate last December provides a good budget that strengthens our Nation, protects against known threats, properly supports homeland security and those who serve on the front lines of protecting this country. The negotiated agreement includes critical increases in funding and support for border security, for cyber security, and for other national security initiatives. It maintains strong maritime security operations provided by the Coast Guard. The agreement fully funds continued cyber security advancements. It invests in innovative solutions for border security, for biological defense, and for explosives detection. Senators on both sides of the aisle have talked about the importance of border security and a clean bill that robustly funds border security requirements. The clean bill funds customs and border protections requirements to apprehend, care for, and transmit unaccompanied alien children, while maintaining 21,370 Border Patrol agents on our borders and safely facilitating legitimate travel and trade. The agreement also funds enhanced border security technologies as well as air and marine surveillance along our land and maritime borders to help the Department better interdict illegal crossing of people and narcotics. It allocates grant funding to train and equip first responders, continuing real progress and efficient preparedness, as was so evident in New England in the response to the Boston marathon bombing. And the agreement fully funds known disaster needs and prepares us for the next disaster. In closing, let us support our national security funding by passing a clean bill to fund the Department of Homeland Security for the rest of this fiscal year. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I join my colleague Senator Portman from Ohio in a bipartisan amendment on energy efficiency. This is a very short version that passed overwhelmingly in the House last year. It doesn't pick favorites in terms of fuel sources, and it is good for every region of the country. This is something we all ought to be able to get behind. I am very pleased and hope we get a very strong vote in the Senate. I am pleased to support this amendment, and I thank my colleague from Ohio, Senator Portman, for his leadership.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. I thank the Presiding Officer and I thank my colleague Senator Isakson, and I am pleased to join him on the floor today as we reintroduce this bipartisan legislation, the Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act. I want to start by recognizing the good work of Senator Isakson because he started working on this issue when he came to the Senate in 2005, and he has introduced this legislation in every Congress since then. I have been pleased to be able to join him in the last two Congresses. I think we have an opportunity in this Congress to pass this commonsense bipartisan reform. As Senator Isakson pointed out, there is no question that the budget process in Washington is broken. Since 1980 there have been only two budgets that have been finished on time, according to the process. In that timeframe Congress has resorted to more than 150 short-term funding bills or continuing resolutions, and we all remember what it was like when the government shut down in October of 2013. It cost the economy $24 billion. It hurt small business. It hurt people across this country. That is no way to govern. While we have made significant progress to reduce deficits in recent years, we need a new way to do business in Washington. Biennial budgeting won't fix everything, but as Senator Isakson said, it is an important reform that will allow us to work across the aisle not only to make more sense of the budget process but to be better stewards of taxpayer dollars. We know that biennial budgeting works. I can attest to that personally, coming from the State of New Hampshire where we have a biennial budget. I served three terms as Governor. We were able in each of those bienniums to pass a budget that was balanced, that allowed us to get the budget done in the first year of the election cycle and in the second year to be able to have oversight. It works in New Hampshire, it works in 20 States around the country, and it can work in Washington. Biennial budgeting offers a better process that encourages us to work together to pass budgets on time and to use taxpayer dollars more efficiently. As Senator Isakson says, in the first year congressional agencies would put together a 2-year budget. In the second year Congress would have time to conduct oversight to give agencies the ability to focus on achieving their missions. As we all know, there are regular reports from the Government Accountability Office, GAO, that identify areas of waste, fraud, and duplicative programs within government. For example, they have identified ways to reform the farm programs, to cut down on inefficiencies in defense, to reduce fraud in health programs, but the current budget process doesn't provide an effective mechanism to regularly review GAO's recommendations. Under my annual budgeting, we would be able to take a close look at those recommendations to implement savings in the second year which will allow us to figure out how we can more effectively provide programs to the American people and eliminate those that don't work and support those that do. As we said, in 2013 we had a very strong vote with 68 Senators voting to endorse the concept of biannual budgeting. It was a very strong bipartisan vote. A similar biannual budget bill passed the House last year with a bipartisan bill vote. It is clear the momentum is growing for this concept because people understand we have to do something to reform our budget process. The bill we are introducing today has 22 bipartisan cosponsors. I know we are both working to get more bipartisan sponsors on the bill, and we think we have a great shot, with support from this body, to pass biannual budgeting. We think there is support in the House to do that, and I look forward to working with Senator Isakson and my colleagues in the Senate to get this done.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. I thank the Presiding Officer and I thank my colleague Senator Isakson, and I am pleased to join him on the floor today as we reintroduce this bipartisan legislation, the Biennial Budgeting and Appropriations Act. I want to start by recognizing the good work of Senator Isakson because he started working on this issue when he came to the Senate in 2005, and he has introduced this legislation in every Congress since then. I have been pleased to be able to join him in the last two Congresses. I think we have an opportunity in this Congress to pass this commonsense bipartisan reform. As Senator Isakson pointed out, there is no question that the budget process in Washington is broken. Since 1980 there have been only two budgets that have been finished on time, according to the process. In that timeframe Congress has resorted to more than 150 short-term funding bills or continuing resolutions, and we all remember what it was like when the government shut down in October of 2013. It cost the economy $24 billion. It hurt small business. It hurt people across this country. That is no way to govern. While we have made significant progress to reduce deficits in recent years, we need a new way to do business in Washington. Biennial budgeting won't fix everything, but as Senator Isakson said, it is an important reform that will allow us to work across the aisle not only to make more sense of the budget process but to be better stewards of taxpayer dollars. We know that biennial budgeting works. I can attest to that personally, coming from the State of New Hampshire where we have a biennial budget. I served three terms as Governor. We were able in each of those bienniums to pass a budget that was balanced, that allowed us to get the budget done in the first year of the election cycle and in the second year to be able to have oversight. It works in New Hampshire, it works in 20 States around the country, and it can work in Washington. Biennial budgeting offers a better process that encourages us to work together to pass budgets on time and to use taxpayer dollars more efficiently. As Senator Isakson says, in the first year congressional agencies would put together a 2-year budget. In the second year Congress would have time to conduct oversight to give agencies the ability to focus on achieving their missions. As we all know, there are regular reports from the Government Accountability Office, GAO, that identify areas of waste, fraud, and duplicative programs within government. For example, they have identified ways to reform the farm programs, to cut down on inefficiencies in defense, to reduce fraud in health programs, but the current budget process doesn't provide an effective mechanism to regularly review GAO's recommendations. Under my annual budgeting, we would be able to take a close look at those recommendations to implement savings in the second year which will allow us to figure out how we can more effectively provide programs to the American people and eliminate those that don't work and support those that do. As we said, in 2013 we had a very strong vote with 68 Senators voting to endorse the concept of biannual budgeting. It was a very strong bipartisan vote. A similar biannual budget bill passed the House last year with a bipartisan bill vote. It is clear the momentum is growing for this concept because people understand we have to do something to reform our budget process. The bill we are introducing today has 22 bipartisan cosponsors. I know we are both working to get more bipartisan sponsors on the bill, and we think we have a great shot, with support from this body, to pass biannual budgeting. We think there is support in the House to do that, and I look forward to working with Senator Isakson and my colleagues in the Senate to get this done.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, today I have the solemn duty of memorializing SGT Stephen R. Paquin, a soldier and native of Nashua, NH, who passed away on December 16 at the age of 27. After serving two tours in Afghanistan and a tour in Europe, Sergeant Paquin had recently transitioned from active duty into the U.S. Army Reserves and was training to become a drill sergeant with 1st Battalion, 304th Regiment in Londonderry. Born and raised in Nashua by his parents Kenneth and Paula alongside his brother Shawn, he was a graduate of the University of New Hampshire and Nashua High School South, where in his senior year Stephen was a member of the Purple Panthers 2005 State championship baseball team. Stephen will forever be a member of the special community of Americans who selflessly defend our country so that the rest of us may continue to live in peace and freedom. He bravely joined the military at a time when it was almost guaranteed that new recruits would be called on to serve in a dangerous warzone far from home. It is my hope that during this extremely difficult time, Stephen's family and friends will find comfort in knowing that Americans everywhere deeply appreciate his commitment to our Nation. Stephen is survived by his parents, Kenneth and Paula, his brother Shawn D. Paquin, and Christine Smith of Waltham, MA, his grandmothers Gloria Paquin of Nashua and Carol Mulligan of Dracut, MA, many aunts, uncles, cousins, and friends. This patriot will be missed by all. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in honoring the life and service of this brave American, SGT Stephen Paquin.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am here with Senator Portman of Ohio to try--I think for about the sixth time--to get energy efficiency legislation passed. Senator Portman and I have been working on legislation called the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act for 4 years now. We have tried to bring it to the floor, and it has been objected to not because of provisions in the bill but because of extraneous provisions that have people holding it up. Tonight we are again trying to pass a smaller version of that bill. It is H.R. 2126, the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act, which was passed out of the House with a strong bipartisan vote of 375 to just 36. It was sponsored in the House by Representative McKinley from West Virginia and Representative Welch from Vermont. Senator Portman and I introduced the same bill here in the Senate a couple of weeks ago. I am going to be asking for unanimous consent that the Senate consider passage of this legislation. Before I do that, it is my understanding it is going to be objected to again and that Senator Toomey is here to do that. But I wonder if I could get an answer to a question from Senator Toomey about what his specific objections are to the legislation. I understand the Tenant Star provision in the bill is what he is objecting to. Yet this would establish best practices, and it would set up a voluntary certification system for efficiency and commercial tenant spaces. What it does not do is provide financial incentives or create new regulations. It is a voluntary, market-based, business- friendly approach to encouraging energy efficiency--which is the cheapest, fastest way to deal with our energy needs in this country. It is something everybody agrees we should try and do. So I wonder if I can ask my colleague from Pennsylvania if he could describe his concerns about that provision in the bill.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I yield to my colleague from Ohio who I know is here to talk about the legislation or my colleague from New Hampshire who has been working on the Tenant Star provision with Senator Bennet from Colorado.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, in that case, I ask unanimous consent that the energy committee be discharged from further consideration of H.R. 2126, the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act, and the Senate proceed to its consideration; that the bill be read a third time and passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to my friend and colleague, Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, who will soon retire from the Senate after representing his beloved West Virginia for the last 30 years. Senator Rockefeller and I both came to Washington after having previously served as Governors of our home States, and I have been grateful for his friendship and counsel. I would also note that Senator Rockefeller has some familiarity with New Hampshire, having graduated from Phillips Exeter Academy. Senator Rockefeller will forever be remembered in the Senate for his dedication to the hard-working people of West Virginia. When West Virginia coal mining companies threatened to abandon their pension obligations to miners, Senator Rockefeller successfully fought to pass the Coal Act of 1992 to safeguard their retirements. Among his numerous other legislative accomplishments, Senator Rockefeller will certainly be remembered as the father of the Children's Health Insurance Program. Since its creation in 1997, CHIP has provided millions of low-income children and pregnant women access to health insurance. Just last year, CHIP touched the lives of more than 8 million Americans. During his lengthy career Senator Rockefeller chaired the Senate Committees on Veterans' Affairs, Intelligence, and most recently Commerce, Science, and Transportation. As a chairman, Senator Rockefeller believed strongly that good policy started with listening and ran his committees in a way that allowed all Senators, no matter their party, a voice and a role in the legislative process. The example set by Senator Rockefeller is an inspiration to all of us who serve in the Senate. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I thank him for his years of dedicated service to our country and wish him the best in his well-deserved retirement. Carl Levin Mr. President, I wish to honor Senator Carl Levin as he prepares to retire after 36 years of dedicated service in the Senate. As the longest serving Senator in Michigan's history, Senator Levin has been a stalwart advocate for the people of his State. In the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, Senator Levin played a critical role in drafting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to ensure it would bolster the Midwestern manufacturers that would prove integral to our national economic recovery. As cochair of the Great Lakes Task Force, Senator Levin has worked throughout his career to protect the vast waterways that are critical to Michigan's economy and those of the other Great Lakes States. I have had the honor of serving on the Senate Armed Services Committee under the leadership of Chairman Levin, and his concern for the people of Michigan is perhaps only matched by his concern for the soldiers, sailors, marines, and airman who defend our Nation, as well as the families who support them. Under his steady leadership the Senate has kept faith with our military by passing the annual National Defense Authorization Act, and this year's defense bill bears Senator Levin's name as tribute to his lengthy service on the Committee. As chair of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness and Management Support, I have always appreciated Senator Levin's commitment to a strong bipartisan spirit in the work of the committee, and I know it will endure thanks to his example. A sharp legal mind, Senator Levin also worked in a bipartisan fashion as chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations to hold powerful public and private institutions accountable. Born from the highly successful Truman Committee formed in the lead-up to World War II, Senator Levin's subcommittee investigated critical issues such as the 2008 financial crisis, systemic credit card fraud, as well as corporate abuse of off-shore tax havens--bringing light to complex and obscure issues to the benefit of the American people. Senator Levin has been a source of reasoned counsel for many in the Senate, and I know his presence will be missed. However, I also know he is looking forward to spending some well-earned time back in Michigan with his children, grandchildren, and wife Barbara. Tom Harkin Mr. President, I wish to recognize Senator Tom Harkin and his 30 years of Senate service. When Senator Harkin retires at the end of this year, he will also step down from his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions, a post from which he has advocated progressive policies aimed at increasing opportunity for all Americans. One of Senator Harkin's greatest legislative achievements is the Americans with Disabilities Act, legislation that he fought for on behalf of millions of disabled Americans. The ADA is truly a landmark law in this country, and Senator Harkin's decades of work on this issue will never be forgotten. Senator Harkin also has a strong legacy as a champion for human rights, which began even before his election to public office while he was still a staffer on Capitol Hill. Invited to travel with a congressional delegation to Vietnam in the summer of 1970, Senator Harkin arranged for the group to visit the Con Son prison in order to investigate allegations of human rights abuses by the South Vietnamese Government. At the prison, the delegation strayed from the official tour and found abused prisoners held in so-called ``tiger cages,'' which Senator Harkin documented extensively with a camera. In defiance of some of the delegation members, Senator Harkin courageously handed over the pictures to Life magazine in order to better educate the American public about U.S involvement in Vietnam. I have been fortunate to witness firsthand Senator Harkin's passion for U.S. leadership in human rights during our service together on the Senate Appropriations Committee, where he has brought heightened attention to the scourge of child labor and exploitation. I know this is one particular issue on which Senator Harkin feels his work has just begun, and I look forward to hearing of his continued efforts on behalf of vulnerable children around the world. On a more personal note, I will miss competing with Senator Harkin's office for the most staff participants in the Everybody Wins! DC reading mentorship program, a great cause in which Senator Harkin has been involved in for the last 16 years. I join my colleagues in thanking Senator Harkin for his dedicated service in the Senate and wish him all the best in retirement. Kay Hagan Mr. President, Senator Hagan and I came to the Senate 6 years ago with a shared commitment to bipartisan problem solving reflective of the independent spirit of the States we represent. I am glad to say that in Senator Hagan I found not only a strong partner in policymaking but also a good friend. Born in Shelby, NC, Senator Hagan got her start in politics, as many of us do, at the State level. During 10 years in the North Carolina Senate, she built a reputation as a committed public servant, and that reputation would eventually propel her to the United States Senate. In Washington, Senator Hagan has used her position on the Senate Armed Services Committee to support the military families stationed at Fort Bragg, Camp Lejune, and other military installations in North Carolina. Thanks to her efforts, Congress passed legislation in 2012 to provide health care and compensation to military families impacted by water contamination at Camp Lejune. Also a member of the small business committee, Senator Hagan's private sector experience has been a tremendous asset to the legislative work of the committee. I would like to wish the very best to Senator Hagan, who I know is looking forward to the opportunity to spend more time with her family, especially her grandchildren. Mark Udall Mr. President, I wish to take a moment to thank my friend and colleague Senator Mark Udall for his dedicated service to the people of Colorado and our Nation. As many of my colleagues are aware, long before Senator Udall was climbing the steps to Capitol Hill he was hiking the mountains of Colorado as a course director and educator with Outward Bound, an organization he would eventually lead as executive director. However, as a member of the Udall family, headed by his father Congressman Morris ``Mo'' Udall, who served in the House of Representatives for 30 years, elected office was never far from Senator Udall's mind. After 20 years with Outward Bound, Senator Udall left to pursue a career in public service. After serving a term in the Colorado State Legislature, Senator Udall ran successfully to represent Colorado's Second Congressional District in the House of Representatives, a seat he held for five consecutive terms. When we arrived at the Senate in 2008, Senator Udall and I found common cause in our work on both the Senate Armed Services Committee and the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Senator Udall's commitment to working across the aisle to confront the difficult issues facing our Nation was appreciated by many in the Senate, and I know his presence will be missed. I wish the very best to Senator Udall and thank him for his service. Mary Landrieu Mr. President, my friend from Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu has devoted her entire life to public service, and today I wish to recognize the extraordinary leadership and energy that she has brought to the Senate throughout her career. Senator Landrieu has been a leader on so many issues, none more so than as a passionate advocate for children around the world. I was proud to work with her on legislation to address the decline in international adoptions, in addition to several other bills that Senator Landrieu has authored to support children both in the United States and in developing nations. This issue is particularly near to Senator Landrieu's heart, and I know I am speaking for countless children around the world when I thank her for her efforts to ensure all children experience the benefits of a safe and loving family. I also had the pleasure of working with Senator Landrieu during her leadership of the Senate Small Business Committee, as well as on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Senator Landrieu has always fought hard for her home State of Louisiana, and her dedication to her constituents was made clear in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. All Americans vividly recall the scenes of destruction caused by the storm--more than 1,800 killed and $100 billion in property destroyed in just days. Those who were fortunate to escape the storm physically unscathed were more than likely left homeless, and over 80% of Senator Landrieu's hometown of New Orleans was under water for weeks after Katrina made landfall. After the storm Senator Landrieu immediately set to work building support for legislation to jump start the gulf coast recovery and help her constituents put their lives back together. Senator Landrieu nearly singlehandedly pushed through critical funding and reforms to help Louisiana rebuild. It has been an honor working with her, and I thank her for her years of service to the Senate and the Nation. Mark Begich Mr. President, today I wish to recognize my fellow Senator from the class of 2008, Senator Mark Begich of Alaska. Senator Begich's career in public service began earlier than most at the young age of 19, when he was hired by the Anchorage city health department. By that time, Senator Begich was also well on his way to establishing himself as an enterprising businessman and entrepreneur. Born and raised in Anchorage, AK, Mark Begich would go on to serve in the Anchorage Assembly where he was the youngest member ever elected, before successfully running for the post of mayor in 2003, a role in which he served until his election to the Senate. Here in Washington Senator Begich has used his position as chair of the commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast Guard, as well as his extensive knowledge of the Alaska economy, to advocate for Alaska-first policies. As a Senator from a State with one of the highest populations of veterans per capita, Senator Begich has also been a passionate defender of our Nation's military. I also have had the pleasure of serving with Senator Begich on the Senate Appropriations Committee and have greatly appreciated his contributions. I would like to thank Senator Begich for his years of dedicated service both to Alaska and the Nation. Mark Pryor Mr. President, Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas has served the people of Arkansas in the Senate for the last 12 years, guided by his strong faith and determination to bridge the partisan divide. As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Pryor has successfully directed Federal assistance to his Arkansas constituents, helping to strengthen his State's economy. As a member of the commerce committee, he prioritized bringing broadband Internet service to the rural parts of Arkansas. When Senator Pryor served on the Senate Armed Services Committee, he successfully introduced and passed legislation to provide tax relief for our servicemembers deployed in combat zones, as well as legislation to more quickly inform military families when their loved ones are injured in combat. Senator Pryor has time and again proved his dedication to the State where he was born and raised, and I wish to thank him for his service in the Senate. Mike Johanns Mr. President, over three decades as a public servant, my friend and colleague Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska has proven time and time again that politicians can be deeply principled while still recognizing the need to find common ground on the complex and difficult choices we must make as a nation. I believe this is a lesson that all former Governors carry with them after holding executive office, and Senator Johanns and I were often able to reach an understanding on that basis. Before coming to the Senate in 2009, Mike Johanns had already built a distinguished record of public service as a county board member, city council member, mayor and two term Governor of Nebraska. Senator Johanns also served for 3 years in the White House Cabinet as Secretary of Agriculture to President George W. Bush. While leading the Department of Agriculture, Senator Johanns helped U.S. agriculture producers find new markets overseas, promoted expanded use of renewable fuels, and encouraged conservation of agricultural lands. Having played a key role in developing the farm bill passed by Congress in 2008, then-Secretary Johanns decided to return to legislating full time and successfully ran to represent Nebraska in the Senate. Senator Johanns' time in Congress is best characterized by his low- key approach to the most high-profile and consequential issues of the day. He was one of the bipartisan Gang of 8 Senators who tackled the challenge of crafting a comprehensive Federal deficit reduction plan in 2011, and in 2013 we worked together on a bipartisan deal to reopen the Federal Government and avoid a default on our national debt. I was also very proud to work with Senator Johanns on legislation to address the unacceptable trends in military sexual assault. Senator Johanns always brought the work ethic he developed growing up on a Nebraska farm to our business in the Senate, and for that and many other reasons I very much enjoyed working with him. Senator Johanns has given many years to public service, earning him the right to seek a bit of a break from the spotlight, and I wish him all the best in his retirement. Carl Levin

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of my colleague and my partner in this energy efficiency effort, Senator Portman, to support his unanimous consent request that the Senate pass H.R. 2126, the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act. I am disappointed to hear Senator Coburn's continued objection to this legislation and to energy efficiency measures. This bill is identical to a more narrowly focused energy efficiency bill Senator Portman and I introduced recently in the Senate. It tracks closely to legislation we have been working on actually for 4 years, the Energy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act, also known as Shaheen- Portman. The legislation before us, H.R. 2126, is really a shortened version of Shaheen-Portman. Unfortunately, as we know, the longer version, the energy efficiency act, has stalled twice on the Senate floor--not due to concerns about what was in the bill but because of disagreements over other issues that were related to energy but unrelated to our bill. While we may not be able to pass the larger bill this session, the Senate still has an opportunity to pass meaningful energy efficiency legislation by passing H.R. 2126. This is bipartisan legislation that was introduced in the House by Representatives McKinley, a Republican from West Virginia, and Welch, a Democrat from Vermont, and passed the House earlier this year with overwhelming support from both sides of the aisle, 375 to 36. That broad bipartisan support extends beyond Capitol Hill. It enjoys the support of business groups and environmental organizations and efficiency advocates who all recognize that energy efficiency is the cheapest, fastest way to begin addressing the Nation's energy needs. Supporters include everyone from the Natural Resources Defense Council, to the U.S. Green Building Council, to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the Real Estate Roundtable. The list of businesses and organizations that have endorsed this bill numbers over 200. This bill contains several provisions that will encourage efficient energy consumption, and as a result of this legislation, consumers and families will save money. The legislation will grow our economy, create jobs, and it will reduce pollution. It really is a win-win. Even though it is not the longer version of energy efficiency legislation Senator Portman and I have been working on for the last 4 years, it will do a number of things that are critical to address our energy needs. First, it will create a voluntary, market-based tenant star program. This is modeled after the successful ENERGY STAR labeling program from building owners. It sets up a voluntary certification system for efficiency and commercial tenant spaces. I see my colleague from New Hampshire Senator Ayotte, who I think is going to speak to this provision in the bill. I think it is important to remind people that what it does not do is provide financial incentives or create new regulations. It does not do that. It is a voluntary, market-based, business-friendly approach to encourage energy efficiency in commercial buildings. It also will establish a benchmarking and disclosure process for energy consumed in federally leased buildings, so we will all know how much energy is being consumed. Third, it will require Federal agencies to implement strategies to increase the efficiency of data centers that are operated by the Federal Government--a huge user of energy. Finally, it will remove a regulatory barrier to the manufacturer of large-scale water heaters. It is something Senator Hoeven has been working on for a long time. These four commonsense, targeted provisions are widely supported. As I said, they will grow our economy and help create jobs and demand for the American-made energy efficiency technologies. They will save businesses and families money on their energy bills, and they will cut pollution. I am pleased to join Senator Portman in this unanimous consent request, and I am disappointed that once again we are going to be prevented from moving forward with commonsense energy efficiency measures. I do hope that with the continued support on both sides of the aisle for energy efficiency, we will be able to come back before the end of this year and pass this measure. Thank you very much. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I wish to memorialize a New Hampshire son and proud member of the United States Army, SFC Richard Louis Demers. Sergeant Demers was born in Manchester on December 31, 1966 and spent his young life there, graduating from Manchester Memorial High School in 1985. His lengthy career in the Army spanned 22 years, including a tour of duty in Iraq, as well as tours in Germany, Colorado, Texas, Hawaii and most recently Missouri. Sergeant Demers' choice to dedicate his career to protecting our freedom and security is the essence of American patriotism. It is my hope that during this extremely difficult time, Richard's family and friends will find comfort in knowing that Americans everywhere appreciate deeply his selfless service in defense of our country. Sergeant Demers is survived by his wife of 28 years, Karen, Gagne, Demers, of Laquey, MO; their two sons, Jonathan Demers and his wife Megan, of Georgia, and Shawn Demers and his wife Nadine, of Washington; five grandchildren; two siblings, Michelle Champagne and her husband Roland, of Allenstown, NH, and David Demers and his wife, Marcia, of Florida; and many nieces and nephews. This patriot will be missed by all. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in honoring the life and service of this brave American, Richard Demers.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, it is with great sadness I rise today to honor the life and service of SFC Mark Gerald Gulezian, a New Hampshire native who died on October 10. Mark was born on December 28, 1978 in Manchester, NH and was raised in nearby Londonderry, where he was a graduate of Londonderry High School. He joined the U.S. Army in 1998, and over the course of his career served two tours in Iraq and Afghanistan, in addition to a tour in Korea. Sergeant Gulezian was most recently stationed at Fort Bragg in North Carolina with the Army's distinguished 3rd Special Forces Group, Airborne. Mark will forever be a member of the special community of Americans who bravely and selflessly vow to defend our country so that the rest of us may continue to live in peace and freedom. It is my hope that during this extremely difficult time, Mark's family and friends will find comfort in knowing that Americans everywhere deeply appreciate his commitment and service to our nation. Mark is survived by his parents Jerry and Dotty of Londonderry, NH; his wife, Blair Anastasia Gulezian, of Raeford, NC; children Amira Gulezin and Dylan Gulezian, both of Richmond, VA; a stepson, Christopher, of Pennsylvania; his brother, Steven Gulezian of Londonderry and his girlfriend, Sara Hickey; and niece, Ambree Page ``S.J.'' Gulezian; also his two dogs, Whiskey and Lucic. This patriot will be missed by all. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I ask my colleagues and all Americans to join me in honoring the life and service of this brave American, Mark Gulezian.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I begin by echoing the wonderful analysis of my colleague Senator Heitkamp relative to how much we are all going to miss Senator Jay Rockefeller. As she pointed out, he reminded us today why we all are here, and that is to try to make a difference for our constituents and for the people we serve. No one did that better than Jay Rockefeller. He was always a voice for those most in need and never stopped fighting for the people he served. We will certainly miss him. I come to the floor this afternoon to talk about a provision that I think we need to make sure is included as we continue to negotiate and debate the tax extenders package, a commonsense, bipartisan, bicameral provision that enjoys a lot of support and one that I think should be included in any reform or extension effort; that is, the enhanced tax incentive for conservation easement donations. Conservation easements are a critical component of modern-day efforts to preserve our outdoor treasures. That is something which means a lot to us in New Hampshire, where we have so many wonderful natural resources and historic resources, and we want to try to preserve them. One of the things that conservation easements do is provide a flexible, voluntary, nongovernmental, and nonregulatory approach to protecting our Nation's natural places. Conservation easements and tax incentives for their donations allow landowners to exchange development rights in order to protect a property's conservation values. That then allows them to pass on those conservation values to future generations. Easements keep the land in its natural state and ensure that these outdoor treasures aren't subdivided and exploited. Just as important, lands placed in conservation easements can continue to be farmed, grazed, hunted, or used for outdoor recreation and wildlife conservation. Equally important, they remain on the tax rolls, which makes a huge difference to local communities. In 2006 Congress recognized the importance of promoting conservation easements by enacting the enhanced tax incentive for conservation easement donations. That was done with bipartisan, bicameral support because it is an idea that makes sense. This tax incentive provided working and middle-class landowners with the ability to donate their land for conservation as opposed to simply selling off the land to the highest bidder, allowing it to be developed and partitioned off. The great thing about this incentive is that it worked. It is directly responsible for the conservation of more than 2 million acres of our Nation's natural outdoor heritage. Unfortunately, as with so many provisions in the tax extenders bill, this tax incentive lapsed at the end of 2013. As a result, landowners who want to donate their land for conservation but need this enhanced deduction to make it work financially are left in limbo. Making this incentive permanent will provide much needed certainty to landowners because the decision of whether to donate conservation easements on land--and land is often a family's most valuable asset-- requires careful planning and consideration, and it often takes years from the initial conversations with the landowner before conservation easement is executed. Understandably, many landowners will never begin this process without the assurance of a permanent incentive. In New Hampshire we have seen firsthand how valuable the enhanced conservation easement tax credit is when it comes to making sure we are protecting our special outdoor places for generations to come. For example, take Henry Brooks, Jr., and his sister Linda Brown. They donated two conservation easements on about 200 acres of land in Sullivan, NH, which is down in the western part of our State in what we call the Monadnock Region, not too far from the Vermont border. The land had been in their family since the time of the town's founding-- over 200 years. It is open fields with expansive views all the way to Vermont. The fields are pasture and hay lands that are used for Henry's beef cattle. The forests, streams, and wetlands also provide excellent wildlife habitat. The enhanced conservation easement tax incentive was very persuasive in the decision to move forward and finish the project by the end of 2013. In particular, the ability to take that deduction over the course of 16 years is going to make a significant difference for Henry, who is really of modest means. As his sister Linda said, the enhanced incentive is a win-win situation. Another example that I think is significant is the Squam Lakes watershed. The Squam watershed is renowned for its conservation ethos, and it is the only watershed that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. Organizations, such as the Squam Lake Conservation Society, have used conservation easements to protect 25 percent of the watershed, and, thanks to tax deductions, 91 percent of these easements were donated. Think about that--25 percent of the watershed and 91 percent of it has been donated. Projects like these in New Hampshire are great examples of the need to renew the enhanced conservation easement deduction. Protecting these spaces isn't just good for the environment. Certainly that is the case, but it is also critical to New Hampshire's economy, and I know that is true in other States as well. Our economy depends on tourism, on outdoor recreation. We have thousands of jobs that are created in those industries that bring millions of dollars into our State, and if we can preserve our landscape and protect our national resources, it makes a huge difference in ensuring that those industries are successful, that tourists want to continue to come and visit. Right now we have families who are making decisions about what they are going to do about conservation easements, and they are in limbo because Congress has not yet acted on this issue. We haven't determined if we are going to pass that forward. So people don't know whether they are going to have any certainty about taking a tax deduction on a conservation easement. It is time for us to provide some certainty to encourage people to make those contributions to protect these national treasures. It is important not only in New Hampshire, I am sure it is important in North Dakota and across this country. I urge my colleagues, as we are continuing to look at a tax extenders bill, that we support this legislation that will make smart incentives to help our local economies grow stronger and help the middle class. Thank you very much. I hope we can make some progress on this next week. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the achievements of Donna Kuethe Recreation Director for the town of Moultonborough, NH, who was recently named New England Woman of the Year by Every Child is Ours, ECIO, an organization dedicated to promoting universal educational opportunity. For 40 years Donna has been a tireless advocate for children's education, environmental stewardship and community recreation. On the national and international stages, Donna has volunteered in New Orleans and South Africa delivering emergency supplies to areas hard-hit by natural disasters. She has worked with Operation Recreation Relief, a group designed to help provide recreation services to areas impacted by disasters, in addition to focusing on assisting children in those areas through her work with the Save the Children foundation. Back home in New Hampshire, Donna has been active throughout the State through her work with the Children in Nature initiative, the New Hampshire State Parks Great Park Pursuit and other programs focused on encouraging active and healthy lifestyles. She has also advocated for outdoor initiatives through her service on the House/Senate Committee on Child Care Licensing and as Chair of the Legislative Committee for New Hampshire Parks and Recreation. Donna has also been a key leader at the Moultonborough Parks and Recreation Department, in addition to coaching New Hampshire high school students and establishing after-school programs, youth sports and summer day camps, and programs for seniors. Donna's lifelong devotion to her community and the many organizations she has served is truly admirable, and her recognition as ECIO's New England Woman of the Year is well deserved. On behalf of Granite Staters everywhere, I thank Donna Kuethe for her service.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. I thank Senator Stabenow and Senator Baldwin. I am pleased to be on the floor today joining the distinguished Senator from Michigan, Ms. Warren, Senator Franken, and all the other Senators who will be here to speak on the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act. This is a critical piece of legislation, and it will allow eligible borrowers who took out student loans prior to January 1, 2013, to refinance those loans at a lower interest rate. You can refinance a car and you can refinance a mortgage, but you cannot refinance a student loan. We have heard from literally hundreds of students and residents in New Hampshire who are no longer students but who are trying to pay back loans after years of having to try to pay back the loans and start their lives. Supporting this bill is a commonsense way we can come together to help the millions across this country who are struggling to pay back their student loans. This is especially important to New Hampshire because we rank second in the country in average debt per graduate--almost $33,000 per graduate for student loans. According to recent estimates, almost 130,000 New Hampshire residents could benefit from this bill. These folks need some relief from their student debt burden because it often comes at interest rates that are higher than they pay for a home or a car. It is unacceptable to leave these borrowers struggling with crippling debt when we have an opportunity to address this growing problem. It is not just for those people who are affected because of their own student loans; this has a ripple effect through our economy. I met with a group of realtors over the summer, and one of the things they talked about was how they are seeing first-time home buyers delay buying a home because of the cost of student loans. To put this issue into perspective, I wish to talk about some of the people I have met who have been burdened by their student loans. I first met Calvin, a young soldier from New Hampshire, at Walter Reed Medical Center. He was recovering from losing his leg after stepping on an IED in Afghanistan. He was married and had a young child. We were talking about the challenges he was facing after he recovered from his injuries. What impressed me the most about our conversation--in addition to his commitment to this country--was that the issue he was most concerned about was not losing his leg or where he was going to get a job after he got out of the military, it was how he and his wife were going to pay back their student loans. Another college graduate--a woman from Durham, NH--wrote to me recently. She has a master's degree and is employed in the public service field. She has been working for 12 years but has not been able to buy a home for her family because she still has $90,000 in student loan debt. I also heard from a woman in Stratham, NH, who has a $150,000 student loan debt. She consolidated her loan but has a 7-percent interest rate, which accrues nearly $900 per month in interest alone. A lower interest rate would make a critical difference to this woman and her young family. Those three young people represent thousands--almost 130,000 people across New Hampshire--who would benefit from refinancing their student loans. This bill is important for New Hampshire, and it is important for the country. We should take action today for the benefit of all Americans with student loan debt who deserve a fair shot at the American dream and opportunities for themselves and their families. I urge my colleagues to join me. As Senator Baldwin and Senator Stabenow said, we have an opportunity this afternoon to make a huge step forward in addressing the student loan debt faced by too many Americans. I hope our colleagues will support the Bank on Students Emergency Loan Refinancing Act. I thank the Presiding Officer and yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I would like to honor James Foley, a proud son of New Hampshire, whose life was guided by love--love for the humanity he devoted his life to documenting, love for his family members who worked tirelessly to secure his release, and love for God who brought him strength and comfort, even in the darkest moments. The entire Nation was saddened to hear the news about Jim. It was with a heavy heart that I joined the Foley family and a crowd of nearly 1,000 on August 24 at Our Lady of the Holy Rosary parish in Rochester, NH, to memorialize Jim and reflect upon how he chose to live his life. As we here pause to remember Jim, we cannot allow those responsible for his death to fill us with sorrow and despair. Though the sense of loss remains, through Jim's life we may hope to rediscover a sense of optimism and goodness--the same feelings that motivated him as a journalist to search for humanity in the world's darkest and most dangerous places. When I think of Jim, I will remember his fierce passion for his work and for the people whose stories he lived to tell. I will remember the interminable spirit of his parents, Diane and John. And I will remember how New Hampshire, and Americans across the country, came together to support the Foleys. Jim Foley's life began in Wolfeboro, a small New Hampshire town on the shores of Lake Winnipesauke. He graduated in 1992 from Kingswood Regional High School, where classmates remember him as light-hearted, but also caring and eager to see the world. As the oldest of Diane and John Foley's five children, James developed a strong sense of responsibility for others. Jim was known in his family for running late because wherever he went he ran into friends and colleagues who wanted to stop and catch up with him. Jim's uncommon kindness earned him the trust and friendship of people across the United States and the world. Jim's compassion for others and his desire to learn their stories is what motivated his life's work. According to his parents, Jim's exposure to the poverty of inner-city Milwaukee while attending Marquette University led him to realize that people are often shaped by events and circumstances out of their control, and that it was within his power to tell their stories. He carried this mission with him throughout his life and used it as a basis for his work in conflict zones. After graduating from Marquette, Jim started down the path that would turn him into the successful journalist he became. He first taught history for 3 years at middle school in Phoenix, AZ, a world away from his upbringing in the Lakes Region of New Hampshire. Eager to learn how best to turn his experiences into compelling stories, he went on to complete master's degrees in writing and journalism at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst and Northwestern University. Classmates of Jim's at Northwestern recall that when one of his professors assigned him to cover a neighborhood in the Lower West Side of Chicago, Jim decided to move there, a telling decision for a future frontline journalist. Jim later gained experience in conflict reporting while covering U.S. military operations as an embedded reporter in Iraq and Afghanistan, but he worried that being removed from the local population detracted from his reporting to people back home. When a wave of popular revolutions swept the Middle East and North Africa in the spring of 2011, Jim knew that he needed to bear witness to this incredible phenomenon from the perspective of those living through it. Jim left for Libya, where he provided critical stories on the Libyan civil war until he was captured and imprisoned for 44 days by pro- Gadhafi forces. Others who were detained with Jim tell stories of his unending selflessness toward his fellow prisoners--how he shared food, blankets and an endless stream of jokes to help everyone cope with a difficult and scary situation. Furthermore, when Jim returned to the U.S. after his release, he was frequently asked to tell the story of his capture and detention. Instead of focusing on his own experience, Jim used the publicity to raise money for the family of a colleague who had been killed in the attack that led to Jim's capture. It was Jim's nature to care more about others than he did about his own personal successes or accolades. In his reporting from Libya, Jim discovered that his passion was in helping the world relate to those in the middle of unimaginable conflict, and he would soon return to the region, this time to Syria, where Bashar al-Assad was escalating his brutal tactics of repression to maintain control of the country. It was in the Syrian chaos that observers began to talk about rise of a group of militant Islamists calling themselves the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, the same group that would later hold Jim hostage for 637 days alongside a handful of other innocent journalists and aid workers. Thanks to a message Jim passed to his family through a fellow prisoner who was released, we know that his close relationship with God and his family provided him with strength in captivity. In the letter, he thanked his family and friends for their thoughts and prayers, and recounted treasured memories from time spent together. Most strikingly, he spent most of his words offering encouragement and support to those he loved. Even in the most trying circumstances, Jim Foley refused to abandon his core concern for others over himself. We will always remember Jim for his compassion and devotion to the lives and stories of others, even in the most difficult conditions. We are all proud to call James Foley our fellow American.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, these last few weeks have been very trying for America. In August, as the result of the cowardly and barbaric acts of the terrorist group ISIS, America lost two courageous and inspiring journalists, James Foley and Steven Sotloff. Along with my colleagues Senators Ayotte, Nelson, and Rubio, and Chairman Menendez, I am submitting a resolution to honor the lives of James Foley, who was born and raised in New Hampshire, and Steven Sotloff, a Florida native but a graduate of Kimball Union Academy in Meriden, NH. Our resolution mourns James and Steven, two outstanding journalists who pursued their profession under the most difficult and dangerous conditions in order to tell the stories that needed to be told of the struggles that people on the ground were facing in the middle of difficult conflicts. We will never forget the bravery of James and Steven and their dedication to the ideals of freedom they so embodied. Our resolution strongly condemns the terrorist group ISIS, a group that has committed unspeakable atrocities against humanity and attempted to justify them through a perverted interpretation of Islam. ISIS fighters have targeted Iraqi Christians, killing many and forcing others to flee their ancient homeland, they have massacred Muslims who do not subscribe to their depraved ideology, they have threatened genocide against the ancient Yazidi population of Iraq, and they have targeted other religious and ethnic minority groups. They have threatened to conduct terrorist attacks internationally, including here in the United States. And of course ISIS brutally murdered these two American journalists, Jim Foley and Steven Sotloff. Let us be clear. We must hold ISIS accountable for their despicable acts. We must vigorously pursue those responsible and bring them to justice, and we must not let the deaths of these two Americans go unanswered. The terrorists who murdered Jim Foley are deeply mistaken if they think their barbaric acts will lessen Americans' resolve and pave the way for ISIS to continue terrorizing. We will bring an end to those who stand against everything these men stood for. I hope the entire Senate--Republicans, Democrats, and Independents-- will stand together to adopt this resolution. Let us show the world our Nation is united in its commemoration of the lives of James Foley and Steven Sotloff, and in our condemnation of the barbaric group that took these Americans from us. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I wish to honor Chief Richard E. Wright for his lifelong commitment to the New Hampshire fire service. Chief Wright retired in June after committing 70 years of his life to the safety of Granite State residents. Through seven decades, he served as a soldier, a firefighter, the fire chief for the town of Loudon, and as the chief coordinator for the Capital Area Mutual Aid Compact. Chief Wright's service to the fire department began when he was only 11 years old. His paper route included the Central Fire Station and the fire chief's home. Soon, he became a fixture at the station, and his helpfulness earned him the unofficial title of ``Errand Boy Number One.'' Upon graduating from Concord High School in 1950, he worked for the Rumford Press. Then he served his country, enlisting in the U.S. Army in 1953. After a 2-year tour of duty in Germany, he returned to New Hampshire as a sergeant. Although Chief Wright had left the Army, his life of service had only just begun. He joined the Concord Fire Department call force in 1957 and then became a full-time firefighter in 1963. Soon Chief Wright was using his skills to manage the Concord department's budget and handle administrative tasks. Through his instinct for business and management, Chief Wright helped to create the Capital Area Mutual Aid Fire Compact in 1965. To this day, the Mutual Aid Compact enables Concord and surrounding localities to share resources to fund their fire departments efficiently, saving taxpayer dollars. In 1970 he left full-time fire service to run his family business, Wright Communications, although he continued to serve as a volunteer firefighter in Concord for several years. Then in 1973 he was appointed chief coordinator of the Mutual Aid Compact and became full-time coordinator in 1989. In addition to this position, he worked with the Loudon Fire Department, serving as their fire chief for 12 years. Chief Wright retired from his role as Mutual Aid Compact coordinator on June 14, 2014. Throughout his career, he has responded to fires and calls from across central New Hampshire 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. He has coordinated resources in order to address major emergencies and keep Granite State residents safe. Chief Wright's service to New Hampshire is truly remarkable. I congratulate him on his retirement and thank him for his lifetime of dedication to our great State.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, today I wish to recognize the New Hampshire Day to End Childhood Homelessness. On September 4, 2014, Families in Transition, a Manchester-based nonprofit organization that has long committed itself to ending the cycle of homelessness, will be hosting this important event. Founded in 1991, Families in Transition was born from the belief that having a home is a basic human right. The organization has since been recognized, both statewide and nationally, for its effectiveness in ending homelessness through quality, affordable housing and comprehensive services. Families in Transition focuses on addressing homelessness by facilitating familial cohesion through specialized childcare, family therapy, and positive social activities. Family and youth services at Families in Transition are a vital part of efforts to help homeless children in New Hampshire. The New Hampshire Day to End Childhood Homelessness event will bring critical awareness and support to these children and the work of Families in Transition. On behalf of New Hampshire I thank Families in Transition, its staff, volunteers, and supporters for their determination to serve Granite Staters in need.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to yield back all time.