Jeanne Shaheen

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I would like to congratulate and honor Mr. Kevin McEneaney of Dover, NH, for his faithful service to the New Hampshire Board of Land Surveyors. Mr. McEneaney served on the board from August 18, 1999, until July 11, 2009, and he led the board as chairman during the final 2 years of his term. The New Hampshire Board of Land Surveyors' mission is to set the standards for licensing and regulating land surveyors. The board sets the technical and ethical standards for the profession and is committed to upholding the highest level of public safety. For a decade, Mr. McEneaney demonstrated the utmost integrity and professionalism in his work on the board. His colleagues have recognized his diligence and his generosity of spirit. His contributions to the Board of Land Surveyors and to the people of New Hampshire are admirable. I commend Mr. McEneaney for his exemplary service to our State. On a personal note, I have known Mr. McEneaney since he was a student in my class at Dover High School almost 40 years ago. I have seen firsthand his integrity, his work ethic, and his commitment to his community. I know he will succeed in whatever he does, and I wish him well in his future endeavors.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am delighted to be here this afternoon to join my friend and colleague from the State of Minnesota, Senator Klobuchar, in supporting the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be a Justice of the Supreme Court. Everyone in New Hampshire was very proud 19 years ago when former President George Bush nominated New Hampshire's own David Souter as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Every action Justice Souter has taken since he began service to our Nation's highest Court has only reinforced that pride. So when Justice Souter announced in early May that he intended to retire at the end of his term and return home to New Hampshire, I took particular interest in whom President Obama would select to fill David Souter's seat. I believe the President has made a thoughtful and outstanding choice in nominating Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor has had a distinguished career as a Federal judge. As has been widely noted, if confirmed, she would bring more Federal judicial experience to the Supreme Court than any Justice in 100 years. Today, David Souter is the only member of the Supreme Court with prior experience as a trial court judge. Sonia Sotomayor, too, would be the only Justice with experience as a trial court judge. I happen to agree with Senator Klobuchar. I think it is important that at least one of the nine Supreme Court Justices have that experience. It is trial judges, after all, who day-in and day-out must apply the legal principles enunciated in Supreme Court opinions. Judge Sotomayor also served 5 years as a local prosecutor and practiced law for 7 years as a trial attorney with a law firm. Judge Sotomayor, because of her experience, will be ever mindful of the need to provide those in the courtroom with clear and practical decisions. More important, she will understand how Supreme Court opinions affect real human beings. As a trial judge, every day Judge Sotomayor directly faced innocent victims of crime, vicious perpetrators of crime, and occasionally the wrongfully accused. She directly faced injured parties seeking civil redress and civil defendants who may have made honest mistakes. She had to answer: What is the right verdict? What is the right length of incarceration? What is the right level of damages? These are not easy decisions. I know that because my husband was a State trial court judge for 16 years. Trial court judges must be able to live with the justice they mete out. To do it well, it takes more than an understanding of the law, it takes an understanding of people. Judge Sotomayor has a great understanding of both. I had the pleasure of meeting with Sonia Sotomayor the day she fractured her ankle. I said to her as she came into my office: Boy, you are tough. She said: I grew up in the Bronx; we had to be tough. She handled that painful injury with grace and humor. She has a first-rate temperament and also a first-rate intellect. After growing up in a public housing project in the South Bronx, she excelled at both Princeton and Yale Law School. I believe Judge Sonia Sotomayor is an excellent choice to replace David Souter as a Supreme Court Justice. She deserves a fair and a thorough hearing without delay. I look forward to that hearing. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I wish to express my sympathy over the loss of U.S. Army SSG Edmond Lo, a 23-year-old native of Salem, NH. Staff Sergeant Lo was killed while attempting to neutralize an improvised explosive device in Samarra City, Iraq, early in the morning of June 13, 2009. Staff Sergeant Lo was born and raised in Salem. He attended Salem High School, where he became a leader of the Air Force Junior ROTC program before graduating in 2004. Lo was determined to join the Army after graduation, even turning down a host of college acceptance letters in order to enlist. He became a member of the Army's 797th Ordnance Company--stationed out of Fort Hood, TX--and was on his second tour of duty in Iraq. In high school, Edmond Lo earned the nickname ``Mr. Dependable.'' Those who knew him described him as kind, hardworking and strong- willed. Even after his first tour of duty, Staff Sergeant Lo kept a close connection to the community where he grew up, returning to Salem High School to share photographs from his first trip to Iraq. New Hampshire is proud of Staff Sergeant Lo's service to and sacrifice for our country. He, and the thousands of brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces serving today, deserve America's highest honor and recognition. Staff Sergeant Lo is survived by his parents David and Rosa, as well as two brothers and three sisters. He will be missed dearly by all those who knew him. I ask my colleagues to join me and all Americans in honoring U.S. Army SSG Edmond Lo.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medicare Transitional Care Act of 2009. Time and again, we have heard that our health care system is not working. Costs are too high, outcomes too poor and access too limited. I agree with so many of my colleagues that we need to work together to ensure that all Americans have access to quality and affordable health care. Everyone deserves stable health care coverage that they can count on, regardless of the job they hold or the curveballs life may throw. All Americans should be able to count on insurance premiums and deductibles that will not continue to rise and eat away more and more of our paychecks. Finally, all Americans deserve stable care that lets you keep your doctor, and your health care plan, that you trust and with whom you have built a relationship. Let me be clear: health care costs are too high. Every day in New Hampshire and across our country, families are struggling with the crushing cost of health care that threatens their financial stability, leaving them exposed to higher premiums and deductibles, and putting them at risk for a possible loss of health insurance coverage and even bankruptcy. In 2007 our Nation spent $2.2 trillion--or 16.2 percent of the GDP on health care. This is twice the average of other developed nations. As a Nation, our health outcomes are no better. We still lag behind other countries when it comes to efficiency, access, patient safety and adoption of information technology. It is essential that we cut our Nation's health care costs and improve the quality of care our patients receive. I rise today to offer a solution that can help address this crisis. I rise to introduce the Medicare Transitional Care Act of 2009-- legislation that will reduce costly hospital readmissions, improve Medicare patients' care and cut Medicare costs. I thank Representative Blumenauer and Representative Boustany for their leadership on this issue in the House and I am pleased to be joined by colleagues, Senator Collins, and Senator Lincoln, in introducing this legislation. This bill is about reducing costs and offering better support and coordination of care to Medicare patients. It will help keep seniors who are discharged from the hospital from going back. Simply put, it will improve the health care we offer our seniors while saving money. According to a report from the New England Journal of Medicine, almost one third of Medicare beneficiaries discharged from the hospital were re-hospitalized within 90 days. One half of the individuals re- hospitalized had not visited a physician since their discharge, indicating a lack of follow-up care. The study also estimated that in 2004 Medicare spent $17.4 billion on unplanned re-hospitalizations. This problem is costly for our government and troublesome for our seniors. But the good news is that this problem is avoidable. Research shows that the transition from the hospital to the patient's next place of care--be it home, or a nursing facility or rehabilitation center--can be complicated and risky. This is especially true for older individuals with multiple chronic illnesses. These patients talk about the difficulty remembering instructions, confusion over correct use of medications, and general uncertainty about their own conditions. For example, take Michael, a 71-year-old patient who lives with his 73-year-old wife, and has diabetes. Michael had a knee replacement that required two surgical revisions. He uses a walker and has been hospitalized four times. He says ``they would discharge me and the same day I'd be back in the ER. The wound would burst apart.'' Under this legislation, a transitional care clinician could be there to help make sure that Michael and his wife do not need to go back to the hospital. Let me also tell you about Bill. Over time, Bill has endured a heart attack that required open heart surgery, angioplasty with stent placement, stroke, kidney disease, HIV and depression. He has been hospitalized three times, underwent rehabilitation therapy in an inpatient facility once and lives alone. He says ``there was no help at home [after surgery]. My mother came and took care of household stuff. I was flat on my back for two weeks. The hospital called to make sure I was okay--`Hey how are you doing?'--but what could they do?'' Bill also notes the difficulty he had with discharge instructions: ``By the time I'm home,'' he says, ``I don't remember what the doctor said. Sometimes they write it down, but I have comprehension problems.'' Stories like Bill's and Michael's demonstrate that patients need support and assistance to manage their health needs along with their caregivers. This legislation provides that opportunity. Under the Medicare Transitional Care Act, a transitional care clinician would help ensure that appropriate follow-up care is provided to patients during the vulnerable time after discharge from a hospital--and help ensure that they are not re-hospitalized unnecessarily. The benefit would be phased-in and provided first for the most at- risk individuals. It will be tailored to their needs. It may be as simple as making sure each patient understands how and when to take their medication; or helping to make sure they schedule and are able to get to follow-up appointments with the doctors, or it may be helping patients and caregivers coordinate support services, such as medical equipment, meal delivery, transportation or assistance with other daily activities. I am pleased that the legislation has the strong support of the AARP. Proper transitional care is important not only to reduce hospital readmissions, but also to improve patient outcomes and satisfaction. Experts estimate that this legislation could save as much as $5,000 per Medicare beneficiary. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to pass comprehensive health care reform to fix our broken system. I urge them to join me in supporting a transitional care benefit that will support patients during the very vulnerable time after discharge from the hospital. The evidence is clear. We can implement a transitional care option that will save money by reducing hospital re-admisssions while improving the quality of care we deliver to patients in New Hampshire and all across this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, yesterday, along with Senators Boxer, Klobuchar, and 43 other Senators, I submitted S. Res. 187, a resolution condemning the use of violence against providers of reproductive health care services to women and expressing sympathy for the family, friends, and patients of Dr. George Tiller. Unfortunately, the murder of Dr. Tiller was not an isolated incident. Our country has a history of violence against reproductive health care providers. Since 1993, eight clinic workers have been murdered, and there have been hundreds of additional attempted murders, bombings, death threats, and kidnappings. Since 1977, there have been more than 5,800 reported acts of violence against providers and clinics. My own State has been touched by such acts of violence. In December 1994, a man from New Hampshire killed two workers at clinics in Massachusetts, including a nurse from Salem, NH. Almost 9 years ago, the Feminist Health Center in Concord, NH was burned in an arson attack. These acts of violence are not acceptable. Not only do they violate our laws and lead to human tragedy, but they dissuade medical professionals from entering a field of medicine that is critically important to women across the country. I realize that the issue of reproductive choice is divisive. I know there are many heartfelt feelings on both sides of this issue and on both sides of the aisle, even within my own caucus. However, I was hopeful that regardless of our differences of opinion on this sensitive issue, the Senate could come together and quickly pass a resolution that rejects the use of violence against reproductive health care providers. Sadly, this is not the case. My cosponsors and I have tried to pass this resolution by unanimous consent. Unfortunately, some on the other side of the aisle have objected. How disappointing it is that in this country and in this body, we can't come together to unanimously condemn the use of violence. My cosponsors and I were urged to eliminate references to women's reproductive health care to get this resolution passed through the Senate. We are not going to back down. This country should be able to come together to condemn violence against reproductive health care providers. It is a very sad day when the elected leaders of the greatest democracy on Earth cannot agree to protect those exercising their constitutional rights. I am pleased to be joined by 45 of my colleagues on this important resolution. We are saddened that we are not able to pass it without objection. I wish to now read this simple resolution, a resolution condemning the use of violence against providers of health care services to women. Whereas Dr. George Tiller of Wichita, Kansas was shot to death at church on Sunday, May 31; Whereas there is a history of violence against providers of reproductive health care, as health care employees have suffered threats, hostility, and attacks in order to provide crucial services to patients; Whereas the threat or use of force or physical obstruction has been used to injure, intimidate, or interfere with individuals seeking to obtain or provide health care services; and Whereas acts of violence are never an acceptable means of expression and always shall be condemned. Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Senate expresses great sympathy for the family, friends, and patients of Dr. George Tiller; recognizes that acts of violence should never be used to prevent women from receiving reproductive health care; and condemns the use of violence as a means of resolving differences of opinion. I find it hard to believe that this language condemning the murder of a health care provider and expressing sympathy to a family in mourning could be objectionable. I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I believe I still have the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. I am delighted to do so for my colleague from California.

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Medicare Transitional Care Act of 2009. Time and again, we have heard that our health care system is not working. Costs are too high, outcomes too poor and access too limited. I agree with so many of my colleagues that we need to work together to ensure that all Americans have access to quality and affordable health care. Everyone deserves stable health care coverage that they can count on, regardless of the job they hold or the curveballs life may throw. All Americans should be able to count on insurance premiums and deductibles that will not continue to rise and eat away more and more of our paychecks. Finally, all Americans deserve stable care that lets you keep your doctor, and your health care plan, that you trust and with whom you have built a relationship. Let me be clear: health care costs are too high. Every day in New Hampshire and across our country, families are struggling with the crushing cost of health care that threatens their financial stability, leaving them exposed to higher premiums and deductibles, and putting them at risk for a possible loss of health insurance coverage and even bankruptcy. In 2007 our Nation spent $2.2 trillion--or 16.2 percent of the GDP on health care. This is twice the average of other developed nations. As a Nation, our health outcomes are no better. We still lag behind other countries when it comes to efficiency, access, patient safety and adoption of information technology. It is essential that we cut our Nation's health care costs and improve the quality of care our patients receive. I rise today to offer a solution that can help address this crisis. I rise to introduce the Medicare Transitional Care Act of 2009-- legislation that will reduce costly hospital readmissions, improve Medicare patients' care and cut Medicare costs. I thank Representative Blumenauer and Representative Boustany for their leadership on this issue in the House and I am pleased to be joined by colleagues, Senator Collins, and Senator Lincoln, in introducing this legislation. This bill is about reducing costs and offering better support and coordination of care to Medicare patients. It will help keep seniors who are discharged from the hospital from going back. Simply put, it will improve the health care we offer our seniors while saving money. According to a report from the New England Journal of Medicine, almost one third of Medicare beneficiaries discharged from the hospital were re-hospitalized within 90 days. One half of the individuals re- hospitalized had not visited a physician since their discharge, indicating a lack of follow-up care. The study also estimated that in 2004 Medicare spent $17.4 billion on unplanned re-hospitalizations. This problem is costly for our government and troublesome for our seniors. But the good news is that this problem is avoidable. Research shows that the transition from the hospital to the patient's next place of care--be it home, or a nursing facility or rehabilitation center--can be complicated and risky. This is especially true for older individuals with multiple chronic illnesses. These patients talk about the difficulty remembering instructions, confusion over correct use of medications, and general uncertainty about their own conditions. For example, take Michael, a 71-year-old patient who lives with his 73-year-old wife, and has diabetes. Michael had a knee replacement that required two surgical revisions. He uses a walker and has been hospitalized four times. He says ``they would discharge me and the same day I'd be back in the ER. The wound would burst apart.'' Under this legislation, a transitional care clinician could be there to help make sure that Michael and his wife do not need to go back to the hospital. Let me also tell you about Bill. Over time, Bill has endured a heart attack that required open heart surgery, angioplasty with stent placement, stroke, kidney disease, HIV and depression. He has been hospitalized three times, underwent rehabilitation therapy in an inpatient facility once and lives alone. He says ``there was no help at home [after surgery]. My mother came and took care of household stuff. I was flat on my back for two weeks. The hospital called to make sure I was okay--`Hey how are you doing?'--but what could they do?'' Bill also notes the difficulty he had with discharge instructions: ``By the time I'm home,'' he says, ``I don't remember what the doctor said. Sometimes they write it down, but I have comprehension problems.'' Stories like Bill's and Michael's demonstrate that patients need support and assistance to manage their health needs along with their caregivers. This legislation provides that opportunity. Under the Medicare Transitional Care Act, a transitional care clinician would help ensure that appropriate follow-up care is provided to patients during the vulnerable time after discharge from a hospital--and help ensure that they are not re-hospitalized unnecessarily. The benefit would be phased-in and provided first for the most at- risk individuals. It will be tailored to their needs. It may be as simple as making sure each patient understands how and when to take their medication; or helping to make sure they schedule and are able to get to follow-up appointments with the doctors, or it may be helping patients and caregivers coordinate support services, such as medical equipment, meal delivery, transportation or assistance with other daily activities. I am pleased that the legislation has the strong support of the AARP. Proper transitional care is important not only to reduce hospital readmissions, but also to improve patient outcomes and satisfaction. Experts estimate that this legislation could save as much as $5,000 per Medicare beneficiary. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Senate to pass comprehensive health care reform to fix our broken system. I urge them to join me in supporting a transitional care benefit that will support patients during the very vulnerable time after discharge from the hospital. The evidence is clear. We can implement a transitional care option that will save money by reducing hospital re-admisssions while improving the quality of care we deliver to patients in New Hampshire and all across this country. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, today I congratulate the recipients of the 2009 New Hampshire Excellence in Education Awards. The New Hampshire Excellence in Education Awards, or ``ED''ies, honor the best and the brightest among New Hampshire's educators and schools. For the past 16 years, the ``ED''ies have been presented to teachers, administrators, schools, and school boards who demonstrate the highest level of excellence in education. Outstanding individuals have been compared against criteria set by others in their discipline through their sponsoring organization. Experienced educators and community leaders select outstanding elementary, middle, and secondary schools based upon guidelines established by the New Hampshire Excellence in Education Board of Directors. It is critical that all of our children receive a high quality education so that they can succeed in today's global economy. I am proud to recognize this year's recipients who will receive this prestigious award on June 13, 2009 for the positive examples they set for their peers and the lasting impact they have made on our children and communities. I ask that the names of the 2009 New Hampshire Excellence in Education Award winners be printed in the Record. 2009 New Hampshire Excellence in Education Award Recipients Diane Beaman, Nora L. Beaton, Doug Brown, Michelle Carvalho, Cathy Chase, Mary K. Coltin, Anne Delaney, Arthur R. Deleault, Irene M. Derosier, Kenneth Dugal, Denise Dunlap, Katherine J. Engstrom, Deborah A. Fogg, Venera Gattonini, Doris Grady, Nathan S. Greenberg, Gerri Harvey, Cathy Higgins. Kathleen Collins McCabe, Eric ``Chip'' McGee, Dorothy M. Morin, Jackie Moulton, Sean P. Moynihan, Dorothy A. Peters, Marge Polak, Patricia Popieniek, Richard Provencher, Meagan Reed, Roberto Rodriguez, Fern Seiden, John J. Stone, Lyonel B. Tracy, Jacqueline R. Verville, Sheila A. Ward, Suzette Wilson, Otis E. Wirth, Joseph L. Wright. Bicentennial Elementary School, Boynton Middle School, Inter-Lakes Elementary School, Kennett High School, Matthew Thornton Elementary School, Monadnock Community Connections School, Newfound Regional High School, Northwood School, Raymond School Board, Virtual Learning Center.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. We all know someone who is currently a smoker or someone who has been a smoker. I know we all worry about their health. That is with good reason. Tobacco use is the leading preventable cause of death in the United States. It kills more people each year than alcohol, AIDS, car crashes, illegal drugs, murders, and suicides combined. Let me repeat that because it is hard to believe. The fact is, tobacco use kills more people each year than alcohol, AIDS, car crashes, illegal drugs, murders, and suicides combined. Tobacco-related health problems affect millions more, resulting in skyrocketing health care costs every year. The cycle of addiction is so hard to break, and the tobacco companies work hard to attract smokers with flashy marketing campaigns and by including chemicals that are proven to be addictive. Undoubtedly, this hurts our Nation's overall health. There is no question that one of the most important steps the Senate can take to improve health and to reduce costs is to reduce the use of tobacco. That is why this legislation is so important, why I am proud to be one of the 53 cosponsors of this legislation. Again, over half the Senate is cosponsoring this legislation. I thank Senator Kennedy for his leadership and work on this important issue over so many years. I thank Senator Dodd for managing this bill on the floor. Throughout my career, I have advocated for smoking prevention. We all realize the cost in lives and in health care expenses that smoking creates, not only to the consumer but also to those who are exposed to the dangerous secondhand smoke. In New Hampshire, almost 20 percent of adults smoke cigarettes, and tobacco-related health care expenses in New Hampshire amount to $969 million a year. During my tenure as Governor, I was proud to sign legislation that banned the sale of tobacco products to minors, that prohibited the possession of tobacco products by children, and that required the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services to disclose harmful ingredients in tobacco products. The important legislation we are considering expands on what New Hampshire has done. It will give the FDA the authority to regulate the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of tobacco products. In New Hampshire this year alone, 6,300 children will try cigarettes for the first time. Just over a third of these children will become addicted lifelong smokers. The tobacco companies know these statistics and target much of their marketing to this vulnerable population. In fact, published research studies have found that children are three times more sensitive to tobacco advertising than adults and are more likely to be influenced to smoke by marketing than by peer pressure. This year in New Hampshire alone, the tobacco companies will spend $128 million on marketing, much of it geared to kids. Tobacco companies also attract children to their products by using flavors, such as Twista Lime or Kauai Kolada, which says it contains ``Hawaiian hints of pineapple and coconut,'' or Winter Mocha Mint. It doesn't sound like we are talking about tar-filled cigarettes, does it? It sounds like we are talking about ice cream or candy. But, unfortunately, these fruit and mint flavors not only entice kids to try them but also makes the smoke less harsh, more flavorful so it is actually easier for kids to smoke. Unfortunately, they do not make cigarettes less dangerous or less addictive. The tobacco companies do not stop at just the flavors to attract kids. They package the flavored products in colorful and fun patterns clearly aimed at attracting children to their products. Norma Gecks of Derry, NH, reports that her youngest child is 19 and is addicted to smoking. He buys the mint- and fruit-flavored products and by now is smoking up to two packs a day. Already at age 19, he has developed a smoker's cough. Keith Blessington of Concord is now an adult, but he is also a victim of childhood addiction. He smoked his first cigarette after a basketball game when he was only 17. Recently, he was diagnosed with advanced stomach cancer and told me he has about a year to live. Despite this awful situation, despite the fact that he has cancer, he will tell you plainly: I am addicted. He cannot quit. We need to enact this legislation to help people in New Hampshire and across the country, people such as Keith, people such as Norma's son. Tobacco products and marketing geared to kids need to end. We cannot afford to let another generation of young people put themselves at risk by becoming addicted to tobacco products and suffering the lifelong consequences of their addiction or, even worse, dying. For decades, tobacco companies have targeted women and girls. But in the last 2 years, the industry has significantly stepped up its marketing efforts aimed at our daughters and granddaughters, and we have a picture of one of the ads R.J. Reynolds uses. It is their new version of Camel cigarettes targeted to girls and women, and it is Camel No. 9--sort of a takeoff on some other product descriptions we have heard. This cigarette has sleek, shiny black packaging, flowery ads, and, as you can see, the enticing slogan ``light and luscious.'' This advertisement has appeared in Cosmopolitan, Glamour, InStyle, Lucky, and Marie Claire magazines, and it has been effective. Today, about 17 percent of adult women and about 19 percent of high school girls are smokers. That is more than 20 million women and more than 1.5 million girls who are at increased risk for lung cancer, for heart attacks, strokes, emphysema, and other deadly diseases. These statistics are staggering, and it is important to remember they represent mothers, grandmothers, aunts, sisters, colleagues, and friends. Seventeen-year-old Cait Steward of Dover, NH, has seen these Camel No. 9 advertisements. She saw them in Glamour magazine. But fortunately, she sees through the marketing campaign. She says: Tobacco companies advertise to try and get me and my friends to smoke. They try to make young girls think that smoking is sexy, glamorous, and cool. They know that if they get us to start smoking now we will be addicted for years to come. It is not just cigarettes that we are attempting to regulate in this legislation. The tobacco companies have also developed new products that are both smokeless and spitless. They are just as addictive as those products you smoke, however, and they are just as deadly. Like cigarettes, they do not have any FDA regulation, and the consequences are dire. I want to show a photo of a young man named Gruen Von Behrens. He is an oral cancer survivor. He has had more than 40 surgeries to save his life, including one radical surgery, and you can see how it left him in this picture. It removed half his neck muscles and lymph nodes and half of his tongue. Like too many teenagers, Von Behrens first tried spit tobacco at age 13 to fit in. By age 17, he was diagnosed with cancer. How can we let this happen? Tobacco companies are targeting our children, and it is our job to protect them. This legislation is vital to our children and to our Nation's health. It will prevent the tobacco companies from marketing to children. It will require disclosure of the contents of tobacco products, authorize the FDA to require the reduction or removal of harmful ingredients, and force tobacco companies to scientifically prove any claims about reduced risk of products. The FDA is the proper place to have this authority. It is responsible for protecting consumers from products that cause them harm. The FDA even regulates pet food. Yet it doesn't have the authority to provide oversight for tobacco--one of the most dangerous consumer products sold in the United States. Under this legislation, the FDA will oversee tobacco products with the same objective and the same oversight with which it directs all of its activities--to promote and protect public health. It has the necessary scientific expertise, regulatory experience, and public health mission to do the job. We can't wait any longer to make the necessary changes that will impact the lives of so many people we know and love. Again, I thank Senator Kennedy for his outstanding leadership on this issue and join many of my colleagues in supporting this important legislation that will save lives in New Hampshire and across the country. Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I wish to express my sympathy over the loss of Army SPC Adam Kuligowski, a 21-year-old from Derry, NH. Kuligowski died on April 6, 2009 in Bagram, Afghanistan. Specialist Kuligowski was a signals intelligence analyst assigned to the Special Troops Battalion, 101st Airborne Division. Specialist Kuligowski grew up in Derry, NH, and attended Gilbert H. Hood Middle School and Pinkerton Academy. He had lived all over the world including South Korea, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Honduras, and Utah, before he enlisted in the military in October 2006. Specialist Kuligowski had been in Afghanistan for about a year and was scheduled to return home this summer. Specialist Kuligowski served with honor and distinction throughout his young military career, earning the National Defense Service Medal, the Afghanistan Campaign Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Army Service Ribbon and the NATO Medal. New Hampshire is proud of Specialist Kuligowski's service to and sacrifice for our country. He, and the thousands of brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces serving today, deserve America's highest honor and recognition. Specialist Kuligowski is survived by his parents, Michael and Tracie Kuligowski of Derry, his grandparents, Stanley and Phyllis Kuligowski, two brothers and a sister. He will be missed dearly by all those who knew him. I ask my colleagues to join me and all Americans in honoring U.S. Army Specialist Adam Kuligowski. Specialist Craig R. Hamilton Madam President, I wish to express my sympathy over the loss of U.S. Army SPC Craig R. Hamilton, a 35-year-old native of Nashua, NH. Specialist Hamilton died on March 27 at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, TX. Born in Nashua in 1974, Specialist Hamilton was raised and educated in nearby Milford. After graduating from Milford High School in 1992, he joined the U.S. Marine Corps, rising to the rank of corporal before being honorably discharged in 1996. Hamilton spent 11 years back home in Milford before deciding to once again serve his country by enlisting in the U.S. Army in 2007. He was assigned to Fort Sam Houston where he was recovering from a shoulder injury. New Hampshire is proud of Specialist Hamilton's service to and sacrifice for our country. His decision to reenlist in the U.S. Army following his time in the Marine Corps demonstrates a deep commitment to duty and service for which his country will forever be grateful. He, and the thousands of brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces serving today, deserve America's highest honor and recognition. Specialist Hamilton is survived by his wife Stacey; his father and stepmother Chuck and Kathy Hamilton; his mother Karen Hamilton; and his brothers Jon and Adam. He will be missed dearly by all those who knew him. I ask my colleagues to join me and all Americans in honoring U.S. Army SPC Craig Hamilton.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, today I rise in support of an important small business amendment to the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, amendment No. 1079. It would expand the truth in lending protections of this bill and cover our Nation's small businesses in addition to individual credit cardholders. I am proud to be a cosponsor of this amendment. I thank Senators Landrieu and Snowe, who are the chair and ranking member of the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee. I thank them for their leadership on this issue. I also thank Senators Dodd and Shelby for their tireless work on the Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights. This legislation is important because, as we have heard Senator Dorgan say so eloquently, we can no longer allow predatory and misleading lending practices to jeopardize American consumer credit. Reform of the credit card industry is truly long overdue, and the members of the Senate Banking Committee should be commended for bringing such a strong bill to the floor. I look forward to supporting it. But we need to make a change in the bill because small businesses are critical to America's economic recovery, and in States such as mine, small businesses are the anchor of our communities and our economy, providing the jobs and the services that help families pay their bills and put food on the table. Unfortunately, many small businesses in New Hampshire and throughout the country continue to struggle in today's economy. That is forcing layoffs and slowing our path to economic growth. I have met with small business owners across New Hampshire. They are small business owners who have excellent credit histories, but they cannot access much needed credit because of this economic crisis. Many small businesses have seen their credit lines reduced or even eliminated on short notice, preventing them from restocking their shelves and investing in future growth. Unfortunately, more and more small businesses are relying on credit cards to meet their cash flow needs. I am proud to have led a successful effort to increase access to credit through the Small Business Administration's 7(a) Loan Program. But we must also ensure that small business owners have credit cards on which they can depend. The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights makes important changes that will protect consumers from unfair practices such as arbitrary interest rate increases and unfair credit terms. This amendment simply expands Truth in Lending Act protections to small businesses with 50 or fewer employees. As business owners across the country grapple with the economic recession, we must ensure that credit cards help, not hinder, our recovery effort. By protecting small businesses from unfair credit card practices, business owners will be better able to manage their cash flow, plan for future growth, and contribute to our economic recovery. I urge my colleagues to join me, Senator Landrieu, and Senator Snowe in support of this amendment. I yield the floor.

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, I rise today to introduce the Military Retirement Pay Fairness Act of 2009. I want to thank my colleague, Senator Gregg, for cosponsoring this important legislation. The Military Retirement Pay Fairness Act addresses a critical issue that impacts our nation's veterans. Certain service members who receive special separation pay must have that benefit recouped if they later re-enlist and become eligible for a pension. Under current law, the Department of Defense, DOD, is bound by a statutory formula for recouping that benefit and cannot change the amount it recoups each month, even if it results in severe financial hardship for our nation's veterans. In fact, many veterans are currently in dire financial straits because of this unnecessarily harsh formula. This legislation will fix the formula and provide these veterans with much needed financial relief. I would like to talk about one particular veteran who brought this issue to my attention. Sgt. Wayne Merritt of Dover, New Hampshire served in the Air Force for nearly 14 years until the end of the Cold War, when the Defense Department began to draw down its forces. At DOD's encouragement, Mr. Merritt took a one-time Special Separation Benefit, and then started working in the private sector. But in 1996, Sgt. Merritt decided to serve his country once again, joining the New Hampshire Air National Guard. When Sgt. Merritt retired in 2006, he became eligible for a pension that provided him and his family with enough to help pay the bills, especially his monthly mortgage payments. However, just a couple of months ago, Sgt. Merritt had his life turned upside down when he got a letter in the mail from the Defense Department. The letter said that, within a few weeks, DOD would begin recouping his separation benefit by withholding more than half of his pension each month until the full amount is paid back. Sgt. Merritt was shocked. He planned his family budget around a pension payment he had been receiving each month for nearly 2 years, only to get a letter saying that, in a few weeks, it would be reduced by more than half. Sgt. Merritt suddenly found himself in a position where he couldn't make ends meet and make his mortgage payments. In fact, he was so concerned that he contacted a real estate agent to talk about selling his home. Sgt. Merritt contacted DOD, asking if there was anything that could be done to work out a manageable monthly payment plan. Sgt. Merritt did not ask for the amount to be forgiven, but simply asked DOD to be flexible and work out a payment plan that he could afford. DOD told him that there was nothing it could do to help, citing a statute that tied its hands. On behalf of Sgt. Merritt, I contacted DOD and spoke to Undersecretary Robert Hale. He told me that DOD doesn't have a choice-- it must recoup over half of his income because the formula in the statute dictates the rate. The result is that Sgt. Merritt, and over 1,000 veterans in similar situations across the country, face financial hardship as a result of an unfair rule. As each month goes by, DOD has to garnish over half of Sgt. Merritt's pension payments. I do not believe that Congress intends to treat our Nation's veterans this way. That is why I am introducing legislation today that would provide a simple and straightforward solution. Instead of an unnecessarily harsh formula, our bill will provide DOD with the flexibility it needs to develop manageable monthly payment plans that do not impose undue financial hardship on service members. In addition, DOD would be required to consult with the service member to create a monthly payment plan, taking into account a veteran's financial situation when determining how much should be recouped each month. To make sure these payment plans are manageable, DOD would only be able to recoup, at the most, 25 percent of the veteran's monthly pension check until the benefit is repaid. This legislation would also address other problems with pension recoupment. It would provide service members with adequate notice of the recoupment so that they have time to prepare for the loss of income. Sgt. Merritt received his letter just weeks before DOD garnished over half of his pension pay. This legislation ensures that service members have at least 90 days notice before recoupment begins. Finally, the legislation would also give the Secretary of Defense the flexibility to ensure that no veteran will be left destitute from this recoupment. We need to recognize that financial circumstances change over time. If recouping the benefit would cause a severe financial hardship, the Secretary of Defense should be able to waive that amount. This legislation is critical. Each month, over 1,000 veterans face circumstances similar to Sgt. Merritt's. Undersecretary Robert Hale told me that while he sympathizes with these veterans, he has no legal recourse to change the amount it recoups every month. This legislation provides DOD with the flexibility it needs to ensure that we do not punish veterans who have made the courageous decision to serve their country again. I'm glad that this effort has the support of DOD, as well as veterans organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars, VFW, and the Military Officers Association of America, MOAA. I want to thank Senator Gregg for his support of this important, common sense legislation. I also want to thank my fellow New Hampshire delegation member, Carol Shea-Porter, for introducing companion legislation in the House. I urge my colleagues to join me in addressing these important issues. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Military Retirement Pay Fairness Act of 2009. I want to thank my colleague, Senator Gregg, for cosponsoring this important legislation. The Military Retirement Pay Fairness Act addresses a critical issue that impacts our nation's veterans. Certain service members who receive special separation pay must have that benefit recouped if they later re-enlist and become eligible for a pension. Under current law, the Department of Defense, DOD, is bound by a statutory formula for recouping that benefit and cannot change the amount it recoups each month, even if it results in severe financial hardship for our nation's veterans. In fact, many veterans are currently in dire financial straits because of this unnecessarily harsh formula. This legislation will fix the formula and provide these veterans with much needed financial relief. I would like to talk about one particular veteran who brought this issue to my attention. Sgt. Wayne Merritt of Dover, New Hampshire served in the Air Force for nearly 14 years until the end of the Cold War, when the Defense Department began to draw down its forces. At DOD's encouragement, Mr. Merritt took a one-time Special Separation Benefit, and then started working in the private sector. But in 1996, Sgt. Merritt decided to serve his country once again, joining the New Hampshire Air National Guard. When Sgt. Merritt retired in 2006, he became eligible for a pension that provided him and his family with enough to help pay the bills, especially his monthly mortgage payments. However, just a couple of months ago, Sgt. Merritt had his life turned upside down when he got a letter in the mail from the Defense Department. The letter said that, within a few weeks, DOD would begin recouping his separation benefit by withholding more than half of his pension each month until the full amount is paid back. Sgt. Merritt was shocked. He planned his family budget around a pension payment he had been receiving each month for nearly 2 years, only to get a letter saying that, in a few weeks, it would be reduced by more than half. Sgt. Merritt suddenly found himself in a position where he couldn't make ends meet and make his mortgage payments. In fact, he was so concerned that he contacted a real estate agent to talk about selling his home. Sgt. Merritt contacted DOD, asking if there was anything that could be done to work out a manageable monthly payment plan. Sgt. Merritt did not ask for the amount to be forgiven, but simply asked DOD to be flexible and work out a payment plan that he could afford. DOD told him that there was nothing it could do to help, citing a statute that tied its hands. On behalf of Sgt. Merritt, I contacted DOD and spoke to Undersecretary Robert Hale. He told me that DOD doesn't have a choice-- it must recoup over half of his income because the formula in the statute dictates the rate. The result is that Sgt. Merritt, and over 1,000 veterans in similar situations across the country, face financial hardship as a result of an unfair rule. As each month goes by, DOD has to garnish over half of Sgt. Merritt's pension payments. I do not believe that Congress intends to treat our Nation's veterans this way. That is why I am introducing legislation today that would provide a simple and straightforward solution. Instead of an unnecessarily harsh formula, our bill will provide DOD with the flexibility it needs to develop manageable monthly payment plans that do not impose undue financial hardship on service members. In addition, DOD would be required to consult with the service member to create a monthly payment plan, taking into account a veteran's financial situation when determining how much should be recouped each month. To make sure these payment plans are manageable, DOD would only be able to recoup, at the most, 25 percent of the veteran's monthly pension check until the benefit is repaid. This legislation would also address other problems with pension recoupment. It would provide service members with adequate notice of the recoupment so that they have time to prepare for the loss of income. Sgt. Merritt received his letter just weeks before DOD garnished over half of his pension pay. This legislation ensures that service members have at least 90 days notice before recoupment begins. Finally, the legislation would also give the Secretary of Defense the flexibility to ensure that no veteran will be left destitute from this recoupment. We need to recognize that financial circumstances change over time. If recouping the benefit would cause a severe financial hardship, the Secretary of Defense should be able to waive that amount. This legislation is critical. Each month, over 1,000 veterans face circumstances similar to Sgt. Merritt's. Undersecretary Robert Hale told me that while he sympathizes with these veterans, he has no legal recourse to change the amount it recoups every month. This legislation provides DOD with the flexibility it needs to ensure that we do not punish veterans who have made the courageous decision to serve their country again. I'm glad that this effort has the support of DOD, as well as veterans organizations like the Veterans of Foreign Wars, VFW, and the Military Officers Association of America, MOAA. I want to thank Senator Gregg for his support of this important, common sense legislation. I also want to thank my fellow New Hampshire delegation member, Carol Shea-Porter, for introducing companion legislation in the House. I urge my colleagues to join me in addressing these important issues. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr President, I would like to congratulate and honor two young New Hampshire students who have achieved national recognition for exemplary volunteer service in their communities. Edward Zaremba III of Hampstead and Colleen Slein of Salem have just been named State Honorees in the 2009 Prudential Spirit of Community Awards program, an annual honor conferred on only one high school student and one middle school student in each State. Mr. Zaremba was nominated by Pinkerton Academy for his work in cofounding a club at his school that promotes awareness and inclusion of students with developmental disabilities. The club sponsors social events throughout the year so that classmates with and without disabilities cannot only have fun together, but learn from each other as well. Ms. Slein was nominated by St. Joseph Regional Catholic School for her work raising money for the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation. She baked cookies and cupcakes every night for 2 months and sold them at school the next day, raising a total of $440 for this very worthy organization. It is important that we encourage and support the kind of selfless contributions these young people have made. People of all ages need to think more about how we, as individual citizens, can work together at the local level to ensure the health and vitality of our towns and neighborhoods. Young volunteers such as Mr. Zaremba and Ms. Slein are examples to all of us, and I commend them for their service. I would also like to congratulate two other young people in my State of New Hampshire who were named Distinguished Finalists by the Prudential Spirit of Community Awards for their outstanding volunteer service. Rachel Liff of Bedford prepared a handbook for Special Olympics athletes and volunteers, and Jane Stark of Merrimack raised money to purchase water filtration systems for people living in developing countries. All these young people have demonstrated a level of commitment and accomplishment that is encouraging in today's world, and they deserve our admiration and respect. Their initiative shows that young Americans can--and do--play important roles in their communities, and that America's community spirit continues to hold great promise for the future.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I rise in support of our nominee for Secretary of Health and Human Services, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius. I have known her for over 20 years. I believe she is an excellent nominee, one who brings a wealth of knowledge and skill to the position at a time when we need it the most. As our country and the world begins to battle a very serious outbreak of the swine flu, we need Governor Sebelius's leadership now. Over 100 deaths have been reported in Mexico, and here in America we have confirmed cases in 5 States. It is urgent we have a leader in place at Health and Human Services who can respond to this threat. Governor Sebelius is that person. She recognizes the need to work with experts and scientists on a global scale to make key public health decisions. Our citizens need and deserve to know that our Government is doing everything it possibly can to protect the public and to control this outbreak. We simply cannot afford to delay action in filling this important Cabinet post. Also, as we embark on national health care reform, we need a leader who appreciates the importance of health care security to everyday people. Kathleen Sebelius is a commonsense leader who understands the complexities of our health care system. Through her experience as Governor of Kansas, State insurance commissioner, and President of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, she has a broad and deep understanding of health care and will be an outstanding leader as we work to fix our broken system. Governor Sebelius has worked tirelessly to improve the quality and affordability of health care for the people of Kansas, and she will do the same for all Americans. As a former Governor, I understand the pressures of balancing a budget and working across party lines to get things done, and I commend Governor Sebelius for her track record of success. Upon taking office, she faced a projected $1 billion deficit. So she implemented a top-to- bottom audit of State government that produced significant savings and efficiencies. Under her leadership, Governor Sebelius expanded health care for children and worked to reduce the cost of prescription drugs. Working across the aisle, she was able to reorganize State health care programs to make health care more affordable by creating an independent State agency to control spending on health care and simplify the process of obtaining health care for her constituents. Undoubtedly, Governor Sebelius brings a wealth of knowledge and leadership experience that will be critical in her new role as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting nominee Kathleen Sebelius for Secretary of Health and Human Services. She is the right choice at a time when we desperately need leadership at the Department of Health and Human Services. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, today I rise in support of the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this legislation, and I thank Senators Leahy and Grassley and the members of the Judiciary Committee for their critical work on this very important effort to increase our capacity to investigate and prosecute the fraudulent activity that has severely weakened our economy and hurt the taxpayer. Fraudulent lending contributed to the collapse of the mortgage-backed securities market, sending our economy into a tailspin and putting taxpayers on the hook for a huge Wall Street bailout. Taxpayers deserve to know that those fraudulent lenders are being held accountable. And we need to send a message to those who would commit fraud in the future they will also be held accountable. With their current resources, however, Federal agencies are not able to properly investigate claims of mortgage fraud, which have increased more than 10 times in the past 6 years. With the funding authorized in this bill, the Department of Justice will be able to hire more prosecutors and the FBI will be able to nearly double its mortgage and financial fraud program. The bill would also allow the Department of Justice to prosecute fraud committed by all mortgage lenders, not just those who are regulated by the Federal Government. Under current law, Federal fraud laws do not apply to nondepository mortgage lenders, which made nearly half of residential mortgages before the housing market collapsed. Including these businesses in the fraud statute will allow the Department of Justice to properly investigate and prosecute fraud in the entire mortgage market. Last month, I offered an amendment to the budget to expand the capacity of the Housing and Urban Development inspector general to fight mortgage fraud. I was pleased to have the Senate agree with that amendment. Now we have an opportunity to follow up with an explicit authorization of funds to protect vital HUD programs. The Federal Housing Administration, which a few years ago insured only 2 percent of all new mortgages, now insures roughly a third. Yet the HUD inspector general's office has not expanded. We need to make sure HUD has the resources to properly investigate and remove fraudulent lenders. With the sharp decline in private mortgage lending, programs such as FHA insurance make home ownership a reality for millions of Americans. By providing HUD with the resources it needs to fight fraud, we will protect FHA's long-term vitality while preventing the taxpayer from footing the bill for another bailout. Fraud in the financial system greatly contributed to this economic collapse we are experiencing. Every day, taxpayers in New Hampshire and across the country bear the burden of fraudulent activity. I am confident this legislation will help protect those taxpayers by providing the resources and legal tools we need to root out fraud. I hope my colleagues will join me in support of this bill. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I wish to express my sympathy over the loss of Marine Cpl Michael W. Ouellette, a 29-year-old native of Manchester, NH. Corporal Ouellette died on March 22, 2009, as a result of injuries sustained from an improvised explosive device while on foot patrol in the Helmand Province of Afghanistan. Another marine was killed in the attack and two others were injured. Corporal Ouellette graduated from Memorial High School in Manchester in 1999. He joined the Marines in June 2005 and was trained as an infantryman. He served two terms in Iraq, deploying there in March 2006 and again in July 2007. He began his third tour overseas when he deployed to Afghanistan in November 2008. Ouellette was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 8th Marine Regiment, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force out of Camp Lejeune, NC. Corporal Ouellette served with honor and distinction throughout his highly decorated military career. He received a number of awards for his duty, including the Afghanistan Campaign Medal, the Combat Action Ribbon, the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, the Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, the Iraq Campaign Medal, and the National Defense Service Medal. New Hampshire is proud of Corporal Oullette's service to and sacrifice for our country. He, and the thousands of brave men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces serving today, deserve America's highest honor and recognition. Corporal Ouellette is survived by his parents, Donna and Leonard Ouellette, as well as a brother, Alan, and a sister, Stephanie. He will be missed dearly by all those who knew him. I ask my colleagues to join me and all Americans in honoring U.S. Marine Cpl Michael Ouellette.

Mrs. SHAHEEN

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Senators Kaufman and Mikulski be added as cosponsors.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment, call up my amendment No. 776, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Madam President, my amendment is simple and straightforward. It would establish a deficit-neutral reserve fund to monitor FHA-approved loans. The Federal Housing Administration, the FHA, plays an increasingly critical role in promoting home ownership during these tough economic times. The FHA insures one-third of all new mortgages. The number of FHA-approved lenders has doubled in the past 2 years. However, the Department of Housing and Urban Development has not received additional resources to expand its efforts to investigate claims of fraud. Recent reports of a rise in borrowers who haven't made even one payment suggest that fraudulent activity has increased among FHA-backed loans. Should that activity continue to increase, FHA and its critical work could be put at risk. As we all know, in the runup to the subprime crisis, many fraudulent lenders pushed borrowers into mortgages and refinancings that they could not afford just to collect the commissions and fees. We need to make sure we prevent that activity from migrating to federally insured loans which would put taxpayers at risk for footing the bill of another bailout. This amendment addresses the need for HUD to properly investigate and remove fraudulent lenders from the program wherever appropriate. It creates a deficit-neutral reserve fund--a deficit-neutral fund--to increase the capacity of the inspector general of Housing and Urban Development to investigate cases of fraud of FHA loans. I am hopeful my colleagues will join in this effort and support my amendment. As we all know, at this critical time when we are trying to make sure there are stimulus funds available and that we are doing all we can in Government to support the ability of the private sector to respond to this economic decline we are in, we need to make sure we have the oversight capability to run programs as effectively and efficiently as possible. That is what this amendment would help accomplish. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.