Tim Scott

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I rise today regarding my amendment No. 2132, specifically targeting an opportunity to improve education for those kids attending title I schools. This is a portability amendment. As we debate this Education bill, we must ensure our focus is in the right place. Education policy is not about protecting a bureaucracy, it should not be about empowering Washington, and it cannot be about an endless, fruitless push for some sort of one-size-fits-all type of system. This conversation must be about kids--5-year-olds and 15-year- olds--and their unlimited potential. I believe without question that each and every child has within them a reservoir of potential. We should make sure that the access to experiencing the fullness of their potential is available to all Americans throughout this country. Too many of our Nation's children today do not have access to quality education. They don't have access to the education they deserve. Now, more than half of the students in our Nation's public schools come from low-income households. This is an important point. As someone who grew up in poverty, as someone who grew up in a single-parent household, I know full well the challenges that come with poverty. Poor kids too often move a lot. By the time I was in the fifth grade, I had attended four different schools--four schools in my first 5 years of education. That is 4 different administrators, 4 different sets of teachers, 4 different funding streams--probably 40 different funding streams. So when we look at this through the eyes of a poor kid or if we look at this through the eyes of a single mother who is struggling simply to make ends meet, it seems very clear to me that providing more educational options is the right path forward for us to make sure every child everywhere experiences their full potential. Giving States the ability to provide portability for the title I dollars--school choice for those most in need--is the kind of reform our kids deserve. It is the kind of reform they need. I don't care whether it is public, private, charter, virtual, home school; I don't really care what option as long as we have all the options so that the parents find the best for their kids. Instead of forcing funds through redtape and bureaucracy, let's have it directly follow our students. We are not talking about all the school funding this amazing Nation provides--somewhere around $700 billion of funding for schools. We are talking about a sliver--about 14 percent. Let that 14 percent of the Federal dollars--let those dollars be portable. Give the children in title I areas the greatest opportunity for success we know as a nation. We all understand and appreciate the fact that to achieve the American dream today, it requires a quality education. By backpacking those funds, we will help kids who are like I used to be--growing up in difficult circumstances--to look into their own future with hope, understanding that opportunity lives and breathes everywhere in America. We are seeing what happens when the majority of parents simply do not have those basic options, and we are seeing it in some challenging and stunning statistics. In 2010, there were 2.8 million high school dropouts between the ages of 16 and 24. The unemployment rate in America today is around 5.2 percent, but for those kids who dropped out, the unemployment rate is 29 percent, and nearly 36 percent--more than a third of those students--were not participating at all in the workforce. Taken as a whole, nearly two-thirds of all high school dropouts are simply not working. These are devastating numbers for our Nation as a whole. No matter where one lives in America, one is impacted by these statistics, and they should cause us to stand up and take notice. These are students who deserve better, students who just need a little confidence in their abilities, and we can provide that through school choice. These kids, trapped in failing schools and underperforming schools, deserve an opportunity. It is simply not fair to our children, it is not fair to their parents, and it is not fair to America to allow the status quo to remain. I know there is no silver bullet, but school choice is a large step-- a leap--in the right direction. That is one of the reasons why I launched my Opportunity Agenda with school choice, the CHOICE Act, as a part of the foundation. That is why I am standing here today discussing--pleading with my colleagues to take a serious look at the educational opportunities available in some of the poorest ZIP Codes in America. I think it is important to note that my amendment complements a growing body of evidence where we see 57 school choice programs in 29 States--57 school choice programs in 29 States--not in the South primarily, but in the South, yes; the Southwest, yes; the Northeast, absolutely; and the Midwest, yes. Local and State leaders are figuring out that when parents have a choice, kids have a chance. Let me be crystal clear. It is absolutely paramount that we act and that we act now. I know opponents of school choice want to use ``voucher'' as a dirty word. I understand the tactics of those who do not support giving every child a quality opportunity. I understand. But they forget that the Federal Government already authorizes vouchers for education. We just call them Pell grants. Too often too many of our poor kids and our kids of color never receive a Pell grant because their high schools did not prepare them for college. Now we know there are quality public schools all over this country, and we should celebrate the success of our quality public schools. I am a big fan of our public schools when they work, but I am a bigger fan of removing the potential traps to our kids in underperforming schools. We can make a difference, we should make a difference, and this amendment provides us the opportunity to make that difference today. We don't have to wait until tomorrow. We don't have to wait until next year. We can do it today. You see, this Senator took a Pell grant to Charleston Southern University, probably the greatest university in the history of the country. Charleston Southern University, a private university, is where I took my Pell grant and experienced a wonderful education. Faith and hope are two of the most powerful and necessary emotions. They oftentimes serve as the glue to better opportunity. We can restore those two powerful emotions in areas where kids too often are losing hope. This Senator knows that personally. This Senator has seen it happen personally in his own life. That is the power of school choice. All of our kids--yes, all of our kids--have amazing potential. I believe there are good people on the other side of this argument. I know the other side believes school choice, as I am describing it, is wrong. I believe they have good intentions. This Senator is speaking from personal experience. This Senator is speaking from the statistical realities that we see across this country. This Senator is speaking on behalf of those kids who have been trapped too long, locked out too often, and said no to too many times. It is up to us as policymakers to create an environment where we unlock their potential. I hope we will continue to have a robust debate, leaving politics behind and figuring out how to improve educational opportunities for all of our children. Thank you, Mr. President.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I stand before you today and before the Nation not as a Senator, not as an elected official but as a humble South Carolinian. The past week has been one of terrible tragedy and amazing unity. Last Wednesday night, we experienced an unimaginable tragedy. Nine men and women--nine mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons, daughters--were lost forever. The hateful and racist actions of one deranged man have changed nine families forever. It has changed South Carolina forever and Charleston forever. But what we saw from the nine families at last Friday's bond hearing was simple. It was powerful and absolutely the best of who we are as Americans. A few minutes ago I was in the cloakroom, and I had the opportunity to talk to one of the victim's sons, Daniel Simmons, Jr. I was talking to him back there. I said: Is there anything you want me to share when I go on the floor of the Senate? He said: Please share that God cares for his people. God still lives. I was amazed. Then he said with great enthusiasm and energy and a sense of excitement: This evil attack will lead to reconciliation, restoration, and unity in our Nation. Those are powerful words. It is with great sadness and amazing hope that our future as a nation has been changed. It has been changed because one person decided to murder nine. It has been changed because the response of those nine families has been so courageous and so inspiring. If you permit me, I will read the names of those nine individuals. We honor the Reverend Sharonda Coleman-Singleton, beloved teacher and coach at Goose Greek High School. Her son Chris has shown us all what an amazing mother she was through his strength over the past 6 days. We honor Cynthia Hurd, whose love for education has been shared for over 31 years as a librarian in the public library system. We honor Susie Jackson, who at 87 years young still offered her beautiful voice to the choir and had recently returned from visiting her family in Ohio. We honor Ethel Lee Lance, who served her church with pride and whose daughter calls her the strong woman who just tried to keep her family together. We honor Depayne Middleton-Doctor, who dedicated her life to serving the poor and helping her students as an enrollment counselor at Southern Wesleyan University. We honor my good friend, the Reverend Clementa Pinckney, an amazing man of faith, a great dad, and a wonderful father. We honor Tywanza Sanders, beloved son of Tyrone and Felicia, whose warmth and heartfelt spirit has kept us moving. We honor the Reverend Daniel Simmons, Sr., whose granddaughter said: My granddaddy was an amazing man. It seemed like every time he spoke, it was pure wisdom. And we honor Pastor Myra Thompson, who served the Lord with grace and dignity. She loved her children, her grandchildren, and her great grandchildren. If you would pause for 9 seconds, I would appreciate it. (Moment of Silence.) Thank you. In closing, I want to thank all of my colleagues in the Senate and the House for their kind words over the past week and for the prayers that continue to come into our city from across the Nation. We are Charleston, we are South Carolina, and we are absolutely united. We are committed to replacing hate with love, pain with kindness, and ill will and hostility with goodwill and comfort. I yield to Senator Graham.

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, and the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 212, submitted earlier today.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Graham and I be allowed to speak for about 5 minutes, equally divided.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I would like to congratulate and honor the Leonard School of Music in North Charleston, SC, for their 70th anniversary. In 1945, the Leonard School of Music was founded by Mr. Patrick Leonard, who became a Charlestonian early in his life. He was a tromobonist for the prestigious Armco Band and the Circus Corporation of America. After traveling to Charleston with the circus, he fell in love with the city and ultimately started the Leonard School of Music. Mr. Patrick Leonard eventually retired from his leadership role at the school and passed it on to his son, Dan Leonard. Mr. Dan Leonard is a recognized expert in the field of music education. His work has received State, national, and international acclaim. He has taught and directed bands of all levels: elementary, junior high, high school, and college. Many of Mr. Leonard's students are accomplished musicians and teachers. His specialized rhythm approach has inspired Leonard School instructors' teaching strategies. The Leonard School of Music became a nonprofit organization in 2010. The school's mission is to provide solid music education for all Lowcountry youth regardless of race, creed, or financial standing. On May 23, 2015, the Leonard School of Music will celebrate 70 years of music excellence. I applaud Patrick and Dan Leonard for their expertise in music education, and therefore recognize the Leonard School of Music's accomplishment.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, today is the National Day of Prayer. It is a day where we as a nation have an opportunity simply to get on our knees and ask God for Divine intervention and ask the Lord for help. Our Nation is, indeed, an amazing nation, a great nation, a nation with a destiny. I think it is important for us to take the time to remind ourselves, as part of the foundation of this very Nation, that there is a foundation of faith. As I think about that foundation of faith and the need for prayer, it is hard not to remember that the last year has proven to be a difficult time for low-income communities and minority communities throughout this country. It is time for us to have a national conversation about solving some of the problems that we see arising in communities around the Nation. Whether those communities are in Ferguson or Baltimore, Ohio or Oklahoma or in my hometown of North Charleston, SC, finding solutions is critical. I believe that a part of the puzzle includes body cameras to be worn by our officers. Body cameras are simply not a fantasy but a part of a larger puzzle to provide solutions to communities that are distressed. I know firsthand that the solutions in my Opportunity Agenda work. As a kid growing up in a single parent household, I drifted in the wrong direction. I struggled in school. I had a difficult time. I was a hopeless kid in a challenging situation. I will state that as I look around the Nation, many of the challenges we see today are kids just like me, growing up in places like where I grew up, looking for hope, looking for leadership. I believe that embedded in my Opportunity Agenda we have some of the solutions that can help heal and restore as well as direct and instruct these communities into places of hope and opportunity. I believe that too often we see impoverished communities and distressed communities as high-risk communities. I prefer to see them as high-potential communities, communities where greatness breeds and lives. We just need to find an avenue to harness the potential and move forward. I am hopeful that as we focus on the issues that are embedded in the Opportunity Agenda--issues such as education, and I mean a quality education in every ZIP Code in America and that we should have high- performing schools in those ZIP Codes. That includes school choice, whether it is charter or virtual or home schools or public schools. We need to have a serious and robust conversation about school choice. Work skills are so important. In so many of these communities the unemployment rate is over 30 percent--a 30-percent unemployment rate. We can challenge those statistics by looking at the work skills and also by looking at apprenticeship programs, where you can earn and learn at the exact same time. We are breathing new hope into these communities. I also think that when we think about the future, we must think about the chance to save the future of so many of these young kids who may be losing hope in our country, who may be losing hope in their communities, and perhaps losing hope in themselves. We have a chance to make a difference in this next generation. I thank Senator Grassley, our chairman of the Judiciary Committee, along with Senator Graham, our subcommittee chair, for agreeing to hold a hearing on the use of body cameras in the next few weeks. I believe the hearing on body cameras will produce important information on how we can deal with some of the challenges in some of our distressed communities. I believe we can find ways to restore hope and create opportunities for every single child in America. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment in order to call up the Scott amendment No. 692 in regard to transparency in health insurance costs.

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, my amendment is a very simple amendment. It simply seeks to make sure insurance companies increase the transparency on the actual cost of the health insurance tax on monthly premiums. The bottom line is this: When a single mom goes to the grocery store and she gets her receipt, at the bottom of the receipt it reflects the taxes she has paid. When a father of three buys clothes, at the end of his receipt it reflects the taxes that are being paid. By the year 2018, this invisible tax not seen by the average insurance purchaser will have raised about $14.3 billion in costs because of this health insurance tax. My amendment makes it easier to understand and appreciate the actual cost of the health insurance tax.

Mr. SCOTT. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Madam President, we are here today because the NLRB has once again overstepped the line. I am not sure it is a red line, but I do know this--that the Board has become a hyperpartisan, pro-union entity, and that does not benefit the American people. We saw it in my home State of South Carolina, in my hometown of North Charleston, when the NLRB and the IAM attempted to destroy what was at the time 1,100 jobs at Boeing. Boeing represents more than 8,000 jobs in North Charleston because of the success of South Carolina's pro- business, pro-employee--I want to emphasize ``pro-employee''-- environment. But the NLRB and the President simply decided that didn't fit their tastes. So after more than a year, when we saw the NLRB's general counsel joke about destroying the American economy and call Members of Congress names, they finally relented when they realized South Carolina and the American people would not stand for it. But since then, the NLRB has continued to push policies loved by union bosses, even though it was created to be an unbiased arbiter. So today we are taking a very rare step--invoking the Congressional Review Act--because the NLRB decided to do union bosses one more favor. The ambush elections rule, which the Board has now finalized, will allow as few as 10 days to pass between employees filing a petition to unionize and a vote occurring. This rule is perhaps the most pro-Big Labor action taken by the current administration, which is quite a fete for this administration. Ambush elections hurt the ability of employees to make a well-informed choice on joining a union as it gives limited time to hear both sides of the debate. The rule also requires unprecedented amounts of employees' personal information to be given to union representatives, such as personal cell phone numbers and email addresses. The NLRB is also now placing burdensome requirements on employers that unions do not have to follow themselves, providing an unfair advantage to union organizers. In South Carolina we have seen the potential ramifications that come as a result of a widely partisan NLRB, and this rule simply reinforces the fact that the Board must return to acting as the neutral arbiter it was intended to be. But since that does not seem likely anytime soon, as my friends on the left resist efforts that Senator Alexander and I and others have introduced to reform the Board, we find ourselves here today. I will leave you with just a few quotes. One is from Brian Hayes: The principal purpose for this radical manipulation of our election process is to minimize, or rather, to effectively eviscerate an employer's legitimate opportunity to express its views about collective bargaining. I urge my colleagues to vote to disapprove of the ambush elections rule and return workplace decisions to employees--not to Big Labor and a partisan administration. Just a few weeks ago we had a hearing in the HELP Committee. Sometimes when we have this conversation about what is good for employees versus what is good for employers, we find a way of taking these two groups of folks and trying to put them in competing categories. I asked a very simple question at one of the hearings, and I wish to take a few minutes to walk through what we are expecting of employers as we engage in this new process of ambush elections. I think we will see very clearly why we call them ambush elections. For the last 13 or 14 years, before entering Congress, I was a small business owner, an entrepreneur. I thought I had found the American dream. We were making a profit. We were moving forward. We were hiring people. And now, as I think it through, if I were still in business today, what are we asking employers to do in as short a window as 10 days? With less than two dozen employees and no in-house legal counsel, I am expected in as few as 10 days to understand what an election position is; to find a labor attorney in Charleston with NLRB experience, and hopefully, NLRB expertise; to learn what can and cannot be said to employees; to figure out which employees are eligible to vote; to submit to the union names of eligible employees, their addresses, personal emails, their cell phone numbers, their work location, shift information, employee classifications; and to ensure all legal arguments are raised at this point in time so that I do not waive my right to use those arguments in the future. All of this must be done with amazing haste and great precision. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking. The clock is ticking on my right to talk with my employees before an election. My business is being neglected. Bear in mind that employers and entrepreneurs start businesses so that we can actually accomplish a task, not necessarily to defend ourselves in this process. So while we are neglecting our business and incurring substantial legal costs, I have to ask myself one very simple question--and I think many people are going to ask themselves the same exact question--and it is simply this: How does this lead to a fair election for any employee or any employer? It seems to me that it simply cannot and it will not. I thank the Presiding Officer. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I rise today to honor another of our Lowcountry Vietnam Veterans, Nathan White, Jr. He grew up in the area known as Liberty Hill, SC. As a young boy growing up, he embedded in his heart a desire to be a U.S. Marine. His mother gave her final blessing upon his graduation from Bonds-Wilson High School, and Nathan went to training at Parris Island before being deployed to Vietnam. Private White gave his life while saving a fellow Marine at the age of 19 years old. His influence continues today in the lives of his family members who have extended his love of serving our county. His oldest nephew Alfred Green serves in Germany and his niece Lt. Col. Antoinette Sheppard proudly serves at Joint Base Charleston. We are also honored to recognize his sister Alfreda Levaine, who not only helped raise her brother but also took a stand and marched with Mrs. Coretta Scott King in 1969. As she passionately puts it, ``you have to stand for something during your life to make a difference.'' It is with pride and honor we recognize Private Nathan White, Jr. and his family. We will never forget his sacrifice.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I am humbled to recognize Mr. Odell Lumont Price, and especially during Black History Month. As a constituent, I can say he has encouraged all who are familiar with his story. Mr. Price exemplifies the words of the late Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.--he has truly lived a life in which he has been ``judged by the content of his character rather than the color of his skin.'' He grew up in Liberty Hill, a small part of North Charleston, and was among the first to graduate from all-white North Charleston High in 1967. Upon graduation, he volunteered to join the U.S. Marines at the age of 17 because he lacked the finances to attend college. He also served to show his love and respect for his country and family. He saw much during his time in battle, and quickly became a squad leader of the 3rd Marine Division. After leaving the military, he used the GI Bill to further his education. Mr. Price believes that the opportunity to further his education played a huge part in his success working at the Charleston Naval Shipyard. Mr. Price is an example of everything that has allowed me to stand before you today. His values of faith, family and freedom have granted me the chance to stand on his shoulders and continue helping our beloved country march forward. Please join me in a heartfelt ``Thanks'' to not only a fellow South Carolinian but someone who deserves the title of ``Hero'' for his service to our country.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to a former member of this Chamber, and note with pleasure the passage of S. Res. 19. Senator Edward Brooke of Massachusetts passed away on January 3, 2015 at the age of 95. I was deeply saddened by his loss. I had the privilege of hosting an event last year celebrating America's Black Senators. We invited Senator Brooke, but he was unable to attend. We did honor him that day, because as one of the two African Americans to currently serve in this great body, I know that I stand on the shoulders of giants like Senator Brooke and those who have come before me in public service. Senator Brooke was a true trailblazer, and those of us who followed cannot thank him enough. As the first African American Senator to be popularly elected to serve, he was a true inspiration. From his service to our Nation beginning as a captain in the U.S. Army during World War II, to his service as chairman of the Finance Commission for the city of Boston and then as the Commonwealth of Massachusetts' attorney general before coming to the Senate, Senator Brooke was a committed public servant. Having served for two terms in the Senate, he was a powerful voice for housing reform and advancing issues like economic opportunity for all Americans. Recognized with both the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2004 and the Congressional Gold Medal in 2008, our Nation was truly blessed by his life and accomplishments, and his place in history will stand the test of time. May God bless the family of Senator Brooke.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Madam President, I wish to commend the hard work and achievement of a team of students and their teacher in my State of South Carolina. I believe that education, and especially STEM education, is a key to success, and I am thrilled to see students across my State and our Nation creating original research to compete for the honor of having their experiments performed in space by the Student Spaceflights Experiments Program. This year, this team of Lowcountry students and teachers collaborated on an extraordinary experiment design to test the formation of tin whiskers in lead-free solder in space flight. With tin whisker formation causing failures in devices ranging from space satellites to pacemakers, the students chose an important and relevant topic for their work. Rachel Lindbergh, a senior at the Palmetto Scholars Academy, Gabriel Voigt, a sophomore at Bishop England High School, and Joseph Garvey, a sophomore at Palmetto Scholars Academy, came together with their teacher facilitator Kelly Voigt and put in a tremendous number of hours to create an excellent research project design. The team's experiment will be launched into space as part of the Student Spaceflight Experiments Program Mission 6 to the International Space Station. I am very proud of their work, and hope that it will serve as an example for all students that if you work hard and follow your passion, there is no telling where it may lead you.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Madam President, I am pleased the President signed the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, WIOA, into law last week to improve job training in the United States. WIOA is the result of a commitment in both parties and both Chambers to modernize our workforce development system to ensure American competitiveness. The last time a Workforce Investment Act reauthorization was signed into law was in 1998, far too long ago, and the significant skills gap we face as a nation is evidence that our fragmented system simply is not working. Despite the billions of taxpayer dollars we invest annually on Federal job training programs, there are 4.5 million unfilled jobs and a staggering 10 million unemployed Americans. We need to bridge this gap, and WIOA helps get us there by reducing bureaucracy and providing American workers with a more flexible and effective workforce training system. Over the past year, I have heard from businesses, elected State and local leaders, and families back home about the critical need for reforms to our job training system, and I am glad to have had the chance to work on this bill and be a part of this process in the Senate. This legislation incorporates many reforms contained in the SKILLS Act, which I introduced in the Senate earlier this year, including the elimination of 15 programs identified as duplicative or ineffective and countless Federal mandates on States and local boards. In addition, WIOA establishes common performance metrics and requires independent evaluations every 4 years of all workforce programs to ensure effectiveness and accountability to taxpayers. By reducing bureaucracy and enhancing flexibility, WIOA eliminates delays that hinder job seekers from immediately accessing job training services and reentering the workforce. I thank Senators Alexander, Harkin, Isakson, and Murray and Representative Foxx for their leadership on this issue and am pleased to see this important legislation was signed into law without delay.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Madam President, I would like to take a moment today to honor Beaufort, SC resident, Maj. Gen. James E. Livingston, a 33-year U.S. Marine Corps veteran and Medal of Honor recipient, for his tireless service to this country. He is truly an American patriot worthy of our recognition. Born in Towns, GA, General Livingston knew from a young age that he wanted to serve his country. While enrolled at the Military College of Georgia, he was a member of the nationally recognized Corps of Cadets. After graduating from Auburn University in 1962 with a degree in civil engineering, General Livingston rose through the ranks of the Marine Corps. From Vietnam to the Philippines and domestically, wherein he was the first commander of the Marine Reserve Forces, General Livingston distinguished himself with exceptional service all over the world. Throughout his long and storied career, General Livingston has made his mark as a man who leads by example. General Livingston, serving as the operations officer for 3D Battalion, 7th Marines, oversaw Operation Frequent Wind, the evacuation of Saigon. Despite the urgency and chaos of the situation, General Livingston led with poise and professionalism: characteristics that would define his career. Due in large parts to General Livingston's leadership during Operation Frequent Wind, more than 7,000 American civilians and Vietnamese people in a desperate situation were airlifted out of Saigon and to safety. In 1968, while serving as the commanding officer, Company E, 2d Battalion, 4th Marines, General Livingston led his men on a determined assault on the village of Dai Do, where another Marine company had been isolated the night before when enemy forces seized the village. Despite being twice wounded by grenade fragments, General Livingston refused medical treatment and continued to lead his men across 500 meters of open rice fields. Having reestablished contact with the surrounded Marine Company, General Livingston then learned of a third Marine Company leading an attack on nearby Dinh To village. Marshalling his resources, General Livingston consolidated the two companies and led a support effort to halt the aggressive enemy counter attack from Dinh To. After being wounded a third time and rendered immobile, he remained in the combat zone and supervised the evacuation of his men. Only after his fellow marines were safe did General Livingston allow himself to be evacuated. For his gallantry, bravery, and selflessness, General Livingston was awarded the Medal of Honor from President Richard Nixon in 1970. In addition to the Medal of Honor, General Livingston also holds the Navy Distinguished Service Medal, the Silver Star, the Superior Service Medal, the Bronze Star, and the Purple Heart. It is because of men like James Livingston that Americans sleep easy at night, knowing they are safe from those who wish to inflict harm upon them. It is an honor that this Saturday, August 2, General Livingston will be the keynote speaker at my Vietnam Era Veterans Honor Ceremony in Columbia, SC where I will honor more than 1,500 veterans. General Livingston and his fellow veterans deserve to be recognized for their gallant efforts, and it will be my honor to stand with him on this special occasion. I invite my colleagues to join me in thanking Maj. Gen. James E. Livingston for a life and career dedicated to the protection of this Nation, her ideals, and her citizens.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I wish to voice my concern over the nomination of Mr. Norman Bay to be a Commissioner on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission--and eventually Chairman of the entire FERC. I have serious concerns with Mr. Bay's qualifications to serve as a Commissioner, let alone lead the entire agency, particularly at such a critical time for the Commission and the many issues it must address such as energy grid infrastructure, safety and reliability. Mr. Bay has at best limited experience in the energy sector and, unlike many of the recent FERC Chairmen, has never served on the Commission. Mr. Bay's inexperience is only further illuminated when compared to the lengthy and significant energy sector experience of current FERC Acting Chairman, Ms. Cheryl LaFleur. While I may not agree with Ms. LaFleur's various policy positions, there is no denying the fact that she has spent nearly her entire career learning the intricacies of a very complicated electricity grid. We must have the very best people on FERC, and the Chair must be the best qualified for leading the agency. Mismanagement in this critical agency could have serious consequences for American families, small businesses, national security and energy infrastructure reliability. I do not believe in on-the-job training for such an important position. It appears there has been an undefined deal--some would say a backroom deal--struck with the administration to give Mr. Bay a FERC apprenticeship, while the qualified Ms. LeFleur is forced out of her current role as FERC Chairman. Certainly, the Obama administration knows enough regulators to have nominated one that would be ready to serve once confirmed. This presents the question: if he is not ready to serve, why was Mr. Bay nominated in the first place? I am afraid that President Obama and his Senate cohorts want to use Mr. Bay and the FERC to carry out their radical energy agenda that uses the government to pick winners and losers in the energy marketplace, which will only cause prices to increase on those who can least afford more expensive energy. I also think serious questions have yet to be answered by Mr. Bay about his time as FERC's Enforcement Director. His answers to questions by various members of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee were vague at best and evasive at worst. Some suggested that actions taken by Mr. Bay as Enforcement Director have had a chilling effect on wholesale electric markets and have already caused electricity prices to increase in certain parts of the country. There is simply too much at stake for me to support a nominee we know so little about and who knows so little about the job for which he was nominated.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Madam President, I am pleased the Senate voted this week to improve job training in the United States. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, WIOA, is the result of a commitment in both parties and both Chambers to modernize our workforce development system to ensure American competitiveness. The last time a Workforce Investment Act reauthorization was signed into law was in 1998, far too long ago, and the significant skills gap we face as a Nation is evidence that our fragmented system simply is not working. Despite the billions of taxpayer dollars we invest annually on Federal job training programs, there are 4.5 million unfilled jobs and a staggering 10 million unemployed Americans. We need to bridge this gap, and WIOA helps get us there by reducing bureaucracy and providing American workers with a more flexible and effective workforce training system. Over the past year, I have heard from businesses, elected State and local leaders, and families back home about the critical need for reforms to our job training system, and I am glad to have had the chance to work on this bill and be a part of this process in the Senate. This legislation incorporates many reforms contained in the SKILLS Act, which I introduced in the Senate earlier this year, including the elimination of 15 programs identified as duplicative or ineffective and countless Federal mandates on States and local boards. In addition, WIOA establishes common performance metrics and requires independent evaluations every 4 years of all workforce programs to ensure effectiveness and accountability to taxpayers. By reducing bureaucracy and enhancing flexibility, WIOA eliminates delays that hinder job seekers from immediately accessing job training services and reentering the workforce. I appreciate my colleagues' work on this important issue and look forward to swift passage of WIOA in both Chambers.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, one of the greatest issues impacting the American health care system is the lack of access to high quality care for the uninsured. According to a 2012 CBO study, 26-27 million people will not have health insurance in 2016, with other studies suggesting that number may be closer to 30 million. Recent data from the Health Resource and Services Administration, HRSA, shows that close to 20 percent of Americans live in areas with an insufficient number of primary care physicians. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, AAMC, it is expected that there will be a shortage of 45,000 primary care physicians in the US by 2020, further limiting access to care. An immediate way to improve access to high quality health care for the uninsured is to engage the physician community to provide greater levels of charity care. Currently, there is little incentive for physicians to provide charity care outside of their normal scope of practice, and the percentage of physicians providing charity care has been in a state of steady decline. Due to reimbursement changes over the years, physicians are currently forced to maintain a certain amount of private, Medicare, and Medicaid insured patients in order to ensure their practices can remain profitable. This often leaves no opportunity to care for patients who lack insurance and who are often the most vulnerable and sick. The Charity Care Expansion Act would create a much needed incentive for doctors to deliver uncompensated care, thereby improving and expanding access to care for the uninsured. The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and allows for physicians to have a tax deduction for the taxable year at an amount equal to the amount the physician would have otherwise been paid. For example, if Medicare would have reimbursed at $100 for a service, the physician would be able to deduct for $100. None of the deduction amounts would be arbitrary. To qualify for the tax deduction, the bill would require physicians to have a pre-existing relationship with a health care clinic or another organization providing health care which is targeted to serve low income individuals. Through this coordination, the patient would be placed into the healthcare system with follow ups and health care professionals to see, instead of getting lost in the system after treatment. This would also prevent the use of the tax deduction as a tool to write off bad debt. The limitations on the deduction are 10 percent of gross income of the taxpayer for the taxable year derived from the taxpayer's provision of physicians' services. For retired physicians, no more than a $10,000 deduction would be allowed. While I am still waiting for a cost estimate on the bill, I repeal the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant, PHHSBG, which was included in the President's budget as a recommended cut, to provide an offset.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, one of the greatest issues impacting the American health care system is the lack of access to high quality care for the uninsured. According to a 2012 CBO study, 26-27 million people will not have health insurance in 2016, with other studies suggesting that number may be closer to 30 million. Recent data from the Health Resource and Services Administration, HRSA, shows that close to 20 percent of Americans live in areas with an insufficient number of primary care physicians. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges, AAMC, it is expected that there will be a shortage of 45,000 primary care physicians in the US by 2020, further limiting access to care. An immediate way to improve access to high quality health care for the uninsured is to engage the physician community to provide greater levels of charity care. Currently, there is little incentive for physicians to provide charity care outside of their normal scope of practice, and the percentage of physicians providing charity care has been in a state of steady decline. Due to reimbursement changes over the years, physicians are currently forced to maintain a certain amount of private, Medicare, and Medicaid insured patients in order to ensure their practices can remain profitable. This often leaves no opportunity to care for patients who lack insurance and who are often the most vulnerable and sick. The Charity Care Expansion Act would create a much needed incentive for doctors to deliver uncompensated care, thereby improving and expanding access to care for the uninsured. The bill amends the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and allows for physicians to have a tax deduction for the taxable year at an amount equal to the amount the physician would have otherwise been paid. For example, if Medicare would have reimbursed at $100 for a service, the physician would be able to deduct for $100. None of the deduction amounts would be arbitrary. To qualify for the tax deduction, the bill would require physicians to have a pre-existing relationship with a health care clinic or another organization providing health care which is targeted to serve low income individuals. Through this coordination, the patient would be placed into the healthcare system with follow ups and health care professionals to see, instead of getting lost in the system after treatment. This would also prevent the use of the tax deduction as a tool to write off bad debt. The limitations on the deduction are 10 percent of gross income of the taxpayer for the taxable year derived from the taxpayer's provision of physicians' services. For retired physicians, no more than a $10,000 deduction would be allowed. While I am still waiting for a cost estimate on the bill, I repeal the Preventive Health and Health Services Block Grant, PHHSBG, which was included in the President's budget as a recommended cut, to provide an offset.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, the Empower Employees Act prohibits Federal agencies from automatically deducting union dues from the pay of Federal employees. The current system provided for under title 5 of the United States Code permits taxpayer resources to be used for the collection of these dues, which in turn are often used for political purposes. This legislation takes an important step in eliminating this taxpayer subsidy to organized labor by shifting the administrative burden of funding public sector unions to labor organizations and away from the American taxpayer. Federal union employees enjoy benefits far greater than those in the private sector and the unions' power to bargain is supported by the dues they automatically collect from employees' paychecks. This bill in no way prohibits Federal workers from joining a union or paying dues, but rather increases freedom and choice for American workers while decreasing the strong-hold that labor unions have on American politics and the Federal budget.

Mr. SCOTT

Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, the Empower Employees Act prohibits Federal agencies from automatically deducting union dues from the pay of Federal employees. The current system provided for under title 5 of the United States Code permits taxpayer resources to be used for the collection of these dues, which in turn are often used for political purposes. This legislation takes an important step in eliminating this taxpayer subsidy to organized labor by shifting the administrative burden of funding public sector unions to labor organizations and away from the American taxpayer. Federal union employees enjoy benefits far greater than those in the private sector and the unions' power to bargain is supported by the dues they automatically collect from employees' paychecks. This bill in no way prohibits Federal workers from joining a union or paying dues, but rather increases freedom and choice for American workers while decreasing the strong-hold that labor unions have on American politics and the Federal budget.