Jon Tester

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I rise to talk about the farm bill and recognize the fine work the Senate Agriculture Committee did in bringing this bill forward. I am disappointed, to say the least, that this bill is bogged down in legislative games. This bill is too important for folks to play politics. If we want to talk about a lack of predictability, this is a prime example. We should be passing a bill and instead games are being played. Agriculture is the largest industry in Montana. Montana's farmers and ranchers produce the food that powers the Nation. Providing an effective safety net for those of us in production agriculture is important, and it is potentially very costly. It would have been easy for the Senate Agriculture Committee to write a bill that keeps spending at the levels of the last farm bill, but they did not. This bill recognizes the fiscal challenges we face. It cuts more than $23 billion, more than double the amount proposed by the Simpson-Bowles Commission. Due to the good work of the Senate Agriculture Committee, this bill produces meaningful savings and reduces the number of programs at the Department of Agriculture. At the same time the bill preserves a strong safety net for farmers, invests in conservation and nutrition and institutes much needed reforms. I have offered amendments to address the issues that still face farmers and ranchers around the country. The first is my provision to ensure that farmers will be able to buy public varieties of seeds. My amendment will make sure the Department of Agriculture follows through on the government's commitment to public seed varieties. It ensures that the USDA will devote the resources necessary to support a strong public breeding program and develop public plant and animal varieties. For too long the Agriculture Department has failed to promote public seed varieties. The USDA must support diverse seed research that farmers can adapt to various growing conditions. My amendment will not solve the problem, but it is a necessary first step to ensure that farmers have a choice of what kind of seeds to purchase. I have also introduced an amendment that takes a proactive approach to protect our country's livestock producers. Back in 2009, Senator Barrasso and I wrote a new law to help livestock producers get compensation for losses related to wolves. Any producer will tell us they would rather prevent predation than get compensated for a loss, but losses do happen. A number of States receive some assistance from that program. That is why I have introduced an amendment to help producers protect their livestock from the threat of predation. It is a commonsense solution to support livestock producers who live near protected populations of predators. Speaking of commonsense amendments, I am also offering what some have called the biggest package of sportsmen's bills in a generation. My sportsmen's act combines over 20 different sportsmen bills. It comes in response to the concerns I have heard as a chairman of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus. What I hear most often from sportsmen is the importance of access to public lands. That is why this bill dedicates funding to ensure sportsmen's access to some of the best places to hunt and fish in this country. Some folks might ask why is this important, but hunting and fishing is a way of life in places such as Montana. In fact, one in three Montanans hunts big game and over 50 percent fish. For us, it is not just recreation, it is a critical part of our economy. It drives and sustains jobs. So Senator Thune and I, as cochairs of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus, have combined the best bills and ideas from Republicans and Democrats. In addition to preserving access to public lands, it reauthorizes several vital conservation programs and preserves our shooting heritage. That is why it has the support in a wide variety of sportsmen and conservation groups. Neither party has a monopoly on good ideas. My sportsman's act takes the best from the House bill and the best from both sides of the aisle in the Senate to move the ball forward for sportsmen and sportswomen in Montana and the Nation. By adding this sportsmen's package to the farm bill, we will conserve some of our most productive habitat, passing on hunting and fishing traditions to future generations and entrusting them to those who care about them the most. (The further remarks of Mr. Tester are printed in today's Record under ``Morning Business.'')

Mr. TESTER. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, finally, let me shift gears to another topic I care deeply about; that is, taking care of our veterans. This weekend a group of World War II veterans from Montana will be visiting our Nation's capital. With a great deal of honor and respect, I extend a hearty Montana welcome to each and every one of them. Together, they will visit the World War II Memorial and share stories about their service. This journey will no doubt bring about a lot of memories. I hope it will give them a deep sense of pride also. What they achieved together almost 70 years ago was remarkable. That memorial is a testament to the fact that a grateful nation will never forget what they did nor what they sacrificed. To us, they were the greatest generation. They left the comforts of their family and their communities to confront evil from Iwo Jima to Bastogne. Together, they won the war in the Pacific by conquering an empire and liberated a continent by defeating Hitler and the Nazis. To them, they were simply doing their jobs. They enlisted in unprecedented numbers to defend our freedoms and our values. They represented the very best of us and made us proud. From a young age I remember playing the bugle at the memorial services of veterans of the first two world wars. It instilled in me a profound sense of respect I will never forget. Honoring the service of every generation of American veterans is a Montana value. I deeply appreciate the work of the Big Sky Honor Flight, a nonprofit organization that made this trip possible. To the World War II veterans making the trip this weekend, I salute you. We will always be grateful, and we will never forget your service or sacrifice.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, water is the foundation for life. That is true in every community, but especially in American Indian Country. Water plays a particularly important role in Native American life--past and present--in history, culture and religion. That is why I am proud to introduce the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 2012. Not every issue relating to this important compact is resolved. I very much appreciate the perspective of those who say that changes are still needed. My goal in introducing this legislation is to get all interested parties to negotiate on the issues that must still be resolved. By introducing this bill today, the Ft. Belknap Indian community, surrounding counties and the State of Montana indicate to the United States that we are ready to negotiate in earnest. During that process, Montanans and I will work to gain support from the Department of the Interior, State of Montana, the Tribe, and local communities as we address individual concerns. The current federal policy to determine Indian water rights is to negotiate, rather than litigate. Montana has had a similar policy since it created the Montana Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission in 1979. Both governments recognize that litigating every water right on Montana's vast Indian reservations is cost prohibitive and time consuming. Negotiated settlements are cheaper for everybody. They are much faster than litigation. They allow individuals to participate in the outcome. They provide a greater degree of certainty to everybody involved. Folks working on this settlement and I intend this legislation to fulfill the spirit of those policies. Since the Supreme Court's 1908 decision in Winters, the United States has had a responsibility to provide water to the land it reserves for specific purposes, such as reservations for American Indian homelands. This legislation fulfills that responsibility. It will empower the Tribe to create jobs and stronger communities by improving critical infrastructure. More importantly, it strikes the proper balance to achieve a fair, equitable, and final settlement of claims to water rights in the State of Montana between the State, the Tribe, and the United States for the benefit for the Tribe and allottees. There is more work to do to ensure that all interested parties can support a final agreement. I understand that. However, hundreds of hours of deliberation over more than a decade have been put into shaping the terms of this Compact and Settlement. Although we have made good progress during that time, we still have a lot of work left. I look forward to working with my tribal, local, state and federal partners to get this done. It is the right thing to do for the United States, the Tribe and the State of Montana. In 2001, as a member of the Montana legislature, I was happy to support state ratification of the Fort Belknap Water Rights Compact. I look forward to assisting the parties in moving this Compact over the next hurdle--congressional authorization.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, water is the foundation for life. That is true in every community, but especially in American Indian Country. Water plays a particularly important role in Native American life--past and present--in history, culture and religion. That is why I am proud to introduce the Gros Ventre and Assiniboine Tribes of the Fort Belknap Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 2012. Not every issue relating to this important compact is resolved. I very much appreciate the perspective of those who say that changes are still needed. My goal in introducing this legislation is to get all interested parties to negotiate on the issues that must still be resolved. By introducing this bill today, the Ft. Belknap Indian community, surrounding counties and the State of Montana indicate to the United States that we are ready to negotiate in earnest. During that process, Montanans and I will work to gain support from the Department of the Interior, State of Montana, the Tribe, and local communities as we address individual concerns. The current federal policy to determine Indian water rights is to negotiate, rather than litigate. Montana has had a similar policy since it created the Montana Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission in 1979. Both governments recognize that litigating every water right on Montana's vast Indian reservations is cost prohibitive and time consuming. Negotiated settlements are cheaper for everybody. They are much faster than litigation. They allow individuals to participate in the outcome. They provide a greater degree of certainty to everybody involved. Folks working on this settlement and I intend this legislation to fulfill the spirit of those policies. Since the Supreme Court's 1908 decision in Winters, the United States has had a responsibility to provide water to the land it reserves for specific purposes, such as reservations for American Indian homelands. This legislation fulfills that responsibility. It will empower the Tribe to create jobs and stronger communities by improving critical infrastructure. More importantly, it strikes the proper balance to achieve a fair, equitable, and final settlement of claims to water rights in the State of Montana between the State, the Tribe, and the United States for the benefit for the Tribe and allottees. There is more work to do to ensure that all interested parties can support a final agreement. I understand that. However, hundreds of hours of deliberation over more than a decade have been put into shaping the terms of this Compact and Settlement. Although we have made good progress during that time, we still have a lot of work left. I look forward to working with my tribal, local, state and federal partners to get this done. It is the right thing to do for the United States, the Tribe and the State of Montana. In 2001, as a member of the Montana legislature, I was happy to support state ratification of the Fort Belknap Water Rights Compact. I look forward to assisting the parties in moving this Compact over the next hurdle--congressional authorization.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Madam President, this amendment is pretty simple. I thank Senator Pryor for joining me on it. It basically is an amendment that reduces compensation for the senior executives at the Postal Service. It limits the six most senior Postal Service employees to a base salary no more than we pay our Cabinet Secretary, which is just a skosh under $200,000. There are going to be some changes in the Postal Service. Some of these cuts are going to take place at the lower end, some in the middle management, some at the upper end. To be fair, everybody needs to feel the pain and besides that, to be right fair, the Postmaster is an important job but so is the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of State, and others. I don't think we should be paying him more than what we do our Cabinet Secretaries. After all, the Postal Service is public service. I ask Senators' concurrence on the amendment.

Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I call up amendment No. 2032.

Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I rise to speak about an issue that affects everybody in my community. Although it is hard to imagine right now, some of the people we serve fear for their own lives, not because of a terrorist attack or a natural disaster; they are afraid that somebody who is supposed to love them or support them will hurt or even kill them. This is an upsetting issue, but one we need to face head on, and I am glad we are addressing it today. Domestic violence and sexual assault are harsh realities. They know no class, race, or economic limitations. Although we have made good progress curbing domestic and sexual violence over the past decade, we still have a lot of work to do. The legislation before us takes another step toward our goal of ending domestic and sexual violence. It might not go far enough for some, but it is progress, and I am proud to support it. Over the years, the Violence Against Women Act has helped reduce the rates of domestic and dating violence, sexual assault, and stalking, but the numbers are still stunning. This bill gives us an opportunity to help victims get out of a dangerous situation. We have an obligation to pass this reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Unfortunately, Montana is no different from the rest of the Nation. There were almost 5,000 cases of domestic violence or sexual assault in 2011, and 10 percent of them involve Montana's kids. Federal funding is crucial for Montana shelters, crisis lines, mental health services, and victim advocates. The domestic and sexual violence programs in Montana rely heavily on Violence Against Women Act funding to keep women and children safe and to administer the important programs we have operating in Montana. It will also promote changes in the culture of law enforcement, pushing governments and courts to treat violence against women and children as a serious violation of criminal law and to hold the offenders accountable. The Violence Against Women Act helped a constituent of mine in Billings rebuild her life after she was the victim of domestic violence. Maria Martin was beaten by her boyfriend. He threatened to kill her and her three daughters. Her cries for help were answered by the police who rescued her from a violent attack, but it is the programs supported by the Violence Against Women Act that helped Maria rebuild her life. The Violence Against Women Act provides funding to strengthen law enforcement, prosecution, and victim services. Each community has flexibility to use these funds in ways that respond to folks most in need and take into account unique cultural and geographic factors. This is especially important for a rural State such as Montana. I am proud of my work with the Judiciary Committee to ensure that the set-aside of funding for sexual assault services does not disadvantage service providers in Montana who often offer many services in one place. I wish to thank Chairman Leahy for his efforts to address this important issue. For States and cities with specialized programs, this wasn't a big concern. In Montana and other rural States, we have county and regional service coalitions. That means funds must be flexible enough so that we can serve everyone who walks in. If rural areas had to carve out funds for each type of service, people wouldn't get what they need to regain their footing. The next closest facility might be 90 miles away. That is not a referral; it is not help; it is another obstacle for folks who are already facing a life-threatening situation. Domestic violence crimes also take a heavy toll on those who survive the violence. The vast majority of survivors report lingering effects such as posttraumatic stress disorder, a serious injury directly from the abuse, missing school or work, higher frequencies of headaches, chronic pain, and poor physical and mental health. And while domestic violence affects every community, every race, and every rung of the economic ladder, the problem is even more severe in Montana's Indian country. In fact, violence against Native women and children is at an epidemic level. As Montana's only member of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, I have had several hearings on domestic and sexual violence. American Indian women suffer from violent crime at a rate 3\1/2\ times greater than the national average. Nearly 40 percent of all Native American women will experience domestic violence. One in three will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. Murder is the third leading cause of death among Indian women. In response to our hearing, I was proud to join Chairman Akaka and many others on the committee in introducing the Stand Against Violence and Empower Native Women Act, or SAVE Native Women Act, which is now included in the bill before us today. We owe it to the women and children of Montana to intervene--to provide resources to those programs which are on the ground, and to providers who are in the trenches. They offer safe havens, including support and educational services to help survivors of sexual or domestic violence break free of the cycle of violence. They help children who have lived with violence understand and make sense of what has happened so that they are less likely to get entangled in future abusive relationships. They help survivors gain the strength and the know-how to advocate for themselves in the legal system and in their relationships. By passing this bill now, we will continue to make progress toward empowering communities to protect all citizens, particularly the most vulnerable--women and children. As I stated before, this is not just an opportunity; this is an obligation that we have to improve our communities, and I urge my colleagues to support it. I thank the Chair, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I call up my amendment No. 2056 and ask unanimous consent that it be modified with the changes at the desk.

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, amendment No. 2056 requires the Postal Service to take into consideration some pretty commonsense things, such as economic savings, before they urge the shutdown of a post office or mail processing center. It also requires the Postal Service to take into account retail service standards. That means the Postal Service would not be able to leave a community without access to basic postal services when it closes down a post office. If the Postal Service does not meet these criteria, the Postal Regulatory Commission can review and reject the Postal Service's proposal. This amendment adds much needed teeth to the amendment that Senator Moran and I offered when this bill was before the committee. I am joined by a number of cosponsors, but in particular Senator Franken and Senator Levin. This is a commonsense amendment that allows a lot of the post offices that are going to be closed to have another set of eyes and have the Postal Regulatory Commission take another look.

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

Mr. TESTER

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

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I rise to discuss this postal reform bill. The Postal Service keeps rural America connected. It helps Montana seniors receive everyday necessities such as medicines, it allows our small businesses to conduct business, and it even makes sure our election ballots get counted on time. That is why this reform bill is so critically important all across rural America. First, I wish to thank my colleagues on the committee for their hard work on the substitute amendment to the postal reform bill. I want them to know how much I appreciate their efforts to work across the aisle with my colleagues and me to address several of our concerns with this bill. This bill has come a long way from the version I opposed in committee. But there is still a lot of work that needs to be done to make sure it works for rural America. I have been working for several months on some changes, such as preserving the requirement for overnight delivery and providing better protection for rural communities that could lose their post offices. But we need to go further to find more ways to keep rural post offices open and functioning. That is why Senator Franken and Senator Levin and I have submitted an amendment to prevent the Postal Service from closing a post office if it leaves rural communities without sufficient access to Postal Services, from buying stamps to regular mail service. Our amendment gives the Postal Regulatory Commission more teeth in being able to reject the Postal Service's efforts to close post offices and mail processing facilities if the Postal Service does not follow the criteria laid out in the bill. The Postmaster General is seeking to close around 3,700 post offices and over 200 mail processing facilities in this country. This bill will result in the reduction of another 100,000 postal employees. It will rewrite the rules of workers' compensation across the entire Federal Government. In short, it will change the lives of many people--to say nothing of the millions of Americans who will be impacted by a change in mail service. With this in mind, I think it is critically important that the upper management at the Postal Service and the Board of Governors lead by example. That is why I am offering an amendment to reduce the number of Governors on the Postal Board of Governors from nine to seven. The Board is currently not at capacity, and it should be encouraged to work with the six Governors who presently sit on the Board. Governors receive compensation for expenses and a stipend of about $30,000 a year, with total compensation up to about $42,600. It seems like a small savings. However, reducing up to $80,000 a year by cutting two positions could save three post offices in my State: For example, in Dupuyer or Wyola or Coffee Creek. We need to make sure everyone is tightening their belts, not just the folks who depend on mail service or the employees who will be forced into retirement or laid off over the next few years. My final amendment limits the six most senior postal executives-- including the Postmaster General--to a base salary of not more than $200,000, which is what a Cabinet Secretary makes. I know there are some folks who think the Postal Service should be a private enterprise and that the pay of the postal executives should reflect that. But the reality is, the Postal Service is a public service. It is right there in the Constitution that the Congress has the power to establish post offices. You cannot get much more public than that. Again, the savings from this amendment may seem like a drop in the bucket, but saving just $200,000 a year in reduced executive compensation is the same savings we would get from the closure of the mail processing centers in Helena, Montana's State capital, and Havre, an important town in north-central Montana. To me, the choice is simple. If the Postal Service is out of money and painful cuts have to be made, they need to be felt up at the top as much as at the bottom. I hope we get a chance to consider these amendments. They are relevant to the bill. This is a debate that is long overdue. It is time to have a serious debate in the Senate about what we want the Postal Service to look like. That is why I voted to begin the debate on a bill I cannot support yet. I want to get to the point where we have a bill that is going to save the Postal Service and not lead to its dismantling. So let's have the debate, let's look at amendments, and let's start voting. I'd like to add one additional point that is of critical importance to rural America. I have expressed my concern that the Postal Service is rushing to close rural post offices, and I have asked the Postmaster General to find alternatives to this effort. Many people aren't aware that, in rural America, nearly 90 percent of postal facilities are owned by private parties and leased to the Postal Service, rather than the Postal Service owning those facilities itself. Across the nation as a whole the Postal Service leases more than one- third of its facilities. Without the Postal leasing program, the Postal Service would not be able to meet its mandate of universal service. It would not be able to provide mail service to huge swaths of our nation in rural America. By partnering with the private sector, the Postal Service has facilities and provides service without the enormous expense of constructing, owning and maintaining its own buildings. More than 40 of the postal facilities in Montana are leased by the Postal Service. In all, more than 3,000 private property owners lease facilities to the USPS across America. Without the Postal leasing program, the infrastructure to serve many parts of America either would simply not exist or would require massive expenditures on building facilities that the Postal Service cannot afford. As the Postal Service explores options about the future of rural post offices across America, I urge it to look carefully at the leasing program and to realize the role it plays in saving money and providing universal mail service. Both of those roles are critically important. So as we make the tough choices about the how we can preserve rural post offices, I hope that the Postal Service will continue to consider the leasing program as part of its future. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Mary Mack, a veteran of World War II. Mary was born in Butte, MT and graduated from Girls Central High School before attending Sacred Heart School of Nursing in Spokane, WA. Sixty-eight years ago, Mary enlisted in the Army as a registered nurse. She was assigned to the 203rd General Field Hospital. Her mission was to provide medical support for troops staged in England as they prepared for the invasion of Nazi-occupied Europe in Operation Overlord on June 6, 1944. One month after the invasion, Mary, along with the 203rd Field Hospital, crossed the English Channel and arrived at Utah Beach in Normandy, France. From there they traveled on foot past scenes of war and destruction to set up a hospital for troops as they continued on into Europe. After the liberation of Paris in late August 1944, the 203rd established the largest general hospital in the European Theater of Operations in the French capital. There they treated over 65,000 patients. While stationed in Paris, Mary achieved the rank of First Lieutenant. She later served in Africa and the Middle East. Mary was honorably discharged from the Army on January 7, 1946. Because honors were made known toward the end of the war, many members of the 203rd may not have been aware of their eligibility or received their awards. After the war, she returned to Montana where she committed herself to raising a family and serving her community. Mary passed away last month on March 15. I had the honor of presenting Mary's family with a European-African-Middle Eastern Campaign Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars. This decoration represents the gratitude of the Nation she served and the wish that her family continues to share the memories of this courageous woman.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I ask to speak for up to 10 minutes, with Senator Merkley following me.

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I rise to speak in strong support of the capital formation bill that we received cloture on a few minutes ago. In a place where we too often get bogged down by politics, this legislation reflects a strong, bipartisan commitment to creating jobs by ensuring that small businesses have access to critical capital that they need. This legislation has tremendous potential to create jobs and spur economic growth and innovation. The key component to achieving all of these goals is ensuring that small businesses have access to the capital they need to grow their businesses and create jobs. This legislation is a rare instance in Congress where both Chambers in both parties come together to focus on this Nation's most urgent priority, and that is jobs. The President has already expressed his support for it. So let's get this bill done and off to him for his signature. Over the past few years, I have held 12 small business opportunity workshops all over the State of Montana. Without a doubt, access to capital is always one of the most critical issues that I hear from small business owners. Access to capital makes all the difference for a small business. If the money is there, so is the expansion; so is the capacity to do more research and development; so is the next great idea. Without capital, though, there is no growth, no risk-taking, and there are no jobs. Montana is a State of entrepreneurs. It is a frontier State. It has a tradition of self-reliance, which is clearly reflected in the entrepreneurs and the successful and innovative small businesses they have created and grown in this great State. They clearly reflect America's entrepreneurial spirit, which helps keep rural America strong and makes our economy the most innovative in the world. Our small businesses in Montana vary from family farms, ranches, and one-man manufacturing shops, to innovative biotech companies and cutting-edge information analytics firms. Many of these newer firms have the opportunity to change the landscape when it comes to diversifying Montana's economy. According to research from the Kauffman Foundation, nearly all net jobs created since 1980 have come from firms 5 years or younger. The role of startups in creating jobs and driving innovation has been well documented, but that ability to create jobs is limited if these firms do not have access to financing to scale and to grow their companies. So central to job creation is making sure investors and capital markets are accessible for startups. Because of this potential for growth, we need to do all we can to empower these businesses with the tools they need to survive and thrive at every stage of their development. These young companies must be able to access the capital they need to bring innovative ideas and products to the marketplace. Back in July I held the first of a series of hearings in the Banking Committee to examine the challenges and opportunities facing innovative small businesses as they try to access capital. A major take-away from the hearing was the need to ensure that capital markets remain within reach of startups at various stages of their development, particularly in the stages before they may be ready to go public. A key recommendation offered at the hearing came from Rob Bargatze of Ligocyte Pharmaceuticals in Bozeman, MT. He said we should take a closer look at updating SEC regulation A to better enable small businesses to raise capital through these public offerings. The regulation A exemption was created in the Securities Act of 1933 to provide small companies with an opportunity to raise capital without being subject to full registration with the SEC. Ligocyte is developing a new norovirus vaccine with the potential to prevent hospitalization and save significant health care costs--and to create those jobs of the future. Working through the FDA approval process is not easy. It requires years of hard work and tens of millions of dollars. It can be tough for any company to stick it out for that long or for that much money, but for a small firm in Bozeman, MT, it can be especially difficult. Access to capital to fund their clinical trials will be the determining factor in their ability to gain FDA approval. Back in September, Senator Toomey and I introduced the Small Company Capital Formation Act to update regulation A by increasing the total amount of capital that can be raised through these offerings to $50 million, while protecting new investors. Currently, the businesses can only raise $5 million under regulation A--a limit that has not been updated in nearly 20 years and one that many view as too low to be a valuable tool in raising capital. The bill maintains the most attractive elements of regulation A, including the ability for issuers to test the waters before registering with the SEC. It also preserves the nonrestricted status of securities sold through a reg A offering so that these securities can be resold to investors after the initial offering. New investor protections include a requirement that issuers file an audited financial statement with the SEC--a requirement that has been included in the legislation that I introduced as well as the House bill before us today. The bill also directs the SEC to establish additional disclosure requirements and requires issuers to electronically file offering statements with the Commission. Additionally, the bill subjects those offering or selling securities under regulation A to negligence-based liability under section 12(a)(2), and it includes disqualification provisions to prevent bad actors from making these offerings in a way that is consistent with Dodd-Frank. From what I have heard said about the House version of regulation A, you would presume none of these investor protections are included. Let me clarify that the bill I introduced with Senator Toomey, S. 1544, is identical to the language included in the House bill, H.R. 3606, that is before us today. The truth is that the substitute amendment that was voted on yesterday made very minor changes to this portion of the House bill, such as changing a ``may'' to a ``shall'' and adding a study by the SEC 5 years after implementation of these changes. We should have been able to pass this bill by a voice vote here in the Senate since this bill has enjoyed strong bipartisan support in the Senate, with six bipartisan cosponsors. Regardless of that, I am pleased that this balanced bill also enjoyed a 420-to-1 vote in the House--420 for, 1 against. Imagine that--all but one voting Member of the House of Representatives agree on this bill. I would also note the SEC's recently released recommendation from its Forum on Small Business Capital Formation increasing the regulation A exemption to $50 million was one of the top recommendations at this forum. By the way, this is an idea which has been in the SEC's Forum on Small Business Capital Formation recommendations almost every year since 1993, the year after the limit was last raised to $5 million. So the idea that this is some risky new idea is not correct. In fact, at a briefing with the SEC a few weeks ago, SEC lawyers suggested that there was absolutely nothing scary about S. 1544 and that they felt very comfortable with the existing investor protections included in that bill. The bottom line is that I am thrilled we will finally have an opportunity to pass this legislation--hopefully very soon--and get it to the President's desk. What does this legislation mean for Montana entrepreneurs? Let me cite a few examples. For Brett Baker, president and CEO of Microbion Corporation in Bozeman, lifting the cap on regulation A offerings will provide him with broader opportunities to raise capital. Instead of worrying about where the next phase of financing will come from, he can focus on discovery and research, working with the Department of Defense to use compounds Microbion discovered to treat antibiotic-resistant wounds. These changes will also allow a company such as Microbion to access capital at an earlier stage without diluting its earlier investors who believed in them from the earliest days of that company. And raising capital publicly through regulation A would also give folks in Bozeman who know about the company an opportunity to share in its success, something that is not possible now unless they are an accredited investor. More broadly, this legislation is going to provide small businesses in Montana's emerging data and biotech industries with new tools and options to access capital at different stages of development, and it will also provide necessary updates to existing regulations. For example, changes to the SEC's 500 shareholder rule would ensure companies, such as investment brokerage D.A. Davidson in Great Falls, can continue to provide their employees with stock in the company without having to go through a costly and time-consuming registration process with the SEC. This Montana-grown company dates back over 75 years and has always believed in rewarding its employees so they can have a stake in the success of the firm, which now operates in 16 States. Without these changes, a company such as D.A. Davidson would be faced with the choice of costly public registration or potentially eliminating existing employee shareholders. For companies such as Rivertop Renewables in Missoula, this legislation will provide them with an onramp to going public if that is an option they choose to take one day. Rivertop has begun full-scale production of their groundbreaking green biochemical products used in commercial products such as dishwashing detergents and de-icer. These changes will ensure that Rivertop will have multiple strategies at their disposal so they can go public at a time that is right for them and take advantage of the public markets as they continue commercialization of their products. For Lance Trebesch of ticketprinting.com and Ticket River, this legislation will enable him to grow his ticket printing, event management, and online ticket printing firm. Since 1997 this company has expanded its reach internationally, with over 25 employees in Bozeman and Harlowton, MT. This bill will ensure that entrepreneurs across the State of Montana will have a whole new set of tools at their disposal so they can make smart decisions about their future to develop and expand their businesses. They will have more choices and better access to capital markets, which should also give them more leeway to create and innovate. We have seen ecosystems of support for small businesses such as these as they spring up in virtually every county in Montana. Obviously, the success of these companies has implications for job creation and growth, but there are also tremendous opportunities for innovation. It is not surprising that in Montana so many startups have located near universities in Missoula and Bozeman. In fact, many of these firms got their start with discoveries in the labs at Montana State and the University of Montana. With this legislation, the possibilities are endless for Montana and for entrepreneurs and innovators across Montana and this Nation. Mr. President, I look forward to voting on this legislation and getting it to the President for his signature. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the fourth annual RxIMPACT Day on Capitol Hill. This is a day to recognize the contribution of pharmacies to the American healthcare system. Hundreds of pharmacists, pharmacy school faculty and students, State pharmacy leaders and pharmacy company executives will visit the Capitol to share with Congress the importance of supporting legislation that protects access to neighborhood pharmacies and utilizes pharmacists to improve quality and reduce the costs of health care. Over 260 advocates from 41 States have traveled to Washington to talk about their contributions in over 50,000 community pharmacies operating nationwide. These important health care providers are here to urge Congress to recognize the value of pharmacists and protect access to these medication experts as a part of our valued health care delivery system. Pharmacists are some of the Nation's most accessible and trusted health care providers. Most Americans live within 5 miles of a community retail pharmacy. They are the ultimate do-it-all providers. Pharmacists prepare, bill, and dispense prescriptions. They offer patient counseling. With their specialized education, they also play a major role in medication therapy management, disease management, immunizations, and health care screenings. Eighty-six percent of rural Americans reside within a 10-mile radius of a sole community pharmacy. As the face of community health care, pharmacies across the Nation offer these and other cost-saving programs and services to help patients take medicines appropriately to achieve positive results. For more than a century, pharmacies and pharmacists have supported folks in Montana and throughout America with these important patient care services. It is critical we work to support their unique contributions. As we continue to make health care better and more affordable, we should adopt policies that recognize the health and financial benefits from helping patients adhere to their medications. This helps to improve health outcomes and reduces the risks of adverse events and unnecessary costly hospital readmissions and emergency room visits. Unfortunately, only half of Americans living with chronic diseases adhere to their drug regimens. Patient nonadherence costs the Nation's economy an estimated $290 billion each year, not to mention the avoidable loss of quality of life for patients and their loved ones. Congress recognized the important role of local pharmacists when it included a medication therapy management, MTM, benefit in the Medicare Part D Program. By improving patient health outcomes, we have seen better efficiency and savings in the prescription drug program. That is why I support community pharmacys' efforts to strengthen the MTM benefit so it is available for seniors and others struggling with chronic conditions and other illnesses. Medicaid beneficiaries also deserve access to the most cost-effective medications. The Affordable Care Act made important changes to pharmacy reimbursement for generic drugs in the Medicaid program. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services recently issued a proposed rule to implement these important changes, and it will be critical for Congress to monitor this rulemaking to ensure it is consistent with congressional intent. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the vital role pharmacies play in the field of public health. All 50 States recognize the role pharmacists play by supporting their ability to administer immunizations and other important preventative services in Medicare, both Part B and Part D, and other Federal health programs. Today, as the cochair of the Senate Community Pharmacy Caucus, I celebrate the value of pharmacists and support efforts to protect access to neighborhood and community pharmacies. I appreciate how pharmacies improve the quality and reduce the costs of health care. In recognition of the fourth annual NACDS RxIMPACT Day on Capitol Hill, I would like to congratulate pharmacy leaders, pharmacists, students, and executives, and the pharmacy community for their contributions to the good health of the American people.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I thank the Presiding Officer. I also thank the floor managers of the highway bill for allowing me a couple minutes and to let them know how appreciative I am of their efforts to move forward on an important piece of legislation--the highway legislation. Nothing creates jobs and makes our economy stronger in the long run than responsibly investing in our infrastructure. So I thank Senator Boxer and Senator Inhofe for their good work and, hopefully, that good work will come to fruition very soon. Last September, the Department of Labor published new child labor regulations. They would have the effect of restricting how young folks are able to work on farms. I am deeply concerned about these new rules which will keep teenagers from working on farms and ranches. As the Senate's only working farmer, I know how important it is for young people to have the opportunity to work on farms and ranches. I am not alone in that belief. There are many folks here who understand the value of family farm agriculture. Growing up on the same farm that my grandparents homesteaded nearly a century ago--well, it was a century ago this year--my brothers and I were expected to bail the hay, pick rocks, feed the livestock, do field work, and the list goes on and on. That work ethic that was instilled in us as youngsters is a big part of my success today. It was that work ethic that built this Nation and that work ethic which I think is critical to the future of America. The skills young people learn from working on a family farm translate into a healthy work ethic that will serve them their entire lives, whether they choose to be in agriculture or in some other business. Family farm agriculture is one of the foundations of this country, and irresponsibly regulating the ability of young people to fully experience and grow from it will be detrimental to this country's future. I know firsthand that agriculture is uniquely a family industry in the United States, in Montana, and throughout rural America. Young people are expected to help out on the family farm or ranch. That is part of the economics of family agriculture. For smaller farms and ranches to survive, it has to be everybody pitching in. By participating in production agriculture, young people learn the value of a day's work. They also learn that grain doesn't come from a box or vegetables don't come from a bag or meat doesn't come from a package. They truly get educated about where our food comes from while they build that work ethic. These new rules get in the way of that education. That is because these rules were not written with a solid understanding of how family production agriculture works today. We are losing family farms every day in my hometown of Big Sandy, for example. In that community, I went to school with about 40 kids or so in my high school class. Today there are about 60 kids in the entire high school. That is because family farms are getting bigger, and there are fewer folks living in rural America. We ought to encourage beginning farmers and ranchers, preparing them to be our next generation of food producers in this country. The proposed rules would expand restrictions on what duties teenagers can perform on farms, limiting them. Under these new rules, all animal operations would be off limits until a person reaches 16 years of age. That is a sad day, a missed opportunity, and a loss of an opportunity for our young folks to learn. I am calling on the Department of Labor to withdraw this proposal as it applies to family farm agriculture and allow this country's youth to learn a solid work ethic. The common sense that goes with that work ethic is so critically important to our Nation's future. With that, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Paul Walborn, a veteran of Vietnam. Paul, on behalf of all Montanans and all Americans, I stand to say ``thank you'' for your service to this Nation. It is my honor to share the story of Paul Walborn's sacrifice in Vietnam, because no story of heroism should ever fall through the cracks. Paul joined the Navy in December of 1963. He was an Electrician's Mate, based on a landing craft. From Coronado, CA, he flew to Japan. On May 5, 1965, one of Paul's first assignments was to be part of a convoy from Okinawa, Japan to Vietnam. Paul was part of the third wave that took Marine Corps artillery equipment to the Chu Lai beach. Intelligence reports were unclear whether Viet Cong forces would meet them on the beach. From Chu Lai, Paul went to Da Nang where he unloaded Navy and Merchant Marine equipment. His boat then made several trips up the Perfume River to deliver equipment to support the war effort. When Paul returned to America, he wanted to get back to normal life. His DD-214 form was correct but the Navy had no record of him serving in Vietnam, even though he unloaded cargo onto Vietnamese beaches. He says there was just too much going on in 1967 for the Navy to worry about getting his paperwork processed correctly. Earlier this month, in the presence of his family, it was my honor to finally present to Paul the National Defense Service Medal, and the Vietnam Service Medal with one Bronze Star. I also presented to Paul the Meritorious Unit Commendation Ribbon, and the Vietnam Campaign Medal with the 1960 device. These four decorations are small tokens, but they are powerful symbols of true heroism. Sacrifice. And dedication to service. These medals are presented on behalf of a grateful nation.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor Mark Hamill, a native Montanan and a veteran of Operation Desert Shield and Desert Storm. It is my honor to share the story of Mark's service during the first gulf war. Mark was in the Army Reserves as a helicopter crew chief. In the fall of 1990, he was assigned to a Medivac unit and deployed to Saudi Arabia. As a helicopter crew chief, Mark was responsible for making sure the Medivac helicopters were ready to fly at a moment's notice. Two helicopters went to Bahrain and two were on standby to go north for Medivac calls. When Mark returned to the United States, the maintenance platoon never got their medals from the U.S. Army. The pilots and medics from the helicopters did but the men and women who were responsible for the safety of the helicopters were forgotten about. Earlier this month, in the presence of Mark's wife, parents, and friends, it was my honor to correct this oversight and finally present Mark with the medals he earned nearly 20 years ago. I presented to Mark the Southwest Asia Service Medal with Three Bronze Stars, and the Overseas Service Ribbon. I also had the honor of presenting to Mark the Kuwait Liberation Medal--Saudi Arabia, and the Kuwait Liberation Medal--Kuwait. These four decorations are small tokens, but they are powerful symbols of true heroism, sacrifice, and dedication to service. These medals are presented on behalf of a grateful nation.

Mr. TESTER

Mr. TESTER. Mr. President, I wish to thank the Senator from Alaska for his explanation of what has been going on as far as executive compensation with FHFA. Amendment No. 1492 to Amendment No. 1470