Ron Wyden

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, when we went to college, usually things were different. Often a student took out a loan, but those loans were manageable, and usually there were jobs waiting. Today, too often that is not the case. In fact, the students today who take out loans will leave school weighed down, on average, with $25,000 worth of debt. They are going to be trying to get into a labor market where there are more than four unemployed Americans for every available job. It has been noted that for the first time student loan debt exceeds credit card debt, and that now totals over $100 billion. Now, clearly, investment in higher education is an economic imperative. Education is the great equalizer. It enables upward economic mobility, and it breaks down class structures that impair many countries' ability to grow their economies. A highly-skilled and educated workforce is the basis for a healthy economy, and it is the linchpin to our economic future.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the long-awaited passage of the long term FAA reauthorization conference report is a great achievement for Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Hutchinson, and the many other Senators and staff members who were involved in this legislation. I'm pleased with the important nationwide achievements in this bill-- NextGen radar systems, improved passengers' rights, and airline ticket transparency, to name a few. But I wanted to take a few moments to talk about the huge positive impact this legislation is going to have throughout almost every part of my home State of Oregon. The big news for the Portland region is that the new slot exemptions at Washington National Airport will likely allow for the first direct flight from Portland International Airport to Washington National. This was not an easy victory for the northwest--many of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle had opinions on this issue and it seemed like we were not going to be able to come to an agreement. But I'm proud to say that both sides came to a compromise that will improve air service in the northwest and throughout the country. One of the things I'm most proud of is that this bill permanently protects Crater Lake from the threat of noisy air tours. As most folks who have visited Crater Lake know, the quiet and peace of the park is just as important as its scenic beauty. This legislation says that Crater Lake is specifically off limits to any overflights that might threaten that tranquility. This bill creates six new test areas for commercial use of unmanned aerial systems. In Central Oregon, folks are excited about the potential for using those test areas to advance the cutting edge aviation industry that already exists there. It's also an opportunity to monitor wildlife, do meteorological testing, and improve law enforcement in the vast acres of public lands now being co-opted by drug traffickers. Perhaps the folks who are most directly helped by this legislation are in Independence, OR. Independence has a community of general aviation enthusiasts who live near Independence Airport and who keep their planes on their own property. The FAA recently decided to change the rules on them, putting their future in doubt. This legislation erases that doubt and allows those folks to continue an arrangement they've had for nearly 40 years with no significant safety issues and no significant noise complaints. Finally, this legislation includes language to encourage recycling at airports, something I have been working on for nearly a half dozen years. I'm glad that it will provide important tools for airport recycling going forward. I commend my colleagues for moving this legislation forward as a positive step for the country and for my home State.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize someone who may not be familiar to members of the Senate, but in my State is synonymous with what makes Oregon a place that values the environment, its natural resources and its scenery. Gail Achterman of Portland passed away on January 28 of pancreatic cancer. Gail was a special friend for more than 40 years. When I arrived on the Stanford University campus in the summer of 1969, Gail and I were tour guides together, two Democrats at the conservative Hoover Institution of War, Revolution and Peace. We laughed about it then, and kept sharing jokes and stories for more than 40 years. Gail leaves behind an impressive legacy of public service and dedication to environmental causes that will endure for years to come. Her professional resume is impressive: Lawyer, director of the Institute for Natural Resources at Oregon State University, chair of the Oregon Transportation Commission, natural resources advisor to a former governor and member of too many State councils, boards and commissions to list here. Even more impressive, however, was her life-long commitment to those things that make Oregon great. For an example, look no further than the indispensable role she played in creation of the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area in 1981. Anyone who has seen the majestic Columbia River Gorge knows it is one of the most beautiful places on earth--a crown jewel in a landscape filled with natural beauty. I was proud to be part of protecting The Gorge and proud of partnering with Gail in making that happen. I want to extend my condolences to her husband Chuck and to her family and assure them that Oregon is a greater State thanks to my special friend Gail and the ideals she believed.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. I thank the Senator from New York for his courtesy. I too will be brief. It is an extraordinary honor to represent Oregon in the Senate. Having this special privilege, I have tried to make the lodestar of my service transparency and accountability. It is why I worked with the distinguished Senator from Missouri Mrs. McCaskill to end secret holds in the Senate. I have had more than 600 open town meetings. That is why we take legislative drafts and put them online so citizens can comment wherever possible. It is all about transparency and accountability. Today's campaign finance system is neither. It is not transparent, it is not possible for Americans to see who is giving what sums to what particular candidate, and there is no accountability--certainly no accountability in the sense that when people go to the polls in Vermont or New Hampshire or New York or anywhere else people know who has given a donation so that they can factor that in to their political judgment. With the explosion of mass media, the tradition of negative campaigning through pamphleteers and partisans has grown and grown to the point where the typical voter cannot find a way to avoid the flood of half truths and outright falsehoods. It becomes even harder to send the message that voters want; that is, we made our choice because we have full and complete information. Now, all of this was getting worse until the Congress came together to take two steps. The first was Congress enacted regulations of independent expenditures and eliminated the so-called soft corporate money that had begun to overwhelm the process. The second step--and I want to thank Senator Collins from Maine for working with me on this issue--is we passed what is called ``stand by your ad.'' This is the law that requires candidates who sponsor political ads to take individual responsibility for their ads and state in the ads that they ``approve this message.'' I thank Senator Schumer, who has been a champion for this kind of accountability for years. That is where we were until the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United drove the system right back into the mud. Through this decision, the Supreme Court has seen fit to create what amounts to a new route for massive sums of unreported, unaccountable, and unacceptable spending to drown out any responsible discourse. In my view, this decision degrades our democracy and creates the appearance that the American Government is simply up for sale to the highest corporate bidder. This decision by the 5-to-4 majority on the Supreme Court overturned almost a century of precedent and undermined the intent of the Founders. The decision, in my view, reflects a lack of understanding about a political process and an inability to see the corrosive effect of massive and hidden expenditures. Justice Kennedy, in the decision, specifically said this: We now conclude that independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption. In effect, it was the opinion of the Court that if Disney or Comcast or British Petroleum spends $20 million in an otherwise $10 million Senate race advocating one candidate, that newly elected Senator will not even have the appearance of working in their corporate interests instead of the public interest. In my view, that kind of reasoning does not pass the smell test. This is the sort of decision that ought to be left to the branch of government with constituents who understand not just the theory but the reality of elections. It is incumbent upon the Congress, whose members do understand the electoral system, to begin the process of restoring balance to the mechanisms of democracy. This needs to be done before our elections are entirely overrun by shadowy interests warring unchecked, using the political system and American voters as pawns. My final point is that I do not reach this judgment lightly. I believe constitutional amendments ought to be reserved for those situations when the delicate balance set up by the Founders has been upset by time, circumstance, or, in this case, a sudden and ill- considered change in the jurisprudence that governs our system. That is the situation we face today, and it is why I have decided to add my name to the sponsors of this amendment. I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN. I would yield.

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I commend my colleague from Oregon for his statement.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, Senator Durbin speaks for every Member of the Senate. Senator Kirk is such a decent, caring, and thoughtful man, and all of us enjoy working with him in the Senate on various kinds of bills. Godspeed, Senator Kirk, for a healthy recovery. We are thinking of you tonight and you are in our prayers. I am very glad the senior Senator from Illinois has reflected the concerns of everybody from his home State tonight.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I want to take a few minutes with Senator Moran tonight to reflect on the events of the last few days with respect to the Internet legislation. I want to begin by thanking Majority Leader Harry Reid for reopening the debate on anticounterfeiting and copyright protection legislation. In pulling the Protect IP Act from the floor, Leader Reid has given the Senate an opportunity to get this policy right. The Senate now has the opportunity to consult all of the stakeholders, including the millions of Internet users who were heard last week. The Senate has the opportunity to ensure that those exercising their first amendment rights through the Internet, those offering innovative products and services, and those looking for new mediums for sharing and expression, have their voices heard. I also express my appreciation to Senator Moran. He is an impassioned advocate for job creation and innovation on the Net--the first on the other side of the aisle to join me in this cause. My colleague, Senator Cantwell from Washington State, who is as knowledgeable as anybody in public service about technology, and Senator Rand Paul, who is a champion of the Internet as a place where those who look at the Net as a marketplace of ideas, stand together and approach policy in an innovative way. Last week, tens of millions of Americans empowered by the Internet effected political change here in Washington. The Congress was on a trajectory to pass legislation that would change the Internet as we know it. It would reshape the Internet in a way, in my view, that would have been harmful to our economy, our democracy, and our national security interests. When Americans learned about all this, they said no. The Internet enables people from all walks of life to learn about the legislation and then take collective action to urge their representatives in Washington to stop it. So everybody asked, come Wednesday, what would happen? In fact, the American people stopped this legislation. Their voices counted more than all the political lobbying, more than all of the advertising, more than all of the phone calls that were made by the heads and the executives of the movie studios. Their voices were heard loud and clear. Last week, the Congress did what the American people called for instead of what the Washington insiders wanted. That is what I call real change. It was a grassroots victory for the history books, and, as one commentator said, now we are in unexplored territory. Here is why. Eight million of 162 million who visited Wikipedia took action to influence their Member of Congress; 7 million Americans signed Google's petition to block consideration of PIPA; hundreds of thousands of Americans called the Congress. In all, in just 1 day, more than 15 million Americans communicated with Congress and urged it to reject the Hollywood proposal to censor and censure the Internet. The 15 million Americans who took action, who signed petitions, who provided their e-mail addresses and ZIP Codes in a desire to be informed are now going to be watching us like never before. The 15 million who looked up and spoke up are not faceless and they are not anonymous. They are people such as Frances Stewart of Maryland, Nancy Linton from Oregon, Debbie Kearns from East Hartford, CT, and John Jewett of Colorado, who gave their names to Web sites around the country. They are joined by millions of other Americans who were raising concerns for months before last week's Web blackout and supporting the filibuster I announced here in the Senate almost 1\1/2\ years ago. These 15 million citizen activists were not the only ones saying the PROTECT IP Act took the wrong approach. The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times--the hometown newspapers for the content industry--both wrote editorials saying the legislation overreached. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record copies of those articles.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, while the 15 million are no doubt pleased, as I am, that Majority Leader Reid pulled PIPA, they are waiting to see if we will now retrench into the old ways of doing things--the old way where Senators went behind closed doors and wrote legislation with the help of well-healed lobbyists, the old way that has eroded the trust America has with the Congress and the confidence that we are here on their behalf--or will the Congress instead construct legislation in a transparent way that responds to our broad collective interests? The American people want just that, and they deserve it. Among the lessons we should have learned from the events of the past few weeks is the importance of letting the public in on what we are doing. There are serious unintended consequences when Members of Congress and staff think they have all the answers and rush to construct and pass legislation. There are clear virtues in prudence, deliberation, and even a little humility. I believe that is what our constitutional Framers had in mind for the Senate. I know my colleagues are waiting, and I want to close with this. I harbor no doubt that this Congress on a bipartisan basis can and should construct legislation to combat international commerce in counterfeit merchandise and content that infringes on copyrights. There is no question that selling fake Nikes or movies you don't own is a problem that needs to be addressed, but it can be done in ways that do not threaten speech, that allow for the legitimate sharing of information and protect the architecture and value of the Internet. I look forward to working with my colleagues and a broad cross-section of stakeholders to do that. I have proposed an alternative with Senator Moran and Senator Cantwell here in the Senate. Chairman Issa and Congresswoman Lofgren have proposed exactly that kind of alternative in the House. It is called the OPEN Act. It is bipartisan. It is bicameral. It would allow us to go after the problem of these rogue foreign Web sites while at the same time protecting what we value so greatly about the Internet. We are going to have more discussions about this legislation and other approaches in the future, but we now have an opportunity to get this right. To a great extent, that is possible because of my colleague from Kansas who has joined me in this effort, the first on the other side of the aisle to step up and join our efforts. I am very appreciative of what he has done, and I look forward to his comments. I also thank the Senator from Texas, Mr. Cornyn, for his courtesies so that Senator Moran and I, because of our bipartisan work, could make these brief remarks. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I think that is a reasonable request. Senator Moran and I, who have teamed up on Internet policy, wish to speak for a few minutes, if we could follow each other. We plan to be brief. The Senator from Illinois will be brief. Is that acceptable?

Mr. WYDEN. Five or 10 minutes each. We will be brief.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. The next rollcall vote will be on Monday, January 23, at 5:30 p.m. on confirmation of the Gerrard nomination.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. If there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand adjourned under the previous order.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn and convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session the Senate adjourn until the following pro forma session: Tuesday, December 20, at 11 a.m.; Friday, December 23, at 9:30 a.m.; Tuesday, December 27, at 12 p.m.; Friday, December 30, at 11 a.m.; and that the second session of the 112th Congress convene on Tuesday, January 3, at 12 p.m. for a pro forma session only, with no business conducted, and that following the pro forma session the Senate adjourn and convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma session the Senate adjourn until the following pro forma session: Friday, January 6, at 11 a.m.; Tuesday, January 10, at 11 a.m.; Friday, January 13, at 12 p.m.; Tuesday, January 17, at 10:15 a.m.; Friday, January 20, at 2 p.m.; and that the Senate adjourn on Friday, January 20, until 2 p.m. on Monday, January 23; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, and the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day; further, that following any leader remarks the Senate be in a period of morning business until 4 p.m., with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each, and that following morning business, the Senate proceed to executive session under the previous order.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I understand cloture has been filed on the motion to proceed to the PIPA legislation. As one of the bipartisan group of Senators who strongly objects to proceeding to this bill, I believe it is important to begin to outline the very real dangers that are posed by the bill. The primary architects of the Internet and our leading cyber security experts have made it clear this legislation will undermine the key technologies that prevent fraud and protect consumers on the Internet. Our Nation's leading first amendment scholars have made it clear that this bill poses a serious threat to speech and civil liberties for all who use the Internet, and our Nation's leading technology employers warn that this bill presents a clear and present danger to innovation and job growth in an area that is going to be a major source of new jobs for this century. Today, along with Senator Moran of Kansas and Senator Cantwell of Washington, I have introduced the OPEN Act. We believe this is a reasonable and bipartisan alternative to the PIPA bill and to the legislation that is before the other body, and we hope the Senate will take the time to consider alternatives before taking action that could deal an enormous body blow to a vital job engine for our economy. Over the past few weeks, more than 1 million Americans have weighed in strongly in opposition to this legislation. Therefore, I will be working with colleagues on both sides of the aisle over the next month to explain the basis for this widespread concern, and I intend to follow through on a commitment that I made more than 1 year ago to filibuster this bill when the Senate returns in January. Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. WYDEN

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

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, over the last 10 months, I have been working with a diverse group of people in my State on ways to get healthier food and more local agricultural products to consumers throughout the country. Our group included folks from every part of the State, from gleaners to cattle ranchers to pear growers. Today, I am introducing legislation based on my discussions with that agricultural advisory group. What we came up with is a series of proposals that I believe will create agricultural jobs, increase access to healthy locally grown fruits and vegetables and reduce paperwork for small farmers while improving access to Federal loans. This legislation, the Fresh Regional Eating for Schools and Health Act, or FRESH, will provide healthier choices for recipients of Federal programs, push the U.S. Department of Agriculture's, USDA's, technology agenda forward, increase flexibility for State and local stakeholders, and provide better tools for small and beginning farmers. For too long, the Federal Government has pushed one size fits all solutions when it comes to nutrition and school lunches. That is why this bill allows States to put forward innovative approaches to increase nutrition outcomes for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, beneficiaries. Let me make it clear: under this waiver, no benefits will be reduced, and eligibility requirements will not be changed. But States will be allowed to provide incentives for eating healthy for SNAP recipients, and help those folks meet the nutritional guidelines the Federal Government has put out. Another area where flexibility is needed is in the school lunch program. Right now, over $1 billion goes to Oregon schools to purchase food for school lunches from a USDA commodity warehouse. Meanwhile, I have heard time and time again from school lunch administrators in Oregon that they would prefer to use that money locally to purchase the healthy fruits and vegetables that are so plentiful in our State. This bill would give them the flexibility to use half of what they now get from USDA to buy local agriculture products. This approach not only enables schools to buy healthier food for their students but also helps keep that money in their local economy and support the family farmers down the road. This bill also moves USDA nutrition programs into the 21st century when it comes to technology. It would push USDA to allow using smartphones and tablet technology to accept SNAP benefits, just as they can accept debit and credit cards today. This will open up access for SNAP beneficiaries to roadside food stands and farmers markets, and encourage innovation within the agency. SNAP recipients would also be allowed to use online grocery stores to purchase foods--a hugely helpful option for busy moms or elderly folks for whom a grocery store is just too hard to get to. For the WIC program, state agencies will be allowed to use technologies like videoconferencing to keep costs low when it comes to training and certification, particularly for stores in rural areas. Folks will also get a better sense of how the over $70 billion a year taxpayers fund SNAP with is being spent if this bill passes. It requires companies that take in over $1 million a year from the SNAP program to provide the Federal Government with a receipt of just what they have provided. For small farmers, this bill suspends the 15-year limit for farmers to use FSA-guaranteed operating loans and the 7-year limit for them to use FSA direct operating loans. By suspending these time limits indefinitely, farmers will have more access to these critical capital tools. It includes creation of a streamlined micro-loan program that will allow small farmers who just need a quick loan to repair their truck or buy some feed to borrow up to $5,000 on an expedited basis and with reduced paperwork. For beginning farmers, this legislation provides an alternative to the requirement that they need three years of farm management experience to get direct loans to buy farm lands. Instead, it allows the completion of college degrees related to business and agriculture to be considered a substitute for hands-on experience. For example, Horticulture or Agricultural Business Management degrees would be acceptable as an alternative. This will give young folks more opportunities to get the capital needed to start a farm. I am really proud of the efforts the Oregonians on my agricultural advisory committee made in helping provide common sense solutions for nutrition and farming programs. I want to thank them for helping to create these proposals, and I am going to work hard with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we move to the next farm bill to include these ideas.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, over the last 10 months, I have been working with a diverse group of people in my State on ways to get healthier food and more local agricultural products to consumers throughout the country. Our group included folks from every part of the State, from gleaners to cattle ranchers to pear growers. Today, I am introducing legislation based on my discussions with that agricultural advisory group. What we came up with is a series of proposals that I believe will create agricultural jobs, increase access to healthy locally grown fruits and vegetables and reduce paperwork for small farmers while improving access to Federal loans. This legislation, the Fresh Regional Eating for Schools and Health Act, or FRESH, will provide healthier choices for recipients of Federal programs, push the U.S. Department of Agriculture's, USDA's, technology agenda forward, increase flexibility for State and local stakeholders, and provide better tools for small and beginning farmers. For too long, the Federal Government has pushed one size fits all solutions when it comes to nutrition and school lunches. That is why this bill allows States to put forward innovative approaches to increase nutrition outcomes for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, beneficiaries. Let me make it clear: under this waiver, no benefits will be reduced, and eligibility requirements will not be changed. But States will be allowed to provide incentives for eating healthy for SNAP recipients, and help those folks meet the nutritional guidelines the Federal Government has put out. Another area where flexibility is needed is in the school lunch program. Right now, over $1 billion goes to Oregon schools to purchase food for school lunches from a USDA commodity warehouse. Meanwhile, I have heard time and time again from school lunch administrators in Oregon that they would prefer to use that money locally to purchase the healthy fruits and vegetables that are so plentiful in our State. This bill would give them the flexibility to use half of what they now get from USDA to buy local agriculture products. This approach not only enables schools to buy healthier food for their students but also helps keep that money in their local economy and support the family farmers down the road. This bill also moves USDA nutrition programs into the 21st century when it comes to technology. It would push USDA to allow using smartphones and tablet technology to accept SNAP benefits, just as they can accept debit and credit cards today. This will open up access for SNAP beneficiaries to roadside food stands and farmers markets, and encourage innovation within the agency. SNAP recipients would also be allowed to use online grocery stores to purchase foods--a hugely helpful option for busy moms or elderly folks for whom a grocery store is just too hard to get to. For the WIC program, state agencies will be allowed to use technologies like videoconferencing to keep costs low when it comes to training and certification, particularly for stores in rural areas. Folks will also get a better sense of how the over $70 billion a year taxpayers fund SNAP with is being spent if this bill passes. It requires companies that take in over $1 million a year from the SNAP program to provide the Federal Government with a receipt of just what they have provided. For small farmers, this bill suspends the 15-year limit for farmers to use FSA-guaranteed operating loans and the 7-year limit for them to use FSA direct operating loans. By suspending these time limits indefinitely, farmers will have more access to these critical capital tools. It includes creation of a streamlined micro-loan program that will allow small farmers who just need a quick loan to repair their truck or buy some feed to borrow up to $5,000 on an expedited basis and with reduced paperwork. For beginning farmers, this legislation provides an alternative to the requirement that they need three years of farm management experience to get direct loans to buy farm lands. Instead, it allows the completion of college degrees related to business and agriculture to be considered a substitute for hands-on experience. For example, Horticulture or Agricultural Business Management degrees would be acceptable as an alternative. This will give young folks more opportunities to get the capital needed to start a farm. I am really proud of the efforts the Oregonians on my agricultural advisory committee made in helping provide common sense solutions for nutrition and farming programs. I want to thank them for helping to create these proposals, and I am going to work hard with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle as we move to the next farm bill to include these ideas.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation to expand the Wild Rogue Wilderness Area and expand protections to Oregon's iconic Rogue River and its tributaries. I am pleased that Senator Merkley is joining me in this effort, and that Congressman DeFazio has introduced similar legislation in the House of Representatives. The Wild Rogue Wilderness and the Rogue River that runs through it embody one of the Nation's premier recreation destinations, famous for the free flowing waters which provide numerous rafting and fishing opportunities. The headwaters of the Rogue River start in one of Oregon's other great gems Crater Lake National Park, and the river ultimately empties into the Pacific Ocean, near Gold Beach on Oregon's southwest coast. Along that stretch, the Rogue River flows through one of the most spectacular canyons and diverse natural areas in the United States. The Rogue River is a world class rafting river, offering everything from one day trips to week long trips through deep forested canyons. On the land, the Rogue River trail is also one of Oregon's most renowned backpacking routes. The legislation I introduce today, the Rogue Wilderness Area Expansion Act of 2011, would add 60,000 acres of new wilderness to the existing Wild Rogue Wilderness. The Wild Rogue Wilderness expansion would protect habitat for bald eagles, osprey, spotted owls, bear, elk, cougar, wild coho, wild Chinook, wild steelhead and many others. It would also ensure these treasured lands are protected for generations to come. My legislation would also protect an additional 143 miles of tributaries that feed the Rogue River with cold clean water; 93 miles would be designated Wild and Scenic Rivers and an additional 50 miles would be protected from mining. The areas receiving protection include Galice Creek, Little Windy Creek, Jenny Creek, Long Gulch, and 36 other tributaries of the Rogue. The Rogue River is one of Oregon's most iconic and beloved rivers. It is a river that teems with salmon leaping up rapids to spawn, and finds rafters down those very same rapids at other times of the year. The Rogue River is home to runs of coho, spring and fall Chinook, winter and summer steelhead, and it has the special distinction of being one of only a handful of rivers in the country with runs of green sturgeon. In 2008, American Rivers named the Rogue and its tributaries as the second most endangered river in the U.S. I am hoping to change that today by introducing legislation to protect this river and its tributaries. I previously introduced legislation to protect the Rogue River tributaries in the last two Congresses. Since that time, I have worked with the timber industry and conservationists to find a compromise that protects one of America's treasures with additional wilderness designations and more targeted protections for the Rogue's tributaries. I am pleased that nearly 60 local businesses, and over 100 organizations and business in total, support protecting the Wild Rogue, and that support grows every day. Many of those businesses directly benefit from the Wild Rogue and the Rogue River. As I often say, protecting these gems is not just good for the environment, but also good for the economy. These protected landscapes are powerhouses of the recreation economy that draws visitors from around the world to this region and the Rogue River is one of Oregon's most important sport and commercial fisheries. The Wild Rogue is the second largest salmon fishery in Oregon behind the Columbia. The Wild Rogue provides the quality of life and recreational opportunities that create an economic engine that attracts businesses and brings in tourists from around the world. The Rogue River supports 450 local jobs in nearby communities like Grants Pass. By protecting the Wild Rogue landscape and the tributaries that feed the mighty Rogue River, Congress will ensure that future generations can raft, fish, hike and enjoy the Wild Rogue as it is enjoyed today and that the recreational economy of this region remains strong. I want to express my thanks to the conservation and business communities of southern Oregon, who have worked diligently to protect these lands and waters and enable the outdoor recreationists to use and enjoy these rivers. I look forward to working with my House colleagues and the bill's supporters to advance our legislation to the President's desk. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, today I am pleased to introduce legislation to expand the Wild Rogue Wilderness Area and expand protections to Oregon's iconic Rogue River and its tributaries. I am pleased that Senator Merkley is joining me in this effort, and that Congressman DeFazio has introduced similar legislation in the House of Representatives. The Wild Rogue Wilderness and the Rogue River that runs through it embody one of the Nation's premier recreation destinations, famous for the free flowing waters which provide numerous rafting and fishing opportunities. The headwaters of the Rogue River start in one of Oregon's other great gems Crater Lake National Park, and the river ultimately empties into the Pacific Ocean, near Gold Beach on Oregon's southwest coast. Along that stretch, the Rogue River flows through one of the most spectacular canyons and diverse natural areas in the United States. The Rogue River is a world class rafting river, offering everything from one day trips to week long trips through deep forested canyons. On the land, the Rogue River trail is also one of Oregon's most renowned backpacking routes. The legislation I introduce today, the Rogue Wilderness Area Expansion Act of 2011, would add 60,000 acres of new wilderness to the existing Wild Rogue Wilderness. The Wild Rogue Wilderness expansion would protect habitat for bald eagles, osprey, spotted owls, bear, elk, cougar, wild coho, wild Chinook, wild steelhead and many others. It would also ensure these treasured lands are protected for generations to come. My legislation would also protect an additional 143 miles of tributaries that feed the Rogue River with cold clean water; 93 miles would be designated Wild and Scenic Rivers and an additional 50 miles would be protected from mining. The areas receiving protection include Galice Creek, Little Windy Creek, Jenny Creek, Long Gulch, and 36 other tributaries of the Rogue. The Rogue River is one of Oregon's most iconic and beloved rivers. It is a river that teems with salmon leaping up rapids to spawn, and finds rafters down those very same rapids at other times of the year. The Rogue River is home to runs of coho, spring and fall Chinook, winter and summer steelhead, and it has the special distinction of being one of only a handful of rivers in the country with runs of green sturgeon. In 2008, American Rivers named the Rogue and its tributaries as the second most endangered river in the U.S. I am hoping to change that today by introducing legislation to protect this river and its tributaries. I previously introduced legislation to protect the Rogue River tributaries in the last two Congresses. Since that time, I have worked with the timber industry and conservationists to find a compromise that protects one of America's treasures with additional wilderness designations and more targeted protections for the Rogue's tributaries. I am pleased that nearly 60 local businesses, and over 100 organizations and business in total, support protecting the Wild Rogue, and that support grows every day. Many of those businesses directly benefit from the Wild Rogue and the Rogue River. As I often say, protecting these gems is not just good for the environment, but also good for the economy. These protected landscapes are powerhouses of the recreation economy that draws visitors from around the world to this region and the Rogue River is one of Oregon's most important sport and commercial fisheries. The Wild Rogue is the second largest salmon fishery in Oregon behind the Columbia. The Wild Rogue provides the quality of life and recreational opportunities that create an economic engine that attracts businesses and brings in tourists from around the world. The Rogue River supports 450 local jobs in nearby communities like Grants Pass. By protecting the Wild Rogue landscape and the tributaries that feed the mighty Rogue River, Congress will ensure that future generations can raft, fish, hike and enjoy the Wild Rogue as it is enjoyed today and that the recreational economy of this region remains strong. I want to express my thanks to the conservation and business communities of southern Oregon, who have worked diligently to protect these lands and waters and enable the outdoor recreationists to use and enjoy these rivers. I look forward to working with my House colleagues and the bill's supporters to advance our legislation to the President's desk. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, the Benton County Drug Treatment Court is a shining example of our Nation's drug court system. As one of only 10 mentor courts in the Nation, the Benton County Drug Treatment Court serves as a model program for the over 2,500 treatment courts in the United States. This achievement is especially significant given that the Benton County Drug Treatment Court started as an ambitious pilot program only 10 years ago. The positive impact drug treatment courts have on individuals, families, and communities throughout our country is remarkable. Due to tireless efforts underway since the first drug court was established over 20 years ago, there is now a system in place which, if completed, reduces the likelihood of drug relapse for individuals, provides increased housing stability, and brings families together. The positive outcomes from completion of drug courts are well documented and benefit those outside the system as well by reducing costs to the taxpayer. Congratulations to the Benton Country Drug Court on their 10th anniversary. Because of innovative solutions like drug courts, our country is one step closer to breaking the cycle of addiction which has plagued our country for far too long.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Joel Garrison, a defense legislative fellow in our office, be granted floor privileges for the consideration of these amendments.

Mr. WYDEN

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent for the pending amendment to be set aside, and to call up amendment No. 1160 and amendment No. 1253 en bloc.

Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this first amendment has previously passed the Senate, and it would solve a problem created by the lawyers at the Pentagon who, in effect, at the last minute on a critical issue for eastern Oregon pulled the rug out from under our communities. When we have a problem or conflict in our State, we solve it the Oregon way, by finding consensus and building common ground. That is why, when it became apparent 20 years ago that the U.S. Army's chemical depot in Umatilla, OR would be closing once all the chemical weapons were destroyed, the community leaders gathered all of the critical organizations together and began the process of planning what to do with the land once the facility closed. The depot straddles two counties, several cities, and historic tribal lands. So suffice it to say, there are a lot of folks at home in my State who are interested in what happens to the land. As progress was made in destroying the weapons at Umatilla, we were able to find consensus. The Federal Government helped. More than $1 million in grants was made available to move the project along. When the facility was listed in the 2005 BRAC recommendations for closure, the Pentagon eventually recognized the organizations that were involved in building this consensus in an official local reuse authority. Everything appeared on track, until last summer. That was, in effect, the time when at the last moment the Pentagon changed the rules. After decades of planning and $1 million was spent pulling together an extraordinary communitywide consensus, a lawyer at the Pentagon decided to reinterpret the law and declared that the 2005 BRAC report, which became law when Congress didn't pass a resolution of disapproval, didn't matter. He decided that the Umatilla depot would be closed outside of the BRAC authority because the last of the chemical weapons wouldn't be destroyed until after the 6-year limit for completion of BRAC actions. What this lawyer either didn't know, or chose to ignore, is this was precisely the intention of the BRAC Commission when they put the depot on the closure list. The BRAC report discusses the fact that the mission of destroying the chemical weapons wouldn't be completed until after deadline. On page 239 of the report, the Commission found Secretary Rumsfeld's assertion that the chemical demilitarization would be complete by the second quarter of 2001 was optimistic. The Commission wrote: An examination of status information for the depot's mission completion and subsequent closure revealed that dates may slip beyond the six-year statutory period for completing BRAC actions. Therefore, the Commission took the Secretary of Defense's recommendation: ``Close Umatilla Chemical Depot, OR'' and changed it to: ``On completion of the chemical demilitarization mission, in accordance with treaty operations, close Umatilla Chemical Depot, OR.'' These facts make it clear that the Commission did not, as this Pentagon lawyer claimed, make a conditional recommendation that the facility only be closed if the chemical demilitarization mission is completed by September of 2011. Rather, the Commission acknowledged that the closure will have to happen when the demilitarization mission is complete, even if that is after September 2011. That decision by the Commission became law. It is also important to note that the Commission was aware that the demilitarization mission had a deadline of its own. Under the terms of the Chemical Weapons Convention treaty, Umatilla had to complete the mission by April 29, 2012. The fact is, they actually beat the deadline. The depot should be closed under BRAC so that the will of the community in the form of this local reuse authority and the will of Congress and the BRAC law will be taken into account. The Pentagon has to implement the law as it is, not as it wants it to be. But since the lawyers at the Pentagon seem to think there is some ambiguity, I seek to clarify it for them with my amendment. The amendment would require the Pentagon to follow the BRAC commission's report and close the Umatilla depot under BRAC. Once again, I would like to note that this has already passed the Senate once. I am very appreciative of Chairman Levin, Senator McCain, and all our colleagues who are involved, and I thank them. Amendment No. 1253 Briefly--and I appreciate the courtesy of Chairman Levin on this matter--I want to discuss my second amendment, which I call the Soft Landing Act. I think we all recognize the extraordinary contributions that are made by our Guard and Reserve. They do tour after tour after tour, and we all understand that never in our Nation's history has the American military relied more on the Guard and Reserve than it has in the last 10 years. More than 800,000 members of the Guard and Reserve have been called to Active Duty since 9/11. As I indicated, they are serving repeated tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. I strongly believe that, for the period from when a Guard member is holding a rifle to the time when they are holding a child back at home in beautiful Oregon, there is not sufficient time being given in order to have what I call a soft landing--an opportunity to reintegrate and get your life back in order and get back into the community. What we have is a very abrupt period where a soldier faces the trauma of combat and comes right back to the community and really does not get an adequate time to readjust. Literally in a matter of days, these guardsmen go from holding guns in the chaos of a combat zone to holding their children in the serenity of their own homes. It is a difficult transition. I want to make the point that it is a very different transition than most of our Active-Duty troops have. Many of our Active-Duty troops come back to communities that are close to facilities, close to bases. There is a variety of support services. Many of the guardsmen come back to communities that do not have the support of a large base. It seems to me that the amount of personal and professional requirements that are placed on these patriotic, courageous Americans who serve in the Guard and Reserve warrants our making it possible for them to have what I call a softer landing getting back into their home communities. I am very appreciative that Chairman Levin has given me the opportunity to discuss this briefly. He and I and his staff have talked about this before. I will close by saying that to have all these men and women who have served with great valor in the Guard and Reserve coming home--we all understand they already face an unacceptably high unemployment rate. We know that in many instances they feel strongly about taking the time to get mental health services, to get back together again with their families, and very often the time period simply is insufficient for Guard members who come home. And right now, the reality can be pretty harsh. They go and serve their country. Their families are concerned about them being in harm's way for months on end, and then they come back with no job and no source of income to be able to support their families. What this legislation does is provide a soft landing for Guard and Reserve members by allowing returning guardsmen and reservists to take up to 45 days--it is not a long period of time--to come back, get home, get their lives in order, and still get paid. My view is that this is part of the promise we have made in this country to take care of our troops. They did their best for us. We ought to do our best for them. I am hopeful that the soft landing amendment, amendment No. 1253, will be included when this legislation passes here in the Senate. I again express my appreciation to Chairman Levin. I know he is speaking on an important matter. I thank him for working on both of these amendments, and I look forward to working with him on these matters. He is our authority on these issues. I appreciate his courtesy. I yield the floor.