Sheldon Whitehouse

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, let's try another one. I call up Executive Calendar No. 704. This is the nomination of Judge Timothy Black, again, a district court nominee, a local trial court nominee, to serve on the U.S. district Court for the Southern District of Ohio. Judge Black has served the Southern District of Ohio for 6 years as a Federal magistrate judge. He is currently a Federal magistrate judge in the court for which he is nominated as a district judge. Before that, he spent a decade as a municipal court judge and had a long career as a civil litigator. He was reported out of the Judiciary Committee without dissent after a voice vote on February 11 of this year. February, March, April--more than 2 months ago. He has languished on the Senate floor after clearing the committee without dissent--a judge, a district judge, a trial judge who serves now as the magistrate judge. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session, and notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate proceed to Executive Calendar No. 704, the nomination of Judge Timothy Black; that the nomination be confirmed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table; that any statements relating to the nomination be printed in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I am told a Senator is coming to make an objection, so I will withhold. While we are waiting for a Republican Senator to come and object to these nominees, they came out of the Judiciary Committee back in January. They were voted out of the Judiciary Committee by, in one case, a unanimous, bipartisan vote of 19 to 0. I am informed that the Senator from Arizona, Mr. Kyl, is coming to object. He sits on the Judiciary Committee. He likely was one of those 19 who voted in favor of this nominee at the committee level. I don't know who the one vote against Judge Wynn was, but he cleared the committee by a vote of 18 to 1--again, a strong bipartisan vote of support. Yet I am informed by the floor staff that they are finding somebody to come and object to these nominees who have now been held through all of February, all of March, half of April, despite being, in one case, unanimous votes in the Judiciary Committee, and the other an 18-to-1 overwhelming bipartisan majority. For the record, I am informed that the minority was aware that I was coming to make these unanimous-consent requests; that they had full knowledge this was going to come. If they are unable to get somebody to the floor to object, as far as I am concerned that is not my concern. Mr. President, I renew the unanimous-consent request now that there is a Senator on the floor.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to executive session, and notwithstanding rule XXII, the Senate proceed to Executive Calendar Nos. 656 and 657; that the nominations be confirmed en bloc; that the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table en bloc; that any statements relating to the nominations be printed in the Record, as if read, and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action. I ask for the regular order on the unanimous-consent request. The unanimous-consent request is pending right now, and there is nobody on the floor to answer it or object to it.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I wish to talk for a minute about nominations and holds. The Senate's Executive Calendar contains the names of those individuals whom President Obama has nominated to serve in his administration, and those positions require Senate confirmation. The Executive Calendar also contains the names of those the President has nominated to be Federal judges--it is called the Executive Calendar, but judicial offices are on it as well--at the district court level and the appellate level. Since President Obama took office, this Senate has voted on 44 nominees. Some others have been approved by unanimous consent, but we have had 44 votes on nominations. Of those 44 votes, 31 of them--that is 70 percent of the nominees we have confirmed--have been held over, filibustered, and delayed by days, weeks, and months. The average length of time these nominations have languished in the Senate has been over 106 days. That is 15 weeks--3\1/2\ months--from the time they were nominated to the time they were confirmed. That is just the average delay. Some have spent 1 full year in Senate limbo as a result of holds by our colleagues. If it has taken this long to confirm them, these must have been controversial nominees, and these must have been tough votes and close votes for the Senate, one would think. Well, let's take a look--bearing in mind that it takes 51 votes to be confirmed by the Senate. Sixteen of these nominees who have been held over, filibustered, or delayed were subsequently approved when they came to a vote by more than 90 votes in the Senate. Again, sixteen of the filibustered nominees passed the Senate with votes of more than 90. Another 10 have been approved with more than 80 votes--bear in mind that it only takes 51 to get confirmed--and 3 more with more than 70 votes. That is 29 out of those 31 nominees who, when they finally came to their vote, were approved overwhelmingly, by enormous bipartisan majorities, in the Senate. They have spent 106.6 days, on average, waiting to be confirmed by those vast majorities--waiting to be confirmed overwhelmingly. The only conclusion that a rational mind can draw from this is that this is not about controversial nominees; this is about politics, plain and simple--the bare knuckles politics of obstruction, the kind of politics that says I don't care if you are qualified for the job for which you were nominated. I don't care that the Department of State or the Department of Homeland Security needs you for a critical job. I don't care. You are going to sit on the Senate calendar for months and months and months so that I can score political points against the President, so that I can inhibit the deployment of this elected President's administration into the office of the government. Well, that is wrong and it needs to stop. As of Monday, the Executive Calendar contained the names of 101 nominees--101 individuals for critical jobs in agencies all across the government that are now sitting on the Senate's Executive Calendar waiting and waiting. I want to address some of the judges who have been waiting for a long time, and I will ask that their nominations be called up and approved. Mr. President, I will start with Judge Albert Diaz and Judge James Wynn, a pair of judges who are Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals nominees. So I will call up Executive Calendar Nos. 656 and 657, the nominations of Judges Albert Diaz and James Wynn, nominees to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Let me tell you who they are. Judge Diaz currently serves on North Carolina's Special Superior Court for Complex Business Cases. He was reported out of the Judiciary Committee on January 28, 2010, by a vote of 19 to 0. He has served in the Marine Corps and has 9 years of State court judicial experience. Judge James Wynn was reported out of the Judiciary Committee the same day, January 28, 2010, by a vote of 18 to 1. He currently sits on the North Carolina Court of Appeals, the State's intermediate appellate court. He is a certified military trial judge and a captain in the U.S. Navy Reserve.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, let me first thank the Senator from Oregon for his remarks. He has brought great passion for this issue to the Senate. He serves with distinction on the Banking Committee. I couldn't agree with him more that the spectacle of colleagues scampering up to Wall Street to offer their services, and interfering with, obstructing, watering down, and impeding, of all things financial regulatory reform, after all we have been through, is not a spectacle that is salutary. I appreciate his remarks.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Jordan DiMaggio and David Williams of Senator Bingaman's office be given the privileges of the floor for today, April 20, 2010.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I rise to describe the catastrophic flood damage in my home State of Rhode Island and to ask all my colleagues, to appeal to my colleagues, for swift action to deliver to our families and businesses badly needed aid. Rhode Island saw more rain last month than any month on record: over 16 inches, with over 5 inches of rain falling on March 30 alone. The devastation wrought by these storms exceeds anything in living memory. Meteorologists who have reviewed this are calling it the most damaging storm to hit the ``Ocean State'' since the Great September Gale of 1815, a monstrosity of a storm that tossed ships through the streets of Providence and carried out to sea the shops on Newport's Long Wharf. Rhode Island's floods of March 2010 could not have come at a worse time. They struck a Rhode Island already weakened by the worst recession we have seen since the Great Depression. Even before the recent flooding, unemployment in our State stood near 13 percent and homelessness was on the rise. We have already experienced 27 months of severe recession. For a year, we have been in the top three States for unemployment. It is too soon yet to estimate the full economic impact of the March flooding, but it is clear the flooding's economic damage will be prolonged and severe. The peak storm of March 30 and 31 brought commerce in the entire region to a halt. Route I-95, the main artery that connects the major cities of the New England and Middle Atlantic States, was closed for 2 full days, flooded out, following a surge of the Pawtuxet River. The river, which has a flood level of 9 feet, crested at its alltime high, almost 21 feet on March 31. It is hard to overstate the importance of this highway to Rhode Island's economy because it is not only a regional artery, but it is the main commuter artery for our home State. Similarly, Amtrak's Northeast service was closed for 5 days due to flooding of the track in our State. This next picture shows the Warwick Mall. It is one of the largest shopping centers in the State. It was completely flooded following the unprecedented rainfall of March 30 and 31. You can see the top of a car right up to the hood. You can see the entry is completely flooded. There are thousands of Rhode Islanders who work at the mall, others use the mall, many have kiosks who sell within the mall. Suddenly, with very little warning, they are temporarily unemployed. I toured this complex with its owner, Aram Garabedian, just after the water had gone down. The water was only about an inch deep when we were there. You could still see--it says ``Food Court.'' You could still, in the food court, some of the flooding was vanilla and some of the flooding was chocolate because of the ice cream stores that had lost their power and melted into the flood. Mr. Garabedian and his workers are in the middle of a heroic job cleaning up, and they are determined to reopen as soon as possible. But it could be weeks or even months until all those stores are back in business. Those, of course, are weeks and months when families who depend on paychecks from this mall will need to survive on unemployment benefits; unemployment benefits, I might add, with which our friends on the other side are trying to interfere. Some store owners doubt whether they will be able to reopen at all. I recently held a telephone townhall during which a store owner named Kathleen told me about the damage to her store in the mall which had been in business for 25 years. Her payment counter and her register were destroyed. The drywall in her store was ruined. Little if any of the merchandise or fixtures appear to be salvageable. Kathleen's flood insurance company has claimed that her damage is not covered. She said if she doesn't receive some grant assistance from the government, she will not be able to reopen, after 25 years. We can see from this picture the scale of hardship that business owners are facing as they begin to clean up their stores. It is difficult to relay in a single speech the extent of the devastation wrought by the floodwaters. Flooding in places where, as I went around the State, the thing I heard more than anything else was: 35 years I have lived here, never even water in the basement, and now look at this. I wish to take a few more minutes to show some pictures that represent the damage. These were taken as I toured throughout the State in the immediate aftermath of the storms. This is the Natick pumping station which sits near a river bank in west Warwick. It is the sewage treatment plant overwhelmed by the floodwaters and largely submerged. The flooding crippled the station's ability to process sewage and caused essentially all of the untreated waste that would have gone through it to flow out into local waterways. This station was submerged. The Warwick sewage treatment plant was submerged, and Bristol's sewage treatment plant was also inundated. The Warwick treatment plant became really part of the river. It just flowed right through and across it. So for days Rhode Island's floodwaters were contaminated with raw sewage. On March 30, I visited Glen Rock Reservoir in south Kingstown with town manager Steve Alfred. As we can see, the reservoir has overflowed the banks of this dam and has washed out this section of Old Usquepaugh Road. This is a very typical photograph of the sort of road damage we are going to see from the flooding in Rhode Island. When we have water like that flowing as white water over a road, one can imagine what damage it does to the road. Our infrastructure requirements to rebuild from this are going to be very considerable. At the height of the rains, Providence Street, a main road in west Warwick, a small, largely working class, great Rhode Island town which was probably, per capita, hardest hit of any of the towns, its main street looked more like a river than a road. This picture shows local emergency workers out rescuing people who had been flooded into their homes and apartments, driving them through the street with a boat and a jet ski. It is not often that one sees local emergency workers driving down the streets of Rhode Island towns on boats and jet skis, but that is what it took to get the residents out who had been trapped by the unprecedented floodwaters. The day after the rain subsided, the flooding was still substantial. This is the scene behind a local mechanic's shop on Elmwood Avenue in Cranston. As we can see, the garage building is almost entirely underwater. Nearby I was able to see cars and trailers for this mechanic's shop just under the surface. Later on when the water came down, I could see that under this were cars. The water is right over the roof of the cars and so they are not visible now, but what I thought was an empty parking lot was filled with cars. I went back and saw it later when the waters had gone down. Here is a different shot of Elmwood Avenue, looking across to an old mill complex filled up through the ground floor. The floodwaters are not only covering the road itself but the entire parking lot and into the mill building itself. The local residents obviously were distraught by this kind of damage. The bridge that is down below this, the Wellington Avenue bridge, thankfully, held against the pressure of the water rushing past and over it. But two other bridges in Coventry and North Providence were so damaged by the flow of the water past and over them, they have been condemned and have to be completely rebuilt. I went up to Cumberland to visit Mayor Dan McKee and to see some of the damage there. His first responders took us in this boat out to Hope Global, which is a company on the banks of the river. It is the Blackstone River this time, not the Pawtuxet. This river was the cradle of the Industrial Revolution. The famous Slater Mill in Rhode Island, a true spark that lit off America's Industrial Revolution, was a riverside mill that used the rivers for power. Historically, Rhode Island's working waterfront has been a riverfront where mills up and down the Blackstone, up and down the Pawtuxet, up and down other rivers took advantage of water power. Then, as we moved from water power to electric power, they stayed. But they stayed very vulnerable to the rivers. So from Hope Global down to Ashaway Line and Twine Manufacturing Company and Bradford Printing and Finishing, down near Westerly, the riverside businesses in Rhode Island were swamped and flooded. Now businesses that had existed for generations, that employed many hundreds in each plant, lie submerged and silent and out of work. One of the things that impressed me during the course of my visit was the resilience and courage shown by Rhode Islanders. We took this picture at the Okonite Company. It was also covered by the floodwaters, but it was nice to see both the American and the Rhode Island flags flying high, notwithstanding the devastation that surrounded them. This struck me as a fitting example of the perseverance and resilience of Rhode Islanders responding to this crisis. It is often true that trying times bring out the best in people. Certainly this flood brought out the best in many folks in Rhode Island. Everywhere I have traveled in the days since the floods began, I have seen neighbors helping neighbors, and I have witnessed the extraordinary diligence and courage of the municipal workers, the first responders, the police and fire folks, public works, literally all municipal employees who worked long hours, wet hours, cold hours, tired hours helping their communities. A couple in Westerly had to evacuate their home in 30 minutes as the floodwaters picked their house up off its foundation. Amazingly, after all they had been through, they were still more concerned for their neighbors than for themselves. They wrote to me: . . . as tough as things are for now, we see so many of our neighbors that had no insurance and they lost everything. Many of the people who were renting apartments were given five minutes to evacuate. As we were leaving, we took all of the food from our fridge and were able to distribute it to some of the folks running for cover. Life seems to throw lots of curveballs and you never anticipate when you get up in the morning that you will be homeless by the afternoon but Mother Nature has a mind much her own. I want to point out that the word on the Rhode Island State flag is ``hope.'' As I look at this picture and see the flag flying high amidst the devastation from the flood below, I am reminded of countless acts of kindness and generosity, indeed hope, which have accompanied the troubling, sad, and difficult events of recent weeks. The flooding has destroyed homes, closed businesses, and ended jobs, but the people of Rhode Island have stood up remarkably well. Spirits are strong. But the job of rebuilding roads, bridges, sewage treatment plants, public facilities, homes, and businesses is a colossal and daunting task for a State 27 months into severe recession. Now we in Rhode Island need help from the Federal Government to fulfill that hope and to help us rebuild. Just as Congress was quick to respond in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 and following the flooding in Iowa and North Dakota in 2008 and 2009, I ask my colleagues to work with my senior Senator, Jack Reed, and I to bring needed assistance to Rhode Island as quickly as possible. I yield the floor.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business, it adjourn until 9:45 a.m. today, Thursday, March 25; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of H.R. 4872, as provided for under the previous order.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

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

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, Senators should expect a series of rollcall votes in relation to amendments and motions to the reconciliation bill at approximately 9:45 a.m. Under the agreement reached tonight, we expect to complete action on the bill around 2 o'clock tomorrow. There are other matters that need to be considered during tomorrow's session. Therefore, Senators should be prepared for additional votes upon disposition of the bill.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that it adjourn under the previous order.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I am very honored to have the chance to join my distinguished senior Senator Jack Reed on the floor of the Senate today to pay our respects to a friend of both of ours who has departed us. I will say a few words about our friend George Panichas myself and then my senior Senator will say a few words in conclusion. It is a great honor for me to be here with Senator Reed. One of the bonds we have is our friendship with the Honorable George Panichas. On March 2, in our Ocean State, the day of George Panichas's funeral, the flags across the State were at half mast in his honor. While George's family and friends are still in mourning, we wish to take this opportunity to share some of our memories in celebration of the life of a man who was one of Rhode Island's legends. Representative George Panichas was many things: a husband, a father, a grandfather, a veteran, a public servant, an advocate, a loyal and active member of Rhode Island's Greek community, a successful businessman and, to so many of us, a trusted friend. Although George was small in physical stature, he will always be remembered as big, big, big in personality, heart, influence, and accomplishments. Born in the city of Pawtucket, Representative Panichas was a lifelong resident of the great State of Rhode Island and a member of our country's ``greatest generation.'' A decorated Air Force veteran of World War II, George served as a tail gunner in the U.S. Air Force, completing 50 missions over enemy-occupied Europe at a time when not many men survived 50 missions. He received the Air Medal with four oak leaf clusters, three battle stars for service in the European theater, the Presidential Unit Citation with oak leaf cluster, and a personal citation from the commanding general of the 15th Air Force. Representative Panichas was elected to the Rhode Island General Assembly representing a district in Pawtucket in 1970. He served until he retired in 1984. He was the first Greek American to hold State office in our State. Throughout Representative Panichas's tenure, he was known for speaking up with his powerful voice and for his influence in getting the job done. This Chamber still remembers John O. Pastore, another distinguished Rhode Island public servant, small in stature, large in voice and influence. George Panichas was very much in his mold. Representative Panichas was a tireless advocate for Rhode Island's veterans. Thanks to him, today we have a beautiful Rhode Island Veterans Memorial Cemetery. Thousands of people visit the cemetery every year and witness firsthand George Panichas's work. He was responsible for its expansion and many of the improvements that happened on its grounds. The brave Rhode Islanders and their families who served our country so honorably will always have a special beautiful place to be remembered, due in large part to the work of this man. Perhaps above anything else, Representative Panichas was widely known for his dedication to his beloved Greek heritage. Many years I have attended the Pawtucket Greek Festival with him, held at the Greek Orthodox Church of the Assumption. I will always remember how he knew virtually everybody in attendance and the affection and respect the entire community showed for him. At his funeral, I returned to the Church of the Assumption for his wake, and I heard so many stories there from his family, friends, and colleagues of his unique character, his kindness, and his bold leadership. It is with heavy hearts that we remember one of Rhode Island's legends today. But Representative Panichas's spirit will live on through his accomplishments and through his beloved family. I extend my deepest condolences to his loving wife Angela, to his two daughters, of whom he was so proud--Denise and Joan--to his loving and beloved son George, Jr., and the apple of his eye, his grandson George III, and, of course, the rest of the Panichas family. George was truly one of a kind, and he will be missed. George Panichas once quoted the great Greek philosopher Aristotle in saying: You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the greatest quality of the mind next to honor. Today we recall with respect and affection a man whose courage will long live in our hearts. I yield the floor for my distinguished senior colleague.

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

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

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

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the nomination of Judge Thompson.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the Senate is considering the nomination of O. Rogeriee Thompson to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. I join my distinguished senior colleague, Senator Jack Reed, in applauding President Obama's selection of this very talented nominee. Judge Thompson's nomination has been an uncontroversial one and for good reason: She is a dedicated public servant, a highly experienced and respected judge, and a credit to our home State of Rhode Island. I congratulate Judge Thompson on coming to this point in the process. I look forward to an uneventful confirmation vote in the next few moments. I express to my colleagues my thorough confidence that she will have a distinguished career as a U.S. circuit court of appeals judge. I also thank some of my colleagues. I am grateful to majority leader Harry Reid, to our chairman, Patrick Leahy, of the Judiciary Committee, and to Senators on the other side of the aisle, in particular Judiciary Committee Ranking Member Sessions, for clearing the path for us to vote on Judge Thompson's nomination today. I also am grateful that my senior Senator, Jack Reed, gave me the opportunity to assist him in identifying the best possible nominee to recommend to President Obama to serve on the first circuit. As my colleagues know, it has been a great honor to serve with Senator Reed since coming to the Senate. This experience with him was another great privilege for which I am deeply grateful. After the Senate's action today, after a lifetime of achievement, Judge Thompson will make history as the first African American and only the second woman to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. This will not be the first barrier broken by Judge Thompson, as she was the first African-American woman on each of the Rhode Island courts on which she has served. These were great moments in the history of our State. Her arrival will be a wonderful addition in the history of the first circuit. Judge Thompson has given our State 21 years of distinguished judicial service, first as an associate judge on the Rhode Island district court and subsequently as an associate justice on the Rhode Island superior court. Judge Thompson has long scrupulously adhered to the proper role of a judge, respecting the role of the legislature as the voice of the people, deciding cases based on the law and the facts, not prejudging any case but listening to every party before her, respecting precedent and limiting herself to the issues properly before the court. Her courtroom deservedly has come to be known as a place in which every party can expect a fair hearing. I know she will earn the same reputation for fairness and excellence as a judge on the first circuit. I should add that Judge Thompson has also made great contributions to our home State of Rhode Island outside of the courtroom. She has chaired or been a member of important court committees that have improved the quality of justice in our State. She has given back to her alma mater, Brown University, by serving as a trustee of that great university. She also has provided mentoring to innumerable students, given her time to countless law school programs, and served on the boards of valuable and important nonprofit groups such as the Rhode Island Children's Crusade for Higher Education, a board on which I was privileged to serve with Judge Thompson. Her willingness to give back to our Rhode Island community is characteristic of her entire family. Judge Thompson's husband, Bill Clifton, is a judge on the Rhode Island district court. Her brother-in- law, Bill's brother, Edward Clifton, is a judge on the Rhode Island superior court. It is a very judicial family. I had the occasion to appear before Judge Clifton. He was the first judge when we began our Rhode Island drug court, when I was attorney general. I have had firsthand experience of his qualities as well. We in Rhode Island are very fortunate to be blessed by the service and excellence of this family. I am sure this is a very proud day for them all. I extend my best wishes and my congratulations. I anticipate we will have a strong vote in favor of Judge Thompson. She passed without incident or opposition through the review of the Judiciary Committee. There were no questions raised about her at her hearing. The voice vote in her favor was unanimous. The track record to date is an indication of a likely resounding confirmation. I might add, if that happens, that is yet another evidence of how talented she is and how well she deserves this seat on the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. It is an important circuit for our State. It is a very distinguished court. It has had very distinguished Rhode Islanders sit on it in the past. A friend of Senator Jack Reed's and mine, the honorable Bruce Selya, has served on that court with immense distinction for many years. So there is an important Rhode Island tradition on the first circuit. I can assure all of my colleagues in the Senate that as a justice of this court, O. Rogeriee Thompson will discharge all of her duties with the greatest of distinction. I yield the floor, suggest the absence of a quorum, and ask unanimous consent that the time be divided between the minority and majority.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I thank the distinguished Senator for yielding for that unanimous consent.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. As in executive session I ask unanimous consent that today at 3 p.m. the Senate proceed to executive session to consider Calendar No. 653, the nomination of O. Rogeriee Thompson to be a U.S. circuit judge for the First Circuit, and there be up to 30 minutes of debate with respect to the nomination with the time equally divided and controlled between Senators Whitehouse and Sessions or their designees; with Senator Reed of Rhode Island controlling up to 5 minutes; that at 3:30 p.m. the Senate proceed to vote on confirmation of the nomination; that upon confirmation, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid on the table and any statements relating to the nomination be printed in the Record as if read, the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action, and the Senate then resume legislative session.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I thank the Senator. The last 2 years have seen the American economy on the brink of collapse, battered by an economic maelstrom not seen since the Great Depression and now slowly--too slowly--recovering its strength. President Obama's Recovery Act led the way, and we have seen its benefits over the last year with job losses slowing significantly. He inherited an economy losing, I think, 700,000 jobs a month, and it is now back to nearly break even. An essential element of this recovery has been encouraging thriving export markets. Last week, President Obama laid out his plan to double exports in 5 years, an initiative which could create up to 2 million jobs. As the President said: ``In a time when millions of Americans are out of work, boosting our exports is a short-term imperative.'' But for international trade to function, our government must participate fully in international trade negotiations, advocating fair and open trading rules that allow American businesses to compete and export. Yet a single Senator, the Republican Senator from Kentucky, has blocked the President's nominees for two key trade positions--nominees who cleared the committee with strong, positive votes. Michael Punke, nominated as Deputy Trade Representative to Geneva, and Islam Siddiqui, nominated to be Chief Agricultural Negotiator, deserve an up-or-down vote in the Senate. In this economic crisis, why in the world would a Senator hold up such important appointments for our exports and for our economy, hobbling this administration's ability to fully participate in international trade talks? The Senator from Kentucky has told us why: to try to force U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk to file a complaint regarding Canada's recently passed antismoking law. Yes, believe it or not, the Senator from Kentucky is blocking the appointment of critical U.S. international trade officials to try to force the administration to put pressure on Canada to change its antismoking law. I am sure the tobacco industry is important in the Senator's home State, and protecting home State jobs is important. But hampering our ability to negotiate our trade agreements in this time of economic distress is not the way to do it. The Senator's hold is particularly ironic and unproductive, since trade officials, such as these nominees, are the ones charged with negotiating resolutions to trade issues such as the one that appears to motivate the Senator from Kentucky. Ambassador Kirk recently commented that the absence of these officials is having a significant impact and indicated the situation is causing some countries to question our commitment to serious trade talks. ``We would be greatly advantaged not only just from the manpower and intellectual strength these two individuals bring, but I think it would help us regain some of our credibility,'' is what Ambassador Kirk said. Let's be clear. The Senator from Kentucky has said he does not have any objection to these nominees. He is only blocking the nominations as leverage against the President and Ambassador Kirk. That is pure obstructionism. It is these kinds of political power plays--one Senator actually had 70 nominees on hold--that lead to such cynicism in the country about our ability to work together and get things done. When a Senator blocks basic governmental action--action that all agree is of national importance--for purely parochial and political reasons, the public rightly wonders what is going on. If the Senator from Kentucky disagrees with the Canadian Legislature, fine, he should voice that disagreement publicly and try to persuade the President of the merits of his point of view. He is welcome to do that. Instead, he has chosen to add to the obstructionist tactics that are poisoning this Chamber and preventing the Government of the United States from doing its business. That may serve the immediate political goals of his party, but it is wrong for our country and it is wrong for all Americans who depend on an effective U.S. Government. I urge the Senator from Kentucky to release his holds. I yield the floor back to Senator Warner from Virginia.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

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

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, more than a year ago I came to the Senate floor to share stories I had heard from Rhode Islanders who are struggling in our broken health care system. Since then I have been here on many occasions continuing to share those stories and continuing to urge Congress to get to work on legislation to transform our health care system so all Americans can receive the health care they deserve. Over the past year, with my colleagues in the Senate on the HELP Committee, our colleagues on the Finance Committee--the many colleagues who were active in preparing this legislation and working on the Senate floor--we have worked through differences, ironed out details, and slowly but surely moved toward creating a reformed health care system that will lower costs, cover millions of the uninsured, and deliver the care we need when we need it. Today, we stand on the brink, on the doorstep, just a few short steps away, from achieving this landmark reform. As we move forward to take those welcome final steps, let's not forget that the deliberate failure to act--as our Republican colleagues recommend--would leave millions of Americans mired in a status quo that consistently--consistently--fails them. I recently heard from Valerie, a working mother in Warwick, who carried the health insurance coverage for her entire family until she lost her job. The double blow of losing her job and her insurance left Valerie and her husband with very few choices. The choice they faced was a difficult one. Here is what they decided: After paying for costly individual plans for their teenagers, they could not afford coverage for themselves. So they went ahead, covered their kids, and have left themselves exposed to the devastating financial consequences of getting sick while uninsured. Here is what Valerie wrote to me: Looking back on our lives, major life decisions have been based upon the availability and affordability of health insurance for our family. I have had to pass up job opportunities and make other major sacrifices to ensure we had affordable insurance. Now that isn't even possible. Valerie is one of the 14,000 Americans who lose their health care coverage every day we do not act. Mr. President, 14,000 is a very big number, but it is just a number. Behind each one of those 14,000 people is a story like Valerie's and a family who is worried and anxious, perhaps even frightened. For Emily, a resident of Barrington, the continuation of the status quo would prolong the endless runaround she and her husband have endured to get just one health insurance claim resolved. Last March, Emily's husband required back surgery. The insurance company preapproved the coverage, assuring him the surgery would be paid for. With this assurance, Emily's husband went to the hospital and went through with the surgery. Months later, however, the insurance company still had not paid. They began to ask for more information. Emily resubmitted lengthy paperwork, but she heard nothing back. Nine months have now passed--9 months--and the insurer has yet to pay the $17,000 charge for her husband's surgery. Nationally, insurance company overhead has more than doubled in the past 6 years. It is up more than 100 percent in the past 6 years. It is now estimated to cost America $128 billion. What do you suppose they spent that money on when they doubled their overhead and their bureaucracy? More people to take cases such as Emily's and find more ways to deny and delay their payment. If we do not change the status quo, there will be even more insurance bureaucracy, even more fighting to delay or deny claims, and even more people such as Emily and her husband who are on the short end of the stick when the insurance companies engage with them. For Christine, a concerned mother in Providence, the status quo has left her worried sick about her son. Christine has always provided health insurance for her family, but when her son turned 23 years old he became ineligible for coverage under her insurance policy. In this difficult economy, Christine's son has only been able to find part-time work, like so many other Americans, so many Rhode Islanders. Christine writes this: It breaks my heart when he expresses to me that he feels insecure and strange that he is not covered medically. Christine prays that nothing goes wrong with her son that would require medical care, and asks me: ``What is he to do?'' Well, when this bill passes, Christine's son will have something to do. He will be able to stay on her family coverage until he turns 26. These stories I have shared today--stories from anxious families of fear, uncertainty, and frustration--are the direct result of the rampant dysfunction in the broken status quo of our health care system. I know the Presiding Officer, who comes from Minnesota, sees this in his home State every day. The legislation we passed in the Senate on Christmas Eve will begin to correct this rampant dysfunction. It will begin to make our system start to work for the American people and not support the insurance companies working against them. To our Republican colleagues who seek to delay and obstruct this historic reform, I have to say we need to pass comprehensive health care reform so people like Valerie never have to make the choice between health insurance for herself and health insurance for her children. We need to pass comprehensive health care reform so that people such as Emily and her husband can't be denied care or denied payment or get the runaround from profit-driven insurance companies. We need to pass comprehensive health care reform so that children such as Christine's son can stay on their parents' insurance policies, particularly during this tough economy, until the age of 26, helping them get by during those exciting, challenging, tumultuous years when a young person gets out of college and starts to find their way in the workforce, those years between college and an established career. These changes will make a real difference in the lives of millions of Americans. I hope all of my colleagues will hit the reset button on their opposition and will think of the Emilys and the Valeries and the Christines in their home States, the thousands of Americans whose lives will be made better in real and important ways by this reform. I urge them to join us in supporting this historic effort. I yield the floor, and I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, as I have traveled throughout Rhode Island, I have heard from countless constituents about the sacrifices they have made during these difficult economic times. Many of my constituents have adjusted to the economic climate by cutting back on extras and finding savings where they can. For seniors living on a limited budget, however, simply cutting back is not an option. I have heard from seniors who have turned off the heat in their homes because oil prices are so high. I have heard from others who are splitting pills and skipping doses because they cannot afford to refill a prescription. These are seniors who have worked hard their whole lives, paid into the system, and believed that they would be able to grow old comfortably. Instead, many are barely scraping by on Social Security benefits that no longer cover their daily living expenses. Last Wednesday, the Senate had the opportunity to provide some extra help for seniors, veterans, and individuals with disabilities who rely on Social Security. We voted on an amendment offered by Senator Sanders, which I cosponsored, that would have provided an extra $250 payment to Social Security beneficiaries. The payment would have been an extension of the financial assistance I successfully fought for as part of the economic recovery package last year, and these funds would plow right through into our economy to help further stimulate demand and economic recovery. Unfortunately, this year, the amendment failed to receive enough votes for passage. Although a $250 payment may not sound like much to some, for those on a limited budget the extra financial assistance provides peace of mind amid skyrocketing health care and prescription drug costs. The payment would provide added relief for the millions of older Americans who, for the first time since 1975, did not receive a cost-of-living adjustment in their Social Security benefits. Without some extra help, these beneficiaries are hard-pressed to make ends meet. Just ask Jackie, a North Smithfield resident, who has seen her health insurance premiums increase by double digits this past year and the cost of her prescription drugs continue to rise. At a time when every penny counts, Jackie says the winter months are particularly hard for her. When Jackie hears the oil truck drive by, she cringes knowing that the cost of heating her home is another bill she simply cannot afford. I also heard from Edward, a senior living in Warren, who is worried how he will make ends meet without the increase in his Social Security benefit. In recent months, he is seen his car and home insurance increase by $200, and other daily living costs, such as heating oil, gas, and groceries, rise significantly. In these tough times, Edward could just use a little help. He writes, ``I just don't understand why Congress cannot do something to help seniors at least maintain a status quo.'' Linda, a Rhode Islander from Providence, survives on only $500 a month. Like so many older Americans, Linda takes multiple prescriptions every day. The out-of-pocket costs for her prescriptions add up, even on Medicare. Between her medical costs, food, heating, and other daily expenses, she can barely make ends meet. Linda would welcome any financial assistance she can get, so that she can save for copayments for visits to the doctor which she knows she will soon need. Linda says she is disappointed that the Senate does not realize how desperately seniors need added financial help. Like Linda, I am disappointed by the vote this past Wednesday. My colleagues failed to act on an opportunity to help our seniors when they need it the most; at a time when just a little help would go a long way. For Jackie, Edward, Linda, and seniors across our country facing similar challenges, I will continue fighting to assist older Americans during these difficult economic times. I urge my colleagues join me in standing by our Nation's seniors.

Mr. WHITEHOUSE

Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to lay aside the pending amendment and call up amendment No. 3354, and at the conclusion of my remarks that amendment No. 3354 be withdrawn.