reproductive health care and condemns the use of violence as a means of resolving differences of opinion. madam president, i find it hard to believe that this language condemning the murder of a health care provider and expressing sympathy to a family in mourning could be objectionable. madam president, i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from california. mrs. boxer: thank you very much. i want to say to my friend, senator shaheen, her words were eloquent here today. and that her voice adds so much texture to the senate. in a very plain spoken way, as is her way, senator shaheen has told us that regardless of where we stand on this contentious issue of a woman's right to

choose, we should be able to come together when there's violence of any sort from any quarter, right, left, or center, there is no place for violence in any of our debates. that's what makes this such a great country. we debate here. we have had difficult debates here on the issue of a woman's right to choose. yes, we have. but we decide those issues in this chamber, in the house, at the white house, and across the street at the supreme court. madam president, the supreme court has ruled very clearly in 1973 in roe vs. wade that it is legal, legal, for a woman in the early stages of her pregnancy to make this tough choice and get the health care she needs. and, yes, later in the pregnancy, if her health is threatened, if her life is threatened, yes, a doctor can

help her in that type of a circumstance. and here we have many cases where violence is being used, where websites are being put up, with pictures of doctors and nurses trying to insight trouble. trying to insight violence. that is not what the law allows. now, in the case of dr. tiller, he is a doctor. after this tragedy where he was shot and killed in church and before that he had his arm shot but he continued his work. many, many women came forward to attest to how kind he was to them in their good need. dr. tiller operated within the law. there were those who tried to run him out of town with

lawsuits. and he won all of those. so when a procedure is legal and a doctor is following the rules to have a murder of a doctor in that circumstance is a tragedy to his family, to his friends, so his paints patients and, frao america, because it difficult ds us as a society. i want to tell it like it is around here. every democrat cleared this resolution and said "yes," we ought to have a chance to bring it to the floor and be voted on. that's all my colleagues wants. she wrote a simple resolution. she read it to you. she want as voted. every democrat said "yes." let's bring it to the floor. you don't like it, you don't have to vote against it. you want to change it, make it an amendment to change it. but the republicans will not clear this amendment.

now, i have to say to the people who may be listening to this debate, hear what i'm saying: the republicans will not allow a vote, will not clear an amendment, that simply says in the "resolve" clause -- and i quote -- "we express great sympathy for the family, friends and patients of george tiller. we recognize that acts of violence should never be used to prevent women from receiving reproductive care and we condemn the use of violence as a means of resolving differences of opinion." i think that my colleague, in her eloquence here, has said it all. and i urge those people who are anonymously holding up this bill, holding up this resolution, come to the floor, have the courage and the guts to look out at this chamber and explain why you don't believe we should condemn acts of violence to prevent women from receiving

their health care. come to the floor and explain why you're not ready to condemn the use of violence as a means of resolving differences. this is the greatest democracy in the world. we will not be the greatest democracy in the world if we decide we're going to take the law into our own happens and kill people whom we disagree with. so i beg my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to rethink their position because i can tell you, anyone who doesn't know senator shaheen, she was a governor of a state, she's a great senator already, she's not going to give up on this. we're going to be here day after day. we're going to ask that this be brought before the body. and we're going to make those stopping us from voting on this, come to the floor and explain why they can't join with us.

we know abortion is a contentious issue. we appreciate that. we respect our colleagues' views. frankly, i totally respect their views on the issue. but i don't respect someone who is holding up anonymously a resolution that condemns violence. so i'm going to work with my colleague. i'm very proud of her work on this. i'm proud of senator klobuchar's work on this and i want to thank every democrat in this senate who said "yes," this resolution is worthy of debate and worthy of a vote. i thank you very much and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from delaware. mr. carper: madam president, thank you very much. i want to take the floor for a few minutes to draw the tans ofe attention of my colleagues, the 75th birthday not of a member of the house or senate but the national archives records and

administration, 75 years old this year. colleagues may recall the reception we held at the archiving during the orientation for new senators and their spouses back in november, as it turns out -- it was a small group of people able to witness and to visually see and read some of the most famous historic documents in our nation's history, but over a million americans come every year, visitors from all over the world come each year to visit the archives which serves as custodian of some of our country's most precious and historic records and documents. they have been doing this for something like three-quarters of a century. i want to take a moment on behalf of all of my colleagues, democrat and republican, and independent or two, to thank the men and women who work at the archives now and who have drop that for the last three-quarters of a century, who work diligently to preserve our nation's history not just for us

but for future generations of americans. established by congress to be our nation's recordkeeper, the national archives is the critical mission of storing and protecting our most valuable and most important documents. in fact, the main archives facility which is not locate -- located not far from where we're gathered is the home of -- get this -- permanent home of the declaration of independence, permanent home of our constitution, permanent home of our bill of rights. thomas jefferson once said that an educated citizenry will ensure a free society. he was right then. he's right, right now. unhin derd access to information of our government and leaders is critical to health of our democracy. that's why i'm pleased to hear that more than a million visitors travel to the national archives each year to see thousands of documents, including records and special

exhibits. the national archives is one of most popular agencies in the united states government which is probably a surprise. it is not just a tourist attraction. it has become an international leader in developing an electronic records archiving system that will preserve digital information in any format not just for a few years, but forever. information technology is altered forever our ability to create access and search information from any location in the world. every year, billions -- not millions -- billions of documents that shape and reform government decisions are never written with pen and paper but the records are born digital. that means they are created electronically and are stored not in a filing cabinet but on computers and on the intern the each year, thur the archives sas and more information about our history and culture. to put it in perspective, it

took eight military planes to transfer the paper materials created in the clinton administration. imagine that: eight military aircraft. following the most recent presidential transition it took 20 tractor trailers, two boeing 747's and a dc-8 aircraft to transport all of president george w. bush's records. and at the same time, national archives continues to maintain records from 1775, including the military record of every single veteran in the 20th and 21st century. that is though small task. so i stand here today to give my thanks, really, to give our thanks, to the hard working folks who work and volunteer their time at our national archives. winston churchill said a nation that forgets its past is doomed to repeat it. i think that sums up the important role of the archives not just for history but for our

future. i ask unanimous consent, madam president, to include in the record the text of a resolution that i put forward with a number of my colleagues to commend the national archives and its employees for excellent service over the past 75 years and to wish them many years of additional service. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. carper: thank you. also i would like to -- i know my colleague from wisconsin is standing to speak and i'll be brief. i want to take a moment -- while senator shaheen and senator boxer were speaking i chatted with one of our colleagues from texas who is on the floor. we talked about the debate on health care and he raised, as we approach in a week or two, marking up a heck hk reform bill in the finance committee he mentioned to me something i agree with, the 8020 rule. senator enzi from wyoming likes to talk about the 8020 rule.

senator kennedy, a liberal member, and senator enzi, a scervellive member, they get a lot done in the health, labor, and pensions committee, focusing on the 80% they agree on and set aside the 20% they don't agree on and focus on where the most agreement is. we need a similar approach in the, as we prepare to mark up in the finance committee the health care bill to go along with areas and work in the help committee. i strongly agree with senator balk and senator grassley, we need a bipartisan bill. many democrats and republicans, we need a bipartisan bill. my fear is if we don't have a bipartisan bill we will not be successful. while there's -- most of the media coverage of the health care debate is focusing on the conflict, should we have a public plan or not? tax exclusion? what portion of our benefits should be excluded from taxation? should there be employer mandate? setting that aside, but there is

huge agreement on a bunch of things that are important that are going to save money, save lives, reduce costs and provide better health care. make it possible for businesses, large and small, but especially small businesses, to get interest a purchasing pool to be able to take advantage of lower rates and better choices of benefits for their folks. moving toward chronic care. to make sure we're -- people who have diets do not have to wait until they are really sick and have to have arms, legs or feet amputated but take care early on. the purchasing pools that we will create under health care reform, if people have a preexisting condition, they don't get, excluded, they can participate, as well. we are going to be covering more people for pharmaceuticals, doing a better job of making sure people who will benefit from a particular pharmaceutical, whether large monthly cularge orsmall, with w.

we are going to do a better job of coordinating care and providing medical homes for people as we go failure. and we're going to take examples like -- a neighboring state of senator feingold, over in minnesota, they have mayo clinic and they figured out how to provide better health care, better outcome, lower cost, than most other places in this country. they took their model, they went down to florida where costs are very high for health care and they took the mayo model in florida and ended up with better outcomes, lower costs, than florida compared to the other folks doing business in florida, providing help for years. it is not just the mayos but the folks in the inner mountains, nonprofit in utah, and a number of good examples out there. part of what we will do through the debate as we move toward health care reform is learn from the examples, go to school on those examples and put them to

work for all of us. my friends, some say health care, we will not get it done, we have to get it done. we spend more money on health care for this nation than any nation on earth and we don't get better results. democrats working together with republicans, we can get there and let's not give up. thank you, madam chair. thank you for your patience. the presiding officer: the senator from hawaii. a senator: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that with respect to the conference report to accompany h.r. 2346, a negotiation waive all applicable points of order be consideredded having been made by the majority leader -- considered having been made by the majority leader. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. inouye: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the vote on the motion to waive rule 44 occur at 2:50 p.m. and that

time until then be equally divided and controlled between the majority leader and senator gregg or their designees. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. gregg: i have a parliamentary inquiry. we are now then on the conference report? the presiding officer: not at this point in time. not yet. a request has to be made to go to the conference. mr. inouye: madam president, i ask that the senate resume the conference report to accompany h.r. 2346. the presiding officer: without objection. the presiding officer: the senate will resume consideration of the conference report to accompany h.r. 2346, the clerk will report. the clerk: conference report to accompany h.r. 2346, an act making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2009, and for other purposes. the presiding officer: under the previous order a motion to waive all applicable points of order

under rule 44 is considered as having been made by the majority leader. the presiding officer: the senator from wisconsin. mr. feingold: if it is appropriate, i ask to speak for 10 minutes as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. feingold: thank you, madam president. every year i have a town hall meeting in every county in wisconsin after 1,188 of those sessions, i heard a lot from my constituents on pretty much every issue you can imagine. but one issue in particular stands out as it is consistently been one of the top issues raised throughout the 17 years, than issue is, of course, health care. again and again, and not just at listening sessions, but at conversations an phone calls an letters and e-mails, wisconsinites have talked to me about their struggles to obtain and afford health insurance coverage. their stories have stayed with me and been the foundation of my work to push comprehensive health reform throughout my

career in the united states senate. as freshman senator i worked to increase access to long-term care and home and community-based services in the wisconsin tradition during the 1994 attempt at health reform. because i knew how valuable these programs were to my constituents. i continue to fight for real and fair access to affordable prescription drugs by speaking up for seniors during the debate on creating medicare part-d. i ended up not voting for part-d because i knew it would help pharmaceutical companies instead of seniors. for years i tried to get the senate to address the issue that was foremost in the minds of my constituents. i teamed up with senator lindsey graham to introduce legislation that sought to break the logjam blocking health care reform legislation. while senator graham and i have had different ideas about what reform should look like, we agreed that further delay was unaccept. i know some of my colleagues are now arguing that health care is being rushed through the senate. well, that's not my experience, and i think the wisconsinite

who's have been talking about the need for reform for years would agree. that's why i'm so excited that the senate is preparing to consider health reform legislation. and i look forward to reviewing the bills at -- that the help and finance committees are expected to report shortly. i remain committed to reforming our health care system so that every single american is guaranteed good, affordable health care coverage. today i want to talk about one of the most important elements of any reform and that is a strong public health insurance option. frankly, i'm disappointed that this has become the topic of so much controversy because it really is such a fundamental part of making sure we provide the reform that my constituents and all americans deserve. some have even suggested scrapping a public option in the interest of passing a bill with bipartisan support. well, madam president, i want to pass health care reform and i hope very much we can do it with bipartisan support. but i'm not that interested in

passing health care reform in same only. i'm not interested in a bill that allows us to somehow tell our constituents that we've done something but doesn't really address their concerns that they've had so very long. we need real reform and real reform means a strong public option. and americans want a public health insurance option. according to a recent poll by nbc in the -- and "the wall street journal" over three-fourths of those polled said they would like the ability to choose between public and private health insurance plans, providing a public health insurance option does not discriminate against those with preexisting conditions and illnesses and will significantly improve the ability of people to seaks health care. there are millions of americans who will tell you that the current so-called competitive market didn't work so well for them because they were denied coverage from the outset or they were given a benefit plan that covers everything but the diseases that they actually have. health insurance should not be a

privilege but, that's what it is. those healthy enough to be approved for coverage or wealthy enough to afford it are too often the privileged ones that receive health care. we should shift it back to where it should be, on health insuressers -- insurers competing. a public health insurance option if done right will help shift the health insurance market so that plans focused on what is best for the patient thrive instead of plans simply focused on the bottom line. just a few weeks on a constituent shared her story with me. her husband suffers from renal care. she is doing her best to make ends meet for her family. but sometimes has to choose between paying the monthly bill on her home or her husband's medical care. jeri said that she came to washington, d.c., to share her

story because her husband is -- quote -- "choosing death over debt." she worries that they will lose their home and they lost their savings. but above all she worries that she will lose her husband with a strong public health insurance option, we can ensure that jeri and her husband can afford policies that can cover medical bills and folk requests on getting -- focus on getting well. a strong health insurance option is one that the public can rely on regardless of income, age, job status. it is an insurance option that will focus on helping the sick get the treatment they need instead of turning the biggest profit for shareholders. it will help the public invest in wellness an disease prevention an primary care and chronic disease management. a public option will help ensure that no matter what people have access to a health insurance plan that actually meets their

need. one of my priorities in the health care reform debate and one of my priorities throughout my time in the senate has been fiscal responsibility. it is not enough to pass a bill that expands coverage, we need to do so that rens in runaway spending. that's another reason, madam president, why we need a strong public health insurance option. because it will help keep costs down for individuals, for employers, and for the government. a strong public health insurance could save wisconsin employers private and government ove over $1.1 billion each year for the average wisconsin family currently paying around $13,500 a year in health care premiums, this translates to a 33% savings, lowering their premiums to just over $9,000 a year. now, this is real savings. and it would have made a big

difference to deneen spencer of ryryelander, wisconsin. she has had a tough time recovering from an injury that would leave her a qawd row pledgic for life. while deneen has made incredible progress, she has a long way to go. she qualified for medicaid benefits to cover her medical costs, but she wants to be independent. she wrote me a letter in which she says she wants to get off of disabilitiy very badly. i'm horribly ashamed that i collect a government check every month, as it stands i cannot afford private health insurance. she writes that she has heard of a public option insurance planner that would lower costs for people like me she said. please put everything you have into making sure it is part of the health care reform bill. she has overcome inkred

challenges. she wants to purchase health insurance, but is denied that. a public health insurance option would help ensure that dennen is guaranteed affordable high-quality health care. too often americans are at the mercy of the insurance companies when it comes to paying peopleus and out-of-pocket costs and deduct ibles. while i commend the growing efforts to increase transparency, for the most part consumers have little idea how much procedures cost, where premium dollars go and whether you are getting the best value for your dollar. a public health insurance option would serve as a benchmark competitor for premiums, for administrative costs an benefits packages. a strong hubbell health insurance option is consistent with the private health market. we have several insurers who operate in my home state of wisconsin that provide great

health coverage to their beneficiaries. responsible insurers should have no problem competing with a public insurance option on the merits of their plan. but a strong public health insurance option will provide a powerful incentive for less responsible insurers to reevaluate their own cost sharing an benefit plans to ensure that they're an attractive option for consumers, and there's another benefit of a public health insurance option which hits particularly close to home. my hometown of jamesville, wisconsin, has one of the highest unemployment rates in the state. recently our g.m. assembly plant ceased production and other related businesses throughout the community are struggling to stay afloat. of course these challenges are shared by other communities across the state of wisconsin. madam president, a public health insurance option would be invaluable to families in jamesville and other parts of the state who have been recently laid off. because it is a guaranteed, affordable option that can

travel with an individual from job to job. a public health insurance option would make a tremendous different to our small business owners who face crippling health care costs while trying to keep their business open. madam president, health care reform cannot wait. the president has said that he wants a health reform bill on his desk by this fall and i will work hard with my colleagues to make sure we send him a good bill that good bill that guarantees every american high quality affordable health insurance and includes a strong public health insurance option much after so many years of delay and inaction, now is the time to act. madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: will the senator withhold? golmr. feingold: i withhold the request on the quorum call. mr. gregg: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from new hampshire. mr. gregg: did the chairman wish to speak? mr. inouye: i'll speak after

you. mr. gregg: i'm happy to yield to the chairman if he wishes to go before me. first off, this is a very important piece of legislation. i congratulate the chairman and ranking member, senator cochran and senator inouye for bringing it forward. it is critical that we adequately fund our troops in the field. this is the first responsibility yeas a government when we have troops in the field in harm's way to give them the resources they need in order to protect themselves and defend our liberties. and so this is a very, very important piece of legislation. it must pass. it simply must pass. however, ironically, the hedges legislation that occurs around here, this legislation had air dropped into it by the house of representatives something that has no -- nothing to did with our troops fighting in the field. and that is a bill called the cash for chunker bill. now, -- clunker bill.

i have -- purchasing automobiles that are high-mileage vehicles that use a lot of gas and exchanging them for lower-mileage vehicles in order to accomplish some environmental protections. i would simply note this, however. that this bill that was airdropped into this doesn't accomplish that. basically this is a bill that was drafted in the house about the input -- without the input of the senate. there was a much better bill near the senate. senator feinstein, senator collins had it, which would have meant some mileage differential would have occurred but it was not allowed to be put in because the bill, as it was put into the conference report, was unamendable. and so the bill itself is flawed because it basically only allows -- it all