week, just to mention them without describing them. one is mass outreach. we canvas 100 buildings a month, foreclosed buildings. two is mass meetings, about 120 people come to our meetings every week. three is mass case work, a way of working with people, individual way but through a collective process that expands our staff capacity. four is mass actions. we did a mass action, a public protest against the banks once a week last year. and five is mass political discussion to look at the causes of the crisis. so having said that, i'll pass it on. [applause] >> pretty exciting. now we're going to feature some members of united workers. and it's interesting how michael's panel was divided in exploring the relationship as consumers, employees and

citizens, it's sort of interesting because steve just described a way of interacting with the financial industry as a consumer in a much more powerful way than we're used to. now, as employees, united workers has a unique human rights-based model, and veronica dorsey will be presenting, and i think ashley huff nagel is going to come up and do the av. is that true? >> yeah, yeah. >> here, here, why don't you take this, veronica. >> veronica, do you want to come up so you can see the presentation? >> sure. [inaudible conversations] all right. ..

we are fighting for end of poverty and by low-wage workers from the ranks of the port and

also by other members and sectors of different people that come to be allies in solidarity with us. what we want to do is unite all pour across color lines and barriers to create a movement to end poverty. we know with the economic crises of today that in order for us to be able to find solutions to these housing crises to the economic crisis of people losing their houses the brendel people can't pay their bills, is to organize people across formative values. that is human rights issues. we are able to break down those barriers of color, gender, race, religion and all that and we do that through our leadership

development. next slide please. with responding to the economic crisis. we know that service sector jobs have been replaced by manufacturing jobs and the answer to that is to have people come together and fight for human rights. this is a picture of low-wage workers for where the campaign was and it was the first time they won a victory of living wage and receive human-rights. when this picture was taken we were making $4 an hour to clean up the stadium. when i started working there i was making less than a hot dog. they put my human worth value less than a hot dog but we were making these corporate developers and everyone millions of dollars that they pay a hot dog. it was through this and

organizing people across barriers of language and culture that we were able to do a three year campaign, a struggle. and people came together. we have a allies and members stood up for a longer strike forcing the governor of the state of maryland to come out and say hold up, you need to go back and do something. i am for the workers. it forced the powers that be to go -- vote 5-1 against a living wage because they don't want to lay in front of their stadium. and to see how organized we were. we won different wage campaigns from $4 to $11.30 an hour. securing that living wage workers came together. first time they had a union. they now have a local union with a fair grievance process.

one day we go down and they were hired and fired. some trans formative values to get people around. when we won that victory lot of people that started working -- were not even working there but came back to secure our human rights. it was the right thing to do. this picture is where we came together victorious on $11.30 an hour at one of our churches and it was through this organizing that leadership development made this possible. after we won met victory in 2008 we declared baltimore city in our harbor a human rights zone. the inner harbor is controlled by two conglomerate corporations. the workers decided to target

the developers. when we won the victory, now that we have the inner harbor the workers wrote up their demands and asking to end -- enter into a fair development contract which would mean workers, human rights and living wages have access to health care and education. developers will be accountable to put up a certain percentage to their health care education. gdp is the largest -- second-largest small donor in the united states. why are they paying people property wages? the human rights bill provides a space for culture based

human-rights values. the process underlining the development of the human-rights zone is what matters, wiki point is a leadership development. we know where martin luther king started with the civil rights campaign. he got killed. he died. they can't kill all of us. if they kill us they're killing themselves. that is how we will get this done. leaders to the ranks of the 4 across different barriers of religion, gender, race, whatever. since we won that campaign at camden yards, when we started organizing, we worked for temporary agencies. the majority of the workers were black.

a couple temp agencies decided to let the black people go to -- worth hiring. latinos. a couple agencies let the black people go so this was the first year of the campaign so united workers was like this could be devastating. we slip the script. we started organizing latino workers so they were able to bring latino workers and african-american workers together in the same room. we also became a bilingual organization and we have different interpreters -- i took spanish for a little while. we have equipment, translation equipment and speak to each other and language is no longer a problem for us. after we came in together we found out we had more in common than any thing and the reason we were having problems was and thus, it was them.

we got together and were victorious. the key point in getting anything done a matter what it is is having leaders that will stick and stay-consciousness and cooperation -- the big three. this is looking for a retreat. when we have actions and do things we have a space where we come back and reflect and go over what worked and what didn't so we have things to take out of our toolbox for the next time and we come together and strategically plan what we want to do because we don't have money like the big corporations. we have to do what we can with

the limited amount of money and the only thing we do have is each other. they can't take our dignity. we are already poor. we have nothing left to lose. this picture right here, we build communities. not only the members and low-wage workers, we work with different communities throughout our city. we have faith leaders and the grassroots organizations, students. it is a combination of everybody working together like i said. more poor people than anybody. at one time i used to be part of the middle class but i lost my position. i don't know how you feel but the middle class is disappearing here and will be rich or poor. things like this, where we build culture, this is what we did in the front of the inner harbor to let gdp knows that we were

coming after them. tried to ignore -- i got to hurry up. this is part of leadership development. this is what happens after that series of things you have just seen. putting words and planning into action. you can see one of our pastors with us showing people how we can make a change. i am about to leave. and i ask you to please come back -- oh oh oh, i have to show you, this is the last part. you will see the news coverage of the espn zone. a lot of them close on the east coast. the one in inner harbor close and did not notify the workers that they were closing. several heard on face book that they couldn't get in, that type of thing.

through this process of developing leaders and developing the inner harbor human rights zone, we have human rights committees and all the restaurants, the espn zone workers came together and did a protest and action and news conference, a lawsuit against these needs and this is part of the news coverage. [applause] [inaudible

conversations] >> walt disney company. these workers are slamming disney saying it violated federal law when it shut down inner harbor espn restaurant june. [talking over each other] >> can we start over? >> 154 employees. everyday, complain that they complain the restaurant will be shutting down and saying they will lose their jobs days before they were lost. there was no notice. the job market had thundered. some of them ended up -- demanding disney paid them under

the -- he closes up. [inaudible] ♪ >> some of those workers took their complaints to the inner harbor and federal court house and when the lawsuit, some workers say their biggest challenge is finding a new job. and federal court this morning disney had 60 days to respond. it could take a year for the lawsuit to play out. >> spokesman for the espn's jones says they voted to legal obligation in the lawsuit.

[inaudible] [applause] >> i want to make sure we get audio for the next video presentation. let's see here. would people like to ask questions of the first two folks first? while i deal with this? first two speakers, presenters, groups, and will you take the mike? >> who would like to ask a question first?

>> there was an article in close recently about mediation in the foreclosure sector in boston and it said mayor menino is requiring mediation for boston foreclosures? >> mayor menino has a home will positions set up for the state and as this was passed by the state legislature, boston had the power to require mediation. it is not in law yet. it will not pay us for some time. we are backing that and proposal along with a larger coalition proposed mediation and judicial

review, we are trying -- the bank can't evict former tenants. we are trying to extend that. >> after the foreclosure for speakers, people are -- against a corporation. against bad people. they are -- all the corporations but important things. their supervisor, not really the best people. they create -- legislation and they use this against the

indigenous -- for closure, they didn't use frost foreclosure basically like imprisonment or adoption so people had to get out of the house. for the homeowner and arranger. the core positions, for how it is generous for speakers for organization, somebody to really work together. the procedures in the future.

>> something to solve the problem, is that -- are there bad people good people to work with? [inaudible] >> i would like to invite steve from community well project to come up and present -- >> a couple of words.

the video in some ways is self-explanatory, it is a different kind of project. to the community development side. cooperation and in tension between those two, for protest and community development. what do we do and assuming we can get an opening. i work with a group called democracy collaborative, information clearing community moments. we got invited to cleveland, of

ohio. a city that the second leading -- there are more fortune 500 companies in cleveland, chicago or los angeles. there's one fortune 500 company left. there used to be 900,000 people in cleveland. today it is 400,000. there are 30,000 properties in the city of cleveland. cleveland at the heart of the foreclosure crisis. in 2009, it was 35%. the question is, how do you create wealth in devastated community, and surrounded

wealthy institutions. university hospital, western reserve university itself. in the surrounding neighborhoods, 40,000 people, 18,000 per household. three thousand of those people, a classic situation of wealthy institutions where people come from the suburbs, with banking on the campus and go home. we try to work in a strategy to

do that and leering employees are these institutions, they no longer exist and moved elsewhere. the fortune 500 companies in these hospitals universities, expenditures by hospitals and universities about a trillion dollars out of of $14 trillion economy. this is a major part of the economy. we are trying to leverage that spending and use that to support the creation of community owned businesses and worker cooperatives, workers come from these low income neighborhoods and not just employees but owners of those businesses. when businesses were developing, what we call green jobs. the greenest in class of the different industries that meet those institution needs and lower the cooperative footprint

and when a green jobs as a good thing, always good to have a green jobs that you can unknown. we will stop and see the video. we have an hour-and-a-half tomorrow. how we might bring this to your own community. now back >> with a network of businesses. we have a new paradigm for a network of for profit businesses

and those employees are created. >> we all want to have names and staff to informed that. >> we have opportunities, to participate and access the wealth that would be excluded. really the best part of this. >> i envision making a decision. >> rush these projects into communities long term. because of these relationships for service relationships. we don't have to get back as companies move in and out of the market. >> we benefit and make money and it gets sort of around. and when folks arrive it gives

benefits to everybody. >> it isn't just a job. it is the future long term. that can really help bring about positive change in the neighborhood. >> it is amazing. gave me a second chance. have plans for my future now. >> they are willing to put the hard work necessary to make a difference in their home life and the lives of their families. >> they are revitalizing their neighborhood and taking ownership of their future. >> we are investing in the employee's who will end up owning the businesses. over the next three or four years we think we can create 600 jobs in the low income neighborhoods for the university circle. >> we are catalyzing, catalyzing

a whole new grouping of companies. >> that is not construction. there is a staff. that is to purchase food, and extra things. >> investing as well or working -- we determine pretty accurately that there is two fifty million times health-care available annually. >> for legislation in the ohio as a mandate to create solar generating capacity in the year 2012. right now there is two. >> we are targeting several megawatts over the next couple years on the order of nothing that has been done in ohio to date. great day knowing we are happy to generate some power in a

clean environmentally responsible way. >> this is a laboratory for in new economic development's. actually a career which is one of the reasons i wanted to be involved. >> this is different. it is high risk. it is not based upon the social service model but the business model and the ownership model. >> it could serve as a model not just here but other places in the same way it helped in spain. >> it offers a bootstrap strategy for pulling yourself up with your own resources. >> run everything in this and also picks up and what i would like.

>> we are not asking for dollars to stop at one or two companies. if we could keep going to 20 or 30 companies and get to the scale they experience, that is one definition of success. >> in five years, most cities going to jump on, we look at what we're doing here. even want to be where the world is going, not where the world is. just being part of evergreen in general is tremendous. there is a little party going on. a blue lake, move to portland, oregon to be part of the revolution. being in cleveland, looks like what is going on. >> this is just the beginning. it is a great model.

this is the real deal. we see the guys that are here and ladies that own this company and what an incredible opportunity. >> i am and employee of the solar -- also an honor. >> it is a great day for the employees and a great day for all of us working together. >> it is comprehensive and thoughtful the plant and transfer of this is a way that ends the quality of life for all those who will be touched by it. ..

>> i would like to invite paul glover who is an innovator, and out of her activist, always innovating. he has worked everything from creating alternative currency systems to free health care clinics. so i'm sorry to keep rolling along here, but thank you for still being here. >> i have been a community organizer for much of decades. what have you got? hello? i've been a community organizer for a bunch of decades, an increasing bunch of decades.

and initially was focused on being against things and became increasingly effective against the things. spent here it is, paul. sorry. >> a combination of a diplomacy and apocalyptic brutality, i was able to begin movements which put an end to incinerators, shopping malls, suburban development highways and so forth. and made a dent of course like many of them in enthusiasm for war. but it gradually occur to me it would be a lot more fun, and ultimately effective, to find and model what i and many others were for. and i figure that history would move in a direction of and favor those who proved that we could

feed our house, he'll, educate, finance the public in ways which make life easier. and fair despairing and reluctant to rely and wait for state and federal initiatives, then decide to take initiative within my reach, the reach of people i knew in my community. that's of course a progressive social change is always happened. the end of slavery, votes for women, the eight hour workday, civil rights, the establishment of the nation itself began with local activities that gradually merged. so, to show a slideshow, it's a gallop through -- i have been a

member of many organizations. where i have seen holes in the progressive movement, i have initiated organizations. i started probably 24 organizations over the decades. and how do i start this? i click on these arrows to the left? i will narrate this very swift summary. some of these organizations that i started -- >> not working right? >> i don't know. i can't see what's going on here so i can't narrate it effectively. if i did stand out front next to it i could see. >> you could, actually. >> can we started over again? >> you bet. >> my agenda is what i call the

green labor administration, g. lad. glad. and that is a summary of the variety of needs to be met and ways they can be met by grassroots initiatives. the creative genius -- the creative genius in every person brought forward to contribute to the collaborative creating of grassroots economies, which meet our needs with less and less reliance on external organizations. distant legislatures, remote boardrooms. all right, how are we doing there? [inaudible] >> okay. just talk to us, paul.

>> i will refer to some notes. wars that piece of paper? started a local currency, cultural paper money, convinced several thousand individuals, and over 500 businesses including a bank, health clubs, restaurants and medical center. this is money we transacted millions of dollars of our own local paper money based on the success of that i started ithaca health allies. members pay $100 each a year. the specified maximum amounts. they own their own free clinic. it beyond charity to ownership. starting a local stock exchange. philadelphia regional and independent stock exchange.

praise. a way to get the capital of all kinds for regional eco-developer. and also in philadelphia, which i've moved in the last five years, i started the philly orchard project. there are 4000 -- this dependency on them waiting for condos and casinos. and i raised the issue that, in fact, we should use these because there are 60,000 chronically hungry people in philadelphia, let orchard. so we planted a whole bunch of orchard so far in philadelphia, berry bushes. and after planting a few trees, there's a half page article about our initiative because we were raising that critique of the urban land use. a critique demanding urban land reform. the green jobs philly i started a website, which makes it easy

for people in philadelphia to offer and request green jobs. and have written a book, green jobs philly, and issue a newsletter green job philly news. to celebrate the capability and creativity in our community, or as a daily paper in the media in general are talking about how deadly and, we are, how we can't trust each other or collaborate. that green jobs philly news is a rare example, that celebrates our initiatives. i'm starting a neighborhood enterprise for schoolteachers, which brings together people in low-income neighborhoods, adults. what can you do? what can you teach the kids in this neighborhood? i can't teach anything, i just got out of j-lo. i used to be a pretty good wrestler. and brings us together with the kids, and credentials and

rewards. the adults were teaching and the kids for learning. jumpstarting a respect for learning, respect for their own capability in neighborhoods where people are left out of the prevailing economy. the ithaca health allies. i signed a contract with patch adams last year. patch adams is a clown doctor, they made a movie about his life starring robin williams. and i convinced patch after some years of lobbying to allow me to start the first patch adams free clinic in his name. and radical enterprise transferring control over health care and health financing. low income neighborhood in philadelphia. the new clinic he built as a solar earth shelter structure on two acres in philadelphia surrounded by orchard and gardens. and in which we teach green

skills. it's far more than a clinic. in a city where 200,000 uninsured. i am now launching a website almost ready to go, to the league of uninsured voters. luv. love. the model is tough luv. the mascot, there it is. how timely? is a big part with boxing gloves. and i hope to get into a lot of trouble with his because it's a very in your face. this is not conference panel discussion but necessity and practicability and the financial profitability of universal health coverage. this is like saying get out of the way. here we come. it is very confrontational and effectively so, attacking the financial foundation. you have 51 million uninsured together, we send our bills to

the insurance companies. we will bog them down. right? of this is about ready to go. this is a certain citizen plan of los angeles. in 1983, to assert ecological urban design. and brought together a lot of people and wrote a book about the history of the future. this lays out a process by which gradually over many decades los angeles is actually transformed. this is a process which employs everyone. which creates trillions of dollars invested. this is an alternative to war, for making money. for those people who need to make money. so, i'm looking at my agenda is, the entire rebuilding of civilization. [applause]

>> thank you very much. and that's what i had to say tonight, and the happy talk, my website is paulglover.org, which you will see links to many of these. thank you. >> it finally worked. technology. so, again, we are exploring the realms of trans-partisanship. and this is a level of trans-partisan that maybe we had been considered before. sometimes people have not represent my any parties. and yet they are the most impacted why the collusion of corporate intellectual power, and they might not -- that elected power may be any number of countries. so we have a wonderful guest,

marty cobenais, who is working, a model of trans-movement work international work, and i invite marty to begin as he likes. >> you want to run it from other while i sit here are. [inaudible] >> i don't want to screw you up. >> you know, this is why the people have their own av. folks who do the ag while other people are talking and organizing stuff. and, let's see. marty, what was the name of that piece? [inaudible] >> thank you very much, sir. >> all right. here we go.

play slides. >> you just have to do it manually. >> great. >> i will try to kieu as we go along. my name is marty cobenais. i would want to thank everybody for staying here this late. this is amazing this late and we've been at this all day, since the rally at the capitol this morning. if you want to go ahead. what are they? most people don't understand what we think about oil and stuff like that you think what jed clampett were shooting at when he was shooting at some food. it comes up to the ground and it's pretty liquid and it's really nice. reality is it's that. it looks like molasses. it has the same consistency as molasses. in the wintertime it does freeze. so it makes it very hard to

extract the oil. where are the tar sands? the tar sands where talking about today are in alberta. on the screen you see what all the orange is, that is worth the oil fields are. the actual square miles is about 30 square miles less than the state of new york. is what they are projecting it be. new york is the 26th largest state in the united states. so to give you an idea of how big the tar sands are actually. what companies involved? as of the last couple of years every oil company in the world is involved in the tar sands. it's not just anyone. it is bp. bps lacks one of the last want to go into the tar sands.

and when we sit and talk about every oil company, even the norwegian -- the tar sands was a major factor in the norwegian collections last year, which doesn't make any sense, but the government owns the oil company in norway which owns 51% of the gas company over there. so, the president -- there are nine president -- nine candidates running for president. eight of them were against continuing on with the tar sands. the one that was in office was for tar sands. obviously, they have new leadership. if you action want to stay back there. when pipeline copies, talking about transcanada, there's a proposal in the state department for presidential permit, the eis system, or process, which is. and also ambridge.

what i want to talk about this a little bit here is we all remember bp and offshore oil. the hospital by group are supervising overseen by mms. what the problem there was that it was a government steering committee that was made up of all industry people. so basically the industry people telling the government what to do and how to do and what they're going to do. we all remember the michigan oil spill that enbridge in kalamazoo, michigan, this year. that one is covered by pipeline hazardous material. once again, they are made up of mostly, well, over 50% of industry led people. the director is cindy, a former

enbridge attorney. so she has a row on her saying that she cannot deal with anything on enbridge for two years of her employment so that's why she wasn't even able to talk when they're doing an investigation in the congress and stuff like that. she couldn't go to testify for that. the lobbyists, for transcanada right now in secretary clinton's, which was running for president, that was her manager who is now the lobbyists for transcanada. other groups that i work with, through freedom of information act we were denied the requests that they put in which was to get all the e-mails and documents that were put between the lobbyists and the state department through transcanada.

that request was denied, but the incidental part, the coincidental part of it is that three days after the freedom of information act request was put in, the lobbyists registered as a lobbyist. yet been working in that job for two years. okay, this is actually a map of the united states sure all the pipelines -- showing were all the pipelines where natural gas and crude oil and refined gas goes through out the united states. there's actually more than that, but that's 1974. so that was a long time ago that that was put out. i think we're going to skip the next few. and go down to water issues.

for those of you in at home, this will be the version, the quicker version for today. some of the processes, in order for the tar sands -- obvious he when we looked at the pictures, that doesn't make it look like it's going to flow through any pipelines anytime soon, and it doesn't. there's quite a process it has to go through, and it requires a lot of water. it requires for girls of water to make one barrel of oil. that's to get it out, steam it out and everything else which then creates large amounts of waste water. to which 87% of this water that is coming out are being used, comes out of the river. that's important here. these are proximally 70 square miles. if you look on google maps or anything else like that you can

see it from space, and you can see the actual pond. so you have 70 square miles which is big enough but then it's also 300 feet deep. so it's very large. one pond has 17 gallons per second into the river. the same river that it is taken out of. or 22,380,000,000,000 gallons per year. that's a lot. that makes bp oil spill out on the gulf of mexico look really small like a mud puddle. this is a very serious situation. this has been going on for four years. this tailing pond is the oldest helibond that they have. this information actually comes from the government and industry. so who knows if it's actually may be higher. environmental effects.

the top left picture is before, and the bottom right is after. that is what it is doing to the land. it is killing the people from health effects that i kind of skipped over, where a lot of bile duct and cancers, very rare forms of bile duct cancers that are normally one out of 100,000 people, tiny community has five cases that are mostly passed on now, out of 1200 people are why this was important for us in the u.s., this is a very carbon intensive process to get oil. consumes enough natural gas to heat 30 million homes. in 2007, tar sands produced

40 million tons of carbon emissions. that is more than most countries. on the back, if you go around and talk to some of the alberta government people here in d.c., on the back of their business card it says they only produce -- the tar sands only produces 11 thousands of the world's carbon emissions. the tar sands produced that amount. and they make it sound like it is a good thing. it doesn't make any sense to me. most of this oil is right now, it is being mined out, but it remember president clinton talked -- president clinton. president obama talked a couple months ago about how the tar sands are going to be greener. they are process of being green is that they're going to use, it's called sag d. would've put the chemicals into the earth and they suck the oil of. if anyone is a mud with fracking

india states, it's the same process. they're going to not create the tailing ponds they have no. they will put they tailing ponds basically into the groun so we will have the same problem, or they will have the same problem there that we have now. so, we all remember about what gas prices were a few years ago when the recession started. when up to about $140 per barrel. this is when the tar sands became really profitable because a lot of it isn't profitable to even get into its $120 a barrel. so that means we are looking at the $3.50, $4 a barrel, or a gallon. we're getting there. it's almost there. how this affects the u.s., we are being asked to put in more pipelines, which are going to put in more leaks and spills. we need to increase our electricity capacity to run the pumping stations.

they are disturbing sacred sites. threatening the u.s. is largest aquifer in nebraska. we actually have, the senators from nebraska have written letters asking secretary clinton to actually move the pipeline. eminent domain cases, where the companies are suing land owners to take their land. last friday in oklahoma, land owners actually countersued and are suing them back and saying, no, you're not going to take our land. there are other people across all the states that the keystone pipeline is going through that is going to be coming forward soon and saying no, and countersuing also. what that also does is it gives us dependent on fossil fuels.

president bush and president obama have both said we are addicted to oil. and we are. but now is the time that we need to start to wean ourselves off of that oil. that's pretty much the last slide there. what we do, we work with grassroots people is what we really work with. we work with on the ground people. we don't normally work with troubled governments into many cases. because they are normally subject to economic blackmail. a sickly by big companies. and saying we will promise you jobs and everything else, and so they take the money for the tribe. but we don't, we don't support that, and so we end up working with the grassroots people. some of the other places where taking on, we are taking on the banking industries that are funding the tar sands.

royal bank of canada, royal bank of scotland. there's other groups here in the u.s. that are taking on citibank. and we're also going across over to europe, taking on stockholders in bp and shell. we just got done having a staff over there doing the trade agreement between europe and canada, making free trade regulations so that they had easier access to do trade between canada and europe, basically for the tar sands. so that is were i'm going to end it for today. my information is on the screen now. but due to the latest at everything, and we're going to be talking more tomorrow, that's where i'm going to end it for tonight. [applause] >> thank you, everybody, for sticking around.

thank you, you panelists took i really appreciate you coming out and sharing your unique contribution to organizing, and i hope everybody gets some sleep tonight. i know i need to get some sleep tonight. okay, all right. talk to you tomorrow. [applause] >> and thanks to c-span for being here today. it's really great. we really appreciate that. start thanks, c-span. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> the senate is gaveling in this morning, returning from a three-week recess. although technically today is still part of the first legislative day. senators will be permitted to get general speeches and tell 12:30 p.m. eastern at which point they will break for the weekly party lunches. the senate returns at 2:15 p.m. eastern to resume debate on senate floor rules for the 112th congress. among those proposed changes to rules regarding filibusters. possible votes this afternoon. now live coverage of the u.s. senate on c-span2.

senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. almighty god, whose kingdom is above all earthly kingdoms and who judges all lesser sovereignties, give our lawmakers this day clean hands and pure heartsto serve you and your people. equip them with grace, strength and wisdom to make our nation and world better, for the glory of your name.

lord, infuse them with a creativity that will empower them to do their work according to your will. give them peace of soul when their thoughts and plans are right, and disturb them when they drift from what is best. lead them in paths of righteousness and truth. we pray in your holy name amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and

justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington d.c., january, 25, 2011. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable jeanne shaheen, a senator from the state of new hampshire, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. mr. reid: madam president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i note the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent the call of the quorum be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: following any leader remarks, the senate will be in a period of morning business. senators will be allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each. the senate will recess from

12:30 until 2:15 p.m. today. that's for our weekly caucus lunches. i'll continue to work with my colleagues on the senate roles and committee assignments as i have the last week or so. at 9:00 tonight the president will deliver our state of the union address to congress. the presiding officer: mr. leader, the senate will be in order. mr. reid: thank you very much, madam president. grateful to you. at 9:00 the president will address the nation from the house chambers. senators are asked to gather here in the senate chamber at 8:30 so we can proceed as a body to the house of representatives. and we'll leave here about 8:45 this evening. madam president, in the two weeks we were away from washington all of us absorbed the numbing tragedy and horrific attack in tucson, arizona.

the nation mourned the loss, thanked the heroes and waited by a brave congresswoman's bed bedside. we continue to keep the victim's families in our thoughts. in the days since the senate last convened, the nation resumed the debate over the words, the tones and the metaphors we use here in the senate as well as on the campaign trail in the internet and over the airwaves. the national conversation about our national conversation is not new. it happens every year. but since the shooting in tucson, calls from our careful language multiply and have been amplified. there is no evidence that partisan politics played any role in this monstrous attack. even so, we should be more civil anyway. being more mindful of the weight of our words always helps. we have much more to gain from civility and discretion. in this new year, i hope we'll return to the respect that has

always been a hallmark of the united states senate. i hope my colleagues will join in renewing our commitment to productive debate. some may be inspired by the town halls of two augusts ago, others by the heated election debates. some may be motivated by the conversation started after tucson, arizona. and many will seek more civility simply because it's the right thing to do. whatever the reason, i hope the turn to more responsible rhetoric is more than empty rhetoric. i intend to do my part. what i'm talking about goes beyond inflammatory allegations or hate speech. it also means not questioning others' motives or calling into question the patriotism of a colleague who's been elected to serve his state and his country. it's even more than that, as we more carefully choose our words we must also remember what we do, we don't have the luxury, as

senator moynihan used to caution, to choose our own facts. if we're really going to change the way we speak and hope to change the way we do business, we have to reintroduce truth into public debate. this doesn't mean rephrasing an attack line from job-killing to job-destroying as house republicans have done in response to the shooting. it means that if there's no proof that a policy takes away jobs, if in fact it shows the opposite, we shouldn't intend any differently. the nonpartisan referee we rely on for this data, the congressional budget office, found twhe comes to health reform, the claim is not true. change in rhetoric requires us to debate facts, not invent them. in the coming weeks much of the discussion on the senate floor will revolve around health care, the deficit and debt limit; those three things. each of these issues affects the number-one issue in america: jobs. and each issue is complex.

if we're going to make the right decisions and point our economy in the right direction, we have to start with the shared respect for the facts. first, let's look at health care. independent fact checkers examine all the political rhetoric of last year, given the intensity of the legislative debates in the election season, there was a lot to choose from. one claim stood out from all, the habit to call health care a government takeover. one of those nonpartisan exerts, factcheck.org called it false. another political fact, a product of the st. petersburg, florida times called it the lie of the year. if we're going to have an honest debate about health reform law we passed last year, retiring the scare tactic would be a good place to start. the deficit. madam president, my friends on the other side are quick to associate the current president with the current deficit as if

it happened overnight and under his watch. but here is a brief review of the facts. in the 1990's we balanced the budget under the direction of president clinton. at the beginning of the next century america had a bigger surplus than ever in its history. over the next decade while our troops went into battle, the cost of two wars went off budget. the richest took home giant tax breaks, but nobody paid the bill. a massive prescription drug program wasn't paid for either. president clinton left president bush a record surplus. president bush left president obama a record deficit. those unpaid-for wars, tax breaks and programs are the reason we're in a hole today. what we do next is fair game for debate. but facts, as president john adams said, are stubborn things. finally, madam president, the debt limit. we'll soon debate the debt limit. earlier this month the secretary of the treasury sent each of us a letter outlining what would

happen if we don't raise that ceiling. it would be the first time in the history of america that our country would default on our legal obligations. he didn't share his partisan opinion in that letter. he simply laid out the facts. this is what he wrote -- and i quote -- "default would effectively impose a significant and long lasting tax on all americans, all american businesses and could lead to the loss of millions of american jobs. even a short-term or limited default would last for decades." end of quote. what are some of those consequences? our troops and veterans would no longer get their paychecks. our seniors would no longer get the social security and medicare checks. student loans would simply stop. on a larger scale, the secretary of the treasury warned it would lead to a worse financial crisis than one we're still recovering from there soon will be lots of time to debate about the debt

limit, but these are the facts we must first acknowledge and consider. so, finally, madam president, the american people voted in november for a divided legislative branch of government, a democratic senate, a republican house. they didn't elect houses led by competing political parties because they want us to compete. they did so because they want us to cooperate. we cannot cooperate without an honest debate and we cannot have an honest debate if we insist that fiction is fact. mark twain, a great nevadan, once said, if you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything. he was right. here's one thing every senator should remember and never forget, though there are many different points of view in this body, we all share the same reality. madam president, i look forward to a productive congress and we can do that by debating the facts.

before i turn this over know friend, the republican leader, i ask consent the senate proceed to the immediate consideration of h. con. res. 10, which was received from the house and is at the desk. the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the motion to reconsider be laid on the table, and that no intervening action or debate take place and any statements related to the measure be placed in the record at the appropriate place as if read. the presiding officer: is there objection? without objection, so ordered. mr. mcconnell: madam president? the presiding officer: the republican leader. mr. mcconnell: madam president, i'd like to start this morning by acknowledging the news from last week that three of our colleagues will be leaving us when their current terms expire. senator hutchison has been a

trusted adviser of mine, a leader in the senate, and a dear friend. senator conrad has been a leader on the budget. he's done a lot to alert the country to the fiscal problems we face as a nation. and senator lieberman has been a consistent and courageous leader on defense and national security issues. we'll be sorry to see them go. they've all been a great credit to this body. now, madam president, every grade schooler in america knows that all three branches of the federal government in washington are equal. but as every member of congress quickly learns, the president sets the agenda. and never is that more apparent than on the day of the state of the union address. this year the president will be speaking to a congress that looks very different from the one he spoke to last year. the voters sent a clear message in november that when it comes

to jobs and the economy, the administration's policies have done far more damage than good. and one very positive thing that the president could do tonight is to acknowledge that they have a point. he's tried to do so indirectly in recent weeks by hiring new staff, by speaking in tones of moderation -- plodder radification, but it tikes -- plodderration but it takes more than a change in tone to reduce the debt. it takes more than a change in tone to create the right conditions for private-sector job growth. it takes a change in policy. and the early signals suggest that the president isn't quite there yet. the president has talked recently about working together to improve a regulatory climate that stifles business innovation and job growth. yet, he hasn't acknowledged the

extent to which his own policies have stifled growth. over the past two years, his administration has issued more than 13 130 economically significant new rules or 40% more than the annual rate under the last two presidents. what's worse, the new health care bill will alone create 159 new bureaucratic entities and is exempt from the president's proposed regulatory reforms. the health care bill, which will create 159 new bureaucratic entities is exempt from the president's proposed regulatory reforms. and this is bad news for small business, who are already struggling to get by on a down economy and who are now grappling with how to afford all the new mandates in the new health care bill. the president has talked about streamlining and reducing the burden of government. yet, the health care bill he signed has increased the cost of care and forcing people out of

their existing coverage. the debate over this bill continues and the president and democrats in congress continue to defend it. but with nearly two -- when nearly two-thirds of doctors surveyed predicted it would make health care worse, not better, americans are right to be concerned. it should tell us something that 19 doctors currently in congress, 18 of them support repeal of the health care bill. the president's talked about the need to cut spending and reduce the debt, yet, over the last two years his policies have added more than $3 trillion to the national debt, much of it through a stimulus that promised to keep unemployment, now hovering just below double digits from rising above 8%. and now we hear that he plans to stick with the same failed approach of economic growth with more government spenting with a call for -- quote -- "investments."

in education, infrastructure research and renewable energy. we've seen before what democrats in washington mean by investments. in promoting the failed stimulus, the president referred to that too as an investment in our nation's future. 14 times alone during his signing statement he referred to the stimulus bill's investments. we all know how that turned out. the first stimulus we were told would include critical so-called investment in education, infrastructure, scientific research, and renewable energy. the same areas we're told he'll focus on tonight, only later did we learn that some of these critical investments included things like repairs on tennis courts, a study on the mating decisionings of cactus bugs, hundreds of thousands of dollars for a plant database, and

a $535 million loan to a california solar panel maker which instead of hiring 1,000 new workers, as planned, just laid off 175 instead. this is what happens, madam president, when the government decides to pick winners and losers without considering what the marketplace really wants. competitors are left out in the cold, employees get a false sense of security, and taxpayers are left holding the bag. unfortunately the president doesn't seem to have learned this lesson quite yet. but taxpayers now know that when democrats talk about investments, they should grab their wallets. so i'm all for the president changing his tune, but unless he has a time machine, he can't change his record. and if we're going to make any real progress in the areas of spending, debt, and reining in

government, the president will have to acknowledge the policies of the last two years are not only largely to blame for the situation we find ourselves in, unless we do something to reverse their ill effects, the road to recovery and prosperity will be a bumpy one. the president spoke in tones of a moderate many times. he did so in his campaign. he's done so in countless speeches. he's got a knack for it. i have no doubt he'll do so again tonight. but speeches only last for as long as they're delivered. americans are more interested in what follows the speech. and in the case of this administration, americans have a good reason to be skeptical. time and time again the president has spoken in a way that appeals to many, then governed in a way that doesn't. my hope is that he'll leave that method aside. a better path, in my view, is

the one that republicans have been proposing for two years, one that respects both the wishes of the public and the two-the party system. -- the two-party system. last year prior to the president's state of the union, i proposed a number of areas where i thought the two parties could find common ground and work together to help the economy. the president ignored just about everything i proposed. so when the pundits ask whether there are areas where the two parties can come together, i would say yes. i've proposed several of them, but the democrats don't seem to be interested. some have suggested that in this new post-election environment, i might find a more receptive audience. no the spirit of bipartisanship -- so in the spirit of bipartisanship, i'd like to propose a few areas where i believe the two parties can work together in the weeks and months ahead. i believe the parties can and should work together on energy initiatives that expand america's domestic energy supply and make us less reliant on

foreign sources. on expanding exports and creating jobs through free trade agreements with panama, colombia and south korea and reforming corporate taxes so american businesses are more competitive in a increasingly more global marketplace. these are the things that we can do beyond the symbolic gestures and posturing to help the economy. beyond that, we must work to cut spending and to rein in the size and cost of government. the voters have been crystal leer clear on this point. by proposing government spending tonight, the president is not only defying the well, but to learn the clear lesson of the failed stimulus. government may create debt, but it doesn't create jobs. so i think we have a lot of work to do in bringing the two parties together on a program ma will -- on a program that will actually address the problems that we face. but there are reasons for

optimism. the president's change in tone is an acknowledgement that something has to change as was his willingness to work with republicans last month on keeping taxes from going up on anyone. in the coming weeks and months, americans will be looking for him to come around on spending and debt as well. and republicans will be working hard to persuade him to do so. madam president, i yield the floor. mr. durbin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: thank you, madam president. last week, the president of china came to chicago. he had visited washington, d.c., -- the presiding officer: will the senator hold? under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. under the previous order, the senate will be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each. the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: thank you, madam president. as i was saying last week the president of china came to chicago after visiting washington and he was received in a gala manner in that great

city and i happened to be there for the dinner. the leaders of the community and businesses all there because china has become an important part of american life. it wasn't that long ago that china was really stuck in the past. we can recall the chinese and their green quilted identical clothes on their bicycles holding their little red books of the chairman mao's great quotations and basically being discounted and dismissed. in the world economy now china is a major factor and that's why the remarks of the republican minority leader need to be put in that perspective. the real question the president will ask us tonight is, america ready to compete in the 21st century? do we have what it takes it regain the edge when it comes to manufacturing jobs and to be competitive? the challenge the president offers us is to do the spom thing when -- responsible thing when it comes to our budgeting, but not to forget the

investments necessary in our future. when i look at how the united states is likely to succeed, you have to start with education and training. we have to have an educated workforce, the best in the world. we have to reward innovation, provide the kind of research incentives at the federal government level that lead to the commercialization of products and ultimately manufacture and production that grows our economy. if we walk away from that, madam president, if we say that the united states can no longer invest -- afford to invest in america, we are walking away from wit what is essential for r competitive edge when i hear the republican leader stand up and say we can't afford these investments in america anymore, i really wonder what his vision is when it comes to our competitive edge. i think it's important that we maintain that and the president is going to do that, i believe in the context of responsible budgeting. for the record -- for the record, madam president, we had

a deficit commission proposed on a bipartisan basis last year by senator conrad and senator gregg and it was a commission that came up for a vote on the floor of the united states senate. does the senator from new hampshire remember what happened? we failed to pass this deficit commission when seven republican senators, who were cosponsors, came down and voted against it. the president had no choice at that point but to start an executive commission which i was proud to serve on. and that executive commission didn't have the binding authority that the legislative commission did, which was defeated by the republicans on the floor of the senate. so now as they pose for a holy pictures in deficit reduction, they want us to erase that memory of seven republican senators cosponsors who turned and reversed their position when it came to this deficit commission. i served on this commission.

the one thing that the commission reminded us of over and over is when we hit the deficit brake don't hit it too soon. we could be back into a deeper recession if we're not careful. there's good news, madam president. not as much as we'd like but there's good news. a cnn opinion research poll released this morning says the percent of american people that feel things are going well is up 14 points since december. the director said we haven't seen numbers like this since april 2007. one likely reason for the change is the public's growing optimism about the economy. why is it that this good news about the economy makes the republicans feel so sad and gloomy? it's an indication we are moving in the right direction. the senator from kentucky gets up and says government just creates debt; it doesn't create jobs, that wasn't the speech we heard when we extended the tax cuts. exactly the opposite was said on the floor of the senate. republican senators stood up and said give tax cuts to people, and they are going to be able to

spend more money for goods and services and have more confidence in the future. that was a government decision, a government decision endorsed by the president and a strong bipartisan majority in the senate and the house. the government can work in a positive way. let me say one word about health care. listen carefully. as republican after republican comes to the floor to decry the notion that there would be a government-administered health care plan -- now it's not a government health insurance plan. it's private health insurance administered through the government and insurance exchanges to give everybody a chance to have health insurance. but those who stand up on the other side and decry government-administered health insurance plans are in fact insured under a government-administered health care plan called the federal employees health benefit program. so i would basically say this, we all know the hippocratic oath and we all know the saying physician heal thyself.

i would say to those republican senators calling for repeal of health care for the rest of america that, first, senators repeal your own. step away from the government-administered health care plan if you find it so objectionable for the rest of america, then reject it when it comes to your own health insurance. members of the senate, democrats and republicans, i think without exception, are all members of the government-administered health care plan. if it's good enough for members of the senate, why isn't it good enough for the rest of america? that, i think, is the basics. let me close by saying this, when it comes to trade agreements, i believe we should have good ones, ones that are fair to american workers and businesses. but we've got to be careful as well that we have a tax code that also rewards good conduct by american business. our tax code currently subsidizes american corporations that want to ship production overseas. why in the world would we spend

$1 in our tax money to reward a company that wants to remove a job from america? over and over again we've begged the republicans to join us in a bipartisan effort to end this subsidy for shipping jobs overseas. that will be a good way to build the economy here in america, create good-paying jobs here at home and invest in a country which has a bright future if we don't get caught up in the political rhetoric of the day. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. kyl: thank you, madam president. i'd like to call time out from this partisan discussion to speak for a moment about the events in tucson of january 8. it's the first opportunity i've had to address my colleagues about the tragedy of that day. and the theme that i'd like to discuss is the goodness of people, because if anything has -- if i've gotten any lesson from this, after meeting and talking with all of the people

who i could involved in this tragedy, the overwhelming notion of the goodness of people is what i am most left with. tomorrow senator mccain and i will offer a resolution in support of the victims of the shooting, offering condolences to those who were lost and their loved ones and our prayers for the recoveryy of those who were injured and to express appreciation for those who engaged in real acts of heroism. we'll have more formally to talk about when we do that tomorrow. i just wanted to share some thoughts from my home based on my interaction with the people over the last two weeks after this event occurred. it begins with the proposition that tucson likes to call itself a town, not a city. it's over half a million people. but you're all familiar with communities which though large

in numbers seem small because people work together, they play together, they have a sense of community and of helping and working with each other. and that is tucson, where my wife and i both attended the university of arizona. the safeway where this event occurred is only two blocks from my tucson office, and my -- the head of my tucson office and his staff were at the safeway saturday morning shopping. they left about seven or eight minutes before this occurred. judge john roll, who is a very close friend, attended mass virtually every morning, had just come from mass, and had decideed to document safeway to express his appreciation to representative gabriel giffords. they were friends. among other things, he wanted to tell her that he appreciated her signing a letter along with representative grajova that supported the arizona federal district court in its desire to

be named an emergency district by the commission that does that for the federal courts because of the overwhelming caseload in that court. judge roll, though he had significant administrative responsibilities, kept a full caseload himself because to do otherwise would have been to put part of the burden on to his colleagues. so he was really carrying two separate loads, administering a very, very busy court at the same time acting as a judge on all of his cases. part of the things that he and i had been working on -- in fact, senator barrasso, senator lemieux and i had lunch with him to stalk about -- to talk about how we could strengthen the caseload. part of his work and that i was working with him on was to try to find ways to ameliorate the load of his court and potentially get additional

magistrates, if not judges, to help handle the caseload. when they -- when representative giffords decided to hold this congress on your corner event, many of the people in her tucson staff went with her to the event. they're very devoted to her, and i don't know of anyone that enjoys meeting with constituents more than representative giffords. so she had several staff people there too. when the gunman came, he immediately headed for her. his intention was obviously to do her harm. but right after shooting representative giffords, he began to shoot the people on her staff and the others waeugtd in line to -- waiting in line to talk to her. this is where some of the goodness of the people just comes out. i talk about the goodness of the people, judge roll who didn't have to say thank you to representative giffords but he went out of his way to do that. when ron pw-r -- barber, the head of her tucson staff was shot, judge roll, the cameras

show, pushed him down under a table and put his body over ron barber's body and thus took the bullet that killed john roll's life. talk about the goodness of people. and everyone in tucson and in arizona who knew judge roll at his funeral spoke not just of his abilities as a jurist and his public service but his goodness. his love for his wife, their sons and grandchildren. three of his grandchildren spoke and it was moving when they talked about the love they had for their grandfather who took a lot of time to teach them how to swim and so on. representative giffords' staff were there. they liked her and were very willing to be with her on a saturday morning when they could have been doing something else with their families. gabe zimmerman, 30 years old, he too lost his life.

gabe is a democrat working for a democratic. my staff enjoyed him. my tucson staff is taking his loss very, very hard. there were others from his staff who were there, one of whom is an intern we're going to see this evening. he's going to be sitting in the president's box. his name is daniel hernandez. we saw him on the -- at the ceremony in tucson, at the university of arizona, on wednesday after shooting. he was one of the people who immediately went to representative giffords' aid and continued to staunch her bleeding. the goodness of people. his unselfless act to help her. pam simon was another one of her staffers who the shot. i had a chance to visit with pam in the hospital and then after. there she is with wounds. the bullet went in and out of her arm and another in her leg and couldn't wait to get back to

work. and she has done so now. the other people who were shot there: christina taylor green is the nine-year-old. the things that were said about her remind me of my youngest granddaughter. the hugest heart you can ever imagine. athletic, yet studious, interested in government, all the things you'd want in a young woman. president obama spoke eloquently about her in his remarks on that wednesday. she was taken to the event with a friend who just wanted to expose her to representative giffords and a little bit about our government. dorothy morris. i didn't know dorothy, but i knew her husband george. they had communicated with me, and i visited with george a couple of times after this event. he's a retired marine. i tell you, he's having a hard time with this because he said that dot, his wife, would follow him -- his words -- she would follow me to hell.

she's obviously in a different place, and he is going to be as well. but the fact that she didn't particularly want to go that morning, but he's a republican. he wanted to go talk to representative giffords because he thought he could talk to her just in a way that we do, about issues and have a good conversation with somebody he didn't totally agree with. and then saved his wife's life. dorwin stod tkard, he was killed. his recent life was devoted to his home. his daughters were there. just the kindness of all of those people and the way they talked about the others involved as well as you could see the members of family and friends helping each other was, as i said, an impression that will stick with me forever.

phyllis was a wufrpl -- was a wonderful grandmother. she lived in new jersey and spent winters in arizona. all of these human beings had family, friends, future. all of them taken from us is a real tragedy. whrabg we take from that -- what can we take from that? at this time i think i've gone almost ten minutes. i'll mention tomorrow some of the heroes. bill badger, retired army colonel, didn't want to talk about his heroism but he helped to subdue the assailant. anna wallace, who has two sons both of whom are u.s. marines who have done repeated tours in afghanistan and iraq. she was in the safeway, came out and immediately began administering to ron barber. i went to visit ron in the hospital at the same time that anna had gotten there a few minutes before. ron was holding her hand the entire time saying this is the lady who saved my life.

and just a tremendous act of selfless courage on her part and just showing again wonderful humanity of all of the people there. steve rail, doctor, former emergency room doctor, was there to help subdue the assailant. there were many others. we'll talk tomorrow more formally. i know all of our colleagues will want to joint us in supporting this resolution to let the folks of tucson know that we appreciate what they have endured here. we appreciate the heroism. our prayers are with the victims, and our hearts go out to all of those who were injured in some way or other. but from this, among the lessons that we learned is that people have innate goodness. we all have a side of us that we wish we didn't have sometimes too, frequently expressed on the floor of this body. maybe for a little while we can acknowledge the fact that there

is goodness in everyone, and i saw so much of that in all of these people drawn from all over the community, different walks of life, different political parties, different ages. and yet, when they came together, what was most obvious? it was their sacrifice and their goodness. and i think that that is something that should be a lesson to all of us. i will tomorrow speak more formally, as i said, about this resolution. but i am deeply grateful for the expressions of condolence and support that all of my colleagues have presented both to me and senator mccain. the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: madam president, i certainly grieve and also appreciate all of the remarks of the distinguished senator from arizona. what a tragedy. but there are heroes there as well. and i appreciate his remarks. madam president, in recent months president obama has frequently discussed our

nation's disturbing fiscal situation. he's right to do so. our yearly deficit and accumulated debt hangs over the futures of our children and grandchildren. though he was late to the table on this issue, president obama seems to have finally recognized the frustration and anger of the american people over our federal fiscal policies. recognize that you have a problem -- recognizing that you have a problem is an important first step and i applaud the president for speaking to our nation's structural deficits. but this is a critical issue and any solution will require that those responsible will give a full and fair accounting of the policies that have led to this crisis. 0 unfortunately rather than own up to the own accomplicity in the fiscal balance, the president continues to blame the current fiscal problems on the previous administration. for this president the buck always seems to stop over there.

this trope getting old. well before citizens organized against this administration and the spending spree, the president and democratic allies in congress were justifying the stimulus program by blaming the previous administration. prying to pass off the consequence of the -- on the last two years of a long-retired president that the congress ended over four years ago is no longer plausible. try as they might, revisionist fiscal history will not resolve our friends on the other side for the fiscal decisions made on their watch. i'll explain that point separately and in detail in a few days. it is well past time that this administration stop pointing fingers. the american people are demanding that their elected representatives in congress and the white house act like adults and fix this fiscal mess. in a few weeks president obama will send congress his third budge. the fact that treasury secretary geithner has written us requesting legislation to raise

the debt ceiling does not bode well for citizens sinking greater spending restraint from this administration. the people of utah and this nation deserve a fair accounting of the spending decisions that have led to this request. let me be clear. the president's desire for larger level of public debt is a consequence of the fiscal policy choices that he and a democratic congress have made over the last two years. between 2007 and 2010, democrats enjoyed unprecedented control over federal policy. when the president was inaugurated two years ago, he set to work with historic majorities in both the house and senate. never letting a crisis go to waste, he sought a fundamental restructuring of the american economy, one in which government would play a starring role. thanks to our founders' design, the american people were able to go to the ballot box and give their opinion about the spending

policies. under fortunately the administration and its allies did not curb their spending. the people spoke first in virginia and new jersey and then in massachusetts and finally last summer nationwide. but the democrats, rather than adjust their policies accordingly, kept on spending. the tab for this binge is most -- is almost beyond description. in the two years that the democrats controlled washington, our debt has risen by almost -- by almost $3 trillion. let's look at that. $3 trillion. i have a chart documenting these staggering hikes in the debt chart -- in the debt limit. this chart shows just how out of control we are. during the short period of all democratic rule the law was changed to raise the debt ceiling on three separate

occasions. on february 17, 2009, president obama signed a debt limit increase bill of $789 billion, the cost of the stimulus bill at that time. on december 28, 2009, president obama signed a debt limit increase bill of $290 billion. and on february 12, 2010, president obama signed a third debt limit increase o of $1.9 trillion. these dollar figures in terms of the percentage of the economy they represent are breathtaking. i, like most other members on both sides of the aisle, eagerly await the president's state of the union address. the president is a gifted speaker and in his usual eloquent manner i'm sure he will skillfully lay out his fiscal and economic policy goals. as the incoming ranking republican on the finance committee, let me be the first to say the republicans are happy to hear the president contemplate serious deaf the sit reduction proposals. we would be overjoyed if he took

a stand for a meaningful attack obstructal deficits and the debt. we will judge his proposals harshly if they propose window dressing rather than a spending trajectory approaching crisis status. willie sutton, the infamous bank robber, was asked why he robbed banks. by the way, here's a chart of mr. sutton from life.com. that's willie sutton, the great bank robber. how did willie respond he allegedly said he robbed banks because that's where the money is. if president obama wants to propose credible deduction proposals, he needs to go where the deficit dollars are. what is the source of those deficits? taking willie sutton's answer to heart, where do we look for those deficits? they are in the trillions of dollars of new spending that the american taxpayer has been burdened with by this

administration. non-defense discretionary spending has grown by 24% over the last couple of years. and that 24% figure does not include the stimulus bill spending. if stimulus spending is included, non-defense discretionary spending is grown by 84%. that's right, madam president. 84%. how many typical tax paying american families have grown their budgets by that much in the last couple of years? let's look at the gallup weekly survey of consumer weekly spending. i have a trend line in daily consumer spending. as you can see that trend line in daily consumer spending. the seven-day rolling average. over here you can see -- that the chart consumer spending before the financial fall of 2008 and the recession. that's right over in this side right in here.

it's running near or above $100 a day. then what happens? americans cut back on their extra spending. it's right here in the rest of the chart. just look at how they cut back. is it any wonder americans are telling us to cut our spending? they've cut spending. why can't we in washington do the same? when the president laid out his last two budgets, the loudest bipartisan applause came when he stressed fiscal discipline. that reaction should surprise no one. though conservatives led the way, the american people understood or understand that deficit reduction is not a partisan issue. if the promises of our declaration of independence and constitution, promises of liberty and opportunity are to mean anything for future generations, our country needs to take up deficit reduction now. republicans are going to incest on meaningful deficit reduction

as a course correction to our currently unsustainable fiscal policy and path. as our nation comes out of this painful, slow growth period, hopefully sooner rather than later, we must focus on cutting the debt, the deficit, and the debt. as republicans we agree with the president on the priority of fiscal discipline. but deeds mean for more than words and -- more than words and twice the president's budget in spite of the nod toward fiscal discipline has gone in the direction of unpaid for spending, new government programs and entitlements and massive financial burdens on the next generation of american taxpayers. the numbers don't lie. the president and the democratic leadership have dramatically expanded the deficit and piled on to the debt. two years ago republicans and democrats dramatically disagreed on the stimulus bill. out of all the republicans in the house and senate, only three

supported the stimulus bill conference report. along with most of my republican colleagues, i rejected this stimulus bill for several reasons. first was the size ant form of the stimulus -- and the form of the stimulus. most on our side understood that $1 trillion in deficit spending was an unacceptable burden on the people who would ultimately foot the bill. second, we questioned the focus of the stimulus. we weren't keen on trying to grow the economy by priming the government pump. spending $1 trillion of taxpayer money on the academic theory that you have to spend money to make money was a gamble the american taxpayer could not afford. and last year while the administration and its allies were out promoting recovery summer, citizens in utah and around the country had long before figured out that the administration's stimulus bet was a big loser. finally, what disturbed us most was the hidden fiscal burden

built into this bill. though sold as a $787 billion bill, the real cost of the stimulus was, in fact, much higher. i'm going to use a chart to show this hidden cost of the stimulus bill. this chart was produced last year but will be updated when we receive the congressional budget office baseline. according to the nonpartisan c.b.o., if popular new programs in the stimulus bill are made permanent, the cost will b be $3.3 trillion. think about that. to use washington speak, the greatest threat of the new stimulus bill was that it raised the baseline. this is a nifty trick if you can pull it off. the purpose is to open any future spending cuts no matter how modest to withering attack. think about it, $3.3 billion out of that -- $3.3 trillion out of the so-called stimulus bill.

here's how it works. first democrats raise spending for some program to borrow from george castanza, we will call it the human fund. after democrats take control of congress and the spending for the human fund goes up 25% fro from $1 million to $1.250000, when republicans roll it back to cut the spending by a meager 5% from 1,250,000 to 1 million 87,000 leads all to scream that the sky is falling. an attack on the human fund is an attack on all that is decent in this country. never mind that this program is still substantially better off than before the democrats' massive increase in spending. all that we hear is that republicans are ruthlessly seeking to cut 5% from this

program's budget. and so it goes. our deficit and debt continues to grow as irresponsible and unaffordable and increases in spending are baked into our budgetary cake. this strategy of raising the baseline is on full display in the stimulus bill. the threat that the program that it was sold to the country as temporary will become permanent. this chart details c.b.o.'s analysis of the stimulus. as you can see the first column is the basic cost of the bill. if the making were paid tax credit as extended, there' there's $571 billion more in the future deficits. this is the second column right here. if they extend that. if the new entitlement spending in the stimulus made permanent, then the cost of the bill more than doubles.

it means almost $1 trillion in new hidden entitlement spending right here. in the fourth column we have the appropriations spending. if those increases become permanent, there is $276 billion in new non-defense discretionary appropriations in this bill. that's right here. finally we have the rent in all of this borrowed money, that's the interest expense. the c.b.o. tells us that the interest cost alone on the overt new spending and the hidden new spending from the stimulus totals $744 billion. that's just the interest alone. totaled it all up, total all of these columns up and you

get $3.3 trillion in spending. not the 787 -- $787 billion. the total cost of the stimulus is $3.3 trillion. our nation can simply no longer afford this. madam president, these are c.b.o. figures, congressional budget office figures. the c.b.o. head, who i happen to admire, happens to be a democrat. madam president, these c.b.o. figures are not from a conservative think tank. there are a couple of simple ways for the stimulus bill supporters to support this extra jectry. if they -- trajectory. if they want to keep the long-term cost of the stimulus down, they can agree to make all of the stimulus provisions temporary or agree to offset extensions of stimulus spending with other spending cuts. but our friends on the other side have done just the opposite. they've insisted on extending the policy and the stimulus bill without offsets in the areas of spending.

madam president, you recall then-national economic commerce director larry summers three t's, tests for stimulus. to be effective, the stimulus needed to be timely, targeted and temporary. that's what it needed to be. it is failure on the third "t," the temporary test, which has been very troubling. two years into this failed economic experiment and democrats still refuse to agree that temporary stimulus proposals should remain temporary. the path forward is not going to be *edz. while we -- easy. while we have a recent example of deficit reduction it was not generated by this administration or its congressional allies. if you want to look over the last decade there is one significant spending reduction bill. it was the deficit reduction act of 2005. it contained a modest amount of deficit reduction. the deficit reduction attained was $35 billion.

how do we achieve these savings? that bill was accomplished through reconciliation. the other side opposed it in lock step. in the end only republican votes carried that stand-alone deficit-reduction measure. yet now american taxpayers are being asked to believe that democrats have found religion on deficits and debt. our friends on the other side will no doubt say time out, we've produced a significant deficit-reduction bill, they will say. they will point to last year's obamacare legislation. they will argue that this bill which creates massive new entitlements sphou saves money. our democrats friends will site a c.b.o. score sight a $230 billion reduction from this bill. anyone who looks beyond the basic score will see that obamacare is another huge deficit generator that will burden the american taxpayer for generations to come. house budget committee chairman

paul ryan released an analysis derived from c.b.o. data that tells the full story of the obamacare's deficit impact. here's what chairman ryan said -- and i quote -- "claims of deficit reduction exclude the $115 billion needed to implement the law. the score double counts $521 billion to our social security payroll taxes, class act premiums and medicare cuts. it strips a doc fix provision included in the initial score. it measures ten years of revenues to offset six years of new spending. there is no question that the creation of a new $1 trillion open-ended entitlement is a fiscal train wreck. add it all up, and the fiscal reality is that obamacare busts the budget by $701 billion." i ask unanimous consent that a copy of chairman ryan's analysis be inserted in the record at this point. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: thank you, madam chair. this double counting of the medicare cuts is a dangerous

accounting gamut. former senator gregg and i warned the medicare trustees about it in a letter last year. i ask unanimous consent that a copy of that letter be inserted in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: thank you. a clear pattern emerged with respect to democratic rhetoric on the budget. they speak loudly about deficit reduction while continuing to write checks that this nation cannot cash. madam president, consider the last debt limit increase bill which included the much ballyhooed statutory paygo scheme. my friends on the other side speak of it frequently but they have also been the most frequent violators of the statute and letter of paygo. the committee analyzed the spending offsets and other budget restraints rejected since statutory paygo was adopted. i ask unanimous consent that a copy of this analysis be included in the record at this point. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: total it up and you will find that the cost of democrats and running their own paygo rule meant almost $280

billion in additional deficit spending. i think this point needs to be very clear. the senate republican attempts to force our friends on the other side to abide by the letter or spirit of their own paygo rule were rebuffed for almost all of last year. this is not some mere academic exercise. now the american taxpayers are on the hook for roughly $280 billion, courtesy of democrats purportedly committing commited to spending restraint. still we are heartened that democrats are thraoefpt claiming a commit -- at least claiming a commitment to deficit reduction. talking tough is a necessary though not sufficient step toward getting our fiscal house in order. similarly, it is a positive development that the president has endorsed passage of u.s.-korea free trade agreement. maybe the administration is waking up to the importance of our pending trade agreements for our exports and the workers that make them. the proof of his commitment to

our exporters must go go beyond the korean f.t.a. we can no longer let trade agreements with panama and colombia languish as we allow other countries to seize these markets for their workers. talking about trade does not produce jobs. we need the president to take action and submit these agreements to congress. and we need that action now. the u.s. worker cannot afford to wait. passage of these trade agreements can boost our economy and our competitiveness without additional spending. they are important tools that we must put to work if the president chooses this route, i believe he will find an important ally in congress. i look forward to president obama's proposals for prioritizing deficit reduction. there is no issue more critical to this nation's future, and i expect we'll hear quite a bit about it in the state of the union address. at least i hope so. the president can count on applause from our side of the aisle if he presses for reductions and out-of-control

spending. but merely relabeling this spending as investments will not make our deficits go away and it will do nothing to tackle our escalating debt. the president must give serious attention to the legitimate arguments and concerns of conservative citizens if he wants to achieve anything more than a pleasant-sounding rhetorical flourish. president obama did inherit a serious budget deficit and our friends on the other side will once again applaud that hraoeufpblt they will cheer -- that line. they will cheer the assertion they inherited deficits. they will spin the tale that republicans alone bequeathed the deficit to president obama, but that is certainly not the case. and the record is clear, a democratic congress and a republican president created this deficit from bipartisan policies that they jointly developed. to those democrats who claim republicans have no right to discuss deficits, they need look

no farther than their own actions. look at the stimulus bill they crafted two years ago. take a comprehensive look at the real deficit impact of obamacare. take an honest look at the appropriations bills that piled on double digit increases in spending. american families don't have the luxury of 84% or 24% increases in their spending. they made their priorities and restrained their spending. this is the american people from spending up here, restraining it down into this level. if we can do it, why can't the government? if american families can prioritize, deleverage and live within their means, i hope the president will push his allies in washington to do the same. all of us in congress await the arrival of president obama's third budget. the american people are demanding that he make deficit reduction a priority, and they're asking congress to approach this subject in an intellectually honest fashion. we need to acknowledge that when it comes to the budget, the road to fiscal ruin has been paved

with good intentions. in the name of the economy, the democrat stimulus bill has imposed short-term and long-term costs on the american taxpayers, jeopardizing economic growth and with it liberty and opportunity. that damage has been expanded with an unoffset extensions of what we were told were temporary provisions. as we start writing a budget, let's do it with all the fiscal cards on the table. let's remove the political blinders and deal with the fiscal facts. and that means being realistic about expiring tax relief, its merits, its economic growth effect and its political popularity. this is not a problem that we can tax our way out of. getting our fiscal house in order is going to require hard decisions on spending. we need to put our shoulders to the wheel. we owe it to the people that sent us here. there's an old saying that applies here. i'm not the first person nor will i be the last to reference it in the context of our fiscal

troubles. the saying is when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. we need to use our shovels to fill this fiscal hole, not dig it deeper. i look forward to this debate on spending. it will not be an easy one. but the american people have demanded that congress take up this cause, and i fully intend to. ultimately i'm confident that we will achieve meaningful deficit reduction. yet, i go into this debate with my eyes open. president reagan and the foreign policy arena reminded us to trust but verify. as we await the president's state of the union speech, republicans trust that democrats will make a nod toward deficit reduction, but we need to verify whether they are serious about getting this problem under control. democrats do not have a great track record when it comes to cutting spending. but hope springs eternal. madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum.

the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. mr. cardin: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, on monday, january 17, our nation once again celebrated the birthday of dr. martin luther

king jr. as a national holiday. signed into law in 1983, the bill to make dr. king's birthday a legal public holiday was the result of a 15-year legislative effort. although i was not a member of the congress at the time, i remember well the national debate and eventually the overwhelming support that this legislation engendered. for the senate pages on the floor today, for their entire lifetime dr. king's birthday has been a federal holiday. but they and all young americans should know that the passage of that law was not certain and not without controversy at the time. madam president, i was the speaker of the maryland house of delegates in the 1980's when the state of maryland took up legislation to make dr. king's birthday a state holiday. and we were one of several states to pass state laws to make dr. king's birthday a

holiday. and as the federalism system works, as more states got engaged in this issue, the momentum at the national level became very apparent, and for the importance of this day and its message to americans, the congress finally enacted legislation in 1983. this holiday, which has appropriately come to be known as a day of service, would not have happened without the leadership of former senator charles mathias of maryland. and i'm very proud of the work that senator mathias did on this issue and so many issues that were important to the opportunities for all americans. and i also want to acknowledge the work of former representative katie hall of indiana, the author of the 1983 legislation. without the work of representatives john lewis and john conyers and their dedication of life to social justice and also i might add the work of our former senator

kennedy, ted kennedy, this bill would never have become law. and i congratulate all of them for their work. madam president, serving in the senate today are colleagues whom i would also like to thank for their efforts to enact that legislation. the 1983 king holiday bill had six of its 34 sponsors are still in the senate today, including senator baucus, senator bingaman, senator inouye, senator lautenberg, levin, and lugar as well as the president of the senate, vice president joe biden. five senators who were members of the house of representatives at the time were original cosponsors of the companion bill, h.r. 3706, which became law. they are majority leader reid, senator akaka, boxer, mikulski and schumer. i thank them all for their leadership and vision in the 1980's as to the importance of making this holiday a remembrance to dr. martin luther king.

20 years before its enactment in august of 1963 on the steps of the lincoln memorial, dr. king delivered his most well-known speech in which he called for racial equality and social justice for all americans. madam president, in honor of dr. king's holiday, i would ask unanimous consent to insert in the record a copy of that speech. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: thank you, madam president, with that i would yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. a senator: thank you, madam president. i'd like to ask to vitiate the quorum call. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. corker: and i will speak for just a few moments on something that i think is the most important issue facing our country today and i can't think of a better time than the first day we're in session here in the senate in this new congress, and that is the federal deficit. i'm proud to say that later this week claire mccaskill from

missouri will be joining me, along with richard burr, john mccain, senator alexander, and senator isakson in something called the cap act. and what it does is take us over a 10-year period from where we are in spending at the federal government level as a percentage of our country's economy, the cross domestic product, taking us at where we are today, 24%, down to the four-year average which we've had in this country, as i mentioned, for 40 years of 20.6%. this is something that puts in place a construct or a straitjacket on congress that really allows us over time to take methodical, thoughtful approach to spending at the federal level, but to actually have to do it. in this -- in this bill, which we also offered as an amendment during the lame-duck session is now a stand alone bill, again,

we'll be offering it a little bit later this week. we hope to have additional cosponsors from both sides of the aisle. but what it would do is take us from where we are today down to that average. and if congress did not act responsibly, then o.m.b. would have the ability through sequestration to actually take money out of mandatory and nonmandatory accounts to ensure that we, again, have that discipline to take us where we need to be. i have talked about this bill now i've traveled through tennessee, i've made about 46 presentations of how we in congress could act more responsibly. and it's amazing that people on both sides t aisle have looked -- on both sides of the aisle looked at this and said, you know, this makes sense. it's my hope that as we try to rein in federal spending that this bill -- i believe this bill is the vehicle -- there may be

other ideas, but i hope that this is something that we, in fact will act upon during the spring. i know the president most recently has talked a great deal about this issue -- issue of fiscal responsibility. i thank him for that. i'm hoping that tonight when he delivers his speech he talks about the fact that we here in washington have got to have the same kind of discipline that all of our folks back home have to live by. and, again, this is something we've been working on for a long, long time. we tried to work on it in a way that in no way points fingers. people understand that people on both sides of the aisle are responsible for our country ending up where it is fiscally. and so we've tried to grasp something that brings people together that for the first time since i've been here, i've been here four years, and i've just been amazed at the lack of discipline that exists in congress that we have no

mechanism, no straitjacket, if you will, that forces us to act responsibly. and so through a long period of time we've worked to put together a bill -- by the way it's under 10 pages. i think it's eight or 9 pages long that does that. it has a smoothing mechanism in it so when there are gyrations in the economy, that the federal government can't act in the way that a city or state can. that is averaged out so we know what the target is in the ensuing year. it has tight constraints. it requires a 60 vote majority or two-thirds of the house and senate to ride. i think people on both sides of the aisle are beginning to embrace this type of thinking. it's my hope, again, that as the president tonight hopefully talks responsibly about our fiscal state here in the united

states, that this type of mechanism, if you will, gains momentum. it is also my hope that we will vote and pass something like this along with actual budget cuts prior to the debt ceiling vote. i think all of us know that -- that it would be very irresponsible not to act responsibly prior to this debt ceiling vote which will take place sometime in april, may, possibly june. so, madam president, i thank you for the time to talk a little bit about this, again, on the first day of us coming back together. i can't imagine anything more important for all of us to focus on than to get our fiscal house in order. i know the whole world is watching us. i know people have said that we here in washington don't have the courage to deal with this. i know the presiding officer has had to deal with this as a governor of a state. i've certainly had to deal with

this as a mayor of a city and businessman and commissioner of finance of my state. we all know that things are awry here. i think that we have a wonderful opportunity in a bipartisan way to do something that really puts our country back on strong footing. with that, madam president, i thank you for the time and i yield the floor. mr. corker: i notice the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

mr. durbin: mr. president? the presiding officer: the assistant majority leader. mr. durbin: i ask unanimous consent the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: during the recent two-week recess i was invited to speak to the parliament of the nation of hreugt wayne in -- of lithuania. it was a great honor. this country holds a special place for my family. my mother was born in lithuania 100 years ago this year my brand mother brought her -- my grandmother brought her and her sister to america, landed in baltimore and our family found its way to meet up with my grandfather in east st. louis, illinois, where a lot of hreugt lithuanians were coming to take jobs, hard, manual-labor jobs.

so i was asked to come and speak to the parliament on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of what has come to be known as bloody sunday. it recalls a time 20 years ago when mikhail gorbachev, as head of the soviet union, made his last desperate violent effort to stop lithuania from breaking away from the soviet union. i recall that period because i followed it closely as a member of congress. you can still see some details of what life was like in lithuania under the soviets. the old police headquarters had been preserved as a museum, basically a horror museum to show and catalog the torture and killings that took flays there during -- that took place there. in february of 1990 the people of this nation on the baltic decided they had enough. they swept the ruling communist

party out of power in an open parliamentary election. a month later, in march of 1990, the new parliament sroetd 124 -- voted 124-0 to restore the country's independence. it was bold, it was historic. that's when gorbachev turned the screws. he ordered soviet tanks to stop the break-away effort. in the early morning hours of january 13, 1991, 14 lithuanians -- just regular people, common people in the country -- were killed, and as many as 1,000 were wounded by those the economist magazine described as bullies. the crackdown failed. by august of 1991, lithuania had won its independence again. today because of the brave efforts of those ordinary lithuanians, it's a free country.

it's democratic. it chairs the community of democracies and is a member of the european union and one of america's allies in nato. imagine my surprise at what i saw during a stop in the neighboring country of byelarus. i saw a step back into soviet times, a step back into barbarism that we found in a kgb museum in hreugt wayne in a. sad -- in lithuania. this wasn't a museum show. it was real life. byelarus defied the transformations that swept across europe following the collapse of the soviet union. the country has been ruled with an iron fist for most of the last few decades by a strong man, alexander lukashenko. lukashenko's two-decade old totalitarian nightmare,

opposition figures, anybody who had the courage to step up and defy him had been subjected to harsh repression and imprisonment. over the years those who might have been alternatives to lukashenko in an election have disappeared or have been thrown in jail. in fact, lukashenko proudly still calls his police force the k.g.b. in recent years there was a tkpwhreurpl of hope -- glimmer of hope that lukashenko was going to move away from his dictatorship a presidential election was scheduled. those hopes were dashed when lukashenko claimed another term as president amid elections described by international monitors as seriously flawed. he ended up with 80% of the vote and said that was a good indication that it was a real election. he didn't get 99% as usual.

lukashenko ordered his k.g.b. thugs to suppress activists and supporters who gathered in protest on election night in independent square in downtown minsk last year. six of the seven political opponents who ran against lukashenko and more than 600 of their followers were arrested. several of the presidential candidates who were being held incommunicado still today face charges that can carry up to 15 years in jail. their crime? they ran against him and they lost. they get to go to jail now. since then lukashenko's k.g.b. continued daily raids on the homes and offices of those with suspected ties to democratic parties and organizations, human rights organizations and what remains of the independent media in byelarus. lukashenko ignored election monitor reports questioning the

credibility of the election and tphaeurbt demands to re -- and international demands to release the political prisoners. he follows the old soviet play book. his government tried to blame outside forces and other countries, everyone but himself, for the shameful political mess he's created. i was in minsk last week and i met with the foreign minister to lukashenko. he pleaded for me to give his -- quote -- "new democracy credit" in byelarus. he said, senator, you live in a country that's had democracy for 200 years. we've only had it for 20 years. he said give us credit. when we arrested all these people, including seven of the people who ran against him, we didn't use tear gas. there were no rubber bullets, no police dogs. give us credit, he said. no, i said you didn't use those

tools, but you just systematically arrested and threw into jail everybody who ran against you. that's not even close to democracy. mr. president, i had the chance to meet with some of the family members of those who are in jail, and i couldn't help but think that just a few hours before i had been in lithuania, a three hour drive from minsk in byelarus where 20 years ago ordinary people like these, families stepped up and said we are willing to fight for freedom. 14 of them lost their lives and 1,000 were injured. just ordinary people. these are not the political class. these are folks who just are sick and tired in byelarus of the authoritarian rule. i want to show you some of the people that i met that i think are worth being part of the record here today. first -- and this was in a meeting established by our consolate in byelarus, they threw out our ambassador a few

years ago so we have five people trying to represent the united states of america in this country. bless them for trying. it's a hard job. they are constantly monitored, eavesdropped, followed. life is not pleasant. when we start getting down on people working for the united states of america, remember these five who are risking their lives for us every day so that there is an outpost for the united states and for freedom in this authoritarian country. this lady was at the meeting in the consolate offices. svetlana liabetka. she is the wife of the chair of the united civic party. she has been fined and imprisoned for his political activities, in 2004 severely beaten. his wife told me in taoerts that her -- tears that her husband had been taken away in jail and she has no information about him. she doesn't know what's happening to him or where he's being held. the second person which i would like to make a part of this

record is tatiana sevorinitz. she is the mother of the head of the presidential -- the head of presidential candidate's campaign. he already served several years in jail for protesting a rigged election when it's those doing the rigging that ought to be in jail. her letters to her imprisoned son go unanswered. her complaints filed against the government have been ignored. she has been prevented from traveling and told me it is impossible to find an explanation for what's happening. my son has been persecuted for 16 years. this photo shows -- forgive me

as i pronounce these names. these people deserve better. constantine senokow, allah seneka and lut s*eu ni phillip. first we have the son and mother of a detained presidential candidate. allah told me in tears she had no contact with her son for 14 days nor had his lawyers. no information on his condition. lutsina is the grandmother of a prim candidate son. -- prim candidate's son. the grandmother said she would take care of the pwoeufplt for the longest time there was doubt as to whether the boy would be left with the family. they relented yesterday and said

the boy could remain with the family. this is a picture of him. cute little fellow. you see in byelarus, you not only arrest the candidate. you take the boy out of the house and family. that is what they planned on doing. when they arrested the wife, a journalist and automatically considered dangerous in byelarus, they decided to go after her child. the grandmother fought a winning battle and has custody of the child. let's hope the american attention though will make a difference. the last one i want to show you was particularly compelling. this is a 34-year-old mother of two whose husband was also a presidential candidate. she told me of harassment by byelarus officials since her husband's arrest. mr. president, 34 years old, this woman was standing there with her baby girl, scrambling around on the floor around her.

she had a ten-year-old at home and she was trying to describe how she was keeping things together while her husband who had the courage to run for president and lose against the dictator luke -- lukashenko. anyone is subject to disbarment as attorneys and being charged with crimes themselves. it isn't exactly a fertile field of attorneys stepping up to represent these people. they take their lives in their hands to do so. and the families have no access, no communications, no correspondence, no way of visiting those who are in prison. they have no idea when they're going to be charged or when they're going to be tried. there is no indication that there will be a public trial. now, this is going on in byelarus today and this woman, with her little girl, is trying to figure out when and if she'll ever see her husband and the father of this little girl again.

the nightmare that she described to me was incredible. she literally has had her house raided by the byelorussian k.g.b. she's been stopped from going to poland, where she was trying to find some support for her husband. and thugs beat her husband on election night. she doesn't even know how he is physically. mr. president, i was so glad to be in lithuania and to join in the celebration of their quest for freedom and independence. after 20 years passed, sometimes you forget how much courage it took for that to happen. but a three-hour drive from vilnius to minsk reminded me. these people in byelarus are making the sameattle today that was made in lithuania and so many other places 20 years ago. they are trying to find one thing that we as americans take for granted every day -- freedom. the freedom to practice the religion of their choice. the freedom to write a newspaper

or do a blog. the freedom to vote for the candidate of their choice. their freedom to oppose government policy. and as a result of that, they have been arrested and imprisoned. mr. president, i'm calling on the government of byelarus to immediately and unconditionally release these political prisoners. the fact that they continue to languish in jail without access to family, lawyers or medical care is an outrage and an embarrassment to europe and the world. these actions show the desperation and fear of a dictator whose rein belongs in the dust bin of history. the european union will decide by the end of january whether byelarus should face renewed sanctions, including targeted actively and access freezes against lukashenka and his top elite political figures. the united states should waste no time joining in this effort. i have spoken directly to secretary of state hillary clinton. she understands, as i do, that what's at stake here is today's fight for freedom and what's in question is whether the united states will stand up and fight

with these families. the european union is prepared to lead. we should be by their side. we should be working together to put the pressure on this dictator to tell him that in the 21st century, there is no place for the bully of byelarus and the terrible oppressive tactics which he's engaged in. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: mr. whitehouse: mr. president? the presiding officer: the junior senator from rhode island. mr. whitehouse: mr. president, may i ask that the pending quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. whitehouse: thank you, mr. president. from the recovery act to the small business jobs act, in the previous congress we passed a number of substantial pieces of legislation to preserve, protect and create american jobs.

the recovery act alone has supported between 2.7 million and 3.7 million jobs, including 12,000 jobs in my home state of rhode island. this was vital in stemming the 700,000-per-month job loss rate that we faced when the previous administration left office. without the recover act and the -- recovery act and the other fiscal stimulus that we passed over the past two years, the economy would have been much, much worse. while the recovery act protected our country from what would have been a far worse economic meltdown, the employment market is still weak and families are sill hurting. our national unemployment rate was 9.4% in december, an unacceptably high level, and it was higher still in harder-hit states like rhode island, where

we have had an 11.5% unemployment rate in december. as we begin this new congress, our number-one priority must remain job retention and creation. the manufacturing industry has historically been the engine of growth for the american economy. the manufacturing economy has been especially important in the industrial northeast, particularly in my state of rhode island. from the slater mill in patuckett, one of the first water-powered textile mills in the nation and the birthplace of the industrial revolution, to high-tech, modern submarine production at quansette point, the manufacturing sector has always been central to rhode island's economy. unfortunately, as american companies have faced rising production costs and increased and very often unfair

competition from foreign firms, u.s. manufacturing employment has plummeted. according to the bureau of labor statistics, the number of manufacturing jobs declined by almost a third over the past decade, from 17.2 million people at work in 2000 to 11.7 million people at work in 2010. six million jobs lost. this decline has been felt most sharply in our old manufacturing centers like rhode island. in rhode island, the loss of manufacturing jobs over the past decade has topped 44%. the decline of the manufacturing sector is a primary reason why rhode island has had greater difficulty than most other states in recovering from the recent recession. over and over, i've traveled around rhode island to meet with local manufacturers, listening to their frustrations and

discussing ideas to help their businesses grow. during these visits, i've heard one theme over and over and over and over again: unfair foreign competition is killing domestic industries. mr. whitehouse: one patuckett manufacturer i visited last week told me that they recently lost 8% of their business to a chinese competitor. it's clear to me that if we want to keep manufacturing jobs in this country and in rhode isla island, we need to level the playing field for our manufacturing companies with their foreign competitors. today i will introduce legislation that will remove one home-grown incentive to move jobs offshore and hope make competition fairer for companies struggling to keep their factory doors open at plants here in the united states. the offshoring prevention act, cosponsored by senators leahy, sanders, boxer, durbin, brown of

ohio, and harkin, would end a perverse tax incentive that actually rewards for shipping jobs overseas. under current law, an american company that manufactures goods in rhode island or montana or maine must pay federal income tax on profits in the year that the profits are earned. that's standard tax law. but if that same company moves its factory to another country, it is permitted to defer the payment of income taxes from that factory. and declare them in a year that is more advantageous, for example, one in which the company has offsetting tax losses. if an american company moves a plant offshore, it acquires this

tax deferral advantage. it makes no sense that our tax code allows companies to delay paying income taxes on profits when made through overseas subsidiaries that charges -- but charges those profits in the year that they're made at home, and my bill will put a stop to this practice, where profits earned on manufactured goods exported to the united states. to put it simply, our tax system should not reward companies for eliminating american jobs. the offshoring prevention act is based on legislation that senator byron dorgan offered over the past two decades again and again. we can all remember senator dorgan coming to this floor right there with pictures of iconic american goods like york peppermint patties, radio flyer red wagons, fig newton cookies, and huffy bicycles. to highlight the fact that the production of these american

classic products had moved to mexico, to china, elsewhere. on dozens if not hundreds of occasions, senator dorgan spoke passionately on this floor about the decline of american manufacturing. i am grateful to his leadership on this critical issue and for bringing our attention to an unfair tax advantage that rewards companies for moving manufacturing jobs overseas. last year, a version of senator dorgan's bill was included in the creating american jobs expending offshoring act. while a majority of this body, 53 senators, voted to begin debate on the bill, we were not able to overcome a filibuster to have a chance to consider and pass this legislation. i'm sorry that we were not able to pass the bill last year and i will do my best to bring it up for a vote in the new congress. mr. president, keeping jobs in

america and providing a level playing field for american manufacturing should not be a democratic or a republican iss issue. we all serve here in the senate to represent the interests of our constituents and our constituents want us to keep these good-paying manufacturing jobs in america. i hope that all of our colleagues will join me in passing the offshoring prevention act to do just that. i thank the chair, and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the senator from maine. ms. collins: mr. president, improving public safety, growing our economy, increasing energy independence, and protecting the environment have always been among my top priorities as a senator. today the very first bill that i'm introducing in this new congress will advance all of

those goals by allowing the heaviest trucks to travel on our federal interstate highways in maine rather than being forced to use secondary roads and downtown streets. i'm delighted to have the senior from vermont, patrick leahy, as my democratic cosponsor and my good friend and colleague from maine, olympia snowe, also as an original cosponsor. vermont has the same problem as we do in maine. thus, the bill that i'm introducing applies to our two states. mr. president, in 2009, i authored a law to establish a one-year pilot project that

allowed trucks weighing up to 100,000 pounds to travel on maine's federal interstates -- i-95, 195, 295, and 395. according to the results of a preliminary study by the maine department of transportation, this pilot project, which ran until mid-december of last year, helped to preserve and create jobs by allowing maine's businesses to receive raw materials and to ship their products more economically. mr. president, also important, the pilot program improved safety, saved energy, and reduced carbon emissions. let me give you a specific example. on a trip from hamden to

houlton, maine, the benefits are obvious. a truck traveling on i-95 rather than on route 2 avoids more than 270 intersections, nine school crossings, 30 traffic lights, and 86 crosswalks. in addition, the driver also saves more than $30 on fuel -- given the cost of diesel, it's probably even higher than that now -- and 50 minutes by traveling on interstate 95 rather than on the secondary road of route 2. unfortunately,, mr. president mr. president, despite the clear success of this pilot project and the strong support of the

administration and many of my colleagues in the senate, the house of representatives failed to include my provision making the pilot permanent in the federal funding bill. as a result, for both maine and vermont, the program expired on december 17 and the heavy trucks are once again unable to use our most modern, safe and efficient highways. mr. president, it's important to emphasize that our legislation does not increase the size or the weight of trucks in our states. maine law already allows trucks weighing up to 100,000 pounds to operate on state and municipal