legislature passed something called sb-5, the governor of ohio signed it. it was a direct assault in many ways on the teaching profession. the discussions i hear from conservative politicians and their allies in the media and they have many on editorial boards especially in central ohio. and the discussions -- in the discussions of the -- the lack of respect they show for people who chose to teach as a profession is just mindboggling. we trust our children to teachers, yet we attack them, too many politicians attack them. i'm going to make it personal. i'm going to start with my mom. my mom was a high school english teacher. she was born in mansfield, georgia, in 1920. she taught in the era of seg dwaition in florida and georgia. raising my two older brothers and me in mansfield, ohio -- she met my dad coming back from world war ii and moved to another mansfield in the north, in ohio. they met in washington at the

end of the war. she taught in the era of a growing american middle class. like teachers throughout our history, she taught her students and her sons that education is a gateway to opportunity that can integrate a segregated nation. at a time when our nation needs our teachers the most, when our economy needs our students to succeed, it's appropriate that we remind ourselves, in spite of this background noise that i hear from so many conservative politicians about teachers unions and about teachers that don't care and about teachers taking off in the summer and teachers are done at 30:00 and all the kinds of attacks they like to make on teachers, i think it's an important reminder of our teachers. this week, our country recognizes national teacher appreciation week to give thanks and gratitude to those people across the country to whom we entrust our children who have made a difference in our lives. let me share a few stories of great teachers in ohio. linda michael of pomeroy, ohio, down at the ohio river, miss michael works with homeless

students k-12 to make sure they have equal access to the same education as other students, from head start to preschool to doctor referrals. she locates students in shelters and motels and homes of relatives to make sure they have what they need, housing assistance, clothing, food, utilities, mental health. this is a teacher that quits at 3:00, that doesn't work in the summers. really, this is above and beyond the call of duty that most of us look -- most of us do in our society. imagine, imagine growing up homeless, growing up homeless, going to school not having your own room, not having a room to share with your sibling, not having a place to go at night. we need teachers to take care of them. we need to do better as a society, but teachers are really the safety net for these children in this county. ms. michelle rusidio rupwright is an elementary school teacher in cleveland. her teaching jobs means going to

homeless shelters after school where students live. it means buying supplies for students out of her pocket. she is a role model to the community. how many teachers -- i know senator mccaskill talks to teachers a lot and tells us this. how many teachers tell us they reach into their pockets -- these aren't wall street bankers. they are teachers. they are sometimes making as little as $45,000 a year. how many reach in their pockets? do senators preach into their pockets and buy folders for our office, buy pens? do senators do that? do most business people like that reach into their pocket to take care of their children? so many teachers do, to buy construction paper, to buy pens, to give kids money for lunch sometimes. clearly, teachers play a role that most people in this country don't play. david faucet, a columbus drama teacher. mr. faucet has helped generations of new immigrants and low-income students see something greater in themselves, more than just a poor immigrant child trying to make it. he encourages students to learn language and speech and culture

through lines of a play or a musical, through elocution lessons and his guiding presence. again, another teacher that focuses on the individual, unique needs of a child, a child that may have been born in another country, may have parents that don't speak english coming here. that child has some different childhoods from what i had with educated english speaking as a native language parents in mansfield, ohio, with lots of ideas and privileges. i was taught by my parents to read before i started kindergarten because -- because i was smarter than other kids, because i had parents that knew that mattered for me to get ahead and for the advantages i would have. mr. faucet clearly focuses on each child's individual, unique personality, needs, situation, all that. john keller, a government teacher in orange. orange is a suburb about 20 miles east, 15 miles east of cleveland. mr. keller addresses the complexity of the subject with the simplest tools and a sense of humor. he engages students as soon as

they walk in the classroom, ensuring a passionate debate, empowering students to stand up to speak out to learn about the world around him. he makes them laugh. what better way to teach them engaging in students, having a big personality and making people laugh. sometimes the teacher himself, i'm sure, being the butt of the jokes, the humor about himself. miss debby lammer and mr. paul lense, teachers in put new hampshire, ohio, -- in putnam, ohio, northwest of toledo. they are the kind of teachers every math student deserves. they are patient and kind. they adapt teaching schools to student needs. they arrive early, they stay late. again, all this stuff. teachers quit at 3:00. teachers don't work in the summer. all this kind of thing that conservatives, why they don't like teachers is beyond me, but like so many conservative politicians attack teachers for all kinds of things. i don't even pretend to understand. but these teachers in putnam

county, ohio, arrive early, stay late, be accessible to students whenever they neat help. miss dilette walker is a retired grade schoolteacher in shaker heights, a cleveland suburb. for decades, she helped children overcome shyness, instilling in them the confidence to read out loud, to sing in a musical, to confront their fears. we know how young children -- i have four, my wife and i do. when they were young, they were not so shy now, when they were young, they were fairly shy. he had had teachers that helped bring them out of their shell sometimes. as parents, we try to do that, with some success, but teachers have -- i've watched teachers with my own children, watched them with my young elizabeth. watched them help them believe in themselves, particularly young girls. i wanted to teacher my daughters that they could accomplish anything, anything, and the fact that they are of their gender, especially in that generation a few years ago when i was a kid,

girls were treated different and girls were not expected to achieve the way boys did in too many cases, the way boys were expected to. i saw teachers with my own daughters help -- help them believe in themselves in a big, important way. that's what mrs. walker did. now retired but with grade school children that she taught in shaker heights. diane scelley, vicki hilliard, high school teachers in west carrollton, ohio, outside of dayton. through the written word, chemistry, equations, musicals, they are teachers that encourage students to try higher, reach harder, never to doubt one's talents. i know a young woman in my office was taught by these three teachers, and i know that she believes -- she believes -- i know her parents, too. i know she believes that she can take on the world and grow and learn, something that women maybe a generation or two might not have been so successful at. and all three of these teachers in west carrollton helped her

achieve that and helped countless others in montgomery county and that part of southwest too to believe in themselves and move forward, whether it was in english, whether it was music, whether it was chemistry. vicki speakman was a grandview high school teacher, outside of columbus. spanish teacher, dedicated mother, a bedrock of the community. diagnosed with cancer, mrs. speakman remained a constant presence at games and concerts, never missing a chance to share a smile, tell a joke, reach out to a lonely student. ten years ago next month, ms. speakman lost her fight with cancer, but like all great teachers, her memory lives with the countless students whose lives are better because of her. not just her memory but the impact she had on these students. whether they think of ms. speakman every day or every week, they live a life differently because of ms. speakman. that's -- that's true with so many of these teachers. when i think of this teacher -- and i do not know ms. speakman. but when i think of her presence

at ballgames and school plays, i think of so many teachers i had at mansfield senior high school. my junior high was one that will probably make the pages here laugh. my junior high was johnny appleseed junior high school in north central ohio where johnny appleseed 200 years ago or so used to go around -- it was a peculiar life he lived. he went around in a country that was totally forested planting apple trees. he became a legend. to each his own. i remember at junior high school, high school, i remember so many teachers that would come to our plays. i played basketball in eighth grade and played baseball and basketball in high school. i would see teachers, not just the coaches but teachers come to the games, the friday night basketball games or the tuesday afternoon baseball games or the school plays on saturday. part of the community cheering on their students, not showing favorites but caring particularly for those students that were a little shy or a little less talented, that might

need a bump up from their teacher and encouragement from their teacher. the same goes for miss jackie geary who taught reading for 45 years in dayton. she was a mate remark of a family of educators. her husband mike is a professor at the university of dayton, one of our great universities in ohio. her daughter beth is a special needs teacher for families of u.s. military personnel in the country of japan. aside from her constant smile and laugh, she reminded all who knew her that one of her great responsibilities is to -- is read to a child each and every night. jackie passed away last month after a long battle with cancer. up until her very last day, she insisted on teaching the most valuable lesson of all -- compassion and love and commitment. again, teachers who go above and beyond the call of duty, not just to collect a paycheck, not to go home at 3:00, not -- not just be off in the summer and not be part of the community. she -- miss geary, as ms. speakman, gave so much of their lives to their students.

both passed away -- ms. speakman sometime ago, ms. geary more recently. both will be remembered and their mability will be seen throughout. sandy ryan is a special ed preschool teacher in cleveland. she first taught special needs adults. she went to college later in life to earn a master's degree and teach special needs children. she buys her students coats in the winter, supplies, book bags and coats for the children. we don't pay teachers a lot. they are barely in the middle class in terms of their income if they are a single parent and on a teacher's salary. yet, again, they reach into their pockets. this isn't just buying pencils and pens and occasional lunch money. this is a teacher who -- who buys coats in the winter sometimes for her students because she teaches in a low-income area. ms. donna marie sheur is a high school teacher. she partners with water projects in the community in building

homes in jamaica and schools in pakistan and afghanistan. she inspires schools to believe education is continuous and service is a lifelong pursuit that extends beyond the classroom. a teacher who by showing -- showing by example, teaching by example helps these students navigate the rest of their lives. a commitment to service beyond, beyond the classroom, beyond their workday, beyond their family, a commitment to service in the community, and it doesn't stop at our borders. with ms. sheur from oberland, not far from where i live, it's international, also. i visited clark school last year. it was a finalist for the competition for president obama to deliver its commencement speech, losing out at the last minute to a school in michigan. teachers like ms. blaise instill values of curiosity and wonder in their students from diverse backgrounds and academic achievement and community

service. teachers are counselors, they are coaches, they are mentors, they serve as surrogate parents, they are friends of students at the right time, they are advisors, they are cheerleaders, they are partners, they are -- fill in the blank that any of us can do because we have had good teachers in our lives. they so often go the extra step. they drive talented pupils to competitions and scholarship interviews. they are a central part of our communities. yet, yet, yet, madam president, in ohio, s.b. 5 is a -- an amazing thing. it basically takes away rights from teachers, collective bargaining rights -- and i know that teachers that when they collectively bargain, they sit down with the school board. sure they want -- they negotiate for decent wages. they negotiate for health care. they negotiate for a pension. but you know what else they do? they negotiate for class size. i was talking to a teacher at a roundtable at a church right off capital square last -- a couple of months ago, and she teaches

in a columbus -- i believe suburb. i can't remember where she said. i think she teaches in hilliard, maybe, i'm not sure. she talked about negotiations, how they negotiate class size because she knows no matter what she is paid or no matter what benefit she has, she wants to be a very good teacher. she can't be as good a teacher if there are too many students in the classroom because she can't give them the kind of individual attention that she chooses to do. yet, the governor, the legislature, because of this intellectual, ideological -- this ideological mission they're on, they want to bust teachers' unions, they want to apparently downgrade the respect teachers have in the community. maybe they think they should become bankers or doctors or lawyers so they can make more money. i don't know why they think that. but what that means is i'm -- i'm just tired of hearing parents tell me and young people tell me, you know, my daughter or i or whoever was going to be a teacher and they were studying at miami university or ohio

university or toledo or whatever college, and they decided when they hear all these politicians, these conservative, mostly republican politicians in ohio, columbus, downgrading teachers and criticizing the profession of teacher, they think why do i want to do that? i'm not going to make a lot of money. if i'm not going to have any respect from the people that run our state, why do i want to be a teacher, in spite of the fact they did want to be a teacher. i'm also hearing from young people who are now in the classroom waging these fights -- it's not easy teaching kids who don't have advantages, it's not easy teaching kids with discipline problems, it's not easy teaching kids whose parents are not engaged for reasons of dysfunctional families or incomes or all the reasons parents aren't as involved as we would like them to be, it's hard to do that without a bunch of conservative republican politicians criticizing the profession, saying they quit at 3:00, they are lazy, no matter what they say about them. i wanted to do this to talk about teachers that affected my life.

most of these people teach people in my life. almost every one of these teachers was somebody who prepped to produce stars, absolutely stars in my office, and i -- that's one reason i wanted to share their story and i wanted to share their story because i think most of us that are fair-minded, unless we're elected to legislatures and right-wing politicians, most of us care about education, most of us honor the tierches and respect them. but area not honoring and respecting teachers, you're not honoring and respecting perhaps the most important profession in this country when you take away their rights, when you downgrade them, when you go after their unions in the name of some ideological mission that you're on. it's tragic, madam president. and i'm sorry, i apologize on behalf -- you apologize for them and their behavior to the teachers of ohio and teachers around the country. it is too important a profession to do that. madam president, i yield the floor.

mr. brown: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from oregon. mr. wyden: i ask unanimous consent to vacate the quorum call as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. wyden: madam president, i come to the floor today to honor a man who touched every corner of my home state of oregon. harold schnitzer left his mark on our business community, the arts, health care, education and practically every nook and cranny of my home state. he died last week of

complications relating to cancer and diabetes. he learned of his impending death earlier this year and faced it with extraordinary style and grace and the wit that marked his 87 years of life. those who knew shairld schnitzer described him in one of two ways. many knew him as a powerful and philanthropic force in our state. others knew him as approachable, easygoing, and especially a person who never took himself all that seriously. i knew him in both ways, and i knew him as a friend, and like many in oregon, i'm saddened by his passing. harold was a successful real estate developer, and he and his wife of 62 years, arlene, gave

generously to my alma mater, the university of oregon, and to portland state university. they established a harold schnitzer diabetes health center and the oregon health sciences university. their gifts of art and financial support helped transform our portland art museum into a center for regional art works. the generosity of harold and arlene can be found throughout oregon in places such as the oregon zoo, a special favorite of my children, louis and clark college, the middleman jewish community center, the oregon symphony, the oregon ballet, and the portland opera. a centerpiece of oregon's arts community is the beautiful arlene schnitzer hall in our downtown portland community. it's affectionately known, madam

president, as the schnitz. harold schnitzer was a humble man and he came from humble roots. as a boy, harold earned 25 cents a week polishing metal in his father's portland scrap yards. from there, it was on to the massachusetts institute of technology for a degree in met lure just, -- metallurgy, and then he went on to a career in real estate. certainly, our colleagues from the bay area of california know who harold schnitzer was, because with great pride he restored the historic claremont hotel club and spa in berkeley to its former glory. and in true harold schnitzer fashion, when he sold the hotel in 1998, the proceeds provided the funding for two family charitable foundations. we have lost a man but

fortunately we have not lost his vision and his generosity. his wife arlene will continue to stand up for those kinds of good works in our home state, and their son jordan, a successful businessman in his own right who shares his passion -- his parents' passion for philanthropy continues every single day to look for opportunities to serve our home state. you can look no further than the jordan schnitzer museum of art in eugene and downtown portland simon and helen director park named for his maternal grandparents. madam president, what i like most about harold schnitzer was his very wry sense of humor and particular knack for kind of summarizing the events of our time. i remember often when i would

see him, after a particularly spirited discussion here in the united states senate, harold had a great interest in politics, was a devout consumer of all the sunday morning talk shows, and after a particularly volcanic debate here in washington, d.c. about some issue where it seemed nothing could get resolved, i would go home and be out and about perhaps at the grocery store in portland, i'd see harold and he would tug on my elbow and he would say i have been watching what's going on in washington, d.c., ron. got things pretty much worked out back there, do ya? he would kind of chuckle and it expressed perfectly his kind of sense of the irony of the challenges we have in washington, d.c.

he knew that somehow we would always get through them, but whenever you were around harold, you got a sense that he really captured some of the irony of what goes on in washington, d.c., very well, and he brought that same kind of approach and that -- that light touch, the combination of humor andirony to so much of what he did. in my view, madam president, harold schnitzer represented what was good in humanity. his legacy of good works are going to go forward, but for all those who didn't know him personally, didn't know him like i had the chance to, i wanted to take just a few minutes to tell the senate and our country that harold schnitzer was a very, very special man. in my view, he was what i call a

vintage oregonian. somebody who got up every day and tried to make our state and country a better place, and he will be greatly missed. madam president, with that, i yield the floor. and i would note, madam president, the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from illinois. mr. durbin: i ask consent the quorum call be suspended. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: and to speak as if in morning business. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, there are many issues that come before the senate. some are simple, some are complex. the issue which i am going to speak to today which you are personally aware of as the senator from west virginia and more and more members are becoming aware of and it's the question of interchange fees or swipe fees. for those who don't follow this closely, every time you use a credit card or a debit card in

the united states of america, the retailer or merchant that you do business with pays a fee to the bank that issued the card. the fee is established by the major credit card networks, visa and mastercard. they tell the banks how much they'll receive each time a customer uses this card. and what it comes down to is that the fee that is being charged, the debit card fee, has become the subject of controversy. let's go back in history a little bit. i can still remember when people used checks, and some still do, but not as frequently. now we use the plastic form of a checking account. instead of writing out a check and pushing it through the banking system and for a few cents watch it be processed, we use a debit card and a debit card draws money directly out of our checking account to the merchant we're doing business with. so the debit card has in fact

and in large measure replaced checks. in many instances, replaced cash as more and more people are using plastic for transactions. so i started hearing from merchants and retailers all around the united states about the fee that was being charged for debit card transactions. now, debit card transactions are different than credit card transactions in this respect. when i use my credit card, i'm going to be billed each month for what i put on my credit card. there is a collection issue, will durbin actually make his monthly payment, will he make it on time? is he able to make the payment, and there is a question about whether or not this is going to be processed. so there is, i guess, an uncertainty involved in credit card transactions and much less so when it comes to debit card transactions because that money is coming directly out of your checking account to your merchant. so in terms of risk, there is greater risk with a credit card

than there is with a debit card. nevertheless, over the years, what we have seen is the swipe fee or fee charged the merchant for the use of a debit card keeps going up, up and up. and people would say well, why don't the merchants and retailers bargain with visa, mastercard and the banks to make sure that they don't have to pay an increasingly large fee every time a person uses a debit card? and the answer is they have no power to bargain at all, not at all. and so the retailer, the merchant ends up accepting the debit card, swiping the debit card, paying for the transaction and then paying a fee. to the point where you look and ask well, how much of a fee is it? the average debit card fee found by the recent study of the federal reserve is about 40 cents a transaction. 40 cents may not sound like much if you're buying a television -- or of course it's going to be a percentage. but think about 40 cents to the person standing in front of you

in line at the airport buying a package of bubble gum. that 40 cents is all the profit that that retailer could ever expect, and it's going right out the window. in fact, they are losing money on the transaction because of the debit card. so for years, retailers and merchants, restaurants, convenience stores, hotels, charities, universities, went to visa and mastercard and said you can't keep just raising this fee. it's not fair to us. you're not justifying it in terms of your cost of doing business, and we're paying more and more and more out of each transaction even though your cost is not going up. and basically, visa and mastercard told them go take a hike. we're going to charge what we want to charge, take it or leave it, buddy. if you don't want to take plastic, that's your business. try to do business without it. you can't. so retailers and merchants were on the loosing end of this conversation. so they came to me and said is there a way to do a study, a study on this issue and determine what's fair?

so a few years ago, i joined with senator bond of missouri and the two of us on credit card -- on the credit card reform bill asked for a study. it turned out the banking industry didn't want any study at all. they killed our request for a study and told people, all the people in the senate, democrats and republicans, vote against even a study of the swipe fee, the debit card interchange fee. so we ended up empty-handed. and the day came last year when we revisited the issue. this time, i came to the floor with an amendment and said here's what i'd like to do. i'd like to give to the federal reserve the power to promulgate a rule which says that the fee charged for the use of a debit card is going to be reasonable and proportional to the costs incurred by the bank in processing this transaction, and we're going to put in a factor here for fraud. if there is something they need to add to take care of fraud, add it in.

we went a step further. we said this is not going to apply to every bank and credit union that issues a debit card. we are going to exempt the overwhelming majority of community banks and credit unions across america. mr. president, there are about 15,000 community banks, i should say, banks and credit unions across the united states, 15,000. so we said if your bank or credit union has a valuation of less than $10 billion, you're not covered by this law at all. you're exempt. at the end of the day, it meant that about 100 banks across america were subject to this new law, and three credit unions. all the rest are exempt. so you say well, durbin, if you exempted all these banks, almost 15,000 of them and you only affected about 100 of them, how can this have any impact? well, it turns out that of the

largest banks in america, three of the big ones. that would be citibank -- pardon me, chase, rather. chase, wells fargo, and bank of america, they really comprise over half of all the debit card transactions in the country. some say even more, 60% or even more. so by just making this a law that applies to the largest banks, we're affecting the majority of debit card transactions and we're establishing a reasonable and proportional fee for what the transaction is. so the retailer and merchant, the person running the mom and pop store, or the person running a big box store, is going to get fair treatment in terms of how much is charged. so you say to yourself well, how much are they charging now? the federal reserve estimates they are charging about 40 cents a transaction, and the actual cost to the bank and the credit card company is about 10 cents.

they are charging four times as much as they should on each transaction. how much money is it worth to the banks? the estimates range from from $1.3 billion to to $1.7 billion a month. a month. now, these banks, the big banks that i'm addressing with this law, they're not having little collections outside the bank to keep themselves in business. they are bringing in quite a bit of money. they're very profitable. and to say that they should have a reasonable charge for retailers and merchants across america, small businesses, large businesses alike i don't think is unreasonable. and remember, we exempted the community banks. we exempted the credit unions. it's only the big ones that are going to be affected by this. well, you would think that i had done the worst thing in the world to these banks and credit card companies. they have unleashed with the

greatest fury you can possibly put together on wall street this attack against the durbin amendment. they are sending out letters, chase is, to all the people who have debit card accounts and credit card accounts and say if this durbin amendment goes through, we're going to charge extra fees here and extra fees there. well, at the end of the day, that's the threat we always hear from them, and the fact of the matter is since they are virtual monopolies in their business, they are increasing their fee charges regularly. people across america know it. every time we put in a reform, they race to raise their interest rates and race to raise their penalties. they give you these free checking accounts loaded up with penalties. if you stumble and don't pay on the exact day or whatever it happens to be. and so it's become quite a battle. it's a battle between visa, mastercard and the biggest banks in america versus the retailers and merchants of america, and they are both engaged.

now, the retailers and merchants really can't hold a candle to the big banks and credit card companies when it comes to their investment in this fight, but they are trying valiantly. we are organizing small businesses across the united states, in illinois, west virginia, all over the place, to step up and say come on, this is an important part of business. i ran into one of my colleagues on the floor here, and she said, you know, what i am worried about is even if you reduce the fee charged to the retailer for using the debit card, how is that going to help the customer? how is that going to translate into anything more than profits for the business? mr. president, your family background, you have been involved in business. if you have got a competitor across the street, whether it's a gas station, a drugstore, a grocery store, a restaurant, you know that your price competition is an important part of whether the person chooses your store over the other store. so when you give the owner of the store a break on the fee that's being charged by the credit card companies and banks,

then you give them an opportunity to engage in more price competition. oh, but what about wal-mart? this is the monster of retailers in terms of size. 10% of all the sales in america. i can tell you, even with wal-mart, target is looking over their shoulder. they are watching the prices of goods and decide weathering they can be competitive. so there is competition at this level. and if you give retailers a break when it comes to the amount they have to pay to banks and credit card companies, i think it's going to end up in consumer benefits and the consumer organizations, the major ones in this town support what i've done. they aren't supporting the position of the big banks and credit card companies. well, one of the arguments that comes down is -- it's interesting, the lion's share of the argument against my amendment is not coming from the people directly affected by it. you're not hearing as much in washington from those big banks on wall street or the credit

card companies, and they're the ones most affected by it. why? they don't have much credibility around here. these are the folks that came filing in for a bailout when they made some pretty bad decisions and got billions of dollars from the federal government to bail them out, and then, of course, they turned around and gave bonuses and all sorts of high-level compensation to their officers. so they're not the most popular crowd on capitol hill, so they have brought in surrogates to argue their position, and the surrogates, as you know, are the small banks and small credit unions, saying the derouchie amendment is terrible. saying the durbin amendment is terrible. the first thing you have to say is you you're exempt. you're not covered by the durbin amendment. if you have $10 billion or less, you're not covered. still think they this might hurt us. so you've taken an extra step here behind beyond the law to try deal with some of their concerns because i value these community banks and credit unions. i worry that they have now

become part of the banking industry -- in capital letters -- instead of what they were traditionally, our neighborhood banks, our small-town banks, our local credit unions. they've now become part of this big banking industry thing. i don't think it's healthy for them, the economy, or their consumers. so what i did was to go to the merchants' coalition -- on my side on this issue, the retailers -- and ask them to put out a statement of policy when it comes to whether or not they are going to discriminate on the card that is presented. let me be more specific. if you're running a restaurant in wheeling, west virginia, and somebody walks to the door and puts a debit card down to pay for the meal, will your restaurant take a close look and say, oh, that's a community bank, that's a higher interchange fee than it might be with a card from chase bank, for example, and that is one of the concerns expressed by the

community banks and credit unions. even though you exempted us, ultimately, these retailers could discriminate against us because our swipe fee is higher than night be coming out of chase. well, mr. president, we ended up with a lerks an important lerks which i have shared with every one of my colleagues. and it a letter from the merchants' payment coalition which i ask unanimous consent to put in the record at this point. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: this is a letter to me dated may 2. "dear durbin, we understand that some in the financial industry are claiming that the durbin amendment exemption for interchange fee regulation for financial institutions with assets under $10 billion will not be effective in practice because merchants will discriminate against debit cards with higher fees, higher swipe fees. on behalf of the undersigned trade associations and tens of thousands of merchants and retail associations we

represent, we're writing to make sure that we have no practical ability to treat debit cards issued by small financial institutions or credit unions differently than those issued by large institutions. furthermore, our member companies are committed to customer service and it is not in their interest to discriminate against debit cards that so many customers carry. currently merchants are subject to visa and mastercard network rules that require us to accept all visa and/or mastercard debit regardless of which bank or credit union issues the card. this is called the "honor all cards rule" and we risk the threat of 5,000-a-day fines or higher if we break this rule. so we assure you that merchants have no intention of violating this term of brand acceptance. these rules also prevent merchants from pricing goods differently based on the financial institution that issued the card." the number-one complaint of

community banks and credit unions about discrimination against their cards is addressed directly by this letter. and i a made this a part of record. it is being sent to every member of the united states senate. there's a second part of this argument: the question is whether or not visa and mastercard, the networks, will continue to allow the community banks and credit unions to charge a higher interchange fee than the big banks. under our law, there is no reason to change it. so i am challenging visa and mastercard and these card networks to state clearly and unequivocally, as this letter has stated, that they will not discriminate against these smaller banks, community banks, and credit unions. the merchants have come forward, as a matter of record, and it has been put in the "congressional record" this day, to say there'll be no discrimination. tend of the day, if visa and mastercard will make the same promise of no discrimination,

then ultimately there is no disadvantage to the community banks and credit unions, none. now the burden is on the big credit card networks to step up to the plate. i've sent a letter today to the president and c.e.o. of the illinois bankers association, illinois credit league and the community bankers association of illinois and we're going to send to to their national affiliates as well, sending them a copy of this merchants letter so that they can no longer make the claim that they're going to be victims of discrimination by merchants and retailers and asking them to now step up and join us in challenging visa and mastercard and the major card networks, that to me resolves the most fundamental issue that's been brought to the members of the united states senate. they can no longer claim that these retailers are going to discriminate against thevment as a matter of record, they will not. i think it is important for us to change this, and i think it is important for these virtual monopolies of visa and mastercard to be held accountable.

i think what we've done here in passing this law, in giving the federal reserve the authority to establish this rule, is the right thing to do. now there is a big effort afoot to stop us. you know that, mr. president. they are lobbying like i've never seen before on capitol hill. you'd think there's $1 billion a month at staifnlgt an stake. and there is. they are determined to stop the federal reserve from issuing a rule that saying that merchants and rye retailers will be treated fairly. i'm hoping that my colleague who join me in this vote will stand with me. i know the alternative. the alternative is the largest banks in america and the credit card companies, they've got a lot of frerchedzs and they're very powerful. but i think wit to give the federal reserve th the chance to issue final rules. talk to any bank across the country and they're doing fell you that the current system is working just fine.

they don't want reform. they want to keep it as is. it is worth billions of dollars to the major banks to keep this charge as it is. at the expense of businesses across america, i favor transparency and i favor competition, and i wish we didn't have to bring the federal fleece this conversation. but we looked for a neutral regulatory agency that would establish a reasonable and proportional fee, promulgate a rule, issue it after a public comment period, and implement t that's what we're striving to do. the c.e.o. of j.p. morgan chase -- this is a friend of mine, or at least he d. used to be -- has called interchange reform downright idiotic. he sphents a good share of his shareholder letter criticizing this reform. chase has sent letters to its share members about this and they have threatened to raise

prices to their customers unless they stop the durbin amendment of i ask unanimous consent that the letter i sent to jamie diamond be entered into the record. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: thank you. i haven't had a replay yet from mr. dimon. but i would whriek to hear his response. i encourage him to share my letter with the same shareholders and customers to whom he's written. after all, in his shareholder letter, mr. dimon said he wanted -- quote -- "analysis in the full light of day" -- of the durbin amendment so i figured he'd want his audience to be informed. i don't think chase has done that yes. i hope they will. i know that the banking industry prefers for the giant wall street banks to stay in the background ch it comes in this fight because they're not that popular. estimates indicate that about half of all debit swipe fees go to just ten big banks. bank america, chase, and we will

fargo maid make the most of all, well over $1 billion each. but the banking industry knows that the public isn't happy with big banks. industry argues that even my amendment exempts all but the largest 1 frr regulation, it just won't work and small banks will get hurt. this letter makes it clear that when it comes to retailers and merchants there will not be any pain infliblghted. they are in fact exempt under the law. they will be exempt in practice. i received a letter from 20 of the nation's largest retail astheetionz reaffirms what i just said. the merchant groups make it clear that they do not have the contractual authority, the practical ablght abilitier or the economic in my view to discriminate. they point out that visa and mastercard contracts -- they

point out that in many if not most retail environments the merchant doesn't have the practical ability to distinguish between a small bank or large bank card at the point sale. i had wendy kronister, whose family owns a chain of gas stations in downstate illinois, come into my office and talk about this. i have known her mom and dad a long tievment wendy is running the business. she said, senator, for goodness sakes, when they put the plastic on the counter, we take t we're not going to sit there and argue with them about who issued it. that just stndzs to reason. merchants all point out that they aren't in the position to tell customers to put their debit cards away. they'll lose sales and customers when they do it. the merchants make the observation that most customers only have one debit card. if you want to make the sale, you are going to take that debit card. what i've tried to do with this letter is to show that my side

on this debate, the small businesses, the retail businesses are trying to be reasonable, had the credit card companies and major banks been reasonable on this issue, i never would have introduced this amendment. they've refused, refused to bargain with the retailers and merchants. they said it was take it or leave t they did it in the obscurity of lengthy contracts and regulations that it's almost impossible to work your way through. i think those who are asking for a delay and study of this issue should be called out for what they're asking for. every month that they delay means that musters ca customersd consumers will pay over $1 billion more in phenes these debit cards, taken taken away from our economy whvment these small businesses have the advantage that they can get under the durbin amendment, they are going to be able to be more profitable, expand their businesses and hire more people. how many times have we heard the

speech on the floor that the key to economic recovery is small business. if you believe that you cannot vote for this two and a half-year delay and study of this issue. if you really believe in small business, i think the issue is very clear. i urge my colleagues not to fall for this argument, that the banks and card companies are playing. don't let them delay and derail the swipe fee reform that main street american businesses and consumers need so badderly. the senate has already voted to establish a process for implementing enter change refomplet we should let the federal reserve issue their rules, which they are planning to do in just a matter 6 weeks. i think at that time we'll see that there is a reasonable way to deal with this that doesn't create a disadvantage for community banks and credit unions. mr. president, i ask that the statement i am about to make now be put in a separate place in the "congressional record." the presiding officer: without objection. mr. durbin: mr. president, according to the u.s. energy

information administration, the average price of gasoline is $3.96 a gallon nationwide. i have my own special appointed monitor of gasoline prices in the state of illinois: my wievment and i called her yesterday morning and she said to me, senator, it is up to $4.20 in springfield. what are you going to do? so she put me on the spot. since she's my number-one stirkts i said i'lconstituent, t least make a speech. every time they go to the pump, families and small businesses feel the pinch. at the same time, the five largest oil companies in the country made $33.9 billion in profit between january and march this year. exxonmobil earned almost $11 billion in the first three months of this year. 69% greater profits this year

compared to laflt year. the high oil and gas prices are forcing many american families to make tough choices about what to forego mosquito they can fill the tank. it gets worse. while operating at substantial profits, oil companies will get an estimated $4 billion this year in federal subsidies. think about that. these companies making $11 billion in the first three months of the year are asking for federal subsidies? we don't have the money to subsidize them. in fact we have to borrower it. how do you pay for higher gas prices in america? you are going to pay it three ways. first, you pay at the pump, sometimes $80 or $90 to fill your bank, even in maryland. secondly, you are goings pay, when you pay your taxes because your tax dollars are going back to the oil companies to subsidize their operations. but, mr. president, you are going to pay a third time. you know why? because we have to borrow 40

cents for every dollar we spend in america and we borrow it primarily from china and we have to pay china back with interest, so your children and your grandchildren are going to pay interest on the money we borrowed to provide a subsidy, a $4 billion annual subsidy, to oil companies that are making record-breaking profits. what's wrong with this picture? is there anybody left in this town who's willing to fight for families and small businesses? who are getting nailed with these high gasoline prices. the interesting thing -- and i o is a former congressman from maryland -- is accurate. there are rites of spring in america. the opening of the baseball season, easter egg hunts. seder dinners for our jewish friends and skyrocketing gasoline prices every single year. right before the summer vacation season, the oil companies raise gasoline prices at the pump and

politicians talk about how fundamentally unfair it is and then we replay this movie next year. every year, year after year. and for the oil companies, why do the prices go up? any excuse will do. this year it was libya. qadhafi's in trouble, we're going to raise prices at the pump by 40 cents, 50 cents or $1. it turns out libya is responsible for about 3% of the world's oil supply. and even if there is an interruption of supply from that place, most of that oil goes to europe. as i said, any excuse will do when it doms raising gasoline -- when it comes to raising gasoline prices. next year we're going to take up a bill i support. have you seen advertising? these oil companies like exxonmobil that made $11 billion in the first three months of the year say if we cut their

subsidies, they're going to raise gasoline prices even higher. talk about being at the end of the gun here, your money or your life. they to* close the big -- to close the big oil tax loophole act would end the lease in the gulf of mexico. these companies have been allowed to drill without paying the federal government for the oil they extracted. ending this will generate billions of dollars. we suggest -- i suggest -- let's take the money that's going to these highly profitable, record-breaking profitable oil companies and put it in to reduce the deficit. how about that for a start? reduce the amount of money we're borrowing from china so we don't have to pay interest on it. this bill is not intended for punishing the oil companies for turning a profit but it is not going to reward them. it simply asks large, wealthy international companies in an industry that existed for over 100 years to pay their fair

share and no longer depend on the government for a handout. some of these tax breaks started almost 100 years ago. they were op rated -- or they were created, rather, to encourage companies to explore for oil. however, at $113 a barrel, how much more encouragement do these oil companies need? domestic oil production, incidentally -- i hear this all the time from some of the critics. domestic oil production in this country has been increasing consistently since the year 2008. domestic production was 1.8 billion barrels in 2008. it's 2 billion barrels in 2010. in 2004, about 60% of oil consumption in america was from imports. and imported oil as a percentage of consumption has dropped a little more each year. last year it dipped to 50%. still too much, but the amount of imported oil has come down as domestic production has gone up.

the united states is currently the third-largest oil producer in the world behind saudi arabia and russia. this is despite the fact that we have less than 2% of the world's total proved oil reserves. oil production, incidentally, has also been increasing on federal lands and water since 2008. some of the critics are saying you know why gas prices are up. they won't let these oil companies go out and drill in the gulf of mexico and other places. should we be careful about drilling in the gulf of mexico? i think so. b.p. taught us that lesson last year. having said that, oil production has increased on federal lands and water since 2008. in the last two kwraoerbgs oil production from the -- last two years, oil production from the federal outer continental shelf has increased by more than a third, more than 600 million barrels in 2010. oil production on federal lands increased 5% in 2010 over 2009.

but greater domestic production of oil hasn't led to lower gasoline prices. we've got higher gasoline prices. drill, baby, drill isn't the solution to rising gas prices in the short or long term. the united states consumes 25% of the oil each year that is produced in the world. we have the capacity to produce 2% to 3%. we can't drill our way out of this challenge. crude oil prices went up in february with the spread of political unrest in the middle east, north africa, even though domestic production in the united states was going up too. the oil industry has access to millions of acres of federal land and water, land that they have bought leases on and land that they will not drill on. for them to argue the government's stopping them from drilling, the obvious question is: so what about the land you currently have to drill on? why aren't you taking that lease land and putting it in production? out of the 41 million acres

under lease across the united states, the oil industry is only using 12 million acres for production. that leaves 29 million acres under lease to oil companies that is not being used today. 38 million offshore acres are currently under lease, but only 6.5 million of them are in affect production. the bureau of land management issued over 4,000 drilling permits last year -- 4,000 of them -- and approximately 2,500 of them still remain unused at the end of the year. so this argument that the request for permits drill are stacking up in some bureaucratic office in washington and if they'd just approve them, these oil companies would start drilling more oil and gas prices would come down isn't the truth. the bureau of land management issued 4,000 drilling permits last year, 2,500 of them went unused. i support measures proposed by my colleagues to force the oil companies to use their leases or lose them.

the bill would require nonproducing leases to pay an annual fee of $4 an acre. these leases of public lands should be affectively used for domestic energy production, not kept higher as we face high oil prices. i recently returned from a trip to china, ten days in china. and china is an inanything ma. -- an enigma. on the one hand they are a significant partner of the united states because they are our largest creditor. and on the other hand, they are our most significant economic competitor. partner and competitor, and that's the relationship. when you go to china, you are struck by the fact that their air pollution is horrible. in every city we visited. i cannot imagine how people live there full time and don't develop serious health problems because of the terrible pollution that they have in their country. but despite the pollution, they

are creating an expanding economy. they are building right and left. and what are they focusing on as the number-one area where china wants to dominate the world? clean energy. in every direction solar panels and wind turbines and new research on clean energy. i wish i could say the same for the united states, but i'm afraid i can't. we do not have an energy policy. we are still dependent on traditional fuels. we still recognize that those fuels create environmental issues that we have to face, and unfortunately we're not. and we're not acknowledging the fact that if we're not careful, china is going to dominate in the world when it comes to clean energy throughout the course of this century. we need an energy policy in this country not just to deal with the terrible gas prices we're facing today but to deal with the future which makes us less dependent on foreign oil. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll of the senate.

quorum call: intelligence that was available,

and the tactics that might be used in that compound and gave the order. some said it was the most courageous order a president had given in their memory or lifetime. they were all from the administration. it was a good order, no question. i don't think it was the most courageous. it didn't lack courage. but there are a number of other big decisions that stand up there i think in a higher profile than this one. but it was the right decision. it was a good decision. the president had to take a chance. he could have ordered massive bombing raid on that compound andurned it into, as some have said, turned it into a glass parking lot. which would have raised the

level of degree of success, but probably eliminated the chance to show that osama bin laden was in that compound. he could have dropped a single bomb, one-ton-plus bomb from a predator that would have had a reasonable chance of succeeding and taking out thmost evil man on the planet. or he could have just said nothing or ordered the special forces in, to fast rope inside that compound and do what they did. of those options i believe the president chose the right one. and i congratulate him for that decision. and sitting here and listening to the gentleman from california, mr. lungren, talk about the situation wh the intelligence that we had, it's clear to me, and it's been clear to me for a long time, that one of the essential links in the intelligence that led us to osama bin laden and the compound in pakistan was information that was given up in part by can

league shake muhammad -- can leak sikh muhammad and the encounters he had probably before he went to get know. that information then was worked

the presiding officer: without objection. and the senator from virginia is recognized. mr. warner: mr. president, i rise today to once again touch on a subject that is important to me and i know very important to the presiding officer. the commonwealth of virginia and the great state of maryland are blessed to have a large number of federal employees. and as the presiding officer knows, this week we celebrate public service recognition week to honor public servants at all levels of government for their admirable patriotism and contributions to our country. i want to begin by again commending our military intelligence professionals for the coordinated and painstaking work that was responsible for tracking down osama bin laden. there are a number of nameless, faceless federal workers who have been investigating his

whereabouts for more than a decade. i was proud to be in this chamber with the presiding officer and colleagues from both sides of the aisle when on tuesday afternoon this body recognized their work. but our military intelligence -- and intelligence professionals are not the only ones on the front line of keeping our country safe. today i rise to honor a resident of reston, virginia -- carl pike, the assistant special agent in charge of the special operations division at the drug enforcement administration, d.e.a. this is carl and his whole team here that we're honoring. we've all seen reports in recent years detailing the violent and inhumane acts of the mexican drug cartels that terrorize cities and control a significant percentage of the narcotics flowing into the united states. mr. pike is head of a complex multiagency task force set up to

catch many of these violent criminals and disrupt the flow of drugs. last year he and his team led the largest strike ever against la familia, one of the most ruthless mexican drug cartels and a major trafficker of methamphetamine in the united states. the strike dubbed "project coranodo" was an operation that spanned 20 stays, 50 cities, two countries and multiple federal agencies. attorney general eric holder said the -- quote -- "unprecedented coordinated u.s. law enforcement action was a significant blow to la familia's supply chain of illegal weapons, drugs and cache flowing between mexico and the united states. this strike would not have been possible without mr. pike, as so many of his colleagues attest. one d.e.a. special agent in charge said he oversaw the broad interests of the law enforcement

community, displayed phenomenal negotiating and planning skills, facilitated collaboration between agencies and international partners thaofpb had competing interests -- that often had competing interests. in the end project coranodo led to the arrest of 1,200 associates of la familia and shaoeur of -- seizure of tons of methamphetamine and a cache of weapons. carl pike and his team should be recognized for removing dangerous drugs and criminals off our streets, something for which we can all be grateful. i hope my colleagues will join me in honoring mr. pike as well as his team and all those at the d.e.a. for their excellence and service. i was proud to be part of a group earlier today recognizing a number of federal employees, nine from the commonwealth of

virginia and i know many from the state of maryland who were part of a national competition that recognizes quality work of government workers. as we -- as we saw this week in broad display of the military professionals in this most dramatic action against osama bin laden as we see mr. pike and his team taking on the drug cartels and the hundreds of thousands of other federal workers who day in and day out, often without recognition, do the job of keeping our government operating, in many ways keeping our country safe. i hope that my colleagues will join in saluting those -- those efforts, and, again, recognize that this week is the public service recognition week to honor all our public servants. with that, mr. president, i yield the floor. a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi. a senator: do i understand that we are continuing in morning business? the presiding officer: the senator's correct. mr. wicker: mr. president, on

several occasions i've risen to address my colleagues on the topic of russia and the continuing sad state of the rule of law in the russia federation. i rise today to address the latest information regarding the absence of rule of law framework with respect to businesses an investors. specifically this situation negatively impacts the united states and the entire international community. there have been a number of court decisions around the world related to the ucoast oil issue that highlight russia's hostility toward investment and business. as my colleagues may be aware, g.m.l., the majority shareholder of the ucoast oil headed by businessman and former businessman has a $1 billion

arbitration claim to obtain compensation for the ucoast assets which were taken between 2003 and 2005. several recent developments demonstrate yet again that international courts do not recognize russiaa 2003 ex appropriation ofyoucoast -- ucoast an former stakeholders of the company may pursue compensation for their assets seized improperly and in essence nationalized by the russian state. court victories handed to shareholders involved in the dispute indicate that the international legal system will not recognize the validity of russia's bankruptcy of ucoast. in december 2009, "the new york times" detailed one of these victories in which an independent arbitration panel made a jurisdictional ruling that shareholders of the former

ucoast oil company g.m.l. had a right to pursue an estimate estimated $100,000 in damages, the tribunal indicated that russia was bound by the energy charter treaty and must adhere to its provisions. this claim now moves to the next stage with a decision expected in october 2013. regrettably slow, but moving surely. the most recent victory occurred in december of last year and involved a second international arbitration tribunal in stockholm which had a minority shareholder of ucoas ucoast $3.5 million for the damages resulting from the ruin government's actions. mr. president, this was the first case in which anyone seriously examined the claims of an individual ucoast

shareholder. the panel independently and unanimously concluded the ruin federation was -- russian federation was liable for exappropriateing assets. i would stress that this was a unanimous decision even though the tribunal included a russian arbitrater. i bring these developments to the attention of my senate colleagues because i believe they demonstrate a growing movement in the international community that holds russia accountable for its actions towards investors and it is a movement the united states should support. minority shareholders such as rals and vesco are the tip of the -- as a result of the seizure of ucoast assets. in the united states alone shareholders were stripped

of $6 billion to $12 billion. russia's actions toward ucoast remind us that investment in russia is extremely risky. the international community is taking note of this. americans are taking note of this. american legislators should take note of this, mr. president. and recent court decisions indicate the legitimacy of the russian government's claims over ucoast assets are suspect at best. with these thoughts in mind, i urge my colleagues to continue working to ensure protection and adequate mechanisms for u.s. shareholders and businesses doing business in russia. and i yield the floor. mr. vitter: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. mr. vitter: thank you, mr. president, very much.

mr. president, tomorrow, may 6th, will mark the one-year anniversary of the formal moratorium placed on gulf of mexico energy production by president obama and secretary salazar. so i wanted to speak on that occasion on -- on the eve of that occasion particularly as our constituents continue to see the price at the pump go up and up with really no end in sight. and i think those two facts are deeply related. because i think this moratorium, which continues with the de facto moratorium, a performatorium, a permit logjam to this day is really one of the most poorly thought out, mismanaged and ill conceived energy decisions in terms of domestic energy production in our history. now the first of these moratoriums in the gulf -- there

are actually three different formal moratoriums, was announced on behalf of president obama by secretary salazar, again, one year ago tomorrow, may 6, 2010. and it was done in retrospect, we find out, very hastily, and without scientific backing and justification. i say that because after that first moratorium was put down on may 6, 2010, on june 22, a federal judge, judge martin feldman of the eastern district of louisiana ruled against this job-crushing moratorium. it banned drilling below 500 feet of water for six months, but judge feldman put it on hold because he found that under federal law it had failed to properly weigh a number of factors, including the economic impact it would have on the industry and surrounding communities. and i might add in a hearing we

had in the senate about the administration decision to place the moratorium, in effect, it was shocking to hear administration officials say very directly no holds bar that they never considered any economic impact in the decision whatsoever. now, again, this failing to properly weigh the economic impact of the decision has been a chronic problem in some agencies like the e.p.a. unfortunately this administration seems to have brought that same knee-jerk reaction of the interior problem with the same economic illiteracy. in the interior department's infinite wisdom on july 12th, secretary salazar issued a backup second moratorium. the courts struck down the first moratorium on the basis of existing federal law so he just came and issued a second moratorium on deepwater

drilling. this second moratorium would soon be met with resistance and disappointment as coastal louisiana communities would realize there was nothing they could do from interior that seemed to be absolutely hell bent on adversely impacting their jobs. now, on october 12th, secretary salazar celebrated a victory by lifting that moratorium and at that time he claimed -- quote -- "the policy position that we are articulating today is that we are open for business." that's what the secretary, ken salazar, said last october 12th. unfortunately those of us who live in louisiana and along the gulf coast know that that's not true. what he should have said is, the policy position that we're articulating today is, we're open for business as long as you don't need a permit from the

interior department. because that second federal moratorium was lifted, but that brought us to the initiation of the third moratorium, not an official moratorium, but a de facto moratorium, a complete logjam in this administration and at the department of interior. again, this has been commonly and accurately referred to as a de facto moratorium, an absolute logjam and secretary salazar has per pep waited that and -- perpetuated that that repeatedly stated that it doesn't exist, but the facts, the statistics, the numbers make -- now it wouldn't be until four more months until february 28th of this year that the interior

department would issue the very first permit to drill in deep water, an explorery well. so, again, big celebration, big announcement that the formal moratorium was lifted. but for four months zero permits an only four months later the first deepwater exploratory permit. to date, even since february 28th, of this year, there have only been 12 deepwater permits issued in the gulf. now, that pace is well below the pace before the norm of the b.p. disaster, 60% slower than the prespill pace. the pace of only deepwater new well permits that would decrease domestic supplies are forthcoming at the average pace of one per month, just a trickle -- just a tiny percentage of the predisaster pace.

so tomorrow's one year since the obama administration implemented this moratorium policy. the first of three crushing mororups, two -- moratoriums, two formal moratoriums, the ongoing de facto moratorium. the energy division is now estimating that the falloff in domestic production this year alone will be about 200,000 barrels per day. that's a lot of oil, 200,000 barrels per day. and an additional 200,000 barrels per day in 2012. to put this falloff that is expected from the obama administration's policy in perspective, as a result of the logjam by 2012 we would lose as

much in the gulf of mexico as we currently import from brazil an colombia, combined. these are the two countries, by the way, where we supported with taxpayer funded guarantees projects related to their energy production. this falloff is roughly equivalent also to what we imported in january from iraq. now, there are several things i'd like to highlight for tomorrow's anniversary of the initiation of this moratorium policy. first, the price of gasoline at the pump is now $3.00 8 a - a -- $3.98 a gallon. it more than doubled since president obama took office. there's perhaps not a greater anti-stimulus for our economy than that doubling at the price at the pump. second, seven deepwater rigs have left the gulf of mexico. they're gone and they're not coming back any time soon.

and, in addition, five are coal stacked are without a contract. that's a total of 12 rigs. ironically that's exactly the same number of deepwater permits that the interior department issued, a trickle compared to pre-b.p. levels. number three, what minor credit i should give the interior department for this abysmal base of permitting will be noted when i release my hold on the nomination of dan ash. i'm currently holding that nomination of a top-level interior department official and i said i would hold it until we got at least 15 deepwater explorery permits. at the time i initiated there was zero. as i said, that's finally now up to 12. i said i would lift the hold when i got to 15. we're just three away. we'll get there, we'll get the hold but that is merely a

trickle of what our pace needs to be. fourth, i'll be introducing an important piece of legislation, it's called the agency overreach moratorium act. we need a moratorium. we need a moratorium on regulatory overreach, agency overreach as we see in the interior department, in e.p.a., in many other agencies. so this legislation is intended to prevent federal action that you would -- you would unilaterally destroy jobs on federal lands, on the o.c.s. that is happening every day at the interior department. instead of issuing permits to find american energy, they're issuing regulations, the most recent on a whole new category of contractors completely unnecessary because they're already regulating the drillers and that is regulatory overreach and that is job-killing action. my agency overreach will lay out

the real moratorium we need on job-killing action out of washington, out of this administration, not on domestic energy production. mr. president, i want to thank all of my colleagues and i hope we'll all come together soon around a commonsense pro-active domestic energy policy. it needs to include a lot of things. i'm a fervent believer in all of the above. but it certainly needs to start on lifting the continuing de facto moratorium on u.s. energy production, on u.s. jobs, on good additional revenue to the u.s. treasury to lower our deficit if we're going to get on the right energy path. thank yo, and i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll of the senate. quorum call:

business. i rise to speak specifically about the alarming situation in syria where the regime is pursuing a barbaric campaign of indiscriminate oppression against the syrian people. over the past two weeks the crackdown pursued by assad has escalated. there can no longer be doubt about his intentions as a report by the respected nongovernmental organization, the international crisis group warned this week and i quote -- "the regime's

hope appears to be that a massive crackdown can bring the protesters to heel. such a course of action would entail loss of life on a massive scale and it could usher in a period of sectarian fighting with devastating consequences for syria. it could destabilize its neighbors and ultimately it is highly unlikely to work." madam president, in the city of dara, the assad regime has deployed tanks, it has cut off phone lines, food, electricity, and deployed snipers, according to human rights groups who have been firing at anyone who ventures outdoors. and that includes young people who are sent outdoors by their families to try to buy some food. in short, what we see in dara is

a broad based i indiscriminate assault by assad's military forces against the people of his own country. the evidence is growing that international crimes are being perpetrated by bashir he'll el-d himself. the attack is one part of a broader crackdown by syrian security forces across the country. the crackdown that has left several hundred people dead. tanks and military forces have been reported being deployed in other cities in syria. according to human rights watch the number of arbitrary detentions of civilians and enforced disappearances around the country has skyrocketed in recent days. as the assad regime has swept up not only demonstrators, but

women, miners and family members of activists. another syrian human rights group has documented more than 500 arrests in dara since last week and thousands more nationwide have been detained or disappeared arbitrarily. that report by the international crisis group that i referenced before that came out earlier this week argued and again i quote -- "the regime is fanning the flame of secon second terro. er iterrorism. the authority's tactics betray a determined and cynical attempt to exploit and exasperate them. what's more remarkable of all is

that in the face of and despite these outrageous inhumane actions by the assad regime, the people of syria refuse to be silenced. they refuse to be intimidated. in the face of tanks and snipers, the people of syria continue to cry out an common -- and demonstrate for their fundamental human rights. and they have ton continued to o peacefully. moreover despite the sectarian provocation, the protesters have remained steadfastly one of syrian national unity. tomorrow, friday, it is expected that thousands of brave syrians will once again take to the streets of their cities and towns in protest of the totalitarian dictatorship that

currently controls their country. as they do so, i want them to know that the united states and the rest of the civilized world stands unequivocally on the side of the people of syria in solidarity with them and their courageous struggle for their human rights. and they should know also that we are increasingly confident that the people of syria can and will prevail over the assad regime. as much as we here in the united states -- there's much that we here in the united states can and must do to help the syrian people in their fight for freedom. president obama authorized targeted sanctions against individuals an organizations responsible for the human rights abuses in sir yavment the administration -- syria. the administration used this newest authority to sanction

three syrian officials including the brother of bashir al-assad. this is a very important action and i thank and commend the obama administrationor taking it. there is, however, more that now can and must be done. to begin with, it's clear that there are many more individuals in the syrian government than the three names so far who are responsible for the human rights abuses and worse that are taking place throughout syria. it's urgent and essential that the obama administration expand the sanction to cover these additional syrian officials. members of the syrian security forces and government must understand that they face a choice in the days ahead. if they -- ahead if they stick with the assad regime and

participate in the crackdown against their fellow syrians, their names are going to be made famous around the world and they will be held accountable. it's also critical that the united states impose sanctions on bashir al-assad himself, for he is the head of the regime that is systematically carrying out large-scale human rights abuses. it is he who is directing his military forces to fire on his own people. surely it requires a willing suspension of disbelief to think that the order to use military force against the syrian people did not originate with the president of syria himself, bashir al-assad. he must be held accountable. i respectfully urge president obama to speak out as soon as

possible directly and personally about what's happening in syria. for the moral authority of the president of the united states matters enormously at historic moments like the one in syria now. unfortunately there are still many in syria and throughout the middle east who believe the united states is hedging its bets in syria. it's time to put that to -- those doubts to rest. i met yesterday with syrian distents -- dissidents and i heard the same question, why has president obama not spoken out personally about what's happening in syria. they say we need to hear and see the president and hear his voice, president obama, making clear his disdain and refusal to accept what's happening in syria

today. and so i respectfully urge the president to answer these appeals by syrian freedom fighters for support of their cause. i -- i hope that the president can make clear, once again, as he did so effectively in the cases of egypt and libya, that bashir al-assad has lost the legitimacy to lead syria and it is time for bashir to go. the united states can also work with our allies and partners to increase international pressure on the assad regime. press reports indicate, i'm pleased to note, that the european union is preparing to put in place an arms embargo against syria. and that they are also considering targeted human rights sanctions against top syrian officials. i fervently hope that our european friends and allies take

these and furnth steps to increase -- further steps to increase the pressure on the assad regime. i'm especially encouraged that the french foreign minister this week called for al-assad to be sanctioned himself to tie up his economic assets, to limit his mobility. in addition to our e.u. partners, madam president, i want to say that i believe turkey can also play a unique leadership role in the days and weeks ahead to support a successful democratic transition in sir yavment -- syria. no one has worked harder than their prime minister to encourage bashar al-assad to reform, to embrace democracy. unfortunately, despite these efforts, assad has ignored the wise counsel of the turkish leader and week, is undertaken immediately.

every day matters, and we should work to refer assad's regime to the international criminal court. again, as we did in the case of libya. and what the assad regime is doing to the people of syria looks every day more the mirror image of what the qadhafi regime has done to the people of libya. for its actions in the city of daraa and throughout the country, the assad regime deserves to be investigated by the international criminal court. i respectfully urge our own administration to use the diplomatic clout that we have at the united nations to put what's happening in syria on the agenda of the u.n. security council. i have no illusions about the challenges and obstacles that exist at the security council at this time to taking action with regard to what's happening in

syria, but we must try. if the security council fails to take up what is happening in syria, perhaps because of the opposition of the russians and the chinese, it does so at the expense of its own international credibility and legitimacy. and finally, madam president, i hope that president obama will work together with our international allies to provide the syrian people with the humanitarian assistance that they urgently need. food, water and medical supplies, and to restore communications linkages that the assad regime has cut among the freedom fighters in various communities in syria. assad has cut them in an offer to prevent news and information about what's happening in syria

also from reaching the outside world. madam president, the situation in syria is fast approaching the point of no return. the fact is that several hundred syrians have been killed by assad security forces. this is a regime that i conclude is beyond self-correction. difft sort in dictatorships across the middle east are finally discredited and abandoned in the ash heap of history where they belong. i thank the chair. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

mr. cardin: madam president, i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with.

the presiding officer: without objection. mr. cardin: madam president, this month people will all over the country grab their tackle boxes and head off in pursuit of the elusive trout in mountain streams. mothers and fathers will turn on their kitchen faucets and hand their children glasses of pure, clean drinking water that we have in this country. farmers will irrigate their spring plantings of vegetables and grains with clear water from nearby streams. all over the united states, americans will take advantage of the simple, priceless natural resource of america's water, and thanks to the actions taken by the obama administration last week, we can rest assured that these vital resources are being protected by the full strength of the clean ai clean water act. last week the obama administration release add guidance document on the jurisdictional waters of the united states.

the document was a sensible response to the confusion left in the wake of recent supreme court rulings. the draft guidance document that was released last week will help the army corps of engineers and the u.s. environmental protection agency in the nearterm as they make decisions about whether projects will impact the waters of the united states and, therefore, require protective permits. eventually this draft document will be replaced by formal regulations that will ensure the clean water act continues to protect america's waters. for nearly 40 years, the clean water act has safeguarded almost all of our nation's waters. these safeguards protect our rivers, streams, and wetlands from the pollution in accordance with congress's intent that the landmark statute -- and i quote -- "restore, maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters."

nowhere in america is this more important about the enforcement of the clean water act than the chesapeake watershed. we understand that more than 100,000 rivers and streams come together to form north america's largest estuary and they're all critical to the health of the chesapeake bay. these streams and rivers, along with their associated wet laintdzs, serve as habitat for hundreds of species, burst of for slowing the flow of pollutants into the bay, and sponges that soak up and hold large amounts of floodwater and storm water runoff. despite major steps forward that have resulted in a majority of the nation's waters now being safe, the fishing, swimming and other uses, recent supreme court decisions have placed this progress at risk. the guidance developed by professional scientists and approved by the obama administration provides strong protection for our nation's

waters and restores the ability of federal agencies to enforce the clean water act. i also want to underscore the fact that the guidance reflects the long-standing agricultural and other exemptions codified in the clean water act. madam president, this is a commonsense solution right in the o mainstream of america's values. the court decisions -- decision in the 2001 ruling in u.s. army corps of engineers, in its more recent ruling in 2006 on rappanos threatened to roll back the clowrkt making more than 60% of our nation's waters vulnerable to polluters. the waters threatened by the narrowing of the clean water act protections are important for fish and wildlife habitat.

flood protection and supply and drinking water. more than is -- 117 million americans receive cringing water at least in part by headwaters and streams. these vital streams and wetlands are also critical to the health of our most treasured water bodies, from the chesapeake bay to the great lakes to lake cham plane to puget sound. millions of small streams and wetlands provide the freshwater that flows into these regional economic engines. if we do not protect this incredible network of waters, we cannot hope to restore these water bodies that help. as americans, we cherish clean water and the magnificent bounty we are blessed with. that is why last week's announcement was met with such strong support from a broad range of americans, especially from our sportsmen. among the groups supporting the administration's actions are ducks unlimited, izaak walton league of america, national

wildlife foundation, theodore roosevelt conservation partnership and trout unlimited. as chairman of the water and wildlife subcommittee of the environment and public works committee, i am especially pleased that the administration has taken such a strong and sensible approach to protecting our nation's waters. too often, we raise our voice in criticism to the actions of others. today, i am proud to add my voice to the chorus of thanks to the obama administration for a job well done. thank you, madam president. with that, i would yield the floor. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from louisiana. ms. landrieu: thank you, madam president. i rise to make a few brief remarks about the fact that this week we're celebrating charter school week in america and in the united states senate. i'm pleased to join my colleague, lamar alexander, in

cosponsoring this amendment that i hope will be hotlined tonight, and that means passed unanimously without need to bring it to the floor for debate because there are so many members of our senate, both democrats and republicans, that recognize the value of high quality charter schools and the difference that they are making in the advancement of education reform and extraordinary achievements being reached by students and teachers and communities because of them. i'd like to just have a brief statement on the floor and then share some interesting and really exciting statistics from my own experience in the city of new orleans, which is the city that has the highest percentage of children in charter schools in america today. as a parent of two precious and delightful children, i know firsthand the value of a quality

education to secure their future. many american families are fortunate to live in places where public schools provide engaging and infect -- effective instruction and a culture of achievement that inspires students to aim high and thrive. other families have the financial means to provide their children with a top-notch private school education. madam president, you know whether it's in missouri or louisiana or texas or right here in d.c., that education can be quite expensive at our top private elementary and secondary schools in our country. sometimes tuition can reach to to $25,000 a year and beyond, as hard as that might be for some to believe, that is true. and unfortunately, too many americans are left without either option for their children, and their children are falling through the cracks. this cannot continue if america

is going to maintain a leadership role and produce young adults who have the knowledge and skills to compete and win in this new worldwide marketplace. fortunately, in a growing number of communities, including several in louisiana and particularly in new orleans, there is another option, an exciting option for parents and students, and those are high-quality public charter schools. this week, as i said, we celebrate the 12th annual national charter school week. it's a good time to take stock of how successful many charter schools have been and what we can do to replicate them across the country and more importantly what we can do to improve them, what we can do to eliminate poor quarter schools and strengthen the great ones and make the good ones even better. charter schools are public schools that receive public funding and save the same

neighborhood students as traditional public schools. currently, it may surprise people to know that there are over 5,000 charter schools in our country serving more than 1.6 million children. these schools are required to meet the academic student achievement accountability requirements under all of our laws, and in the same manner as traditional public schools. however, they differ from traditional public schools in several important ways. charter schools operate free from many of the district rules and regulations so they have more freedom to invote, -- to innovate, to experiment, to explore, to think outside of the box to try some new approaches. charter schools have autonomy in areas such as the length of the school day and year as well as principal and teacher recruitment, selection and development. with this freedom, however, comes greater accountability for

improved student achievement, and unlike public schools in many places, charter schools that aren't successful can actually lose their charter, be forced to close or be forced to transition to a new model. there are countless examples of high-performing charter schools that are producing impressive results as they continue to show that our students, including -- and most importantly, that our low income and minority students and disadvantaged students can and are rise to go great academic heights. in my home state of louisiana, there are 90 public charter schools, including 61 in the city of new orleans, representing almost 72% of our city student population. a higher proportion than any other school system in the united states. the city's cy academy is one remarkable example of a

successful charter school, and i had the great pleasure to skype with some of their students earlier this morning. cy academy opened in 2008 with 90 ninth graders entering a rigorous and inspiring environment. more than half of the ninth graders who entered cy academy's inaugural class had failed state promotional performance tests and more than 70% read well below the ninth grade level. many of these students had missed a full year of school because of hurricane katrina and were significantly behind other students of their age. incredibly, that same freshman class later scored 76% on our state's test, making it the third most successful high school in new orleans. and the other high schools that beat it out actually had selective enrollment. what's extraordinary about cy

academy is its open rollment, really focusing on the quality of teachers and the quality of teaching. it really is remarkable. and right here in the district of columbia -- and i'm proud to have had a hand in the development of this in the district of columbia as a former chair of the subcommittee and a partner with eleanor holmes norton and others that have worked so hard with the district on its reform efforts. charter schools are an integral part of improving education outcomes in this city, our nation's capital. starting with two small campuses in 1996, d.c. charter schools now educate 40% of the school-aged children in the district and they are serving the highest percentage of low income and minority students in the city's most economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. d.c. charter public schools outperform the city's traditional public schools from the fifth grade up, and they graduate 84% of their students,

higher than both the city and the national average. where quality charter schools exist, parents have real choices, exciting choices, and they are overwhelmingly choosing public charter schools. as many of these schools have long, long waiting lists. in fact, more than 50% of charter schools report having waiting lists, and the total number of students on these waiting lists, madam president, is enough to fill more than 1,100 average charter sized schools. average sized charter schools. quite a number on these waiting lists. over the past 17 years, congress has provided $1.6 billion in funding to promising charter school movements throughout the country, through grants for planning, program design, initial implementation, replication, expansion, dissemination, evaluation, and for improving facilities.

our efforts at the national level are beginning to show real results. maintaining and increasing where possible funding for charter schools is a winning proposition. for parents, for students, for their teachers, for our community, and may i say for our nation, for our work force of the future and for our economic security. make no mistake, america will only go as far as our collective talent and ability will take her, and our future will continue to be shaped by how well we prepare today's students for tomorrow's challenges. parents who are doing everything they can to give their children an opportunity for success deserve not only a quality choice but a solution to the challenges of our education system. successful charter schools provide that choice, and in many areas, they provide the solution.

and now it's time to make them a central component of our education strategy all over the country. senator lamar alexander and i are pleased to chair the charter caucus in the united states senate, to join with president obama and secretary arne duncan in a focus on quality education for all children in america. president obama and secretary duncan are -- often say that charter schools are one tool, not the only tool, to get us from failing and mediocre public schools to great and exciting public schools in our country that are making a real difference. i want to just share some really extraordinary results that were given to me just this week as i hosted a roundtable with staffers and senators earlier this week about the accomplishments of charter schools. this comes from a wonderful group in new orleans, new

schools for new orleans that is really one of the leaders in the charter school movement nationally. they are helping the city of new orleans and many, many of our organizations and partnerships with all sorts of funders and philanthropy and the city of new orleans, the mayor and the city council and others that are so supportive of what's going on, our universities, i might say, the university of new orleans, tulane university, dillard and xavier have also been really on the forefront of this movement as well. let me just share these results because they are quite extraordinary. this chart will show that in 2005, 62% of students in the city of new orleans -- not 15%, not 20%, but 62% were academically unacceptable. based on standards set by our state and by the federal

government, in 2005, basically 62% of all the students in new orleans were failing. they were not up to just basic education levels in reading and math. we had a terrible event happen, as many people will remember, in 2005, hurricane katrina and rita and the crashing of our levee system, the failing of our levee system, and 100 of our 146 public schools were virtually destroyed and remain unusable. through the great efforts of local leaders, state leaders and federal leaders and with fema's help and some new outof the -- out--- out of the box thinking, we were able to pool the money that each individual school and present one check to the city of new orleans and the school board and the recovery district, and

we have been building a new school system ever since and charter schools are the foundation of that rebuilding. it is quite extraordinary that in only five years, when you look at the same population virtually -- now, there have been some families that have not yet come back but they're on their way. there have been some families that left and aren't coming back, but it is a population still of a great number of minority students and disadvantaged and lower middle-class students as well as middle class and some wealthy students in our public school system. we have moved from 62% unacceptable to only 17% unacceptable, in five years. i don't know of any other group of schools anywhere in the country that have made such remarkable gains. so when people question about do charter schools work, let me say the evidence is in.quality char,

and in everyplace where they exist, they outperform even their suburban counterparts, and in large measure suburban counterpart public schools that are among some of the best. many of these charter schools are in rural areas where there aren't a lot of opportunity for white, black, hispanic, or asian kids. some of them are inner cities that don't have the same opportunities. we again have taken 62% of our population that was underperforming and now only 17%. here it says the new orleans students' test scores demonstrate the first significant improvement in the city's history, a 30% increase on this chart right here. and finally, closing the gap, the achievement gap, between new orleans schools and state schools by more than 50%. and here the thomas fording

institute study ranked 30 major cities on six critical reform categories. niewcialtion i'm proud to say, ranked first as the reform friendly city in the country, followed by washington, d.c., niewrks, deny veanders gashing sonville. but the great news is madam president, that there are cities and counties and states waking up to the exciting opportunities of education reform. we know that in america today it should be unacceptable in some of our communities where 50%, 60%, 70% of our children are failing to get out of high school. we should be ashamed that even when some of our children walk across that stage and get that die p.l.odiddiploma that signify are graduating, they are leaving without the skills to get the job that will give them a living or saving wage because our schools have been handing out

diplomas that aren't worth the paper they are written on. that has got to come to an end. that is what we're fighting for. it is what charter schools help us to do. now, is it possible for public schools that are not charters to achieve this success? yes, and that is also happening. but i found in my own experience trying to work with a system that was unwilling to make too much change that charter schools provide the kind of competition and spark and challenge to an otherwise system that is run by a monopoly. this provides a diverse set of providers to education. it encourages new kinds of educators to come in and teachers. it gives the freedom they need to help the students who walk through that doored and want so desperately to walk across that stage with a diploma that means something and a future ahead of them.

so i am proud to help lead this effort here in the senate. i really thank my colleagues for supporting for the 12th year a resolution commending high-quality charter schools in america, and let me just say, in conclusion, we are not resting on our laurels. i've introduced a bill, along with others -- senator durbin and senator kirk have introduced a companion bill, if you will -- and both bills are in an effort to take the bar even higher, to say to the country, let's get riffed our low-performing charter schools, let's focus on strengthening the authorizing of these charter schools. we do not want authorizers out there that are giving out charters to run schools, to people who have no why'd they're doing -- have no idea what they're doing. we want this movement, we know it can be successful, we know it can be a real choice for parents. think about it. think about the value after quality education. if you have to pay for it in the

private sector, you are paying $25,000 to $30,000 in some of our communities per year. maybe you are lucky enough to be in a catholic school, an episcopal school where the education is subsidized. but for many children with four children and five children, that's out of reach. they can't possibly afford that. and so having quality public schools is essential in every community in our country. i believe if we can do this in new orleans, which is one of the poorest cities, not the poorest but we struggle, as you know, in the city of new orleans -- we have a very broad demographic population. but if we can do it here, trust me, it can be done anywhere, with, you know, political will and with the support of your state, your local and of course the federal government. so i'm pleased to have introduced to help cosponsor thal-star bill which is -- the

all-star bill which is a grant program for replication of high-quality charter schools and my own bill, the high-quality charter school act. and i'm open to working with others as we authorize the elementary and second act and be reminded of the great success that charter schools are having and ultimately we'd like to have 100% of the public dismools the city of new orleans be charters with some of the most exciting charter providers, some of the benevolent ibest in the world cg our kids, giving parents real choices where they want to send their kids based on the personalities and the desires and dreams, personalities of the children and the desires and dreams of that family. and that's really what america is all about, competition and choice, opportunity, and we just aren't quite, madam president, doing enough in this regard. -- in our country today. but perhaps our charter school,

the success of this movement, can show us a way forward. so i thank you and i hope that we can get that resolution passed without further delay tonight. and, again, i want to congratulate rchg that's worked so hard on making this national charter school week a success here in d.c., in our nation's capital, and around our country. and i yield the floor. ms. landrieu: i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from wyoming. a senator: madam president, are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are. mr. barrasso: i ask the quorum call be vitiated. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: i ask unanimous consent to engage in a colloquy with my colleague, senator hatch of utah, for up to 20 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. barrasso: thank you, madam president. i come to the floor today as a physician who practiced medicine in caspar, wyoming, for about a quarter of a century with the concerns i have about the president's health care law, part of which has taken over $500 billion from our seniors on medicare and taken that money not to help medicare, not to save medicare, not to strengthen medicare, but to put a whole new government program in place for

people on a program called medicaid. and they want to put about 16 million or so people on to medicaid. it's a program that is not functioning well now, where many doctors don't want to take care of patients on medicaid. and yet, as part of this health care law, there is something called the medicaid maintenance of effort. 33 governors have written to the president and said we don't want this to apply to us. i'm delighted to be a cosponsor of a piece of legislation called the state flexibility act, and i do that as i -- come to the floor with that as a physician who's practiced medicine and have been coming to the floor week after week with a doctor's second opinion. so today my second opinion is that the -- this state flexibility act is a good idea. it gives states the flexibilities, the flexibility that they need. it gives governors the

flexibility that they have requested. it is a bipartisan effort in the sense that governors, whether they be republican or democrat, are looking for more flexibility with the, with this medicaid program, and specifically, the medicaid maintenance of effort. so i'd like to ask my colleague, the senior senator from utah, senator hatch, if he could perhaps tell us a little bit about this effort that you have now introduced that i've cosponsored, the state flexibility act. mr. hatch: thank you, senator barrasso. i just want to -- i appreciate your perspective on this important issue. because you are a physician, you have cared for medicaid patients, and you understand the medicaid program better than anyone in this body. and, senator barrasso, you aoufls served in the -- you've also served in the state ledges slay taourbgs and you understand that unlike washington, states must balance their budget every

year, unlike washington, d.c., i guess i better say. i want to talk about our initiative to roll back the medicaid maintenance of effort or m.o.e. requirements threatening medicaid beneficiaries and the financial health in many states across the country. if you bear with me, i think it is important to go through a little of the history on this subject. when medicaid was first established as a limited state federal partnership, less than 5 million americans used this program. today nearly one in four are enrolled in this government program. medicaid spending now absorbs nearly a quarter of all state government budgets, often forcing severe cuts to other critical state programs. unfortunately, this situation is getting even worse with the medicaid mandates first imposed in the surplus bill and then again -- in the stimulus bill and then again in the partisan health law. as a result of this washington mandates states are being forced

to make drastic cuts to important priorities like education and law enforcement. states, unlike washington which too often just prints money to pay for out-of-control spending, actually have to make tough budget decisions every year. and the states are facing the worst budget crisis since the great depression with a collective $175 billion shortfall. washington's micromanagement of state medicaid programs makes it incredibly difficult for the states to balance their budgets and provide for those who are most in need. because of the overly generous benefit programs that washington forces on the states, they are unable to target health services to those most in need of assistance. governors are unable to undertake common sense kproerpls that -- reforms. the result is nothing short of washington-state induced crisis. mr. barrasso: i ask my

colleague, because we're neighboring states -- wyoming and utah -- but i would ask if you could is explain how these mandates, how they directly impact the state of utah. mr. hatch: my home state of utah where the fiscal year 2012 budget shortfall is approximately $390 million -- that's a lot of money to us. my state has said -- quote -- "the m.o.e. requirements imposed by the federal government will cost the state $3.2 million annually." unquote. now this might not sound like a lot to the people here in washington, d.c. who don't bat an eye at interest-dollar deficits. but in -- at trillion-dollar deficits. in utah $3.2 million is a lost money in the state budget. gary herbert said -- quote -- "not a state in this nation is immune to tough budget decisions and sometimes washington makes it even harder. utah must seriously weigh the

real cost of medicaid, one of the largest and most expensive programs we have. unfortunately, federal mandates tie our hands. utah has zero flexibility to respond to economic conditions or the option to scale the program back in a way that reflects local values and priorities. unquote. governor herbert and many other governors across the nation have repeat lid asked washington to repeal these onerous medicaid mandates. we have just introduced legislation, the state flexibility act, that you've mentioned so kindly to do exactly what the governors have asked. the state flexibility act fully repeals these burdensome m.o.e. regulations. it starts to put states back in control to balance their budgets while simultaneously lowering federal entitlement spending. now, our legislation will save taxpayers $2.8 billion over just the first five years. that's a lot of money. regardless of political

affiliation, i'm confident that this bill has the potential to garner strong bipartisan support in congress and represent a strong first step toward achieving comprehensive medicaid reform. any senator who has talked to his or her state's governor knows that we need to pass this legislation to enable states to survive the current fiscal crisis and to better care for the most vulnerable medicaid beneficiaries in their respective states. now, it's time for congress to roll back these unreasonable m.o.e. mandates and put the states -- not washington -- back in charge. i'd just personally like to thank you, my colleague from wyoming, senator barrasso, again, forki without you here, i don't think we would be able to do anywhere near as much as we're doing. you in particular bring a unique perspective to the debate over m.o.e. requirements, and i don't know of any senator who is serving a state any better than you do.

and all i can say is i would appreciate hearing more of your thoughts on this matter because you're the one with the experience, you're the one who's helped people. you're the surgeon who has operated on countless people. you've done it whether they have been medicaid beneficiaries, people who have insurance or people who have nothing. and i know you've done that, and i have great admiration for you. but we also know these states are being heavily burdened with these m.o.e. requirements that are just bureaucratic unnecessaries. and i'd like to hear from you just how important this is. mr. barrasso: i appreciate the kind comments of my colleague and neighbor from utah, because i have seen medicaid patients, taken care of medicaid patients over the years, and i know that this is a program that is burdensome. and i served in the state legislature. so i know that the mandates coming out of washington make it harder for the people back home to take care of patients, make it harder for our state legislature to deal with helping

people on medicaid, making it more difficult for physicians to take care of those patients, making it more expensive. and there's a lot of waste in the mandate. so when senator hatch talked about some comments from your governor, i have comments from our governor as well, governor matt meade, a new governor, has been in office just since january. and he wrote and was one of the 33 governors that signed a letter to president obama talking about the cost of maintaining their medicaid program are fast becoming a serious threat to the state general funds. and we live in a state where we have to balance the budget every year. he went on to say wyoming needs to have flexibility, which is the key word and the title of the bill that has been introduced by senator hatch, senate bill 868. state flexibility act. that's what governors are asking for: flexibility, because with

that flexibility they can do it better for the patients and do it cheaper. as he says, wyoming needs the flexibility at the state level to ensure the medicaid program is operated efficiently and effectively. you know, people when they look at washington don't believe they're getting efficiency and effectiveness out of washington these days. they don't think they're getting value for their money, and i agree with the american people. i've heard them loud and clear. i said it when i was practicing medicine and i say it today as a member of the united states senate. as our governor goes on, he says, wyoming strongly supports the removal of these maintenance of effort requirements. this is why i come to the senate floor every week, senator hatch, to talk about this health care law, the implications in it, the impact on the people of this great country and why i think that this health care law that is one that is ultimately bad for patients, bad for providers, the nurses and the doctors who take care of those patients, and

also bad for the american taxpayers.d and at a time when we're borrowing 41 cents for every dollar in this country, we cannot afford to waste money and our problem in this country is not that we're taxed to little, but we spend too much and don't spend it well. we have to begin focusing differently and one of the ways we can do it -- because my understanding from looking at this is that actually the congressional budget office who does the scoring on pieces of legislation scored your state flexibility act as actually saving -- saving i thin think $2.8 billion total over five years. and isn't that what we're trying to do, save money, help people do it more efficiently, more effectively and that's why i'm proud to cosponsor with my friend, senator hatch, the state flexibility act. mr. hatch: to be able to do what they do better than the federal

government. as a former medical liability defense lawyer, back in my early days, i represented doctors, health care providers, nurses, and hospitals in defending from what really were, in most cases, frivolous suits that run up the cost of medicine. i can't tell you what it means to have you here in the united states senate with all the medical experience that you have. and, frankly, the states can do the job, but they can't do it within budget if we keep piling regulation and regulation and onerous burdens on them like -- like the partisan health care bill does. and, frankly, i just want you to know that i just feel an honor to serve with you and -- and an honor to have a couple of medical doctors on our side. you and dr. coburn are both excellent doctors. you've lived through these

problems up know what they're like. you don't have to have anybody tell you what's wrong with the approaches we're taking here. you know what's wrong. and, frankly, i just want to thank you for being willing to serve here. mr. barrasso: i appreciate the kindness and the fact that you allow me to work with you. you have a long and il ill illus career here. what works in one state may not work this another state. if you give states the flexibility, ultimately they will do it better. they are the laboratories of democracy, and that's why we believe in limited government and making decisions at the local level as close to home as possible, which is why i know so many governors across the country support the state flexibility act and i'm hoping that we get a successful vote here in the senate on that. whenever washington makes a

one-size fits all decision, it hardly ever works for the folks back home. mr. hatch: i believe this will have great bipartisan support among the governors and this body as well. thank you for bringing this to the attention on the floor. mr. barrasso: thank you, senator hatch. madam president, i will tell you, i still believe this is a laws that bad for patients, bad for health care providers in this country, bad for taxpayers. i'll be back at home in wyoming over the weekend visiting with patients as well as providers as well as taxpayers listening to what they have to say and i know that people of wyoming have great concerns about this health care law and would like the kind of flexibility that is described in the senate 868, the state flexibility act. with that, madam president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from mississippi's recognized. mr. cochran: madam president, i am pleased to introduce a resolution today to honor the distinguished 39-year career of admiral thad allen, comment daunt of the united states -- ma --alexander hamilton observet a few armed vessels judicially stationed at the entrance of our ports might at a small expense be made useful centinels of the

law. this words inspired the united states coast guard. more than 200 years later the coast guard today is dutifully executing its diverse and challenging missions. demonstrating their dual functionality as both a military service and a law enforcement authority. despite limited resources and a broadened scope of responsibility, the coast guard has risen to the increased challenges it faces. time and time again the men and women of the coast guard prove the value of their presence and their important role in protecting the public as well as the environmental economic and security interests of the united states.

for almost four decades admiral allen dedicated himself to these missions and kept his -- capped his career by providing meritorious leadership to our nation's oldest, continuous sea-going service. thad allen was born and raised in tucson, arizona. his parents were chief damage controlman clyde allen and wilma allen. after grad waight from the united states coast guard academy in 1971, he served in a variety of assignments eventually becomin becoming com. it has been said before and i think it is worth repeating, when times are at their worst,

the coast guard is at its best. admiral allen deserves credit for providing the leadership skills that allow that statement to remain true during some of the most difficult time of our nation in recent years. i came to know thad allen in a time of hardship. my home state of mississippi and other coast guard -- gulf coast states had just experienced two of the deadliest hurricanes in our nation's history in katrina and rita. he was the principal federal official for response and recovery for those natural disasters. i will never forget the destruction we witnessed. homes, schools, and big oak trees that had stood for decades

were completely leveled. but through his efforts and those of the brave men and women throughout the coast guard over 33,500 gulf coast residents were rescued from rooftops and flooded homes. admiral allen proved himself to be a man of not just sterling courage with compassion to match, but also a man of great integrity and an enormous capacity for hard work. he is the direct -- he is a direct reflection of a guardian ethos and an inspiration for those who have had the good fortune to work with him. admiral allen will be the first to say that the brave men and women throughout the ranks of the coast guard are the ones who deserve the credit for success. he has made a habit of openly

praising their sacrifice and often thankless service. today i'm proud to say that my state, due in part to his leadership, and those coast guard men and women who have served under him has made a great deal of progress in recovering from the most severe natural disasters in our nation's history. as the coast guard's motto is semper paratis, always ready, admiral allen is an embodiment of that motto. we don't need to look back too far to find an example. most recently when the president selected him to serve as national incident commander in the wake of the deepwater horizon oil spill in the gulf of mexico. admiral allen stood ready and provided resolute leadership

overseeing the federal government's response efforts and remaining on active duty for an additional three months past his slated retirement. in mississippi we are grateful for the service and leadership of admiral thad allen, which will be long remembered and appreciated. i know that admiral and his family will enjoy the new opportunities that come with retirement in addition to a well-earned respite from the demands and challenges of his exemplary career in the united states coast guard. mamadam chairman, i yield the floor.

quorum call: