vote:

the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their votes? if not, the yeas are 60, the nays are 37. and the nomination is confirmed. a senator: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: i ask unanimous consent that with respect to the nominations confirmed today the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the president immediately notified of the senate's action. the presiding officer: is there objection. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order, the clerk will report the raskin nomination. the clerk: nomination, sarah bloom raskin of maryland to be

deputy secretary. the presiding officer: there will now be two minutes of debate, equally divided prior to the vote on confirmation. mr. harkin: i ask unanimous consent to yield back the two minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. without objection. all time is yielded back. and the question occurs on the nomination. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed say no. the ayes appear to have it. the ayes do have it. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the motions to reconsider are considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of s. 1086 which

the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 309, s. 1086, a bill to reauthorize and improve the childcare and development block grant act of 1990 and for other purposes. mr. harkin: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. harkin: i'm pleased the senate is considering the childcare and development block grant act of 201. i have a subcommittee amendment to the substitute amendment at the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: the senator from iowa, mr. harkin, proposes amendment numbered 2811. mr. harkin: i ask further reading of the amendment be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. harkin: so,

madam president, we are now on the childcare and development block grant of twinch. i know that senator alexander and i and -- of 2013. i know senator alexander and i are anxious to consider amendments, i encourage people who have amendments to bring them to the floor so that senator burr, senator alexander, or i or senator mikulski could look at them and get things lined up. it is my intent, i hope i can speak for senator alexander in this, too, to have an open yesterday managed process with respect to this bill for senators to have relevant amendments to have the opportunity to have them offered and to be voted on. i expect that we would have a couple of votes within the next few hours. i don't even know but sometime soon. so, again, i strongly encourage senators with amendments to bring them over and file them so we can get them discussed expeditiously. madam president, this bill was voted automaticsly out of the help committee last september.

i hope it will receive strong bipartisan support here on the senate floor. i want to give tremendous credit and thanks to senators mikulski and burr, the sponsors of this legislation, for their leadership in this process for over a couple of years, working together, creating a bill that takes huge steps? in improving the lives of children and their families. i want to thank our ranking member, senator alexander for his partnership and for working with us to reauthorize this vital program. our offices have worked very collaboratively over the last couple of years to produce a strong bipartisan bill. if i might, i'd start first by saying that this program has a big impact in my state of iowa, too. right now iowa servers about 15,800 children each month with ccdbg funds and about 28% of infants and toddlers, about 26%

ages 3 and 4 and about half, 46% ages 5-13. i want to continue to make it clear most people think of this simply as a childcare type bill that's for infants and toddlers. this goes -- about half goes to those urpd the age of five. the last time this was reauthorized in 1996, 18 years ago, this program was basically looked at as mainly a work-support program, a work-related support program taking care of kids while parents went to work. it was only incidentally thought of as something that could have a real impact on the kids. well, 18 years later, backed by impressive scientific research, we know the program can and should be much more. in addition to providing vital work support for pairptses, it ca-- forparents, it can be a riy

learning program for children. a groundbreak being report was made that said from the time of conception to the first day of kindergarten development proceeds at a pace preceding that of any subsequent stage of life. that what happens during the first years of life matters a lot. not because it provides an indelible blueprint for well-being, but because it sets either a sturdy or fragile stage for what follows. and what it bill does is set that sturdy staifnlgt this report that i talked about from the national research council reinforces what we already know, that learning starts at birth and that preparation for learning begins hurricane -- ben before earth. 80% of a child's brain develops between birth and age 3. because much of a child's skills

develop before he or she begins kindergarten, we need to give every child the opportunity to reach their full potential at the earliest stages of life. this means including access to high-quality child care. the bill before us represents a strong and positive advance for low-income families who benefit from the child-care subsidy. the bill makes many needed improvements that will help establish high expectations for federally subsidized child care in this country. it accomplishes -- the bill aplirveaccomplishes a lost thin. first of all, education and training for child-care workers. under this bill, the states that apply and get these block grants will need to develop minimum education and training requirements for child-care workers that describe what they must know and able to do to promote the healthy development of the children they serve.

just as we know that great -- a great teacher is one of the most important factors in the classroom, we also know that one of the most critical components of early development in children is whether they have a supportive, nurturing interactions with caring adults. again, another important thing we do in the bill is to promote safety and health standards. this bill ensures that licensed child-care providers receive a pre-licensure inspection and at least one annual inspection thereafter. alarminalarmingly, some states t child-care providers once every five years. some don't even do a pre-licensure inspection until the provider is serving more than a dozen children. the bill also stipulates and focuses on vulnerable populati populations, including basically children with disabilities, infants and toddlers, children

whose parents work nontraditional hours. the sponsors of this bill, senators burr and mikulski, took great care to ensure that child-care programs supported through this block grant will be well-suited for children with special needs and their families. the legislation asks states to consider the unique needs of children with disabilities when developing training requirements for child-care workers. a child-care worker may be trained to take care of nondisabled children but taking care of a child with a disability takes a little more expertise that's what this bill provides. it also let lets parents know -- gives them the information to parents to know the types of services available through the individuals with disabilities education act. the bill also provides families with stability on continuity of care for families, that once

they receive care, they're going to get it for at least one year, once they're initially deemed eligible. currently some states require parents to reapply for care after only a few months. in some cases states will kick parents off of care if they receive a small pay raise that makes them ineligible under the state's eligibility guidelines. this bill remedies this by ensuring that as long as a parent is working or in a training program and whose income does not exceed 85% of the state's median income, they'll get care for at least one year without having to work. again, this helps children because we know that a lot of times these kinds of disruptions can really set a child back, and this allows at least for that continuity for one year. the bill also supports development of a web sievment i know senator burr was very interested in that and helped

promote that and put that in there. development of a web site that's going to be available to all parents to show them the range of child-care providers in their area, so they can shop around, see what's out there. now, i have -- the other one -- on the current access right now, right now the law says states can set their eligibility requirement as long as it doesn't exceed 85% of the state's median income. but if you look at all of the children ages 0-13, that's because the bill covers up to age 13, if you look at preschool-age kids, those 0-5, you do a little bit better and states are serving a little more than a quarter of children who would be eligible under the federal guideline. i think this shows the present landscape right now. out of 100% of the kids that are eligible, we have 73% eligible

but not being served, about 27% served -- of children. so we do have a long way to go. as chairman of the aeption pros subcommittee -- appropriations subcommittee on labor, health, human services and education, our committee has fought for years to increase funding so that we could serve more children. a fiscal year 2014 omnibus included more than a $154 million increase for the child-care pravment i know that sounds like a lot but all it did was replace the $118 million cut that happened because of sequestration. so we replaced the $118 million blues whatever that figures out to be, another $36 million more. so it helps. the increased funding will help states improve access to quality and affordable child care by increasing the numbers of kid whose can receive t but actually we have a long way to go and the last chart kind of shows what's

happening here. if you look at the blue line at the bottom, it actually states actual funding under this program. if we go back to 2005 and we see inflation, we're about $600 million short of where we'd be if we just kept up with inflation. so if yoso you see just since 2e know what it was like before that. we have a lot of a lot of ground. and we need to make that up and i hope we can do that in our appropriations bills that are coming up. so, again, this bill changes the landscape, makes things a lot better for families out there. but i just wanted to mention the funding this bill authorizes. but the appropriations has to fund it. and i hope that we can in fiscal

year 2015 continue to be able to keep up the funding increases for the child care and development block grants. so, madam president, it's a good bill. i'm very proud of this bill, proud of the efforts that senator burr and senator mikulski have put into this over a long period of time. so i urge my colleagues to join in the bipartisan spirit of cooperation that we have witnessed in the help committee over the last year, and as i said, if senators have amendments germane to the bill, i encourage hem to bring them over -- them to bring them over so we can take a look at them and determine a fair path forward with respect those amendments. i want to thank senator alexander for a great working relationship on this committee and thank him for working so hard to help bring this bill forward to the floor today. i yield the floor. mr. alexander: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from tennessee. mr. alexander: i want to say

to the senator from iowa how much i appreciate working with him. we were talking yesterday. he told me -- understand think i have the facts right -- that our committee in this congress has reported 17 bills that have passed the senate and ten that have become law, which i suspect exceeds that of any other committee. and as our hearing this morning on minimum wage shows, it is not because we always agree with each other all the time. we probably have the most ideologically split committee in the congress by party, but we get a lot done. and that's due in great -- in great measure to the way the senator from iowa leads the committee. and i apreasht that very much. -- and i appreciate that very much. and i'll have more to say about senator burr and mikulski in a few moments because they've done yeoman's work on this. they're the leaders in this effort. they've immersed themselves in it in the last two years. they brought it to a position that was -- which convinced everybody on the committee it

was time to move ahead. but that's not where we were when we started. we had lots of differences of opinion and we came it a conclusion that they'll be explaining in detaivmen detail. the way we'll proceed is this: after my remarks, senator mikulski and senator burr will step up and begin to manage the bill. senator harkin and i will be here. we're continuing right through the afternoon. we hope that senators will bring their amendments to the floor. what we're hoping to do is have a debate about the child care development block grant. and we're hoping to have amendments about it. and we will have votes on those amendments. and it's not our desire to pick this democratic amendment or this republican amendment. if you have an amendment on the child care development block grant that's related to the bill, please bring it over and talk with senator burr, senator

mikulski, senator harkin or me, and we'll start lining them up, and there will be time for debate, and there will be a vote, and it'll be considered. and our hope is to have votes this afternoon, votes tomorrow morning to let senators know that there won't be votes tonight so they can plan their schedules. senator burr will talk more about that -- and a time for attempting to conclude the bill tomorrow. that's ours goal. that's the way the senate has traditionally worked. it is the way we hope it works today. now, since senator mikulski, the senator from maryland, the senator from north carolina have done the principal amount of work on the bill, i see no need for me to go through the details of the bill. i think they're better- equipped to do that and better-prepared to do that. let me put the whole effort in perspective before i step down and step aside and senator mikulski and senator burr step up.

during world war ii, there were a great many mothers, women, who took jobs outside the home. that was different. in our agricultural society, families worked together. as the industrial society in america developed during the 20th century, men, largely, went away from home to work and women, mostly, worked at home. but in world war ii, something different happened. most -- many of the men were overseas fighting. there was a lot of work to be done at home, and so women took jobs in the factories that they didn't have before. and that produced a new phenomenon in the american society which was called "work sight day care." someone had to take care of the children. a large number of companies provided sites at the work place so that mothers could bring their children while they

worked. then after the war was over, things went back to the way they were before, and most american women worked at home. that began to change probably in the 1970's. it is probably fair to say that the greatest social change in our country over the last 40 years has been the gradual and steady phenomenon of women in the workplace outside the home and the adjus a adjustments thar society has made. i had an early head start in the town of merryville, tennessee p. my mother had one of the two preeducation programs. she had been trained in kansas in a settlement house in chicago, and she had -- it's hard for me today to imagine how she did this. she had 24 5-year-olds in the

afternoon. that was mrs. alexander's preschool, which we called the institution of lower learning. she had nowhere else to put me, sos i became i guess the first united states senator to have five years of kindergarten, which i probably needed. but it gave me a head start, and it gave me the understanding of what senator harkin said earlier, that research then, but especially now, shows that the brain develops at least from the moment of conception and that all of the influence around an infant even are important to that person's development over a long period of time. and most parents who understand that want to make sure that they are with the child at a very early age, stimulating that child or if they can't be for some period of time for some reason, that someone else is. so along with the changing role of women in the work force came

the idea of more childcare. i remember in 1986 i was governor of tennessee and the head of our human services division, a woman named marring aretail seli came to me and proposed i ask the businesses in tennessee to create a thousand work site daycare places. i was taken aback by that because i didn't understand the need for it and didn't think the businesses would do it voluntarily. we did that and we got twice as many work site daycare places as were asked for. it was good for businesses to do and plenty of demand for it from the parents who had to take their children to work. then in the next year i was out of a job, i was through with my time as governor and so was marguerite along with captain kangaroo, bob keeshon, my wife and bob martin founded a company

that provided work site daycare places. after 10 years it merged with its competitor, bright horizons and became the largest provider of work site daycare in the world. as companies have realized the worse of work site daycare. but not all of -- not all mothers can send their children or fathers can send their children to bright horizons while they work. and so there came to be a recognition that there needed to be some response by the federal government. that came the next year in about 1988 with the first federal programs on childcare and in 1996, the law that we have today was basically a part of the reform of the welfare act. it's a remarkable law in effect because it involves lots of state flexibility, in other words, what's good for maryland may not be good for north carolina, it models our higher education system by letting the money follow the child to the

institution that the parent thinks best. these are vouchers. and -- and it gradually has grown to an area where we spend $5 billion or $6 billion of taxpayers' money each year to provide about 1.5 million children with an opportunity for childcare. let me mention one success story so we can have an example of exactly what we're talking with. about. i'm thinking of a young mother in memphis, tennessee who was attending lemoine-owen college earning a business degree. she had an infant child so she put that child in a childcare center she chose, the voucher through this program that we're talking about today provided about $500 to $600 a month to help pay for that. infant childcare is especially expensive, as if you think

about it, you can understand. the success part of the story is that she earned her degree, she's now an assistant manager at wal-mart in memphis. the child who was the infant in the childcare center is 5 years old and she earns enough money to pay all the bill for that child to go to the same childcare center while the money that helped her before is now available to some other mother. so this program encourages work, it encourages job training, and for those americans who are low income and working or low income and training or educating themselves for a job, this helps them get that job. so this is an important bill for -- for many, many families. i know in tennessee we have about 20,000 families affected, nearly 40,000 children. it's a big help to them.

it makes a difference in their lives. so i thank senator mikulski and senator burr for working with this legislation. i know of no two senators in this body who approach -- who approach issues in a more serious, effective, and determined way, and they also understand that, you know, in a body of a hundred members where we each have a right to object, that no bill is going to be what any of us would exactly want. for example, i'm leery of the extent of the background checks here which is one of the major accomplishments of the bill. as a former governor i'm skeptical of washington setting rules for states. but i accept the compromise they've come to. we've talked that through and i think it's a sound -- a sound proposal. and i want to congratulate them

for the way they've done this over the last two years, and the way we approach it. and then the conclusion, let me say where i started, we're asking senators to join us in a debate about the childcare and development block grant. what we hope senators will do is come to the floor with their ideas about it. we know of a number of senators who have amendments on both sides of the aisle. what we're saying to those senators is if you have an amendment that's related to our bill, you'll have a chance to talk about it and you'll have a chance for it to be voted on and perhaps accepted by the full senate and then hopefully this bill will go to the house and become a law. we know that that hasn't been the story as often as it should be in the senate but we'd like to see that happen more often. it requires a little bit of restraint on the part of each of

us as senators. we can't all exercise all of our rights all the time and get anything done. it requires some trust and restraint on the part of our leader, senator reid, senator mcconnell, we appreciate them turning the management of the bill over to senator mikulski and senator burr with senator harkin and i in support of their efforts. and we appreciate the cooperation of the many senators who have already come up with excellent amendments, notified of us about them, senator burr and senator mikulski know about them and will talk about them. at this stage, madam president, i'd like to step down and turn the matter over to senator mikulski first and then senator burr and encourage colleagues to come over now, we're continuing through the lunchtime and discuss, debate, talk and beginning voting on the childcare and development block grant reauthorization. thank you very much. ms. mikulski: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. ms. mikulski: before i speak on the childcare and development

block grant, i have 11 unanimous consent requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and the is the minority leaders and i ask these these requests be agreed to and that these requests be printed in the record. the presiding officer: without objection. ms. mikulski: madam president, i'm so pleased to bring to the floor the very important bipartisan legislation, the childcare and development block grant of 2014. standing here today to really speak on behalf of families and children across this nation. i'm excited to bring this bill for two reasons. one, the content that it represents. a reauthorization framework for the childcare and development block grant, one of the most

important tools that families have to be able to afford childcare so that they may go to work. it is a childcare development bill, and it is a work assessment bill. but i'm also proud of the process by which we are undertaking this bill. the process by which we arrived at this bill, and on which we're on the floor today. this legislation has not been reauthorized since 1996. senator richard burr of north carolina and i serve on the health education committee, which the presiding officer is a member. we once chaired the subcommittee -- i -- on children and families. senator burr and i, who have a long-standing professional relationship, said let's see what we can get done on that

committee. where can we found common ground? where can we find that sensible center? how can we move things forward on a bipartisan basis where we add value to our country but don't add to our debt? so we put our heads together and looking at the childcare needs in our country, we began a regular order process. three hearings, lots of meetings with stakeholders, over 50 organizations, meetings with our staff, meeting with each other, characterized by three things -- mutual respect, focusing on national needs, how we can be both smart in terms of our policies, yet frugal in terms of the way we went about the money, how we could maybe not expand the number of vouchers the way some of us would like but that we could expand value by focusing

on quality. we, because of the tone we set with each other, we think we were able to do this. this is the way the senate ought to operate. mutual respect, talking with each other and not at each other. listening to experts, listening to the grassroots, paying attention to the bottom line. we were able to do that. and today as we come to the floor, this is an open amendment process. you know, there are -- we talk a lot here about regular order. there are very few members of the senate, particularly those that have been elected since 2006, that know what a regular order is. a quick thumbnail, it means bring legislation to the floor, offer an open amendment process, debate, deliberate, and vote. this is where we hope to be able to proceed today. no strong arming, no stiff

arming, no heavy hand, just regular order, regular debate with every senator having the opportunity to have their day and their say. this is the it should operate. what excites me coming to the floor is not only being the senator from maryland but also the presiding officer knows, i'm a professionally trained social worker. i have a master's degree in social work and work with the children, i was a foster care worker for catholic charities, i was a child abuse worker for the department of social services, and being here when one of the reasons i came into politics was to be able to take that values of a social worker and bring it to the floor of the united states congress to make sure we looked at families and their needs. and this is what i think this bill does. we're looking at childcare.

every family in america with children is concerned about childcare. they wonder if it's available, they wonder if it's affordable, they worry if it's safe, and they also are concerned does it help their children be ready to learn. we all say that children are one of our most important resources which also means that childcare is one of our most important decisions. families will scrimp and save to make sure that they have adequate childcare. if you're a single parent working double shifts, you wonder if childcare is safe and sound. if you're a student working towards a degree, you're wondering if -- while you're in school are your children in a good preschool or daycare program. these worries weigh heavily on the shoulders of parents everywhere, and our bill helps lift that burden, giving families and children the childcare they need. this bill, as i said, is the

product of a bipartisan effort. childcare is something all families worry about, regardless of income or zip code. this bill ensures that all children get the care that they need and deserve. what we did was focusing on what these needs are. childcare has not been evaluated since 1996. at that time the program was solely envisioned as a work force aid. what we know today is that this is also the time of the most rapid period of brain development. that's why it's imperative that we ensure that our young children are at high quality childcare programs. we need to make sure that childcare newerrures their development, prepares their mind, and prepares them for school. the program is out of date. it doesn't go far enough to

promote health and safety and also to make sure that the staff is ready to meet emergency responses and to take care of the needs of those children. what we know in this legislation is that we are focused on quality. i will elaborate on that in more detaism but whadetail. but what i do know is that way back when this bill was first signed in to law, it was under george herbert bush. president clinton came in, and part of the welfare reform was to be able to do that. now it is a new day. and we want to make sure that child care not only helps the parents, but it also focuses on the children. that when they come to their day care, they know that their providers will be trained, that the environment will be safe, that their whole program will be able to help them make them

learning-ready. we know there are differences in north carolina from in maryland. we know that there's differences in utah from maine. so what we've provided here is to make sure there's incredible state flexibility. i'll go into that in more detable, but i hope that -- detail, but i hope that my colleagues will join senator burr and i, senator alexander and senator harkin in passing this bill. and i look forward to further debate and discussion. the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. burr: i thank the president, and i thank my good friend and colleague, the senator from maryland, senator mikulski. you know, in the senate, for

those of us that have been around for a while, we understand how it works. and i'm not sure that the media does justice to the american people about how difficult it is for legislation to actually pass the united states senate. as a matter of fact, the historical threshold of 67 and then 60 in agreement means that in you're a serious legislator and yoand your interest to workn good policy -- not perfect; i think senator alexander said, we've never seen a perfect bill -- then the first thought that goes through your mind as you work on a legislative agenda is, who on the other side of the aisle can i get that this would be appealing to from a standpoint of their interests and, two, an individual that

understandunderstands how to geh difficult times? well, i'm here to say to my colleagues, barbara mikulski is one that fills that category -- not just on this, but on so much, because of her great depth of knowledge and more importantly her tenacity and her willingness to tell people "no" and to pur pursue what's right, because at the end of the day i think i can speak for both of us, this is not about headlines; this is about looking at a generation of kids that are going to be benefited by reforms to a reauthorization that hasn't happened since 1996. you know, historical on this issue is that george h.w. bush started the program, and it was under the clinton administration under welfare reform that we formalized these vouchers.

and the vouchers were really created so that families who struggled to keep a job and were low-income but had child-care needs didn't have to worry about the child-care piece; that there was a federal assistance that was determined on a sliding scale. and by the way, let pe me say fr my colleagues, if a statedon stf a state doesn't provide a waiver, then they've got skin on these vowfns. and thi-- on these vouchers. this has benefited 1.6 million families. in north carolina there are 74,000 vouchers on an annual basis that benefit our children. those are family members that are either in education or in work, and they can commit to those jobs because they know that child care is available and the cost is affordable because of this federal voucher program.

and i think senator mikulski would agree with me, we hope we never see a program that waits this long to be reauthorized. every program up here deserves to be reevaluated every five years: one, on its effectiveness, two, do we still have the problem that we had when the program was started. i dare say in her time here -- and she's been here a lot longer here than i have -- and i don't say that, barbara, as it relates to your age -- there are programs here that don't have a constituency anymore. but the hardest thing for congress to do is to get rid of something or to consolidate. and i think senator mikulski and i have taken the attitude, if we can make this better and have a positive effect on the people it was intended to, then that's our job. that's our responsibility here as members of the united states

senate. so i have searchl certainly lood forward to the two years we have spent that some might listen to the debate and say, gee, why didn't you just go to the floor and pass an consent consent. yes, that's -- and pass an unanimous consent u yes. yes, that's an option. if you can make this bill, come to the floor and offer your amendment. if we come to the floor and we think it makes the bill worse, then we're going to vote against you. but we promise you this: we'll have a vote. and that's an important part of the united states senate is that members always feel that they can put their fingerprints, they can put their state's interest into every piece of legislation, whether they are on that committee or subcommittee or not. and we have now with this bill returned to a process that i think reaches out and

incorporates that. let me say to our colleagues, it is our intent when i get through to start accepting amendments. and at some point, with both leaders' agreement this afternoon, we will target a period where we will vote on whatever stacked amendments we've been able to process. after that we will hopefully go back in to consider more amendments, and i think it's senator mikulski's and my intent not to have votes tonight but to work with the leaders then to roll those votes to the morning. but let me make this perfectly clear to our colleagues. it is our intent to finish this bill tomorrow afternoon. period. so, you know, the way to effect positive change in this legislation, to get your input into it and your fingerprints on it, is not to wait until tomorrow afternoon. it's to come down this afternoon, it's to debate the amendments, it's to let us

process the amendments, it's to let us work like the senate is designed to work. so i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do that. madam president, i do rise today to speak about s. 1085, the child care development block grant reauthorization bill with my good friend senator mikulski. and i must say, we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for the cooperation of senator harkin and senator alexander, senator harkin who has a long history of interest and involvement with policies that affect children. he's passionate about it. senator alexander with a similar lifetime commitment, a gentleman that's served as the education governor of tennessee, the secretary of education of the united states, and the president of the university of tennessee in knoxville. so both of them come with a tremendous amount of expertise and passion for this issue.

this legislation is actually necessary to build on what the child care development block grant program was established for. as i said earlier, 1.6 million children nationally are served today. 74,000 in north carolina. and there tends to be a lot of talk in this body about strengthening job training, getting people back to work, and in min myincentivizing self-rel. that's imheact th exactly what d care development block grant does. it says to a family, work and we'll help you with child care. but one of the problems since 1996 when this bill was created was that the way we looked at one's income was an instantaneous snapshot.

so as a parent, if i was offered a second shift where i could earn a little more money, i'd look at how that might affect my child-care voucher and realize that they'd take my voucher away if i took that second shift or if i worked overtime and got time and a half pay. well, this is evidence that we've looked at all angles, we've reached out to the communities that are affected, we've talked to people who are providers, we've talked to parents, we've looked at the difficulties that they struggle with because our inthent intento make sure that we have a piece of legislation that parents can choose to accept that shift offer, can accept to work overtime and know that they're not going to be adversely affected, because now we're looking at the year-long versus the individual snapshot. so through federal vouchers, parents who demonstrate they're working or they're in

job-training programs are furthering education and are below 85% of the state's median income are eligible to receive the child-care voucher, to use that as a child-care provider of their choice in their state. now, this is not one where we're saying, you have to go here and you have to go there. we open it up for the choice of the parent. in addition, cdbg requires families, as i said earlier, to have skin in the game on a sliding scale based upon their income. as a block grant, states have great flexibility in how they administer the funds but are generally required to set health, safety, and quality guidelines to promote parental choice, assist parents in becoming independent through work promotion, and provide good consumer information so parents can make decisions about their

child's care. s. 1086, the legislation that we've offered, would reauthorize this law for the first time since 19969. -- since 1996. it the would do so bhai by makig some commonsense changes which address the realities which i have highlighted: prioritizing the safety of children that receive care with federal dollars. first, we'd require all providers and individuals who have unsupervised access to children to submit to a criminal background check. that check would ensure that our young children are not left alone with individuals who've committed felonies, such as murder, rape, child abuse, neglect, robbery, and other serious offenses. this provision is the result of legislation i introduced over the past several congresses called the child care protection act, which i believe will do a great deal to improve the safety of our children. now, let me just stop there,

madam president, and just say, this is incredible because most men's, americans, i think, belit these background checks take place today. in some respects they're right. states like north carolina have been responsible and they do carry out some degree of background checks. not all states. not all providers. but when this bill becomes law, it will say to all states and to all providers that receive federal vouchers, you must doz o this. you must assure every parent that these felons are not part of the workforce that was unsupervised access to your children. second, this bill asks states to monitor through inspections the quality of child-care settings so that basic health and safety precautions are taken. many states currently conduct no checks at all for certain settings and conduct them years

apart, all while providers receive state and federal tax dollars. at the very least, parents who are working several jobs just to make it should know that their child is in someone's care who's been traininged in the basics of c.p.r., fire prevention, and other commonsense precautions. let me say, one of my colleagues, senator landrieu, i think will come to the floor sometime this afternoon and offer an amendment that requires evacuation plans. well, for a senator from louisiana who lived this firsthand, this is a really, really important thing. it is a great job of where a member's amendment is going to help to perfect our bill and for anybody who's on a coastal state -- north carolina, i'm sorry i didn't think of what she did -- but when you look at tornadoes and fires, we're all susceptible to the need of a day-care facility having an evacuation

plan that local officials and, more importantly, parents and the providers that work there understand what to do. third, it asks states to make transparent all the information as widely as possible so parents are armed with all the information they need whe when y shop for child care under the federal child care vouchers. fourth, in keeping with the maximum flexibility afforded to states under the cdbg this bill provides states the option of seeking waivers from any federal law that funds early learning or childcare that might have conflicting or onerous results for the delivery of that care and requires the secretary of h.h.s. to work with other agencies to provide a waiver for those requirements so states and childcare providers can focus on providing quality care, not just complying with washington's confusioning -- confusing set of requirements.

in other words, the focus of this is to make sure that the childcare quality component is the single most important feature to providers. fifth, it promotes continued employment incentives for parents to move higher in their careers by providing better guidance to states on how they determine the eligibility of parents and their children to me it's just common sense we shouldn't penalize a parent from taking an extra shift or working overtime. but at the same time we require states to make sure that only the most needy parents receive the childcare vouchers, and they can demonstrate that they're following the laws -- the law's work rules. let lett me say again, madam president. i think this is lost because we haven't talked about this in almost two decades.

that for many in the communities that we all represent, this is the difference between a family being able to keep a job or to be 100% on assistance. and what we've got is a federal program that not just is beneficial, we have the data to prove it works. and that matrix continues to be in place. finally, madam president, it asks states to play a greater emphasis on building quality care settings by gradually increasing the amount of federal dollars that can be set aside from current law's 4% to 10% over the next several years that must be used to improve quality programs. let me explain. today we say that you can set up to 4% aside for quality. we want to extend that.

we want to create an incubator that is an investment in what we can do to further enhance the quality of what these children are exposed to. i think senator harkin, senator mikulski, senator alexander have all pointed out when we go from infancy to 13, we've got the majority of the learning period of a child's life, and some of it we pick up in the education system, but if they go to childcare after that or they go to childcare before it, we want to make sure that the quality of that and more importantly, the innovation of that quality, is such that all students, all children can advance because of it. this bipartisan legislation is the result of work in the help committee. it was influenced and really ramrodded by my friend, senator mikulski.

she was tireless at inviting experts, she sought practitioners in all of our states, and it was that and the leadership of our chairman and our ranking member that bring us here today. madam president, i believe this legislation will go a long way towards improving childcare in our country. but also towards promoting self-sufficiency and independence for working parents. this is not a federal handout. this is a partnership between the federal government and the opportunity for parents to have a better life. and i think that the way we have addressed the commonsense changes in reauthorization make it more likely, not less likely, that more parents will succeed at that. so i urge my -- i encourage my

colleagues to support this bill, but i really do stress with my colleagues, now is the time to come to the floor. bring your amendments to the floor. let's debate the amendments, let's vote the amendments, let's prove that the united states senate can function in a very open process because in this particular case, those vulnerable parents and those children that are the next generation really do matter and what we do really does affect them. i thank the president, i thank my colleague from maryland, and i yield the floor. ms. mikulski: madam president -- the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. ms. mikulski: thank you. madam president, i know we'll be offering amendments through the afternoon, and we look forward to ample debate and

discussion on them. i want to reiterate my appreciation to senator burr for the way we worked together on this bill. he was very generous in his comments to me about me, and i appreciate this, but what i so appreciated in working with him is that his whole focus was how do we really protect these children? and his work to ensure that the children were safe when they were at the daycare, regardless of the size of the provider, was really important. so yes, we have good background checks. at the same time, we were looking at health and safety standards. making sure that the staffs were at least trained in the elements of first aid so that if they needed help because they had

swallowed something until the 911 -- excuse me, the 911 responders could be there, were really important. and yet we had to look at it in a way that we didn't overregulate so we wanted quality standards, but we didn't want to have so many rules, so many regs, exactly what senator alexander cautioned us about, let's not overregulate so that we then stifle or end up shrinking the pool. so we again worked on what -- the phrase "sensible center" really comes from colin powell, that if we work hard and listen to each other, we find that sensible center. so it was the balance between federal standards, but also local flexibility on the best way to achieve those standards. and also to help states pay the

bill for the training. one of the things that we've done in our bill was set aside 3% of funding to expand access to improve the quality of care, especially for infants and toddlers, the most vulnerable populations because they can't tell you things. you know, they can't tell you where they hurt or some of these others. in addition the amendments they -- amounts they set aside for quality improvement also must be at least 10% within five years of enactment and states must say what they choose to invest in. we hope not only to have reporting and accountability, we're getting a idea for best practices we can circulate among providers and we think this will be really important. the other area that we focused was senator burr talked about

providing protections for children who receive assistance. exactly what i heard in maryland. you know, this is all income based. in other words, your voucher -- this is a means-tested program. and -- but if your means change in the program, you could lose your daycare. so it was an actual disincentive for improving yourself or maybe taking a seasonal job. so if you had the opportunity perhaps to work in retail during a holiday season, exactly for your own family's holiday celebrations, you were going to be tremendously disadvantaged because it would be a boost, it would look like you've gone up when actually your income might be the same. so if you've taken that part-time job. so we want to reward work. we want to reward personal

responsibility. and so we were able to provide that flexibility that when parents redetermine their eligibility they'll give them ample opportunity to be able to do so. so if your child is in daycare and you take your part-time job, you won't lose the daycare you have for that year or that determination. so we thought that was important. the other thing was meeting the needs of children with disabilities. this was a strong passion of senator harkin, a well known advocate for people with disabilities, and i know he will speak to that. but it will require states to examine what are they doing to coordinate with the idea programs, again, for preschool age children with disabilities.

omnibus a child who faces a disability -- often a child who faces a disability is in a daycare that doesn't promote learning. canned i have, ms. rivera, i have a constituent in maryland, she spoke at our press conference yesterday. her name is kathy rivera. she's the mother of two children, age 7 and 2. she is also a resource person working at cen tro nio family services which is information and services and focuses on early childhood education. now, her little dpirl was born without an ear. -- girl was born without an ear. that's rough going. so imagine being an infant, then a toddler trying to learn

language, your family is bilingual, it could be a great asset, but when you can't really hear and the doctors are doing the most for you to help you, you still need to have -- be in an environment that acknowledges that and is helping with the learning in childcare so at your pace, your way, so that your language skills are also developing because language and brain development are tied together. so without the proper environment, this little girl would have been doubly disadvantaged. one with the physical situation from birth but then the learning situation because of where she was. well, fortunately because of the -- her mother working in the field of daycare, working

at a very agency who provides information and resources and with the help of the childcare subsidy, this little girl could be in the daycare that she needs to not only look out that her physical needs are being met but that her learning needs are being met. isn't that a great story? isn't that a great story? but here's a mother who is working. a bit strapped financially, but with her own sense of motherhood and personal responsibility she found what she needed, the childcare subsidy was able to help her pay for the daycare, and now this little girl has a promising -- it's going to be a challenging future for her, but she's ready, she's up for this challenge. this is what this is. this isn't only about numbers and statistics. so when we talk about improving quality, we've really tried to take in -- into consideration of

these needs. you know, daycare is expensive, and in maryland, the maryland family network tells me that they had with all of the licensed daycare, over 23,000 children were on the wait list for this program. not for daycare. that's even larger. but for this program. so this is why we want to pass this bill and really be able to move forward on it. but, again, i'm going to come back to this bipartisan effort of focusing on safety, security, and also learning readiness. so, madam president, i yield the floor and i'll say more later. mr. burr: madam president,. the presiding officer:

the presiding officer: the senator from north carolina. mr. burr: i just want to take this opportunity to say to my colleagues we're now at a point that we would like to consider amendments. so if you've got improvements to this bill, it's after lunch, before you take a nap, come down to the senate floor, offer your amendment, let's talk about it and let's process as many as we possibly can. it is our intent to consider amendments for the majority of the afternoon. at some point with the cooperation and agreement of leaders on both sides to set a time that we would then vote for the amendments that have been processed, hopefully continue to take some amendments early in the evening, but our intent would be not to have votes tonight, so that the schedules are predictable, to come back in the morning with the leaders' agreement at a specified time to

consider the votes that might be stacked, any additional amendments that need to be debate yoed and voted on, and it would be senator mikulski's and my intent -- and it is our goal -- and when she has a goal, let me say to my colleagues, she will achieve that goal. so it is our intent and our goal to finish this tomorrow afternoon. we want to make sure that we've accommodated every member who has an amendment, every member who wants to make an improvement to this bill, but we ask you to come to the floor preferably today and to introduce that, call it up, debate it, let us schedule it in the queue of votes and we will feel more cch- feel more confident of exactly the time line we're on as this starts. so i remind my colleagues that the key enhancements in this bill is that it improves quality

while simultaneously ensuring that federal funds support low-income and at-risk children and facilities. two, it addresses the nutritional and physical activity needs of children in a child-care setting. three, it strengthens coordination and the alignment to create a more comprehensive early childhood education and care system. four, it meets the needs of children with disabilities who require child care. five, it provides protections for children and families who receive assistance. six, it safeguards the health and the safety of children. i can't think of points that are more important as it relates to changes to a bill that was created in 1996 and still

embraces, i might say, the context that it was negotiated in, which was wel welfare refor. how did we provide the avenue for more individuals to enjoy what great things this country has to offer for those who are willing to work? and welfare reform was a pathway -- bipartisanly agreed to -- to lead people from unemployment to employment and hopefully to continue to whatever degree of prosperity they chose to pursue. we all know that that means that you've got to have a partner and that you've got to have flexibility, whether that's flexibility in being able to meet the hours that might put you up for a for a promotion or

get the skills that you need to consider a different career or the next level and that every parent should probably look at this like i did with mine; that they are the single-most important thing. there are sacrifices that every parent makes for themselves because of what they provide for their children. that's the right thing to do. but through this partnership for 1.6 million children and for 900,000-plus families, we've now provided for over two decades a federal program that helps to make that decision to where it's not either/or. they can -- they can pursue a career. they can pursue advancement. they can increase their skills. they can increase their education without sacrificing that federal subsidy that provides them the ability to drop their kids off in the morning and that those kids are taken care of.

this is a win-win. it is what welfare reform was written to do, and i'm proud to work with my good friend, senator mikulski, to make sure that we get this across the finish line. so once again to my colleagues, come to the floor, brin -- brinr amendment, let's debate them, vote them. but we're going to finish tomorrow afternoon. with that, madam president, i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: the presiding officer: the senator from maryland. ms. mikulski: madam president, i ask that the call of the quorum be vacated. the presiding officer: without objection.

ms. mikulski: i reiterate senator burr's request. people wanted an open amendment process. we're open. come on and amend. and we're looking tbiewrd to -- and we're looking forward to it. but while we're waiting for our members to come careening to the floor -- and by the way, 25 amendments have been filed. so here we are. i want to comment on something else. if you notice, i'm dressed in green today and i also have on a girl scout pin. don't i look like a little girl scout standing here? i feel like a girl scout. but because i was a girl scout, and once a girl scout, always a girl scout, today, madam president, we are celebrating the 102nd anniversary of girl scouts in america, which started out as a group of 18 girls in georgia organized by juliet

loarks which has grown into an organization of 3.2 million girls and weu78. i knew firsthand what it was like about learning, leadership, and service. i loved working on my badges. i loved the camaraderie of working with other girls on the various challenges we had. madam president, i was a child during world war ii. the day care -- the girl scout program run out of our parish was really important. it provided important activities for girls after school, and there were comparable cub scout, boy scout, just like we had the daisies and the girl scouts. in my community, women are working as rosie the riveters.

so we could actually be in a safe environment, we learned wonderful thirntion and w -- wonderful things, and we learned about our responsibilities. i can't think enough about ms. helen nimick, i wanted to grow up like here because she knew how to do 43 things with oatmeal boxes. there's a little bit of an age difference between us, madam president, but what i loved also the most was our pledges. and i'll just say today, first of all, you know the girl scout promise: to serve god and my country, to help people at all times, and to live by the girl scout law. pretty good. but here's the girl scout law. i actually carry this in my wallet, and i'll tell you why. because if you follow the girl scout law, you're in pretty good shaivment and, by thshape.

and by the way, i think over 90% of the women in the senate were hereto a daisy ar or a girl scout. "i will do my best to be honest and fair, friendly and helpful, considerate and caring, courageous and strong, and responsible for what i say and what i do, and to respect myself and others, to respect authority, to respect and use resources wisely, make the world a better place, be a sister to every girl scout, and a sister to every boy scout." and i think that this is great. to girl scouts everywhere, whether they're daisies or the senior leadership, we say congratulations on the 102nd anniversary. but i want to do a particular shoutout for the leaders, people who give of their own time and earn their own dime to help young women learn about their country, the world they live in,

working collegially and in comradeship, camaraderie with others. i believe the values that i learned as a girl scout were the lessons of a lifetime. and, quite frankly, if i can live up to the girl scout law today, i think i'll be a pretty good senator. so, hats off to girl scouts everywhere, a big thanks to the leaders who do it, and let's eat those cook cheerks evethose coon a different program than they're called for. mr. burr: madam president, let me admit that i was not a girl scout. and i guess i could have assumed that barbara mikulski was a girl scout because scouting has made a significant difference in the lives of so many -- not just in

america, but globally. and many of the qualities that come from that experience lead to some of our most important national leaders, both in the past and in the future. so i join her in recognizing this significant milestone for the girl scouts. i know that it must be challenging in today's nutritional environment to actually fund everything off of cookies, but, as we have seen drastically the change in the way they're marketed, i will assure you that we are raising a generation of girl scouts who are the most creative at how they market and sell their products that fund their programs of any generation that i've seen to date. and i think when kids are challenged at that age to be their own entrepreneurs, this is

good for this country. we should be proud as parents, and we should continue to support programs like scouting. i thank the chair. i yield the floor. mr. heller: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from nevada. mr. heller: i ask unanimous consent to speak as if in morning business for up to ten minuteminutes. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. heller: thank you, madam president. i rise today to recognize the great state of nevada, as we celebrate 150 years of statehood. it is a remarkable opportunity to speak on the floor of this chamber about this milestone, given the role that congress played in the formation of the silver state. the movement to make the nevada territory a state began within the territory, but the first attempt to formulate a constitution failed. shortly affirmation the 38th congress passed an enabling act for nevada statehood, signed by president abraham lincoln on march 21, 1864, this bill made

it possible for nevada to eventually adopt a state constitution. lincoln proclaimed nevada a state on october 31, 1864. the guarantee of statehood was given to us by abraham lincoln, who with our assistance would go on to pass a 13th amendment, win the civil war and heal a broken nation. making the 150th year of nevada statehood takes me back to carson city when i was just 4 years old. it was nevada's centennial celebration. the date was october 31, 1964. i remember being with my family, sitting on the lawn, listening to the carson city municipal band lead the festivities at the state capital. now, during that same year in 1964, lyndon johnson was reelected over barry goldwater and would go on to declare a war on poverty. in 1964, race riots broke out in

harlem. across the nation president johnson signed the civil rights act of 1964 into law. the 24th amendment to abolish the use of poll taxes was ratified. in 1964 the summer olympics were held in tokyo, congress passed the gulf of tonkin resolution which ultimately escalated the increased military action in vietnam. the james bond film "gold finger" began its run in the united states and "bewitched" premiered on television. so much has changed over the past 50 years but the characteristic of nevada has not. from its first birthday to its 100th to its 150th, nevada continues to be shaped by its people. people who are entrepreneurial, fiercely independent, and as diverse as our terrain. we are molded by the grit, hard work, and pir pioneering spiritf individuals determined to succeed.

the list of men and women who have molded our state is long. where some saw impossibility, a nevada senator by the name of nulance saw opportunity. to this day, his legacy lives on in the hay, the cattle, and very fields made possible by the water that he brought to this desert. standing among our nation's great frozen greeting visitors to the nation's capitol is another nevada's, sarah winnemucka, she challenged the status quo and refused to accept the injustices brought on her native american brothers and sisters. so instead of fighting with a weapon, she fought with her pen. through her words the plight of our fellow americans living on reservations was heard. of course in nevada, mark twain was born. samuel clemens adopted the

famous pen name while covering the enterprise in virginia city. twain wrote eloquent by about nevada from the rough and tumble attitude of the wild west to its beauty dubbing it. more recently, i think of paul laxalt, former lieutenant governor and united states senator for nevada. he was instrumental in preserving lake tahoe, establishing our state's first community colleges and our medical school. or former representative barbara vucanovich who will be recorded in the history books to be the first woman to represent nevada in the united states senate. this remark is not only achievement but the integrity with which she fulfilled her duties makes her achievement

grander. bill raggi also comes to mind, a true statesman, longest serving member in the nevada state senate. these people left their mark but it is the people of nevada who formed the silver state. during the formation of our state's constitution, nevadans demanded our mothers and sisters be heard. the women of nevada were granted the voice of a vote before the 19th amendment was ratified by our nation. we helped pioneer the vote for all. during world war ii when our brave soldiers fought for peace and prosperity, nevadans who were not able to fight brought forth minerals like magnesium from the ground. magnesium harvested near the township of henderson was considered a metal for airport parts which would help lead us to victory. the residents of boulder city built the hoover dam, a government infrastructure project which holds back 26

million acre feet of water and was delivered early and on budget. with an expected 2,000-year life span, the hoover dam supplies clean energy to the grid, water to thirsty cities across the southwest and protection to downstream communities. ever since we were born into battle to mend our broken nation, nevadans have been willing and able. though our population is small, our caliber is high. from all walks of life, brave nevadans have heard and respond to the call to the arms. the naval air force station in fallon we host the navy's top gun school. elite men and women who train here push the limits, compete and set the tone for global air superiorty. welcoming tourists from around the globe, farming, mining, ranching, serving in the armed forces, these are a few things

we nevadans do. as our state motto goes, all of these things are done all for our country. recent times have been tough in nevada but our pioneer spirit lives on. we continue to move forward. we have seen the booms and now more than most we continue to feel the most in the recent bust. like many in our great nation, nevadans have lost homes, livelihoods and the promise of a steady paycheck, but this will not deter us. our state has battled more. we will continue to fill our 150-year-old promise of being willing and able to give all for our country. i'm a proud nevadan. and as the son of an auto mechanic from carson city, it is a privilege to stand on this senate floor today to recognize our state's 150 years of statehood. madam president, before i close, i'd like to thank lieutenant governor brian keurlicky, chair

of the nevada sesquicentennial commission. over the course of this year the commission has planned and overseen many events and activities providing nevadans an opportunity to reflect on where we've been and where we are going. madam president, thank you. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call:

the presiding officer: the senator from utah. mr. hatch: i ask unanimous consent that the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. hatch: madam president, i rise today to discuss my disappointment in the recent turn of events involving the sustainable growth rate formula or what we call the s.g.r. or the doc-fix. enacted in 1997, the s.g.r. was conceived as a means of trying to balance the budget and restraining health care costs and medicare, but it was deeply flawed from the start. its reimbursement cuts to

physicians would cripple seniors' ability to get the quality health care they deserve from their doctors. consequently, since 2002 when the s.g.r. came into effect, congress has patched it on a regular basis and there has been bipartisan support for doing so. these -- quote -- patches -- unquote -- have frequently been cobbled together at the midnight hour by the leadership of both parties and included in larger legislation without the input of the members or even going through the regular legislative process. now, this perverse annual dark of night ritual has to stop. seniors and physicians understand that. republicans and democrats in the house and senate understand that. for the better part of the year, congress, to the sacrifice of many, worked to fully repeal the s.g.r. and replace it with more reasonable reforms that moved

medicare's physician fee for service reimbursement system towards a system that rewards doctors for providing quality care based on outcomes, and we have made tremendous progress. senator baucus and i worked for months on a bill that sailed through the finance committee on a bipartisan basis. the two relevant house committees passed bipartisan legislation, repealing the s.g.r. as well. then in a turn of events as all too rare these days, the chairman and ranking members of the senate finance committee, the house ways and means committee and the house energy and commerce committee worked tirelessly to come up with one unified policy that the house and senate democrats and republicans could support. believe it or not, we succeeded and we succeeded by involving all stakeholders, including the influential american medical association in a fair and equitable manner that as a

resulted in a near unanimous support across the health care community. for the first time since its exact in 1997, the house and senate unite behind a policy that gets rid of this flawed medicare reimbursement system. so, madam president, if we have moved this far, what is the problem? why am i disappointed? i'm going to tell you. last night, i was informed that the majority leader is bringing straight to the floor of this body the very policy that we successfully negotiated, tacking on what are known as the health care extenders that the finance committee passed, but which were not included in what the house and senate agreed upon with the s.g.r. but -- and here's the problem -- the democrats have no plans whatsoever to pay for it. so if senate democrats want to pass a bill that has roughly

$177 billion price tag without even trying to offset any of the costs. and sadly, these same democrats don't seem to care that they have quickly turned what was a true bipartisan accomplishment into another partisan political ploy. to me, this is deeply disappointing. madam president, i'm very sympathetic to those who say that since congress has never let the s.g.r. go into effect, we should not have to pay for it. but let's be honest. there's no way right now a bill that would add close to $200 billion to the deficit is ever going to pass the house, and i don't blame the house. this is reality, madam president. democrats in the senate have blasted the house s.g.r. repeal bill that is paid for by repealing obamacare's individual

mandate. the senate majority leader has said that what the house is doing has -- quote -- no credibility -- unquote -- and that house republicans -- quote -- have got to find something else -- unquote -- to pay for it. but can't the very same thing be said of what the senate democrats are doing, that their plan has -- quote -- no credibility -- unquote -- and that they have to find a way of paying for this if they're going to do it? i think we all know the answer to that. madam president, i just don't understand how we've gotten here. i don't understand why -- why there are these unfortunate attempts to poison a bipartisan product with needless partisanship. we all want to repeal the s.g.r., so let's dispense with the games and get back to figuring out a real path forward, and that involves an offset. what's even more astonishing is that senate democrats are proceeding in this manner on the very week that some of my

colleagues are trying to make the senate work. senators burr and mikulski have put forward a bill that the senate is set to consider to reform the childcare development block grant program. that's an important bill. certainly to me because i was one of the few who rammed that through way back when. i took a lot of flak in the process but it has worked amazingly well. now, since senators burr and mikulski have put forward this bill after a lot of work by senator alexander and senator schumer to get the senate working again to allow amendments and debate, i have to say i commend them. i think that senator burr and mikulski deserve great applause and commendation, as do senator alexander and senator schumer. that's what i don't understand, madam president. everybody here knows i have a

record of working across the aisle, sometimes to the chagrin of members of my own party, and certainly sometimes to the irritation of some of our very far right people in utah. why turn this bipartisan proposal into a partisan exercise when so many senators want to work together to fix the problems the american people face each and every day? let me be clear. i support what house republicans have proposed. it is a reasonable approach to paying for a full repeal of the doc-fix. almost every week, the white house delays or repeals another part of obamacare, so it's time for the american people to get a reprieve as well. it's the right thing to do. but i'm interested in a result. i want to fix the s.g.r. system once and for all. i hope that after this pointless exercise designed for political cover that we can come together to do what's right. let's go back to our winning

formula and get our bipartisan, bicameral negotiations under way to find a responsible path forward. look, i like both of our leaders. they're strong people. they have differing philosophies . there is much to commend both of them. and i suppose some would say much to criticize in each case. there's no reason for this type of ramming something through that has no chance of passing the house. frankly, it doesn't have much chance of having any republican support at this point because we believe that this kind of a program has to be offset to literally be valid and to be viable. i think everybody here knows that. we have got to find an offset to do it. if we can't find an offset, we have to keep the s.g.r. alive

until we do, but to make it into a partisan game at this point after all the bipartisan work that has been done is really a tragedy. i hope they realize this. i told them lay back, we'll get this done for you. they didn't. it went right to the partisans in this body and undermined everything we were trying to do during this time which would have gone a long way toward sosmg some of these problems. we were on the verge of getting them solved. i hope that doesn't work this time because a lot of us have worked our guts out to get to this point on both sides of the floor, and it would be an absolute tragedy if we can't get the cooperation to get this through. the democrats, if they don't like the offset that the house

has come up with, although it seems to make sense to me, then they control this body and let's come up with an offset that -- that both sides can agree to. but we have got to have an offset and we have got to do this the right way or we're right back at base one after all the work that's been put in florida bipartisan way to get this done. madam president, i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call:

quorum call: