[
    {
        "claim_id": 0,
        "claim": "Every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee blocked Steve Scalise's amendment to require New York to turn over all the data on nursing home deaths or have a temporary decrease of the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "Committee blocked an amendment to the Energy and Water",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee block Steve Scalise's amendment related to nursing home deaths?",
                "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRECB-2009-pt14/html/CRECB-2009-pt14-issue-2009-07-21.htm",
                "scraped_text": "[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 14] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois. The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer: God of grace and glory, in the darkness of our limited knowledge, we Today, send our lawmakers forth with Your light to do the right as You give them the ability to see it. Lord, help them to keep their minds on You so that Your peace will provide the foundation for their confidence. In their dealings with each other, keep them from unkind words and unkind silences. Kindle on the altar of their hearts a devotion to freedom's cause in all the world, as You bring their thoughts and actions into conformity to Your will. Lord, lift their hearts in gratitude to You for our heritage in this land of rich The Honorable Roland W. Burris led the Pledge of Allegiance, as I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd). Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois, to Mr. BURRIS thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized. Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, if any, the Senate will resume consideration of the Defense authorization bill. There will be 2 hours of debate prior to a vote on the Levin-McCain amendment regarding F-22 funding. Senators should expect the first vote to begin shortly after 12 today. The Senate will recess from 12:30 to 2:15 for our weekly caucus luncheons. After that time, the bill will be open for further amendment. I hope Members who have amendments they wish to The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1390, which the clerk will A bill (S. 1390) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other Thune amendment No. 1618, to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1469. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so The Senator from Michigan [Mr. Levin], for himself and Mr. (Purpose: To strike $1,750,000,000 in Procurement, Air Force funding for F-22A aircraft procurement, and to restore operation and maintenance, military personnel, and other funding in divisions A and B that was reduced in order to authorize such appropriation) At the end of subtitle A of title I, add the following: SEC. 106. ELIMINATION OF F-22A AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT FUNDING. (a) Elimination of Funding.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 103(1) for procurement for the Air Force for aircraft procurement is hereby decreased by $1,750,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for F-22A aircraft procurement. (1) Operation and maintenance, army.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army is hereby increased by $350,000,000. (2) Operation and maintenance, navy.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy is hereby increased by $100,000,000. (3) Operation and maintenance, air force.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby increased by (4) Operation and maintenance, defense-wide.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities is hereby (5) Military personnel.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 421(a)(1) for military personnel is (6) Division a and division b generally.--In addition to the amounts specified in paragraphs (1) through (5), the total amount authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense by divisions A and B is hereby increased by The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there is Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this amendment will strike $1.75 billion in additional funding for F-22 aircraft that was in the committee-reported bill. It will also restore serious cuts that were made in readiness and military personnel accounts and across-the-board cuts. These cuts were made in order to shift funds to support F-22 production. It is appropriate that the F-22 issue receive the full consideration by the Senate that it has received. The F-22 debate is among the most important debates we will have on the DOD authorization bill this year. Stating what may be one of the worst kept secrets in Washington today, the Department of Defense budget request called for ending production of several programs, including the F-22 program. I suspect the Department of Defense will seldom shut down any major acquisition program without a fair amount of controversy, and I agree with the Senator from Georgia that Congress should never be a rubberstamp for the executive branch. But neither should we object to terminating production of a weapons system because of parochial reasons. Terminating production, such as closing a base, can involve some economic loss for communities involved. I know that very personally. But we must do so from time to time and make these difficult decisions based on what is best for the Nation and what is best for the men and As President Obama said the other day, in strong support of ending To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do The Senate has heard from the senior leadership of the Defense Department, both civilian and military, that we should end F-22 production. The recommendation is strong and clear, as strong and clear as I have ever heard when it comes to ending the production of a The Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force sent me and Senator McCain a letter on this matter. This letter is already part of the Record. It reads, in part, as follows: This review concluded with . . . a balanced set of recommendations for our fighter forces: 1) focus procurement on modern 5th generation aircraft rather than less capable F- 15s and F-16s; 2) given that the F-35 will constitute the majority of the future fighter force, transition as quickly as is prudent to F-35 production; 3) complete F-22 procurement at 187 aircraft, while continuing plans for future F-22 upgrades; and 4) accelerate the retirements of the old 4th generation aircraft and modify the remaining In summary, we assessed the F-22 decision from all angles, taking into account competing strategic priorities and complementary programs and alternatives, all balanced within the context of available resources. We did not and do not recommend F-22s be included in the FY10 defense budget. This comfortable. Most importantly, in this and other budget decisions, we believe it is important for Air Force leaders to make clear choices, balancing requirements across a range The Senate has also heard from the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In their letter to me and Senator McCain on July 13, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen wrote the There is no doubt that the F-22 is an important capability for our Nation's defense. To meet future scenarios, however, the Department of Defense has determined that 187 aircraft are sufficient, especially considering the future roles of Unmanned Aerial Systems and the significant number of 5th generation stealth F-35s coming on-line in our combat air It is important to note that the F-35 is a half generation newer aircraft than the F-22, and more capable in a number of areas such as electronic warfare and combating enemy air defenses. To sustain U.S. overall air dominance, the Department's plan is to buy roughly 500 F-35s over the next five years and more than 2,400 over the life of the program. Furthermore, under this plan, the U.S. by 2020 is projected to have some 2,500 manned fighter aircraft, almost 1,000 of them will be 5th generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is expected to have only slightly more than half as many manned fighter aircraft by 2020, none of them 5th The F-22 program proposed in the President's budget reflects the judgment of two different Presidents, two different Secretaries of Defense, three chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the current secretary and chief of staff of the Air Force. If the Air Force is forced to buy additional F-22s beyond what has been requested, it will come at the expense of other Air Force and Department of Defense priorities--and require deferring capabilities in areas we believe are much more critical for our Nation's defense. For all these reasons, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of [W]e strongly believe that the time has come to close the F-22 production line. If the Congress sends legislation to the President that requires the acquisition of additional F- 22 aircraft beyond Fiscal Year 2009, the Secretary of Defense You do not get much stronger statements than that from a Secretary of The Secretary of Defense, just last Thursday, expanded on those thoughts at the Economic Club in Chicago, when he said the following: . . . supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were The Senate has also heard, of course, from President Obama, as In December 2004, the Department of Defense determined that 183 F-22s would be sufficient to meet its military needs. This determination was not made casually. The Department conducted several analyses which support this position based on the length and type of wars that the Department thinks it might have to fight in the future, and an estimate of the future capabilities of likely adversaries. To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops So the President, based on his uniformed and civilian advisers' recommendations, has now said he will veto this bill if we keep the additional $1.75 billion in the bill to buy the additional seven F-22s those military leaders--uniformed and civilian--strongly say we do not I know my friend from Georgia has quoted some private sector individuals and one senior military official in particular, GEN John Corley, the Commander of the Air Force's Air Combat Command. I do not take lightly the recommendations and advice of someone with a distinguished career such as General Corley. However, General Corley's assessment of a high military risk if we end the buy of F-22s at 187 is not shared by the most senior leadership of the Department that is responsible for viewing the F-22 program, and all other Department of Defense programs, from a broader perspective. These same leaders from the previous administration--the previous Secretary of Defense, the previous Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-- recommended termination to President Bush, and President Bush also General Cartwright said at his confirmation hearing--or reconfirmation hearing--2 weeks ago the following: . . . I was probably one of the more vocal and ardent supporters for the termination of the F-22 production. The reason's twofold. First . . . there is a study in the Joint that we just completed and partnered with the Air Force on that, number one, said that proliferating within the United States military fifth-generation fighters to all three services was going to be more significant than having them based solidly in just one service, because of the way we deploy and because of the diversity of our deployments. Point number two is, in the production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the first aircraft variant will support the Air Force replacement of their F-16s and F-15s. It is a very It is 10 years newer in advancement in avionics and capabilities in comparison to the F-22. It is a better, more Well, that F-35 is in production now. In fact, there are 30 being paid for and bought and produced in the very budget for the Department President Eisenhower noted, from time to time, the military industrial complex will push for more and more, more than is needed. In this case, however--in this case--the senior military leadership is not Finally, to quote again from Secretary Gates's speech last week--this The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. So, Mr. President, the time has come to end F-22 production at 187 F- 22As. That is all we need to buy, that is all we can afford to buy, and Mr. President, I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of our The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I am going to proceed on my leader The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, Americans are eager for health care reforms that lower costs and increase access. This is why many of us are proposing reforms that should be easy for everyone to agree on, such as reforming our medical liability laws, strengthening wellness and prevention programs that would encourage people to make healthy choices, such as quitting smoking and losing weight and addressing the needs of small businesses without imposing new taxes that kill jobs. The administration is taking a different approach to health care reform, and the more Americans learn about it, the more concerned they become. So it is good the President plans to spend a lot of his time in the days ahead discussing the administration's plan for reform because people need to know what the administration's plan is. Specifically, Americans have concerns about losing the care they have and spending trillions of dollars for a so-called reform that could leave them with worse care than they have now, especially if it is paid One prospect Americans are extremely concerned about is that they will be forced off of their current plans as part of a government takeover of health care. Despite repeated assurances from the administration to the contrary, the independent Congressional Budget Office says that just one section of one of the Democratic proposals we have seen would force 10 million people off their current health plans. Americans do not want a government takeover, and they certainly do not want the government to spend trillions of their tax dollars to pay for it, especially if the care they end up with is worse than the care they already receive, and especially if the money that is spent on these so-called reforms only adds to the national debt. The President has repeatedly promised that his reform would not add to the debt. Yet both the House and Senate reform bills we have seen would do just that. This is why even Democrats have started to One reason Democrats are having second thoughts is because the Director of the Congressional Budget Office has sounded the alarm over the administration's claims that its reforms would cut long-term overall health care costs. On the contrary, he said the administration's reforms would actually lead to an increase in overall costs. Concerns like these about costs and debt have been building Another growing concern even among Democrats is the impact these higher costs would have on States in the form of higher Medicaid costs. At a time of tight budgets, this is something that Governors from both For example, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has said, and I am I'm personally very concerned about the cost issue, particularly the $1 trillion figures being batted around. Expanding Medicaid might look like an easy way to expand access, but it will actually mean massive spending increases for both Federal and State taxpayers. This could be a devastating blow to States such as Kentucky and many others which are already struggling to pay the The administration's efforts to pay for its plans are not the least bit reassuring. The two main groups they are targeting are the last two that should be expected to pay for it: seniors, through Medicare cuts, To me, it is just common sense that in the middle of a recession the last thing--the last thing--we should be doing is raising taxes on small businesses. Yet both bills we have seen would do just that. Indeed, under the House bill, taxes on some small businesses would rise as high as roughly 45 percent. This means in order to pay for health care reform, Democrats would increase the tax rate on some small businesses to about 30 percent higher than the rate for big corporations. Taxes would go up so much, in fact, under the House proposal that the average combined Federal and State top tax rate for individuals would be about 52 percent--52 percent, Mr. President. Let's consider that figure for a moment. To repeat: In order to pay for a health care proposal that would not even address all the concerns Americans have about access and cost--and which might even increase overall health care costs--Democrats in the House would raise the average top tax rate in the United States to about 52 percent. The chart behind me was created by the Heritage Foundation and appeared last week in the Wall Street Journal. It shows that the House bill would raise the top U.S. rate above even France. Of the 30 countries the OECD measures, only Belgium, Sweden, and Denmark have higher rates, and five U.S. States would have tax rates even higher The United States is in the middle of a recession. We have lost more than 2.5 million jobs since this January. Families are losing homes. The last thing they need is a government takeover that kills even more jobs, adds to the ballooning national debt, increases Americans' long- term health care costs, and leaves Americans paying more for worse care than they now receive. The proposals we have seen are not just incomplete, they are indefensible, particularly at a time of spiraling Maybe this is why the administration has started to insist on an artificial deadline for getting its reform proposals through. We certainly do not need to rush and spend $1 trillion to enact this flawed proposal by the August recess. The American people and members of both parties in Congress are calling on us to slow down and take the Health care reform is too important to rush through and get it wrong. We saw what happened when some rushed and spent $1 trillion on an artificial deadline with the stimulus. The American people do not want the same mistake to be made. Instead of setting a 3-week deadline on legislation that would end up affecting one-sixth of our economy, the administration should focus on meeting existing deadlines. The Mid-Session Review of the administration's earlier predictions about unemployment, economic growth, government spending, and the outlook for the Federal deficit has traditionally been released in mid- July. Yet now we are hearing the administration may not release its midsession review until August, after Congress has adjourned and after the administration's artificial deadline for a Senate bill on health The administration is also struggling to meet its decision to close Guantanamo by January 2010. The administration's task force on detainee policy has said it will miss its deadline for making recommendations. It seems premature to announce a closing date for Guantanamo without knowing where these detainees may be sent. The most recent delay is even more reason for the administration to show flexibility and reconsider its artificial deadline for closing Guantanamo. Americans want Republicans and Democrats to enact real health care reform that reduces costs and makes health care more accessible. They don't want a government takeover of the health care system that costs trillions of dollars, is paid for by seniors and job-killing taxes on small businesses and that leaves them paying more for worse care than they currently have. Before the administration rushes to spend another trillion dollars, it needs to slow down and focus on fixing our economy and addressing the issues it is already falling behind on. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Georgia. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the Levin- McCain amendment on the F-22. I was listening with interest to the chairman speak a little bit earlier when he raised several points that I am going to address specifically as I get into the guts of the argument. I think it is kind of interesting when he gives a list of those individuals in the Pentagon and in the White House who are now in opposition to continued production of the F-22. Interestingly enough, everybody he talked about--from the President to the Secretary of Defense, to the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs--every single one of those individuals is political. They are appointed. They are appointed by the I am going to talk about some individuals who are in support of the F-22 who are not appointed. No. 1, they are the men and women who fly the F-22. Secondly, it is men who have had the courage to wear the uniform of the United States of America in an unparalleled way that I have seen since I have been here, who have been willing to stand up to that political leadership and say: You guys are wrong. They have been willing to stand and say that if you cut off production of the F-22 at 187, you are going to put this country at a high risk from a national As we go through the debate, it is going to be interesting to contrast the statements and the letters that every Member has received a flurry of over the last several days. I have never seen the White House lobby such as they have lobbied on this issue. For a White House that was not supposed to be a lobbying White House or in support of lobbyists, it has been unparalleled in my now going on 15 years as a Senator Levin spoke earlier about the F-35: We are going to ramp up production. We are going to buy 30 airplanes, 30, in this budget. Well, guess what we are paying for those airplanes. We are paying $200 million a copy. Guess what we are buying an F-22 for today--an airplane that has been through the test phase; an airplane that has proved itself. We are under a multiyear contract that calls for payment by the Air Force to the contractor of $140 million a copy. There is going to be a lot of conversation on this floor about the cost of the F-22, and it is expensive: $140 million a copy is very expensive. But to come in here with a straight face and say we are going to save taxpayers' money by moving to the F-35 and then turn around and say we are going to pay $200 million a copy in this bill for F-35s, something about that Well, let me just say we are in a debate with the Pentagon with respect to budgetary issues submitted by the Pentagon to Congress. There are a lot of people who think we ought to step in line, salute the Pentagon and move ahead and do exactly what the Pentagon says with respect to the purchase of weapons systems. Well, that is not the way the Framers of the Constitution intended the Senate and the House to work. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution provides Congress with the power to levy and collect taxes, provide for the common defense of the United States, to raise and support armies and to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Clearly, we in Congress have a role in overseeing the Department of Defense, reviewing budgets, and questioning budget and policy recommendations. Our interest and involvement in these issues are appropriate and not just based on parochial issues. We are charged with the responsibility of reviewing DOD policies, whether fiscal policies I think it is important to note that on several occasions in recent years, Congress has authorized policy or funding initiatives that DOD has strongly opposed and, in retrospect, Congress was right and DOD was wrong. Perhaps the most similar example to the F-22 is the battle over the F-117 that occurred many years ago when the Air Force wanted to stop buying F-117s. Thank goodness my predecessor, Senator Sam Nunn, who was then chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, forced the Air Force to buy more F-117s. Ironically, part of the Air Force's argument was that they wanted to shift funding and focus to buying more F-22s. The F-117 was critical to establishing air dominance over Iraq in Desert Storm, and we can thank Congress for recognizing the need for There are several other examples, such as the Goldwater-Nichols Reorganization Act of 1986 and the establishment of Special Operations Command in 1987, both of which were strongly opposed by the Pentagon. Other examples are continuation of the V-22 program and prohibition against retiring U-2s and B-52s, all of which are paying dividends beyond what the military expected, including in Iraq and Afghanistan I wish to address a comment Senator Levin and others have made regarding previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supporting only 183--or 187 now, with the addition of four F-22s we are buying in the supplemental. First, that number of 183 originally was established not on the basis of any study or analysis--never a study that came out and said we need 183 and we are going to be basing our decision on that--but it was based on PBD 753, which is inside Washington baseball, which was an OSD budget drill 2 days before Christmas in 2004, in which the Air Force had absolutely no input. Neither the Chief of Staff nor the Secretary was involved. A number of ``183'' or ``187'' has always been budget driven and not strategically There have been at least 10 studies done on F-22 numbers over the past 10 years. Of those, only one, the Joint Air Dominance Study done by DOD in 2005, recommended 183 F-22s. However, that study was based on only needing F-22s in a single-threat scenario and which also used a Senator Levin mentioned the comments General Cartwright made in the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing 2 weeks ago. And he relies heavily on the statement General Cartwright made. General Cartwright question to General Cartwright was: General, you say you support terminating the F-22 program at 187. Has there been any one single study, in the Air Force or outside the Air Force, any analysis done that recommends we terminate the program at 187? General Cartwright's statement to me was: Yes; there is a study going on in the Air Force right now that says we should terminate the program at 187. Well, unfortunately for General Cartwright, we now know no study was done. It is our understanding that the comment of General Cartwright is being corrected for the record and that we are receiving a corrected I wish to quote from a statement by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell that was made last Tuesday with respect to the comments of General Cartwright. This comment is quoted in the Daily Report. It now turns out that a recent study touted by Pentagon leadership as the justification for terminating the F-22 fighter isn't a study at all but a series of briefings by DOD's program analysis and evaluation shop in the Air Force. That word comes from the Pentagon's top spokesman, Geoff Morrell, who told the Daily Report late Tuesday that the study, or whatever it is, is: Not so much a study as work products. Asked to describe the nature and timing of this study, Morrell told What I think General Cartwright was referring to . . . is Since PDB 753, only 183 F-22s have been programmed in the budget, with fiscal year 2009 being the last year of funding. To say previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supported this is misleading since, until the fiscal year 2010 budget bill process, a decision on whether to buy more F-22s would be deferred to future decisionmakers. It is perhaps with this in mind that Secretary Gates himself decided last year to request additional F-22s in the fiscal year 2009 supplemental, and he did, in order to keep the line open and preserve the next administration's option for procurement of the F-22. I know the former President, President Bush, did not want to see the program terminated. They can say what they want to on the other side, but having had personal conversations, I know what his feeling was about this great aircraft. He could have terminated the program, but he did not terminate the program. It is this administration that is There have been five previous Secretaries of the Air Force, six previous Chiefs of Staff of the Air Force, seven previous Secretaries of Defense before this one, and eight previous commanders of Air Combat Command who have said we need more F-22s. We have supported this program from day one. We have continued to reduce the number from the original 781, now down to 187. The current Chief of Staff of the Air Force, whose letters have been quoted and inserted in the Record where he says we should cap it at 187, has testified time and time and time again in recent days and in recent weeks and who has written me letters stating that the military requirement for F-22s is not 187, it is 243, but he says we can't afford it. Therefore, he has to salute his boss. His boss is a political appointee--Secretary Gates--and the political appointee says we are going to cap it at 187; therefore, that is the direction in which we are going to go and the direction in which you I am going to close my comments at this time and turn to my colleague from Connecticut. Before I do so, I will quote somebody who is not political, somebody who is not an appointee, somebody who is a former Chief of Staff of the Air Force. That is GEN Merrill McPeak, who, last week, in an unsolicited statement, came out and said, when he talked about terminating the F-22 production rate at 187: I think it's a real mistake. . . . The airplane is a game- changer and people seem to forget that we haven't had any of our soldiers or Marines killed by enemy air since 1951. . . . It's been half a century or more since any enemy aircraft has The F-22 is at the top end. We have to procure enough of them for our ability to put a lid on, to dictate the ceiling of any conflict. We certainly need some figure well above 200. That worries me because I think it is pennywise and pound foolish to expose us in a way this much smaller number General McPeak is a supporter of this administration and, as far as we can tell, he is not a consultant for any major defense contractor. For this reason, I think his comments deserve significant attention and I will stop at this point, but I will say more later. I now turn to my colleague, Senator Dodd, who I will say has been a great champion on this issue, a great partner in support of not just the men and women of the Air Force and our other branches that depend on this weapon system to protect America and our soldiers in the field but also a great The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, how much time remains for those of us in The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is 44\\1/2\\ minutes remaining. Mr. DODD. I ask to be recognized for 10 minutes, and if I need a The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I commend Senator Chambliss for his eloquent and persuasive argument about why this amendment is a dangerous one, and I say that respectfully. I have great admiration for Carl Levin and John McCain, but there are serious problems with this approach, from a national security standpoint as well as a manufacturing and industrial To put this into context for our colleagues, we are being asked to authorize $1.75 billion, or two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget before us of $680 billion. We are told there are at least 25,000 direct jobs and 95,000 direct and indirect jobs at stake for that $1.75 billion--again, two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget--which Senator Chambliss has offset, by the way. It is not an expenditure that is not We are going to put those jobs at risk--not because this industry is in trouble, unlike the automobile industry, which we bailed out to the tune of $63 billion, by the way--understanding the reason many of us supported that was to maintain an industrial manufacturing base. In this case, we lead the world in aerospace. Nobody comes even close to the ability of the United States to produce the most sophisticated aircraft in the world. Yet with an industry doing relatively well-- although commercial orders are way down, which is causing serious problems but that is as a result of the economic conditions. We are unwilling to come up with $1.75 billion or two-tenths of 1 percent to put those many jobs at risk, not to mention retreating on our air One of the critical components of national security is maintaining superiority both at sea and in the air. The F-22, by any estimation, is the most superior aircraft in the world. It is not even close in terms of competitors. Yet with the numbers we have and that we are relying on, we leave ourselves way short of the earlier projected numbers. As Senator Chambliss pointed out, the testimony over the years of those who advocated this program has been significant. In fact, in the letter most recently received from General Corley, head of the Air Combat Command Office, headquartered at Langley, VA, June 9, it points out how serious this would be in terms of exposing our Nation to national security risks. The head of the Air National Guard Bureau, Lieutenant General Wyatt, makes the same claim. Chief of Staff Schwartz, before he changed his mind a week earlier, advocated the F-22 From both a manufacturing perspective and job loss, at a time when body is about to lay off anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 people--at a time when unemployment rates are going up, because we decided that $1.75 billion is too expensive at this juncture, even though we have offset it, and we have put that many jobs at risk, not because the industry is failing or because it is a bad aircraft but because the Secretary of Defense and the administration have decided this program So explain to those 90,000 people--somewhere in that range--once they lose their jobs and get laid off, and they will--why it was we decided today, because of two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget, to move in a different direction. Put aside, if you will, the $63 billion we spent I raised these concerns expressed by our military commanders--again, most notably, GEN John Corley of the Air Combat Command, LTG Harry Wyatt of the Air National Guard--I have mentioned them. In my State, there are 2,000 to 3,000 jobs at risk, and 1,000 of the jobs are down because commercial orders are down. So it is really 2,000 to 4,000 No matter how much I care about the people in my State, I could not oppose this exclusively on that basis. You ought to look nationwide. It is not just my State; it is all across the country. I raised concerns about what this amendment would do to our global competitiveness and discussed the potential harm to our economy posed by terminating the world's most advanced fighter jet. I raised concerns over the industry's ability to build the less sophisticated F-35--which has only one engine not two, and the word ``stealthy'' applied to the F-35 is a myth; it is not as stealthy, even remotely, as the F-22--that the United States and its allies are Mr. President, before I revisit these critically important arguments, let's be clear on the context in which we are having this debate. The proponents of this amendment suggest they are saving taxpayers valuable resources in terminating the F-22. They claim such cost savings are well worth the risk Generals Corley and Wyatt have warned us about. But out of a total of $680 billion in the Defense authorization bill, this amendment is valued at $1.75 billion. That is two-tenths of 1 percent of the total authorization. Since the planes are fully offset, Instead, this amendment will come at enormous cost to our security and our economy. We are in the midst of a national manufacturing crisis. Everybody has talked about it. It is why we voted for so much support for the automobile industry only a few weeks ago right here in According to the Federal Reserve's July 15, 2009, Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization Report, manufacturing production has declined 15.5 percent nationwide, between June 2008 and June 2009. I will repeat that: There has been an over 15 percent decline in our manufacturing sector. This quarter's manufacturing production is the lowest in 27 years, which was the previous low point in production since 1967, when the Fed started to keep track of the data. We in Congress tried to respond to this crisis. We passed the Emergency Economy Stabilization Act, designed to relieve credit markets We passed the $787 billion American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to stimulate the economy and boost demand in various sectors and put We have provided $63 billion to Chrysler and General Motors to keep their production lines running--companies that were brought to their knees, in part, due to dismal business planning and severe Additionally, the government has acquired unprecedented equity stakes in these companies--8 percent in Chrysler and a whopping 60 percent in I have not opposed these efforts. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I worked with my colleagues who represent those States to provide Federal assistance through the legislative process. But we took this step because we were responding to a national manufacturing crisis. We did it because we are responding to the dire and credible warnings about the potential impact of the auto industry's collapse-- particularly in Midwestern States, which greatly depend on the auto I will discuss briefly another critically important manufacturing base and its economic impact: the aerospace industry. While my home State of Connecticut ranks 29th in total population, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it ranks sixth in total In 2008, according to the Connecticut Department of Labor, aerospace employed over 36,000 residents of my State. So any discussion of terminating the fighter jet production has an outsize effect on the I would not be arguing this case for the F-22 if it were strictly a parochial matter. We don't have a right to ask 99 other people exclusively because of something happening in our own States. The truth is, halting this production will have consequences for our industry's ability to continue to build aircraft for our military. I will lay out The expertise of these people cannot be duplicated overnight. These trained engineers, scientists, manufacturers, and machinists are highly skilled and trained. I am concerned their skill sets and experience are being taken for granted, without consideration for the peculiarities of jet engine construction. That doesn't just hurt the workers and their According to the Defense Contract Management Agency, there is a 20- to 24-month lag between payment for and production of jet engines. So the number of planes ordered in any 1 given year doesn't correspond Under Secretary of Defense Gates's plan in calendar year 2010, Pratt & Whitney is expected to make 48 F-22 engines and 19 F-35 engines, for a total of 67 fighter jet engines. The following year, the number will drop precipitously to a total of 43 engines, since the F-35 is not scheduled to begin what is called ``full-rate production'' until 2014. Thus, in calendar year 2011, Pratt & Whitney will be producing 11 F- 22 engines and 32 F-35 engines, for a total of 43 fighter engines. In 2012, since there will be no F-22 production, there will only be 41 F- The problem is even more acute when you compare overall military engines being built in 2010 versus 2011 and 2012. Under current plans, Pratt & Whitney is expected to go from building 194 military engines to 130 in 2011. That is an average drop of 33 percent in work volume. What will happen? It is the same thing occurring in manufacturing States all across the country: layoffs. Thousands and thousands of people--not just in my State but across the country. In the absence of military aircraft work orders for 3 years, companies will be forced to tell the legions of highly skilled engineers, technicians, and machinists--workers such as the Pratt & Whitney mechanics I introduced and mentioned last week--that they are not needed now. They need to retrain. They need to find another Then, 3 years later, after these workers have settled in a new job, or have retired, the Department of Defense and our allies will try to ramp up production of the F-35. But they will not be able to. They will be left scratching their heads, wondering: Why can't industry meet our production needs right now? No doubt, we will ask the same question on To assume that the thousands of workers across the Nation who work on the F-22 will stand idly by until 2014 when we begin to build the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is naive at best. This argument I make is not new at all. The Defense Department recognized this point in the 2006 Review, published by the military to identify the needs and strategy of The report stated that F-22 production should be extended ``through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in fifth generation stealth At the same time, the F-35 was scheduled to begin construction in 2010. Since then, of course, it has been pushed back 4 years to 2014. There are some rumors that this date may be pushed back even further. This means the military identified only 3 years ago--36 months ago-- the most recent published report of this type, that our Nation would suffer a loss in aerospace manufacturing capability if fighter Their response was to ensure that we keep building F-22s until the F- 35 reached full-rate production. Yet when the F-35 production schedule was pushed back 4 years, we did not extend the F-22 production to stabilize our industrial base. That is why you have the job losses I Now we find ourselves in the very situation the Department of Defense was trying to avoid 36 months ago, as we face looming job losses across our Nation, commercial orders down--losing these people on that basis and now because of the vote we may take on this issue--and thus a degradation of our ability to meet the aerospace production capability our national security requires. So I believe it is our duty and responsibility to protect these workers from losing their employment and make sure our country retains a viable and competitive capacity in Let me also point out--and I did the other day on a national security basis--that, again, superiority is critical. Right now, there are some 40 nations that have the SU-27, which is a sophisticated aircraft, and the MiG-29, which competes with the F-15 and the F-16. Forty nations have that capability. I had a larger chart earlier--I don't have it with me today--but there are little red and yellow dots all over this map that indicate advanced surface-to-air missile capability where there have been orders made or they have already been acquired. Our F- 15s and F-16s are vulnerable to those surface-to-air missiles. All over The F-22 literally could avoid the kind of detection these surface- to-air missiles provide. So we now have a capacity to be able to respond. Now we may not--and as long as we are dealing with Afghanistan and Iraq, that is one issue. But, frankly, we have to prepare for situations that could get a lot more dangerous for our Nation. The Chinese and the Russians are aggressively pursuing a fifth generation aircraft to compete with the F-22. And to say that the F-22 and the F- 35 are virtually alike I think is a mistake. That is not the case at From a national security standpoint as well, there was a reason why General Corley and General Wyatt and others have made a case on these aircraft. There is a reason why we invested some $65 billion to develop this aircraft. There is a reason why the quadrennial report 36 months ago warned about these gaps and what it would do to our industrial base I hope our colleagues, in the midst of all of this, would understand what is at stake. Again, here we are, on an economic basis, where many jobs could be lost in our country with critical technology that hangs in the balance. It would be one thing if we were arguing here this plane was no longer needed, it was not going to do the job we thought it would do, it wasn't as sophisticated as we hoped it would be. Then you might decide dropping this, giving up some jobs, may make some sense. But to give up an aircraft of this sophistication and this capability, and simultaneously, in an economic situation such as we are in, to lose as we are predicting somewhere between 25,000 and 90,000 jobs with this decision, for $1.75 billion in this budget--two-tenths of 1 percent out of a $680 billion authorization bill, I think is I hope my colleagues would listen to these arguments, would debate and understand there is an ability, to reach a compromise where we can go forward with production, reduce some of the cost that the proponents argue for in this amendment, and then move toward together. But to make the decision that we may make in the next hour and a half or so would I appreciate my colleague Senator Chambliss giving me the opportunity to respond on this issue, and I thank him for his work as well in making the case to our colleagues, Democrats and Republicans. This ought not to be an issue that divides along those lines at all. We need to understand what is at stake for our Nation, both in terms of our manufacturing base as well as the national security needs that have Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the two letters, one from General Corley and one from General Wyatt. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to comment on the critical issue of F-22 fleet size. At Air Combat Command we have held the need for 381 F- 22s to deliver a tailored package of air superiority to our Combatant Commanders and provide a potent, globally arrayed, asymmetric deterrent against potential adversaries. In my opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near to mid- To my knowledge, there are no studies that demonstrate 187 F-22s are adequate to support our national military strategy. Headquarters Air Force, shows a moderate risk force can be obtained with an F-22 fleet of approximately 250 aircraft. While OSD did not solicit direct input from Air Combat Command, we worked closely with our Headquarters in ensuring our views were available. We realize the tough choices our national leadership must make in balancing current warfighting needs against the fiscal realities our Nation The F-22, a critical enabler of air dominance, plays a vital role and indispensable role in ensuring joint freedom of action for all forces and underpins our ability to dissuade and deter. Thank you for your continued support of Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your inquiry and the opportunity for me to discuss what I believe to be a serious threat to the Air National Guard's ability to fulfill our Nation's highest strategic priority; defending the Homeland. The ANG has proudly performed the bulk of this mission, while simultaneously participating in overseas contingency operations, with aircraft that are rapidly nearing the end of their service life. While I believe our Nation has the capacity to recapitalize the ANG, I am not aware of any plan that commits to doing so. As such, we are in need of an immediate solution in order to ensure that America's most cost effective force can continue to perform its most While a variety of solutions abound, I believe the nature of the current and future asymmetric threats to our Nation, particularly from seaborne cruise missiles, requires a fighter platform with the requisite speed and detection to address them. The F-22's unique capability in this arena enables it to handle a full spectrum of threats that the ANG's current legacy systems are not capable of addressing. I am fond of saying that ``America's most important job should Indeed, I am keenly aware of the severe strain that our current economic situation has placed on the Department of Defense as it attempts to modernize for an ever evolving threat environment. Given this reality, finding more efficient ways to protect our Nation's interests at home and abroad is the new imperative. Many say this will mean making tough choices, but I believe we can maintain our vitality by making smart choices; leveraging the cost effective and dual use nature of the ANG is the answer. Basing F-22s (and eventually F-35s) at strategic ANG locations throughout the United States while simultaneously making them available to contingency operations is the most responsible approach to Again, thank you for your inquiry and your continued The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield myself 1 minute to give the figures relative to the F-35 production, which are the Pentagon figures. I am not sure where my good friend from Connecticut got his figures on future F-35 production. But the figures from the Pentagon are that there are 30 in this year's budget; in next year's budget, fiscal year 2011, they plan 70 F-35s; in fiscal year 2012, 109 F-35s; in fiscal year 2013, 119 F-35s. Those are far different than the numbers which my friend from Connecticut just gave. I am not sure the source of his numbers. Perhaps he can give us those At this point, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Delaware. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. DODD. I wanted to state where the numbers came from. They are from the Defense Contracting Management Agency. That is where the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware is recognized. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, today, I would like to speak in strong support of the Levin-McCain amendment which strips $1.75 billion in spending for additional F-22s. These are fighter jets the military does not want and does not need. This is a Cold War system, in a post-9/11 world, that is underperforming and overpriced. To force this purchase, against the best judgment of our military leadership and Commander in Chief, weakens our ability to keep our Nation safe. The White House and Pentagon agree that continuing the F-22 production line decreases our military readiness by wasting resources that could be much more usefully employed. And it is not a partisan issue. Presidents Obama and Bush; Defense Secretaries Gates and Rumsfeld; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, and his two predecessors; and the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force all agree that the F-22 is not the most efficient or effective warplane to meet our current and future defense needs. The F-22 has not flown one mission over Afghanistan or Iraq, because it is not the best weapon to meet the challenges we are currently This system was designed to counter Soviet fighters at the end of the Cold War. And its continued purchase deprives the military of $1.75 billion it requested for other critical priorities, such as building the capability to protect our troops and defeat insurgencies. With ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we cannot afford to disregard the views of our military. And in these tough economic times, we cannot afford to adopt an irresponsible approach to defense spending. These facts speak for themselves, and the stakes are simply The F-22 prepares us for the wars of the past; the wars we have already won. Today, we must look forward and make tough decisions for the future. We must heed the advice of our military leaders, such as Secretary Gates, to rebalance our defense budget and enhance our capabilities to succeed against current and future threats. This includes preparing for a wide spectrum of conflict and continuing to Madam President, this debate is not just about the future of F-22s. It is about changing the way we do business. It is about accepting this rebalancing and ending unnecessary waste. And it is about matching vital national security interests with commensurate levels of funding. The F-22 is the first test of our willingness to make the tough choices necessary to truly prioritize defense spending. The grim reality is that with regard to the budget, we have entered into a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. Madam President, I want to align myself with the remarks of Secretary Gates, and reiterate to my colleagues that this is a risk none of us Many of my colleagues have spoken of the sacrifice and cost such a decision incurs in terms of jobs. They are right, and I share their concern about jobs; especially in these tough times. I know this makes our decision today hard, and no one wants to do anything that will hinder job creation and growth. But it is with these economic constraints in mind that we must also consider the implications of spending nearly $2 billion on a defense program that our military Building more F-22s does not allow for smart or efficient growth of our workforce. Moreover, the number of jobs lost on the F-22 will likely be matched by increased production of the F-35, which is a newer and more capable warplane. American workers are needed to meet this and other defense priorities, which strengthen our national security. Jobs should follow, as opposed to dictate, our defense needs. For those concerned about cuts, I point out that the budget proposed by the President and Secretary Gates represents an increase, not a decrease, in defense spending. But this is not just an increase for the Rather, it is a budget that recognizes that over the last two decades, the nature of conflict and war has fundamentally changed. It recognizes that we must continue to build the capacity to confront a wide spectrum of challenges--conventional and unconventional; regular and irregular--and better prepare for a future in which we will Today, we must do what is in America's best interest. Today, we must focus on weapons systems that offer the maximum versatility and effectiveness, and prepare the military against the widest range of threats. And today, we must plan for our current and future counterinsurgency needs, as shaped by our experiences in Afghanistan It is in this regard that I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Levin-McCain amendment, and adopt a better approach to Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be charged equally on both sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized. Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I thank the Senator for yielding time As we consider the future of the F-22 program, it is important for us to remember the most fundamental goal we have for our defense industry way we have met that goal for many decades. That goal is to give our men and women in uniform technology and equipment that is far superior to that of our enemy so they can protect themselves and defend our Nation. It has been our mission from the time of the Wright brothers to the days of Rosie the Riveter, to the era of stealthy technology. But maintaining that technology has depended on an important partnership and that is a partnership between the Pentagon, which determines the needs of our war fighters, and industry, which does the research and design and builds the next generation of military equipment that meets those needs. It is a partnership that is vital to our military strength, to our economy, and to the health of our Unfortunately, it is also a partnership that is being weakened by amendments such as the one we are considering today. Instead of treating military procurement such as the partnership that it is, this amendment envisions it as a one-way street. This amendment cancels a vital military program without adequate thought of the men and women we rely on to design and build the equipment our war fighters depend on without any consideration of the fact that if we end the F-22 program, we are cutting a link in technology that we will not be able to repair As many of you know, this is not the first time I have come to the floor to talk about the erosion of our Nation's industrial base. It likely will not be the last. That is because protecting our domestic base is not about just one company or one program or one State or one industry. This is about our Nation's economic stability, it is about our future military capability, and it is about the ability to retain skilled family-wage jobs in communities throughout the country. Just last week, the Aerospace Industries Association issued a major report that finds the Pentagon failed to consider industrial effects when choosing strategies. That report urged the Pentagon to take into account the impact decisions such as the one to stop production of the F-22 make on our manufacturing base. That report also noted that our manufacturing base was not taken into account in past Quadrennial Defense Reviews, and when Secretary Gates unveiled his program cuts in April, he specifically said defense industry jobs were not a factor in As our country faces two difficult but not unrelated challenges-- safeguarding our country in a dangerous world and rebuilding a faltering economy--ignoring the needs of our industrial base should not be an option. Whether it is the scientists who are designing the next generation of military satellites or whether it is the engineers who are improving our radar systems or the machinists assembling our war planes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest strategic assets. What if they, all of a sudden, were not available? What if we made budgetary and policy decisions that did not take into account the need of making sure we have a strong domestic workforce in Actually, that is not impossible or even unthinkable. It is actually happening today. We need to be clear about the ramifications of amendments such as the ones we are considering today because once we give up on producing this technology, once we say that certain research and development is no longer needed, we lose that. We lose it and we Today, as we consider a critical tool for the future of our military across the globe, we have to also remember the partnership we have built with our industrial base because, unless we consider the needs of that partnership, we are not only going to continue to lose some of our best-paying American jobs, we are going to lose the backbone of our Supporting continued F-22 production will help defend against potential threats, it will protect family-wage jobs, and, most importantly, it will preserve our domestic base. That is important because we do not know what conflict will come in the future. We don't know what our challenges will be 10 or 15 or 20 or 30 years from now. If we lose our engineering or our production base and we face a challenge in the future and go back to rebuild that, it will never happen. We will be at a disadvantage in whatever future conflict we I urge our colleagues to think about the long-term interests of this decision. I oppose the amendment and I look forward to further debate. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains on our side? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The proponents have 35\\1/2\\ minutes, the Mr. LEVIN. I yield to the Senator from Arizona as much of that time The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank the chair. I, again, thank my friend, the distinguished chairman, for proposing this amendment. I thank the distinguished chairman for being the sponsor of this amendment. It is a privilege to work with him on this as well as many This amendment is probably the most impactful amendment I have seen in this body on almost any issue, much less the issue of defense. It boils down to whether we are going to continue the business as usual of once a weapons system gets into full production it never dies or whether we are going to take the necessary steps to reform the The F-22, in itself, is $1.75 billion. That is an impressive number anyplace outside the beltway. But more important than that, it is a signal that we are not going to continue to build weapons systems that are plagued with cost overruns, which outlive their requirements for defending this Nation and, very frankly, starts to gain control of the acquisition process which is completely out of control. The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that there were over $295 billion in cost overruns in the last several years--$295 billion in cost overruns. Recently, a close friend of mine and great leader and former Secretary of the Navy wrote an article in the Wall When John McCain was shot down over Hanoi in 1967, he was By the way, I didn't know that cost to the taxpayers I had caused. Inflation has risen by 700 percent since then. So Mr. McCain's A-4 cost $6.1 million in 2008 dollars. Applying a generous factor of three for technological improvements, the price for a 2008 Navy F-18 fighter should be $18 million. Instead, we are paying about $90 million for each new fighter. As a result, the Navy cannot buy sufficient numbers. In 1983, I was in the Pentagon meeting that launched the F- 22 Raptor. The plan was to buy 648 jets beginning in 1996 for Now they cost $350 million apiece and the Obama budget caps At least they are safe from cyberattack since no one in China knows how to program the '83 vintage IBM software that He then goes on to cite other problems, including Navy shipbuilding . . . the Army's Future Combat System that was meant to re- equip the entire Army, the 400 percent cost overrun of the It is out of control, I say to my colleagues. I will match my commitment to equipping the men and women in the military with that of anyone in this body, but it has to stop, and this vote on the F-22 will determine whether it is business as usual with the earmarking and pork- barreling of billions of dollars which has bred corruption--we have former Members of the Congress residing in Federal prison--or whether Who better to be a spokesperson, in my view, than our Secretary of Secretaries of Defense. I know of no one whom I admire more than Secretary Gates. He gave a very important speech, on July 16, at the Economic Club of Chicago--a remarkable speech. I hope all my colleagues would have the chance to read it. In part of it he says, about the First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless, I determined in a triumph of hope over I wish to emphasize my strong support and appreciation for the --and the President agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move ahead with business Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy. For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles The President's budget would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- He goes on to say how important the F-35 is, and then he says: The F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios-- specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense I ask my colleagues, would you ask yourselves why the F-22 has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. It has been in production for nearly 5 years. It has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. And I want to emphasize that I think it is an important fighter. We are building 187 of them. The question before this body is why we continue to build more, whether we continue to build more, or the F-35, the Joint Strike Fighter, which goes to the Marine Corps and the Navy and the Air Force. Is this the weapons system we need to balance our entire capability of I would ask my colleagues, since the F-22 was on the drawing boards and moved into production, look at the advancement in unmanned aerial vehicles. I say that as an old pilot. The unmanned aerial vehicles have been performing a magnificent job both in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have been a critical element sometimes on the battlefields. And this President's budget understands that and gives extreme priority to that. So as we go on, in light of these factors, Secretary Gates goes on to With the support of Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries The fact is, in the view of the President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and most any objective observer of the military scene, they believe the F-22 is important, we need to have what we have, but it is now time to move on to the F-35, the Joint So this amendment really means, are we going to look at the real and compelling needs we have to have in order to win the war in Afghanistan, continue our success in Iraq, and put our funds into that kind of equipment and weapons systems or are we going to continue? Finally, I have great sympathy for the Senator from Georgia and other Senators who have come to the floor. I understand the sincerity of their views. I respect them. I would also point out, though, that to argue we should build weapons systems in the name of jobs is not what we should be about. What we should be about is procuring and building the best weapons systems to ensure our national security and how we can best equip the men and women who are in harm's way all around the world So I understand the economic impact, particularly in these hard times. My sympathy goes out to the communities that are dependent on the contracts for the F-22 aircraft. All I can say to them is we will do everything we can to help you and your families and make the adjustments, and there will be--we continue to increase spending on defense. We hope that we will be able to provide you with the necessary jobs and manufacturing that would be devoted to what we have ascertained as our national defense weapons systems procurement priorities, I say with sympathy to my colleagues who are deeply concerned about the loss of jobs in these difficult economic times. But this is not the way to provide jobs. Our obligation is to defend this So I think this amendment is overdue. I think it will be a significant, a very significant amendment, as I said before, as to whether we will get our priorities straight and listen to our esteemed Secretary of Defense, our President, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other military leaders in whose hands we entrust to make the tough decisions. I understand the final decision is here in Congress, but I also don't think we should dismiss the arguments that have been made by I think one of the finest men to ever serve this THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time to the Senator from Utah? Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to yield 7 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized. Mr. HATCH. Madam President, during his July 16 address, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, said the military needed maximum versatility to bring to bear in a wide range of armed conflicts. Last January, he argued that ``our military must be prepared for a full spectrum of operations, including the [insurgent] type of combat we are facing in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as large-scale threats that we face from I could not agree more with Secretary Gates. However, just as our Nation unwisely disregarded the hard-learned lessons of how to fight counterinsurgency operations after Vietnam, the Defense Department seems poised to make similar errors by limiting our capability to defeat the air threat of today and tomorrow: the integrated air defense This advanced system is composed of extended-range Russian surface- to-air missiles such as the S-300 and advanced fighters such as the Su- 30, which have already been sold in large numbers to China and India. Together, these systems make penetrating hostile airspace extremely difficult, if not deadly, for aircraft lacking the F-22's advanced stealth technology and capability for sustained supersonic speeds. It is these capabilities that enable the Raptor to have the unique capability to conduct stealth operations at any time of day or night. Secretary Gates argues for ceasing production of the F-22 after only are built because we will not face what the Pentagon refers to as a ``near-peer adversary'' for the foreseeable future. For the sake of our Nation, I hope he is right. However, I believe this statement misses a critical point: advanced integrated air defense systems are comparably inexpensive and readily affordable by nations such as Iran, with its insistence on developing nuclear weapons. History provides ample examples of the effective use of integrated air defense systems by nations that lack the resources to be considered a near-peer adversary of the U.S. As retired LTG Michael Dunn recently noted, North Vietnam defended its territory during the Vietnam war with what, at the time, was an advanced air defense system. This system, comprised of surface-to-air missiles and fewer than 200 fighters, was The 1973 War between Israel and Egypt is another example. The Egyptians learning from their recent defeats built an integrated air defense umbrella under which its forces were able to initially make significant territorial gains, while the Israeli Air Force faced serious losses. Only when the Egyptians advanced beyond the range of their surface-to-air missiles' umbrella was the Israeli Air Force able A more contemporary example is the loss in the 1990s of an F-117 Nighthawk to the Serbians, who were not equipped with the latest air Despite such examples, some argue additional F-22s are not necessary since stealthy jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs, which are still under development, will play an increasingly vital role in destroying critical ground targets. This is true for threats on the ground, but I am unaware of any plans to operationally deploy a UAV that can dogfight existing or next-generation Russian and Chinese jet Our forces could be confronted with the next generation Russian and Chinese fighters soon. There have been numerous media reports the Russian Government is developing a new stealthy aircraft, presumably to counter the F-22. This aircraft called PAK-FA, is being developed jointly with the Indian Government. Additional media sources cite China's development of a similar twin engine, stealth aircraft known as Some argue that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter can tackle those threats and defeat this new generation of advanced aircraft. While the F-35 is a very capable stealth aircraft, it was designed to complement the F-22, not replace it. The fact is the F-35 is neither as capable a fighter nor as stealthy as the F-22. For example, the F-35 does not have, nor can be upgraded to use, the supercruise engines increasingly Remember the F-22 is the NASCAR racer of this air-dominance team. Fast and unseen, the Raptor will punch a hole in an enemy's defenses, quickly dispatching any challenger in the air and striking at the most important ground targets. The Joint Strike Fighter is the rugged SUV of the team. Impressive, but not as maneuverable or capable of sustained supersonic speeds, the F-35 will exploit the hole opened by the F-22 and attack additional targets and directly support our ground forces. This is not to say the F-35 is not a highly capable stealthy aircraft. But the F-35's role is to supplement the F-22, not substitute for it. Only by utilizing the strengths of both aircraft do we ensure air Furthermore, if the F-22 is such a boondoggle, why do our allies such as Japan and Australia want to spend billions to purchase the aircraft? Why does Australia, for instance, plan to purchase up to 100 F-35s and large numbers of UAVs, and yet remains interested in the F-22? Perhaps it is because Australia understands the Russians and the Chinese are developing even more sophisticated surface-to-air missile systems and stealth fighters, threats the F-22 is uniquely designed and equipped to Others point out the F-22 has not been deployed in support of our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is true. However, there were recent plans to deploy the F-22 to the Persian Gulf. But according to the July 9, 2008, edition of the widely respected Defense News, the Pentagon overruled those plans, citing concerns about ``strategic dislocation.'' This means the F-22 is hardly a dinosaur. It is a weapon that can change the balance of power in a region and deter our In conclusion, I am reminded of a point author Michael Korda made in his book about the Battle of Britain. He observed that even though the two British prime ministers before Winston Churchill pursued a policy of appeasement, they also committed their government to develop and procure the three pieces of equipment: the Spitfire fighter, Hurricane fighter and radar, which were to ensure that nation's survival during I hope the Senate will profit from these lessons of history and vote I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. LEVIN. How much time remains for the proponents? The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 21 minutes remaining. Mr. LEVIN. I ask Senator Wyden, how much time does he need? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon is recognized. Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I rise this morning to support the Levin- McCain amendment. It seems to me that buying more F-22s at this point would meet the very definition of government waste. What you have is a situation where the Pentagon, which, suffice it to say, has not exactly been shy over the years in terms of calling for additional weapons, is on record as saying this is unnecessary. Further, I have been out talking with members of the Guard at home and trying to get their sense of what is needed in this dangerous time, and they have never once mentioned something like this. They talk, for example, about body armor. They talk about boots. They don't talk about more F-22s. Suffice it to say, when the Congress is now having a debate about trying to find additional money for health care, for example, to go out and spend close to $2 billion to buy seven more F-22 fighters the Air Force says it doesn't want defies common My home State, for example, would love to hire back police and other essential workers who have been laid off. Instead of building seven planes, we could be restoring infrastructure and developing renewable energy. Again, in my home State, we have had budget shortfalls. We have seen reductions in essential services, law enforcement being one. The debate is not about necessary steps to ensuring a strong national defense. The question is about whether the U.S. Congress wants to spend close to $2 billion to pay for more fighter jets the Air Force does not It is also important to remember that the F-22 is not being purchased for wars the United States is currently fighting. Certainly, the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents do not have an Air Force. The F-22 is being purchased to fight in possible future conflicts with other countries that may have an air force. While I strongly believe the Pentagon ought to be able to prepare for such possibilities, it is the Pentagon that is telling us we don't need these additional F-22s. It is also important to note that the Pentagon has purchased 187 F- 22s. There is not a debate about whether the United States ought to have fighters in our arsenal. The question is whether the Air Force needs 194 of them instead of 187. We have a very good Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. The Secretary has said that 187 is sufficient to combat current and future threats. He is the one who said that more are We must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built, and that are then usable only in a narrow range of low probability scenarios. Secretary Gates has hit the nail about as perfectly on the head as one can. He and our country want the strongest defense possible. But there are ways to make better use of that $1.75 billion than on seven I serve on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I know there are threats to our forces every single day. I see the Senator from Georgia who serves on the Intelligence Committee. He believes strongly about this as well. We need to make sure we are protecting our troops in harm's way, but we have a variety of choices in order to secure the protection our troops have been in need of. I intend to work with Chairman Levin, Secretary Gates, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and the President to ensure we replace the current F-15 with Last month, I visited with some of the 3,000 members of the Oregon National Guard's 41st brigade combat team, as they trained for their current deployment to Iraq. Not a one of the soldiers told me that their big concern was whether the Air Force would have 194 F-22s instead of 187. They talked to me instead about the best vehicles, the best medical care if they are injured, about the best body armor. Not I am not voting against the F-22. I am voting for the soldier, the taxpayer. They both deserve our government's greatest protection at I urge colleagues to support the Levin-McCain amendment. Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to address the F-22 program. For the past week as the debate has swirled around on this program I have not spoken on the subject. My colleagues know that I have strongly supported the F-22 program over the past two decades. Why? Because it is without question the world's most advanced fighter aircraft. It's capabilities far outstrip anything else in the world. There simply is When the Advanced Tactical Fighter Program began more than 20 years ago, no one could foresee what the world would look like in 2009. We planned to build 750 F-22s in order to match the Soviet Union's assumed far greater number of advanced fighters. The F-22 was designed with a goal of defeating 10 Soviet fighters apiece. The strategy was that using a combination of stealth and an advanced radar the F-22 would be able to attack Soviet fighters long before the adversary knew they were I am pleased to note that 20 years later as we train with the F-22 our Air Force pilots report that is exactly what it can do. Time after time as we exercise with the F-22, the results are nearly the same. The F-22 defeats all adversaries nearly with the same predictions as the What has changed, however, is that the Soviet Union no longer poses the threat that was assumed by the Defense Department in the 1980s. So then, critics say, why do we need to continue to buy more? We will soon They note that the F-22 hasn't been used in Afghanistan. While that is considered a clear argument that it isn't needed, it is laughable. As far as I know al-Qaida and the Taliban don't have an air force. The F-22 is designed to defeat conventional military forces. It is designed, for example, to counter a conventional attack by an adversary against one of its neighbors. Were the Chinese to attack Taiwan, the F- 22 would provide an incredible counter to the Chinese. The same would be true if a resurgent Russia were to try to reclaim countries in the Baltics. Unless we truly believe that we will never face another nation state in a conventional conflict then the F-22 is indeed necessary. At 187 aircraft, the F-22 provides a very credible deterrent to those nations. Is it sufficient? Perhaps. Will the Joint Strike Fighter replace it, not a chance. The Joint Strike Fighter, we expect, will be a terrific aircraft, but it is designed primarily to attack ground targets. In a battle against the F-22, it would likely lose each engagement. With better trained pilots and tactics, the Joint Strike Fighter could probably give the F-22 a run for its money, but it was never designed to replace the F-22 and should not be viewed as such. To me what is maddening about this debate is the sense that the decision is so clear cut that the F-22 program should be killed that it is only parochial politics that could keep it alive. That is pure The Nation has invested more than $65 billion to develop and buy 187 aircraft. If we choose to buy more F-22s we will do so at a very reasonable price--about $150 million. While that is not cheap by any stretch of the imagination, it is far cheaper than what we paid to initiate the program. And, if we kill the program and decide that we need to restart it in a few years, it is far cheaper than we would have This is not a boondoggle. We don't have critics saying the program is flawed and should be killed. Everyone agrees it is a great aircraft. While some of my colleagues obviously support the program because it means jobs in their States, others like myself who have no F-22 jobs in their States support the program because of its capabilities and their concern for the future. Why then has it become an issue over which to veto a bill? Why are the stakes so high with this program? I have the greatest respect for the President and the current Secretary of Defense. I have supported both in almost every initiative they have advocated. But I see in this case a pattern that I have Time after time our new leaders, both civilian and military, look at a program and see all the reasons why it isn't the right one. For example, in the early days of the Clinton administration the C-17 program was nearly terminated because the production of the aircraft wasn't performing up to expectations. I recall 2 years prior to that the Appropriations Committee recommended a pause in funding for the C- 17, not because we had lost confidence in the program. We still believed in the requirement for the aircraft, but the program wasn't performing. Up to that point, we had appropriated funds for 16 C-17s in total, but not a single one had been delivered, and there were very few coming together on the factory floor in Long Beach. We weren't recommending cancellation, but it served notice that attention was needed. However, the attention that the program received was mostly When the Clinton administration came into office many of the new officials were convinced that the C-17 should be terminated. In that instance the Pentagon mandated a study to determine whether the C-17 was still required. Luckily the conclusion was that yes the plane was still needed and those who were calling for its cancellation, including It was only a few years earlier that Secretary Cheney determined that the V-22 should be terminated. He was justifiably concerned that the price was increasing and that the program was taking longer than planned. It took the concerted effort of the Congress to stand up and say that we would not allow the program to be terminated. Certainly there were those in the Pentagon who agreed with the Secretary, but the I am told that a few years prior to that my good friend Senator Rudman weighed in with Chairman Stevens to overrule the Air Force who wanted to kill the F-117 after the production of only one squadron of aircraft. I should point out that the F-117 was not built in New Hampshire. There might have been some modest amount of work associated with the plane in his state, but the reason that Senator Rudman insisted that we keep buying the F-117 was because of its unique My colleagues all know the history of the B-2 program. It was started classified program in 1981. The Air Force was going to build 132 bombers. We expected it to cost between $20 and $25 billion in total. The contractor built a huge state of the art factory out in the high desert of California to handle the production of the aircraft. Because it was highly classified every precaution had to be taken to protect national security all of which dramatically increased the cost to Clearly the contractor and Air Force were overly optimistic on the cost and schedule of the program. Within 5 years it was clear that the program was not going to be completed within $25 billion. As development delays occurred, costs continued to escalate. The Air Force was unwilling to devote more resources to the program so in a series of moves it consistently delayed production of the aircraft and transferred dollars appropriated to build the aircraft to be used instead to cover higher development costs. By the time I became chairman, it was clear that the program would exceed its budget, but it was also clear that if it were successful it would provide an unmatched capability to this Nation. As costs mounted, the Defense Department determined that it would not be able to purchase all 132 aircraft. First production was cut to 75 and eventually it dropped to 20. In 1996 as the program was being killed, the contractor offered to produce three per year for several years at a price of about $600 million per copy. However, by that time support for the program had eroded so that neither the Pentagon nor the Congress would take up the offer. Instead, by only buying a total of 21 aircraft, we invested over $2 billion per plane making it the most costly aircraft in history. This situation isn't unique to aircraft programs. In the case of shipbuilding, I remember vividly Secretary Cheney's decision to cancel the Seawolf submarine. As a result of that decision, the three Seawolf- class submarines that were eventually built were very expensive. Because we only bought three, the average cost of each submarine was more than $4 billion. Had we built the 29 originally planned, I can only speculate about the cost, but it would certainly have been less than the price we are now paying for its replacement. What is even more galling is that during that time we were still building the capable SSN-688 Los Angeles class submarines and only paying about $800 million apiece for them. Instead of reinvigorating that program, we cancelled the Seawolf program and proceeded with the New Attack submarine, now called the Virginia class, in order to move to a cheaper submarine. Regrettably, I have to report that the cost of the Virginia class submarine is so high that we have only been able to afford to purchase one per year. When I became chairman we were buying four Los Angeles class submarines a year and paying only 1/3 the cost of the Virginia class. Is the Virginia a better submarine? Surely it is. The technological advances that the Nation has developed between the time the Los Angeles subs were designed and this decade have allowed for substantial improvements. Is it better than the Seawolf? That is The pattern I have watched during my tenure is a mix of four things. First, programs are cancelled before or as they reach maturity. Why? Sometimes because new leadership wants to go in a new direction more often, and important costs increase and schedules are delayed which erode the support for the programs. Sometimes programs are cancelled because we believe the promised replacement will be more capable or cheaper. And sometimes we argue times have changed and we don't need them. In a few cases it is clear that the program wasn't performing as For the F-22 some will argue it is too expensive. That was the argument against the V-22 program. Some say we simply don't need any more. That was the argument used to kill the B-2. Would we like to have more B-2s in the inventory today? I, for one, surely would. Others will say the threat doesn't warrant buying more F-22s. This is where I have my gravest concern. Some experts will tell you that we know that potential adversaries are working on fifth generation fighters. If in 5 years the Chinese unveil a new fifth generation fighter and begin to produce it in numbers will we regret the decision I am told that no one is likely to be able to develop and build an F- 22 equivalent aircraft for a generation. The skill and funding required to do so exceeds any foreign nation's ability. But in my view, they might not be able to design an F-22 themselves, but that doesn't mean We were told that the North Koreans were years away from a long range missile, then were surprised when they unveiled the Taepo dong. We were surprised when Pakistan conducted a nuclear test. We were shocked when the Soviet Union collapsed and most Americans were shocked when they learned about al-Qaida after 9/11. if there is one thing that shouldn't surprise us is that we cannot foretell the future. So as my colleagues deliberate on the F-22 program I come down on the side of caution. I believe it makes more sense at this time to continue to produce the program to hedge our bets against the future. To my knowledge there isn't a single worker in the State of Hawaii whose job is dependent on continuing production of the F-22, but I I believe it is unfortunate that the debate on this matter has taken on an overblown proportion. One can make the case that 187 could be sufficient. Our Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree that is the case. But just like the Marines argued for continuing to produce the V-22, the leaders of our Air National Guard and those in charge of flying the aircraft argue that we need more--even though the Defense When some say well, the Air Force leaders say they have enough, I will remind my colleagues that the Air Force said the same thing about When some say we should kill this and move on to the Joint Strike Fighter, I remember the Seawolf debate. We killed that submarine to build a cheaper alternative. Will we do the same thing here and be disappointed in the cost of the so-called alternative? On February 2, 1989, I was selected as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Appropriations Committee. For the past 20 years, it has been my distinct honor to serve either as the chairman or the ranking member of this subcommittee. As my colleagues all know, the defense subcommittee has the largest budget of any of our appropriations subcommittees, and to many of us it is probably the most important of our subcommittees. It has required a great deal of my time and attention over the past 20 years. For me it has been a labor of love. I have the greatest respect for the men and women of this Nation who are willing to serve and who guarantee constitutional freedoms for the rest of us. It has been my priority to support their cause during As I consider the F-22, I do so with the past twenty years as my guide. In my opinion what I have learned has taught me to be cautious as we kill programs. Therefore today I will cast my vote to continue Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I am going to continue to support production of the F-22 Raptor because we are still hearing strong indications from top military leaders that we need additional aircraft. Last month, General Corley, the Commander of the Air Force Air Combat Command, wrote that ending procurement of the F-22 would put our ability to execute our nation's military strategy at ``high risk'' over In addition, LTG Harry M. Wyatt III, the Director of the Air National Guard, has stated that these aircraft are particularly important for homeland defense missions, including addressing potential threats from GEN Merrill McPeak, retired, the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, also recently added that ending F-22 procurement ``is a real mistake,'' and that ``we certainly need some figure well above 200.'' I am also not prepared to vote to end production because I have yet to see a conclusive study indicating that 187 F-22s are enough. In fact, as late as May 19 of this year, GEN Norman A. Schwartz, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, told the House Armed Services Committee that The United States has made a significant investment in the F-22 program. Before terminating it, we must see in unequivocal terms how the defense planning process has determined that requirements and The next Quadrennial Defense Review--QDR--which outlines our national security strategy--is scheduled for submission by the Department of Defense in early 2010. This important document shapes how our military will respond to threats to our national security. The timing of today's I will feel more confident making a decision on this important program after reading the QDR, as it will shape our national security strategy for years to come. As GEN James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during his confirmation hearing for his second 2-year term, ``The military requirement right now [for the F-22A] is associated with the strategy that we are laying out in the While I realize that there are compelling arguments on both sides of this issue, I do not believe we have enough information at this time to shut down the F-22 line and terminate the program at 187 aircraft. Mr. CHAMBLISS. How much time remains on both sides? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 11 minutes; the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I am not sure how many other Senators want to speak or whether the opponents have speakers remaining on their Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, Senator Inhofe indicated a desire to speak. He is tied up in an EPW Committee hearing. He may be able to get Mr. LEVIN. We would like to be at the end of the line, Senator McCain Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to make some comments. Then Senator McCain and Senator Dodd and the Senator from Michigan could close it out. If Senator Inhofe comes in, we will give him a couple of minutes. Madam President, would the Chair notify me when I have used 5 Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I want to make a couple of quick comments relative to some of what has been said. First, with regard to Senator Wyden's comments concerning the National Guard, sure, all of us want to make sure we equip our Guard, our Reserve, as well as our active-duty force with all the needs they have. I would cite him to the letter of General Wyatt, who is the head of the Air Force Guard. General Wyatt says the F-22 is uniquely qualified to fill the needs the Guard has for its national security mission. To even slightly indicate that the Guard has issues with this program is simply not correct. The Guard is on record as being a strong supporter of this program. I have a letter from retired GEN David Bockel, retired from the United States Army. He now is the acting executive director of the Reserve Officers Association. Let me quote part of this: War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22s is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede the U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of F-22s required to ensure a strong defense is 250. I ask unanimous consent that the letter of retired General Bockel be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: The Reserve Officers Association, representing 65,000 Reserve Component members, supports additional procurement of the F-22 Raptor Aircraft. ROA urges Congress to authorize and appropriate funds for continued War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22 is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of Potential adversary nations are committed to producing their own fifth-generation aircraft in the immediate future. Not providing further funding for this crucial weapons system places at risk our nation's ability to meet known and near future threats. The United States can ill afford a fighter Thank you for your efforts on this key issue, and other support to the military that you have shown in the past. Please feel free to have your staff call ROA's legislative director, Marshall Hanson, with any question or issue you Mr. CHAMBLISS. I also have quoted earlier the comments by an active- duty general, a guy I consider a great American hero, not just because he falls in that category of wearing the uniform of the United States, but he is standing up to the personnel at the Pentagon. He is saying: For an active-duty general to do that takes significant courage. This is a guy I want in the foxhole with me. That is General Corley, commander of Air Combat Command, who very clearly says in a letter that we have previously entered into the Record that a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our national military strategy at high risk in the near to midterm and that the minimum number of F-22s we need, in his I want to also talk for a minute about Senator McCain's comments on the cost. This is an expensive weapons system, but it is also the most sophisticated weapons system ever designed by mankind. Most importantly, it is doing its job. It is doing its job in a very professional way. Instead of costing the $350 million Senator McCain stated in his earlier statements, because of a multiyear procurement contract we entered into between the Pentagon and the Air Force, as approved by this body--and I know Senator McCain objected to that and I understand that--but by a vote of 70 to 28, that multiyear contract was approved by this body as well as by the House. As a result, instead of paying the $350 million per copy he alluded to, we are today, under that multiyear contract, paying $140 million a copy. That is in comparison to the $200 million a copy that will be paid for every single F-35 we are buying in this budget. The figure for 200 F-35s in There are a number of people who are watching this debate out there today. Certainly those folks at the Pentagon are anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The White House is anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The Chinese are anxiously awaiting this vote. Let me tell colleagues why. I want to quote from an article of July 19 from a gentleman named Robert D. Fisher, Jr., who is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center. He writes: Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. Government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it I ask unanimous consent that that article be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in If Japan's long-standing effort to acquire the Lockheed- Martin F-22 Raptor fifth-generation superfighter falls victim to Washington power politics, the United States may inadvertently encourage an Asian arms race over which it may It is fortunate for the United States that in what may be the last year a deal is possible, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye and his supporters have decided to lead an effort to reverse a 1998 law barring Through Mr. Inouye's efforts Japan now knows a slightly degraded export model of the Raptor may take five years to develop and cost about $290 million a plane for about 40, compared to the estimated $150 million the U.S. Air Force Japan's long-standing quest to obtain the F-22, however, may be shot down amid the intense political struggle over the F-22s very future. President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have made termination of F-22 production at 187 planes a symbolic goal of their effort to cut defense spending and reorient U.S. military strategy. This has been challenged recently by the House Armed Services Committee, which approved the production of 12 more Raptors, and a Senate committee that approved production of seven more. However, the administration immediately threatened a veto, and the F-22's opponents are working hard to ensure that After 2011, the F-22's costs will grow significantly, so Japan and its U.S. supporters have little time to nail down a deal. However, some U.S. officials have long doubted that Japan can afford to pay for the F-22, which is why the George W. Bush and Obama administrations have not seriously promoted the F-22 for Japan. Mr. Gates reportedly favors selling Tokyo the smaller, somewhat less capable and less expensive While Japan may also purchase the F-35, there are two important reasons Washington should fully support Japan's goal to acquire the F-22. First, the F-22 will be the only combat aircraft capable of countering China's expected fifth- generation fighters. Second, selling Japan the Raptor may become a critical nonnuclear means for Washington to help Japan deter a China on its way to becoming a military superpower by the 2020s. If Washington cannot provide decisive nonnuclear means to deter China, Japan may more quickly consider decisive deterrents such as missiles and Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it capabilities such as anti-ship ballistic missiles, its buildup of nuclear-missile and anti-missile capabilities and space-warfare weapons will increasingly undermine U.S. strategic guarantees for Japan. China's development of long- range anti-air and surface-to-air missiles also threatens the electronic support aircraft critical to the ``networked'' U.S. air-warfare paradigm, meaning that jet fighters could quickly lose force-multiplying radar aircraft, tankers and communication satellites. As such, Japan is correct to prefer the F-22, which reportedly can fly 300 to 400 mph faster and two miles higher than the F-35--an aircraft optimized for If Japan is serious about the F-22 and its military security, it will have to pay for both. But if Washington is serious about sustaining a strategic alliance, it should sell the Raptor to Japan and be prepared to do more as China's Mr. CHAMBLISS. There is another group watching very anxiously out there. It is a group of men and women who wear the uniform of the U.S. Air Force. They are lieutenants, captains, and majors. They are watching this anxiously because they are saying to themselves: I signed up to be a part of a U.S. Air Force that believes in putting men and women in cockpits, men and women who are going to carry the fight to the enemy. What am I hearing from Members of Congress? What am I hearing from the leadership at the Pentagon? That we are going to move away from the most advanced fighter in the world today and move to a smaller fighter? That we are going to move away from fighters maybe even altogether by going to UAVs? Is this the Air Force I signed up I can tell my colleagues why they are anxiously awaiting the outcome. They have talked to me time and time again about the fact that they are concerned about their future in the U.S. Air Force. The worst thing we can do is to discourage those brave men and women who want to make a career of the Air Force and want to be wearing the two, three, and four stars one of these days. I assure my colleagues those lieutenants and those captains and those majors are watching what this body does from a policy standpoint today. They know where their leadership at the Pentagon is coming from. They don't like what they are hearing. They are now looking to Congress to fulfill the role that John Hamre, the director of CSIS, has said time and time again, and that is to objectively review the budget the Pentagon sends to the hill. We are in the process of doing that and exercising the type of oversight we I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I know almost everything that can be said has been said. Having served on the Armed Services Committee for quite some time and having watched this, what is kind of worrisome to me is that when we started out the F-22 program, the fifth generation fighter program, at that time they were talking about 750. Then the numbers started coming down and approached, I guess, 243. The Air Force officials have repeatedly stated that no fewer than that would be My concern has been the same concern I have when we are talking about ground capability, when we see countries such as China and Russia passing us up in areas. I will not bring up the NLOS cannon right now. But there are many places where our prospective enemies have better equipment than we do. We do know China has their J-12s; and Russia, I believe they are calling theirs the T-50s. We do know those are fifth- generation fighters. It is very disturbing to me that we would consider stopping at this point when this is not going to be adequate to get us So I certainly support the effort to maintain those seven. Quite frankly, when Senator Chambliss offered the amendment to expand it by seven, I was thinking we should really be shooting for more, and I think he agreed with that. However, apparently with the exports out there and with the additional seven that were put in, in the committee, that would be enough to keep the line open. So I strongly support the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Fourteen minutes 45 seconds. Mr. LEVIN. Well, if the Senator from Arizona would go, and then Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, how much time do we have remaining? Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, we would be glad to yield a couple more Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 additional minutes to the Mr. McCAIN. Three, four. I ask the Senator, do you want to go ahead Mr. DODD. Madam President, I will wait a couple of minutes. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I will be fairly brief. This argument has been made, and we pretty well covered most of the issue. I would remind my colleagues that all the things we do are a matter of choice have unlimited amounts of funding, obviously, and if you spend money on one project, then obviously you may have to spend less on another. That is the case of the F-35, if we do not eliminate this $1.75 billion. But most importantly, I want to point out again, this amendment is more than just about a weapons system. This amendment is about whether we will stop doing business as usual; that is, continuing to fund weapons systems that are no longer needed and unnecessary. We are not saying the F-22 is not a good aircraft. We are saying it is time to end The President of the United States has threatened to veto this entire bill. That is not good for the men and women in the military to have to go through this whole process over again. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and, very importantly, the Secretary of Defense, who has served now under two Presidents and has gained the respect and appreciation of all of us for his service--Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Secretary of Defense Gates' speech last July 16 to the Economic Club of Chicago be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant (As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Chicago, IL, Thank you, Secretary Daley, for that kind introduction. It's an honor to be at the Economic Club of Chicago. I certainly appreciate the special arrangements you made to I thank all the distinguished citizens of this great city who came here today. I am mindful I am speaking in the adopted hometown of my boss. President Obama sends his greetings, as do Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod and the rest of the Chicago crew. They are no doubt discovering that The issue that brings me here today is central to the security of all Americans: the future of the United States military: How it should be organized, equipped--and funded-- in the years ahead, to win the wars we are in while being prepared for threats on or beyond the horizon. Earlier this enthusiastically agreed--that we needed to fundamentally reshape the priorities of America's defense establishment and reform the way the Pentagon does business--in particular, the weapons we buy, and how we buy them. Above all, to prepare to wage future wars, rather than continuing the habit of I am here on relatively short notice to speak publicly about these matters because Congress is, as we speak, debating the president's defense budget request for the next fiscal year, a budget request that implements many needed reforms and changes. Most of the proposals--especially those that increase support for the troops, their families, and the war effort--have been widely embraced. However, some of the crucial reforms that deal with major weapons programs have met with a less than enthusiastic reaction in the Congress, among defense contractors, and within some quarters of the Pentagon itself. And so I thought it appropriate to address some of these controversial issues here--in a place that is, appropriately enough not only the adopted home of our Commander-in-Chief, but also a symbol of America's industrial First, some context on how we got to this point. President Obama's budget proposal is, I believe, the nation's first truly 21st century defense budget. It explicitly recognizes that over the last two decades the nature of conflict has fundamentally changed--and that much of America's defense establishment has yet to fully adapt to the security realities of the post-Cold War era and this complex and During the 1990s, the United States celebrated the demise of the Soviet Union and the so-called ``end of history'' by making deep cuts in the funding for, and above all, the size of the U.S. military, including a 40 percent drop in the size of the Active Army. This took place even as a post-Cold War world grew less stable, less predictable, and more turbulent. The U.S. military, with some advances in areas such as precision weaponry, essentially became a smaller version of the force that held off the Soviets in Germany for decades and expelled Iraq from Kuwait in 1991. There was little appetite for, or interest in, preparing for what we call ``irregular warfare''--campaigns against insurgents, terrorists, militias, and other non-state groups. This was the bipartisan reality both in the White House and in Of course, after September 11th, some things did change. The base defense budget--not counting spending for the wars-- increased by some 70 percent over the next eight years. During this period there were important changes in the way U.S. forces were organized, based and deployed, and investments were made in new technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles. However, when all was said and done, the way the Pentagon selected, evaluated, developed, and paid for major new weapons systems and equipment did not fundamentally Indeed, the kinds of equipment, programs, and capabilities needed to protect our troops and defeat the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan were not the highest priority of much of the Defense Department, even after several years of war. I learned about this lack of bureaucratic priority for the wars we are in the hard way--during my first few months on the job as the Iraq surge was getting underway. The challenges I faced in getting what our troops needed in the field stood in stark contrast to the support provided conventional modernization programs--weapons designed to fight other modern armies, navies, and air forces--that had been in the pipeline for many years and had acquired a loyal and enthusiastic following in the Pentagon, in the Congress, and in industry. The most pressing needs of today's warfighter--on the battlefield, in the hospital, or at home-- simply lacked place and power at the table when priorities were being set and long-term budget decisions were being So the most important shift in President Obama's first defense budget was to increase and institutionalize funding for programs that directly support those fighting America's wars and their families. Those initiatives included more helicopter support, air lift, armored vehicles, personnel protection equipment, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, we also increased funding for programs that provide long-term support to military families and treatment for the signature wounds of this conflict--such as traumatic But, while the world of terrorists and other violent extremists--of insurgents and IEDs--is with us for the long haul, we also recognize that another world has emerged. Growing numbers of countries and groups are employing the latest and increasingly accessible technologies to put the United States at risk in disruptive and unpredictable ways. Other large nations--known in Pentagon lingo as ``near- peers''--are modernizing their militaries in ways that could, over time, pose a challenge to the United States. In some cases, their programs take the form of traditional weapons systems such as more advanced fighter aircraft, missiles, and But other nations have learned from the experience of Saddam Hussein's military in the first and second Gulf wars-- that it is ill-advised, if not suicidal, to fight a conventional war head-to-head against the United States: fighter-to-fighter, ship-to-ship, tank-to-tank. They also learned from a bankrupted Soviet Union not to try to outspend us or match our overall capabilities. Instead, they are developing asymmetric means that take advantage of new technologies--and our vulnerabilities--to disrupt our lines of communication and our freedom of movement, to deny us access, and to narrow our military options and strategic At the same time, insurgents or militias are acquiring or seeking precision weapons, sophisticated communications, cyber capabilities, and even weapons of mass destruction. The Lebanese extremist group Hezbollah currently has more rockets and high-end munitions--many quite sophisticated and In sum, the security challenges we now face, and will in the future, have changed, and our thinking must likewise change. The old paradigm of looking at potential conflict as unconventional, high end or low--is no longer relevant. And as a result, the Defense Department needs to think about and prepare for war in a profoundly different way than what we have been accustomed to throughout the better part of the What is needed is a portfolio of military capabilities with maximum versatility across the widest possible spectrum of conflict. As a result, we must change the way we think and the way we plan--and fundamentally reform--the way the Pentagon does business and buys weapons. It simply will not do to base our strategy solely on continuing to design and buy--as we have for the last 60 years--only the most technologically advanced versions of weapons to keep up with or stay ahead of another superpower adversary--especially one To get there we must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of cost, complexity, and delay to systems that are number can be built, and that are then usable only in a We must also get control of what is called ``requirements creep''--where more features and capabilities are added to a given piece of equipment, often to the point of absurdity. The most flamboyant example of this phenomenon is the new presidential helicopter-- what President Obama referred to as defense procurement ``run amok.'' Once the analysis and requirements were done, we ended up with a helicopter that cost nearly half a billion dollars each and enabled the president to, among other things, cook dinner while in flight We also had to take a hard look at a number of weapons programs that were grotesquely over budget, were having major performance problems, were reliant on unproven technology, or were becoming increasingly detached from real world scenarios--as if September 11th and the wars that followed manufacturing sectors have at some point probably faced some combination of these challenges in your own businesses. But in the defense arena, we faced an additional, usually insurmountable obstacle to bring rationality to budget and acquisition decisions. Major weapons programs, irrespective of their problems or performance, have a habit of continuing long after they are wanted or needed, recalling Ronald Reagan's old joke that a government program represents the closest thing we'll ever see to eternal life on this earth. First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless I determined in a triumph of hope over experience, and the president agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move To this end, the president's budget request cut, curtailed, or ended a number of conventional modernization programs-- satellites, ground vehicles, helicopters, fighters--that were either performing poorly or in excess to real-world needs. Conversely, future-oriented programs where the U.S. was relatively underinvested were accelerated or received more For example, we must sustain and continually improve our specialized strategic deterrent to ensure that our--and our allies'--security is always protected against nuclear-armed adversaries. In an initiative little noticed, the President's program includes money to begin a new generation of ballistic missile submarines and nearly $700 million in additional funds to secure and assure America's nuclear deterrent. Some of our proposed reforms are meeting real resistance. They are called risky. Or not meeting a certain military requirement. Or lacking in study and analysis. Those three words--requirements, risk, and, analysis--are commonly invoked in defense matters. If applied correctly, they help us make sound decisions. I've found, however, that more often they have become the holy trinity of the status quo or In truth, preparing for conflict in the 21st century means investing in truly new concepts and new technologies. It means taking into account all the assets and capabilities we can bring to the fight. It means measuring those capabilities against the real threats posed by real world adversaries with real limitations, not threats conjured up from enemies with unlimited time, unlimited resources, and unlimited Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future potential conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy? For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles that can simultaneously perform intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance missions as well as deliver precision-guided bombs and missiles. The president's budget request would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs--aircraft that have a greater range than some of our manned fighters, in addition to the ability to loiter for hours over a target. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- 22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F-22, and can be produced in quantity with all the advantages produced by economies of scale--some 500 will be bought over the next five years, more than 2,400 over the life of the program. And we already have eight foreign development partners. It has had development problems to be sure, as has every advanced military aircraft ever fielded. But if properly supported, the F-35 will be the backbone of America's tactical aviation fleet for decades to come if--and it is a big if--money is not drained away to spend on other aircraft that our military leadership considers of lower Having said that, the F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios--specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense anyplace else in the spectrum of conflict. Nonetheless, supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less cost by three Navy SEALs. These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were sacrificed to help pay for it. In light of all these factors, and with the support of the Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s and The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries Consider that by 2020, the United States is projected to have nearly 2,500 manned combat aircraft of all kinds. Of those, nearly 1,100 will be the most advanced fifth generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is projected to have no fifth generation aircraft by 2020. And by 2025, the gap only widens. The U.S. will have approximately 1,700 of the most advanced fifth generation fighters versus a handful of comparable aircraft for the Chinese. Nonetheless, some portray this scenario as a dire threat to America's Correspondingly, the recent tests of a possible nuclear device and ballistic missiles by North Korea brought scrutiny to the changes in this budget that relate to missile defense. The risk to national security has again been invoked, mainly because the total missile defense budget was reduced from In fact, where the threat is real or growing--from rogue states or from short-to-medium range missiles that can hit our deployed troops or our allies and friends--this budget sustains or increases funding. Most of the cuts in this area come from two programs that are designed to shoot down enemy missiles immediately after launch. This was a great idea, but the aspiration was overwhelmed by the escalating costs, operational problems, and technological challenges. Consider the example of one of those programs--the Airborne Laser. This was supposed to put high-powered lasers on a fleet of 747s. After more than a decade of research and development, we have yet to achieve a laser with enough power to knock down a missile in boost phase more than 50 miles from the launch pad--thus requiring these huge planes to loiter deep in enemy air space to have a feasible chance at a direct hit. Moreover, the 10 to 20 aircraft needed would cost about $1.5 billion each plus tens of millions of dollars each year for maintenance and operating costs. The program and operating concept were fatally flawed and it was time to face reality. So we curtailed the existing program while keeping the prototype aircraft for research and development. Many of these decisions--like the one I just described-- were more clear-cut than others. But all of them, insofar as they involved hundreds of billions of dollars and the security of the American people, were treated with the utmost seriousness by the senior civilian and military leadership of the Pentagon. An enormous amount of thought, study, recommendations including the National Defense Strategy I Some have called for yet more analysis before making any of the decisions in this budget. But when dealing with programs that were clearly out of control, performing poorly, and excess to the military's real requirements, we did not need more debate, or more delay--in effect, paralysis through analysis. What was needed were three things--common sense, political will, and tough decisions. Qualities too often in All of these decisions involved considering trade-offs, balancing risks, and setting priorities--separating nice-to- haves from have-to-haves, requirements from appetites. We cannot expect to eliminate risk and danger by simply spending more--especially if we're spending on the wrong things. But more to the point, we all--the military, the Congress, and industry--have to face some iron fiscal realities. The last defense budget submitted by President George W. Bush for Fiscal Year 2009 was $515 billion. In that budget the Bush administration proposed--at my recommendation--a Fiscal Year 2010 defense budget of $524 billion. The budget just submitted by President Obama for FY 2010 was $534 billion. Even after factoring inflation, and some of the war costs that were moved from supplemental appropriations, President Obama's defense request represents a modest but real increase over the last Bush budget. I know. I submitted them both. In total, by one estimate, our budget adds up to about what the entire rest of the world combined spends on defense. Only in the parallel universe that is Washington, D.C., would that be considered ``gutting'' defense. The fact is that if the defense budget had been even higher, my recommendations to the president with respect to troubled programs would have been the same--for all the reasons I described earlier. There is a more fundamental point: If the Department of Defense can't figure out a way to defend the United States on a budget of more than half a trillion dollars a year, then our problems are much bigger than anything that can be cured by buying a few more ships What is important is to have a budget baseline with a steady, sustainable, and predictable rate of growth that avoids extreme peaks and valleys that are enormously harmful to sound budgeting. From the very first defense budget I submitted for President Bush in January 2007, I have warned against doing what America has done multiple times over the last 90 years by slashing defense spending after a major conflict. The war in Iraq is winding down, and one day so too will the conflict in Afghanistan. When that day comes, the nation will again face pressure to cut back on defense spending, as we always have. It is simply the nature of the beast. And the higher our base budget is now, the harder it will be to sustain these necessary programs, and the more So where do we go from here? Authorization for more F-22s is in both versions of the defense bill working its way through the Congress. The president has indicated that he has real red lines in this budget, including the F-22. Some might ask: Why threaten a veto and risk a confrontation over a The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. And, with regard to something like the F-22, irrespective of whether the number of aircraft at issue is 12 planes or 200, if we can't bring ourselves to make this tough but straightforward decision--reflecting the judgment of two very different presidents, two different secretaries of defense, two chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff, and the current Air Force Secretary and Chief of Staff, where do we draw the line? And if not now, when? If we can't get this right--what on earth can we get right? It is time to draw the line on doing Defense business as usual. The President has drawn that line. And that red line is a veto. And it is real. On a personal note, I joined CIA more than 40 years ago to professional career in government I have generally been known as a hawk on national security. One criticism of me when I was at CIA was that I overestimated threats to the security Well, I haven't changed. I did not molt from a hawk into a dove on January 20, 2009. I continue to believe, as I always have, that the world is, and always will be, a dangerous and hostile place for my country with many who would do America harm and who hate everything we are and stand for. But, the nature of the threats to us has changed. And so too should the way our military is organized and equipped to meet them. I believe--along with the senior military leadership of this nation--that the defense budget we proposed to President Obama and that he sent to Congress is the best we could design to protect the United States now and in the future. The best we could do to protect our men and women in uniform, to give them the tools they need to deter our enemies, and to win our wars today and tomorrow. We stand by this reform A final thought. I arrived in Washington 43 years ago this summer. Of all people, I am well aware of the realities of Washington and know that things do not change overnight. After all, the influence of politics and parochial interests in defense matters is as old as the Republic itself. Henry Knox, the first secretary of war, was charged with building the first American fleet. To get the support of Congress, Knox eventually ended up with six frigates being built in six But the stakes today are very high--with the nation at war, and a security landscape steadily growing more dangerous and unpredictable. I am deeply concerned about the long-term challenges facing our defense establishment--and just as concerned that the political state of play does not reflect the reality that major reforms are needed, or that tough We stand at a crossroads. We simply cannot risk continuing down the same path--where our spending and program priorities are increasingly divorced from the very real threats of today and the growing ones of tomorrow. These threats demand that all of our nation's leaders rise above the politics and parochialism that have too often plagued considerations of our nation's defense--from industry to interest groups, from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other. The time has come to draw a line and take a stand against the business-as-usual approach to national defense. We must all fulfill our obligation to the American people to ensure that our country remains safe and strong. Just as our men and women in uniform are doing their duty to this end, we in Washington must now do ours. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I am a student of history, and there is one particular President whom I have grown, along with historians, to appreciate more and more for his two terms as President of the United States; that is, Dwight David Eisenhower. We were at peace during President Eisenhower's term, and many believe that perhaps the war in Vietnam might have been avoided if we had heeded his wise counsel. There are many things President Eisenhower did to contribute to this On several occasions, I have reread his farewell speech of January 17, 1961. In his speech, President Eisenhower said: In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex I would only add to President Eisenhower's farewell address to the Nation--which is compelling in many ways--that the words should be changed from ``military-industrial complex'' to ``military-industrial- What we are seeing here, with the advice and counsel of our President, of our Secretary of Defense, of our uniformed military, with rare exception, is a recommendation that we stop with this aircraft and build another--not that we stop building fighter aircraft for our inventory, not that we stop defending this Nation with weapons systems we need. We are even defending a weapons system's continued production that has never flown in the two wars in which we are engaged. So I urge my colleagues to understand the impact of this amendment. If we are able to succeed, it is going to send a signal that we are stopping business as usual, and we must move forward providing the men and women with the necessary means to win the struggles we are in throughout the world, especially two wars. So I urge my colleagues to understand that sacrifices will be made. Jobs will be lost. It will cause disruption in some communities. But our first obligation is the defense of this Nation and the use of scarce defense dollars in the I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. Mr. DODD. Madam President, I have 2 minutes; is that correct? Mr. DODD. Madam President, first of all, let me begin where I did a few moments ago; that is, with my great respect for Carl Levin and John Let me begin with a point my friend from Arizona has made. There is nothing more important than the national security of our Nation. It is that very argument which brings those of us on this side of the table in support of this program and in opposition to this amendment. This program is a critically important program to maintain superiority--not parity but superiority--which has always been our goal in protecting our national security interests. It was the very Pentagon itself which advocated we move forward with this program only 36 months ago. Obviously, people can change their minds. But over the months, when they were preparing for the needs of our Nation, it was the Commission on the Future of Aerospace, authorized by this Congress, which concluded the following. They said that ``the Nation immediately reverse the decline in and promote the growth of a scientifically and technologically trained U.S. aerospace workforce,'' adding that ``the breakdown of America's intellectual and industrial capacity is a threat to national security and our capability to continue as a world It was the Pentagon, only 36 months ago in their Quadrennial Review, that said the following--and they said in this report--that: The F-22 production should be extended through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in There are reports that the F-35 could be delayed an additional 11 months--what we have already heard about. That creates a gap of 5 years that we are talking about. The danger of losing not just any jobs, anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 aerospace workers is not insignificant. Four days ago, we were warned there has been in excess of a 15- percent decline in our industrial capacity in the aerospace industry. This will hit us even further. The ability to have a workforce capable of building these aircraft we need in the 21st century is at risk. That is why the issue not only of the technical capability of the aircraft but the workforce to produce it is at stake with this amendment. And I say that respectfully. But we have this gap in production, which we have been warned about now by the Pentagon--not by the industry itself, by the Pentagon, by the very Commission this Congress authorized to determine what our capacities were and the industrial capacity in aerospace. We are defying both reports and both recommendations by canceling this program at this number and placing at risk the future generation of superior aircraft that we need in the 21st century. So again, Madam President, I urge my colleagues, respectfully, to reject this amendment. There is a compromise, in my view, available to end up with a number far less than the originally projected numbers. But to cancel the program prematurely and create the gap in our production capabilities is a great danger for our Nation, not to mention these jobs which are critically important to our Nation and its For those reasons, I urge the rejection of the amendment. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I commend the leaders of the committee. I also commend Senator Chambliss and Senator Dodd for their Herculean efforts here to try to stave off the closure of the line. I try to put myself in the shoes of others when I take a position on an issue. What I say comes from the heart and not because of a lack of respect for the efforts they have shown in support of their constituents. We have just come out of 8 years where we have seen our national debt double. We have incurred as much new debt for our country over the last 8 years as we did in the previous 208 years. We are looking, this year, at a 1-year deficit higher than any in the history of our country. It If you go back to 2001 and look at the cost overruns for major weapons systems, in 2001 it was about $45 billion. Last year, that number had grown to almost $300 billion. We say to our folks who are running the Pentagon, the Department of Defense: Tell us which weapons systems you need and those you do not. And Secretary Gates has said very clearly, as Gordon England did as well, his deputy, and the last President and this President: We do not need more F-22s. We have F-15s. We have F-16s. We have F-18s. Before too many more years, we will have My hope is we will be smart enough--if people are displaced, if the F-22 is not continued in production--my hope is we will be smart enough, since Lockheed has a role in building the F-35, some of the folks--hands that can build an F-22 can certainly help build F-35s. I The last thing I would ask everyone to keep in mind--as an old naval flight officer, I used to think about and I still think about how much it costs to fly an aircraft for an hour. It is anywhere from $20,000 to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, in terms of the alleged gap, there is no gap. The QDR said we should be building fighters, F-22 production, into fiscal year 2010. As a matter of fact, what we are now doing is exceeding that production with F-35s. We have 30 F-35s in this fiscal year 2010 budget. There is no gap in fighter production. As to whether the F-35 is a capable fighter, let me just read from The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F-22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F- The F-22 is costing an awful lot more than has been represented here because they are asking now, if this amendment is defeated, that we would be spending $1.75 billion for seven F-22s, which is approximately $250 million a copy for the ones the opponents of this amendment want The President of the United States, the last President of the United States, the previous one; two Secretaries of Defense, this one and the previous one; two Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force say it is time to end production of the F-22 to move into greater production of the F-35 which will serve three services, not just one. If not now, when? If not now, when? When will we end production of a weapons system, if not now, when we have both President Obama and President Bush trying to end it, Secretaries of Defense trying to end it, Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs trying to end the production of the F- 22? We must now do what is sensible, that which is requested by Secretary Gates, not because he is saluting the Commander in Chief, as has been suggested. He is not just saluting the Commander in Chief; he feels deep in his gut that we must change the way we do business. We must finally bring some of these systems to an end. That is why Secretary Gates so passionately believes we must bring production of the F-22 to an end and move into greater production of the F-35--more F-35s produced in this budget than would be produced of the F-22 if Madam President, I don't know if there is any more time. If there is, I yield back the remainder of my time, and I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1469. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) and the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 58, nays 40, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote. Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:39 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Acting President pro tempore. NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010--Continued The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I will make some brief remarks here, and at the conclusion we will determine whether there is an agreement on the other side so I can go ahead and lay down an amendment. But first I want to discuss what that amendment will be. It is amendment No. 1628, and in a moment I will seek to offer it and get it pending. It is an amendment I introduced with Senator Lieberman, Senator Bayh, and Like other Members of this body, we have watched recent events unfold in Iran with great concern. This year began with talk of warming ties and potentially reestablishing contact with Iran; that we would no longer be afraid to talk to Iran and perhaps to even reach some kinds of agreements. In recent months, however, the Iranian regime has continued its support of terrorism, its illegal nuclear weapons program in defiance of its NPT obligations, and its engagement in violent and While the administration has made clear its intention to continue to pursue high-level talks with Iran, an overture which the regime has not seen fit to even respond, the President has indicated that the window for Iran to negotiate and demonstrate progress toward complying with its international obligations is not open indefinitely. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all In May, the President indicated that Iran would have until December to show meaningful improvement. More recently, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on behalf of the G8 nations that they will give Iran until September 2009 to agree to negotiations with respect to its nuclear If negotiations do not prove fruitful, the United States must be ready to act quickly to increase pressure on Iran to end its support for terrorist groups and its illegal nuclear program. The Kyl-Lieberman amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should sanction the Iranian Central Bank if, by December, Iran has not verifiably halted its uranium enrichment activities, as well as come into full compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation By sanctioning the Central Bank of Iran--Bank Markazi--our Nation would send the message that we will use all methods at our disposal to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and oppose The case against the Iranian Central Bank is strong. It is knee-deep in the regime's illicit activities. Last year, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmit revealed that between 2001 and 2006 the bank had moved $50 million from banks in London to Hezbollah front organizations in Beirut. Hezbollah, of course, is a terrorist organization. It also processes transactions for Iranian banks that already face U.S. sanctions. The Central Bank of Iran is instrumental in helping Iranian banks--the very ones this body voted overwhelmingly to sanction in 2007--to avoid sanctions. In March 2008, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury warned financial institutions about the illicit behavior of the Central Bank of Iran. The Central Bank of Iran and Iranian commercial banks have transactions in order to make it more difficult for intermediary financial institutions to determine the true parties in the transaction. They have also continued to provide financial services to Iranian entities designated by the U.N. Security Council in its Resolutions 1737 and 1747. The U.S. Department of Treasury is particularly concerned Under U.S. law, institutions that aid entities covered by financial sanctions are liable to penalties. The Central Bank's activities clearly warrant such action, and sanctioning the bank would increase the effectiveness of existing measures. I urge my colleagues to support our amendment at such time as we are able to get a vote on it. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and I thank my friend from Arizona, Senator Kyl, for his very strong statement. I rise to speak in support of this bipartisan amendment which I have cosponsored along with Senator Kyl, Senator Bayh, and Senator McCain. As you know, President Obama has made a historic offer to Iran's leaders, inviting them to engage in direct diplomacy to resolve the outstanding differences between our two countries. As the President has repeatedly said, the door is open for the Iranians to come in out of the cold, if they choose to do so. It is by suspending their illicit nuclear activities and ending their support for terrorism that the Iranians have a clear path to ending their international isolation and taking their rightful place in the community of nations. Unfortunately, as Senator Kyl said, it has now been more than 3\\1/2\\ months since the formal offer of engagement was made by President Obama, and there has been no reply from the Iranians. Meanwhile, Iran's illicit nuclear activities have continued to speed forward, in violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions. Thousands of additional centrifuges are being installed, and more and more At the same time, Iran's support for terrorist proxies in Iraq, in Lebanon, and in the Palestinian Authority areas has continued. And, of course, over the past month we and the rest of the world have watched with horror as the Iranian regime has engaged in a brutal crackdown against its own people, who have sought no more than basic human President Obama, together with our international allies, has been very clear that we will not wait indefinitely for the Iranians to respond to our offer of talks, nor will we enter into negotiations--if that is the willingness of the Iranians--that go on without end. Two weeks ago, at the annual G8 summit in Italy, the President joined with other world leaders to make clear to the Iranians that they have until the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, at the end of September, to return to the The amendment Senators Kyl, Bayh, McCain, and I have put forward would place the full weight of the U.S. Senate behind the time frame that the President and the G8 have articulated. Our amendment expresses our strong hope that Iran seizes this historic opportunity for direct We also make clear that if the Iranians have failed to engage with us diplomatically by the time of that G20 summit 2 months from now, it is our preference that multilateral sanctions be imposed through the United Nations Security Council. However, the Iranian Government--the regime that controls the people of Iran--must also understand that the United States is itself prepared to put in place what Secretary of State Clinton a while ago referred to as crippling sanctions in the event that they in Tehran continue to flaunt the will of the Specifically, our amendment asks the President to impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and other banks involved in proliferation and terrorist activities, in the event that the Iranians haven't entered into negotiations that are serious by the time of the Pittsburgh summit or if they haven't suspended enrichment and reprocessing activities The Central Bank of Iran is the financial lifeline of that regime. It is an entity that our own Treasury Department says has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the efforts of other Iranian banks that are involved in bankrolling proliferation and terrorist activities to avoid international sanctions, and that have themselves been sanctioned by the U.N. and our Treasury Department as a I will say this. The idea of imposing sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank is not new. It has already been endorsed by a bipartisan majority in this Chamber. Last year, the Senate Banking Committee, under Chairman Dodd, adopted bipartisan legislation by a vote of 19 to 2 to urge the President to immediately impose sanctions against the Central Bank. Also last year, the House of Representatives passed such More recently, the legislation that Senators Bayh, Kyl, and I introduced this spring--the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, S. 908--in addition to the other steps it takes--also expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should impose sanctions against the I am very grateful to report that S. 908, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, now has 67 Members of the Senate, a strong bipartisan group of 67, or two-thirds, as cosponsors of that legislation. These cosponsors range all across the ideological spectrum of Members of the Senate, and clearly make the point to Iran and to the rest of the world that whatever other differences we have, we stand together here as a strong majority and beyond the Senate in our concern about the nuclear proliferation and terror-sponsoring activities of the Iranian You might say, if you are one of the 67 cosponsors of S. 908--which does more than this amendment does but includes it--you have already This amendment, I want to point out and make clear, in no way ties the President's hand in his diplomacy with Iran. That is not our intent. The amendment is about empowering the President, giving him additional leverage in his diplomacy, by endorsing the same timetable that came out of the G8 summit a short while ago. The effect is this, and I will repeat: The Iranians must appreciate that there will be consequences if they fail to respond to the international community's diplomatic initiatives; in other words, if they continue to speed their I think this amendment will send an unmistakable message to the fanatical regime in Tehran, in support of the G8, in support of President Obama: Either you can engage with the United States and the world community and take steps to suspend your nuclear activities or you can continue on your current course, in which case you will face the crippling sanctions this sense-of-the-Senate resolution calls for. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, before my colleague Senator Lieberman leaves the floor, I wish to thank him for this amendment. We are working right now to see if we can get the amendment pending and possibly a voice vote, because it is clear it is a very important amendment and one where I think we need to express very strongly the sense of the Senate, given the situation as it exists in Iran. I wish to thank Senator Lieberman, and right now it is my understanding that your side is checking to see if it is an agreeable amendment. Hopefully, we will get that decision and move forward with it right away on a voice vote, if that is agreeable to the Senator from The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. I am encouraged by that. And in talking to the other cosponsors, we would be happy to have The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the amendment is straightforward and expresses the sense of the Senate that there should be a date certain-- and soon--by which Iran is required to end its nuclear program or face severe sanctions. The amendment expresses that if the Iranian regime has not accepted the offer of the United States of direct diplomatic talks by the time of the G20 summit in late September or if it has not suspended all of its nuclear enrichment and reprocessing activities within 60 days after the summit, and if the U.N. Security Council does not adopt new and significant and meaningful sanctions on the regime, the President should sanction the Central Bank of Iran. The situation with respect to Iran is nearing the crisis point, if it is not there already. We have all watched the brutal crackdown in the streets of Tehran and elsewhere as the Iranian regime imposed the results of a fraudulent election. We have been astonished by the courage and resolve of those Iranian citizens who have protested for their own inalienable rights in the face of repression. And we have known that, while these dramatic events have played themselves out, the Iranian regime has continued its enrichment of uranium, growing ever closer to the day on which it has a nuclear weapons capability. The Iranian regime has gotten away with too much for too long. Its illicit nuclear activities, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles, support for Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, and its repeated threats against Israel and the United States, represent a real and growing threat to the security of the United States and the Middle East. It is in the interest of the United States, and the world's other great powers, to achieve an end to The administration has held out an ``open hand,'' making clear that it intends to open direct talks with Iran. Yet 3\\1/2\\ months since the President's formal offer, the Iranian government has made no response, nor has it suspended its enrichment activities, as required by U.N. Security Council resolutions. Time is not on the side of those pushing the Iranians to cease these dangerous actions. Administration officials and others, including the French President, have stated that they will not wait interminably while the Iranian nuclear program proceeds. At the G-8 summit 2 weeks ago, the assembled leaders agreed that the Iranians do not have forever, and that they should return to the negotiating table by the time of the G-20 summit in September. This amendment puts the Senate on record behind that timeframe, irrespective of any Senator's individual view about the likelihood of agreement Make no mistake: we must not wait interminably. According to the IAEA's latest report, Iran has increased its stockpile of low enriched uranium by some 60 percent in the previous 6 months, and has brought the number of active centrifuges above 7,000. The IAEA also reported that Iran denied inspectors access to the Arak heavy water reactor. As the threats--including to the State of Israel--continue. As the Secretary of State has recently articulated, should Iran continue to defy the international community, it must face severe sanctions. Should the regime not take up the historic offer extended to it, this resolution advocates sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank, the country's major connection to the international financial system. The U.S. Treasury Department has stated that the central bank has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the movement of funds to those involved in proliferation and terrorist activities. This must end, and in fact 67 Senators have cosponsored legislation-- the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act--that urges the President to By adopting this resolution, we will send an unmistakable message to the government of Iran that its actions are unacceptable and will result in real and severe consequences if continued. The administration has offered to talk; the ball is in the Iranian court, and if that regime continues down its destructive path, we have no choice but to impose crippling sanctions for its continued defiance. Let me point out again, this amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment, an important sense of the Senate but certainly one that allows the administration the latitude it needs in its handling of its Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I would first ask to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to recognize that tremendously hard work both the chair of the Armed Services Committee and ranking member are doing. We are very proud of the chairman, coming from Michigan, and of all of his excellent work in standing up for the I would like to congratulate him and the Senator from Arizona for Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to speak for a moment on health care. We are hearing a lot, as we hear from colleagues, many colleagues--not every one but many colleagues on the other side of the aisle--about the need to be against health care reform, to be a ``no.'' We all know that saying no to health care reform means we are going to have the status quo. ``No'' equals the status quo. For too many families, too many businesses all across this country, that is The status quo works, it is good--for special interests making profits off the current system. But it is bad for American families, American small businesses, American manufacturers that are trying to pay the bills and trying to make sure health care is available for the We need change. We are here because the system, with all of its good parts--and there are many strengths in the American system--is also broken in too many cases for people. We want to build on what works and Right now our current health care system is bankrupting too many families. We know over 60 percent of bankruptcies are linked to medical expenses, and 75 percent of families who file bankruptcy actually have health insurance. Those with insurance, on average, are putting out medical expenses of over $18,000 when they file--even though they have There are many families--we are not only talking about those who do not have health insurance, but those who do who find themselves in very I am constantly amazed when I hear the argument about: We can't do any kind of reform because reform means putting a bureaucrat between your doctor and yourself. You and your doctor can't make decisions Do you know who stands between you and your doctor right now? An insurance company, an insurance company bureaucrat. Your doctors can't just give you whatever tests they wish. You are not able to get whatever care you need for your family. The first call they make is to Reform is about putting health care decisions back in the hands of doctors and patients and being able to create a system that actually I set up online the Health Care People's Lobby for those I represent in the State of Michigan so they could share their stories. We have a lot of folks lining the halls who represent all kinds of interests, all kinds of special interests, and they tell us what they think should be happening or not happening. But in Michigan we have set up the Health Care People's Lobby so people can share their stories about the real If the system worked today, there would be no reason for us to be here. We would be working on something else. But the fact is, we are spending twice as much on health care as any other country and have 47 million people at any one time who do not have health insurance. Those On top of that, people who are currently covered are battling every day to try to get what they thought they were paying for or to make sure their family is covered or that test or procedure or medicine can One constituent of mine in Michigan, Sandra Marczewski from Waterford, MI, wrote to me that she and her husband have been without You have no idea the fear I walk around with every day. That is too many people in Michigan, over a million people in Michigan, without insurance altogether, and millions more who are fearful every day if they lose their job, their health care goes with it, for themselves and their families. People every night are putting the kids to bed and worrying about whether someone is going to get sick, saying a prayer: Please, God, don't let the kids get sick. Don't let me get sick. I have to be able to go to work so I can make sure we There are a lot of people, as I mentioned before, who make a lot of money off of the status quo, off of the current system. It is no surprise they don't want to change it. All the ads we see, all the things going on, all the scare tactics that are going on--and there are plenty of scare tactics going on right now--all of that is about trying to scare people and raise red flags. It is easy just to be no, no, no. We certainly hear that around here all the time, people who are just saying no to any kind of progress or change or making things better for The reality is, the status quo for a lot of folks means more profit, that is underlying a lot of the motivation of what is going on right now. Our job is to make sure the American people can afford health care and have the care they need for their families. For too many families, the status quo means insecurity, expenses, and fear that come along with not knowing whether they are going to be able to afford the health care they have from month to month and whether they will, in fact, even We are here because when it comes to health care, American families and businesses are in a serious crisis, and they are asking us for action. The status quo is not good enough anymore. It is not working. It is going to bankrupt families, businesses, and the country. High health care costs are causing cuts in benefits, increases in premiums, adding to the ranks of the uninsured at alarming rates. Even those who have insurance, as I indicated before, are feeling the pain of the current system. Every day in America families are forced to choose a different doctor because their health care plan was changed, because their employer can no longer afford the old plan they had. Skyrocketing health care costs make American businesses less competitive in the global economy. It costs us jobs, and I can speak directly to that coming from the great State of Michigan. Every day in America, families see their health care plan benefits eroding because they cannot keep up with high premiums, copays, and deductibles. Every day in America, people decide to skip a doctor visit and the medication and treatment they know they need because they cannot afford the payment--in the greatest country in the world-- because the expense is too high. Year after year, as health care costs increase, American families are losing the very parts of their health care they value most: their choice of doctor, hospital, and insurance plans; their choice of treatments; the security and stability that comes from knowing they are covered if anything goes wrong. That is what we are about fixing. That is what we will fix as we do health care Recently, Families USA found that the average costs of family coverage in the workplace rose 78 percent in 7 years--78 percent. During those years, health insurance company profits ballooned 428 percent. At the same time, wages went up about 15 percent. So wages go up 15 percent, health insurance profits go up 428 percent, and premiums The fact is, we cannot wait to get started on reform. The status quo is not acceptable and ``no'' equals the status quo. So we are here working with colleagues to get it done. Doing nothing is not Recently, the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation released a report that projects if Federal reform efforts are not enacted within 10 years, the cost of health care for businesses could double and the number of uninsured could rise to over 65 million people with middle- class families being hit the hardest. The report shows if health care reform is not enacted, individuals and families would see health care Total individual and family spending on premiums and out-of-pocket costs could increase 68 percent in the next 10 years. I cannot imagine 68 percent out-of-pocket costs. That is if we do nothing, if we listen to those just saying no. Even under the best-case scenario, health care costs would likely increase, according to this report, at least 46 percent. And I can tell you absolutely wages are not going to go up 46 percent. Businesses could see their health care costs doubled within 10 years. The report found that employer spending on premiums would more than double, and even in the best-case economic condition, employer spending on health care will rise 72 percent. The result would likely be far fewer Americans being able to be offered insurance or accepting employer-sponsored insurance. Estimates suggest a drop of 56 percent of Americans who are now covered by their employers, dropping from 56 to So there are many numbers. There are numbers that relate to the public programs of Medicaid and children's health insurance and the increased cost there as well and what will happen if we do nothing. The amount of uncompensated care in the health care system will increase, and the worst-case scenario: the total of uncompensated care could By the way, when we say ``uncompensated care,'' that does not mean somebody is not paying for it. That is why our premiums, if you have insurance, go up so much. It means someone can't afford to see a doctor, can't take their children to the doctor, so they don't get the tests on the front end that they need or they don't see a doctor. They wait until they are really sick, and then they go to the emergency room. They are served, as they should be, and it is the most expensive venue in which to do ongoing care for people. But they are served, and then guess what happens. Everyone who has insurance sees their rates go That is what it means when we say that covering the uninsured will lower costs as we go out. I mean it will take time to do this, but over time what we are doing is working to change the way we pay for health care now because we pay for it in the most expensive way, by ignoring the problem, not focusing on health and wellness and primary care but waiting until people are in the worst possible situation: they go to the emergency room, they get care when they are sicker than they otherwise would be if they could see a doctor. And then we pay for it. That is what we want to change and will change under health care So this is about many facets. We know we have a system in America that works for many; they are blessed. We are blessed to have health insurance. For the many who have insurance, it allows them to cover their family needs. The system works well. But for many others it does not. And the reality is, we all pay for a system that does not work effectively for everyone. We all end up paying because the reality is, you can say: Well, I am not going to buy a car, I do not need car insurance; I am not going to buy a house, I do not need house insurance, but sooner or later, you are going to get sick, and just because you don't have health insurance does not mean there is not We are a great country. We can do better than what we are doing today. We have to do better. We are working hard to have a bipartisan effort that will move reform forward in this country, to make a real difference to change the system so it works for everyone and begins to lower the cost over time of what is happening, the explosion in health The option of saying no is not good enough. ``No'' equals the status quo. We just cannot have that. The public gets it. It is time for us to get it as well and move forward. I yield the floor. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona is Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I call up the Lieberman-Kyl amendment and ask for its immediate consideration. It is at the desk. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report. The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Mr. Kyl, for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. McCain, proposes an (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on imposing sanctions with At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPOSING SANCTIONS WITH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The illicit nuclear activities of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles and support for international terrorism, represent a grave threat to the security of the United States and United States allies in (2) The United States and other responsible countries have a vital interest in working together to prevent the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a (3) As President Barack Obama said, ``Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all concerned, (4) The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly called attention to the illicit nuclear activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and, as a result, the United Nations Security Council has adopted a range of sanctions designed to encourage the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease those activities and comply with its obligations under the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968, and entered into force March 5, 1970 (commonly known as the (5) The Department of the Treasury has imposed sanctions on several Iranian banks, including Bank Melli, Bank Saderat, Bank Sepah, and Bank Mellat, for their involvement in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups. (6) The Central Bank of Iran, the keystone of Iran's financial system and its principal remaining lifeline to the international banking system, has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated such practices among banks involved in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, including Bank Sepah and Bank Melli, in order to evade sanctions imposed by the United States and the (7) On April 8, 2009, the United States formally extended an offer to engage in direct diplomacy with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran through negotiations with the five permanent members of the United States Security Council and Germany (commonly referred to as the ``P5-plus-1 process''), in the hope of resolving all outstanding disputes between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States. (8) The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has yet to make a formal reply to the April 8, 2009, offer of direct diplomacy by the United States or to engage in direct diplomacy with the United States through the P5-plus-1 (9) On July 8, 2009, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France warned that the Group of Eight major powers will give the Islamic Republic of Iran until September 2009 to accept negotiations with respect to its nuclear activities or face (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran should-- (A) seize the historic offer put forward by President Barack Obama to engage in direct diplomacy with the United (B) suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, and work on all heavy-water related projects, including the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water, as demanded by multiple resolutions of the United Nations Security (C) come into full compliance with the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, including the additional protocol to (2) the President should impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian bank engaged in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, as well as any other sanctions the President determines (A) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran-- (i) has not accepted the offer by the United States to engage in direct diplomacy through the P5-plus-1 process before the Summit of the Group of 20 (G-20) in Pittsburgh, reprocessing activities and work on all heavy-water related projects within 60 days of the conclusion of that Summit; and (B) the United Nations Security Council has failed to adopt significant and meaningful additional sanctions on the Mr. McCAIN. The amendment is in the name of Senators Kyl and The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further debate? If not, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee. Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I listened carefully to the Senator from Michigan. Republicans and I believe most Democrats want health care reform this year. The President said he wants health care reform this year. Republicans want health care reform this year. We want to make sure it is done right. Let me put it this way: If we were in an operating room and a seriously ill patient came in and we knew we had only one chance to save that patient's life and to make that patient healthy, our goal would not be to see if we could do it in the next week, it would be to see if we could get it right. So far, the proposals we have seen coming out of the committees have not gotten it right. One might say: Well, that is a Republican view of Democratic proposals. Perhaps it is. But the proposals we have seen coming out of the Senate HELP Committee and out of the House of Representatives flunk the most important test, which is cost. The most important test is whether Americans can afford their health care and, after we get through fixing it, whether they can afford their government. According to virtually everyone we have heard from, the legislation we have seen simply does not meet that test. In my opinion, what we should do instead is start with the framework of the bill sponsored by Democratic Senator Wyden and Republican Senator Bennett which has 14 cosponsors--8 Democrats, 6 Republicans. This is a different sort of framework that offers virtually every American coverage, does so without any Washington takeover or government-run programs without raising the debt one penny, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Remember, I said that is a framework. I do not agree with every single part of that bill, although I am a cosponsor, but it may be a much better place to start than what That is not just my opinion. Lately, we have heard a lot about the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. President Obama has talked a lot about the Mayo Clinic. The point is, at the Mayo Clinic and a few other clinics around the country, there have been significantly better outcomes. In other words, if you go there and come out, you are more likely to be well, and at a lower cost. And the question is, Why? The President has repeatedly pointed to the Mayo Clinic, Democratic Senators point to the Mayo Clinic, and Republican Senators point to the Mayo Clinic. Here is what the Mayo Clinic had to say on Friday about the legislation that is being considered in the House of Although there are some positives in the current House Tri- committee bill, including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects--the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever--a change in Medicare payment policy--to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States of America. That is the Mayo Clinic talking about the bill we are beginning to I think the prudent thing to do is to try to make that bill better or start over and certainly not try to pass a 1,000-page or 2,000-page bill in 1 week or 10 days without knowing what is in it, as we did with That is not just the opinion of the Mayo Clinic. Here is a letter to House Members on July 16, a few days ago, from a number of clinics, including the Mayo Clinic. These are the Intermountain Healthcare, Gundersen Lutheran Health System, the Iowa Clinic, the Marshfield Clinic, the Rural Wisconsin Health Cooperative, ThedaCare, and I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care These are the people whose hospitals we go to, whose clinics we go to We applaud the Congress for working on this. However, we The first is about the Medicare-like public plan, as they call it, a public plan with rates based on Medicare. They say it will have a severe negative effect on their facilities, that they lose a lot of money every year, hundreds of millions of dollars. Because what happens is that Medicare, a government-run plan, pays its doctors and its clinics and its hospitals about 80 percent of what private insurance companies are paying. So roughly 177 million of us have private insurance of one kind or another. If a doctor sees you, he gets paid 100 percent. But if you go to one of these clinics and hospitals, they are paid according to the government rate, which is roughly 80 percent of the private rate. These clinics say that is not sustainable for them, and that if that continues, some of those providers, such as the Mayo Clinic, will eventually be driven out of the market. What market? The market for Medicare patients. Those are the 45 million senior Americans who absolutely depend on Medicare for their service because for most of them, that is their only option. If that is the case, what that means is they will not be able to go to the Mayo Clinic or to the MeritCare Health System or to the Iowa Clinic or to the doctor they choose because that doctor will not be a part of the Medicare system So that is the first objection these clinics make to the bill they see coming because the bill they see coming proposes to create another The second objection they have is geographic payment disparities. They say that we are a big country and there ought to be differences in Third, and maybe this is the most important of all, that the President has said and many of us in the Senate have said we need to change the way we pay for medical care, and we ought to pay more for value, for quality, for results, and less for volume--in plain English, not how many patients a doctor can see but how many of his or her We have talked about that for weeks here in our hearings. But what these respected voices in medicine are saying is that the legislation we see today--and understand, this is not even in a bill that has presented to us in the Senate yet in a way upon which we can act--does not meet the test for that. The legislation we have seen so far is David Broder, the respected columnist from the Washington Post, said that the plans which have been passed in a partisan way are ``badly flawed'' and ``overly expensive.'' I mean, the Democratic plans; we have Republican plans that we would like to be considered. I mentioned that the Wyden-Bennett plan, which is the only really bipartisan plan here, has not been given one bit of consideration so far in the Senate. And then Senator Burr and Senator Coburn have a plan, Senator Gregg has a plan, and Senator Hatch has a plan. We all have different ideas. As I said, we would like for them to be considered, today I'm talking about the Democratic plans that are now being considered. The Congressional Budget Office, of course, is the nonpartisan office in this Congress that we count on as an umpire to tell us what we are really doing. It is not supposed to have any political rhetoric. Last Thursday, the head of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf was asked at a Senate Budget Committee hearing what he thought about the bills which had begun to emerge. In other words, here we go, at a time when we are in a recession and where the President's proposals for other programs will add more to the debt in the next 10 years, three times as much as we spent in World War II, and we are talking about legislation that would add another $2 trillion. We haven't dealt with cost which is where we ought to start. Look at the 250 million who have health care and ask the question: Can you afford it? Then after we get through fixing it, can you afford your government? And what the head of the CBO is saying, as far as the Then the Lewin Group, a well-respected private agency, was asked what would happen if we had a government-run program which many of us believe will lead to another Washington takeover. We are getting accustomed to this, Washington takeovers of banks, of insurance companies, of student loans, of car companies, now maybe of health care. The Lewin Group said 88 million people will lose their private employer-sponsored insurance. How could that happen? It could happen because a small employer or a big employer would see one of these plans that is beginning to come out take place. To be specific, the Senate HELP Committee plan says you either have to provide everybody who works for you insurance or pay $750. There are a lot of employers who cannot afford to provide everybody the kind of insurance that is envisioned. So they will say: OK, we will pay the $750 fine to the government. What happens? All those employees lose their health insurance. Where do they go? Into the Government plan. That is their option. Some of them may have a choice of other plans, but if they do have a choice and one of the choices is a government-run plan, it may have the same future the Mayo Clinic and others were saying Medicare was causing to them. The government will set a low price for the doctors and a low price for the clinics. So all these employees who now have insurance that they like will lose that insurance because of the passage of this bill. The government will set the provider rates and physician rates low, and so they will be part of a government plan for which many doctors and many hospitals and many clinics will not offer services. It is similar to giving somebody a bus ticket to a bus station with no busses. Then there are the Medicare cuts. According to the Washington Post last week, Medicare cuts will pay for one-half the cost of health care for the uninsured in one of the bills being proposed. If we are to find savings in Medicare and take from the 45 million elderly people who depend on Medicare, every bit of those savings ought to be put back into Medicare and not spent on some new program. I don't think legislation that is paid for half by Medicare cuts is going to go Then there are the employer taxes. According to the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the House version has an 8- percent Federal payroll tax. I mentioned the Senate version, a $750 annual fine per employee, if the employer doesn't offer insurance. The NFIB, small businesses, estimates that will lose about 1.6 million How could that be? Well, if a small employer or even a large one has government-mandated costs added and they have less money, they will hire less employees. That is one of the options they have. Then there is the income surtax. There is a whole string of trouble for these bills. USA Today on Monday said: It is the highest tax rate in a quarter of a century that is proposed: A 45-percent top tax rate Then rationing, there are provisions in this bill which would have the government make decisions about which treatment you will have and Finally--I say ``finally'' because this is the subject I want to spend a moment on--there is the Medicaid State taxes. Sometimes this Mr. President, 177 million Americans have private insurance, but a lot of people have government insurance now. Veterans do. Military people have TRICARE insurance. About 45 million older people have Medicare. But then there is a program called Medicaid, which is the largest government-run program. About 60 million people are in it now. The Federal Government pays about 57 percent of it, and the States pay 43 percent. Every Governor I know--and I was once one--has struggled with the Medicaid Program. I once came up here in the early 1980s and asked President Reagan to take it all, let the Federal Government run it and give us Governors all of kindergarten through the 12th grade. I thought I saw a couple of Democratic Governors earlier today, and we talked about the story every Governor faces. If you have an extra dollar and you want to put it in higher education so you can improve the quality of the University of Colorado or Tennessee or keep tuition from going up, what happens to it? That dollar is stolen because it has to go in the increasing Medicaid cost. It is an inefficiently managed program. The Federal Government keeps changing the rules. The Governors have to get permission from Washington whenever they make minor changes. It is If our real goal is to help people, then why under these new plans do we say to low-income people--defined as, say, a family of four who makes less than $32,000--your only option is going to be to go in the Medicaid Program under this plan. It is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office and others that 15 or 20 million Americans will be added to the 60 million in the Medicaid Program. What will they find when they get there? They will find that 40 percent of the doctors don't see Medicaid patients. When we add another 15 or 20 million people to it, it may be a larger number. Why don't they do see Medicaid patients? For the same reason the Mayo Clinic warned about this government plan in its letter. It is because Medicaid only pays its doctors and its If you are confused by that, it works out pretty simply. Medicare pays 80 percent of what the private insurers pay, and Medicaid pays about 72 percent of what Medicare pays. If you are a doctor or a clinic or a hospital, you get paid about 60 percent, if you are helping a Medicaid patient, of what you would if you were helping one of us who has his or her own private health care. You can see that will be a pernicious trend. If we continue to dump low-income people into a government-run Medicaid Program, that is what will happen. There is another thing that happens with Medicaid. Many members of the committees working on this bill said: We can't let that happen. We can't be inhumane and just say we are out here to help people who are uninsured, and we are going to dump 20 million of them into a government-run program that doesn't have enough doctors and hospitals and clinics. We will have to raise what we pay to doctors and clinics. That sounds good, but that is very expensive, particularly for a program such as Medicaid that, according to the Government Accountability Office, $1 out of every $10 is fraudulent, is wasted. That is $32 billion a year. That is the program we are going to expand? That is the program we are going to say to low-income people: Congratulations, go into this program where you are not likely to find a doctor every time you want one, and there are a lot of hospitals and clinics that will not take you because we will not pay them for that. Because Senators and Congressmen hear that, they say: We will raise the rates. Here is the proposal: The proposal is, we are going to increase the number of people who are eligible for Medicaid by 133 to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level. That is a substantial increase. Then, if we are going to do that and put many more people into the program, we are going to have to order an increase in what we pay the doctors and the clinics to serve them, maybe up to 83 or 85 Let me talk about what that would do in one State. We called the State Medicaid director in Tennessee. Our program is called TennCare. We said: What would it cost Tennessee if we increase coverage of Medicaid up to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level? The answer came back, nearly $600 million a year. That is the State's share of the cost which is a little more than a third. The Federal Government's share is twice that. So the Federal Government is saying: That is all right. We know Tennessee doesn't have the money to do that, so we will pay it all for the first 5 years. Then, after 5 years, so the talk goes--and we were told, when we were working on this bill, this is an assumption--we will shift these costs back to Colorado, back to Tennessee. Back comes what in today's dollars is about $600 million to Remember what I said. This is a program doctors don't want to go to because they don't get paid very well. So we will have to increase the amount of money we pay doctors. So if States are required to pay doctors and providers under the Medicaid system 110 percent of what Medicare is paid, that still isn't what doctors and hospitals get, if they see somebody with private health insurance. That is about the same amount of money, about $600 million added just for the State cost, which brings the total new state cost for paying physicians and hospitals more and for all the new people in the Medicaid Program to We throw around dollars up here and figures that make any amount of money seem unimaginable. What is $1 trillion, what is $10 trillion, what is $40 billion. We former Governors can imagine it. I figured it out. If in 5 years you shifted back to the State of Tennessee just its share of those costs from the expansion of Medicaid and paying the doctors and hospitals more, the bill for the State of Tennessee to pay the increased Medicaid costs would be an amount of money that equals a The truth is, for our State--and I believe for almost every State--it is an amount of money that nobody has enough taxes to pay. You can run politicians in and out and defeat them for raising taxes all day long, and they still couldn't come up with ways to pay for it. In other words, these bills are based on a premise and assumption that will either bankrupt the States or, if the Federal Government says we will pay for it all, it will add $5, $6, $700 billion more over 10 years to We need to think that through. Is that the best way to help people who are low income? I don't think so. I think there are much better ways. The Wyden-Bennett framework is a better way. It rearranges the tax deductions we have for people who have health insurance from their employers and it says: Let's take the available money and give the money to low-income people who then buy private health insurance. It may be a very basic plan. But at least they would have health insurance, and they wouldn't be stuffed in a government program 40 percent of the doctors wouldn't see and that many of the best clinics We have been told already by the Congressional Budget Office that proposal would not add a penny to the debt. Not only does it not create a new government program, it actually makes the Medicaid Program, except for Americans with Disabilities, history. In other words, if you are poor, you are not stuffed into a program that nobody else would want to join anyway. You have a chance to buy your own insurance, and you are not consigned to the worst run government program we have So there are some real possibilities with health care, and there are some plans on the table that will lead us in the right direction. We have advice from distinguished Americans with a stake in this--which is every single one of us--but the most distinguished are those who deal with it every day. The Mayo Clinic is saying the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite. Shouldn't we slow down and get it right? Shouldn't we get it right? This is the only chance we have to do this. If we do it wrong, we will not be able to undo it. This is 16, 18 percent of the American economy we are talking about. People have tried to do it for 60 years, and they The only way we will do it is if we do it together. The Democrats have big majorities over on that side. They do in the House. But that is not the way things usually happen around here. The President has said--and I take him at his word--and many of the leaders have said-- and I take them at their word--that we would like to get 70, 80 votes But in order to do that, we are going to have to do it the way we usually do when we have bipartisan events around here. We get some Democrats and some Republicans and they sit down with the President and they share ideas and they agree on some things. They don't just say: OK, here it is, and we are going to vote down almost every significant I respect the fact that Senator Baucus is trying to do that in the Finance Committee, and perhaps he will succeed, working with Senator Grassley and others. But this is going to take some time. It cannot be done overnight. There are many sections to this bill. Each of them might be 500 pages long. They have enormous consequences to individuals. That is why we have all these clinics writing and saying: If you do it the way it looks like you are going to do it, you may drive us out of the business of helping Medicare patients. Do we really want to do that? Do we really want to say to 45 million Americans who depend on Medicare: We are going to pass a bill that will accelerate the process whereby respected clinics and the doctor you might choose will not see you anymore because they cannot afford to because the government will not pay them under the system we have? So I would suggest we start over, literally, conceptually; start over and listen to these clinics and doctors and focus on the delivery system and focus, first, on those 250 million Americans who already have health insurance and ask the question: Can they afford it? And, what could we do to make it possible for those Americans to afford it? And can we do it in a way that permits us to be able to honestly say when we are through that those same 250 million Americans can afford their government when we are through without adding to the debt? Then let's look at the 46 million people who are uninsured. Of course, we need for them to be insured. But the fact is, 11 million of the uninsured are already eligible for programs we already have; 10 million or so are noncitizens--half of them legally here, half of them not; a large number of them are making $75,000 a year and could afford it but just do not buy it; and another significant number are college So we are going to have to go step by step by step and see in what low-cost way we can include a large number of these 46 million Americans, who are not part of the system, in the system. But that is the wrong place to start. That is the place to end. So, Mr. President, all I am saying is, on the Republican side of the aisle we can tell you what we are for. Some of us are for the Wyden- Bennett bill with our Democratic colleagues. That is the only bipartisan bill before us today. It has not even been seriously considered by this body, but it is there, and it has significant support in the House. We have two doctors over here: Dr. Barrasso, who has been an orthopedic surgeon for 25 years, and Dr. Coburn from Oklahoma, an OB/GYN doctor. They would like to be involved in the process. So far their ideas are not really being adopted in the result we might have. We have Senator Gregg from New Hampshire, one of the most respected Senators, who has been a part of many bipartisan efforts, and he has his own bill. He would like to be more a part of it, but his ideas do not fit the way things are going. But the way things are going are too expensive for the Congressional Budget Office and take us in the wrong direction, according to the Mayo Clinic. So maybe we ought to step back and say: Well, let's listen to these other ideas. Let's go very carefully. Let's work with the President. Let's see if we can get a result. Let's keep a four-letter word out there that is a good word; and that is ``cost,'' and make sure we focus first on the 250 million Americans who have health insurance and make sure they can afford it; and, second, make sure when we finish fixing health care that those same Americans can afford their government. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor. Dear Congressman Kind: On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care delivery, we write to you today to comment on the House health care reform bill introduced earlier this week. We would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on this legislation. We applaud the Congress for its commitment to passing comprehensive health care delivery system reform this year. However, we have significant concerns about the current language of the bill and we ask that these concerns, set forth below, be addressed First, we are concerned that a public plan option with rates based on Medicare rates will have a severe negative impact on our facilities. Today, many providers suffer great financial losses associated with treating Medicare patients. For example, several of the systems that have signed onto this letter lost hundreds of millions of dollars under Medicare last year. These rates are making it increasingly difficult for us to continue to treat Medicare patients. The implementation of a public plan with similar rates will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the nation's most efficient, high quality providers, eventually driving them out of the market. In addition, should a public plan with inadequate rates be enacted, we will be forced to shift additional costs to private payers, which will ultimately lead to increased costs for employers who maintain insurance for their employees. We believe all Americans must have guaranteed portable health insurance, but it is critical that we not lose sight of the need to ensure Second, our health care systems are among the most cost- efficient in the country in caring for Medicare patients. However, many of us operate in states with some of the lowest Medicare reimbursement rates in the nation. Current physician payments due to geographic disparities are actually greater under Medicare than under commercial insurance. This may be difficult to believe, given the government's rate-setting power, but flows from the fundamentally flawed payment methodology. To date, health care reform proposals simply continue the current payment methodology, despite the fact that formula changes have been identified to address this problem. We support payment changes that work to reduce geographic disparities, rather than perpetuating the flaws in the current payment system. While we believe that the Institute of Medicine study is a good first step, we encourage Congress to take this further and enact payment reforms that will address the existing disparities. Third, consistent with statements from President Obama, we believe that focusing on, defining, measuring, and paying for value is essential for controlling cost within the U.S. health care system. The system must be reformed to compensate for value instead of volume. We believe inserting a value index into various aspects of the Medicare payment system (e.g., physician fee schedule, hospital rates) is the means to accomplish this end goal of compensating for quality legislation. We urge you to address the above-stated concerns, which will demonstrate that Congress is serious about preserving the best parts of the existing health care delivery system. If we can be of assistance to you moving HealthPartners, Intermountain Healthcare, Iowa Clinic, MeritCare Health System, Park Nicollet Health System, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, throughout this Nation's history, our freedom--and at times our very survival--has rested squarely on the shoulders of the men and women of our Armed Forces. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I am proud to know many of these brave warfighters we have. We rely upon their training and discipline. We depend upon their service and their sacrifice. In That means keeping our commitment to every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine at every stage in their career--from the day they report for We can start to honor this commitment in the most basic way by ensuring that their facilities are safe and adequate. That is why I plan to offer an amendment that would help eliminate vegetative encroachment on training ranges. Excessive vegetation can actually render training grounds unusable. If a training range is heavily overgrown, it can lead to dangerous situations, including fires and In a recent study by the U.S. Army, 70 percent of the facilities surveyed are experiencing limitations due to uncontrolled vegetation. My amendment calls upon the Secretary of Defense to perform a comprehensive study of training ranges across every branch of the military. We must develop a plan to reclaim any overgrown land for its rightful use by our fighting men and women of America. This will help us ensure that we can train them adequately and safely so they can fully prepare for any mission they are assigned to perform. But we cannot stop there. Our commitment begins on the day someone volunteers for service in the Armed Forces. But it does not end, even after their service has drawn to a close. That is why I believe it is important to extend dislocation benefits to every servicemember, including those whose service is coming to an end. Over the course of a career in the American military, a service man or woman and their family may be ordered to relocate a number of times--moving here, moving there, this assignment, that assignment. Each move can be quite costly. From basic travel expenses to the purchase of household goods to utilities to rent, it takes a lot to Since 1955, Congress has helped members of the service defray these costs by paying a ``dislocation allowance'' to each person we reassign to a new duty station. This eases the financial burden on military families and means that personnel decisions can be made without fear of breaking the bank--at least for most servicemembers, that is. Unfortunately, those who retire are not covered under the current system, despite the fact that their final orders may require a permanent change of station. So after years of supporting service men and women when we ask them to relocate, we abandon them at the time of their final move. We leave them to fend for themselves, even though the expenses they incur will be as high as ever, and even though their income has been reduced to half of what they had been paid during So we simply cannot stand for this. We cannot allow those who have served us honorably to be left out in the cold at the end of their careers. We must offer these benefits to all Members of our Armed Forces, even those who have been asked to move for the last time. That is why I am calling for a study to examine the feasibility of extending the dislocation allowance to retiring servicemembers. We should find a way to make this work. The cost of moving demands it. Our servicemembers support it. And, most importantly, it is the right thing Colleagues, Members of this great body, let's come together to stand for those who sacrifice on our behalf and protect this great country of ours that allows us to do what we do in America, with freedom and opportunity. Let's provide our men and women in uniform with the support they need at every stage of their careers--from the first day Cutting down on vegetation encroachment will keep our trainees safe and help prepare them for years of honorable service. When that service ends, dislocation benefits will help them retire with some measure of So I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting these initiatives I put forth. We owe our troops nothing less. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I wish to speak for a few minutes about health care and the need for health care reform in the country today. I think most Americans would agree we need to do everything we can to make affordable health insurance available to every American and, hopefully, that is what this health reform debate will be about. Unfortunately, we are seeing a pattern develop here that has been going on all year--since the President took office--that has many Americans alarmed at the rapid pace we are spending and borrowing, imposing new taxes, and taking over various aspects of the American economy. I know a lot of Americans are alarmed and some are outraged. More than any other comment, I am hearing Americans say: Why don't you slow down and read the bills before you continue the expansion of Now we are talking about health care, and we see that same pattern of crisis and rush and it ``has to be done today, hair's on fire'' type of mentality here in Washington so that we almost have to call this a ``son of stimulus'' health care bill. Because certainly the last time the President tried to ram a massive bill through Congress before we had a chance to read it, we ended up with this colossal stimulus failure that has actually resulted in the loss of jobs in America and a burden of debt on our children that is almost unimaginable. It makes no sense for us to follow that same pattern with health care--nearly 20 percent of our economy--to have a government takeover with a bill we haven't even completely seen yet, that is supposed to be passed in the next 2 weeks, even though the bill wouldn't take effect until 2013. What is the rush? The whole purpose of the Senate is to be the place where the legislation comes to cool down, where we deliberate, we look at the details. The President himself has admitted he is not aware of the details of the bill he is out selling every day. We do have serious problems in health care that we need to fix. The unfortunate thing is I have no confidence that the President actually wants to make health insurance affordable and available to all Americans because when he was in the Senate, Republicans proposed a number of alternatives that would have done that. Yet in every case-- every opportunity he had to make health insurance more available and affordable to Americans--he voted no. Let's review some of them, because I think we have to recognize that the point of this health care debate is not to make sure every American is insured, but to make sure the government is running our health care system. The most personal and private part of our lives they are talking about turning over to bureaucrats at the Federal level. This makes no sense. What we could do is be fair to those who don't get their health work. If people get their health insurance at work, as we do here in Congress, your employer can deduct the cost of it and the employee is exempt from paying taxes on those benefits. That is equivalent to about a $5,000 a year benefit to families who get their health care or health insurance at work. Why can't we offer that same fairness to Americans who don't get their health insurance at work? It is something I actually proposed here in the Senate while President Obama was a Senator, that we would give fair tax treatment; at least let them deduct it from their taxes. He voted no, as did I believe every Democrat, and they killed the bill in the House. This was basic fairness to make health insurance a little more affordable to people who didn't get it at work. The President voted no. We hear a lot of talk about how we need a government plan to make the private plans more competitive. Why not make all the insurance companies compete with insurance companies all over the country instead of what we do now? A lot of Americans don't know that the reason we don't have a competitive private health insurance market is that the Federal Government makes it impossible. You have to buy your health insurance in the State where you live, so a few insurance companies basically have monopolies in every State of the country. What if someone such as myself who lived in South Carolina could look all across the country, find a policy I wanted at a better price, and buy it? Why can't we do that? Well, I proposed we do that. We introduced it on the Senate floor. It would have created a competitive health insurance market and allowed people to buy all over the country. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, to kill the bill. Now they are talking about: Well, we need a government option to create some competition, to have a real competitive market. He voted against it. What about allowing Americans who put money in a health savings account, or their employer puts it in there for them--their own money-- why not let them use that money to pay for a health insurance premium if they don't get it at work? It sounded like a good idea to me, to make it a little bit easier, a little more affordable to have your own health insurance, so I proposed that bill here in the Senate. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, and they killed the bill. What about the idea of allowing a lot of small employers--I was a small businessman for years. It was hard to buy health insurance as a small employer, but I did. It cost me a lot of money, a lot more than the big employers. But what about allowing a lot of small employers to come together and form associations and buy health insurance so they could offer it to their employees less expensively? Well, it is a good idea that was offered right here on the floor of the Senate by Republicans. Barack Obama voted no, as did most of the Democrats, and There is a long list here I could go through, but every single bill, every single health reform idea that has been proposed here, the President, when he was in the Senate, voted against. Everything that would have made health insurance available and affordable to the average American who doesn't get their insurance at work was voted no Now he is saying, We need the government to take it over because it is not working. The reason it is not working is we won't let it work. The part of health insurance, the health care system that works the best today is when you have your own health insurance and you pick your own doctor and you and your doctor decide what kind of health care you are going to get. It is not a perfect system, and insurance companies have a lot of work to do to make things work better because I have to argue with them a lot myself. But the part of the health care system that doesn't work is the part that the government runs, Medicaid and Medicare, the SCHIP and TRICARE. Some of the people who get those benefits such as our seniors say Medicare works fine, but, unfortunately, doctors don't want to see them coming because Medicare and Medicaid don't cover the cost of even seeing a patient. So many physicians are closing their practices to our seniors because they have government health insurance. Government health care does not pay enough for the physician and the hospital to see the patient, so they shift The worst part of all of these government plans is they are trillions of dollars in debt--debt that our children are going to have to pay back. These programs are broke. Yet they want to expand these programs. They want to take the part of health care that is not working and essentially force it on every American. They want every American to have a Medicaid plan where doctors don't want to see us coming because As I look at this whole health care reform debate--and I am glad to see the President out taking shots at me for saying we have to stop him on this, because we have been on a rampage since he took office, passing one government program after another, expanding spending and debt at levels we have never imagined in this country. It is time to slow down and take stock of where we are. Other countries that have to lend us money to keep us going are beginning to wonder, Can we pay our debts? We have doubled our money supply by the Federal Reserve, and that means big inflation, higher interest rates. Yet we are moving ahead with this health care plan that is going to expand our debt as a nation, raise taxes on small businesses that create the jobs. It looks as if we are going to penalize Americans who don't decide to buy health insurance, and we are moving again toward a government program that we know won't work. There is not one Federal program that has worked as advertised, that has worked to the budget we said it would be to. This week we have had announcements of what we have already passed as far as stimulus over the last year is going to mean trillions of dollars-- trillions of dollars--we are going to have to borrow and that our I appeal to my colleagues: We don't need to rush through a bill in the next 2 weeks before we go on our August break that affects one- fifth--20 percent--of our total economy, that gets the government to effectively take over the most personal and private service that we ask for as Americans. We don't need to pass a bill such as that, that we won't even have time to read. What the President and I think a lot of the proponents of this bill are afraid of is if we are able to go home on the August break and we take this bill and we put it on the Internet where people can read it, and radio talk shows and bloggers all around the country are able to tell the American people what this bill is and what it will do, and get past this utopian rhetoric that we are hearing from the President and look at the nuts and bolts, because everything he is saying this bill is going to do the Congressional Budget Office and other experts are saying, No, it isn't going to work that way. It isn't going to save us money, it is going to raise our taxes, it is going to cost jobs in America, and it isn't going to fix health care. We need to go back to the basics, including some of what I have mentioned already, that would reform health care and make private health insurance work better, make it more affordable, and get it into the hands of more Americans. Why should we give up on freedom and move to a government plan when we haven't even given freedom a chance to I know the government can't run health care and I don't want them running my plan. One of the best ideas I have heard in this debate is whatever we pass, Congressmen and Senators ought to have to take that health plan. I am going to have an amendment to that effect if they try But I appeal to my colleagues: Let's listen to the American people. Let's stop this rampage toward bigger and bigger government. Let's take our time and look at this bill and, for once, do something right. Our The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be laid aside in order that I might call up The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson] proposes an amendment Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To repeal the requirement for reduction of survivor annuities under the Survivor Benefit Plan by veterans' dependency and indemnity At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. ___. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT OF REDUCTION OF SBP SURVIVOR (1) In general.--Subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, (ii) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) Conforming amendments.--Such subchapter is further (B) In section 1451(g)(1), by striking subparagraph (C). (i) in subsection (f)(2), by striking ``does not apply--'' and all that follows and inserting ``does not apply in the case of a deduction made through administrative error.''; and (D) In section 1455(c), by striking ``, 1450(k)(2),''. (b) Prohibition on Retroactive Benefits.--No benefits may be paid to any person for any period before the effective date provided under subsection (f) by reason of the (c) Prohibition on Recoupment of Certain Amounts Previously Refunded to SBP Recipients.--A surviving spouse who is or has been in receipt of an annuity under the Survivor Benefit Plan under subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United States Code, that is in effect before the effective date provided under subsection (f) and that is adjusted by reason of the amendments made by subsection (a) and who has received a refund of retired pay under section 1450(e) of title 10, United States Code, shall not be required to repay such (d) Repeal of Authority for Optional Annuity for Dependent Children.--Section 1448(d) of such title is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Except as provided in paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary concerned'' and inserting (A) by striking ``Dependent children.--'' and all that follows through ``In the case of a member described in paragraph (1),'' and inserting ``Dependent children annuity when no eligible surviving spouse.--In the case of a member (e) Restoration of Eligibility for Previously Eligible Spouses.--The Secretary of the military department concerned shall restore annuity eligibility to any eligible surviving spouse who, in consultation with the Secretary, previously elected to transfer payment of such annuity to a surviving 1448(d)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the effective date provided under subsection (f). Such eligibility shall be restored whether or not payment to such child or children subsequently was terminated due to loss of dependent status or death. For the purposes of this subsection, an eligible spouse includes a spouse who was previously eligible for payment of such annuity and is not remarried, or remarried after having attained age 55, or whose second or subsequent marriage has (f) Effective Date.--The sections and the amendments made by this section shall take effect on the later of-- (1) the first day of the first month that begins after the (2) the first day of the fiscal year that begins in the Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this is the widows and orphans amendment. This is the dastardly subject we have been dealing with for years, where there is an offset from an insurance payout, that servicemembers pay insurance premiums and/or retirees pay premiums, which is offset by Veterans Department disability compensation, which otherwise the veteran's surviving spouse and children would be able to, under existing law, be eligible for both, but there is an offset. This particular amendment is going to eliminate that offset. Every year, we come to the floor on the Defense authorization bill and we offer the amendment and we have an overwhelming vote in the Senate. Every year, it goes to conference and, for years and years, in the conference committee with the House, they would say you cannot pass an amendment that would even reduce the offset for widows and orphans. Only in the last couple years have we had some modest reduction of the offset. Then, on an earlier piece of legislation this year, we had a little bit more reduction of the offset. What this amendment will do is I wish to point out at the outset, I have a letter from the Military Coalition, and I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Nelson: The Military Coalition (TMC), a consortium of nationally prominent military and veterans organizations, representing more 5.5 million members plus their families and survivors would like to thank you for your sponsoring of Amendment No. 1515 of FY2010 NDAA (S. 1390). This Amendment, like your bill, S. 535, would repeal the law requiring a dollar-for-dollar deduction of VA benefits for service connected deaths from the survivors' SBP annuities. The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is a top We strongly believe that if military service caused a member's death, the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) the VA pays the survivor should be added to the SBP benefits the disabled retiree paid for, not substituted for them. In the case of members who died on active duty, a surviving spouse with children can avoid the dollar-for- dollar offset only by assigning SBP to the children. That forces the spouse to give up any SBP claim after the children attain their majority--leaving the spouse with only a $1,154 monthly annuity from the VA. Those who give their lives for their country deserve fairer compensation for their surviving spouses. Your amendment would also end this inequity. The Military Coalition again thanks you for sponsoring this Amendment to restore equity to this very important survivor program and encourages your colleagues vote for its passage. Air Force Association, Air Force Sergeants Association, Air Force Women Officers Associated, American Logistics Association, AMVETS, Army Aviation Assn. of America, Assn. of Military Surgeons of the United States, Assn. of the US Army, Association of the United States Navy, Commissioned Officers Assn. of the US Public Health Service, Inc. CWO & WO Assn. US Coast Guard, Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the US, Fleet Reserve Assn., Gold Star Wives of America, Inc., Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America, Jewish War Veterans of the USA, Marine Corps League, Marine Corps Reserve Association, Military Officers Assn. of America, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Association for Uniformed Services, National Guard Assn. of the US, National Military Family Assn., National Order of Battlefield Commissions, Naval Enlisted Reserve Assn., Non Commissioned Officers Assn. of the United States of America, Reserve Enlisted Assn. of the US, Reserve Officers Assn., Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces, The Military Chaplains Assn. of the USA, The Retired Enlisted Assn., USCG Chief Petty Officers Assn., US Army Warrant Officers Assn., Mr. NELSON of Florida. This letter supports this legislation. It is from the Military Coalition. The Military Coalition is a group of 34 organizations, and their signatures are on the letter--alphabetically, from the Air Force Association all the way to the last one on the list of 34, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. All those organizations that you would expect are in between; there are 34 I wish to tell you about this particular amendment. I filed this bill--and this is nonpartisan--years ago with Senator Sessions and eight other original cosponsors. It will repeal the law that takes almost $1,200 per month from families who have lost a loved one because of military service. This survivors benefit plan, otherwise known by its initials as SBP, is an annuity paid by the Defense Department. Survivors receive the benefit when either a military retiree pays a premium as income insurance for their survivors or when a servicemember The other law is dependency and indemnity compensation, referred to by its initials DIC. It is a survivor benefit paid by the Veterans' Administration. Survivors receive this benefit when the military What this amendment will do is fix this longstanding problem in the military survivor benefits system. The problem is, it requires a dollar-for-dollar reduction of the survivor benefits from the SBP, paid by the Department of Defense, offsetting against the dependents and indemnity compensation, DIC, paid by the Veterans' Administration. You know the great quote, following one of America's bloodiest wars, by President Lincoln in his second inaugural address--and the war was still raging at that point. He said that one of the greatest obligations in war is to ``finish the work we are in; to bind up the Nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle''--in other words, the veterans--``and for his widow and his orphan.'' Following Lincoln's advice to honor truly our servicemembers, they need to know their widows and orphans, their survivors, will be taken care of. We certainly agree that the U.S. Government must take care of our veterans, their widows, and their orphans. In keeping with that principle, we need to repeal this offset that denies the widows and orphans the annuity their deceased loved ones have earned on Active Duty or have purchased for them. A retired military member can purchase this SBP, and it is an insurance policy so their survivors will have Over in the Veterans' Administration, we have a law that says, if you are disabled a certain percentage, we are going to take care of you. One should not offset the other--particularly, when somebody has paid Well, that dollar-for-dollar offset is what has me so agitated for a decade now. I have already explained that, for the survivors benefit plan, there are two ways to qualify: The military retiree goes out and voluntarily pays into an insurance program with their retirement income. Later, the statute was added that the survivors benefit plan is available to an Active-Duty servicemember if they are killed as a result of military service. For retirees, the SBP is an insurance program that protects the income of survivors; and for Active-Duty military members, SBP is compensation for the servicemembers' On the other hand, the dependents indemnity compensation is a benefit payment to the survivors of a servicemember who dies from a service- connected condition. For almost a decade, I have fought to repeal the law that requires the dollar-for-dollar offset of these two very different benefits. Back in 2005, the Senate took the step in the right direction and passed, by a vote of 92 to 6, my amendment to repeal that offset. When it got down to the conference committee, you know what happened. In the 2008 Defense authorization bill, we cracked the door to eliminating the offset. In the conference committee negotiations with the House, we made some progress when we got a special payment of $50 per month, which would now increase to $310 per month by 2017 because of money savings found in the tobacco legislation passed Our efforts have been important steps in the right direction, but they are not enough. We must meet our obligation to the widows and orphans with the same sense of honor as was the service their loved ones had performed. We need to completely offset this SBP and DIC. We must continue to work to do right by all those who have given this Nation their all and especially for the loved ones they may leave to In that letter that I have had entered into the Record, it says: The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is the top legislative goal for [the Military Coalition] in 2009. I will not take the time to read the names of the 34 organizations that signed the letter, but they are all fairly well known to every one On February 24 of this year, during a joint session of the Congress, To keep our sacred trust with those who serve, we will raise their pay, and give our veterans the expanded health I say amen to that. I ask that President Obama help us end this injustice to widows and orphans of our Nation's heroes. Mr. President, may I inquire if there is someone else who wants to speak now, because if there would not be, I would like to speak as in Mr. McCAIN. I object. Let's dispose of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona objects. Mr. McCAIN. I object to the Senator from Florida going into morning business until we dispose of the amendment. Then he can do it right Mr. NELSON of Florida. I merely inquired if another Senator wants to speak. Certainly, I would withhold asking for a unanimous consent. Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I intend to speak on the Thune amendment and was scheduled to speak in the next few minutes. If it is OK with the floor leaders, if my colleague will speak for a brief amount of time, I am happy to go after him. It is up to the floor managers. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Florida, we will find out if there are others who want to speak on his amendment. If not, we are in favor of disposing of his amendment. Part of the agreement we made, in order for us to proceed, was that if anyone came to the floor to speak on the pending amendment, that Senator would have priority. If it is agreeable to the Senator from Florida, the Senator from New York would go ahead and then we could go back to him speaking Mr. NELSON of Florida. Of course. It is my understanding the Senator from South Carolina had just spoken as in morning business. That is why I was inquiring. I am very grateful to the ranking member of the committee for us to go ahead and dispose of this amendment. Mr. McCAIN. Why don't we wait until after the Senator from New York finishes, to make sure there is no one else who wants to speak on the Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, if my colleague needs 5 minutes, I am happy to yield to him, if I would come after that. I ask unanimous Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman). Without objection, it is so (The remarks of Mr. NELSON of Florida pertaining to the introduction of S. 1484, S. 1485, S. 1486, and S. 1487 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Mr. REED. Mr. President, if the Senator from Florida is prepared, I have conferred with the ranking member, the Senator from Arizona, and The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I know we are not now on the Thune amendment. I know we have gone aside to other amendments and that we will be debating Thune tomorrow morning, but there are so many of my colleagues who want to speak, and I have a lot to say. So I will speak for 5 minutes tomorrow morning, but I will give the bulk of my speech Mr. President, I rise in staunch opposition to the Thune amendment. I believe it is a dangerous amendment that would go far beyond authorizing gun possession for self-defense and not only create a serious threat to public safety but also severely undercut American Amendment No. 1618, authored by Senator Thune, would force States and localities from across the Nation to permit individuals from other States to carry hidden and loaded handguns in public, even where the elected representatives of those States have chosen to bar these persons from possessing firearms. The legislation would require every State with concealed carry legislation to honor concealed carry licenses issued by any other State so long as they abide by the State's This amendment is a bridge too far and could endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Each State has carefully crafted its concealed carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. It is obvious what is good for the safety of people in New York City or Philadelphia or Chicago or Miami or Los Angeles is not the same thing that is needed in rural Idaho or rural Tennessee. Yet this amendment, in one fell swoop, says the protections some States feel they need to protect law enforcement, to protect its citizenry, would The amendment will incite the dangerous race to the bottom in our Nation's gun laws. Let's examine the lineup of people who could carry concealed weapons in 48 States under this amendment. And I don't disparage each State for doing what it wants within its own borders, but why impose that on States outside their borders? Arizona law allows a concealed carry permit to be issued to an applicant who is a known alcoholic. So alcoholics would be in the lineup. They could carry a concealed weapon in States outside of Arizona simply because Arizona allowed them to do so. Texas, which is one of the top 10 sources of guns recovered in crimes in New York City, a city in which I reside, is obliged to issue a permit to a person who has been convicted repeatedly of illegally carrying a handgun. Therefore, we can place arms traffickers in this Mississippi law leaves access to concealed carry permits for members Alaska and Vermont allow adult residents of their States to carry a concealed weapon without a license or background check as long as they are allowed to possess a gun, even if they have committed violent misdemeanors, have committed misdemeanor sex offenses against minors or are dangerously mentally ill and have been voluntarily committed to a Again, each State has its own views. The State of Vermont is a beautiful State. It is different from New York State in many ways, and the laws that fit for Vermont don't necessarily fit for New York. A 17-year-old Crip or Blood from New York--a member of a gang; dangerous, maybe violent--could head to Vermont, obtain a Vermont driver's license, buy a gun, and return to New York or he could buy a whole bunch of guns and return to New York. When law enforcement stops him, a loaded gun tucked in his pants or a whole bunch of guns in his backpack, all he would have to do is claim he is a Vermonter visiting New York, show his Vermont ID, and the New York Police Department would be unable to stop him. This runs shivers down the spines of New York police officers, of New York sheriffs, of New York law enforcement. And it doesn't just apply to New York. This could apply to any large State. Imagine law enforcement stopping one of these characters with a backpack full of guns--a known member of a major gang--and having to let them go. Imagine how empowered gun smugglers and traffickers would feel. Their business would boom. These are people who make money by selling guns illegally to people who are convicted felons. They could go to the State with the weakest laws, get a concealed carry permit--if that State allowed it, and in all likelihood it might--and then start bringing concealed guns into neighboring States and States across the country. Their business would boom, but our safety would be impaired. Imagine routine traffic stops turned into potential shootouts. Police officers in New York have the safety and the peace of mind in knowing that the only people who might legally have a gun are those who have been approved by the police department. That is how we do it in a city such as New York. We have had our problems with crime. Thank God it is much lower now, due to the great work of the New York City police. But now they would be totally unprepared, walking on tiptoe. And if the criminal simply said: I am from this State--wow. I shudder Beyond the very real threat this poses to law enforcement and the safety of our police officers and the safety of our citizens, it would create a logistical nightmare. A police officer making a stop of a car would have to have in front of him or her the laws of all 45 States that now allow or whose residents would now be allowed or even whose people had gotten carry permits who would now be allowed to carry What about States rights? I have not been on the side--it is obvious--of the gun lobby for as many years as I have been here in the House and Senate. I have always believed, though, there is a right to bear arms and that it is unfair to say the second amendment should be seen through a pinhole and the first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth amendments should be seen broadly. I don't think But every amendment has limitations. Through the years when I have been involved in this issue, the NRA and other gun groups have argued, frankly, that the States ought to make their own decisions. All of a sudden we see a 180-degree hairpin turn. Now they are saying that the States cannot make their own decisions. Why is it that every other issue should be resolved by the States except this one? The amendment flies in the very face of States rights arguments and takes away I say to my colleagues who have laws and citizenry who probably want the laws not drawn as tightly as my State, if you open up this door, one day you will regret it. Because if you say that the Federal Government should decide what law governs, you are taking away States' In the 1990s, after the passage of the Brady Act, the National Rifle Association funded multiple legal challenges to it, citing the 10th amendment, that the right to bear arms therefore resided in the States. Indeed, Mary Sue Falkner, who was then a spokesman for the NRA, said at This is not a case about firearms per se, but about whether the Federal Government can force States and local governments Similarly, in reference to Brady, the NRA's chief lobbyist said that the Federal Government was getting too much involved in State affairs. The gun lobby's rallying cry has always been, ``Let each State decide.'' But with this amendment, again, a 180-degree flip. Clearly, large urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas. To gut the ability of local police and sheriffs to determine who should be able to carry a concealed weapon makes no sense. It is wrong to take away any State's rights to make decisions about what can make a resident safer. A one-size-fits-all approach to community safety leads Make no mistake, this is a serious amendment. It is, even though not the intention of the author, a dangerous amendment. There will be needless suffering, injuries, and deaths if this amendment is agreed I talked to my colleague Senator Thune. We are friends. We saw each other in the gym this morning. He said to me: What about truckdrivers who have the gun in the cab of their truck and ride across State lines? I am sympathetic to that. I supported laws that allow police officers in New York to carry their gun when they cross over into New Jersey to shop or whatever. But you do not need this law to deal with that problem, because it creates so many other issues. There are ways we can deal with the problem that the Senator from South Dakota brought up to me in the gym this morning, without decimating State laws that protect Make no mistake about it, this amendment would affect every State in the country, but I do not see the Governors on board. It would affect every city in the country. I don't see the mayors on board. It would affect every county in the country, but I don't see the sheriffs on board. It would affect every town in the country, but I don't see Before we rush to judgment, shouldn't we ask our Governors, our mayors, our sheriffs, our police chiefs if this will make our communities safer or less safe? If this will put the men and women, the brave men and women who defend us and protect us on police forces, in I urge my colleagues to give thoughtful and careful consideration to the consequences of the Thune amendment. I believe if they do, they The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, as we meet here today we are discussing the Defense authorization bill. We debate it each year. It is basically an authorization for the expenditure of funds in defense of America. It is a significant bill with a lot of different parts. I commend the Senators who have brought this to the floor, Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and his Republican I know this bill is important and I know we will be returning to substantive amendments on this bill very shortly. But while we have this break in the action, I want to address another issue which is being debated in almost every corridor on Capitol Hill, and that is the issue of health care reform. It is an interesting issue and an amazing challenge to this Congress, to try to grapple with the health care Despite our prosperity, we know there is something fundamentally flawed with our health care system. We spend more than twice as much per person in America on health care as any other country, and the results do not show that money is being well spent. Many other countries, spending a fraction of what the United States spends, end up with very different and much better results in terms of survival from certain diseases and illness, and mortality rates. There is something to be learned here about how we can be more effective in providing health care for our citizens and not break the bank. Most Americans know what I am talking about when I talk about cost, because they are facing cost issues every day. They know health insurance premiums in America in the last several years have gone up three times faster than the incomes and wages of Americans. We have learned it is not unusual for one-fourth of Americans to spend 1 out of every $10 in income for health insurance. Some, a smaller group but a significant group, spend up to $1 out of every $4 in income on health insurance. The number keeps going through the roof with no end in sight. It worries us, not just as individuals and members of families, but businesses that are trying to do the right thing for their It worries units of government because, whether it is your State government providing assistance for Medicaid or whether it is the Federal Government concerned about Medicare and Medicaid, the costs of health care are growing so quickly that they could easily put us into a perpetual debt situation, something we do not want to see, something we Now we are debating in the House and in the Senate, in a variety of different committees, how to change this health care system. Needless to say, it is a contentious debate. There are a lot of different points of view. There are some people and companies in America that want no change in our health care system. Most people do. Some don't. Many of those who are resisting change, who are unwilling to support the President's efforts to move us in this direction, are the very same companies and people who are profiting from the current system. Make no mistake, when you spend billions of dollars on a system, much more than any other country, you are going to end up in a situation where many people are profiting handsomely from the current system. When you talk about reform--reducing the cost, reducing the payments, being more cost effective--these people see money going out the window, That is what the battle is all about. We have been through it before, and now we have returned to it. But in addition to cost, there is also the issue of the availability of health insurance. This morning's Chicago Tribune, on the front page, told the story of a man who sadly is one of the victims of this situation. He lives in a suburb of Chicago, and he works as a doorman at one of the buildings. He had a bad back. He finally was told--he tried a lot of conservative treatment; it just did not work--you are going to have to have back So he did what he was supposed to do. He went to his insurance company and said: The doctor is recommending a surgery, and I want to know if it will be covered by my health insurance. Well, the health insurance company sent back to him written confirmation that the costs of the surgery would be covered by his health insurance. So he went through with the surgery and ended up incurring $148,000 in medical I think you know how this story ends. They turned in the bills to the insurance company, and they denied them. They said: We did not really approve this surgery. You should have taken a more conservative Well, he thought he had done everything he was supposed to. What followed was a battle with this insurance company, day after day, month after month, while people were saying: Send us the $148,000. This man of limited means was fighting to finally get this health insurance company to pay what they promised to pay. It took him months. When it was all over, Mr. Napientek, Michael Napientek, ended up with coverage. Had he failed to get the coverage for that surgery, it would have wiped out his entire life's savings. That is the reality of health care. That is the situation too many people find themselves in, so vulnerable in a situation where one medical bill denied by an insurance company bureaucrat can literally wipe out their life's savings. We can do better. We have to do better. That is what this debate is all about. First, we have to reduce the cost of health care for families and businesses and governments across America. There are ways to do that. We can lower costs to make sure every American has access to insurance. We can make it clear that no one can be turned down for insurance coverage because of a preexisting condition. We can make certain there is no discrimination in the premiums that are charged individual Americans because one is a male and another female; one is a certain age and another not. We can make certain there is more fairness in the way people are treated by these health insurance companies. This idea of denying coverage for preexisting conditions, imagine how frustrating that must be to realize that if you turned in a claim this year on your health insurance because you had a bad back, and you went to the doctor next year, when it came time for surgery they would not This happened to a friend of mine, a fellow I grew up with in East St. Louis, IL, in the trucking business. He not only owned the business, he drove the trucks. When he reached 60 years of age, his back was killing him. Well, at that point his company had lost its health insurance. Why? Because the wife of one of the employees had a sick baby. Her sick baby incurred a lot of medical bills, and the cost of health insurance went through the roof. They had to cancel the company's health insurance, give the employees some money, and say: He was in the same boat. He went out to get private health insurance, complained about a bad back. The following year when the doctor said he needed back surgery, he turned in a claim to his health insurance company, and they said: No, it is a preexisting condition. We will not Do you know what he had to do? He ended up filing a worker's compensation claim claiming that his back injuries had to do with bouncing around in a truck for 30 or 40 years, not an unreasonable conclusion. Do you know who he sued? He sued himself. He sued as an employee of the company. He sued himself as owner of the company. Is that crazy to reach that point? And he won, incidentally. They said it is subject to worker's compensation. We will pay for the He had done everything right, providing health insurance for his employees until he could not afford it, trying to get private insurance for himself at the age of 60, then turning in a claim and being turned down. He could have been wiped out by that surgery, just as the man on We are all in this vulnerable situation because the health insurance companies have so much power over our lives. I listen to those on the other side of the aisle who come--not all of them but many--every single day and say we do not need to change this system. Who are they talking to? Who are they listening to? They are not listening to people like these who find out every day that they do not have coverage, that the cost of insurance is too high, that their doctor is in a debate with a clerk at an insurance company over whether they are going to get the necessary and proper treatment for a medical condition. That is the There are many ways to address this, and we should. We have to address it by making sure everyone has access to health insurance regardless of preexisting conditions, health status for a medical condition. We have to get rid of the so-called lifetime caps. Imagine that a diagnosis tomorrow that you or someone you love in your family has a chronic condition that is going to call for medical treatment for a long period of time, and then you realize there will come a moment when that health insurance company would say: We are out of here. You just broke the bank. You hit the cap on your policy. We have to put an end to that. We also have to limit the out-of- pocket expenses individuals have to pay. There comes a point where people cannot afford this expense. We have to require equal treatment for men and women--Black, White, and brown, young and old, whether they We have to make sure if a health insurance policy in America is offered, it is a good policy that covers the basic needs. There are policies that do not. They sell health insurance you can afford, and guess what. It is worthless. That is not good for America and it is not There are ways to lower costs. We ought to be pushing for prevention. We ought to be trying to find ways to keep people well, incentives for the right conduct and healthy outcomes. Right now there is not much of a reward or an incentive for wellness. We also have to give support to small businesses. When we look at the insured in America, most of them are small business employees and their children. The poorest people in America are covered by Medicaid, the government health insurance, as Folks are fortunate, like myself, under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and most others who have health insurance policies, to have coverage. But the folks in the middle who get up and go to work every day for the small businesses of America--and their kids--are the One of the proposals before us in Congress is to make sure small businesses can start getting into pools where they can use that pooling power to reach out and have health insurance coverage that is Senator Reed is on the Senate floor today. He and I were fortunate enough to be at lunch today when our colleague from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, got up and spoke about what had happened in the HELP Committee, the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, in preparing a bill on health care reform. There were 800 amendments filed. They met for 61 days. Some 400 amendments were considered and voted on. Over 100 of those were from the Republican side of the aisle. They were trying their best to create a bipartisan compromise to get through the bill. But Senator Dodd came up and talked about this, not in terms of a specific bill and its provisions; he talked about the historic opportunity we have. He said for many of us, for most of us now serving in the Senate, this may be the only time in our political careers when we can change the health care system for the better; when we can make sure that people in America have a better chance to be able to afford He certainly inspired us when he pulled out this magazine and showed us a picture of our colleague, Senator Teddy Kennedy, on the cover of Newsweek, and the quote from Ted Kennedy that says: ``We're almost There is a long essay in here about Ted Kennedy's terrific public career and how much of it has been spent on this issue of health care; what it meant to him personally when his son was diagnosed with bone cancer and had to have his leg amputated; what he went through in a plane crash; when he has seen others and what they have gone through. Teddy Kennedy reminds us that these opportunities do not come around very often. There is lots we can debate and argue about, but at the end of the day the American people want to see the debate end. They want to see us acting together responsibly for health care that is centered on patients; to make sure they have a health insurance policy they like, that they can keep; to make certain they have a good strong confidential relationship with their doctors for themselves and their families; to make sure, as well, they are not excluded from coverage for preexisting conditions; to make sure that health insurance is going to be affordable; and to make sure it covers all Americans. We can do it. We are a great and prosperous nation. We have a President who is committed to it. And working with him on a bipartisan basis we can get this done. We can work with the health care professionals--the doctors, the nurses, those leading hospitals--who This is our chance. For those who are saying no, that they want the status quo, they do not want to change it, only a small percentage of Americans agree with them. Most Americans agree what I have talked about today needs to be done. We have to overcome those voices of negativity and doubt who continue to come to the Senate floor, those Let me tell you, this is a great, strong country that tackles big problems. We have never been assigned a bigger assignment than this one, health care for America. It touches all 300 million of us. We have to make sure it is done fairly, done effectively, and done quickly. If we let this drag out for months beyond this year, it is going to be I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work toward that goal, make certain that President Obama's leadership is rewarded with health care reform that does make a difference. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an amendment that I am cosponsoring with my friend and fellow cochair of the Senate National Guard Caucus, Senator Leahy. We will be introducing a bipartisan amendment to strengthen one of our Nation's most important military and civilian resources, the National Guard. The National Guard, as I think everybody in this body knows, has a long and proud history of contributing to America's military operations abroad while providing vital support and security to civil authorities Since September 11, 2001, our citizen soldiers and airmen have taken on greater responsibilities and risk, from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan to providing critical disaster assistance in the United Now we see the tremendous value of the National Guard forces every time we look as they confront terrorists, provide critical support in unique areas such as Afghanistan where the agribusiness development teams are working to help provide agricultural know-how and better income to the farmers of Afghanistan, to areas where they provide water, food, and health supplies to victims of natural disasters. Furthermore, the Guard is a tremendous value for the capability it provides our Nation. It provides 40 percent of the total military force for around 4.5 percent of the budget. In other words, the Guard There is no doubt today we are asking more from the men and women of the National Guard than ever before, often at great cost to their I think this means we have a heavy responsibility to support our citizen soldiers and airmen in their unique dual mission of developing military support abroad and providing homeland defense stateside. While serving abroad, National Guard troops serve under Air Force and Army Commands in what is known as title 10 status, which refers to the section in the U.S. Code dealing with the military. But when the Guard operates at home, they serve under the command and control of the I had the honor of serving as commander in chief of the Missouri National Guard for 8 years. I can tell you that Missouri has a wide range of natural and sometimes human disasters ranging from tornadoes and floods to blizzards and ice storms. I called out the Guard for every single one of those and several more I probably cannot even remember: threatened prison insurrections, other civil disobedience, to tracking down escapees from prison. Right after Katrina--I think it was about a year after Katrina--I visited Jefferson Barracks, MO, where one of our National Guard engineer units is stationed. They told me proudly that when Katrina hit, they immediately sent one of their National Guard battalions to Katrina. They had all the equipment, the high-wheeled vehicles, the communications equipment. They did such a wonderful job, the adjutant general of Louisiana called and said: You have two more battalions; send us another one. They said: That is where the problem comes in. We only have equipment for one out of three battalions. The Guard was one-third resourced. We could have sent them down there in tennis shoes and a taxicab, but they needed the equipment that an engineer battalion has to deal with the problems of the aftermath of the floods and the hurricane. I think there is a lot more we can do to make this unique arrangement work more smoothly. The Guard will continue to play a critical role in response to another natural disaster or, heaven forbid, terrorist attack. To the men and women of the National Guard, we say: Thank you for that support. But more needs to be done. The amendment we are introducing today to strengthen the Guard consists of two planks which are designed, first, to increase the Guard's voice inside the Pentagon and, second, to clarify how the Federal military support to civil authorities will We would give the Chief of the National Guard more muscle in the Pentagon, providing a seat for him on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. With 40 percent of the force, one would think that big a portion of our total military capability would deserve to sit with the outstanding leaders of the Army, the Air Force, the Marines, and others who are there. One would think this large a segment of our force would be represented. When we have big decisions on the future of our resource allocation for the military--title X and, in this case, also title Last year--I thank my colleagues--we successfully authorized the promotion of the Chief of the National Guard to the rank of four-star general in last year's empowerment legislation. Additionally, this year's empowerment amendment will make certain that the Chief of the National Guard Bureau has a Vice Chief in the grade of lieutenant general. When you are dealing with that many problems, there is a major operation that needs to be handled by a deputy to the four-star Chief of the National Guard. It is critical to the day-to-day operations of the National Guard Bureau and to ensure the Guard is adequately This amendment will also fill the gaps between civilian and military emergency response capabilities. We would give the National Guard Bureau, in consultation with the States' adjutant generals, budgetary power to identify, validate, and procure equipment essential to their unique domestic missions so they will be better prepared to respond to emergencies here at home. The next time they call for a second engineer battalion, I hope we have the equipment to send one to whatever State The amendment also supports the designation of National Guard general officers as commanders of Army North and Air Force North commands. This will ensure unity of effort and of command between the National Guard in the 54 States and territories and the very important U.S. North command which protects the United States in the continental United Finally, our amendment gives State Governors tactical control of Federal troops responding to emergencies inside their State or territory. Time and time again, we have seen Reserve units stationed within close proximity to a natural or manmade disaster forced to stand by and watch when they could have been assisting injured victims in preventing loss of property. This amendment ensures that all available military forces be utilized as early as possible in an emergency situation. This way, our State leaders can act more quickly and decisively to mitigate disasters at home. Our citizen soldiers stand ready to defend the Nation, secure our homeland from natural disasters and terrorist attacks, and are now fighting overseas in the war on nor the Federal military support missions of the Guard are likely to diminish in importance at any time in the foreseeable future. In fact, the need for the National Guard is greater now than ever before. Now more than ever, as budgets are constrained and entitlements continue to grow at alarming rates, we should not be looking to reduce the Guard We have a responsibility to give the Guard the equipment, resources, and bureaucratic muscle they need to meet their critical dual mission. In order to do so, it is imperative we strengthen the decisionmaking capability of Guard leaders within the Department of Defense and make As one former leader of the Guard said: If you want us in on the big plays, at least let us in the huddle when you are planning to call I thank my colleagues for their past support of the Guard. I join with Senator Leahy in asking for continued support of the National Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending Thune amendment and call up my amendment No. 1597. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Brownback], for himself, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Inhofe, proposes an amendment numbered Mr. BROWNBACK. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism) At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REDESIGNATION OF NORTH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) On October 11, 2008, the Department of State removed North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, on (2) North Korea was removed from that list despite its refusal to account fully for its abduction of foreign citizens, proliferation of nuclear and other dangerous technologies and weapon systems to terrorist groups and other state sponsors of terrorism, or its commission of other past (3) On March 17, 2009, American journalists Euna Lee and Laura Ling were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border subsequently sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in a prison (4) On April 5, 2009, the Government of North Korea tested a long-range ballistic missile in violation of United Nations (5) On April 15, 2009, the Government of North Korea announced it was expelling international inspectors from, and recommissioning, its Yongbyon nuclear facility and ending its (6) Those actions were in violation of the June 26, 2008, announcement by the President of the United States that the removal of North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism was dependent on the Government of North Korea agreeing to a system to verify its declarations with respect (7) On May 25, 2009, the Government of North Korea conducted a second illegal nuclear test, in addition to conducting tests of its ballistic missile systems launched in (8) North Korea has failed to acknowledge or account for its role in building and supplying the secret nuclear facility at Al Kibar, Syria, has failed to account for all remaining citizens of Japan abducted by North Korea, and, according to recent reports, continues to engage in close cooperation with the terrorist Iranian Revolutionary Guard (9) There have been recent credible reports that North Korea has provided support to the terrorist group Hezbollah, including by providing ballistic missile components and personnel to train members of Hezbollah with respect to the development of extensive underground military facilities in (10) The 2005 and 2006 Country Reports on Terrorism of the Department of State state, with respect to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, ``Most worrisome is that some of these countries also have the capability to manufacture WMD and other destabilizing technologies that can get into the hands of terrorists. The United States will continue to insist that these countries end the support they give to terrorist (11) President Barack Obama stated that actions of the Government of North Korea ``are a matter of grave concern to all nations. North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security. By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council, North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community. North Korea's behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia. Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea's isolation. It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should designate North Korea as a country that has repeatedly provided support for acts of (1) section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)) (as continued in effect pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. (2) section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. (3) section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, this is a bipartisan amendment put forward by Senator Bayh and myself. I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. This is a bipartisan resolution and sense of the Senate that the administration should relist North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. As my colleagues know, the Bush administration, through a great deal of hoopla, listed North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. They took them off the list in spite of such terrible and erratic behavior as nuclear weapons, missile technology, and now taking U.S. citizens hostage and holding them. Nonetheless, the Bush administration, as part of the six-party talks, did an agreement, a deal to delist them as a state sponsor of terrorism. All that got us was more nuclear weapons, more missiles being sent off, more provocative action by the North Koreans, and a dismal situation. What we are asking with the amendment is that it is a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of In that regard, I wish to enter a few items in the Record to be printed at the end of my presentation that are currently in the news. This is yesterday's front page of the Washington Post where it talks about ``[North] Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back I ask unanimous consent that this full article be printed in the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. That is an old story. Unfortunately, we know very well about the gulags that exist in North Korea and the 200,000 people we believe are in those. Here is today's Washington Post. This was new information I found shocking: North Korea building mysterious military ties with the military junta in Burma now taking place and the possibility of them giving military equipment and supplies, I suppose possibly even nuclear arms and missile technology, to the military I ask unanimous consent that this be printed in the Record at the end The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. If that is not enough to relist them as a state sponsor of terrorism, I don't know what is. But there is a full record we can go forward with on relisting North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. At the outset, I think we ought to look at this and say this is an extremely tough situation for the United States. It is one on action to confront them on what they are doing to militarize some of the worst places and worst actors around the world and what North Korea is doing to threaten interests of the United States. All this is taking place while Kim Jong Il is ill. To what degree, we don't know for sure. A succession is being discussed. Of what nature, we are not sure. But clearly North Korea is doing the most provocative things they have probably done in the history of that provocative nation. It is taking place right now. We should notice it and recognize these are terrorist actions. We should clearly call for them to be I have, many times, spoken before regarding the long and outrageous list of crimes of the Kim regime. I will not go through those again at great length. But I will say the crimes committed by the North Korean regime include not only those external and diplomatic of nature-- violating agreements, treaties, conventions, and proliferating dangerous technologies to the world's worst actors--but the regime has also committed massive and unspeakable crimes against the North Korean people themselves who for decades have been beaten, tortured, raped, trafficked, starved, used as medical experiments, subjected to collective familial punishment, and executed in the most brutal and painful ways. If you want further details on that, read yesterday's Hundreds of thousands languish in the gulag and concentration camps spread out over the entire country. All the while, the world watches and wrings its collective hands. As we pledged never again, we watch as yet again another criminal regime commits a genocide. Never again I have introduced legislation to address these issues. I hope the Foreign Relations Committee can find time to take it up. The amendment before us today deals with another aspect of the North Korean criminal state, its longstanding and robust sponsorship of international terrorism. The amendment would place the Senate on record as standing for the proposition that North Korea's hostile and provocative actions will not be ignored. Indeed, they will have meaningful consequences under the law. This amendment, of which Senator Bayh is the lead cosponsor, expresses the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism based on its nuclear and missile proliferation, abductions, On October 11, 2008, the State Department removed North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism on which it had been placed since 1988. At the time, this is what President Bush said to the North Korean regime upon announcing that North Korea would be removed. He We will trust you only to the extent that you fulfill your promises. If North Korea makes the wrong choices, the United They have made the wrong choices. We should act accordingly. Sanctions are a critical part of our leverage to pressure North Korea to act. They should only be lifted based on North Korean performance. If the North Koreans do not meet their obligations, we should move quickly to reimpose sanctions that have been waived and consider new restrictions going They have not lived up to their obligations. They have continued Let's examine how well the North Korean regime has lived up to its commitment since being removed from the list. Since removal last October, the North Korean regime has done the following: launched a multistage ballistic missile over Japan in violation of U.N. Security Council sanctions; kidnapped and imprisoned two American journalists and sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in a North Korean prison camp; pulled out of the six-party talks vowing never to return; kicked out international nuclear inspectors and American monitors; restarted its nuclear facilities; renounced the 50-year armistice with South Korea; detonated a second illegal nuclear weapon; launched additional short-range missiles; is preparing to launch long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States; and today news accounts are reporting about North Korean proliferation to the Burmese junta, Add to this a long history of other ongoing illicit operations that finance the North Korean regime's budget, including the following: extensive drug smuggling; massive and complex operations to counterfeit U.S. currency, many of which are believed to be in wide circulation; money laundering; terrorist threats by the regime against the United States, Japanese, and South Korean civilians. That is what this regime and group has done and is doing. That is some of what they have done What have we done in response? The U.N. Security Council has passed another sanctions resolution similar to the same resolution North Korea has brazenly violated to get us to this point. In 2006, the State Department, in its terrorism report, said this about keeping North Korea on the list: North Korea ``continued to maintain their ties to Most worrisome is that some of these countries [including North Korea] also have the capability to manufacture [weapons of mass destruction] and other destabilizing technologies If that was the justification for the terror list in 2006, certainly North Korea's actions today fit that standard--perhaps even more so We cannot have it both ways. If we removed North Korea from the terrorism list last year as a reward for its dubious cooperation on nuclear weapons, we would only be reversing that step by adding it back after the regime betrayed its commitments and followed up with hostile I would also like to address this issue: It often has been raised with me--and the Secretary of State herself has raised this indirectly with me--that the multiple statutes that control the list of state sponsors of terrorism do not provide the legal ability for the Secretary of State to redesignate. I think this argument is flawed, and I would like to summarize that by reading the relevant portions of each of these acts, because here is the key point on it, that they are saying: Well, we have to find factual basis that is different from the first round for us to do that. We are going through a legal review of doing this. But here the state sponsor of terrorism list is controlled under two different acts: the Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign As to countries covered by the prohibition, it says this. This is The prohibitions contained in this section apply with respect to a country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided That is what it says in the Arms Export Control Act. The list I have just read goes through what has taken place, and they are clearly and repeatedly providing support for acts of international terrorism. It does not say anything about they cannot be relisted or we have to go through some elaborate finding process, that it cannot be based on actions they have done. These are the actions they have done in the last 6 months that are of public record. And it says the Secretary of State makes this determination and has fairly wide discretion to be Under section 628 of the Foreign Assistance Act, it says: The United States shall not provide any assistance to any country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. Again, the statute is very broad in its statement. It does not say anything about they cannot relist them. It says they can do this on the I do not know why we need to wait any longer, with the actions this government has taken and even with these most recent ones reported today of working with Burma or of the publicly done ones we know about of nuclear weapons detonation or the ones of missile technology being I recognize this is a sense of the Senate, so it is just a sense of this body. But this body has had a strong impact in prior actions when we took a sense-of-the-Senate resolution to list the Revolutionary Guard in Iran, that we believed they should be listed as a state sponsor of terrorism. The administration acted not long after that to I believe if this body took strong action here now and said we believe North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism, it would send a very strong and proper signal to the administration-- not that we are doing your job, but we believe this is the case and this is something that is meritorious toward North Korea and its That is why I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan Bayh- Brownback amendment and vote for this amendment to the Defense N. Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back Burner Seoul.--Images and accounts of the North Korean gulag become sharper, more harrowing and more accessible with each A distillation of testimony from survivors and former guards, newly published by the Korean Bar Association, details the daily lives of 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps: Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, as they age, they hunch over at the waist. Most work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition- related illnesses, usually around the age of 50. Allowed just one set of clothes, they live and die in rags, without soap, The camps have never been visited by outsiders, so these accounts cannot be independently verified. But high- resolution satellite photographs, now accessible to anyone with an Internet connection, reveal vast labor camps in the mountains of North Korea. The photographs corroborate survivors' stories, showing entrances to mines where former prisoners said they worked as slaves, in-camp detention centers where former guards said uncooperative prisoners were tortured to death and parade grounds where former prisoners said they were forced to watch executions. Guard towers and electrified fences surround the camps, photographs show. ``We have this system of slavery right under our nose,'' said An Myeong Chul, a camp guard who defected to South Korea. ``Human rights groups can't stop it. South Korea can't stop it. The United States will have to take up this issue at But the camps have not been discussed in meetings between U.S. diplomats and North Korean officials. By exploding nuclear bombs, launching missiles and cultivating a reputation for hair-trigger belligerence, the government of Kim Jong Il has created a permanent security flash point on the Korean Peninsula--and effectively shoved the issue of ``Talking to them about the camps is something that has not been possible,'' said David Straub, a senior official in the State Department's office of Korean affairs during the Bush and Clinton years. There have been no such meetings since ``They go nuts when you talk about it,'' said Straub, who is now associate director of Korean studies at Stanford Nor have the camps become much of an issue for the American public, even though annotated images of them can be quickly called up on Google Earth and even though they have existed concentration camps and twice as long as the Soviet Gulag. Although precise numbers are impossible to obtain, Western governments and human groups estimate that hundreds of thousands of people have died in the North Korean camps. North Korea officially says the camps do not exist. It restricts movements of the few foreigners it allows into the country and severely punishes those who sneak in. U.S. reporters Laura Ling and Euna Lee were sentenced last month to 12 years of hard labor, after being convicted in a closed trial on charges of entering the country illegally. North Korea's gulag also lacks the bright light of celebrity attention. No high-profile, internationally recognized figure has emerged to coax Americans into understanding or investing emotionally in the issue, said Suzanne Scholte, a Washington-based activist who brings camp survivors to the United States for speeches and marches. ``Tibetans have the Dalai Lama and Richard Gere, Burmese have Aung San Suu Kyi, Darfurians have Mia Farrow and George Clooney,'' she said. ``North Koreans have no one like that.'' Before guards shoot prisoners who have tried to escape, they turn each execution into a teachable moment, according to interviews with five North Koreans who said they have Prisoners older than 16 are required to attend, and they are forced to stand as close as 15 feet to the condemned, according to the interviews. A prison official usually gives a lecture, explaining how the Dear Leader, as Kim Jong Il is known, had offered a ``chance at redemption'' through hard The condemned are hooded, and their mouths are stuffed with pebbles. Three guards fire three times each, as onlookers see blood spray and bodies crumple, those interviewed said. ``We almost experience the executions ourselves,'' said Jung Gwang Il, 47, adding that he witnessed two executions as an inmate at Camp 15. After three years there, Jung said, he was allowed to leave in 2003. He fled to China and now lives Like several former prisoners, Jung said the most arduous part of his imprisonment was his pre-camp interrogation at the hands of the Bowibu, the National Security Agency. After eight years in a government office that handled trade with China, a fellow worker accused him of being a South Korean ``They wanted me to admit to being a spy,'' Jung said. ``They knocked out my front teeth with a baseball bat. They fractured my skull a couple of times. I was not a spy, but I admitted to being a spy after nine months of torture.'' When he was arrested, Jung said, he weighed 167 pounds. When his interrogation was finished, he said, he weighed 80 pounds. ``When I finally got to the camp, I actually gained weight,'' said Jung, who worked summers in cornfields and ``Most people die of malnutrition, accidents at work, and during interrogation,'' said Jung, who has become a human rights advocate in Seoul. ``It is people with perseverance who survive. The ones who think about food all the time go crazy. I worked hard, so guards selected me to be a leader in my barracks. Then I didn't have to expend so much energy, and Human rights groups, lawyers committees and South Korean- funded think tanks have detailed what goes on in the camps based on in-depth interviews with survivors and former guards who trickle out of North Korea into China and find their way The motives and credibility of North Korean defectors in the South are not without question. They are desperate to make a living. Many refuse to talk unless they are paid. South Korean psychologists who debrief defectors describe them as angry, distrustful and confused. But in hundreds of separate interviews conducted over two decades, defectors have told similar stories that paint a consistent portrait of The number of camps has been consolidated from 14 to about five large sites, according to former officials who worked in the camps. Camp 22, near the Chinese border, is 31 miles long and 25 miles wide, an area larger than the city of Los Angeles. As many as 50,000 prisoners are held there, a former There is a broad consensus among researchers about how the camps are run: Most North Koreans are sent there without any judicial process. Many inmates die in the camps unaware of the charges against them. Guilt by association is legal under North Korean law, and up to three generations of a wrongdoer's family are sometimes imprisoned, following a rule from North Korea's founding dictator, Kim Il Sung: ``Enemies of class, whoever they are, their seed must be eliminated Crimes that warrant punishment in political prison camps include real or suspected opposition to the government. ``The camp system in its entirety can be perceived as a massive and elaborate system of persecution on political grounds,'' writes human rights investigator David Hawk, who has studied the camps extensively. Common criminals serve time elsewhere. Prisoners are denied any contact with the outside world, according to the Korean Bar Association's 2008 white paper on human rights in North Korea. The report also found that suicide is punished with longer prison terms for surviving relatives; guards can beat, rape and kill prisoners with impunity; when female prisoners become pregnant without Most of the political camps are ``complete control districts,'' which means that inmates work there until death. There is, however, a ``revolutionizing district'' at Camp 15, where prisoners can receive remedial indoctrination in socialism. After several years, if they memorize the writings of Kim Jong Il, they are released but remain monitored by Since it offers a safe haven to defectors, South Korea is home to scores of camp survivors. All of them have been debriefed by the South Korean intelligence service, which presumably knows more about the camps than any agency outside But for nearly a decade, despite revelations in scholarly reports, TV documentaries and memoirs, South Korea avoided public criticism of the North's gulag. It abstained from voting on U.N. resolutions that criticized North Korea's record on human rights and did not mention the camps during leadership summits in 2000 or 2007. Meanwhile, under a ``sunshine policy'' of peaceful engagement, South Korea made major economic investments in the North and gave huge, unconditional annual gifts of food and fertilizer. The public, too, has been largely silent. ``South Koreans, who publicly cherish the virtue of brotherly love, have been inexplicably stuck in a deep quagmire of indifference,'' according to the Korean Bar Association, which says it publishes reports on human rights in North Korea to ``break Government policy changed last year under President Lee Myung-bak, who has halted unconditional aid, backed U.N. resolutions that criticize the North and tried to put human rights on the table in dealing with Pyongyang. In response, North Korea has called Lee a ``traitor,'' squeezed inter- An Myeong Chul was allowed to work as a guard and driver in political prison camps because, he said, he came from a intelligence agent, as were the parents of many of his fellow In his training to work in the camps, An said, he was ordered, under penalty of becoming a prisoner himself, never to show pity. It was permissible, he said, for bored guards ``We were taught to look at inmates as pigs,'' said An, 41, adding that he worked in the camps for seven years before escaping to China in 1994. He now works in a bank in Seoul. The rules he enforced were simple. ``If you do not meet your work quota, you do not eat much,'' he said. ``You are not allowed to sleep until you finish your work. If you still do not finish your work, you are sent to a little prison inside the camp. After three months, you leave that prison An said the camps play a crucial role in the maintenance of totalitarian rule. ``All high-ranking officials underneath Kim Jong Il know that one misstep means you go to the camps, Partly to assuage his guilt, An has become an activist and has been talking about the camps for more than a decade. He was among the first to help investigators identify camp buildings using satellite images. Still, he said, nothing will change in camp operations without sustained diplomatic In the Clinton years, high-level diplomatic contacts between Washington and Pyongyang focused almost exclusively on preventing the North from developing nuclear weapons and President George W. Bush's administration took a radically different approach. It famously labeled North Korea as part of an ``axis of evil,'' along with Iran and Iraq. Bush met with camp survivors. For five years, U.S. diplomats refused After North Korea detonated a nuclear device in 2006, the Bush administration decided to talk. The negotiations, however, focused exclusively on dismantling Pyongyang's In recent months, North Korea has reneged on its promise to abandon nuclear weapons, kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors, exploded a second nuclear device and created a major security administration's dealings with North Korea. The camps, for the time being, are a non-issue. ``Unfortunately, until we get a handle on the security threat, we can't afford to deal with human rights,'' said Peter Beck, a former executive director of the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Kim Young Soon, once a dancer in Pyongyang, said she spent eight years in Camp 15 during the 1970s. Under the guilt-by- association rule, she said, her four children and her parents At the camp, she said, her parents starved to death and her eldest son drowned. Around the time of her arrest, her husband was shot for trying to flee the country, as was her It was not until 1989, more than a decade after her release, that she found out why she had been imprisoned. A security official told her then that she was punished because she had been a friend of Kim Jong Il's first wife and that she would ``never be forgiven again'' if the state suspected She escaped to China in 2000 and now lives in Seoul. At 73, she said she is furious that the outside world doesn't take more interest in the camps. ``I had a friend who loved Kim Jong Il, and for that the government killed my family,'' she Clinton: U.S. Wary of Growing Burmese, North Korean Military Bangkok, July 21.--The Obama administration is increasingly concerned that nuclear-armed North Korea is building mysterious military ties with Burma, another opaque country with a history of oppression, Secretary of State Hillary ``We know that there are also growing concerns about military cooperation between North Korea and Burma, which we take seriously'' Clinton told reporters after talks in the Thai capital. ``It would be destabilizing for the region. It would pose a direct threat to Burma's neighbors.'' U.S. officials traveling with Clinton, who is in Thailand to attend a regional security forum, said the concerns about Burma and North Korea extend to possible nuclear cooperation. North Korea has a long history of illicit missile sales and proliferation, including secretly helping to build a Syrian nuclear reactor that was destroyed in 2007 by Israeli jets. ``This is one of the areas we'd like to know about,'' said one official. ``We have concerns, but our information is Burma, also known as Myanmar, is regarded as one of the world's most oppressive nations, run by generals who have enriched themselves while much of the country remains desperately poor. North Korea is an equally grim country, with vast prison camps and an ailing dictator, Kim Jong Il. The evidence of growing Burmese-North Korean cooperation since formal ties were restored in 2007 is extensive, but the full extent of the military relationship is unclear. The nuclear connection is even murkier, but intelligence agencies have tracked suspicious procurement of high- precision equipment from Europe, as well as the arrival in Burma of North Korean officials associated with the company connected to the Syria reactor, according to David Albright, director of the Institute for Science and International ``Something may be going on, but no one has any proof. It is a mix of suspicions and concerns,'' Albright said, adding that close examination of satellite imagery of suspected nuclear sites has turned up no evidence. But he said that the purchases of high-precision equipment were especially troubling because the equipment did not make sense for use in missiles and it was shipped to educational entities that had Japanese officials last month also arrested three people for attempting to illegally export dual-use equipment to Burma, via Malaysia, under the direction of a company involved in the illicit procurement for North Korean military Moreover, Albright said, European and U.S. intelligence agencies have identified people associated with Namchongang Trading Corp., a North Korean company also known as NCG, as working in Burma. NCG reportedly provided the critical link between Pyongyang and Damascus, acquiring key materials from vendors in China and probably from Europe and secretly transferring them to a desert construction site near the The State Department last month cited NCG for being ``involved in the purchase of aluminum tubes and other equipment specifically suitable for a uranium enrichment U.S. officials have observed other troubling connections. The U.S. Navy last month closely tracked Kang Nam 1, a rusty North Korean freighter, after the government in Pyongyang tested a nuclear weapon. Although U.S. officials were never completely certain the ship was headed to Burma, the ship returned to North Korea after the United States, China and other countries put pressure on Burma to respect a United Nations resolution barring most North Korean weapons exports. Photographs that have emerged in recent weeks also show an extensive series of 600 to 800 tunnel complexes and other underground facilities built in Burma with North Korean technical assistance near its new capital, Naypyidaw. North Korean officials can be spotted in the photos, which were taken between 2003 and 2006 and posted on the Web site of YaleGlobal Online by journalist Bertil Lintner, an expert on Burma has uranium deposits, but as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is required to allow any nuclear facilities. Russia in 2007 agreed to help build a 10-megawatt light-water reactor in Burma, but little appears At the news conference, Clinton also strongly criticized the Burmese government for its well-documented use of gang rape as a military tactic, organized by Burmese officers, against ethnic minorities. A new offensive against the Karen ethnic group has sent more than 4,000 refugees fleeing across ``We are deeply concerned by reports of continuing human rights abuses within Burma, particularly by actions that are mistreatment and abuse of young girls,'' Clinton said. The Obama administration is conducting a review of its Burma policy, which Clinton said has been placed on hold while Washington awaits the outcome of the trial of Nobel ``We have made clear we expect fair treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi, and we have condemned the way that she has been treated by the regime in Burma, which we consider to be baseless and totally unacceptable,'' Clinton said. The National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party, won a landslide electoral victory in 1990, but the military leadership refused to accept it. Since then, she has been under house arrest for most of the time, as have hundreds of In May, just days before Suu Kyi's six-year term under house arrest was due to expire, the government put her on trial for an incident involving a U.S. citizen who swam across Rangoon's Lake Inya to reach Suu Kyi's lakefront bungalow and allegedly stayed there one or two nights. Suu Kyi was taken to Rangoon's notorious Insein Prison on charges of violating the terms of her detention by hosting a foreigner, which could bring a three- to five-year prison term, according to Burmese opposition officials. Suu Kyi, 63, is said to be in poor health and has recently been treated ``Our position is that we are willing to have a more productive partnership with Burma if they take steps that are self-evident,'' Clinton said. She called on Burmese authorities to ``end the violence against their own people,'' including ethnic minorities, ``end the mistreatment of Aung The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Kerry, is prepared to comment and speak. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of his remarks, the Senator from Delaware be recognized as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, obviously North Korea's actions in recent weeks--months, really; testing a nuclear device on May 25 and launching ballistic missiles on July 4--received the appropriate objection in many different ways of China, Japan, South Korea, the United States, and many other countries. Clearly, those actions threaten to undermine the peace and security of northeast Asia, and the U.S. response to those actions ought to be and, I believe, is already resolute. China responded very clearly. The sanctions have been toughened--individual sanctions for the first time. A number of steps were taken by both the United Nations and China. China, incidentally, has been unprecedented in the personalization of some of the sanctions that it has put into I know the Senator from Kansas cares, obviously, enormously about the underlying issue here. But I have to say this amendment, while well intended, simply does not do what it is supposed to do. It has no impact other than the sense of the Senate: sending a message which at this particular moment, frankly, works counterproductively to other Right now, the Secretary of State is meeting at ASEAN. Right now, the various countries involved in this delicate process are working to determine how to proceed forward with respect to getting back to talks and defusing these tensions. For the Senate just to pop on an amendment like this at this moment in time not only sends a signal that complicates that process, but I think it also, frankly, will make it more difficult to secure the return of two American journalists, Laura It simply is an inappropriate interference without a foundation, I might add--without a foundation--in the law. Let me be very specific. When President Bush lifted the designation of terrorism--in fact, nothing that the Senator from Kansas has laid out here actually is supported either by the intelligence or by the facts. I could go through his amendment with specificity. Let me give an example. This is On March 17, 2009, American journalists . . . were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border by agents. . . . He is citing that as a rationale for putting them back on the list. Well, the fact is, the families themselves, as well as the two journalists--but the families--have acknowledged that they, in fact, were arrested for illegally crossing the border. So that is inappropriate. But not only is it inappropriate to cite a fact that is not a fact, but it is not a cause for putting somebody on the terrorism Nowhere do any of the actions cited here fit into the statutes that apply to whether somebody is designated as appropriately being on the terrorism list. Let me be more specific about that. When President Bush took them off the list, here is what they said. This is the President's The current intelligence assessment satisfies the second statutory requirement for rescission. Following a review of all available information, we see no credible evidence at this time of ongoing support by the DPRK for international terrorism, and we assess that the current intelligence assessment, including the most recent assessment published May 21, 2008, provides a sufficient basis for certification by the President to Congress that North Korea has not provided any support for international terrorism during the There is no intelligence showing to the contrary, as we come to the floor here today, and it is inappropriate for the Senate simply to step Our review of intelligence community assessments indicates there is no credible or sustained reporting at this time that supports allegations (including as cited in recent reports by the Congressional Research Service) that the DPRK has provided direct or witting support for Hezbollah, Tamil Tigers, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Should we obtain credible evidence of current DPRK support for international terrorism at any time in the future, the Secretary could again designate DPRK a state sponsor of terrorism. Well, we have not. It simply does not fit under the requirements. We need to use the right tools. This amendment is flawed and I am convinced could actually undermine what I know is going on right now in terms of efforts by a number of different parties to try to move this process forward. This is not the way a responsible Senate ought to go about trying to deal with an issue with this kind of diplomatic The relisting, incidentally, has no practical effect in terms of anything it would do with respect to our current policy other than raise the issue with respect to the Senate at this moment but, as I say, inappropriately with respect to the statutes it concerns. President Bush actually preserved all the existing financial sanctions on North Korea at the time he lifted the terror designation, and he kept them all in place by using other provisions of law. The fact is, this administration has, in fact, responded in order to put real costs on North Korea for its actions. We led the international effort at the United Nations Security Council, and we did enact sweeping new sanctions on North Korea, and by all accounts they are The U.N. Security Council resolution 1874, passed unanimously, imposed the first ever comprehensive international arms embargo on North Korea. Those sanctions are now beginning to take effect. A North Korean ship suspected of carrying arms to Burma turned around after it was denied bunkering services in Singapore, and the Government of Burma itself warned that the ship would be inspected on arrival to ensure that it complied with the U.N. arms embargo. So that is real. That is happening. Significantly, China has agreed to impose sanctions both on North Korean companies and individuals involved in nuclear and So the sanctions that were recently imposed by the Obama administration, in concert with the international community, are having a real impact. So I think we ought to give them time to work. I do not think we ought to come in here and change the dynamics that, as I say, I know are currently being worked on by the Secretary of State. As we are here in the Senate today, those meetings are taking place. It is better for the United States and the international community to focus our efforts on concrete steps rather than resort to a toothless and symbolic gesture. This will have no impact ultimately because we are still going to go down our course, but it can ripple the process which I might also point out, the President and Secretary of State have been closely communicating with allies and with partners in the region. They are currently involved in discussions with China, Russia, South Korea, and Japan on this issue. Even as we debate the issue here, the effort at the ASEAN Forum is specifically geared to try to coordinate our approach with our treaty allies and with others. We ought to give Third, obviously all of us reject the recent actions taken by North Korea. There is no doubt about that. But it was not so long ago that we were actually making some progress on the denuclearization effort. And observers of the region--those who are expert and who follow it closely--are all in agreement as to the rationale which has driven North Korea to take some of the actions it has taken. I was in China about a month and a half ago. I spent some time with Chinese leaders on this issue because one of the tests took place while I was there and I saw the Chinese reaction up close and personal. I saw the degree to which they were truly upset by it, disturbed by it, and took actions to deal with it. The fact is that they explained it, as have others, as a reaction by North Korea to perhaps three things: No. 1, the succession issues in North Korea itself; No. 2, the policies of the South Korean Government over the course of the last year or so; and No. 3, the fact that while they had nuclear weapons and had been engaged in a denuclearization discussion with the United States, most of the focus appeared to have shifted to Iran, and there was some sense that the focus should have remained where those nuclear weapons So I believe we need to preserve diplomatic flexibility in the weeks and months ahead. There is an appropriate time for the administration to come to us. There is an appropriate way for us to deal with this issue, to sit down with the administration, to make it clear to them that we think we ought to do this, to talk with them about it, to engage in what the rationale might be under the law. But as I say, none of the reasons that are legitimate under the law for, in fact, a designated country as going on the terrorist list is appropriate or fit here. I think that is the most critical reason of all. Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, thank you very much. I thank the floor manager on the majority side for this unanimous consent which allows me I wish to say a word or two about the Defense authorization bill which is before us, and then I want to pivot. I will talk about the health of our Nation's defense, but also about the health care of our Let me start off by extending my thanks to the leaders of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Levin and Senator McCain, and their staffs for the good work they have done. I wish to thank Senator Reed of Rhode Island for his contributions as well. Standing here on the floor, I am looking at Senator Reed, a graduate of the Military Academy at West Point, and right across the aisle, at Senator McCain, a graduate of the Naval Academy. It is great to have that kind of experience here in the Senate. They are sitting on opposite sides of the aisle, coming from schools that are sometimes thought to be rivals, but they are able to I wish to express my thanks to the President and to the Secretary of Defense Bob Gates. We have learned that in the last 7 years, cost overruns from major weapons systems in this country grew from about $45 million in 2001 to last year almost $300 billion, a growth over 7 years in cost overruns for major weapons systems in 2001 of $45 million and last year almost $300 billion. What we need is for the administration as well as the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs to say to the folks on the Armed Services Committee, but also to say to us in the Senate and in the House: These are the weapons systems we need, these are the threats we believe we face as a nation, and to give us some sense of priorities of the weapons systems we should support and fund, the troop levels we need and, frankly, the weapons systems we don't I was privileged to follow on the heels of the Presiding Officer, Senator Kaufman, about a month and a half ago to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He and Senator Reed, I think, led that CODEL and shared with us our needs in that part of the world. We need a military strategy and we also need a civilian strategy in Afghanistan, and I think this administration has given us a good two-pronged approach. We have good new leadership there on the military side. Basically, though, they said our job here is counterinsurgency. We need more troops, more trainers to train the Afghans and to train the military side, and then the civilian side. We also need mobility in terms of a lot of additional helicopters, about 150 new helicopters or additional ones coming in to provide the mobility to move our men and women all over the southern part of Afghanistan, and to meet the Taliban threat. The kind of weapon we don't use there or don't need there, I will be very blunt, is the F-22 which we discussed and debated here for the last several days, a fighter aircraft that has been around for a dozen or so years. We are still building more of them, but they have never flown a flight mission in Iraq and never flown a flight mission in Afghanistan either. The F-22 is limited in what it can do. It basically is a fighter, air-to-air combat. The Afghans, the Taliban, don't have fighter aircraft. In Iraq, the folks we are fighting there don't have aircraft. Meanwhile, we have F-15s, F-16s, F-18s. We are going to build 2,500 F-35s, for less than half the price of the F-22, which not only do dog fights but can also do ground-to-air support and a variety of different functions that the F-22 cannot for a lot less money. The administration, I think wisely, said as hard as it is sometimes to stop the production line on aircraft, in this case the F-22, in terms of what is cost effective, we need to refocus on the F-35 and on counterinsurgency, preparing for those kinds of challenges we face. We voted to do that, a 58-to-40 vote. I was very pleased with the vote and I commend everyone who voted as they did, and, frankly, the people who took the opposite view. There were some tough issues to deal with, I know particularly from folks in whose States the aircraft are being produced and systems for those aircraft are being produced. I know it is difficult to accept. But I am encouraged by that vote. My hope is we will pay heed to some of the priorities sent to us by the Secretary of Defense, which are designed to make sure we spend money on weapons systems that we are likely to need in the 21st century--certainly in the next decade or two or three--and I think with Sort of pivoting, if I can, after having said a word about the health of our Nation's defense, let me talk about the health of the people in our country. Some of my colleagues are probably getting tired of hearing me say this, but when talking about health care, I mention four things: No. 1, we spend more money for health care than any other nation on Earth. No. 2, we don't get better results. No. 3, we have people in this country today losing their health care. No. 4, some 47 million Americans today don't have health insurance, don't have health care. We have to do better than this. We have to do better than this. I There has been a big focus, as there should be, on extending health care coverage to 47 million folks who don't have it, and we need to address that, obviously. Having said that, the other concern we need to address is reining in the growth of health care costs. We are getting clobbered as a nation in terms of being able to compete with the rest of the world where we pay so much more money for health care than any other nation, and employers pay, and we are getting clobbered as a Federal Government with the cost of Medicare and Medicaid, and State governments trying to bear their share of the cost of Medicaid. They Over lunch today, I said to my colleagues in our caucus meeting that wouldn't it be great if somehow we could have our cake and eat it too. I said that with a piece of chocolate cake staring me right in the face. But as it turned out, there are delivery systems, if you will, of health care in this country where they are not necessarily having their cake and eating it too, but where they are able to provide better health care, better outcomes, at a lower price. Think about that: better health care, better outcomes, better quality of health care at a The names are beginning to become familiar to us. Some are already familiar: Mayo in Minnesota, and now they have an operation down in Florida too to see if that model will work in Florida, and it has; Kaiser Permanente in northern California, an outfit called Intermountain Health--all of these are nonprofits--Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, OH, an outfit called Geisinger in Hershey, PA; there is what is called a health care cooperative in the State of Washington, I believe it is around Puget Sound, called Puget Sound Cooperative where they have been able to emulate this interesting result of better quality outcomes, better health care, lower prices. What we need to do is to attempt not only to extend health care coverage to folks who don't have it--47 million--but to rein in the growth of health care costs. The idea that health care costs grow at 2 or 3 or 4 percent over the consumer price index, to continue to do that is going to cripple us economically and competitively as a nation. It is going to cripple our ability to rein in our large and growing In the last 8 years in this Nation we ran up as much new debt as we did in the first 208 years of our Nation's history. Think about that: In the last 8 years, we ran up as much new debt in this country as we did in our first 208 years as a nation. This year we are on track to have the biggest single-year deficit we have ever had. We are also in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and we are trying to stimulate the economy and get it moving. I am encouraged that it is starting to move, but that is a huge deficit, coming on the heels of, frankly, 8 years where we spent like drunken sailors, and I know how drunken sailors spend. It is not a pretty sight, and this is, We need to go to school on the Mayos, the Geisingers, the Cleveland Clinics, the Kaiser Permanentes, the Puget Sounds, the Intermountain Healths, and see what we can learn from them. What is their secret? How are they able to do this, better outcomes, less price? As it turns out, there are a number of things they do in common. I wish to mention a few of them today. Among the things they do, they have literally brought on to their staff the doctors at Cleveland Clinic, for example, who provide health care. They are on staff at the Cleveland Clinic. The same is true at Mayo and these other nonprofits. I saw an interesting special on CNN a couple of weekends ago. They were interviewing a number of people who worked at the Cleveland Clinic. They interviewed a fellow who is a doctor, a cardiologist, as I recall. He used to be in private practice. He said, in the old days when I was on my own in private practice or group practice, I got paid, compensated, for the number of hearts I operated on. If somebody came to me and they had a heart problem and it could be addressed by diet or exercise or medicine, he said, usually I didn't prescribe those things. I didn't get paid for doing that. If they needed to have a heart operation and we could address their problem with an operation, he said, I got paid for that. As a result, I was more inclined to operate on people's hearts than to use some approaches that were arguably more cost effective. He went on to say, now I work for the Cleveland Clinic. I am a staff doc here. I don't have to operate on people's hearts to be compensated. I can provide good advice, help people with their diet problems, their exercise problems, their weight problems. I can help people better understand what their opportunities are with medicine. I So a light went off for me. Some of us are hearing quite a bit the need to get away from these fee-for-service deals where we basically incentivize doctors, hospitals, and nurses to ask for and order more visits, more procedures, more MRIs, more lab tests, for imaging, more x-rays, because they get paid for it, because they know that by doing more of everything, they reduce the likelihood that they are going to be sued. That sort of gets us in this conundrum where we overuse health care. If we are going to have real success in drawing down the costs of health care, part of it will be addressing the issue of fee for service, get away from that practice, and get away from the Let me mention some of the things they are doing at these five or six entities I mentioned, these nonprofits. Among the things they do is coordinate care. I use my mom as an example. My mom is now deceased. She lived in Florida for roughly the last 30 or so years of her life. She had dementia; she had congestive heart failure; she had arthritis. She had five doctors. The last years of her life that she was down there, my sister and I would go down to visit my mom about every other month or so. We would take turns, and we would go with our mom to visit her doctors. These five doctors my mom had never talked to each other. In fact, I don't think they knew that the other doctors existed. They were all in the aggregate prescribing something like 15 different kinds of prescription medicines. We kept them at her home in what looked like my dad's old fishing tackle box. It was compartmentalized with medicines to take before breakfast, during breakfast, after breakfast; before lunch, during lunch, and throughout the day. Some of those medicines my mom was prescribed, she didn't need to take. Somebody needed to know what she was taking and say, You shouldn't be taking these two medicines in combination; they are hurting you. We didn't One of the things these nonprofits do is coordinate the care that is provided to my mom or anybody's mom or dad. Another thing that would have been very helpful for my mom or other people in that situation is to have electronic health records. If my mom had an electronic health record such as we have in the VA and like we are developing in Delaware and some other States, when my mom went from doctor's office to doctor's office they would know in each office who else she was seeing and the medicines she was being prescribed, the lab tests and everything. They would have it right there for her when she came for We have a great ability to harness information technology or electronic health care records, which are a big part of that. Our nonprofits I have talked about--the half dozen or so--have that in common. On wellness and prevention, we know it is not just from nonprofits but out in California is Safeway, and these people have supermarkets all over America and several hundred thousand employees. Their health care costs from 2004 to 2008 have been level and flat. They have incentivized employees to do the right thing for themselves, in terms of holding down their weight, helping them get off tobacco, to lethargy, to get off the sofa, and to eat what is right; and there are antismoking campaigns and all kinds of stuff. So we have a good model It is not just the nonprofits but a lot of employers are starting to There are another one or two points I will mention on the nonprofits. On chronic disease management, such as heart disease and diabetes, I am told that about 80 percent of the cost of these chronic diseases can be controlled by four factors: diet, exercise, overweight/obesity, and smoking. Those four factors control about 80 percent of the cost of our expenditures on chronic care. If we work with those four items, we will help reduce the costs and provide better outcomes for people. We will also hold down our costs. There are a couple lessons from the nonprofits and others. Part of it is pharmacy--making sure people who need pharmaceutical medicines, small and large molecules, are taking those, and somebody is checking to make sure they are taking what they Focusing on primary care, many of those people coming out of medical schools want to be specialists. They are not interested in being primary care doctors. We need more primary care doctors. We need to change the incentives to get more primary care doctors, which is what we need. Another idea is for us to pool insurance costs. As my colleagues know, we have the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan. We have an insurance pool where we pool all the Federal employees and their dependents and the retirees and their dependents into one large pool to purchase health insurance. They get it at a not cheap price but a pretty good price. One of the reasons why is, when you have a lot of people in the purchasing pool, you get a good variety and much better costs. If you think about the administrative costs for health insurance, as a percentage of premiums, I am told, in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program, it is about 10 percent. When it comes to people buying individual policies and small businesses, their administrative costs as a percentage of premiums are about 30 percent. So the idea of creating large purchasing pools makes a whole lot of I will close here. The idea that we would pass health care legislation and stop extending coverage for people who don't have it-- if that is all we do, we have failed the American people. We have to do at least two things. One is extend coverage but also make sure the coverage we extend provides better coverage, better quality outcomes and better health care and that we do so at a price that is diminished and does not continue to expand by several times the rate of inflation. We can do that going forward. That is what we need to do. My friends have been generous in allowing me to proceed. I see several Senators are anxious to get back into the debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the Senator from Kansas concerning North Korea. I must say I was entertained by the outlook--as far as North Korea's behavior is concerned--by the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. I can't remember when I have disagreed more. The State Department's 2008 Country Reports on Terrorism stated that ``as part of the six-party talks process, the U.S. reaffirmed its intent to fulfill its commitment regarding the removal of the designation of the DPRK as a state sponsor of terrorism in parallel with the DPRK's actions on denuclearization and in accordance with They certainly haven't taken any action on denuclearization, and it certainly hasn't been in accordance with the criteria set forth by law. There was a problem with this trade, however. We delisted North Korea, and we got something worse than nothing. Facts are stubborn things. In response to our action, Pyongyang has embarked on a pattern of astonishing belligerence and has reversed even the previous steps it had taken toward the denuclearization prior to its removal from the A few facts. In December 2008--just 2 months after the United States removed Pyongyang from the list--North Korea balked at inspections of its nuclear facilities and ceased disablement activities at the Yongbyon reactor. In March, the regime seized two American journalists near the China-North Korean border and subsequently sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in the North Korean gulag. These are two American citizens who may have strayed over a border. Does that mean they are sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in the most harsh prison camps in the world? What are we going to do about it? It is remarkable. Two weeks later, it tested a long-range ballistic missile, in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions, and then announced it was expelling international inspectors from Yongbyon, reestablishing the facility, and ending North Korean participation in disarmament talks. In May, Pyongyang conducted its second nuclear test; in June, a North Korean ship suspected of carrying illicit cargo departed North Korea in likely defiance of U.N. Security Council obligations; and earlier this month, Pyongyang again launched short- and medium-range missiles into the Sea of Japan, including on the Fourth of July. All these are indications that the North Koreans somehow should not be listed as terrorists? I think we ought to, frankly--I respect and appreciate my friend from Kansas. Maybe we ought to have a binding resolution, rather than a sense of the Senate. It is remarkable that these events have taken place against a backdrop of belligerence and intransigence by North Korea. Pyongyang has never accounted for or even acknowledged its role in assisting the construction of a nuclear reactor in Syria, which the Israelis had to bomb. Similarly, it has refused to provide a complete and correct declaration of its nuclear program. Of course, something we all know, which is one of the great tragedies in the history of the world, is this is a gulag of some 200,000 people, where people are regularly beaten, starved, and executed. According to the Washington Post, most of them work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition-related illnesses, usually at around the age of 50. They are allowed just one set of clothes. They live and die in rags, without soap, socks, underclothes or sanitary It is not an accident that the average South Korean is several inches taller than the average North Korean. This regime may be the most repressive and oppressive and Orwellian in all the world today. So the Chinese have been serious--according to Mr. Kerry, the Senator from Massachusetts, the Chinese have been resolute on the issue of the ship inspections. The U.N. Security Council resolution calls for monitoring and following of the ship, and if the decision is made that they need to board a North Korean ship, if the North Koreans refuse, then the following ship cannot board but can follow them into a port, where the port authorities are expected to board and inspect the vessel. And then that violation is reported to the U.N. Security Council. That ought to rouse some pretty quick action. I don't share the confidence of the Senator from Massachusetts that if a North Korean ship goes into a port at Myanmar, you will see likely action, except maybe the offloading of Look, the North Koreans have clearly been engaged in selling anything they can to anybody who will buy it because they need the money-- whether it be drugs, counterfeit currency, nuclear technology or missiles. Every time we have held onto the football, like Lucy, they I think this is a very modest proposal of the Senator from Kansas. I point out that years and years of six-party talks, different party talks, negotiations, conversations, individuals who have been assigned as chief negotiators who then end up somehow negotiating, with the end If the North Koreans continue to test weapons, test missiles, sooner or later, they will match a missile with a weapon that will threaten the United States of America. Right now, those missiles they are testing go over Japanese territory. I think it is pretty obvious we are dealing with a regime of incredible and unbelievable cruelty and oppression of their own people. The newly published Korean bar association details the daily lives of the 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps. Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, This is a regime that, in any interpretation of the word, is an outrageous insult to the world and everything America stands for and believes in. I believe they will pose a direct threat, over time, to the security of not only Asia but the world. They were able to export technology all the way to Syria, obviously. Why should they not be able I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the amendment by the Senator from Kansas, and I hope we can vote on that sooner rather than The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized. Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Bennett from Utah as a cosponsor of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank my colleague from Arizona. I think he understands more than anybody in this body the situation and what happens in a gulag-type situation. That has drawn me to the topic of North Korea for a couple years--the human rights abuses. Hundreds and thousands of North Koreans are fleeing to be able to simply get food, and a couple hundred thousand of them are in the gulag system. It is unbelievable that this can happen in 2009. We have Google Earth that can even show this. But we just say: OK, that is the sort of thing that happens there. It is mind-boggling to me that we wouldn't act I appreciate the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, the Senator from Massachusetts, who is a distinguished Senator and is very bright and experienced in foreign policy. I could not disagree with him more about North Korea. We have had an ongoing dialog and discussion about this. He makes the point that we should not pop this on the bill. I have been trying for months for us to relist them as terrorists. They should not have been delisted in the first place. It was a terrible process move on the Bush administration to try to move the talks forward, saying we are going to delist you and you are going to do something for us. Pyongyang and Kim Jong Il said thank you very much, and now we are going to stick it in your face, which is what they have continued to do. I have listed the things, as the Senator from The thought that we are acting resolutely, to me, is an insult to the people in North Korea who have lived under this oppressive regime. We are not acting resolutely toward North Korea. We are not putting any sanctions on them. We have asked for international sanctions, but why aren't we willing to put sanctions on ourselves? If we think this is such a proper course to follow, and we are willing to push it on an international body, why wouldn't we be willing to do it ourselves? Why wouldn't we be willing to list them as a terror nation, as a state sponsor of terror? I don't understand that; why, if it is good in the Plus, we need to have teeth into this. This is a modest--a modest-- proposal. It is a resolution, a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism. We are not relisting them. That is an administration call. We are saying we, as a body, given the provocative actions that have taken place since they have been delisted clearly merits the relisting of North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. That is our opinion, and that is what we Without a foundation in the law, it is clearly--as I read previously--allowed for the Secretary of State to determine that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. That is the actual wording of the law in the Arms Export Control Act. Clearly, they have acted to sponsor international terrorism with their relation with Burma, with the missiles, with the nuclear weapons, and with the proliferation they He says, and is suggesting, that delisting has no practical effect. I believe it does have a practical effect, and it certainly does on the administration's stance toward North Korea and their international posture toward North Korea. Plus, it has a practical effect on what we can provide for as far as aid from the United States to North Korea. We shouldn't be providing aid to the North Koreans. We should provide food aid, if we can monitor it. We shouldn't be giving oil to the North Koreans. That should be limited so the administration cannot do that. They would not be able to if they are listed as a state sponsor of Mr. President, it will hurt the people of North Korea and those who are in the North Korean gulags if we don't relist them. It recovers any vestige of hope they might have that at some point in time somebody of enough stature, such as the United States Government, is going to take enough notice that they are going to put pressure on the North Korean regime. I have talked with some people who were refuseniks in the Soviet Union, in a Soviet gulag during an era where we had far less communication capacity than we do today, and yet they were able to get messages at that point in time into the Soviet gulag that the Americans were putting pressure on the Soviet Union and the lack of human rights in the Soviet Union, and it gave them hope. It gave them hope in the If we can pass this, it can give people in the gulags in North Korea hope that somebody is at least paying enough attention to put pressure on this, and maybe they may be able to live longer, or actually live at all. It can give them hope, instead of ``abandon hope all ye who enter here,'' as it says at the entrance to Inferno and as it is in the gulag So it is a modest resolution, and I would hope my colleagues would vote overwhelmingly for this resolution to relist North Korea as a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that amendment No. 1528 be called The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Lieberman], for himself, Mr. Graham, Mr. Begich, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hutchison, and Mr. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To provide authority to increase Army active-duty end strengths for fiscal year 2010 as well as fiscal year 2011 and 2012) SEC. 402. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY FOR INCREASES OF ARMY ACTIVE- (a) Authority to Increase army Active-Duty End Strength.-- (1) Authority.--For each of fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012, the Secretary of Defense may, as the Secretary determines necessary for the purposes specified in paragraph (2), establish the active-duty end strength for the Army at a number greater than the number otherwise authorized by law up to the number equal to the fiscal-year 2010 baseline plus (2) Purpose of increases.--The purposes for which an increase may be made in the active duty end strength for the (A) To increase dwell time for members of the Army on (C) To achieve reorganizational objectives, including increased unit manning, force stabilization and shaping, and (b) Relationship to Presidential Waiver Authority.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the President under section 123a of title 10, United States Code, to waive any statutory end strength in a time of war or (c) Relationship to Other Variance Authority.--The authority in subsection (a) is in addition to the authority to vary authorized end strengths that is provided in subsections (e) and (f) of section 115 of title 10, United (1) In general.--If the Secretary of Defense increases active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2010 under subsection (a), the Secretary may fund such an increase through Department of Defense reserve funds or through an (2) Fiscal years 2011 and 2012.--(2) If the Secretary of Defense plans to increase the active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2011 or 2012, the budget for the Department of Defense for such fiscal year as submitted to Congress shall include the amounts necessary for funding the active-duty end strength for the Army in excess of the (1) Fiscal-year 2010 baseline.--The term ``fiscal-year 2010 baseline'', with respect to the Army, means the active-duty end strength authorized for the Army in section 401(1). (2) Active-duty end strength.--The term ``active-duty end strength'', with respect to the Army for a fiscal year, means the strength for active duty personnel of Army as of the last Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased and proud to introduce this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors. To state it briefly, it extends the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army by 30,000 over the next 3 years, effective with the commencement of fiscal year 2010. It doesn't mandate this increase, but it expands the authority of the Secretary of Defense, obviously, with the support and authorization of the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, to extend the end strength of the U.S. Army. End strength means how many soldiers can the U.S. Army have. Of course, it does this to reduce the tremendous stress on the U.S. Army, which is carrying the burden of combat in two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan today, and over the next year or 18 months will be in this unique position. Progress has been made, thank God, in Iraq, and the Iraq Security Forces are progressively taking over responsibility for keeping the security in their country. The drawdown of American soldiers is happening in a methodical and responsible way, and I again express my appreciation to President Obama that it is happening in that way. At the same time, we are increasing our troop presence in Afghanistan. Bottom line: The demand for members of the U.S. Army on the battlefield over the next year, 18 months, at the outside 2 years, is going up. If the supply remains constant, that means the stress on every soldier in the U.S. Army and his or her family will not be reduced. As a matter of fact, it will go up. The term for this--which I will get to in a This is an amendment that began with members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and a comparable amendment in the House Armed Services Committee, recognizing, as we all do, the tremendous stress that our Army is under, the extraordinary job they are doing in Iraq This is really the next great generation of the American military. But we see in it some tough statistics: the increase in mental health problems, the increase in divorces of members of the service, and, There are many things we have supported in this Senate and the Congress--and the administration has--to respond to each one of those problems. But in a way, the most direct thing we can do is to increase the size of the U.S. Army so there is less pressure on every soldier in the Army, in this sense. Every time we add another soldier to the U.S. Army--and we are talking about authorization to add 30,000 more--it means that much more time every other member of the U.S. Army can spend back at base retraining, preparing and, most important of all, spending As I know the Presiding Officer knows--and I know the President of the United States knows it too--the good news is that the Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, who has done and is doing an extraordinary job for our country with, of course, the support and authorization of President Obama, yesterday announced that he would be temporarily increasing the Active-Duty end strength of the U.S. Army by 22,000 soldiers over the I cannot sufficiently express my words of appreciation for Secretary Gates's decision. He acted by employing the emergency authority he has in an authorization of the use of force and a built-in statutory waiver he has up to 3 percent of existing end strength to expand the size of the Army. This amendment, which had been planned, and was in the committee before this great action by Secretary Gates yesterday, is now before us, and I am honored to offer this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors who are listed on this amendment as a way to do two things: The first is that it literally increases from 547,000 to 577,000-plus the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army, and to leave that authority there in case there is a need that Secretary Gates and the President see in the coming 3 years to raise the number. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. McCAIN. It is my understanding that the amendment authorizes the additional forces Secretary Gates said yesterday in his speech that we need--or the day before yesterday. Why do we need to put this into the Mr. LIEBERMAN. Two reasons. The first is that it is a bit beyond what Secretary Gates did. He authorized using the extraordinary powers he possesses as Secretary in this time of conflict up to 22,000 for the next 3 years. The amendment authorizes--doesn't mandate, doesn't appropriate--30,000 for the next 3 years. So it gives some latitude, depending on how conditions go in Iraq and Afghanistan, to go a bit further--8,000 more, if necessary, over the next 3 years. Second, I say to my friend from Arizona, when this amendment started, we didn't know Secretary Gates was going to do this. I am grateful he did, but this amendment now--frankly, as Secretary Gates himself said to me yesterday, and I appreciate it and I don't think he would mind if I repeated it on the Senate floor--gives the Senate and Congress the opportunity to essentially vindicate and support the step that the Secretary has made and, as he put it, send a message from the Senate to the members of the U.S. Army that help is on the way. Mr. McCAIN. And there is no doubt that the Army very badly needs the Mr. LIEBERMAN. My friend from Arizona is absolutely right. There is no doubt, based on the demand, certainly temporarily, over the next 18 months, perhaps 2 years, as we are drawing down in Iraq, but not as rapidly as we are adding forces in Afghanistan, that there is at least a temporary need for more than the authorized 547,000 members of the Mr. McCAIN. And if I could question the Senator further, perhaps this would illuminate any requirement for stop loss or for involuntary Mr. LIEBERMAN. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons The decision to eliminate the routine use of ``stop loss'' authority in the Army requires a larger personnel flow for each deploying unit to compensate for those whose contract So, yes, this makes it possible to end the use of stop loss, which is essentially, in layman's terms, a way to require people to stay actively deployed longer than they originally were going to be Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. We have illuminated most of the reasons in our exchange why this amendment is important. I will simply add a few more things Secretary Gates said yesterday, which The army has reached a point of diminishing returns in their multiyear program to reduce the size of its training That is the training and support which supports the Active-Duty Army. The cumulative effect of these factors is that the Army faces a period where its ability to continue to deploy combat units at acceptable fill rates is at serious risk. Here is the point I just made in response to Senator McCain's Based on current deployment estimates, this is a temporary A temporary point of stress. We hope and pray that is true. It which will peak in the coming year and abate over the course Mr. President, in addition to the Secretary of Defense, we heard from the Army's Chief of Staff, GEN George Casey, and Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, who have been advocates within the Pentagon for this increase in end strength, and I thank them for that. Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told our Armed Services Committee earlier this year that the light at the end of the tunnel, as he put it, is still more than 2 years away, and that is only if everything goes according to plan, which in combat, obviously, often does not. Again, I say this is an authorization; it is not a mandate. I will add that Secretary Gates announced yesterday that he will find a way to fund the additional troops in this year and fiscal year 2010--the one that begins October 1--by reprogramming other funds appropriated to the Pentagon for fiscal year 2011, which is the budget that will be presented to us next year, if it is probable that the Department of Defense will require funding as part of its normal operations, and more likely as part of the OCO fund--the overseas contingency operation fund--which supports our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. I cannot say enough, I know all of us in the Senate believe we cannot say enough, in gratitude to the members of the U.S. Army who are leading the battle for us against the Islamic extremists and terrorists who attacked us on 9/11/01. We owe them a debt we can never fully One thing we can do, that Secretary Gates did yesterday and the Senate can do in this amendment, is to send a message to our troops in the field that help is on the way in the most consequential way, which I ask that when the vote be taken, it be taken by the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? Mr. LIEBERMAN. Again I say to my colleagues I am doing that, although I expect there will be very strong support for this, because I believe it is the most visible way for this Senate to send the message to the U.S. Army of appreciation and gratitude, to them and their families, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me commend Senator Lieberman and others who support this amendment. We in the Armed Services Committee are very supportive of previous increases; indeed, we led the way on some of them. Because of the stress on the Army and the number of commitments which had been made in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must give the kind of support to our troops they deserve and the American people want us to One of the ways we can reduce some of the stress is by increasing the end strength so the dwell time is more sufficient and there are other positive spinoffs as well from this kind of increase in the authorized The Secretary made a very powerful speech the other day when he called for an increase of 22,000, I believe, in the end strength. That end strength is temporary, it is almost as large as this--not quite; this is 30,000, but this is surely in the ballpark. It is appropriate. It is authority, it is not mandatory, and I think it is a very positive signal to send to our men and women in uniform and to their families. I The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, briefly I thank Senator Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, not just for his strong statement of support now but for the support he has given during our committee's deliberations to the goal of achieving an increase in Army Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Begich). Without objection, it is so Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am going to talk about an amendment we have not yet cleared unanimous consent for it to be brought up. I am hopeful that will come. But in order to advance the issue, I intend to talk about my amendment, No. 1475, without offering it at this time. I think it is an appropriate amendment to talk about at this point following Senator Lieberman's amendment because his amendment deals One of the reasons it is important to do that is the stress that the restricted numbers provide on our military personnel. Senator Lieberman mentioned, and I will repeat, the number of suicides and attempted suicides by our young men and women serving in the military has increased and one of the reasons, frankly, is that the repeated deployments and the length of the deployments have added to the stress Health experts agree that there is most likely a combination of factors leading to this increase in suicides. Many of these factors are simply the results of the prolonged conflict that our Nation finds itself in, including multiple deployments, extended separations from family and loved ones, and the overwhelming stress of combat experiences; each placing a unique and tremendous strain on the men and But while Congress has recognized these strains, and acted to help provide relief by increasing the size of our forces and thereby reducing the number and frequency of deployments, we cannot as easily remedy the stress or mental trauma created by combat experience. For those who have had to witness the ugliness and devastation of war first-hand, they have encountered something very unnatural for the human mind to comprehend or accept. For these service members, recovering from these experiences involves a long and arduous journey in learning to identify, control and cope with a wide array of emotions. And this learning process is often only accomplished with the guidance and management of highly trained mental or behavioral health In this light, we in Congress have acted to increase funding for more mental health providers and improved access for our troops and their families, and we have sharpened the focus of the military on addressing these care needs. That is very positive and has had a very positive What we must now focus on, and direct the military's attention to, is the potentially harmful practice of administering antidepressants to a population that frequently moves throughout a theater of war and is therefore susceptible to gaps in mental health management. We are not certain they are getting the follow-up care they need. A 2007 report by the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team survey of U.S. troops, about 12 percent of combat troops in Iraq, and 17 percent of combat troops in Afghanistan, are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope with this stress. This equates to roughly 20,000 troops on such medications in theatre What I find particularly troubling, when reviewing these figures, is that the Pentagon has yet to establish an official clearinghouse that accurately tracks this kind of data. In fact, the Army's best reported estimate can only tell us that the authorized or prescribed drug use by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is believed to be evenly split between antidepressants--mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs--and prescription sleeping pills. My amendment would provide us with the information so we know what is happening with the use of these Providing that this best estimate contains some degree of accuracy, it is important for us to also recognize that many of these same antidepressants, after strong urging by the FDA, recently expanded their warning labels to state that young adults--ages 18-24 years old-- may be at an elevated risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior while using the medication. This same age group--18-24 years old--represents 41 percent of our military forces serving on the front lines in Iraq While keeping this warning label in mind, it is imperative that my colleagues understand that nearly 40 percent of Army suicide victims in 2006 and 2007 are believed to have taken some type of antidepressant drugs--and overwhelmingly these SSRIs. And as I mentioned at the beginning of this statement, the number of Army suicides reported each This class of antidepressants--these SSRIs--are unlike most earlier classes of psychiatric medications in that they were, from their inception, specifically designed for use as an antidepressant --that is, they were engineered to target a particular process in the brain that plays a significant role in depression and other anxiety disorders. More significantly, however, these SSRIs are unlike most other antidepressant medications because they are still allowed by Department of Defense policy to be prescribed to service members while they are deployed and directly engaged in overseas operations. Now, to be fair, there is widespread consensus in the community of professional mental health providers, and empirical evidence to support, that SSRIs do offer significant benefit for the treatment of posttraumatic stress and some forms of depression. And although there are some side effects, they are reportedly much milder and shorter in duration than other antidepressants. Additionally, SSRIs are also believed to potentially prevent, or at least some believe, lesson the more harmful long-term effects of posttraumatic stress disorder. My concern, however, and hopefully that of my Senate colleagues, is not the long-term efficacy of these SSRIs, but more pointedly the volume and manner in which these drugs are being administered to our You see, unlike medications that work on an as-needed basis, SSRIs only begin to work after having been taken every day--at a specific dosage--for a significant period of time. This frequently translates to a 3 to 6 week latency period before the therapeutic effect materializes and patients begin to feel improvement. In light of the population I have been discussing, there are two very readily apparent problems with this shortcoming--first, is that service members serving in forward operating areas, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, are quite frequently subject to moving between bases or into other areas--some so remote that there may be no trained mental health provider available to administer the treatment and to make sure it is effective. Second, and more importantly, is that this initial period is when patients, particularly younger patients, often suffer an escalation in In essence, DOD may be prescribing SSRIs to its service members, without the assurance that they will remain in a capacity to be observed by a highly trained mental health provider. Worse yet, these same patients may very likely find themselves ordered off to conduct combat operations during this same latency period. Let's return our focus back to the alarming increase in the number of military and veteran suicides reported in 2008 and 2009. At what point do we step forward to direct that action be taken by DOD to capture, track and report this data? And at what point do we ensure that DOD is properly prescribing, dispensing and administering these drugs to our troops without having in place the necessary As a first step in this direction, the amendment I intend to introduce will accomplish a better understanding as to the potential magnitude of this issue. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to capture, at a macro level--at a macro level, not individual information, without divulging or violating any protected patient health information--the volume and types of antidepressants, psychotropics or antianxiety drugs being prescribed to our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will also require DOD, beginning in June of 2010 and then annually thereafter through 2015, to report to Congress an accurate percentage of those troops currently and previously deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan since 2005 who have been I wish to reiterate that this measure specifically directs the disclosure of this information by DOD to be done in such a way as to not violate the individual patient privacy rights of our service men or This legislation further directs DOD to contact the National Institute of Mental Health and provide any and all data as determined necessary by the Institute to conduct a scientific peer reviewable study to determine whether these types of prescriptions, and/or the method in which they are being prescribed and administered by DOD, are in any way contributing to the rising number of suicides by I want to specifically address one issue I have heard from some who express concern about this amendment by saying it would stigmatize, in the eyes of our troops, those seeking mental health care. Nothing could be further from what this amendment does. This amendment would collect information in an anonymous manner, and it will be invisible to the The men and women serving in our military, and equally so their families, deserve our utmost assurance that we are doing everything in our power to see that our Nation's warfighters are provided the best medical care available. An integral part of our commitment must also be to ensure that these service men and women volunteering to serve our Nation are not being exposed to what may potentially endanger them when This amendment is very simple. It asks us to gather information so we can make a judgment in a macro sense, without violating the individual privacy of our service men and women. It allows us to gather the information, to have the best information. This Congress has a proud record of providing the necessary resources for the health care of our This amendment will complement that by making sure that we have the analytical tools to make sure we are providing the right type of mental health services to our service men and women who are in theater. It gets us the information in order to judge what is being done today. I would hope my colleagues would agree that we would want to have this information, and I hope at a later time I will have the Mr. LEVIN. First of all, let me commend the Senator from Maryland on his amendment. I support it. I hope it can be cleared or placed in order so that we can adopt it on a rollcall if it cannot be cleared. I ask unanimous consent that we now proceed to a vote on the Lieberman amendment, a rollcall vote on the Lieberman amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter), and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb) are necessarily absent. Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 93, nays 1, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Leahy be added as a cosponsor on the amendment which we just adopted, the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as ranking member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise in support of this vital amendment in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's, SBA, small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the programs, this amendment will create a more equitable and flexible method for Federal agencies to fairly allocate Federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the Nation. Earlier this year, I offered an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. Unfortunately, that amendment was not accepted. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, is the true order of preference when determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone--HUBZone--program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted amendment provides equity for the The amendment provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This amendment makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, service- disabled veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. And of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this amendment brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the amendment authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled veteran and women-owned firms. The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to support the section 1072 of S. 1390, National Defense Authorization Act of 2010. This section authorizes the Comptroller General of the United States to assess As everyone knows, I strongly believe whistleblowers play an important role in the accountability of all government. This should also be true for the men and women who wear uniforms and serve in the In 1988, Congress passed legislation that gave members of the armed services unique whistleblower protections. Despite this military whistleblower law, I have concerns that military whistleblowers could be underserved by the regulations and processes created by the Department of Defense, DOD, and the DOD, Office of Inspector General, During the course of my own investigation of several military whistleblower cases, I learned some matters which may question how effectively military whistleblower reprisal cases are handled by the DOD and DOD OIG. The Government Accountability Office, GAO, has noted in its past work that the effectiveness of the Federal protection for military whistleblowers rests principally on a two-stage process of investigation and administrative review. The first stage involves a DOD, service, or guard inspector general's investigation of the specific facts and interpretation of issues associated with a whistleblower reprisal allegation. In the second stage of the investigation/administrative review process, the DOD OIG reviews and approves the findings of the service or guard inspectors general. This review is designed to provide assurance that the findings and recommendations in a report were made in compliance with applicable investigatory guidelines and meet legal sufficiency. The second stage of this procedure is crucial for the military whistleblower process to In addition to the tasking included in S. 1390, the military whistleblower reprisal appeal process should be examined by the GAO as whistleblower law, 10 USC Sec. 1034, gives the Boards for the Correction of Military Records--BCMR--of each armed service the appeal authority in these often unique and complex matters. I believe the report requested by the underlying bill is important and I support its inclusion. However, it is important for the GAO to also study the effectiveness of the BCMR appeal process to ensure military whistleblowers are afforded a fair administrative process to combat Last year, I first introduced the idea of a GAO military whistleblower study when I requested this work of the Acting Comptroller General Gene L. Dodaro in a letter dated July 18, 2008. I followed up on my letter to the GAO with a legislative proposal through a filed amendment to the Defense Department appropriations bill for 2009 which instructed the GAO to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this issue. Unfortunately, that amendment did not make it through the legislative process. I thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member McCain for including this sensible military whistleblower study in the current Accordingly, I offer this latest amendment to include a review and analysis of the military whistleblower reprisal appeals heard by the Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 authorizes almost $680 billion for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. The bill provides pay and health care to servicemembers and their families; funds troops with the equipment and resources they need to fight and provide security; strengthens our ability to train foreign militaries and protect against IEDs and rogue nuclear threats; and It also includes legislation to complete the James A. Lovell Federal It gives the VA and the Navy the authority they need to finalize a model partnership between the North Chicago VA Medical Center and the This is a model that the Departments hope can be replicated around Combining separate Federal hospitals will provide better care for our servicemembers and veterans while saving valuable taxpayer dollars. Given the conflicts we face abroad, this bill provides the right amount to spend in support of our troops. Today, the United States is the world's leader in defense spending. Last year, U.S. military spending accounted for almost half of the world's total military spending. We spend more than the next 46 countries combined. U.S. military spending, combined with that of our close allies, makes up 72 percent of all military spending in the world. Our defense budget is six times larger than China's and 100 times larger than Iran's. These funds make good on a promise to our men and women in our military. Our troops continue to do everything we ask of them in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These conflicts have taken an extraordinary toll on servicemembers and their families that we cannot The Armed Forces, particularly the Army and the Marine Corps, will continue to be heavily stressed, even as we start to redeploy our forces from Iraq. Servicemembers still do not have enough dwell time between deployments and the Army has seen a troubling rise in the number of suicides. These are indications of the strain that multiple and continued deployments are taking on the force. The President requested increasing the size of the Army to 547,400 soldiers and increasing the Marine Corps to 202,100 Marines, while preventing cuts in Navy and Air Force personnel. This bill supports the President's request. It also authorizes an additional 30,000 soldiers in 2011 and 2012, should the Secretary of Defense believe such troops are necessary. Additional soldiers and marines will help ease the burdens More personnel will give each service more breathing room to care for its wounded warriors. Others can continue the fight while injured and ill servicemembers can recover in wounded transition units. This legislation creates a task force to assess the policies and programs that support the care and transition of recovering wounded and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. The task force will consider whether servicemembers have sufficient access to care for posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, the signature injury of the wars. It will look at how well we help injured warriors transition from the Department of Defense to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The task force will also review the support available to family caregivers as they care for recovering injured and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. For every servicemember successfully recovering from a serious injury or illness, there is often a family member who has put the brakes on his or her life to care for that Last week, my office received a call from the family of Jordan Hoyt, a soldier from Barry, IL. He was seriously injured in Afghanistan and is receiving care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center here in Washington. His wife Haley has moved to Washington to be near Jordan while he goes through months of surgery and rehabilitation. She has brought with her their infant child, who was born while Jordan was away serving his country. Haley is from Quincy. She has left her family behind to help Jordan recover from his injury. She has also delayed her educational plans to study criminal justice. Haley is 19 years old. After Jordan leaves Walter Reed, the couple will return to Quincy to live with her mother, who has already provided them with incredible support. While taking care of wounded servicemembers is our basic responsibility, we also need to support the families whose lives have been up-ended by the wars. I commend the committee for including this task force to look at the needs of family caregivers. This President inherited many challenges at home and abroad, including two wars and a challenging situation in Pakistan. This bill supports President Obama's new direction in addressing these priorities. In June, our military redeployed from Iraq's cities under the Status of Forces Agreement concluded by the government of Iraq and the previous administration. The Iraqis must continue to take I commend the President's increased focus on defense and development in Afghanistan; preventing the reemergence of the Taliban and al-Qaida; and strengthening economic, agricultural, educational, and democratic development. These goals are important to development in Afghanistan, but they are essential to our military's strategy. I support the National Defense Authorization Act and commend Chairman Levin and Almost 3,000 soldiers from the Illinois Army National Guard are currently deployed to Afghanistan. Members of the Illinois Guard's 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team are helping train the Afghan National Police and providing force protection at military bases. It has been a difficult deployment, with many casualties. Gen William Enyart, the Adjutant General of Illinois, has had to attend the funerals of too many of his soldiers. He sent me an article he had written this spring. Why do the young soldiers serve, he asked? This is what he wrote. They They are our kids, they are our protectors. They are what stand between us and chaos. They don't have to be asked to serve. They don't have to be asked to go into danger. They do it, not out of hate, not out of vengeance, but out of love. Love of family, love of community, love of fellow soldier. I think he is right. Members of the Armed Forces and their families make these sacrifices to keep our country safe. We owe them much in return. This bill takes one step by providing them the resources they need. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and to send it to Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senator Hatch to be recognized for 15 minutes, then Senator Murray for 8 minutes, then Senator Burris for 6 minutes, and Senator Brown for 10 minutes. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, there will be, then, no more amendments we will be able to take up tonight on the Defense authorization bill. We Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to express my concerns about the administration's failure to make the deadline of issuing a report on the Guantanamo detainee policy. Today's deadline, similar to the January 2010 closure deadline, was self-imposed. It concerns me that the administration maintains that closure will occur even though the execution of this process has been less than stellar. In January, on his very first full day in office, President Obama signed the order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in 12 months. The President created separate task forces to examine closure and detainee issues. These task forces were developed and staffed by the Obama administration to achieve successful closure in 1 year. The product of this review is to include a report on a broader detainee Today marks the first deadline in this process. It was set to be the date of release and publication of the task force report on a broader detainee policy going forward. The administration's failure to meet the deadline appears to me to be the ``canary in the coal mine'' that a January closure of Guantanamo without a detailed plan is an exercise in Yet the White House downplays the missed deadline and publicly states that the January closure is still on track. Is it? Despite not having a plan and missing a deadline for a key integral part of the closure process, the administration claims it can still meet the overall deadline of closure by January 1. I find that notion suspect at best In May, a Gallup Poll indicated that 65 percent--65 percent--of Americans oppose the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. Even so, the administration intends to follow its timeline and close Guantanamo by January 2010. The task force examining the cases of the remaining 229 detainees has only reviewed half the necessary caseload The Justice Department hopes to complete its review by an October reporting deadline, but that benchmark is quickly slipping away too. This review process has taken twice the amount of time the administration thought it would take. Yet keeping Guantanamo open beyond January is inexplicably still not an option in the Recently, media reports are circulating that the administration's Guantanamo closure plan has been fraught with political miscalculation and internal dissension. Moreover, the complex nature of this issue will undoubtedly force the transfer of detainees inside the United States. Since the announcement of the President's intention to close Guantanamo, I have joined other Senators in pointing out the lack of planning and clear miscalculation of this decision. That pool has grown and a groundswell of bipartisan support is signaling the White House to In May, the Senate voted 90 to 6 to strip out funding in the fiscal year 2010 war spending request that would authorize $80 million for the transfer of detainees to the interior of the United States of America. Now that the failure to meet this deadline has been reported by outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and New York Times, the administration still does not get it. Senior administration officials are letting hubris get in the way. This is neither the proper There should have been more study of this issue prior to setting us on a course for closure. It is easy to say that Guantanamo can be closed when you are a candidate for President. It is even easier to sign an order on your very first full day in office as President that says in 12 months Guantanamo will close. What is hard is taking a deliberative, methodical approach and then formulating the proper plan to balance the safety of this country with the needs of lawful detention. Had the administration conducted a careful and thorough review of this issue, the conclusion would have been that Guantanamo fulfills both requirements. Instead, the administration has painted Clearly, the administration miscalculated and underestimated the depth and breadth of this issue. From the onset, the administration has tried to reverse-engineer the process for closing Guantanamo--starting from the end and working backward. If changes are not made immediately, administration officials will force this issue on American cities and towns in just 185 days. They will limp across the finish line. We have 185 days until Guantanamo is closed. The days until the plan is released ARE a big question mark. They are going to limp across the finish line on January 22, 2010, and herald their accomplishments a victory despite its ill-conceived planning and Three Stooges-like Guantanamo is still an asset to this country. It complies with international treaties and exceeds the standards of domestic corrections facilities. I don't see how anyone who is honest about this matter can characterize it in any other way, especially when there is not a sufficient replacement located domestically to meet the Justice Department's needs. It is my fervent hope that the President and Attorney General will reconsider their ill-considered plan to close Guantanamo and recognize the obvious, that a $200 million facility that is already operational and in compliance with international treaties This is an important issue. I don't think the American people are going to stand to have these very dangerous people brought on shore to our country when we have a $200 million facility that meets international treaty obligations sitting there doing the job. I think the administration needs to get this work done and needs to get it done The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, 3 weeks ago I sent a letter to families across my home State of Washington asking for their help as we reform our broken health care system. I told them I wanted to pass a plan that protects existing coverage when it is good, improves it when it is not, and guarantees care for the millions who have none. I asked them to share their stories with me and ideas about how to make this vision a reality. I told them that I know health care is a very personal issue, but also that personal stories have the power to change minds and transform debates. The response to my request has been simply I wish to share some of the stories that have been pouring into my office--over 5,000 so far--because they underscore not only the desperate need to fix our broken health care system but also the dire For too many families today, health care reform can't wait. I wish to share a story from a letter I received from Rita from Seattle who sent me a story about her sister Janet. Janet was unemployed and had lost her health insurance when her throat began to hurt one day back in 2004. She paid out of her own pocket to visit a health clinic and was sent home with antibiotics. Well, weeks later, she was still in a lot of pain and finally managed to get an appointment with a specialist, to come in to get help. Only after begging them for an appointment was she seen by the specialist 3 days later and was told that the pain she had been living with was in the late stages of an aggressive form of throat cancer. Janet died not long after that. It was a death that would have been prevented had she been able to see a specialist Janet is not alone. A woman by the name of Kathleen from Puyallup, WA, sent in a story about her friend Kelly. Kelly had just been laid off from work when she came down with what she thought was the flu. She didn't have any health insurance because she had been laid off from her job and she couldn't afford to go to the doctor, so she waited. Two weeks later she felt even worse, so she finally made an appointment to go in for a checkup. Kelly never made it to the doctor. Her 7-year-old son found her dead on the couch on the morning she was supposed to go in. She died from an untreated ovarian cyst. Because Kelly didn't have health insurance, that little boy no longer has a mother. I think the fact that these stories are possible in the greatest and richest country in the world is simply shameful. No son should lose a mother simply because she can't afford care. No family should have to watch a loved one suffer because insurance companies instead of doctors are making the decisions. That is why we so badly need to reform our Our country has been working on this issue for over 60 years and we have spent months and months this session alone working to put together a reform package that works for all Americans. We have had over 6 months of hearings. We went through over 50 hours of public markups. We debated over 200 amendments. So when I hear some of my colleagues from across the aisle saying we should slow down, saying we should take more time, or that we are trying to reform health care too fast, and when I see some of them shrugging off every attempt we have made at engaging them and bringing them into the process, I think of Kelly and I think of Janet and I think of all of the families out there right now with sick husbands or sick wives or sick kids. I think of all the small business owners I have talked to who can't cover their employees. I think of the people who have coverage, but are worried about losing it today in this uncertain economy. I think about all the working Americans who are paying a hidden tax today in the form of rising premiums in order to cover those Americans who don't have access to care. As a mother and as a Senator, I say enough is enough. Yesterday we heard some pretty ugly and blatant rhetoric. One Member of the Senate who wants to protect the status quo, who doesn't want to make any changes, said: ``If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will That is playing games with real lives in order to score cheap political points. Bucking health care reform isn't going to break the President of the United States. It will break American families. It will break American businesses. It is going to break the bank. Americans deserve better. The families of Janet and Kelly and the thousands of others who have written me deserve better. We can't play politics with what is most important to our Nation's families--the They say justice delayed is justice denied. Well, health care delayed is often health care denied. It was denied to Kelly, it was denied to Janet, and it gets denied to more Americans every single day we wait. I call on all of our colleagues here in the Senate to work with us to rise above partisanship. We have a good plan right now. We are working to listen and bring everybody in and make it better. It will rein in the costs with the goal of lowering them across the long term. It will make sure all Americans have high quality, affordable coverage. This issue is not going to go away if we don't do anything. It is not going to get better or easier if we wait. In fact, today, costs are rising at an unsustainable rate for those who do have insurance and more and more Americans are losing their insurance every day. We have been talking about reforming the health care system for a very long time. I go home to my home State of Washington every weekend, and I am asked often now if it is the right time to tackle health care reform. In these difficult and challenging economic times when people are worried about paying their bills, worried about losing their jobs, worried about what is coming around the corner, they ask me if we are biting off more than we can chew. I tell them: This is exactly the time we need to act. Premiums are rising three times faster than wages today. Every day, 14,000 more Americans lose their health insurance. In these already difficult times, I don't want to add losing health insurance to the list of concerns our families have to deal with every We know the current system is unsustainable. Even those people with good coverage today are faced with massive costs and rising premiums. That is why tackling this problem now has to be part of our long-term Without health care reform, family budgets are going to continue to be strapped, more Americans are going to lose their care, and we are going to hear more stories like Janet and Kelly. I hope we can put aside the partisan rhetoric, I hope we can put aside the talk of: Slow this down; it is too fast. This issue is imperative, and I urge my Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity. This legislation ignores the explosion of gun crime plaguing America's cities and putting an unnecessary burden on local In my home State of Illinois, an entire generation of young people, many of whom live in urban areas, is being decimated with gun violence. On May 10 of 2007, a 16-year-old honor student named Blair Holt was shot to death while riding a Chicago city bus. When the shooter opened fire, Blair was shot while protecting a young girl with whom he was riding. The shooter was also a 16-year-old boy and an admitted member of the Gangster Disciples national street gang. Just the other day, justice was presented to him when he was given 100 years in prison by Similar tragic stories have only grown more frequent. In the first 6 months of 2009, Chicago alone logged 202 homicides, 84 percent of whom were shot to death. In comparison, in the same period of time, we lost The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Hundreds of Chicago public school students have been shot so far this year. By the end of the school year in June, at least 36 had died. Over the Fourth of July weekend, while most of us celebrated our Nation's independence, Chicago suffered through an almost unparalleled torrent of gun violence: 63 shootings were tallied, and 11 of them were The carnage on Independence Day weekend led the Chicago Tribune to demand on July 10: ``Where is our courage? Where is the indignation This is far too high a price to pay for inaction. I will say it again: The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Students deserve better than being gunned down in the streets after school and parents deserve better than having to raise families in the midst of a bloodbath. We must work vigorously to combat the rampant gun As a registered gun owner myself, I respect the second amendment and responsible gun ownership. However, I am deeply concerned about the devastating consequences of guns falling into the wrong hands. To this end, I strongly believe we should keep firearms out of the hands of children, terrorists, and criminals, and in solving this problem we need to provide local law enforcement officials with Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and States and not the Federal Government. It is our job as Federal legislators to enact measures that strengthen States' law enforcement efforts instead of arbitrarily increasing their burden. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggles with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug dealers in big I am not alone in my opposition to the Thune amendment. I join the International Association of Chiefs of Police and State lawmakers around the country in recognizing that this legislation would severely hamper efforts to combat gun crime in our Nation's urban areas. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have 2 letters from the the mayor of the city of Chicago, Mayor Daley, and the Major Cities Chiefs There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Burris: I am writing to express the City of Chicago's strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity, and to urge you to vote against this amendment as part of the National Defense Although the State of Illinois would not be affected directly by its passage, this amendment runs the possible risk of reinforcing current movements in the Illinois legislature to pass concealed-carry laws, which would greatly set back Chicago's efforts to curtail gun violence. Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and states, and not the Federal government. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggle with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug Pasasge of this amendment would limit the ability of states and local governments to protect their citizens with common- sense and community-specific laws and regulations regarding the carrying of hidden handguns. It would promote gun trafficking by making it easier to transport firearms between states without the fear of being apprehended by law enforcement. The bill would also endanger the safety of our police officers by making it more difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal gun possession--ambiguity that The City of Chicago continues to do all it can to protect our communities from the gun violence of gangs and drug dealers. It is a tireless effort that requires the involvement of the community members, the hard work of local law enforcement and sensible policy decisions made at all levels of government. The Thune amendment would serve as an obstacle to these efforts, and that is why I strongly urge you to oppose this potentially debilitating legislation. Majority Leader, Hart Office Bldg., U.S. Senate, Washington, Speaker, Cannon Office Bldg., House of Representatives, Dear Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi: On behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs, I am writing to express our strong opposition to S. 845 and H.R. 1620, the Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009. Because we are responsible for public safety in the largest jurisdictions in the United States, we recognize that this This misguided legislation would undermine efforts by law enforcement agencies across the Nation and thwart measures already enacted by the states. Please know that we stand with the more than 400 Mayors who have objected to this ill- An oversimplification of carefully reasoned standards and licensing provisions, the proposed measure would arbitrarily overturn laws which have been tailored to the needs of regions and local communities. Passage of this legislation would be an affront to Federalism as it would force a state to accept permits from other jurisdictions--whether or not We are confident that members of Congress will respect the authority of states, counties and cities to adopt their own regulations regarding weapons and will not act with disregard for the many reasonable and prudent laws already in place Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs call upon you to vote against Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, as I said earlier, cities in every State face unique challenges that require tailored solutions. This is never truer than with the issue of gun control. It is imperative that States set their own standards for concealed carry permits and are not obligated to honor permits awarded elsewhere with different, potentially less rigorous requirements. We must not tie the hands of State governments regarding their ability to protect and serve their I think that this legislation moves our national gun policy in the wrong direction. In their assessment of the recent gun violence, the Tribune opined that ``The tragic loss of brave soldiers killed overseas grabs media headlines and fuels the raging fires of political debate. Meanwhile, in another war right here in our own backyard, the killings We cannot ignore this horrific situation any longer. We must not be conned into believing that easier access to firearms will reduce firearm deaths. Rather than making it easier for people to bring concealed weapons into other States, I hope my colleagues will get serious about addressing the urgent problem of gun crime in our cities I urge my fellow Senators to not only vote against this amendment but to join me in working towards a real solution for this senseless cycle The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to congratulate the community and business leaders of Youngstown, OH, for showing the rest of the Nation what so many of us in Ohio already know: Youngstown is one of the I have held some 140 community roundtables across Ohio's 88 counties at least once since I have been in the Senate, where I have met with educators, students, community and business leaders, and entrepreneurs I have held a half dozen roundtables in the Mahoning Valley, including two in Youngstown, and have traveled across towns along the From the autoworker in Lordstown to the electrician in Warren, to the technology entrepreneur in Youngstown, to the small business owner in Salem, I am impressed by their unwavering commitment to rebuilding this Youngstown remains a great city in the face of many challenges, and its dedicated and talented workforce is driving today's innovation and Each time I visit Youngstown, I learn something new--from Mayor Williams, the fine, aggressive, very bright, young mayor of Youngstown, to Chamber of Commerce leader Tom Humphries, to dozens of teachers, It is easy to see why Entrepreneur Magazine lists Youngstown as one of the top 10 U.S. cities to start a business. On the cover it says: In their August issue, Entrepreneur Magazine describes Youngstown as a ``dreamer,'' where technology innovation is driving job growth and Bold plans and visionary leadership have set the stage for sustained economic growth. Youngstown's healthy dose of all-American grit and hard work will turn economic potential into economic reality, driving regional economic expansion that can strengthen Ohio's middle class. It takes what Entrepreneur Magazine called a ``concept revolutionary enough to help ignite a renaissance in this small city.'' It takes a community that understands a transformation must take place from within--from the educators to innovators, from community activists to the industry leaders. Faced with a choice, it takes the foresight to invest in the future and not dwell on the sometimes Today, we are seeing the results of a decade-long process of renewal and rebirth for Youngstown, in Warren, and the entire Mahoning Valley. More than a year ago, I made my first trip to the Youngstown Business Incubator, which is an example of community and business leaders nurturing startup companies that can strengthen the regional economy. Nurtured in the Youngstown Business Incubator in 2002, Turning Technologies, for example, has become one of the fastest growing technology companies in the Nation, according to Entrepreneur Magazine. This is no accident. Mike Broderick, from Turning Technologies, and other emerging businesses, say they have relied on the affordable startup costs, accessible resources, the transportation network that criss-crosses western Pennsylvania and Ohio, and the community An important part of Youngstown's favorable business climate is access to talented workers and students. Kent State's Trumbull campus is a model for workforce training among Ohio's colleges and universities. Their educators are training a legion of highly skilled But more must be done to close the gap between high unemployment in that part of Ohio. My whole State is still afflicted by high unemployment and this terrible recession. More must be done to close the gap between the high unemployment and the shortage of skilled Congressman Tim Ryan, with whom the Presiding Officer and I both served in the House of Representatives, and who represents Youngstown in the House, and I recently introduced the Strengthening Employment Clusters to Organize Regional Success, or SECTORS Act. SECTORS would help allow businesses, workforce development boards, labor unions, and community colleges to connect skilled workers with workforce and community needs. We will see that with Youngstown State University in Youngstown, and with the Trumbull County branch of Kent SECTORS is not only a jobs skill bill, but an economic development bill. It is only one part of the citywide strategy to harness the Youngstown State University is training engineers and contributing to workforce needs of an emerging advanced materials sector, involving advanced chemical and composite engineering and nanotechnology. I have seen some of this technology in the Mahoning Valley, and it is ready to YSU's science, technology, engineering, and math program, or STEM, teaches students the critical skills in the fields of advanced sciences, information technology, and engineering. If our students succeed in the 21st century global economy, we must invest in our young people, who will create the businesses and We must also ensure that our communities are part of economic revival I met with the Mahoning Valley Organizing Collaborative at one of my roundtables. We sat for an hour and a half in the basement of a church, with 15 community activists, who have a focus you wouldn't believe. This is a collective effort of neighborhood groups, churches, and labor unions. It is another example of citizens taking ownership of their community. It is revitalizing neighborhoods, surveying land to determine future economic use, and cleaning up crime-ridden neighborhoods. Ordinary citizens are organizing to make a difference, Yet another example of strategic economic development is the Youngstown 2010 Citywide Plan, which aims to revitalize the city of Youngstown with carefully planned economic development and urban As Ohio cities experience population loss, Youngstown's efforts to modernize infrastructure to serve current population needs is a All of these efforts are part of a collective strategy by workers, entrepreneurs, educators, and elected officials to tap into the region's rich resources and innovative spirit. That is why Entrepreneur Magazine wrote about Youngstown, calling it the ``dreamer.'' Out of these 10 cities, the other 9 are significantly larger than Youngstown, but none could equal Youngstown in hope, focus, and energy. In the last decade, something special happened in this northeast Ohio city. A new generation is envisioning things we wouldn't have talked about 10 years ago. ``Let's clean the slate and start over again'' is the radical transformation I believe in most places we wouldn't have been able to expand with the speed we did. The affordability here really helped fuel our growth. I found Youngstown to be a brilliant It has been my pleasure to work with Congressman Ryan, Mayor Williams, the Youngstown Business Incubator, Turning Technologies, and all of the community activists who are working hard to create new opportunities for a better and stronger Youngstown. Ohio's dedicated workforce and hard-working community leaders are leading examples of how we can turn around our economy, create new jobs, and how we can, across my State, and across the Mahoning Valley in Ohio, and across this country, rebuild our middle class. Mr. President, before yielding the floor, I add that all of us who do this work and are, frankly, blessed enough to get to serve in the Senate spend much of our time away from home or our families are back, in my case, in Ohio, or in Washington. Either way, we are away from families more than we would like. I would like to, because today is my wife's birthday, wish her a happy birthday, if she is home watching this. If she is not, I will tell her later. I could not be with her today in Ohio. I look forward to coming home this weekend. Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today with sadness to honor the life of Mr. Mason Rudd, a good friend who died on July 5, 2009, at the age of 90. He was loved by many in my hometown of Louisville, KY, and Mason will be remembered as an entrepreneur, philanthropist, and family man who did so much to make his adopted hometown a better place. His American dream began at the University of Minnesota, where he funded his college education with help from a tennis scholarship, participation in ROTC, and by selling doughnuts. In 1939, he graduated with a degree in geology and petroleum engineering. After college, his service in World War II led him to believe that he survived the war for one reason--to help others achieve and live better lives. And this he Mr. Rudd spent a few years working as an engineer for Shell Oil and then selling fire engines in Iowa until 1952 when he moved to Louisville. There he established Rudd Equipment Company, which distributed heavy construction equipment. The company he built brought him a large fortune which would serve him well when he undertook his Mason grew to love the city and especially the local university--the University of Louisville. He contributed $1.4 million to the creation of a neurology professorship at the University of Louisville after his first wife Mary suffered a fatal stroke. His help facilitated the $3.6 million Bass-Rudd Tennis Center at the University of Louisville as well as the endowment for the Rudd Program for Young Artists at the Kentucky However, more important than the money, Mr. Rudd contributed invaluable time and effort to the causes of health care and education. Thirty years ago, this passion was clear to me when I served as Jefferson County's judge-executive and it was my responsibility to appoint someone to the county's board of health. I reappointed him to the board, just as those serving before me had and those after me did. While serving on this board as well as in leadership positions at Louisville General Hospitals and Louisville's Jewish Hospital, his efforts provided everyone in the city with a healthier, safer life. His fellow members credit him with creating lead poisoning education programs, a hazardous-materials task force in the health department, a mandate on sewage treatment, and primary care clinics for the His efforts also extended to helping the Louisville Free Library Foundation during his 16 years on the board there. Because of him the library's book endowment is stronger and the children's reading program continues to grow. Most notably, in the year 2000 library fundraising efforts under his leadership made it possible to purchase computers for Mr. Rudd leaves behind his wife Peggy: his daughter Betsy; and his son Michael. The life he led in his 90 years stands out as an example of service to his community and country which all Americans should Command Master Chief Petty Officer Jeffrey James Garber Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Navy Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber who passed away aboard the Originally from Hemingford, NE, Master Chief Garber enlisted in the Navy in December 1983. His career was an impressive one. At sea his assignments included time aboard the USS Worden, USS Nimitz, USS Portland, and Strike Fighter Squadron 34; and he had been assigned to the USS Eisenhower since June 2008. The Eisenhower is currently operating in the Arabian Sea in support of Operation Enduring Freedom Master Chief Garber's military awards include the Meritorious Service Medal: Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal; Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal, six; Meritorious Unit Commendation; Good Conduct Medal, five; Navy Expeditionary Medal; National Defense Service Medal, two; Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal, two; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, six; And Navy Recruiting Service On June 20, Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber was found unresponsive in a berthing space aboard the carrier, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. When he was found unresponsive in his stateroom at approximately 8:15 a.m. local time, a medical emergency was declared; and medical personnel were on the scene within minutes. Sadly, all efforts to revive him were unsuccessful, and Master Chief Garber was pronounced dead of natural causes at 8:23 a.m. He was 43 years old. Command Master Chief Garber has been posthumously awarded the Legion of Merit medal, recognizing his accomplishments as Command Master Chief Command Master Chief Garber leaves behind his wife Amy, (Vogt) Garber, and his three children, Tayler, Paige and Josh, all of Virginia Beach; his parents Larry and JoAnn Kuester of York, NE; and his brothers Joel and Jon. Throughout his career, those who knew him, admired Master Chief Garber's professionalism, but also, genuinely liked him. He will forever be remembered by his family and friends as not only the epitome of what a command master chief should be, but primarily a loving husband, father, and son. I join all Nebraskans today in mourning the loss of Command Master Chief Garber and offering Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 23-26, the residents of Northwood will gather to celebrate their Founded in 1884, Northwood is located in Northeastern ND, and was named after Northwood, IA, a common starting point for pioneers settling in the Dakota Territory. In its early years, the town grew rapidly, and continued to expand over the next century. It was honored in 1993 by the North Dakota League of Cities as City of the Year. In 2007, Northwood was devastated by an EF4 tornado. Not a single building was left untouched by this monstrous storm that wreaked havoc on everything in its path. Homes and businesses were destroyed, yet amidst all of the destruction, this community banded together, and with the assistance of the federal government, it has successfully rebuilt. Today, Northwood is a friendly and welcoming community that includes a nine-hole golf course, a swimming pool, a strong business community, and a high quality education system. Additionally, the town remains true to its agricultural roots through its farming population. The central point of Northwood's 125th anniversary celebration will be the dedication of the new Northwood Public School and the Veteran's Memorial. Other activities, to name a few, include a community picnic, a tractor pull, a teen dance, karaoke, a 5K walk and run, a craft show, a kiddie parade, and a 3-on-3 basketball tournament. I ask the Senate to join me in congratulating Northwood, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Northwood and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Northwood that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine Mr. JOHANNS. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a leader in In February of 2007, Abigail Kimbell became the 16th Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. She was the first female in this role, a job she held until July 5, 2009. During those 2\\1/2\\ years, she served with distinction and accomplished much for the forests, grasslands, and Gail is credited with renewing the emphasis behind the Forest Service's mission of ``Caring for the Land and Serving People'' and reconnecting programs and functions to that mission. She improved firefighter safety and fire suppression cost containment. Gail showed great vision and leadership, pressing the agency to continually strive to meet a standard of excellence in its operations, both internally and Gail emphasized the importance of quality water to the environment and our communities. She directed the agency's investment in the education of children and youth, particularly those in underrepresented communities, to enhance their connection to the natural world. Gail's numerous and significant contributions span more than three decades of public service. As a Forest Supervisor, she focused on community collaboration to build understanding and support for an economically and environmentally viable long-term timber sale program in Alaska. She also made bold land management decisions to ensure forests remained healthy by reducing hazardous fuels. As associate deputy chief for the national forest system, Gail was central to the development of the Healthy Forests Initiative, including the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. She also worked to improve As regional forester in the northern region, she oversaw the development and implementation of community wildfire protection plans in Idaho, Montana, and North Dakota. She also played a leading role in the development of plans to delist the grizzly bear in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. Gail pioneered the implementation of improved forest planning with unprecedented public collaboration and ownership. On July 31, 2009, Gail Kimbell will be retiring from the Forest Service with 35-plus years of service to that agency and our country. Her dedication to the Forest Service mission ``to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations'' will be forever At 2:56 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has passed the following bill, in which it requests the concurrence of the conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American At 4:35 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has agreed to the following concurrent resolution, in which it requests the H. Con. Res. 164. Concurrent resolution recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as EC-2352. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (6) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2353. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (10) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of brigadier general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2354. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (7) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2355. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Federal Acquistion Regulation Supplement; Restriction on Acquisition of Specialty Metals'' ((RIN0750- AF95) (DFARS Case 2008-D003)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 16, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2356. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Requirements Applicable to Undefinitized Contract Actions'' ((RIN0750- AG29) (DFARS Case 2008-D029)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 17, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2357. A communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, a six-month periodic report on the national emergency that was declared in Executive Order 13441 with respect to Lebanon; to the EC-2358. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Qualified Plug-in Electric Vehicle Credit Under Section 30'' (Notice 2009-58) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to the EC-2359. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 2 on Casualty Loss IRC 165'' (LMSB-4-0309-010) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to EC-2360. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 4 on Mixed Service Costs Phase 1'' (LMSB-4-0509-022) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 20, 2009; EC-2361. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a Clarification Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2362. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-124, ``National Law Enforcement Museum Sales and Use Tax Credit Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2363. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-125, ``Records Access Amendment Act of EC-2364. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-126, ``Raze Permit Community Notification Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2365. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-127, ``Citizen-Service Programs Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2366. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-128, ``Child Development Center Directors Relocation Fairness Clarification Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2367. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-133, ``Transportation Infrastructure Improvements GARVEE Bond Financing Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2368. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-134, ``Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2369. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-135, ``Clean and Affordable Energy Fund Balance Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee EC-2370. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-136, ``Neighborhood Development Tax Deferral Temporary Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2371. A communication from the Director, Office of Personnel Management, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Office's report on Federal agencies' use of the physicians comparability allowance (PCA) program; to the Committee on EC-2372. A communication from the Senior Official, Office of Inspector General, Federal Housing Finance Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee on Homeland Security and EC-2373. A communication from the Inspector General, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee EC-2374. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Summer 2009 Fireworks, Coastal Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA08, 1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0422)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2375. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays in Boothbay Harbor, South Gardiner, and Woolwich, Maine'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0526)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2376. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; San Clemente Island Northwest Harbor August and September Training; Northwest Harbor, San Clemente Island, California'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0522)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2377. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Southside Summer Fireworks, St. Clair River, Port Huron, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0478)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2378. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Sigma Gamma Fireworks, Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0477)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2379. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda, New York'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0110)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2380. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; F/V PATRIOT, Massachusetts Bay, Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0512)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2381. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Regulated Navigation Area; Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, Oregon Inlet, North Carolina'' ((RIN1625-AA11)(Docket No. USG-2009-0489)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2382. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Potomac River, Between Maryland and Virginia'' ((RIN1625-AA09)(Docket No. USG-2008-1216)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2383. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York'' ((RIN1625-AA01)(Docket No. USG-2009-0045)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2384. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Closure of the Eastern United States/Canada Area'' (RIN0648-XQ01) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, EC-2385. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; Closure of the Closed Area II Scallop Access Area to Scallop Vessels'' (RIN0648-XQ05) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2386. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Closure of the 2009 Deepwater Grouper Commercial Fishery'' (RIN0648-XP56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2387. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Biennial Specifications and Management Measures; Inseason Adjustments'' (RIN0648-AX96) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2388. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish; Framework Adjustment 2'' (RIN0648-AX56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2389. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Recreational Management Measures for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Fishing Year 2009'' (RIN0648-AX69) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2390. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Greenland Turbot, Arrowtooth Flounder, and Sablefish by Vessels Participating in the Amendment 80 Limited Access Fishery in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area'' (RIN0648-XP97) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2391. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Closure of the Pacific Whiting Primary Fishery for the Mothership Sector'' (RIN0648- XP82) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2392. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper- Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 16'' (RIN0648-AW64) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2393. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast Specifications Modification'' (RIN0648-XO74) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES--THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2009 The following material was omitted from the Congressional Record of Financial Campaign Contributions Report for Daniel M. (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Daniel Milton Rooney: 5/24/2008, Gridiron-PAC, $5,000; 10/ 21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Patricia Regan Rooney: 6/15/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 6/27/ 2008, DCCC, $5,000; 8/03/2005, Patrick Murphy, $2,000; 9/29/ 2005, Patrick Murphy, $1,109; 4/21/2008, Barack Obama, $500; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/14/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,500; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/28/2006, DCCC, $1,500; 12/28/2007, DCCC, $2,000; 9/23/2008, Patrick Murphy, $250; 10/21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Arthur Joseph Rooney II: 9/07/2006, Melissa Hart, $500; 4/ 13/2007, Arlen Specter, $1,000; 6/20/2008, DCCC, $2,000; 8/ 06/2005, Patrick Murphy, $500; 10/27/2006, Mike Doyle, $500; 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/25/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,700; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, ($1,700); 5/02/2008, Tom Patricia Rooney Gerrero: 4/11/2008, Hillary Clinton, $500. Rita Rooney Conway: 8/14/2008, 07/31/2008, John Murtha, Obama Victory Fund (Joint FR Committee), $2,000; $5,000; 6/ 30/2008, Obama for America, $250; 02/12/2008, Hillary Clinton for President, $1,000; 10/14/2005, DSCC, $500; 05/30/2006, DSCC, $250; 10/23/2008, Committee for Change, $10,000; 06/30/ 2006, DCCC, $2,000; 08/31/2007, Obama for America, $250. Daniel Michael Rooney: 05/12/2005, North Side Good Government Committee, $3000; 3/26/2007, Tom Rooney, $400; 3/ 26/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 7/22/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,900; 9/15/2008, Florida 16 Victory Trust (Joint FR Committee), John Thomas Rooney: 11/15/2005, George W. Bush, $1,000; 8/ James Emmett Rooney: 12/20/2005, Mike Doyle, $500; 01/24/ 2008, Arlen Specter, $500; 03/12/2007, Majority PAC, $1,000; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 11/29/2007, Robert Casey, $1,000; 3/04/2008, William Shuster, $500; 4/25/2008, Jason Altmire, $500; 10/29/2008, Jason Altmire, $2,300; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 9/20/ 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/ 28/2006, DCCC, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 10/ 11/2005, Prosperity Helps Inspire Liberty PAC, $1,000; 6/08/ The following executive reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. ROCKEFELLER for the Committee on Commerce, Science, *Polly Trottenberg, of Maryland, to be an Assistant *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term of two years. *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term expiring *Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., of Maryland, to be a Federal Maritime Commissioner for the term expiring June 30, 2012. *Meredith Attwell Baker, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for the remainder of the *Mignon L. Clyburn, of South Carolina, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for a term of five By Mr. KERRY for the Committee on Foreign Relations. *Anne Elizabeth Derse, of Maryland, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 7. Sisters and Spouses: Jane Quasarano (sister), None. Paul Quasarano (brother-in-law): (A good faith effort was made to obtain contribution information from Mr. Quasarano. The following is what is available:) National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009; Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association (MBWWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007 and $3,000 in 2008 and $3,000 in 2009; Michigan Senator Martha Scott: $1,500 in 2008 and $1,500 in 2009; Michigan Lt. Governor John Cherry: $5,000 in 2008 and $5,000 in 2009; Magistrate O'Brien; Michigan State Representative Ed Gaffney; Michigan Senator Mary Waters; Michigan Senator Steve *Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, September 2008, Barack Obama; $250, August of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this *Donald Sternoff Beyer, Jr., of Virginia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Switzerland, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Post: Chief of Mission to the Swiss Confederation and the (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them in the past four years. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this report is complete and 1. Self: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Judy Feder for Congress, $2,000, 2006; Judy Feder for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Al Weed for Congress, $2,000, 2006; John Tester for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2006; Tom Harkin for U.S. Senate, $2,280, 2007; Leonard Boswell for Congress, $2,100, 2006; Tom Perriello for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Paul Hodes for Congress, $2,000, 2007; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Jared Polis for Congress, $500, 2008; Eighth District Democratic Committee, Virginia Democratic Party, $250, 2006; Allan Lichtman for Senate, $250, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $5,000, 2007; Fairfax County Democratic Committee, $1,000, 2008; Philip Forgit for Congress, $1,000, 2007; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,250, 2005; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $500, 2006; Alexandria Democratic Committee, $250, 2005; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $2,300, 2007; John Kerry for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2007; Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Democratic Party of Virginia, $2,500, 2007; Born Fighting PAC, $2,500, 2008; Leslie Byrne for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Mark Udall for Senate, $2,300, 2008; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Jim Webb for U.S. Senate, $2,100, 2006; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $2,000, 2005; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $900, 2006; Ethan Berkowitz for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Gerry Connelly for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Gerry Connelly for Congress, $1,000, 2009; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $26,700, 2005; Moving Virginia Forward, $20,000, 2007; Kaine for Governor, $19,600, 2005; Deeds for Attorney General, $10,000, 2005; Byrne for Lieutenant Governor, $8,600, 2005; Commonwealth Coalition, $5,000, 2006; Virginia 2. Spouse: Megan C. Beyer: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $10,000, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Ronnie Musgrove for U.S. Senate $1,000, 2008; Leslie Byrne for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Gerry Connelly for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $1,000, 2008; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Virginia Senate 2006, $10,000, 2006; Democratic National Committee, $5,000, 2005; Democratic National Committee, $500, 2006; Democratic Stephanie A. S. Beyer: $2,300, 3/2007, Obama for America. 4. Parents: Donald S. Beyer, Sr.: No contributions. 5. Grandparents: Otto S. Beyer Jr.: (deceased 1948). 6. Brothers Spouses: Michael S. Beyer: $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $250, 5/14/07, Whipple for Va Senate. June C. Beyer, spouse: $250, 8/6/08, Obama for America; 7. Sisters and Spouses: Katherine S. Beyer (single): No Marylee B. Hill: $250, 9/27/06, Feder for Congress; $250, 6/14/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $500, 10/3/07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $250, 3/4/ 07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $600, 12/29/05, Kaine Inaugural Committee; $350, 5/30/07, Vanderhye for Va Delegate; $250, 7/2/08, Petersen for Va Senate; $150, 9/24/ *John R. Nay, of Michigan, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To be best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $0--I have never made a political donation. 2. Spouse: $0--She has never made a political donation. 3. Children and Spouses: Janelle V.A. (Nay) Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jamison R. Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jaclyn E.A. Nay: $0--has never made a political donation; Jordan R. Nay: $0--has never 4. Parents: Jack R. Nay: $50, Spring 2006, Joe Schwartz (R- Michigan); Geraldine G. Nay: $0, (made only one political donation in her lifetime--$30 to the Democratic Nat'l 7. Sisters and Spouses: Karen Y. Sefchick: $0--has never *Vinai K. Thummalapally, of Colorado, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $2,200, 6/07, Obama for America; $9,000, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Madia for U.S. Congress; 2. Spouse: Barbara: $2,300, 6/07, Obama for America; $100, 10/08, Josh Segall for Congress (AL); $500, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Obama for America; $500, 8/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $300, 9/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $1,000, 1/09, Ritter for Governor, Colorado; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for U.S. Senate; $25, 3/09, 3. Children: Vishal: $2,500, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,800, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for 6. Brother and Spouse: Ajay K. Thummalapally: None. 7b. Rasika G. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 7/17/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, 7/31/08, Obama for America; $2,300 10/01/08, Madia for U.S. Congress. Girish V. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $28,500, 10/02/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, 11/02/06, Music Row Democrats Federal PAC Inc.; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 04/26/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 10/31/07, Obama For America; $500, 06/14/07, John Edwards For President; $500, 07/31/08, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 10/21/08, Committee For Change (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 10/27/08, Nebraskans For Kleeb. 4. Parents: Clarence Avant (father): 2005/2006, $1,000, 10/ 16/06, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; $1,000, 03/ 22/06, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $2,100, 09/30/06, Tennessee Senate 2006 (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $500, 06/30/05, LA PAC; $1,000, 10/24/05, Berman For Congress; $1,200, 07/14/ 06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $900, 02/27/06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $2,000, 08/20/05, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $1,000, 12/15/05, Cantwell 2012; $1,000, 01/12/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,000, 06/05/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,100, 08/16/06, Mfume For US Senate; $500, 04/01/06, Schiff For Congress; $1,000, 11/01/05, Schiff For Congress; $5,000, 05/20/05, Hopefund, Inc.; $500, 11/01/06, Mejias For Congress; $500, 09/30/06, Mejias For Congress; $1,000, 09/26/ 05, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 04/18/06, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 05/01/05, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 06/26/06, Mary Bono Committee; $500, 02/12/ 06, Hackett For Senate; $1,000, 03/14/06, Carter For Senate Committee; $500, 05/30/06, Friends Of Tammy Duckworth; $2,000, 08/25/05, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 03/23/06, Feinstein For Senate; $250, 03/24/06, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $250, 11/07/05, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 06/22/06, Klobuchar For Minnesota; $500, 04/25/05, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $500, 03/31/06, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $400, 10/20/05, Friends Of Hillary; $1,000, 06/14/05, Friends Of Hillary; $4,200, 04/04/ 06, Friends of Hillary; $1,000, 07/11/05, Friends Of Hillary; -$3,500, 05/02/06, Friends Of Hillary; $2,500, 10/19/06, Hill PAC; $500, 07/25/06, Lawless For Congress; $500, 03/19/06, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $500, 12/03/05, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $1,900, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $2,100, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $1,000, 11/04/05, Steele For Maryland Inc.; $1,000, 02/21/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; $1,000, 11/02/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; 2007/ 2008, $1,000, 08/31/07, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $2,000, 01/23/08, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $1,000, 10/10/07, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $500, 07/14/08, Loebsack For Congress; $500, 09/30/ 07, John Hall For Congress; $1,000, 05/11/07, Richardson For President Inc.; $1,000, 11/23/07, Friends Of Mark Warner; $2,300, 08/28/08, Friends Of Hillary; $5,000, 07/29/08, Hill PAC; $2,300, 07/18/08, Vernon Jones For Georgia; $500, 07/10/ 07, Richardson For Congress; $250, 06/25/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 08/08/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 05/ 19/08, Alaskans For Begich; $750, 06/18/08, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 07/21/07, Citizens For Waters; $500, 10/15/ 08, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 11/09/07, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $1,000, 09/28/07, Friends Of Senator Carl Levin; $1,000, 03/01/07, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 09/06/07, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 03/30/08, Barbara Lee For Congress; $250, 09/30/07, Mary Bono Mack Committee; $500, 09/17/08, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $500, 11/14/07, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 05/ 09/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 06/20/08, Powers For Congress; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $500, 03/ 20/08, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $2,500, 07/16/08, Rangel Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 10/27/08, David Scott For Congress; $500, 08/27/08, Joe Garcia For Congress; $1,000, 03/13/07, John Edwards For President; $1,000, 03/20/08, Al Franken For Senate; $500, 07/ 07/08, Congressman Waxman Campaign Committee; $1,000, 08/16/ 07, LA PAC; $1,000, 11/20/07, Berman For Congress; $300, 06/ 28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; $2,000, 06/28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; -$400, 04/29/08, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $300, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $700, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,000, 06/14/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,300, 05/02/07, Rangel For Congress; $1,000, 08/20/07, Conyers for Congress; $2,500, 08/02/08, Conyers For Congress; $-1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $5,000, 09/ 19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $28,500, 6/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 03/08/07, Obama For America. Jacqueline Avant (mother): 2005/2006, $2,100, 04/19/06, Friends Of Hillary; 2007/2008, $250, 02/14/07, Emily's List; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $4,600, 08/ 31/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $2,000, 12/ 5. Grandparents: Zella Gray (maternal grandmother)-- deceased; Leon Gray (maternal grandfather)--deceased; Gertrude Woods (paternal grandmother)--deceased; Phoenix 6. Brothers and Spouses: Alexander Avant (brother): $500, 6/07/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $500, 09/11/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $250, 12/13/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 06/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $2,500, 09/19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $250, 10/10/08, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $4600, 3/29/07, Obama for America; $1000, 6/30/06, Boswell for Congress; $1000, 9/21/06, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 2/23/08, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 6/30/2006, Friends of Joe Lieberman; $1000, 9/25/2008, Patrick Murphy for Congress; $250, 2/27/06, David Yassky for Congress; $1000, 12/10/08, Mikulski for Senate Committee; $500, 3/01/ 06, Whitehouse for Senate; $2300, 11/24/08, Hillary Clinton for President; $5000, 7/06/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/2006, Forward Together PAC; $2300, 9/24/2007, Friends of Mark Warner; $2300, 1/16/2008, Friends of Mark Warner; $1000, 4/18/07, Friends of Mary Landrieu; $2100, 3/8/06, Miller 2006 (Harris Miller); $2100, 10/31/05, Rales for Senate; $2500, 9/ 2.-Spouse: Michelle Loewinger or Michelle Gutman: $5000, 7/ 6/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/06, Forward Together PAC; 3/29/07, $2300, Obama for America; 5/25/07, $2300, Obama for America; 10/31/05, $2100, Rales for Senate; 9/24/07, $2300, Friends of Mark Warner; 1/16/08, $2300, Friends of 3. Children and Spouses: Collin Gutman--single--none; Chase 4. Parents: Max Gutman--deceased 1973; Roslyn Gutman--none. 5. Grandparents: All grandparents are deceased for decades. 7. Sisters and Spouses: Deborah Studen (Harvey Studen)-- *Vilma S. Martinez, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge the information contained in this 1. Self: $931.00, 1/29/2008, Obama for America; $1,000.00, 10/30/2008, -Obama for America; $250.00, 3/25/2006, Friends of Juan Vargas; $200.00, 10/02/2006, Madrid for Congress. Carlos A. Singer: $1,000.00, 10/11/2004, Democratic Jessica Uzcategui, (Carlos' spouse): $500.00, 1/26/2008, 6. Brothers and Spouses: Salvador Martinez, Jr.: unable to 7. Sisters and Spouses: Rose Linda Hernandez: none. (*David H. Thorne, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Italian Republic, and to serve concurrently Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Self: Democratic National Committee, $100, 2006, David Thorne; Democratic National Committee, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; New Hampshire Democratic Party, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, David Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $2300, 2007, David Thorne; Biden for President, $1000, 2007, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Footlik for Congress, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Young Democrats of America, $500, 2008, David Thorne. Spouse: Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, Rose Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $1300, 2007, Rose Thorne; John Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination list which was printed in the Record on the date indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that this nomination lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. *Foreign Service nominations beginning with Christopher L. Andino and ending with Holly Hope Zardus, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional *Nomination was reported with recommendation that it be confirmed subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate. The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. S. 1478. A bill to strengthen communities through English literacy and civics education for new Americans, and for S. 1479. A bill to provide for the treatment of certain By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bingaman, and Mr. Tester): S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, S. 1481. A bill to amend section 811 of the Cranston- Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to improve the program under such section for supportive housing for persons with disabilities; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Rockefeller, Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and S. 1483. A bill to designate the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Alexandria, Minnesota, as the ``Max J. Beilke Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on S. 1485. A bill to improve hurricane preparedness by establishing the National Hurricane Research Initiative and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, S. 1486. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the creation of disaster protection funds by property and casualty insurance companies for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from future catastrophic S. 1487. A bill to establish a bipartisan commission on insurance reform; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were appointments for the 111th Congress; considered and agreed S. Res. 219. A resolution honoring the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey; to the Committee on S. Con. Res. 33. A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp should be issued to honor the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought and served during World War II; to the Committee on At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 144, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove cell phones from listed At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad) was added as a cosponsor of S. 211, a bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 telephone service for information and referral on human services and volunteer services, and At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 237, a bill to establish a collaborative program to protect the Great Lakes, and for other At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bayh) was added as a cosponsor of S. 254, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for the coverage of home At the request of Mr. Dorgan, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 428, a bill to allow travel At the request of Mr. Webb, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) was added as a cosponsor of S. 572, a bill to provide for the issuance of a ``forever stamp'' to honor the sacrifices of the brave men and women of the armed forces who have been awarded the At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 616, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize medical simulation enhancement At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Thune) was added as a cosponsor of S. 781, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for collegiate housing and At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Barrasso) was added as a cosponsor of S. 812, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the special rule for contributions of qualified conservation contributions. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. 846, a bill to award a congressional gold medal to Dr. Muhammad Yunus, in recognition of his contributions to the fight against global poverty. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) was added as a cosponsor of S. 913, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand workplace health incentives by equalizing the tax consequences of employee athletic facility use. At the request of Mr. Crapo, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 941, a bill to reform the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, modernize firearm laws and regulations, protect the community from criminals, and for At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1026, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of marked absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed service voters, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1055, a bill to grant the congressional gold medal, collectively, to the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, United States Army, in recognition of their dedicated service during World War II. At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1066, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve access to ambulance At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1121, a bill to amend part D of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to provide grants for the repair, renovation, and construction of elementary and secondary schools, including early learning facilities At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1128, a bill to authorize the award of a military service medal to members of the Armed Forces who were exposed to ionizing radiation as a result of participation in the testing of nuclear weapons or under other At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1153, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the exclusion from gross income for employer-provided health coverage for employees' spouses and dependent children to coverage provided to other eligible designated At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Maine (Ms. Snowe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1156, a bill to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to reauthorize and improve the safe routes to school program. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1265, a bill to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to provide members of the Armed Forces and their family members equal access to voter registration At the request of Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, the name of the Senator a cosponsor of S. 1279, a bill to amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to extend the Rural At the request of Mr. Grassley, the names of the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus) and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) were added as cosponsors of S. 1304, a bill to restore the economic rights of At the request of Mr. Isakson, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Kaufman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1312, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage, as supplies associated with the injection of insulin, of containment, removal, decontamination and disposal of home-generated needles, syringes, and other sharps through a sharps container, decontamination/ destruction device, or sharps-by-mail program or similar program under At the request of Mr. DeMint, the name of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1324, a bill to ensure that every American has a health insurance plan that they can afford, own, At the request of Mr. Vitter, the names of the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Bunning), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of S. 1344, a bill to temporarily protect the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. At the request of Mr. Reed, the name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Akaka) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1362, a bill to provide grants to States to ensure that all students in the middle grades are taught an academically rigorous curriculum with effective supports so that students complete the middle grades prepared for success in high school and postsecondary endeavors, to improve State and district policies and programs relating to the academic achievement of students in the middle grades, to develop and implement effective middle grades models for At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1408, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage alternative energy At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of S. 1415, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to ensure that absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters are aware of their voting rights and have a genuine opportunity to register to vote and have their absentee ballots cast and counted, At the request of Mrs. Murray, the names of the Senator from Washington (Ms. Cantwell), the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) and the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Feingold) were added as cosponsors of S. 1422, a bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to clarify the eligibility requirements with respect to airline flight At the request of Mr. Wyden, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1439, a bill to provide for duty-free treatment of certain recreational performance outerwear, and At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1469, a bill to provide for the administration of Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1474, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the provision prohibiting the crediting of interest to the Highway Trust Fund, and for other At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Carper) was added as a cosponsor of S. Con. Res. 25, a concurrent resolution recognizing the value and benefits that community health centers provide as health care homes for over 18,000,000 individuals, and the importance of enabling health centers and other safety net providers to continue to offer accessible, affordable, and continuous care to their current patients and to every American who lacks access At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 210, a resolution designating the week beginning on November 9, 2009, as At the request of Mr. Johanns, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 212, a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that any savings under the Medicare program should be invested back into the Medicare program, rather than At the request of Mr. Leahy, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Bond, the name of the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be At the request of Mr. Sanders, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1514 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the names of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1515 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bunning, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1517 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1528 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1528 proposed to At the request of Mr. Risch, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1543 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1558 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Brownback, the names of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Utah (Mr. Bennett) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1597 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Begich, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1599 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Thune, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1618 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the names of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) and the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1621 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Ms. Collins, her name was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1628 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bennett, his name was added as a cosponsor of At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1635 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Pryor, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1637 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, today I am here to talk about a simple Each year U.S. consumers spend $2.57 billion more than they should for gasoline and diesel fuel. This is because they are buying hot fuel. The physics behind hot fuel are fairly simple. Retailers currently measure our gasoline as it if is stored at 60 degrees Fahrenheit. However, if the temperature increases, as it often does during the summer or in warm climates, the gasoline expands so that consumers are getting less energy per gallon of fuel. Yet, when consumers buy hot fuel, they are paying the same amount even though they are getting less This problem can be easily solved by installing temperature compensating equipment that will regulate the distribution of fuel based on its temperature at the time of purchase. A similar policy was implemented in Canada 15 years ago because retailers were losing money due to the cold temperature of the fuel they were selling; and earlier this year, the U.S. retailer Costco Warehouse, LLC agreed to install this temperature compensating equipment as a result of a legal Today, I am introducing legislation that would require all retailers of gasoline to install temperature compensating equipment on their retail fuel pumps. The Future Accountability in Retail Fuel Act of 2009, or the FAIR Fuel Act, is not intended to be onerous. It would simply require that within 6 years after enactment of this legislation all retail gasoline pumps would include automatic temperature compensating equipment. Prior to that 6 year timeline, if a retailer replaces their pumps, they must replace it with a pump that will be able to compensate for temperature fluctuations. Rural retail gasoline owners are exempt from this replacement requirement and the bill provides grant assistance for small retail owners to retrofit or purchase pumps with temperature compensating equipment. American families deserve to be treated fairly. They deserve to get what they pay for. With the current economic crisis and the high prices of gasoline, every penny we can save the consumer will go along way to them survive these tough times. This legislation will help to achieve this goal. It will finally give consumers the fairness they deserve. I am pleased that this bill has been endorsed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, OOIDA, USPIRG and Consumer Watchdog. I look forward to working with the members of the Commerce Committee and the full Senate in getting this legislation passed. I think we owe it Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Future Accountability in (1) Automatic temperature compensation equipment.--The term ``automatic temperature compensation equipment'' has the meaning given the term in the National Institute of Standards (2) Equivalent standard.--The term ``equivalent standard'' means any standard that prohibits the retail sale of gasoline with energy content per gallon that is different than the energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline stored at 60 degrees (3) Rural area.--The term ``rural area'' means any area (A) a city, town, or unincorporated area that has a (B) the urbanized area that is contiguous and adjacent to (4) Small-volume station.--The term ``small-volume station'' means any retail fuel establishment that dispenses fewer than 360,000 gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel per SEC. 3. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT. (1) New motor fuel dispensers.--Beginning 180 days after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers that are newly installed or upgraded at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment to ensure that any volume of gasoline or diesel fuel measured by such dispenser for retail sale is equal to the volume that such quantity of fuel would equal at the time of such sale if the temperature of the fuel was 60 degrees Fahrenheit. (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), not later than 5 years after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with the automatic temperature compensation (B) Small-volume stations.--Small-volume stations located in rural areas shall not be subject to the requirement under (1) Annual inspection.--Beginning on the date described in subsection (a), State inspectors conducting an initial or annual inspection of motor fuel dispensers are authorized to determine if such dispensers are equipped with the automatic temperature compensation equipment required under subsection (2) Notification.--If the State inspector determines that a motor fuel dispenser does not comply with the requirement under subsection (a), the State inspector is authorized to notify the Federal Trade Commission, through an electronic notification system developed by the Commission, of such (3) Follow-up inspection.--Not earlier than 180 days after a motor fuel dispenser is found to be out of compliance with the requirement under subsection (a), the Federal Trade Commission shall coordinate a follow-up inspection of such (A) In general.--The owner or operator of any retail fuel establishment with a motor fuel dispenser subject to the requirement under subsection (a) that is determined to be out of compliance with such requirement shall be subject to a fine equal to $5,000 for each noncompliant motor fuel (B) Additional fine.--If a motor fuel dispenser is determined to be out of compliance during a follow-up inspection, the owner or operator of the retail fuel establishment at which such motor fuel dispenser is located shall be subject to an additional fine equal to $5,000. (5) Use of fines.--Any amounts collected under paragraph (4) shall be deposited into the trust fund established under (1) Commencement.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, shall commence a rulemaking procedure to (2) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall issue final regulations to implement the requirement under subsection (a), including specifying which volume correction factor tables shall be used for the range of gasoline and diesel fuel products that are sold to retail SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT GRANT (1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the ``Automatic Temperature Compensation Equipment Trust Fund'' (referred to (2) Transfers.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the Trust Fund out of the general fund of the Treasury an amount equal to the amount collected as fines (3) Investment.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest such portion of the Trust Fund as is not required to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be made only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States. (1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund for grants to owners and operators of retail fuel establishments to offset the costs associated with the installation of automatic temperature (2) Maximum amount.--The Secretary may not award a grant (3) Eligible recipients.--An owner or operator of not more than 5 retail fuel establishments is eligible to receive a (4) Use of grant funds.--Grant funds received under this subsection may be used to offset the costs incurred by owners and operators of retail establishments to acquire and install automatic temperature compensation equipment in accordance (5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out (c) Reimbursement of State Inspection Costs.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund to reimburse States for the costs incurred by the States to-- (1) inspect motor fuel dispensers for compliance with the (2) notify the Secretary of Commerce of any noncompliance Nothing in this Act may be construed to preempt a State from enacting a law that imposes an equivalent standard or a more stringent standard concerning the retail sale of S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that would charge a reinspection fee for goods that fail FDA inspection for good manufacturing practices. Currently, businesses do not have to pay for the second inspection if they fail. Essentially, then, the FDA is absorbing this extra cost. This Nation faces difficult enough choices without subsidizing private companies that fail basic inspections. I am pleased to credit the Bush administration for originally proposing this fee, which is again proposed in President Obama's fiscal year 2010 budget. This fee carries proposed savings of an estimated $24 million per year, and could save as much as $115 million over 5 years. We must ensure that U.S. taxpayer money is being used efficiently and effectively, and this measure would help in our ongoing efforts to streamline government programs and reduce the Federal budget deficit. FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach testified about these fees before the House Agriculture, Rural Development, and FDA Appropriations Subcommittee in 2006. He believes, and I agree, that the reinspection fee will motivate businesses to comply with long-established health and that do not meet Federal standards should bear the burden of the reinspection, rather than getting a free pass at the taxpayer's One of the main reasons I first ran for the U.S. Senate was to restore fiscal responsibility to the Federal budget. I have worked throughout my Senate career to eliminate wasteful spending and to reduce the budget deficit. Unless we return to fiscally responsible budgeting, Congress will saddle our nation's younger generations with an enormous financial burden for years to come. This bill is one small By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Kohl to introduce the Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act as part of my continued efforts to improve student achievement in our Nation's schools. One part of student performance that is often overlooked is nutrition, which can have a significant impact on student achievement. I know many of my colleagues share my support for school programs that help alleviate hunger for the most in-need students, such as the Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program, as well as those programs that provide more nutritious food, such as the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Snack I am sure that I am not the only member of this body who grew up hearing that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. I was lucky never to have to worry about going hungry, and my parents did not have to choose between giving their children lunch or breakfast. The fact is, that is a choice many parents do have to make today, even if they get the help of reduced price meals. The current economic difficulties and rising unemployment have only increased the burdens facing low income families in Wisconsin and around the country as they struggle to provide nutritious meals for their children. The Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act would provide grants for schools wishing to begin or expand universal school breakfast programs. Studies show that kids who eat breakfast perform better in school and on tests, and they tend to be less disruptive to the class. I have heard many stories from teachers, school nurses, and other school officials over the years to confirm this. In fact, in my home State of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Public Schools have been working with the Hunger Task Force for the past few years to implement universal school breakfast programs, which they have in place now in more than 80 schools. This program, which has expanded in its second year, has proven popular with students, teachers, and parents. This bill would target the most in-need schools--those with 65 percent or more of students eligible for the free and reduced price lunch program--with the funds necessary to implement a universal free breakfast program. The grants, which could be used in a number of ways, aim to help schools overcome the numerous barriers faced in trying to Our Nation faces a series of pressing education challenges in its schools, including most significantly a large achievement gap and graduation rate gap among minority and low income students. After decades of civil rights struggles, public education should provide all our students with access to equal opportunities, but the quality of public education provided to students of color and low-income students in urban and rural Wisconsin and around the country still does not come close to affording many of these students an equal chance for success. Too often these students learn in crumbling and outdated buildings, they do not have the same access to high quality technology in their classrooms, they are taught by the least experienced teachers, and they often do not have adequate access to important resources like school These and a number of other factors contribute to the achievement gap in our Nation's schools and the Federal Government can help to address this gap by promoting smarter and more flexible accountability structures and increased supports for schools during the upcoming reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Congress should also help to address some of the many other issues facing our nation's students living in poverty issues that may not seem directly related to education, but impact the academic growth of students including hunger, affordable housing, and crime. This bill takes an important step to address hunger and also seeks to improve nutrition education by providing funds to expand school breakfast programs, boost collaboration between local farmers and schools, expand service- learning opportunities in our classrooms, and improve nutrition In this economy, more and more parents are forced to make these kinds of decisions, and the school meal programs can provide a tremendous relief. As we look forward to reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act, it is vital that we take stock of the successes and limitations of existing programs. School breakfast faces a number of hurdles that, quite simply, other school feeding programs do not. Chief of those is time. For some students, getting to school early is impossible; for some, the lure of breakfast is not a strong enough draw to get up earlier. These are problems that schools across the country are facing and solving with creativity and dedication. This legislation will help support the innovative work going on in some of our nation's schools and will help to scale up successful nutrition programs in other schools so that hopefully one day, none of America's students will By Mr. NELSON, of Florida (for himself and Mr. Martinez): S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on Finance. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, last year we were all transfixed by the non-stop news coverage of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike as they grew into monster storms, crossing the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and leaving a trail of misery in their wake. Ike, the third most destructive storm in the history of the U.S., made landfall in Galveston, Texas, and then tracked through Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, killing 112 people and causing more Since 2003, hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have caused more than 2,000 deaths in the U.S. Forty percent of all hurricanes that make Insured losses from hurricanes average more than $5.2 billion per year. A recent study of hurricane-related damages over the last century suggests that economic losses will double every 10 years. With more than 50 percent of the U.S. population living within 50 miles of the coast, and with 180 million people visiting the coast annually, the Hurricanes, however, do not just impact the coasts. These extreme events also have national consequences, such as increased fuel prices, displaced populations, and severe inland flooding. The American public is increasingly aware of the potential for high recovery costs and financing of natural disaster losses. I cannot overstate the importance of prior preparation and insurance coverage for large catastrophic risks--including natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes--as well as efforts to promote a stable, This is why today Senator Martinez and I are introducing four bills: the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, Act of 2009, S. 1486, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009, S. 1484, and the National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009, 1485. These bills take a pro-active approach in addressing these natural The National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009 will expand the scope of fundamental research on hurricanes. The bill is aimed at improving hurricane forecasting and tracking and helping us find better ways to mitigate their impact. The Act will establish a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant program for hurricane and tropical cyclone research and bring together a task force, jointly chaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, and NSF. The second bill, the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, establishes the bipartisan Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance. This commission will assess the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, as well as the four major hurricanes that struck the U.S. in 2004. It will also evaluate the country's ongoing exposure to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods. Finally, the commission will recommend and report legislative and regulatory changes that will improve the domestic and international financial health and competitiveness of property and casualty insurance markets, assuring the availability of adequate insurance when an insured event occurs, as well as the best possible range of insurance products at competitive The Policyholder Disaster Protection Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow property and casualty insurance companies to create tax-exempt disaster protection funds and to make tax deductible contributions to those funds for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from certain catastrophic events, such as windstorms, Finally, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to create tax-exempt catastrophe savings accounts. Individuals could take tax-free distributions from these accounts to pay expenses resulting from a presidentially declared major disaster. The bill limits catastrophe savings account balances to $2,000 for individuals with homeowner insurance deductibles of not more than $1,000, and the lesser of $15,000 or twice the homeowner's insurance deductible for individuals with deductibles of more than As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the entire country experiences financial losses when hurricanes hit. It is time for us to take the bull by the horns and pass legislation that plans in advance As we are in the hurricane season, it will become painfully apparent just how precarious a lot of the construction is, how precarious building codes are not being fairly and judiciously administered, and it will become evident what an economic disaster even a mild hurricane can cause when it hits the coast. And Lord knows, if the big one hits an urbanized part of the coast--and the big one is a category 4 or a category 5 hurricane--it is going to create economic chaos. It is going to cause the insurance industry to be on the brink of total collapse. And it will ultimately, just like Katrina, end up having the U.S. Government pay a major part of the economic bailout consequences of a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or an earthquake hitting the United States. We ought to get ahead of it and we ought to plan for it, and that is what this package of four bills Senator Martinez and I are Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be There being no objection, the text of the bills was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Catastrophe Savings Accounts (a) In General.--Subchapter F of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exempt organizations) is amended by adding at the end the following new part: ``(a) General Rule.--A Catastrophe Savings Account shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, such account shall be subject to the taxes imposed by section 511 (relating to imposition of tax on unrelated business income of charitable organizations). ``(b) Catastrophe Savings Account.--For purposes of this section, the term `Catastrophe Savings Account' means a trust created or organized in the United States for the exclusive benefit of an individual or his beneficiaries and which is designated (in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe) at the time of the establishment of the trust as a Catastrophe Savings Account, but only if the written governing instrument creating the trust meets the following ``(A) no contribution will be accepted unless it is in ``(B) contributions will not be accepted in excess of the account balance limit specified in subsection (c). ``(2) The trustee is a bank (as defined in section 408(n)) or another person who demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the manner in which that person will administer the trust will be consistent with the requirements ``(3) The interest of an individual in the balance of his ``(4) The assets of the trust shall not be commingled with other property except in a common trust fund or common ``(c) Account Balance Limit.--The aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual (including qualified rollover ``(1) in the case of an individual whose qualified ``(2) in the case of an individual whose qualified deductible is more than $1,000, the amount equal to the ``(B) twice the amount of the individual's qualified ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Qualified catastrophe expenses.--The term `qualified catastrophe expenses' means expenses paid or incurred by reason of a major disaster that has been declared by the President under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford ``(2) Qualified deductible.--With respect to an individual, the term `qualified deductible' means the annual deductible for the individual's homeowners' insurance policy. ``(3) Qualified rollover contribution.--The term `qualified rollover contribution' means a contribution to a Catastrophe ``(A) from another such account of the same beneficiary, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account, and ``(B) from a Catastrophe Savings Account of a spouse of the beneficiary of the account to which the contribution is made, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account. ``(1) In general.--Any distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account shall be includible in the gross income of the distributee in the manner as provided in section 72. ``(2) Distributions for qualified catastrophe expenses.-- ``(A) In general.--No amount shall be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) if the qualified catastrophe expenses of the distributee during the taxable year are not less than the aggregate distributions during the taxable ``(B) Distributions in excess of expenses.--If such aggregate distributions exceed such expenses during the taxable year, the amount otherwise includible in gross income under paragraph (1) shall be reduced by the amount which bears the same ratio to the amount which would be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) (without regard to this subparagraph) as the qualified catastrophe expenses bear to ``(3) Additional tax for distributions not used for qualified catastrophe expenses.--The tax imposed by this chapter for any taxable year on any taxpayer who receives a payment or distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account which is includible in gross income shall be increased by 10 ``(4) Retirement distributions.--No amount shall be under paragraph (1) (or subject to an additional tax under paragraph (3)) if the payment or distribution is made on or after the date on which the distributee attains age 62. ``(f) Tax Treatment of Accounts.--Rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 408(e) shall apply (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 4973 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to tax on excess contributions to certain tax-favored accounts and annuities) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (4), by inserting ``or'' at the end of paragraph (5), and by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph: ``(6) a Catastrophe Savings Account (as defined in section (2) Excess contribution.--Section 4973 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: Accounts.--For purposes of this section, in the case of Catastrophe Savings Accounts (within the meaning of section 530A), the term `excess contributions' means the amount by which the aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual exceeds the account balance limit defined in section subchapter F of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new item: (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``National (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act (1) Hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have directly caused more than 2,000 deaths in the United States since 2003 and account for approximately 66 percent of insured losses (2) While the ability to understand and predict hurricanes and other tropical cyclones has improved since 1999, particularly with respect to storm tracking, much remains (A) storm dynamics, rapid intensity change, and impact on (B) the interactions of storms with natural and built (C) the impacts to and response of society to destructive (3) Several expert assessments of the state of hurricane science and research needs have been published, including-- (A) the January 2007 report by the National Science Board titled, ``Hurricane Warning: The Critical Need for a National (B) the February 2007 report by the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research entitled, ``Interagency Strategic Research Plan for (C) reports from the Hurricane Intensity Working Group of the National Science Advisory Board of the National Oceanic (4) In the June 2005 publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council prioritized Federal science and technology investments needed to reduce future loss of life and property caused, both directly and indirectly, by hurricanes and other (5) A National Hurricane Research Initiative complements the objectives of the National Windstorm Impact Reduction It is the sense of Congress that, consistent with the findings of the expert assessments and strategies described in paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 2, a National Hurricane Research Initiative should be established to address the urgent and compelling need to undertake long-term, coordinated, multi-entity hurricane research focused on-- (1) conducting high priority scientific, engineering, and (2) effectively applying the research results of such studies to mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on society. (1) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the National Hurricane Research Task Force established under section 6(a). (2) Eligible entities.--The term ``eligible entities'' means State, regional, and local government agencies and departments, tribal governments, universities, research (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning given the term in section 102 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a). (4) Initiative.--The term ``Initiative'' means the National Hurricane Research Initiative established under section (5) National windstorm impact reduction program.--The term ``National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program'' means the program established by section 204 of the National Windstorm (6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, (7) Tribal government.--The term ``tribal government'' (8) Under secretary.--The term ``Under Secretary'' means (1) In general.--The Under Secretary, in collaboration with the Director of the National Science Foundation, shall establish an initiative to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Initiative'' for the purposes described in (A) the activities of the Under Secretary under this (B) the activities of the Task Force under section 6; and (2) Purposes.--The purposes described in this paragraph are (A) To improve understanding and prediction of hurricanes (ii) forecasting of storm formation, intensity, and wind and rain patterns, both within the tropics and as the storms (iii) storm surge modeling, inland flood modeling, and (iv) the interaction with and impacts of storms with the (v) the impacts to and response of society to destructive storms, including the socio-economic impacts requiring (B) To develop infrastructure that is resilient to the forces associated with hurricanes and other tropical storms. (C) To mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on coastal populations, the coastal built environment, and natural (iv) other natural systems that can reduce hurricane wind (D) To provide training for the next generation of (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall develop a detailed, 5-year implementation plan for the Initiative (A) incorporates the priorities for Federal science and publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards of the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council; establishes benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track progress of the research carried out under the Initiative and the application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related public benefits, as recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(2); and (C) identifies opportunities to leverage the results of the research carried out under section 7 with other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss- (i) the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program established by section 204(a) of the National Windstorm (ii) the National Flood Insurance Program established under chapter 1 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 (iii) the initiatives of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); (iv) wind hazard mitigation initiatives carried out by a (v) the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project fo the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and (vi) the Working Group for Tropical Cyclone Research of the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services (2) Review.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall ensure that the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) is reviewed (A) the Director of the National Science Foundation; (C) the Director of the National Institute for Standards (D) the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (F) the Associate Administrator for Science Mission (3) Revisions.--The Under Secretary shall revise the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) not less frequently than once every 5 years to address and respond to the findings and recommendations of the Task Force. (1) Establishment of research objectives.--The Under Secretary shall, in consultation with the Director fo the National Science Foundation, establish objectives for research carried out pursuant to section 7 that are based on the findings of the expert assessments and strategies (2) Coordination.--In carrying out the provisions of this subsection, the Under Secretary shall coordinate with the (d) National Workshops and Conferences.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Director of the National Science Foundation and the Task Force, shall carry out a series of national workshops and conferences that assemble a (1) to address hurricane-related research questions; and (2) to encourage researchers to work collaboratively to carry out the purposes described in subsection (a)(2). (e) Public Internet Website.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Task Force, shall facilitate the establishment of a public Internet website for the (1) to foster collaboration and interactive dialogues among the Under Secretary, the Director of the National Science (2) to enhance public access to Initiative documents and (A) information about the members of the Task Force, including their affiliation and contact information; (D) the most recent 5-year implementation plan developed (E) the most recent annual report submitted to Congress (1) Requirement for annual crosscut budget and report.--The Under Secretary, in conjunction with members of the Task Force who represent Federal agencies, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Office of Management and Budget, shall submit to Congress each year, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the fiscal year beginning in such year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a coordinated annual report for the Initiative for the fiscal year in which the report is submitted and the last (2) Contents.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall-- (A) document the funds transferred by the Under Secretary to the heads of other Federal agencies under section 8(b); (B) document the grants and contracts awarded to eligible (C) for each agency that receives funds under section 8(b) and eligible entity that receives a grant or contract under section 7, identify what major activities were undertaken (D) for each research activity or group of activities described in section 7(c), as appropriate, identify any accomplishments, which may include full or partial achievement of benchmarks, milestones, goals, performance measure targets established for the implementation plan under (a) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall establish a task force to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Task Force'' to facilitate and coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies and eligible entities in (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of the (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee. (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and (4) The Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary's (5) The Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (6) The Director of the United States Geological Survey, or (7) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space (8) One member shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who shall be a representative of the Office of Naval (9) The Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and (10) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology (11) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, (12) The Chair of the Executive Committee of the Federal Geographic Data Committee, or the Chair's designee. (13) Such other members from Federal agencies as the chairpersons of the Task Force jointly consider appropriate. Government, selected jointly by the chairpersons of the Task Force in consultation with the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, as follows: (A) At least 3 members who are prominent in the fields of hurricane science, engineering, social science, or related (B) At least 1 member who represents a State government agency responsible for emergency management and response. (C) At least 3 members who represent the views of local governments, tribal governments, and nongovernmental (D) At least 2 members who represent private sector interests engaged in hurricane research, preparedness, (E) At least 1 member who represents a State floodplain or (c) Chairpersons.--The concurrent chairpersons of the Task (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or the Director's designee under subsection (d) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Task Force shall hold (e) Meetings.--The Task Force shall meet at the call of the chairpersons of the Task Force, but not less frequently than (f) Duties.--The duties of the Task Force are as follows: (1) To provide assistance to the Under Secretary with the development of the 5-year implementation plan required by (2) Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and in consideration of the expert findings (A) to develop and furnish to the Under Secretary findings and recommendations, as appropriate, for monitoring research progress and for a set of benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track the transition and application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related (B) to identify interim and long-term goals of the research (C) to prioritize the activities of the Initiative over a (3) To improve communication and coordination among Federal agencies with respect to hurricane-related research, developments in hurricane forecasting and operations, and best practices for applying results of Initiative research to reduce loss of life and property damage resulting from (4) To identify opportunities to leverage the activities and products of the Initiative with the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program and other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss reduction (5) To recommend a model described in section 7(c)(1)(A) and monitor progress on development of such model. (6) To make recommendations to the Under Secretary and the Director of the National Science Foundation on research priorities and content and structure of the program (7) To make recommendations on national hurricane research (8) To assess opportunities to leverage the capabilities of (9) To evaluate the extent to which the stakeholders described in paragraph (8) have been engaged as partners and (10) To assist the Under Secretary in facilitating the development of the annual report required by section 5(f). (11) To review such report and provide comments to the (12) To submit to the National Science and Technology Council and to Congress, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the 2012 fiscal year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a report containing a comprehensive review of the progress of the Initiative in meeting the needs of the United States to understand hurricanes, their impacts on natural and built environment, (1) Authority to establish.--The Task Force may establish such advisory bodies as the Task Force considers necessary to assist the Task Force in its duties under subsection (f). (2) Criteria.--An advisory body established under paragraph (1) shall represent a broad variety of private and public (h) Advisors to the Task Force.--The Task Force may seek advice and input from any interested, knowledgeable, or affected party as the Task Force considers necessary to carry (1) In general.--All members of the Task Force who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services as officers or employees of the United States. (2) Travel expenses.--The members of the Task Force shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Task Force. (j) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.-- The Chairpersons may procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such (k) Volunteer Services.--Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Commission may accept and use voluntary and uncompensated services as the Commission (l) Exemption From FACA Notice Requirement for Task Force Advisory Bodies.--An advisory body established by the Task Force under subsection (g) shall not be subject to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. (m) Termination of Task Force.--The Task Force shall (a) National Science Foundation Competitive Grant Research (1) In general.--The Director of the National Science Foundation, in coordination with the Under Secretary, shall establish a program to award grants to eligible entities to (B) other research that is consistent with the research (2) Selection.--The National Science Foundation shall select grant recipients under this section through its merit (b) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall carry out a program of research described in subsection (c) or other research that is consistent with the research objectives (2) Research activities.--Research carried out under (B) awarding grants to eligible entities to carry out (C) contracting with eligible entities to carry out (D) entering into cooperative agreements to carry out (c) Research.--The research described in this subsection is research that is consistent with the purposes described in section 5(a)(2) and is described by one or more of the (1) Fundamental hurricane research.--Fundamental hurricane (A) Community research models.--Research to support continued development and maintenance of community weather research and forecast models recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(5), including advanced methods of observing storm structure and assimilating observations into the models, in which the agency or institution hosting the models ensures broad access and use of the model by members of the Task Force and the civilian research community. (B) Predicting hurricane intensity and structure.--Research (i) storm formation and tracking with extended time scale (ii) rapid changes in storm size, motion, structure, and (iv) the transition to extratropical characteristics as conditions, including the atmosphere, ocean, and land (C) Understanding air and sea interactions.--Research regarding observations, theory, and modeling to improve understanding of air and sea interaction in hurricanes and (D) Predicting storm surge, waves, rainfall, inland flooding, and strong winds produced by hurricanes.--Research to understand, model, and predict rainfall, coastal and riverline flooding, high winds, and the potential occurrence of tornadoes, including probabilistic modeling, mapping, and understanding of the complex relationships between hurricanes and climate on seasonal to decadal time scales, such as research to determine the most effective methods to use observational information and numerical-model simulations to examine short-term and long-term impacts of climate on changes in storm intensity, geographic distribution, and (F) Relationships between hurricanes and ecosystems.-- Research to improve the understanding of how hurricanes affect ecosystems, landscapes, and natural resources and to develop assessments for hurricane vulnerability and risk, (i) how ecosystems have been influenced by past hurricanes and the ability and capacity of ecosystems to recover from (ii) how ecosystem management practices can minimize disruptions to ecosystem functions and dependent economic (iii) the role of natural features, such as barrier (I) acting as natural buffers to wind and flood forces; and (2) Technology assessment and development.--Technology assessment and development, which may consist of the (A) Improved observation of hurricanes and tropical storms.--Research to improve hurricane and tropical storm observations and to improve the understanding of the complex nature of storms and their interaction with the natural and built environment through development and application of new (vi) other geospatial technologies and geospatial data, (B) Computational capability.--Research and development of robust computational capabilities and facilities required to conduct numerical and other types of modeling that support the scientific studies and research carried out under the Initiative as well as data acquisition and modeling during hurricane events, including research to improve understanding of the efficient utility of multiple models that-- (i) require sharing and interoperability of databases, computing environments, networks, visualization tools, and analytic systems that improve on such technologies that are available on the date of the enactment of this Act; and (ii) are used for transitioning hurricane research assets (C) Technologies for disaster response and recovery.-- Research to improve damage assessments after a hurricane and emergency communications during hurricane response and (i) communications networks for government agencies and (iii) cyber-security during hurricane or storm related (iv) use of models, remote sensing, and statistically based ground sampling to support effective and rapid damage assessment to scale disaster response and recovery needs. (3) Research integration, transition, and application.-- Research on integration, transition, and application of research results, which may consist of the following: (A) Transition of research to operations.--Research to develop mechanisms to accelerate the application of improved models, observations, communication, and risk assessment systems, and related research products to forecasting and other operational settings, including use of 1 or more (B) Assessing vulnerable infrastructure.--Developing a national engineering assessment and clearinghouse of coastal infrastructure by leveraging and building upon existing Federal activities, resources, and research, including infrastructure related to levees, sea walls, and similar coastal flood-protection structures, drainage systems, communications, to determine the level of vulnerability of (C) Interaction of hurricanes with engineered structures.-- Research to improve understanding of the impacts of hurricanes and tropical storms on buildings, structures, and housing combined with modeling that is essential for guiding the creation of improved building designs and construction codes in locations particularly vulnerable to hurricanes. (D) Evacuation planning.--Research to improve the manner in which hurricane-related information is provided to, and utilized by, the public and government officials, including research to assist officials of State, tribal, regional, or (i) determining the circumstances in which evacuations are (i) assess the social, behavioral, and economic factors that influence decision making by the public, government officials, nongovernmental entities, the private sector, and other impacted populations before, during, and in the (ii) improve the translation of natural science and engineering research carried out under the Initiative into informed decision making that enables communities, economies, and the man-made and natural environments to become resilient to hurricane impacts, including development of effective risk and vulnerability assessment and risk communication tools; (iii) develop methods of assessing disaster recovery costs, both government and nongovernment, and of comparing the relative benefits of disaster mitigation methods with (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2010 through 2015 amounts as follows: (1) To the Under Secretary, $18,750,000 to carry out sections 5, 6, and 7(b), of which not less than $13,750,000 (2) To the Director of the National Science Foundation, atmosphere.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(1), the Under Secretary may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Under Secretary considers foundation.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(2), the Director of the National Science Foundation may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Director considers appropriate to carry out sections 5 and (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council of the National Academies for the National Research Council to (2) Timing.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into the agreement described in paragraph (1) not later than 180 (b) Independent Review of National Hurricane Research Initiative.--Under an agreement between the Under Secretary and the National Research Council under this section, the National Research Council shall carry out an independent review of the Initiative. In carrying out the review, the National Research Council shall review the following: (1) Whether the Initiative has well-defined, prioritized, (2) Whether the Initiative is properly coordinated among (3) Whether the Initiative has allocated appropriate (4) Whether suitable mechanisms exist for transitioning the research results from the Initiative into operational technologies and procedures and activities in a timely (c) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives a report on the results of the (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the Under Secretary, $750,000 to carry Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Policyholder Disaster (1) Rising costs resulting from natural disasters are placing an increasing strain on the ability of property and casualty insurance companies to assure payment of homeowners' claims and other insurance claims arising from major natural (2) Present tax laws do not provide adequate incentives to assure that natural disaster insurance is provided or, where such insurance is provided, that funds are available for payment of insurance claims in the event of future catastrophic losses from major natural disasters, as present law requires an insurer wishing to accumulate surplus assets for this purpose to do so entirely from its after-tax (3) Revising the tax laws applicable to the property and casualty insurance industry to permit carefully controlled accumulation of pretax dollars in separate reserve funds devoted solely to the payment of claims arising from future major natural disasters will provide incentives for property and casualty insurers to make natural disaster insurance available, will give greater protection to the Nation's homeowners, small businesses, and other insurance consumers, and will help assure the future financial health of the (4) Implementing these changes will reduce the possibility that a significant portion of the private insurance system would fail in the wake of a major natural disaster and that governmental entities would be required to step in to provide SEC. 3. CREATION OF POLICYHOLDER DISASTER PROTECTION FUNDS; (a) Contributions to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Subsection (c) of section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to the taxable income of insurance companies other than life insurance companies) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (12), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (13) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(14) the qualified contributions to a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year.''. (b) Distributions From Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Paragraph (1) of section 832(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at ``(F) the amount of any distributions from a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year, except that a distribution made to return to the qualified insurance contribution (as defined in subsection (h)) for a taxable year shall not be included in gross income if such distribution is made prior to the filing of the tax return (c) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to insurance company taxable income) is amended by adding at the end the following new ``(h) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Policyholder disaster protection fund.--The term `policyholder disaster protection fund' (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the `fund') means any custodial account, trust, or any other arrangement or account-- ``(A) which is established to hold assets that are set aside solely for the payment of qualified losses, and ``(i) the assets in the fund are required to be invested in a manner consistent with the investment requirements applicable to the qualified insurance company under the laws ``(ii) the net income for the taxable year derived from the assets in the fund is required to be distributed no less ``(iii) an excess balance drawdown amount is required to be distributed to the qualified insurance company no later than the close of the taxable year following the taxable year for ``(iv) a catastrophe drawdown amount may be distributed to the qualified insurance company if distributed prior to the close of the taxable year following the year for which such ``(v) a State required drawdown amount may be distributed, ``(vi) no distributions from the fund are required or permitted other than the distributions described in clauses contributions that are not qualified contributions. ``(2) Qualified insurance company.--The term `qualified insurance company' means any insurance company subject to tax ``(3) Qualified contribution.--The term `qualified contribution' means a contribution to a fund for a taxable year to the extent that the amount of such contribution, when added to the previous contributions to the fund for such ``(B) the fund balance determined as of the close of the ``(4) Excess balance drawdown amounts.--The term `excess balance drawdown amount' means the excess (if any) of-- ``(A) the fund balance as of the close of the taxable year, ``(B) the fund cap for the following taxable year. ``(A) In general.--The term `catastrophe drawdown amount' means an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount ``(B) Net losses from qualifying events.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the qualified losses for the taxable year determined without ``(C) Gross losses in excess of threshold.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over ``(I) the fund cap for the taxable year (determined without ``(II) 30 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable catastrophe loss year.--If for any taxable year included in the reference period the qualified losses exceed the amount determined under subparagraph (C)(ii), the `catastrophe drawdown amount' shall be an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount determined under subparagraph (B) or the amount determined under this subparagraph. The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be an amount equal ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over (determined without regard to paragraph (9)(E)), or ``(II) 10 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable ``(E) Reference period.--For purposes of subparagraph (D), the reference period shall be determined under the following ``For a taxable year beginning in-- The reference period shall be-- 2012 and later...................... The 3 preceding taxable years. 2011................................ The 2 preceding taxable years. 2010................................ The preceding taxable year. 2008 or before...................... No reference period applies. ``(6) State required drawdown amount.--The term `State required drawdown amount' means any amount that the department of insurance for the qualified insurance company's jurisdiction of domicile requires to be distributed from the fund, to the extent such amount is not otherwise described in ``(7) Fund balance.--The term `fund balance' means-- ``(A) the sum of all qualified contributions to the fund, ``(B) less any net investment loss of the fund for any ``(C) less the sum of all distributions under clauses (iii) ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified losses' means, with ``(i) the amount of losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred in the qualified lines of business specified in paragraph (9), net of reinsurance, as reported in the qualified insurance company's annual statement for the taxable year, that are attributable to one or more qualifying events (regardless of when such qualifying events occurred), ``(ii) the amount by which such losses and loss adjustment expenses attributable to such qualifying events have been reduced for reinsurance received and recoverable, plus ``(iii) any nonrecoverable assessments, surcharges, or other liabilities that are borne by the qualified insurance company and are attributable to such qualifying events. ``(B) Qualifying event.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term `qualifying event' means any event that satisfies ``(i) Event.--An event satisfies this clause if the event ``(III) Winter catastrophe (snow, ice, or freezing). ``(ii) Catastrophe designation.--An event satisfies this ``(I) is designated a catastrophe by Property Claim ``(II) is declared by the President to be an emergency or ``(III) is declared to be an emergency or disaster in a similar declaration by the chief executive official of a State, possession, or territory of the United States, or the ``(A) In general.--The term `fund cap' for a taxable year is the sum of the separate lines of business caps for each of the qualified lines of business specified in the table ``(B) Separate lines of business cap.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the separate lines of business cap, with respect to a qualified line of business specified in the table contained in subparagraph (C), is the product of-- ``(i) net written premiums reported in the annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable year in such line ``(ii) the fund cap multiplier applicable to such qualified ``(C) Qualified lines of business and their respective fund cap multipliers.--For purposes of this paragraph, the qualified lines of business and fund cap multipliers specified in this subparagraph are those specified in the Fire..............................................................0.25 Allied............................................................1.25 Farmowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.25 Homeowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.75 Commercial Multi Peril (non-liability portion)....................0.50 Earthquake.......................................................13.00 Inland Marine.....................................................0.25. ``(D) Subsequent modifications of the annual statement blank.--If, with respect to any taxable year beginning after the effective date of this subsection, the annual statement blank required to be filed is amended to replace, combine, or otherwise modify any of the qualified lines of business specified in subparagraph (C), then for such taxable year subparagraph (C) shall be applied in a manner such that the fund cap shall be the same amount as if such reporting ``(E) 20-year phase-in.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (C), the fund cap for a taxable year shall be the amount determined under subparagraph (C), as adjusted pursuant to subparagraph (D) (if applicable), multiplied by the phase-in ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2009........................................... 5 percent 2010........................................... 10 percent 2011........................................... 15 percent 2012........................................... 20 percent 2013........................................... 25 percent 2014........................................... 30 percent 2015........................................... 35 percent 2016........................................... 40 percent 2017........................................... 45 percent 2018........................................... 50 percent 2019........................................... 55 percent 2020........................................... 60 percent 2021........................................... 65 percent 2022........................................... 70 percent 2023........................................... 75 percent 2024........................................... 80 percent 2025........................................... 85 percent 2026........................................... 90 percent 2027........................................... 95 percent 2028 and later................................. 100 percent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ``(10) Treatment of investment income and gain or loss.-- ``(A) Contributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money to a fund shall be treated as a sale or exchange of such property for an amount equal to its fair market value as of the date of transfer, and appropriate adjustment shall be made to the basis of such property. Section 267 shall ``(B) Distributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money by a fund to the qualified insurance company shall not be treated as a sale or exchange or other disposition of such property. The basis of such property immediately after such transfer shall be the greater of the basis of such property immediately before such transfer or the fair market value of such property on the date of such transfer. ``(C) Income with respect to fund assets.--Items of income of the type described in paragraphs (1)(B), (1)(C), and (2) of subsection (b) that are derived from the assets held in a fund, as well as losses from the sale or other disposition of such assets, shall be considered items of income, gain, or loss of the qualified insurance company. Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(F) of subsection (b), distributions of net income to the qualified insurance company pursuant to paragraph (1)(B)(ii) of this subsection shall not cause such ``(11) Net income; net investment loss.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B)(ii), the net income derived from the assets in the fund for the taxable year shall be the items of income and gain for the taxable year, less the items of loss for the taxable year, derived from such assets, as described in paragraph (10)(C). For purposes of paragraph (7), there is a net investment loss for the taxable year to the extent that the items of loss described in the preceding sentence exceed the items of income and gain described in the preceding ``(12) Annual statement.--For purposes of this subsection, the term `annual statement' shall have the meaning set forth ``(13) Exclusion of premiums and losses on certain puerto rican risks.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, premiums and losses with respect to risks covered by a catastrophe reserve established under the laws or regulations of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall not be taken into account under this subsection in determining the amount of the fund cap or the amount of qualified losses. ``(14) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this subsection, including regulations-- ``(A) which govern the application of this subsection to a qualified insurance company having a taxable year other than the calendar year or a taxable year less than 12 months, ``(B) which govern a fund maintained by a qualified insurance company that ceases to be subject to this part, and ``(C) which govern the application of paragraph (9)(D).''. (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Commission on Catastrophic (1) Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, which struck the United States in 2005, caused over $200 billion in total economic losses, including insured and uninsured losses. (2) Although private sector insurance is currently available to spread some catastrophe-related losses throughout the Nation and internationally, most experts believe there will be significant insurance and reinsurance shortages, resulting in dramatic rate increases for consumers and businesses, and the unavailability of catastrophe (3) The Federal Government has provided and will continue to provide billions of dollars and resources to pay for losses from catastrophes, including hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, tornados, and other disasters, at huge (4) The Federal Government has a critical interest in ensuring appropriate and fiscally responsible risk management of catastrophes. Mortgages require reliable property insurance, and the unavailability of reliable property insurance would make most real estate transactions impossible. In addition, the public health, safety, and welfare demand that structures damaged or destroyed in a catastrophe be reconstructed as soon as possible. Therefore, the inability of the private sector insurance and reinsurance markets to maintain sufficient capacity to enable Americans to obtain property insurance coverage in the private sector endangers the national economy and the public health, safety, (5) Multiple proposals have been introduced in the United States Congress over the past decade to address catastrophic risk insurance, including the creation of a national catastrophic reinsurance fund and the revision of the Federal tax code to allow insurers to use tax-deferred catastrophe funds, yet Congress has failed to act on any of these (6) To the extent the United States faces high risks from catastrophe exposure, essential technical information on financial structures and innovations in the catastrophe (7) The most efficient and effective approach to assessing the catastrophe insurance problem in the public policy context is to establish a bipartisan commission of experts to study the management of catastrophic disaster risk, and to require such commission to timely report its recommendations to Congress so that Congress can quickly craft a solution to Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance (in this Act (a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of the (1) The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management (3) 12 additional members or their designees of whom one (B) a representative of a primary insurance company; (D) an independent insurance agent with experience in (H) a faculty member of an accredited university with (I) a member of nationally recognized think tank with (L) a nationally recognized expert in antitrust law. (1) In general.--Any member of the Commission described under subsection (a)(3) shall be appointed only upon (C) the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and (D) the minority leader of the House of Representatives. (2) Consultation.--In making any appointment under paragraph (1), each individual described in paragraph (1) (c) Eligibility Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (a), no member or officer of the Congress, or other member or officer of the Executive Branch of the United States Government or any State government may be appointed to (1) In general.--Each member of the Commission shall be (2) Vacancies.--A vacancy on the Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as (1) Majority.--A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold (2) Approval actions.--All recommendations and reports of the Commission required by this Act shall be approved only by (f) Chairperson.--The majority leader of the Senate, the minority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the minority leader of the House of Representatives shall jointly select 1 member appointed pursuant to subsection (a) to serve as the Chairperson of the (g) Meetings.--The Council shall meet at the call of its Chairperson or a majority of its members at any time. (A) the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, and the 4 major hurricanes earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods; and (2) recommend and report, as required under section 6, any necessary legislative and regulatory changes that will-- (A) improve the domestic and international financial health (i) availability of adequate insurance coverage when an appointment of Commission members under section 4, the Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress a final report containing a detailed statement of its findings, together with any recommendations for legislation or administrative action that the Commission considers appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of section (b) Considerations.--In developing any recommendations under subsection (a), the Commission shall consider-- (1) the catastrophic insurance and reinsurance market structures and the relevant commercial practices in such insurance industries in providing insurance protection to (2) the constraints and opportunities in implementing a catastrophic insurance system that can resolve key obstacles currently impeding broader implementation of catastrophe risk (3) methods to improve risk underwriting practices, (A) analysis of modalities of risk transfer for potential (B) assessment of private securitization of insurances (C) private-public partnerships to increase insurance (D) the financial feasibility and sustainability of a national catastrophe pool or regional catastrophe pools designed to provide adequate insurance coverage and increased (4) approaches for implementing a public insurance scheme for low-income communities, in order to promote risk (5) methods to strengthen insurance regulatory requirements and supervision of such requirements, including solvency for (6) methods to promote public insurance policies linked to programs for loss reduction in the uninsured sectors of the enforcement of structural mitigation and vulnerability reduction measures, such as zoning and building code (8) the appropriate role for the Federal Government in stabilizing the property and casualty insurance and (ii) the modernization of Federal taxation policies; and (iii) an ``insurance of last resort'' mechanism; and (9) the merits of 3 principle legislative proposals (A) The creation of a Federal catastrophe fund to act as a (B) Tax-deferred catastrophe accounts for insurers (S. (C) Tax-free catastrophe accounts for policyholders (S. (a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at the direction of the Commission, any subcommittee or member of the Commission, (1) hold such public hearings in such cities and countries, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths or affirmations as the Commission or such subcommittee or member (2) require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, documents, tapes, and materials as the Commission or such subcommittee or (1) Issuance.--Subpoenas issued under subsection (a) shall bear the signature of the Chairperson of the Commission and shall be served by any person or class of persons designated (2) Enforcement.--In the case of contumacy or failure to obey a subpoena issued under subsection (a), the United States district court for the judicial district in which the subpoenaed person resides, is served, or may be found may issue an order requiring such person to appear at any designated place to testify or to produce documentary or other evidence. Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt of that court. (A) In general.--Information obtained under a subpoena issued under subsection (a) which is deemed confidential, or with reference to which a request for confidential treatment is made by the person furnishing such information-- (i) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of (ii) shall not be published or disclosed unless the Commission determines that the withholding of such information is contrary to the interest of the United States. (B) Exception.--The requirements of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the publication or disclosure of any data aggregated in a manner that ensures protection of the (c) Authority of Members or Agents of the Commission.--Any member or agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the Commission, take any action which the Commission is (1) Authority.--Notwithstanding any provision of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, the Commission may secure directly from any department or agency of the United States any information necessary to enable the Commission to (2) Procedure.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, the head of that department or agency shall furnish the information requested to the Commission. (e) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government. (f) Administrative Support Services.--Upon the request of the Commission, the Administrator of General Services shall provide to the Commission, on a reimbursable basis, any administrative support services necessary for the Commission (1) In general.--The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property. (2) Regulations.--The Commission shall adopt internal regulations governing the receipt of gifts or donations of services or property similar to those described in part 2601 (a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission. subcommittees and appoint persons to such subcommittees as (d) Staff.--Subject to such policies as the Commission may prescribe, the Chairperson of the Commission may appoint and fix the pay of such additional personnel as the Chairperson considers appropriate to carry out the duties of the (e) Applicability of Certain Civil Service Laws.-- Subcommittee members and staff of the Commission may be-- (1) appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive (2) paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of that title relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that an individual so appointed may not receive pay in excess of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General objectives, the Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services of consultants and experts under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General (g) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Commission to assist in (2) such detail shall be without interruption or loss of The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date on which the Commission submits its report under section 6. There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period of continuation coverage under group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage provisions so as to provide for a total period of continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on Health, Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, today I rise to address a growing problem resulting from America's high levels of unemployment and economic downturn. Congress is working to design health reform that will provide access to quality, affordable insurance coverage for every American, but as unemployment numbers continue to rise, help may not come in time to avoid coverage denials on the individual insurance market and unbearable economic strain for those job seekers whose COBRA coverage The Comprehensive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 codified 18 months of additional group rate coverage under employer sponsored plans following a triggering event such as job loss. This law has been instrumental in providing continuity of health coverage for families. The measure requires companies with over 20 employees to provide access to 18 months of continued coverage at the employee's expense, except in cases of firing for gross employee misconduct. Beneficiaries cover the additional administrative expense, and may be charged up to 103 percent The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act provided help with health insurance for families who lost their jobs after September 1, 2008 and through December of 2009. For those in this category, the federal government provides nine months of subsidized premiums, with beneficiaries covering 35 percent of premium costs. However, the For those that lost their job before September, and are still looking for work, the situation is dire. Many are quickly facing the end of their 18 month eligibility period for COBRA. They hear about health reform but have no idea when it may come. Insurance exchanges to guaranteeing eligibility and reasonable premiums on the individual market could take years to set up. In the mean time, those who could have afforded coverage under COBRA may instead have to resort to The Emergency COBRA Expansion Act of 2009 will give job seekers the opportunity to continue their COBRA coverage for up to an additional 6 months. The bill applies to all of those utilizing COBRA benefits as of the date of bill passage, and would not extend anyone's coverage beyond 12 months from the date of bill enactment. A year from now, our country will be on the road to economic recovery, but in the meantime we need to help struggling families to stay insured and healthy. S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise to introduce this bill in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the program, this bill will create a more equitable and flexible method for federal agencies to fairly allocate federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the nation. Earlier this year, I filed an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, the true order of preference is for determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone, HUBZone, program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted bill provides equity for the SBA's The bill provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This bill makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, Service Disabled Veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service- disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. Of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this bill brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the bill authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for Federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill. SENATE RESOLUTION 218--MAKING MINORITY PARTY APPOINTMENTS FOR THE 111TH Mr. McCONNELL submitted the following resolution; which was Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th Congress, or until their successors are appointed: COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, SENATE RESOLUTION 219--HONORING THE HOCKEY TEAM OF EAST SIDE HIGH Mr. MENENDEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred Whereas adolescents who lack a structured, after-school environment are at high risk of delinquency, poor academic Whereas the lack of a structured after-school environment is especially prevalent in inner-city communities such as Whereas athletic organizations provide a safe after-school environment in which adolescents learn about commitment, Whereas East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey, formed Whereas members of the East Side High School hockey team Whereas the New Jersey Devils offered assistance to the East Side High School hockey team, including access to the Whereas the nonprofit organization, Hockey in Newark, has joined with the New Jersey Devils and the National Hockey League to collect and distribute donated hockey equipment and uniforms valued at $85,000 to low-income children in Newark, (1) commends the dedication of the players and coaches of the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New (2) wishes the East Side High School hockey team many (3) commends the New Jersey Devils for engaging the local community and providing low-income, at-risk children the SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 33--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT A COMMEMORATIVE POSTAGE STAMP SHOULD BE ISSUED TO HONOR THE CREW OF THE USS MASON DE-529 WHO FOUGHT AND SERVED DURING WORLD WAR II Mr. BURRIS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 was the only United States Navy destroyer with a predominantly black enlisted crew Whereas the integration of the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 was the role model for racial integration on Navy vessels and Whereas the integration of the crew signified the first time that black citizens of the United States were trained to Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 served as a convoy escort in the Atlantic and Mediterranean Theatres during World War II; Whereas, in September 1944, the crew of the USS Mason DE- 529 helped save Convoy NY119, ushering the convoy to safety Whereas, in 1998, the Secretary of the Navy John H. Dalton made an official decision to name an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer the USS Mason DDG-87 in order to honor the USS Whereas, in 1994, President Clinton awarded the USS Mason DE-529 a long-overdue commendation, presenting the award to Whereas commemorative postage stamps have been issued to honor important vessels, aircrafts, and battles in the history of the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the United States Postal Service should issue a postage stamp honoring the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued. SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson, of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 213, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 706. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HEALTH CARE BENEFITS AND (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) Career members of the Armed Forces and their families extraordinary sacrifices, over the course of 20-year to 30- year careers in protecting freedom for all Americans. (2) The nature and extent of these demands and sacrifices are never so evident as in wartime, not only during the current combat operations, but also during the wars of the last 60 years when current retired members of the Armed Forces were on continuous call to go in harm's way when and (3) A primary benefit of enduring the extraordinary sacrifices inherent in a military career is a range of retirement benefits, including lifetime health benefits, that a grateful Nation provides for those who choose to subordinate their personal life to the national interest for (4) Currently serving and retired members of the uniformed services and their families and survivors deserve benefits equal to their commitment and service to our Nation. (5) Many employers are curtailing health benefits and shifting costs to their employees, which may result in retired members of the Armed Forces returning to the Department of Defense, and its TRICARE program, for health care benefits during retirement, and contribute to health (6) Defense health costs also expand as a result of service-unique military readiness requirements, wartime requirements, and other necessary requirements that represent the ``cost of business'' for the Department of Defense. (7) While the Department of Defense has made some efforts to contain increases in the cost of the TRICARE program, too many of those efforts have been devoted to shifting a larger share of the costs of benefits under that program to retired members of the Armed Forces who have earned health care benefits in return for a career of military service. (8) In some cases health care providers refuse to accept TRICARE patients because that program pays less than other public and private payors and imposes unique administrative (9) The Department of Defense records deposits to the Department of Defense Military Retiree Health Care Fund as discretionary costs to the Department in spite of legislation enacted in 2006 that requires such deposits to be made (10) As a result, annual payments for the future costs of servicemember health care continue to compete with other (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that-- (1) the Department of Defense and the Nation have an obligation to provide health care benefits to retired members of the Armed Forces that equals the quality of their selfless (2) past proposals by the Department of Defense to impose substantial fee increases on military beneficiaries have failed to acknowledge properly the findings addressed in (3) the Department of Defense has many additional options to constrain the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage retired members of the Armed Forces who participate or seek to participate in the TRICARE program, and should pursue any and all such options rather than seeking large increases for enrollment fees, deductibles, and copayments for such retirees, and their families or SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which SEC. __. PORT CHICAGO NAVAL MAGAZINE NATIONAL MEMORIAL. (a) In General.--Section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (f); (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall administer the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System in accordance with-- ``(B) the laws generally applicable to units of the ``(i) the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et ``(ii) the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.). ``(2) Administered land.--The land described in subsection (d)(2) shall be administered in accordance with this ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of the Interior providing for the transfer, without reimbursement, of administrative jurisdiction to the Secretary of the Interior of the land described in paragraph (2), if the Secretary of Defense determines that the land is in excess of ``(2) Description of land.--The land referred to in paragraph (1) is the parcel of approximately 5 acres of land, as depicted on the map entitled `Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial, Proposed Boundary', numbered 018/80,001, ``(e) Agreement With City of Concord and East Bay Regional Park District.--The Secretary of the Interior may enter into an agreement with the City of Concord, California, and the East Bay Regional Park District to establish and operate a facility for visitor orientation and parking, administrative offices, and curatorial storage for the Port Chicago Naval (3) in subsection (f), (as redesignated by paragraph (1)), by striking ``Secretary of the Navy to provide public access to the Memorial'' and inserting ``Secretary of Defense to provide the maximum practicable public access to the Memorial (b) Sense of Congress on Remediation and Repair of Port (1) Remediation.--It is the sense of Congress that, to facilitate the transfer of administrative jurisdiction described in subsection (d) of section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; 106 Stat. 4235)(as added by subsection (a)), the Secretary of Defense should promptly remediate any remaining environmental contamination relating to the land. (2) Repair.--It is the sense of Congress that, in order to preserve the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial for future generations, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Interior should work together to-- (A) repair storm damage to the Port Chicago Naval Magazine (B) develop a process by which future repairs and necessary modifications to the Memorial can be achieved in as timely (c) Effect.--Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section affects or limits the application of, or obligation to comply with, any environmental law, including section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)). SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which Section 2473 of title 10, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following ``(c) Small arms Production Industrial Base.--In this section, the term `small arms production industrial base' means the persons and organizations that are engaged in the production or maintenance of small arms within the United (2) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 394, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1032. TRIAL BY MILITARY COMMISSION OF ALIEN UNPRIVILEGED (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged belligerents for violations of the law of war ``(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the preferred forum for the trial of alien unprivileged enemy belligerents subject to this chapter for violations of the law of war and other offenses made punishable by this chapter is trial by military commission under this chapter. ``(b) Reporting Requirement.--For any alien unprivileged enemy belligerent subject to this chapter whom the United States Government decides to try in Federal district court rather than by military commission under this chapter, the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General shall report to Congress, not later than 30 days after such decision is made, ``(1) the criteria used to decide to try such individual in Federal district court rather than by military commission; ``(2) an estimate of the total costs to the United States Government, including costs borne by the judicial branch, attributable to trying such individual in Federal district ``(3) any other information that the Secretary of Defense (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections of the beginning of such subchapter, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding after the item relating to ``948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall give a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is being evaluated by a physical evaluation board for separation or retirement for disability, incurred in the performance of military duties under this chapter or for placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter the option to remain on active duty during the physical evaluation board process ``(A) is cleared by the board for continuation of active ``(B) is separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2) A member may change the election under paragraph (1) at any point during the physical evaluation board process and ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. ``(e) A member contemplating the exercise of an option under subsection (d) may exercise such option only after being afforded an opportunity to consult with a member of the SEC. 653. ENCOURAGEMENT OF USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Assignment to Community Based Warrior Transition Units for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(ii) consistent with the needs of the armed forces. ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 429, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) Building foreign partner capacity is a fundamental cornerstone of the security strategy of the United States. (2) Significant progress has been made in this area over the past several years, but the United States Government must continue to increase its efforts, including improving reliability of funding and late notifications of school availability for the International Military Education and (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on the effectiveness and efficiency (2) Content.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following information broken out by year over the (A) Number of courses in the IMET program available, accomplished, and cancelled and an explanation therefor. (B) Number of students authorized and actual attendance for each course and an explanation for the difference. (C) The total budget and actual budget executed for each course in the IMET program and an explanation for the (D) The process for selecting students for the IMET (E) The process for distributing funding for each school, (F) Lessons learned to ensure student attendance and course SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following: (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) According to the Department of Defense's (DoD) 2009 Annual Report on Military Power of the People's Republic of China, the military balance in the Taiwan Strait has been shifting in China's favor since 2000, marked by the sustained deployment of advanced military equipment to the Chinese (2) Although the DoD's 2002 Report concluded that Taiwan ``has enjoyed dominance of the airspace over the Taiwan Strait for many years,'' the DoD's 2009 Report states this (3) China has based 490 combat aircraft (330 fighters and 160 bombers) within unrefueled operational range of Taiwan, and has the airfield capacity to expand that number by hundreds. In contrast, Taiwan has 390 combat aircraft (all of (4) Also according to the DoD's 2009 Report, China has continued its build-up of conventional ballistic missiles since 2000, ``building a nascent capacity for conventional short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) strikes against Taiwan into what has become one of China's primary instruments of coercion.'' At this time, China has expanded its SRBM force opposite Taiwan to seven brigades with a total of 1,050 through 1,150 missiles, and is augmenting these forces with conventional medium-range ballistic missiles systems and at least 2 land attack cruise missile variants capable of ground or air launch. Advanced fighters and bombers, combined with enhanced training for nighttime and overwater flights, provide China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) with additional capabilities for regional strike or maritime (5) Furthermore, the Report maintains, ``the security situation in the Taiwan Strait is largely a function of dynamic interactions among Mainland China, Taiwan, and the United States. The PLA has developed and deployed military capability to coerce Taiwan or attempt an invasion if necessary. PLA improvements pose new challenges to Taiwan's security, which has historically been based upon the PLA's inability to project power across the 100 nautical-mile Taiwan Strait, natural geographic advantages of island defense, Taiwan's armed forces' technological superiority, (6) The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 requires that, in furtherance of the principle of maintaining peace and stability in the Western Pacific region, the United States shall make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity ``as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability,'' allowing that ``the President and the Congress shall determine the nature and quantity of such defense articles and services based solely upon their judgment of the (b) Report to Congress on Taiwan's Current Air Force and Future Self-Defense Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report, in both classified and (1) A thorough and complete assessment of the current state (2) An assessment of the effectiveness of the aircraft in the face of a full-scale concerted missile and air campaign by China, in which China uses its most modern surface-to-air (3) An analysis of the specific weapons systems and platforms that Taiwan would need to provide for it's self- defense and maintain control of its own air space. (4) Options for the United States to assist Taiwan in (5) A 5-year plan for fulfilling the obligations of the United States under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide for Taiwan's self-defense and aid Taiwan in maintaining control SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. POSTHUMOUS BENEFITS FOR SURVIVING SPOUSE. (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Military Widow and Surviving Spouse Protection Act''. (b) Amendment.--Section 1703(a)(1) of title XVII of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 ( Public Law 108-136) is amended by inserting ``or the citizen died while serving honorably in an active duty status in the military, air, or naval forces of the United States and such death occurred through no fault of the citizen,'' after SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING COMMITMENT TO GLOBAL (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The surge strategy executed in Iraq by General David H. Petraeus and General Raymond T. Odierno in 2007 and 2008 was highly successful in reducing levels of violence and enabling the Iraqi government and security forces to gain credibility (2) President Obama articulated his general strategy for Iraq during a speech at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, on February 27, 2009, stating that a central goal is to ensure that Iraq ``is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant''. During the speech, the President outlined the President's objective to ``transition to full Iraqi responsibility'' through the ``responsible removal of our combat brigades from Iraq''. (3) As part of the President's Iraq strategy, the President also indicated the President's commitment to ensuring that ``we preserve the gains we've made and protect our troops''. Consequently, the United States and our allies have a continued interest in maintaining these hard-fought security gains, especially during the upcoming Iraqi provincial elections, while simultaneously protecting the United States (4) A key component of the President's plan for Iraq is to retain a transitional force there to carry out several distinct functions, including training, equipping, and advising the Iraqi Security Forces, conducting targeted counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilian and military forces within Iraq. In accordance with this policy, United States forces have largely withdrawn from Iraqi cities, but the President expects that the transitional force, to number between 35,000 and 50,000 United States military servicemembers, will remain in Iraq for the (5) President Obama articulated his emerging plan for Afghanistan in a speech on March 27, 2009, stating that the United States goal there is to ``disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future''. To this end, the current surge strategy in Afghanistan, spearheaded by General Petraeus and General Stanley A. McChrystal, the new commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force, is critical to providing security for the Afghan populace, bolstering the Afghan security forces, and waging a successful campaign against Islamic extremists of al Qaeda, (6) President Obama's laudable goals of disrupting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and Pakistan and developing increasingly self-reliant Afghan security forces necessitated the surge of 17,000 additional United States troops to increase the overall size of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. These more robust forces, focusing in the south and east portions of the country, will have an enhanced ability to protect the Afghan population against a resurgence of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their allies, as well as to provide greater ability for the Afghan government (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the global war on terror represents a critical effort to protect the American people and ensure that future generations may continue to enjoy the precious freedoms we (2) the United States must remain committed to succeeding in the global war on terror and fighting the forces of Islamic extremism in Iraq and Afghanistan, including al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other groups, that are intent on the murder of innocent Americans, the destruction of the American way of life, and the global proliferation of radical and (3) our military servicemembers and civilian United States personnel serving in harm's way in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other fronts in the global war on terror must be given any and all resources they need to accomplish the missions that have been asked of them, including the deployment of additional forces, should United States commanders on the (4) in Iraq, the hard-earned security gains won by our servicemembers must be preserved, and the long-term United States strategy there must continue to reflect that essential (5) the President's plan for Iraq is fundamentally sound and represents a responsible and carefully considered strategy that will help Iraq maintain sovereignty, stability, and self-reliance, achievements that were made possible largely through the extraordinary efforts and tremendous sacrifices of United States servicemembers and civilian (6) the President's plan for Afghanistan is clearly intended to improve the overall security situation there and enable the eventual drawdown and withdrawal of United States forces, and the President's near-term strategy to surge forces and provide improved security to the Afghan people by locating United States military personnel among the population, in conjunction with the growing Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, which the United States supports and trains, will increase the security of the Afghan (7) although gains in the global war on terror will not come without a cost, the American people and the Iraqi and Afghan people share a common enemy and a common goal to do whatever is necessary to defeat terrorists and those who SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. REPORT ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF MEMBERS OF (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the efforts of the Air Force to attract and retain qualified individuals for service as members of the Air Force involved in the operation, maintenance, handling, and (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) A description of current reenlistment rates, set forth by Air Force Specialty Code, of members of the Air Force serving in positions involving the operation, maintenance, (2) A description of the current personnel fill rate for Air Force units involved in the operation, maintenance, (3) An description of the steps the Air Force has taken, including the use of retention bonuses or assignment incentive pay, to improve recruiting and retention of officers and enlisted personnel by the Air Force for the (4) An assessment of the feasibility, advisability, utility, and cost effectiveness of establishing additional bonuses or incentive pay as a way to enhance the recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the (5) An assessment of whether assignment incentive pay should be provided for members of the Air Force covered by (6) An assessment of the long-term community management plan for recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the positions described in paragraph SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. NO MIRANDA WARNINGS FOR AL QAEDA TERRORISTS. (1) the term ``foreign national'' means an individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States; and (A) has the same meaning that term has under the law of (B) includes a privileged belligerent and an unprivileged enemy belligerent, as those terms are defined in section 948a of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031 (b) No Miranda Warnings.--Absent an unappealable court order requiring the reading of such statements, no agency or department of the United States shall read to a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), or otherwise inform such a prisoner of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have under the Constitution of the United States or under any Federal statute, regulation, or treaty. No Federal statute, regulation, or treaty shall be construed to require that a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States be informed of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have. No statement that is made by a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States may be excluded from any proceeding on the basis that the prisoner was not informed of a right SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE (a) In General.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representative a report on financial assistance for child care provided by the Department of Defense, including through the Operation: Military Child Care and Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood programs, to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) The types of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in (2) The extent to which such members have taken advantage of such assistance since such assistance was first made (3) The formulas used for calculating the amount of such (5) The remaining costs of child care to families of such members that are not covered by the Department of Defense. (6) Any barriers to access to such assistance faced by such (7) The different criteria used by different States with respect to the regulation of child care services and the potential impact differences in such criteria may have on the (8) The different standards and criteria used by different programs of the Department of Defense for providing such assistance with respect to child care providers and the potential impact differences in such standards and criteria may have on the access of such members to such assistance. (9) Any other matters the Comptroller General determines relevant to the improvement of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a contingency operation. SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. INCREASE IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILD CARE FOR (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to increase financial assistance provided under Operation: Military Child Care to cover not less than 75 percent of the costs of child care provided (b) Operation: Military Child Care Defined.--In this section, the term ``Operation: Military Child Care'' refers to the program of the Department of Defense to provide financial assistance for child care to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. ___. CONSENT OF CONGRESS TO COMPACT AMENDMENTS. amendments of the State of Maryland, the amendments of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the amendments of the District of Columbia to sections 5, 9 and 18 of title III of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact. (b) Amendments.--The amendments referred to in subsection ``(a) The Authority shall be governed by a Board of eight Directors consisting of two Directors for each Signatory and two for the federal government (one of whom shall be a regular passenger and customer of the bus or rail service of the Authority). For Virginia, the Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; for the District of Columbia, by the Council of the District of Columbia; for Maryland, by the Washington Suburban Transit Commission; and for the Federal Government, by the Administrator of General Services. For Virginia and Maryland, the Directors shall be appointed from among the members of the appointing body, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a term coincident with their term on the appointing body. A Director for a Signatory may be removed or suspended from office only as provided by the law of the Signatory from which he was appointed. The nonfederal appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate for each Director. In addition, the Administrator of General Services shall also appoint two nonvoting members who shall serve as the alternates for the federal Directors. An alternate Director may act only in the absence of the Director for whom he has been appointed an alternate, except that, in the case of the District of Columbia where only one Director and his alternate are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate, including the federal nonvoting Directors, shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall be filled in the same manner as an original appointment. ``(b) Before entering upon the duties of his office each Director and alternate Director shall take and subscribe to the following oath (or affirmation) of office or any such other oath or affirmation, if any, as the constitution or laws of the Government he represents shall provide: `I, , hereby solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state or political jurisdiction from which I was appointed as a director (alternate director) of the Board of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and will faithfully discharge the duties of the (2) Subsection (a) of section 9 is amended to read as ``(a) The officers of the Authority, none of whom shall be members of the Board, shall consist of a general manager, a secretary, a treasurer, a comptroller, an inspector general, and a general counsel and such other officers as the Board may provide. Except for the office of general manager, inspector general, and comptroller, the Board may consolidate any of such other offices in one person. All such officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the Board, shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and shall perform such duties and functions as the Board shall specify. The Board shall fix and determine the compensation to be paid to all officers and, except for the general manager who shall be a full-time employee, all other officers may be hired on a full-time or part-time basis and may be compensated on a salary or fee basis, as the Board may determine. All employees and such officers as the Board may designate shall be appointed and removed by the general manager under such subsection (d) to read as follows (and by renumbering all ``(d) The inspector general shall report to the Board and head the Office of the Inspector General, an independent and objective unit of the Authority that conducts and supervises audits, program evaluations, and investigations relating to Authority activities; promotes economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Authority activities; detects and prevents fraud and abuse in Authority activities; and keeps the Board fully and currently informed about deficiencies in Authority activities as well as the necessity for and progress of (4) Section 18 is amended by adding a new section 18(d) to governments for the Authority for the purpose of matching federal funds appropriated in any given year as authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 regarding funding of capital and preventative maintenance projects of 1 the Authority shall be made from amounts derived from ``(2) For the purposes of this paragraph (d), a `dedicated funding source' means any source of funding that is earmarked or required under State or local law to be used to match Federal appropriations authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 for payments to the Authority.''. (c) Right to Alter, Amend, or Repeal.--The right to alter, amend, or repeal this section is expressly reserved. The consent granted by this section shall not be construed as jurisdiction of the United States in and over the region that (d) Construction and Severability.--It is intended that the provisions of this compact shall be reasonably and liberally construed to effectuate the purposes thereof. If any part or application of this compact, or legislation enabling the compact, is held invalid, the remainder of the compact or its application to other situations or persons shall not be (e) Inconsistency of Language.--The validity of this compact shall not be affected by any insubstantial differences in its form or language as adopted by the State of Maryland, Commonwealth of Virginia and District of (f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. INCLUSION OF SERVICE AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, IN Section 12731(f)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, is (1) by striking ``the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008'' and (2) by striking ``in any fiscal year after such date'' and inserting ``in any fiscal year after fiscal year 2001''. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. 617. SPECIAL COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED (a) In General.--Chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring ``(a) Monthly Compensation.--The Secretary concerned may pay to any member of the uniformed services described in subsection (b) monthly special compensation in an amount ``(b) Covered Members.--A member eligible for monthly special compensation authorized by subsection (a) is a member ``(1) has been certified by a licensed physician to be in need of assistance from another person to perform the ``(2) has a serious injury, disorder, or disease of either ``(A) is incurred or aggravated in the line of duty; and ``(B) compromises the member's ability to carry out one or more activities of daily living or requires the member to be constantly supervised to avoid physical harm to the member or ``(3) meets such other criteria, if any, as the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) prescribes for purposes of this compensation payable to a member under subsection (a) shall be determined under criteria prescribed by the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard), but may not exceed the amount of aid and attendance allowance authorized by section 1114(r)(2) of title 38 for veterans in need of aid and attendance. ``(2) In determining the amount of monthly special compensation, the Secretary concerned shall consider the ``(A) The extent to which home health care and related ``(B) The extent to which aid and attendance services are being provided by family and friends who may be compensated with funds provided through the monthly special compensation. ``(d) Payment Until Medical Retirement.--Monthly special compensation is payable under this section to a member described in subsection (b) for any month that begins before the date on which the member is medically retired. ``(e) Construction With Other Pay and Allowances.--Monthly special compensation payable to a member under this section is in addition to any other pay and allowances payable to the ``(f) Benefit Information.--The Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall ensure that members of the uniformed services who may be eligible for compensation under this section are made aware of the availability of such compensation by including information about such compensation in written and online ``(g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall prescribe regulations to carry out this (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall submit to Congress a report on the provision of compensation under section 439 of title 37, United States (2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall (A) An estimate of the number of members of the uniformed services eligible for compensation under such section 439. (B) The number of members of the uniformed services (C) The average amount of compensation provided to members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation. (D) The average amount of time required for a member of the uniformed services to receive such compensation after the (E) A summary of the types of injuries, disorders, and diseases of members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation that made such members eligible for such (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 7 of such title is amended by adding at ``439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring assistance in SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as At the end of subtitle B of title VI, add the following: SEC. 619. MONTHLY SPECIAL PAY FOR MEMBERS RETAINED IN THE (a) Monthly Special Pay Required.--The Secretary concerned shall pay to each member of the Armed Forces described in subsection (b) monthly special pay in the amount specified in subsection (c) for each month or portion of a month of pre- deployment and re-integration duty performed by such member on or after September 11, 2001, while described by subsection (b), regardless of whether or not such duty was performed by (b) Covered Members.--A member of the Armed Forces described in this subsection is any member of the Armed Forces whose enlistment or period of obligated service is extended, or whose eligibility for retirement is suspended, pursuant to section 123 or 12305 of title 10, United States Code, or any other provision of law authorizing the President to extend an enlistment or period of obligated service, or suspend an eligibility for retirement, of a member of the uniformed services in time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress or the President (commonly referred to (c) Amount.--The amount of monthly special pay payable under subsection (a) for a month or portion of a month is (d) Construction With Other Monthly Special Pay.--Monthly special pay may not be paid under both this section and 8116 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2009 (division C of Public Law 110-329; 122 Stat. 3646) for any SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following: (3) Assessments of members discharged or released upon return from deployment.--In the case of a member of the Armed Forces who is discharged or released from the Armed Forces upon the member's return from deployment, the Secretary of Defense shall make available the opportunity for such member to participate in the mental health assessments required under subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) together with the unit with which the member was previously deployed, without SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR MEMBERS OF THE (a) Availability of Defense Health Program Funds.--Subject to the provisions of appropriations Acts, amounts available for Defense Health Program shall be available for programs described in subsection (b) for members of the National Guard not on active duty in the Armed Forces who incurred a psychological or mental illness or injury on active duty in the Armed Forces as demonstrated by existing medical records or, in the absence of such records, by the opinion of a licensed medical provider in the State where the member (b) Covered Programs.--The programs described in this (1) Programs to assist members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) in case management in the receipt of non-clinical care for an illness or injury described in (2) Programs to advise members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) on the receipt of care and treatment for an illness or injury described in that (3) Programs of psychological health treatment for members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an (4) Programs supporting the efforts of the military departments to update and maintain military health electronic (5) Such other treatment programs as may assist a member of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an illness or injury described in that subsection, as determined by the State Surgeon General of the National Guard of the State in which the member reside, the Director of Psychological Health of the State in which the member resides, the mental health or equivalent agency of the State in which the member resides, or the Director of the Psychological Health Program (c) Budgeting.--The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall coordinate with the National Guard Bureau and other personnel and logistical elements of the National Guard in determining the budget requirements of the National Guard for the programs described in subsection (b). SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as (h) Post-Deployment Health Assessments of Guard and Reserve (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned shall administer a Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) to each member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning to the member's home station or county of residence from deployment in connection with a contingency operation within the (A) In the case of a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, the assessment shall be administered by not later than the member's release from active duty following such deployment or 10 days after the member's return to such (B) In the case of any other member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning from deployment, by not later than the member's release from active duty following such (A) In general.--The Post-Deployment Health Assessment required under this subsection shall be performed by a practitioner trained and certified as qualified to participate in the performance of Post-Deployment Health Assessments or Post-Deployment Health Reassessments. (B) Report on availability of trained personnel.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the availability of personnel described under subparagraph (A) to perform assessments pursuant to this subsection at the home stations or counties of residence of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces. If such personnel are not available at such locations, the Secretary shall indicate the additional resources necessary to ensure such availability within one SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, line 12, insert ``18 months,'' after ``12 SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER DEFENSE ARTICLES AND Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the congressional defense committees, may transfer defense articles and equipment used by the United States Armed Forces in Iraq as of the date of the enactment of this Act to the armed forces of the Governments of Lebanon and Jordan in a manner that is SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 713. REDUCTION OF MINIMUM DISTANCE OF TRAVEL FOR (a) Reduction.--Section 1074i(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``100 miles'' and inserting ``50 (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to referrals for specialty health care made on or after such (c) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(a)(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby decreased by $25,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for line item # 320 in the table in section 4301 for advertising. SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 435, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. PAYMENT BY SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OF PLOT (a) Plot Allowance.--Section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following ``(c)(1) In the case of an individual described in paragraph (2) who is buried in a cemetery that is owned by a State or by an agency or political subdivision of a State, the Secretary shall pay to such State, agency, or political subdivision the sum of $300 as a plot or interment allowance ``(2) An individual described in this paragraph is a spouse, surviving spouse (which for purposes of this chapter includes a surviving spouse who had a subsequent remarriage), minor child (which for purposes of this chapter includes a child under 21 years of age, or under 23 years of age if pursuing a course of instruction at an approved educational institution), or, in the discretion of the Secretary, unmarried adult child of any of person described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (7) of section 2402 of this title.''. (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (c) of section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to an individual who dies on or SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON NON-STRATEGIC NUCLEAR (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, chaired by former Secretaries of Defense William Perry and James Schlesinger, recently concluded that there is significant asymmetry between the tactical nuclear weapons arsenals of the Russian Federation (2) The Commission also determined that ``[a]s part of its strategy to assure its allies, the United States should not abandon strategic equivalency with Russia. Overall equivalence is important to many U.S. allies in Europe. The United States should not cede to Russia a posture of superiority in the name of deemphasizing nuclear weapons in U.S. military strategy. There seems no near-term prospect of such a result in the balance of operationally deployed (3) The Commission continued, ``But that balance does not exist in non-strategic nuclear forces, where Russia enjoys a sizeable numerical advantage. As noted above, it stores thousands of these weapons in apparent support of possible military operations west of the Urals. The United States deploys a small fraction of that number in support of nuclear sharing agreements in NATO. Precise numbers for the U.S. deployments are classified but their total is only about five percent of the total at the height of the Cold War. Strict U.S.-Russian equivalence in NSNF numbers is unnecessary. But the current imbalance is stark and worrisome to some U.S. allies in Central Europe. If and as reductions continue in the number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons, this imbalance will become more apparent and allies (4) The Commission stated, ``Some U.S. allies located closer to Russia, however, are fearful of Russia and its tactical nuclear forces. The imbalance in non-strategic nuclear weapons, which greatly favors Russia, is of rising concern and an illustration of the new challenges of strategic stability as reductions in strategic weapons (5) The Commission also stated, ``The combination of new warhead designs, the estimated production capability for new nuclear warheads, and precision delivery systems such as the Iskander short-range tactical ballistic missile (known as the SS-26 in the West), open up new possibilities for Russian efforts to threaten to use nuclear weapons to influence (b) Sense of the Senate.--The Senate strongly urges the (1) to make it a priority in all United States arms control negotiations with Russia to gain a verifiable accounting of the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia, including the types, current deployments, and security from theft of the same; (2) to ensure that reductions in the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia are a top priority in any arms control (3) to assure United States allies that they are protected from any use or threatened use of tactical nuclear weapons SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 68, between lines 12 and 13, insert the following: (6) A description of current and past sales, or contracts for the sale, by the Russian Federation of technology, materials, components, or services related to nuclear weapons or nuclear energy, ballistic missile or space launch capabilities, or advanced conventional weapons systems. SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 424, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following: SEC. 1059. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT REGARDING THE (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense may not carry out any program for the refurbishment, reuse, or replacement of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile unless the Director of the Sandia National Laboratory, the Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and JASON certify to the congressional defense committees that the program-- (1) may be carried out without the need for any testing; (2) will preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and (3) will provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (1) The term ``refurbishment'' means a strategy of, or similar to, the lifetime extension program, whereby individual warhead components are replaced before they degrade with components of nearly identical design or that (2) The term ``reuse'' means a strategy of using surplus pits or secondaries from other warhead types or, in certain cases, a strategy involving the new manufacture of these (3) The term ``replacement'' means a strategy that permits SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON STATUS OF UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WEAPONS (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found that ``the physical infrastructure'' of the United States nuclear weapons complex ``is in serious need of (2) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States also found that ``the intellectual infrastructure is also in serious trouble. A major cause is the recent (and (3) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States stated, ``Once core capabilities are established, the should require that annual NNSA budget submissions include an assessment of whether the budget as proposed will maintain these capabilities. To monitor progress, the NNSA and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should establish a formal mechanism for tracking funding sources for the weapons laboratories, without additional administrative (4) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States recommended, ``The NNSA should conduct a study of the core competencies needed in the weapons complex, and the Congress and Office of Management and Budget should use these (b) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the directors of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities and as part of the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense budget for each fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code), submit a report on the condition and status of the nuclear weapons complex of the United States. The report (1) An assessment of whether the budget is sufficient to preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and certification. (2) A description of the demographics and experience of the nuclear weapons workforce, including the number of individuals who have ever participated in an underground (3) A plan for enabling the design laboratories to grow the required expertise and sustain it over the long term. (4) An assessment of the condition and status of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons (5) A plan to provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (6) An assessment of the condition and status of the nuclear weapons production complex and the ability of the complex to sustain and modernize the nuclear deterrent. (1) The term ``national nuclear weapons laboratories'' includes Sandia National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. (2) The term ``nuclear weapons production facilities'' means the Y-12 complex at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, the Pantex Plant, the Nevada Test Site, SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall ensure that each member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is determined, after a mobilization and deployment to an area in which imminent danger pay is authorized under section 310 of title 37, to require evaluation for a physical or mental disability which could result in separation or retirement for disability under this chapter or placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter is retained on active duty during the disability evaluation process until ``(A) cleared by appropriate authorities for continuation ``(B) separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2)(A) A member described in paragraph (1) may request termination of active duty under such paragraph at any time during the demobilization or disability evaluation process of ``(B) Upon a request under subparagraph (A), a member described in paragraph (1) shall only be released from active duty after the member receives counseling about the ``(C) Each release from active duty under subparagraph (B) ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year SEC. 653. USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR COMMUNITY-BASED CARE Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Use of Local Residences for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community-based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence if residing at that location ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(II) the optimal course of medical treatment of the ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps, or other qualified legal assistance attorney, regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other transitional (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 66, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: (e) Comptroller General Review.--The Comptroller General of (1) review the assessment required by subsection (b) and (2) not later than 120 days after receiving the assessment and the plan, provide to the congressional defense committees SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title II, add the following: SEC. 245. CONTINUED PRODUCTION OF GROUND-BASED INTERCEPTOR (a) Limitation on Break in Production.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Missile Defense Agency does not allow a break in production of the Ground-based Interceptor (1) completed the Ballistic Missile Defense Review; and (2) made a determination with respect to the number of Ground-based Interceptor missiles that will be necessary to support the service life of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System. (b) Limitation on Certain Actions With Respect to Missile Field 1 and Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska.-- (1) Limitation on decommissioning of missile field 1.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that Missile Field 1 at Fort Greely, Alaska, does not complete decommissioning until seven silos have been emplaced at Missile Field 2 at Fort (2) Limitation with respect to disposition of silos at missile field 2.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no irreversible decision is made with respect to the disposition of operational silos at Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska, until that date that is 60 days after the date on which the reports required by subsections (b)(3) and (c)(3) of section 243 are submitted to the congressional SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 321, strike line 18 and all that follows through (1) In general.--Chapter 47A of title 10, United States (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of chapters for title 10, United States Code, is amended by (1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``covered (A) brought before a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act; and (B) in which final judgment has not been entered, or the matter has not otherwise become final, on the date of (2) Dismissal.--Any covered matter shall be dismissed (3) Statute of limitations.--For any offense charged in a covered matter dismissed under paragraph (2), the running of the statute of limitations for that offense shall be tolled during the period beginning on the date on which charges relating to the offense were filed with a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, and ending on the date of enactment of this Act. SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 435, between line 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. INVESTIGATIONS, AUDITS, INSPECTIONS, EVALUATIONS, Section 3518(c) of title 44, United States Code, is (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following: ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), this subchapter shall not apply to the collection of information during the conduct of any investigation, audit, inspection, evaluation, or other ``(A) any Federal office of Inspector General, including-- ``(i) any office of Inspector General of any establishment, Federal entity, or designated Federal entity as those terms are defined under sections 12(2), 8G(a)(1), and 8G(a)(2) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), ``(ii) any office of Special Inspector General established ``(B) the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency established under section 11 of the Inspector ``(C) the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board established under section 1521 of division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1211. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR THE STATE (a) Availability of Appropriated Funds.--The Secretary of Defense may, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, use funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2010 to pay the costs incurred by the National Guard (including the costs of pay and allowances of members of the National Guard) in conducting activities under the (1) to support the objectives of the commander of the combatant command for the theater of operations in which such (2) to build international civil-military partnerships and capacity on matters relating to defense and security. (1) Approval by commander of combatant command and chief of mission.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless such activities are jointly approved by the commander of the combatant command concerned (2) Participation by members.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for the participation of a member of the National Guard in activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless the member is on active duty in the Armed Forces at the time of such (c) Reimbursement.--In the event of the participation of personnel of a department or agency of the United States Government (other than the Department of Defense) in activities for which payment is made under subsection (a), the head of such department or agency shall reimburse the Secretary of Defense for the costs associated with the participation of such personnel in such activities. Amounts reimbursed the Department of Defense under this subsection shall be deposited in the appropriation or account from which amounts for the payment concerned were derived. Any amounts appropriation or account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and subject to the same conditions and limitations, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title VI insert the following: SEC. 635. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF Section 408a(c) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the first sentence the following: ``The regulations may not, for purposes of subsection (a), define normal commuting distance as any distance greater then 100 SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1083. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) President Barack Obama stated in his speech on April 4, 2009, in Prague, Czech Republic, on working toward a world without nuclear weapons, ``as long as these weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies''. (2) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found, in the Commission's final report, that preserving the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is essential to ensuring the reliability and credibility of the nuclear force, and that the nuclear triad becomes even more important as the size of the nuclear force (3) The stabilizing, reliable, and cost-effective Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile is a critically important component of the nuclear triad, essential for the United States to deter its enemies, assure its allies, and (4) The current 450-missile force, with its inherent broad dispersion, low warhead loading, and high readiness and reliability, makes a successful disarming attack nearly impossible and eliminates pressure to maintain a launch-on- (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) as the United States and Russia negotiate further reductions in strategic offensive arsenals, the United States must be certain that the long-term vitality of the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is not threatened; (2) the land-based nuclear force is the most stabilizing portion of the nuclear arsenal of the United States and it becomes even more so as the total number of weapons in the (3) a robust intercontinental ballistic missile force is an essential component of the nuclear triad and must be retained to advance the Nation's nuclear strategy of deterrence, SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Findings.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, any finding by Congress in division ___ of this Act relating to actual or perceived gender identity shall have no (b) Support for Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions.-- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Attorney General may not provide assistance to a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency under section __04 of this Act (c) Federal Offense.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, section 924 of title 18, United States Code, as (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``gender (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``gender identity''; (A) in paragraph (2), by adding ``and'' at the end; (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a (d) Statistics.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note), as amended by section __08 of this Act, is amended by striking ``and gender (e) Rule of Construction.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, division __ of this Act (relating to hate crimes), and the amendments made by that division, shall SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after ``shall (b) Audit.--Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(e) Audit and Report of the Federal Reserve System.-- ``(1) In general.--The audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) shall be completed before the end of ``(A) Required.--A report on the audit referred to in paragraph (1) shall be submitted by the Comptroller General to the Congress before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which such audit is completed and made available to the Speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee and each subcommittee of jurisdiction in the House of Representatives and the Senate, ``(B) Contents.--The report under subparagraph (A) shall include a detailed description of the findings and conclusion of the Comptroller General with respect to the audit that is the subject of the report, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Comptroller SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR COALITION SUPPORT Section 1232(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 392), as amended by section 1217 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``the Secretary of Defense shall submit'' and inserting ``the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Secretary of State, (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively, and indenting each clause, as so redesignated, 6 ems from the left margin; (B) by striking ``shall include an itemized description'' and inserting the following: ``shall include the following: (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: ``(i) is consistent with the national security interests of ``(ii) will not adversely impact the balance of power in SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: (1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean the Small Business Administration and the Administrator (2) the terms ``HUBZone small business concern'', ``small business concern'', ``small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans'', and ``small business concern owned and controlled by women'' have the same meanings as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 (b) Contracting Opportunities.--Section 31(b)(2)(B) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(B)) is amended by (c) Contracting Goals.--Section 15(g)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is amended in the fourth sentence by inserting ``and subcontract'' after ``not less than 3 percent of the total value of all prime contract''. (d) Mentor-Protege Programs.--The Administrator may establish mentor-protege programs for small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans, small business concerns owned and controlled by women, and HUBZone small business concerns modeled on the mentor-protege program participating in programs under section 8(a) of the Small SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON DOCUMENTATION OF SUPPORT PROVIDED BY (a) In General.--Not later than March 31, 2010, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the documentation of the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) An assessment of the mechanisms used by the Secretary, if any, to document the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is provided as a result of operational requirements and outside of the requirements of their participation in operational missions that involve combat (2) Recommendations for the improvement or creation of (3) An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of creating and implementing an experience, service, or skill identifier to identify the support described in paragraph (4) An assessment of whether such identifier could be used effectively and efficiently for the provision of training and (5) An assessment of whether the current chain of command construct allows members described in paragraph (1) who provide support described in such paragraph sufficient opportunity to obtain recognition for their service. (6) An identification of the differences between service in the reserve components of the Armed Forces and service in the regular components of the Armed Forces and how those differences affect the matters described in paragraphs (1) (7) An assessment of how a mechanism described in paragraph (1) could be used to improve determinations of whether a member of the Armed Forces has, for purposes of establishing service-connection for a disease or injury under section 1154(b) of title 38, United States Code, engaged in combat with the enemy in active service with a military, naval, or air organization of the United States during a period of war, Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the Public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nominations of James J. Markowsky, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil Energy), Warren F. Miller, Jr., to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Nuclear Energy) and Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste, Anthony M. Babauta, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior (Insular Areas), and Jonathan B. Jarvis, to be the Director of the Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Amandaxkelly@ For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, immediately The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 committee on commerce, science, and transportation Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, in Russell 253, at The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a hearing on Tuesday, July 21, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. committee on environment and public works and subcommittee on green Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, to hold a hearing entitled ``The National Security Implications of Climate Change.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in SH-216 of the Hart Senate The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Excessive Speculation in the Wheat Market.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 2:15 pm, in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Ensuring a Legal Workforce: What Changes Should be Made to Our Current Employment Verification The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Army fellow in my office, David Evans, be granted the privileges of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Lea Shanley, a congressional science fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of my statement. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate convenes as a Court of Impeachment with regard to the case of Samuel B. Kent, the following list of staff from the House of Representatives be provided floor privileges during those proceedings. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Phil Tahtakran, Branden Ritchie, Ryan Clough, Michael Lenn, Danielle Brown, Alan Baron, Allison Halataei, Jessica Klein, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the majority leader, pursuant to Public Law 111-25, announces the appointment of the following individuals to serve as members of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission: Sig Rogich of Nevada and Frank Fahrenkoph of Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 218, which was submitted The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The resolution (S. Res. 218) was agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 164, at the desk The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the concurrent A concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record, without intervening The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) was agreed to. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, the managers of the Department of Defense authorization measure have asked for a filing deadline of first-degree amendments to the bill. While no consent will be granted tonight, it is expected that tomorrow morning unanimous consent will be requested for a filing deadline of 11 a.m., Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2245, which was received The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I would note that of the four names the clerk read--those four national heroes--two of them are from Ohio, Neil Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill (H.R. 2245) was ordered to a third reading, was read the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, July 22; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of Calendar No. 89, S. 1390, the Department of Defense authorization bill, as provided for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, under the previous order, the time until 12 o'clock will be equally divided and controlled between Senators Thune and Durbin or their designees. At 12 o'clock, the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote in relation to the Thune amendment. Additional As a reminder, at 2 p.m. tomorrow, there will be a live quorum with respect to the Court of Impeachment of Samuel B. Kent. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:40 p.m., adjourned until The House met at 10:30 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following I hereby appoint the Honorable John T. Salazar to act as The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2009, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate. The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with each party limited to 30 minutes and each Member, other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip, limited to 5 minutes. CALIFORNIA'S THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT'S PERSPECTIVE ON HEALTH CARE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with constituents in my district. As I made the call, I informed them that we were going to discuss any subject they wanted, but I wanted to concentrate on health care. As a result, I had one of the largest responses I ever had. Thousands of people got on the line. Most times, there were no less than 1,400 people on the line. I didn't choose them by party. I didn't choose them by income. I didn't choose them by occupation. It was random, calling people in my The response was overwhelming, overwhelmingly negative with respect to the plans they hear about that are coming from the White House, the Senate and the House. Why were they negative? They were negative because the people in my district were concerned about whether or not the government was going to dominate health care in this country, and those who were satisfied with their plans--even though they had some imperfections, even though they had some desire to have them improved, but by and large had made choices with respect to their plans--wondered whether their freedom of choice would be taken away by the government plan presented by the President and by the leadership in both the Senate and the House. It was interesting, they also were very concerned about the cost. When they hear the word $1 trillion, they begin to think that this particular plan has real problems. As we discussed the various aspects of it, they referred me to the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office's report that disappointed the White House and the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate because the report suggested that this program cannot pay for itself, that we're talking about at least $1 trillion to be imposed on the American people. The dialogue that I had with my constituents was very lively. They were also concerned about the fact that we have Medicare and Medicaid-- as we call it in California, Medi-Cal--that is on an unsustainable path to bankruptcy. This has been pointed out by the director of CBO as well as many others outside the halls of Congress and outside the Federal Government. So the American people are trying to tell us that they are concerned that we have an unsustainable program already that we have not faced up to; and on top of that, we're going to impose this new national health plan. It was interesting because the President and the Democratic leadership have said that, look, the public option is just that. It's not going to destroy the private sector. Yet constituents in my district were very, very clear as to their understanding of the necessary impact of this program. They also were concerned about the promises made in this plan. I guess you could sum it up in these words: First entitlement and then rationing. When government takes over a program like medical care, and when it promises everything, and when you see the track record with respect to Medicare and Medicaid, you understand that at some point in time, we're going to hit the fiscal wall, and government's only ability to control cost at that point in time--if you look historically at other government-centered health You can look at it in Canada. You can look at it in Great Britain. You can look at it in every country around the world. And frankly, I do not want--and my constituents told me last night they do not want the imposition of a government bureaucrat between them, as patients, and Interestingly, last night in one of our committees marking up that case, that question was posed: Could we say in the plan that there would not be the intervention of a government bureaucrat to dictate to your doctor as to what your health care should be? That specific amendment was voted down almost on a party-line vote. Every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against that prohibition; and every Republican voted for it. In other words, it was crystal clear. The amendment presented last night before that committee was: In this plan, can we at least promise the American people there will not be intervention by a Federal bureaucrat to dictate the care you will receive or not receive from your doctor? That specific public policy If you believe that health care delivered by the Federal Government is superior to what you get now, go to your local DMV and see if you'd like them making the decision with respect to your medical care. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, this week the House will debate legislation and give the principle of pay-as-you- go, or PAYGO, the force of law. Quite simply, supporting PAYGO means that we agree to pay for what we buy; and it can be one of the most important actions we take for fiscal discipline in this Congress. PAYGO is essential because America faces unprecedented debt and a fiscal year 2009 deficit of $1.7 trillion. A New York Times analysis found that 90 percent of that deficit is attributable to the economic downturn, Bush administration policies, and the extension of those policies. However we got into this hole, it's imperative that we find a way out of it. PAYGO is not a cure-all, not a solution entirely to our deficits. But it is an important and valuable start, and it is a proven first step to In the 1990s, the Clinton administration turned record deficits, administrations, into record surplus; and the PAYGO rule, supported on a bipartisan basis by Republicans and Democrats, was a key part in that fiscal transformation. As President Obama has recognized, and I quote, ``It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved to record surpluses in the 1990s and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt.'' Today we can once again use PAYGO to begin rolling back the dangerous fiscal situation that confronts us. Under statutory PAYGO, Congress will be required to find savings to balance the dollars we spend. On the one hand, it will constrain unnecessary spending and subsidies. On the other, it will force those in favor of tax cuts to explain exactly what they want to go without in return. In other words, pay for them. Of course none of those choices are easy, but it is exactly the avoidance of hard choices that saddles our children and grandchildren with the debt that confronts us. In addition, deficit reduction will mean fewer interest payments on our debt which, in turn, will help us make sustainable entitlements in the priorities that matter most to the American people, including education, clean energy and health care. The PAYGO law would apply to new policies that reduce revenue or expand entitlement spending. It will exempt extensions of current policy on the alternative minimum tax, the estate tax and middle-income tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and Medicare payments to doctors. Some would criticize these exemptions, but I see them as an important way of keeping PAYGO credible and enforceable. It is clear that there is bipartisan support in Congress for extending those policies without offsets. Now, very frankly, I would vote for offsets; but we have seen that that does not happen in the United States Senate; and there is an inclination not to do it here. A PAYGO bill that does not exempt them would have to be waived again and again, turning the cause of fiscal I find it much more sensible to make a fiscal discipline promise we can keep. I would also note that the exemptions in the House legislation are narrower than those sent to us in the President's original proposal. Most notably, they only apply to the middle-class tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and not to tax cuts generally. Mr. Speaker, pay as you go cannot remove us from our deficit hole in a single stroke, nor will it. That will take much hard work. PAYGO is not enough in and of itself, but it is absolutely necessary because it keeps us from digging the hole any deeper. It is tested and proven. We adopted this policy in a bipartisan way in 1990. We reaffirmed that policy in a bipartisan vote in 1997, with Speaker Gingrich and President Clinton reaching agreement on that proposition. Yes, it's tested and proven, as I said. I hope that all of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, will support it when it comes to the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry I don't have the time to respond to the majority leader's comments about PAYGO. But I would just simply say that the Democrats passed a PAYGO policy when they first took over, and we're getting deeper and deeper into debt. If that's what PAYGO does, The President, the Speaker and the majority leader are all in a rush to pass legislation here. So much in a rush, they will not even give Members a chance to read the bills. Why is that? It's perhaps because they don't want people to know what's in the bills. But the American people want to get health reform right, not just fast. Artificial deadlines for passing legislation serve a political purpose, not a legitimate purpose. I have promised that I will not vote for any health care legislation that is not publicly available in its final form for at least 72 hours in advance of a vote. Every Member of Congress should have time to read the health care bill they are asked to vote on, and the American people should be given this same common courtesy. Let's give them significant time to fully understand the details of a health care proposal rather than steamrolling partisan legislation through Congress. We should make August a national health care awareness month so that Americans can let their Member of Congress know where they stand before voting because we already know of many problems in the proposals that are being put forward. Number one, the bill contains zero savings from eliminating or even reducing waste, fraud and abuse. In an attempt to correct this egregious lack of oversight, Ways and Means Republicans offered six amendments during the committee's markup to reduce wasteful spending. All of them were rejected by the We know that the House Democrats' health care plan will increase Federal spending significantly, that coming directly from the CBO, appointed by the Democrats. We know that it's going to raise taxes on small businesses through surtax increases. Of taxpayers who file in the top brackets, more than half of them are small businesses. The Democrat plan, according to a study by the Tax Foundation, would raise the top Significantly, it includes fines of up to $500,000 on employers who make an honest mistake thinking they had provided what the government deemed ``sufficient'' coverage. It will impose an 8 percent payroll tax on employers who can't afford to offer health insurance to their employees, and on employers who do the right thing and offer health coverage to their employees but it is deemed insufficient by the government, and employers who are not paying at least 72.5 percent of an employee's premium or 65 percent for family coverage. What they plan to do is take over more aspects of our life. Every piece of legislation that is passing out of this House this session is aimed at putting the government more in control of our lives and giving us less freedom. The health care bill is the worst of those. Cap-and- We must not rush into passing health care legislation. We must slow down and get things right. The American people are hurting. We know they are hurting. Unemployment is going up dramatically under this Congress and under this President, and we need to be dealing with what we can do to create jobs and help individual families, not make things worse by killing more jobs and raising taxes. That's what PAYGO does. It is hard to make cuts in spending, easy to raise taxes, and that's what they plan to do. We shouldn't let them fool the American people again. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. We have got to stop letting the Democrats do these things, rushing bills through, hiding things in obscure language, and taxing us into high The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition which has long advocated for restoring statutory PAYGO as an important budgetary tool necessary to impose discipline in both chambers of Congress as it regards the collection and use of taxpayer money. I would like to thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his strong, steadfast, and unquestioned support for statutory PAYGO and for his words earlier this As I stated and as the majority leader has, this is an important to impose discipline. It is a tested and proven tool from the 1990s that again, as has been mentioned, President Clinton and former Speaker Newt Gingrich agreed to back in the 1990s. I think it is imperative that opponents of this legislation explain more clearly why they lived with PAYGO with little or no complaint in the last decade, and the surpluses aided by such disciplines, and why they abandoned such discipline which led to a doubling of the national debt over the last 8 We need to make priorities and tough decisions so as to ensure fairness to future generations. It is essential to adopt statutory PAYGO as one step, among many others, to ensure both economic and national security. It is not fair to future generations for the United States to in any way be beholden to foreign creditors. The interest on the national debt alone is more than we spend on education and veterans Statutory PAYGO is necessary to impose discipline in both Chambers. One of the earlier speakers mentioned that since adopting PAYGO in the House rules, that the deficits have worsened. Unfortunately, much of the legislation passed out of this Chamber that abides by House rules for PAYGO come back to this Chamber after action in the Senate that strips how we pay for our priorities. That's why again reinstating PAYGO as a budgetary tool in statute is necessary for both the House and the Senate, and fortunately is supported by the current So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ask the hard questions about what worked in the 1990s to produce budget surpluses, about what didn't work over the past 8 years to result in a national debt, a record national debt, and what tools are necessary to get us back on the path of fiscal discipline and surpluses once again. Statutory PAYGO is one key, one tool, among others, that will lead to the kind of tough decisions and priorities necessary to restore the fiscal health of the country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today at a time of a great moment in the life of this country. The American people are hurting. We are facing in this country the worst recession in a quarter century. We have lost 2 million jobs since this Congress and this administration enacted a stimulus bill. The unemployment rate at the time we passed the stimulus bill was 7.5 percent. We were told that we had to spend that nearly $800 billion, borrowed from future generations of Americans, so the unemployment rate wouldn't go over 8 percent. It We saw this Democratic majority pass a budget that will double the national debt in 5 years and triple it in 10, and that's if the economy starts to grow again, which sadly, few economists believe it will in Now this summer we saw this majority, in the name of global warming, pass a national energy tax that will essentially raise the cost of energy for businesses and individuals by thousands of dollars per year. And now comes health care reform, a government takeover of health care in this country financed with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Yet my colleagues, many of whom I deeply respect, come to the floor this week to talk about something called PAYGO, fiscal discipline. Well, the truth is that in this majority and this administration, PAYGO means you pay and they go on spending. The truth is we have got to come to terms with these difficult times. We have got to begin to demonstrate the priorities that businesses and family farms and working families are demonstrating at this time of national challenge and economic recession. Families and businesses are sitting down and prioritizing what should come first. We ought to have national energy legislation to set us on a pathway toward energy independence. We ought to have health care reform that brings real competition into our economy and lowers the cost for consumers. But the first thing we ought to be doing is coming together We know how to create jobs. John F. Kennedy knew it, Ronald Reagan knew it, George W. Bush knew it when the towers fell: fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C., and tax relief for working families, small The last thing we need right now is one more massive tax increase, one more government takeover of one more American industry. What we need is focus, and we need to prioritize what this Congress is working on. We ought to be asking what the American people are asking today with a heavy heart as they look at Washington, D.C.: Where are the Health care, energy independence, other priorities, other talking points on Capitol Hill are not going to get the American people back to work. Congress should come together, men and women of goodwill and strong principle, and work in such a way that can restore this economy, and then work in a bipartisan way on the other major issues facing our The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, the House will be taking up H.R. 2920 this week, the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2009, otherwise known as This bill, sponsored by our majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), will renew our commitment to fiscal responsibility and protect core democratic values. As the President said less than 2 months ago, the pay-as-you-go rule is very simple: Congress can only spend a dollar in one place if it saves a dollar in another. Just as families cut back on eating out at restaurants to pay for a new amenity, so too must Congress make In fact, this rule was put in place when the country saw record deficits turn into record surpluses during the 1990s. It is no surprise to learn that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record PAYGO legislation will reestablish this requirement that turned deficits into surpluses under the Clinton administration. It is also critically important to pass PAYGO to ensure our fiscal health and stability as Congress considers health care reform legislation, a necessary item. We must be able to pay for this reform without unduly burdening our American taxpayers. To understand this critically important PAYGO legislation and the record deficits this country is facing, we must understand how we got here. We must move toward a more balanced budget which will initiate an era of fiscal responsibility and a stronger long term fiscal position. PAYGO is an important and critical piece of legislation in that process. First, a number of factors have brought us to this cash-strapped position. Under the previous administration, the PAYGO principle was abandoned, reckless tax cuts were passed for the wealthy and two wars were funded outside of the budget process. On top of that, our economy has seen one of the most severe recessions since the Great Depression. Congressional efforts to get the economy moving again have proven to be fairly effective thus far, but they have come at a price. Understanding these problems and the long term fiscal restraints, what does the PAYGO legislation do? It will require that all new policies reducing revenues or expanding entitlement spending enacted during a session of Congress be offset over 5 and 10 years. As Congress did in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, PAYGO will include an exemption for legislation designated as an emergency. PAYGO will require any future extension of upper income tax cuts to be offset, as well as force a serious examination of wasteful subsidies in the budget and tax loopholes that can be eliminated to benefit more will force advocates of tax cuts to acknowledge the costs and show how they will be paid for, as well as ensuring that we can afford to fund America's most important priorities consistently for future Certain exemptions on discretionary programs funded in the appropriations process will be granted under PAYGO. These programs are the low income home energy assistance program, our Head Start program, Pell grants, the special supplemental nutrition program for women, PAYGO will also establish an enforcement mechanism in nonexempt mandatory programs at the end of year if Congress has not already paid for the cost of all legislation enacted during that given year. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a priority for the President. He understands, as we do, that we must balance short-term deficit spending for economic recovery with a commitment to restoring fiscal discipline in the long term. The large deficits that we inherited as a result of the reckless borrow-and-spend policies of the previous administration have put pressure on funding for important priorities such as health care, education and clean energy jobs. We must ensure that regardless of who is in power, PAYGO will be a powerful impediment to reckless tax Mr. Speaker, the people of our country elect us to come to Washington to represent them in the best way that we can. After years of unrestrained spending, budget gimmicks and rampant waste, as well as fraud and abuse in Federal spending, it is clear we cannot continue along that same fiscal path. We are in a deep fiscal hole. However, with the right tools, including a statutory PAYGO budgeting process, we can reverse this dangerous trend and begin to put the country back on a Mr. Speaker, that is why I support H.R. 2920 and encourage our FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM UNDER THE GROWING FED: A RECIPE FOR TOTAL The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to address the critical issue of regulatory reform in our financial markets. In 1912, a year before he became President, Woodrow Wilson ominously stated ``waiting to be solved lurks the great question of banking reform.'' So here we are almost 100 years later, and we are facing the same lurking The Treasury Department recently issued an 85-page white paper containing five main objectives for reforming or financial markets. Although a few of these objectives may sound good on paper, the devil is always in the details. A closer look at this new plan reveals a fundamental change to our financial system and economy that will stifle the innovation and competition fostered by the traditional American free enterprise system, giving way to a future of Big Government propping up all companies that are ``too big to fail.'' Specifically, the Obama financial regulatory reform plan calls for ceding the Federal Reserve a vast amount of additional authority with the power to create new requirements for capital and liquidity and for any firm ``whose combination of size, leverage, and interconnectedness could pose a threat to financial stability if it fails.'' The Fed, which has failed in the past as a regulator, will be allowed to oversee almost all aspects of any financial company in the United States and its foreign affiliates. Specifically, the Fed will be able to regulate, lend to and close down companies not normally under their control if My colleagues, this is total government control. Additionally, the Treasury will be given more powers as well, such as the ability to appoint a conservator or receiver to ``stabilize'' any large financial firm that is failing, any large financial firm. This will be done in lieu of bankruptcy proceedings, and the result will almost certainly lead to those ``too big to fail'' institutions, backed by the United States Government, having the upper hand in the market, particularly when it comes to raising funds, and smaller competitors will be forced out down the line. Thus, we are destined for an economy dominated by what essentially are government-backed entities, like the Fannie Maes Big government backed by an all-powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to our financial problems. We cannot erode the components of our free market economy because we are afraid to let the market work. It will devastate the innovation and competition that has traditionally Another issue worth mentioning when discussing regulatory reform of financial markets is the issue of transparency and possible conflicts of interest. Bill Gross of Pimco, a private financial institution that manages the world's largest mutual fund, is heavily involved in the mortgage securities market and is an open proponent of the Treasury's public-private investment program. Interestingly, in the spring of 2008, Pimco actually presented a plan in Washington, D.C. for a public- private partnership, very similar to the plan that Geithner came out with this year. Pimco is now hoping to be one of the companies that the Treasury picks to help buy up some of the $1.25 trillion in mortgage bonds that have sank big institutions like Bank of America and In addition, the Federal Reserve has also looked to Pimco to specifically ask for advice on which banks needed more taxpayer TARP funds to stay afloat. Pimco's close relationship with the Treasury and the Fed should not allow it to be the beneficiary of billions of dollars gained through Federal contracts and preferential investment opportunities, particularly with Geithner's public-private investment Mr. Speaker, a free market is an economic system in which individuals, rather than the government, make the majority decisions regarding economic activities. In a free-market economy, the government's function is limited, and it should act in a way as an umpire and issue regulatory procedures. The Obama financial regulatory reform plan will move us away from our free-market system and towards a future where the free market is negated by government over-involvement in the private financial sector. We are moving toward a system of permanent interdependence of big companies' reliance on big government. This is fundamentally un-American, and the long-term consequences of Let's not make Washington, D.C. the bailout capital of the world for every private company in America. Let those companies suffer the consequences for their risky actions. Instead, let's be good stewards of taxpayer dollars, keeping in mind that more regulation doesn't mean better regulation and a powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOYD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the pay-as-you-go legislation that the House will be considering later this week. This is a bill that the Blue Dogs and I have endorsed for the last several Congresses. It is a priority of this President and of the House leadership and of more than 165 cosponsors of this legislation. I'm always intrigued by those who would oppose PAYGO, like my friend, Mr. Pence from Indiana, who spoke earlier that basically criticized the deficit spending that has occurred, I assume that he would be critical of that in the last previous administration and this administration, but yet he seems to oppose the one tool that we have that has proven to The principle is simple, Mr. Speaker. If you have new spending then you have to pay for them. It is very simple. PAYGO was one of the tools that led this country in the 1990s to record surpluses. However, that tool, PAYGO, and others that were in place, were allowed to expire under President Bush and the Republican leadership of this body in Those who claim that PAYGO didn't work need simply to look at the numbers. When it was on the books, we had balanced budgets and even record surpluses. But after it was allowed to expire, we saw the explosion of new spending programs and spiraling deficits to go along with it. By putting PAYGO back into law, we will get back on the path toward fiscal responsibility and long-term sustainability. It is no secret by anybody that works in this place and now even out in the country, that we have an unsustainable budget picture looking forward. When you have a budget hole, Mr. Speaker, the first rule of thumb, the first rule you need to follow is stop digging. PAYGO does that by ensuring that new programs that are enacted must be paid for. We owe it to our children and to their children to stop digging this I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this PAYGO legislation in order to return to fiscal discipline. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, I'm here, too, to join in advocacy for the PAYGO legislation that is going to come before the House floor this week. PAYGO is what it sounds like. If we have a new program, we have to find a way to pay for it, either through cuts or revenues. If we have a proposed tax cut, we have to find a way to pay for it, either in a reduction in programs elsewhere or a shifting of priorities and It is a very simple, elemental approach. If you're going to buy something, you have to pay for it. Families know it, in their family budgets, they have to do it all of the time. And government really is no different. It is no different because in the end, if we borrow money, at some point we are going to have to pay it back. We have gotten into a habit in this Congress of not paying for things, in some cases, expenditure programs, and in other cases tax cuts. We have had some back and forth this morning with our friends on the other side of the aisle, and without getting into the blame game, which doesn't get us anywhere, there is an irrefutable fact, and that is that in the past 8 years with the tax cuts, with Medicare part D that was not funded, with a war in Iraq and a war in Afghanistan on the credit card, we have gone from the largest surplus in the history of this country to the largest deficit in the history of this country. What it means is that our kids and our grandkids are the ones who are going to have to pick up the tab. Aside from the fact that that is obviously unfair and none of us wants to pass the burden of debt for our spending on to others, it really is going to restrict what it is that generation can do to meet its own challenges to educate its kids, to provide health care to its kids and themselves and to provide for We have the capacity to impose on ourselves the same rule that families have to impose on themselves every month when they sit around the kitchen table and go over their checkbook and try to figure out how, at the end of the month, they are going to make the checkbook balance. And that is to accept the burden of the discipline of paying for our tax cut proposal or our spending proposal when we make the Voters know that. They want fiscal responsibility. In fact, their concern about the deficit rightly is at the top of their agenda. We have had extraordinary circumstances here that have required extraordinary actions with the economy going off the cliff, with the stimulus spending and with the legacy of a war in Iraq and Afghanistan We have restored truth in budgeting so that those two things, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, are now on the budget. So it is painful because we are seeing in black and white what the cost of those enterprises are, and we know that we are going to have to pay for them. We are not trying to hide it. We are being direct. The American people are entitled to that candor, and they are entitled to have us respond by making certain that we, going forward, adopt pay-as-you-go principles. It is not just good in theory, and it is not just good for conservatives or liberals. It is good for I'm a big supporter, I think most of us are, that in this country we achieve the goal of having all of our citizens covered by health care. Every citizen should be covered and have access to health insurance. Every citizen should help pay for it. And if you lose your job, you shouldn't lose your health care. The President has acknowledged that as worthy as that goal is, we must pay for it. And the health care bill that we are now considering has to be paid for. What a difference from what happened with the prescription drug program that was largely put on the credit card and it is not able to sustain itself or pay for One of the reasons it is so important to have PAYGO is that it imposes the discipline on us to kick the tires of a program. Health care is a great example. We need it. We have good health care in this country. But the cost is going up at two or three times the rate of inflation, two or three times the rate of profit growth, two or three times the rate of wage growth. So people are falling behind. The middle class is getting squeezed. They are facing higher co-pays and deductibles. By adopting PAYGO, it is forcing us to look at our delivery system and ask yourselves how can we reform the delivery of health care to make it more efficient and provide more value for less In fact, there are examples after examples of how we have, in many cases, excess utilization. So this bill is going to be helpful to all of us. And it is very important that we pass this legislation. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, right now Americans all across the country are dealing with this tough economy, many by tightening their belts and by managing their family budgets. Unfortunately, they are looking to Washington, and they are seeing this Congress that is being run by people that don't get what the American people are dealing with across Spending is out of control here in Washington by this administration and by this Congress. Look at the proposals that we are debating today. Health care in America needs reforms. But with all of the problems that exist, we still have some of the best medical care in the world. In fact, people that live in countries that have a government-run plan and who have the means, come to America to get care because in those countries, government takeover of health care has led directly to rationing of care. And so what are we facing today? We are facing a plan by the President, Speaker Pelosi and others here to have a government takeover of America's health care system. When you read this bill, and you hear all of this great rhetoric, you hear the President saying that if you like the plan you have, you can keep it. The problem is, the bill doesn't allow you to keep your health care plan. There is actually a section in their government takeover that allows a health care czar, some bureaucrat in Washington that was never elected to anything, to be able to take away your health care if they don't think that it complies with these new Federal requirements. So if you like what you have, this health care czar can take it away In fact, if you're uninsured--and all we hear about is the uninsured that we need to address the problem of the uninsured, and I agree. The thing is when you really break down the numbers and when you look at who is really uninsured, you get to a number of about 7 million people. Once you strip away the illegal aliens and you take away the people who choose not to get health care who are currently eligible, you end up with 7 million Americans. That is a number we can address without blowing up all of the things that work for over 300 million Americans. But in their plan, they actually tax some of those very people that The Congressional Budget Office just gave testimony last week. Unfortunately the chairman of the committee threw the public out of the meeting. It was a secretive meeting that they wouldn't even allow the public to come into. I guess after they heard the testimony, you can see why, because the testimony said, number one, that the costs in this bill are out of control. All of the savings that we heard, that were promised, don't even exist. That's the Congressional Budget Office's But then they talked about the taxes, over $580 billion in new taxes on businesses in their health care bill. There's over $240 billion of penalties that would be applied to American families that maybe don't go along with this new government takeover of health care. There's $29 billion of taxes on uninsured people in their bill. The Congressional Budget Office gave the specific testimony that this bill, this government takeover of health care, adds $29 billion in new taxes on the backs of uninsured Americans. And this is as they're running around saying that they want to help uninsured Americans. I know a lot of uninsured Americans out there that don't think $29 billion of new taxes on their backs is the kind of help that they want. When you look at this bill, you start to realize that what they're doing, what they're proposing, is the very government takeover where rationing of care would exist, where a government bureaucrat can get in between the relationship of you and your doctor. It's the same thing that's happened in Canada, it's the same thing that's happened in England, where unfortunately just yesterday we saw the story of a 22-year-old who was denied lifesaving care, denied a transplant by this government bureaucracy that exists in England that rations care. I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee where this bill is currently being debated. We were in committee till 12:30 in the morning last night. We had an amendment that would have prohibited a Federal bureaucrat in Washington from interfering between the relationship of an American citizen and their doctor. That's the most sacrosanct relationship that should exist. Nobody should come between the relationship between you and your doctor. Yet they voted down that amendment. So clearly this is about rationing. Their proposal is not about reforming health care, because there's bipartisan agreement on the reforms that need to be made to address the real problems that exist in health care. What their bill is about is a government takeover. It's growing government more. It's adding more to the Federal deficit. Hundreds of billions of dollars by CBO testimony would be added to the Federal deficit, at a time when Americans are saying, Congress, Washington, control spending. Get a grip. People saw that the This bill is a horrible idea. Government should not be taking over our health care system and interfering in the relationship between us The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from If we do not begin paying our bills today, we will continue to short- change future generations who face higher taxes and cuts to Federal investments in priorities such as education, health care and national security. In order to ensure our long-term fiscal sustainability, we must all work together and return to the proven, effective pay-as-you- go rules that brought our Federal budget to balance in the 1990s. We now have a President who is committed to changing the fiscal course of this country. Together, we are committed to putting an end to the reckless fiscal policies and out-of-control spending of the past that has given us the record deficits we see today. To that end, the President has charged Congress with passing statutory PAYGO, and we have an obligation to see that this critical piece of legislation Our Federal Government simply cannot continue to live beyond its means, mortgaging our future on the backs of our children and our grandchildren. Reinstituting statutory PAYGO will send a message to the American people that their government is serious about putting the country back on stable economic footing. The time to act is now. The President has put his words into action and I look forward to working with the Blue Dogs and my colleagues in the House and the Senate to make statutory PAYGO a reality again in this country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, American families and small business owners are struggling with high health care costs. They're also struggling with access to a doctor; getting to see a doctor and establishing a relationship with that doctor so that you can really lead a healthier life-style, building the kind of trust that's necessary so that the doctor knows the patient and knows what it's going to take to lead them along a healthier pathway and having the patient trust the doctor so that the advice that they're being given is something that they will adhere to. American families are struggling, small business owners are struggling, and we have to do something about Republicans believe we should reform health care, but we need to do it responsibly and in a very, very thoughtful way so as to not disrupt the system that we currently have. If you have health insurance that you like that leads to a relationship with a doctor, you can keep it. But we don't want to see a system completely devastated or disrupted. I am a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, and we worked on the bill in the House which outlines the President's plan; and that bill doesn't do near enough to provide good, accessible health care. Furthermore, it's a very expensive bill. The Congressional Budget Office has just started looking at this and it's seeing a very expensive bill that's going to add significantly to the deficit. As a physician who has practiced medicine for over 20 years, I look at this and I say, whoa, wait a minute, let's get this right. It's more important to get it right than to rush into something and do it very hastily and cause disruption in the health care system where we have some things that are working. One of the speakers earlier mentioned the fact that we've got in fact in effect the finest health care in the world. We've got the most highly trained doctors and nurses. We have people from all over the world coming here to train. We have those who live in other countries who come here to get their health care. But we have a cost problem, we have an insurance problem, and we need to fix that, and we need to make sure that insurance coverage is meaningful and really leads to access to a doctor for every American. Republicans have ideas on how to do this. It incorporates three basic principles: Information for you to make decisions for your family or for your small business, to make cost comparisons, to create transparency, information among physicians so that we don't duplicate tests and run up the costs. These are all important things. Information is very important throughout the system and we believe that we can incorporate this in a very cost-effective way. Secondly, choice. Americans want choices. They like to shop. Let's give Americans a wide range of choices to meet their family needs or their small business needs in health care. If we do that, that will create competition and that will start to drive the costs down of health insurance premiums which we're all struggling with. It will make it more affordable and we'll get more people on it. We can address the uninsured by targeting our response as one of the previous speakers Finally, we need to put families back in control of their health care destiny. There should be nothing between the doctor and the patient in this. That's the essence of good, high quality health care, and that's the only way we're going to control the cost ultimately, by fostering and strengthening that doctor-patient relationship and making it something that every American has. That's how we'll fix health care. Republicans have those ideas and many more and we'll be glad to share them as this debate goes further with the American public. INTRODUCING THE ADULT EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you as a member of the Education and Labor Committee. It is a pleasure to stand before you today to speak about the Adult Education and Economic Growth Act of 2009, known as H.R. 3238, legislation that my friend and colleague Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island and I introduced on As we all know, our Nation is facing one of the most difficult economic times in history. Technology and globalization, coupled with the economic recession, are causing low-wage and low-skilled workers to become particularly vulnerable. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment among individuals with less than a high school diploma has risen from 7\\1/2\\ percent in December of 2007 to almost 15 percent in April 2009. The unemployment rate for high school graduates with no college degree has increased from 4.6 percent to 9.3 percent. Currently, the U.S. ranks 11th among OECD countries in the percent of young adults with a high school diploma. We should be especially concerned that we are the only country in which younger adults are less educated than the previous generation. More than 40 million adults across our country have basic skills needs or limited proficiency in English that keep them from participating fully in work, in family and In 2007, more than 25 million adults ages 18 to 64 had no high school credential. In 2006, 18,400,000 adults spoke English less than ``very well'' according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In my congressional district alone, there are 154,000 adults without a high school diploma. In addition, another 444,000 adults speak a language other than English or do not speak English ``very well.'' In Texas, we have 3.8 million adults who do not have a high school diploma. This is unacceptable. We must do much more to educate our adult learners and assist them in acquiring the 21st century skills they need to succeed in the In my conversations with business leaders in my congressional district and across the country, they have shared their desire for a highly educated and trained workforce. Employers need highly skilled workers to compete globally, particularly in high-growth industries and Despite these alarming statistics and realities, we have not made adequate investments in our adult education delivery system. Our adult education and workforce training delivery systems are in great need of reform. In many States, thousands of adult learners are experiencing long waiting lists for adult literacy services to increase their basic literacy skills or improve their English skills. More than 77 percent of community-based literacy programs currently report waiting lists. Current funding reaches only 2.8 million of these adults each year and thousands more are on those waiting lists that I mentioned for adult A report issued this month by the President's Council on Economic Advisers, Preparing the Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow, underscores that our modern economy requires workers with higher skills and the need to employ workers with education and training beyond the In closing, I want to say that the report identifies key limitations to our education and training system, including low completion rates, limited accountability, poor coordination among different programs and excessive bureaucratic restrictions on the use of training funds. If we are to remain competitive in the global economy, we must invest in high quality adult education and workforce training programs that lead to family-sustaining jobs in careers with the promise of Mr. Speaker, I invite Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle The ``Adult Education and Economic Growth Act,'' H.R. 3238, strengthens our adult education and workforce training systems, increases economic growth in local communities and supports President Obama's call to once again lead the world college degrees by 2020. This legislation provides adult learners with greater access to obtain basic literacy or workplace skills, including English as a Second Language. This bill assists adults in gaining admission to job This legislation provides adequate resources for innovative educational and workforce programs, so that states can bridge the gap between adult education and occupational skills training. Our adult learners will be better served by having access to integrated This legislation expands access by ensuring that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills needs of individual states, including the number of adults who This legislation increases access to adult education, literacy, and This legislation increases access to correctional educational programs and provides added accountability in the system. This legislation invests in lower skilled workers by providing We must reform our adult education and workforce delivery systems if we are to provide adults with the educational opportunities and 21st century skills needed to acquire family-sustaining wages and remain The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from I rise today to express the deepest concern for the fact that unemployment rates have risen to 13.7 percent in the Inland Empire. There are those who believe that the solution to almost every problem facing America involves more government spending here in Washington. I am committed to the fact that just the opposite is the case. We must do everything that we possibly can to create a taxing system that The sooner we get back to the point of creating job opportunities in the private sector and recognizing that growth of government for the sake of government is not the answer, the sooner we will solve this problem. The jobs for San Bernardino and Riverside County lie in the private sector. So let's create an environment of opportunity and hope for those who are looking for jobs for the future. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my good friend and colleague, Chairman Ruben Hinojosa, for his work on this issue of adult Just like Ruben Hinojosa and his district in Texas, in my State of Rhode Island where unemployment rates continue to rise, 23 percent of the adult population in my district alone lacks a high school diploma. Last June when the National Commission on Adult Literacy released its report, it served as a wake-up call for all those concerned with the quality of our adult workforce. The commission found that 80 to 90 million adults in this country have deficiencies in basic education and that our investments in adult education and training were reaching less than 3 percent of those who need it. That's why we need to ensure that our adult education and workforce training programs have the tools and resources they need to prepare our workers for the next generation of jobs in energy, in health care and in technology. We need to improve the way we deliver adult education and workforce training programs and the way we provide career paths to higher growth fields through greater involvement with business leaders, State agencies and adult education community and workforce leaders. We need to better leverage employers to provide educational programs to their employees. We need to enhance the use of technology to improve quality learning access and delivery of adult education, literacy and workplace skills services. The Adult Education and Economic Growth Act which Ruben Hinojosa and I are introducing will do all of these things in order to provide those employed and unemployed with the ability to attain the skills they need I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. The Adult Education and Economic Growth (AEEG) Act of 2009 1. Will refocus the adult education and workforce skills system to make postsecondary and job training readiness a 85 percent of GED graduates have to take at least one remedial course before they can enroll in postsecondary education. We need to do a better job preparing them for success in school and in work, rather than getting them to an arbitrary finish line that actually leaves them short of 2. Will give incumbent workers greater access to the workforce skills training and adult education systems. It is too hard for people already on the job to receive workforce skills training and adult education. It's not enough to get someone into a job, we need to get them into a career. That means continued training, even after a worker is Only 3 to 4 percent of the workers with the most limited literacy proficiencies receive basic skills training from their employers. Our bill will create greater incentives for employer involvement in the education of their employees. 3. Will ensure that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills Federal funding formulas are outdated, and especially penalize states with a high proportion of non-native English speakers. Our legislation will ensure a fairer distribution 4. Will increase the use of technology in workforce skills Technology has greatly increased our ability to reach workers at times and places convenient to them. By 2006, 73 percent of American adults were online, including those at the lowest literacy levels. We cannot reach all of those needing services without deploying technology to provide 5. Will increase access to correction education programs and provide for added accountability in the system. Offenders with education and training are statistically less likely to commit crimes after release. There is a direct correlation between education level and recidivism: the higher the education level, the lower the recidivism rate. A decrease in recidivism reduces costs to taxpayers and keeps The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until noon today. Accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 33 minutes a.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following God of mercy and goodness, may this midday moment of prayer and dedication be received as a welcome gift by all, refreshing Your people and clarifying our purpose in serving this Nation. Bless the work that Congress has begun this day. Rectify any defects and strengthen its integrity. Let us finish the tasks You set before us in a way that pleases You and gives glory to this Nation and Your Holy The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. PAULSEN led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate has passed a bill and a concurrent resolution of the following titles in which the concurrence of the House is requested: S. 951. An act to authorize the President, in conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American to orbit the Earth, S. Con. Res. 11. Concurrent resolution condemning all forms of anti-Semitism and reaffirming the support of Congress for the mandate of the special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti- (Mr. WILSON of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. WILSON of Ohio. I rise today in strong support of statutory pay- as-you-go legislation, which will be taken up this week by the House. This bill demonstrates our commitment to fiscal responsibility and will restore the policy that led us from deficit spending to debt to We have to reduce our deficit spending. If we don't, we will not be able to invest in vitally important priorities like health care, PAYGO is very simple: All the policies that cut taxes or reduce revenues must be paid for or offset over 5 and 10 years. All policies that expand entitlement spending must be paid for over 5 and 10 years. Discretionary spending is not subject to PAYGO, and exceptions could be This makes common sense and families live by it every day. If you spend more in one area of the family budget, you have got to cut back in other areas. It's about time that our government start living by the (Mr. BOEHNER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, before I came to Congress, I ran a small business. And in that small business I offered a health insurance benefit to my employees. I offered a pension benefit to my employees. Both of these plans were as a result of a 1974 Federal law called ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, that allows employers to offer health plans to their employees and pension plans to Over the years, employers now provide health insurance to their employees, to the total of about 132 million Americans that today get But in the Democrat health care plan, I noticed this morning in an article from The Wall Street Journal there's a provision in there that, in their bill, after 5 years all employer plans will have to be approved by the Department of Labor and the new Health Choices Commissioner, who will set Federal standards for what is an acceptable Now, these employers are providing these plans to their employees. They're trying to provide a benefit their employees want and need. And now the Federal Government is going to decide what your health plan is I would suggest that a lot of employers in America are going to look at this and decide, You know, this really isn't worth it. Under their plan, if you're an employer and you don't provide health insurance, you have to pay an 8 percent payroll tax to the Federal Government. Eight Now, most employers probably pay more than this for their health care. And so, as a result, I would think a lot of employers are just going to pay the 8 percent tax and allow their employees to be shoved According to the Congressional Budget Office, some 23 million Americans would lose their benefits from their employers and be forced into government health care. According to the Lewin Group, 114 million Americans would be forced into the government plan. This is not what the American people want. And if you put an 8 percent tax on payroll, guess what? Employers are going to hire less people. And most of my constituents are asking, Where are the jobs? And if you tax employment through this health care plan or you tax employment under this crazy national energy tax, you're going to create At a time when we need jobs and we need our economy going again, we don't need to be taxing employers and taxing employment, because we're (Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona asked and was given permission to Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act. This commonsense measure will help bring fiscal responsibility back to Washington. With the national debt at almost $11.6 trillion, Congress needs to start showing some discipline. I launched my ``Do More With Less'' campaign to cut inefficient spending and reduce the debt. I have been proud to support billions of cuts in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills. And I have called on the Treasury Secretary to use returned bailout funds to pay back what I am also pleased to be an original cosponsor of the PAYGO bill. By requiring that Congress offset spending dollar-for-dollar, this legislation will ensure that Washington makes the tough choices it PAYGO helped produce the budget surpluses of the late 1990s, and it I urge my colleagues to stand with me and support passage of this (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, at a time when millions of Americans are losing their jobs and families are desperately seeking employment, this Congress and this administration have made job creation a secondary concern. As a result, they have squandered a golden opportunity to put Frankly, the American people have just had enough. They have had enough of a stimulus bill that has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars and not staved off job loss. They have had enough of the national energy tax that will impose extraordinary job-killing taxes on the people of this country. And now, Mr. Speaker, they have had enough of talk of a health care bill that not only will fail to deliver the access and quality that we need, but it will cripple small businesses Mr. Speaker, the question is: Where are the jobs? Congress and this administration have been asleep for too long--and we can do better. (Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACA. America's health system is not working. We cannot stay with the failing system that we now have. What good is an insurance card if there's no real access to services? What good is the current system if I have a senior under Medicare, like in my district, scared that their We also need a health care reform that gets past the politics and past the rhetoric that every single person is covered. I stand here to advocate for those without a voice, for those who cannot afford to travel to Washington, D.C. I stand here to advocate for a viable public option to compete with the private sector. I stand here to advocate for American families. And I stand for the American families who are busting at the seams, trying to make ends I urge my colleagues to advocate for all American families and pass health care reform that is needed for all American people in this (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PENCE. In the midst of the worst recession in 25 years, after months of runaway Federal spending, bailout, record deficits, and a national energy tax, now comes a government takeover of health care paid for with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Before we move on to the next big government scheme of this administration, the American people are asking, Mr. President, where Make no mistake about it, the President's health care bill would do nothing to lower the cost of health care and would be a disaster for the American economy. If ObamaCare passes--according to the experts--if ObamaCare passes, you will probably lose your health insurance and you The American people know we can do better. We must do better. For the sake of our economy and reform, I implore my Democratic colleagues, say ``no'' to a government takeover of health care and higher taxes and say ``yes'' to a bipartisan majority in this Congress that is committed to fiscal discipline, reform, and putting Americans back to work. (Mr. CHILDERS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHILDERS. It's a privilege to come to this House floor today to you-go legislation that is scheduled to be introduced this week. As a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, I believe reinstituting PAYGO is vital to restoring confidence with the American people that Washington and this Congress are indeed serious about reducing the Federal deficit and not continuing the reckless spending policies so often associated with Washington over the past decade. The people of north Mississippi and the American people all understand that at some point the bills have to be paid. Going from a $5 trillion debt at the end of the Clinton administration to a now over $11 trillion debt, it is not hard to imagine the daily frustrations I see every weekend at home on the faces of individuals and families It is time for Congress to start operating just as the families in my district do and adopt statutory PAYGO as the law of the land. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this landmark HEALTH CARE WITHOUT RAISING TAXES AND COSTING JOBS (Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. We can have health care reform without raising taxes and costing jobs. The health care version currently being debated in Congress is recognized and called by many as a prescription for disaster--disaster as it relates to ensuring quality and affordable health care and disaster as to the impact it would have on our economy. Governors across the country, Republicans and Democrats, are fearful it would only add additional costs to an already unsustainable system. The Mayo Clinic says this bill misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, they CBO last week stated that it would worsen our economic outlook by increasing deficits and driving our Nation more deeply into debt. There are many reasons to be skeptical of this plan: the job loss, the additional debt, the government intrusion between you and your Some continue to say, It's better than nothing. When you are sick or your son or daughter is sick, you don't want the doctor just to do (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, 15 years ago Frank Luntz wrote the speeches for Newt Gingrich to come out here and scare the American people about the Clinton health reform. They succeeded 15 years ago. What have the people gotten since then? Nothing. The number of people have gone up and up and up and up who do not have health insurance. So here they are all arrayed out here again today one at a time. Folks, they are here to scare you again. Mr. Speaker, the people are smarter In the election of 2008, they elected a President who said he would bring health care reform to this country, and they gave the Democrats an overwhelming majority because they are tired of the fear machine. Now I know you all have your talking points. Frank Luntz pulled them out of the drawer, shined them up for 2008 and said, Hey, boys, here's the speech that worked in 1994. Use it again. It won't work, Mr. Speaker. The people want health care reform, and we're going to give it (Mr. CARTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, the lady on television said, ``Where's the beef?'' The American people are now saying, ``Where's the jobs?'' One of the things that the President promised was jobs for this country. The Speaker said, It's about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, but the national unemployment is 9.5 percent, and in the Midwest it's in double digits. Yes, the Democrats have given us some jobs. They've given us this cap-and-tax bill which is going to stick a tax collector in everybody's pocket, destroy small businesses, and destroy jobs in the country. They've given us 33 czars at $170,000 a year to reward their cronies who helped them get elected up here by creating new jobs in Washington Last night the Energy and Commerce Committee voted to put a bureaucrat between a doctor and his patient to tell him how he's going to treat that sick person. That's a new job they want to create. They've got this idea that if they throw enough money to ACORN, they're going to create jobs for ACORN--if they can keep the indictments away (Mr. PERLMUTTER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friends wanting to talk about jobs. They have the arguments that they want to pursue, but they don't want to let the facts get in the way of their argument. Let's start with the report we received today from the Federal Reserve. We know that jobs fell off a cliff last fall and earlier this year as part of the Bush administration's efforts for jobs. Private nonfarm employment fell by 670,000 jobs on average per the month from January to April, but declines slowed to 312,000 in May and 415,000 in June. The May and June declines in construction jobs were the smallest since Job declines and temporary employment applications slowed noticeably, and employment in nonbusiness services turned up in May and increased further in June. That's why we have the stock market going up. That's why consumer confidence is going up is because this is working, even if (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this ain't a talking point. Last night I talked to one of my constituents. This man is an unemployed truck driver. His statement to me was a very clear one: Where are the jobs? He said, You guys back there in Washington have put together a so- called stimulus bill that cost me--he's still a taxpayer--$1 trillion, and now you plan to take over the entire health care system in this country? He said, It would be devastating. I am looking for a job as a truck driver again, and with what you've done on cap-and-trade, it's The message is loud and clear. It's not coming from anyone putting together talking points, Mr. Speaker. It's coming from the American people to Democrats and Republicans alike in this Congress. Where are (Mr. MINNICK asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. MINNICK. Mr. Speaker, today Congress will consider a law requiring us to do what every other American taxpayer must do with its family finances, something very simple and very basic, pay for what we Ten years ago, thinking somehow it didn't need outside fiscal discipline, Congress abandoned this commonsense approach, wasted our budget surpluses, and went on a spending frenzy, doubling our national the largest budget deficit in our Nation's history. Our government cannot continue to borrow and spend, create ever- higher levels of debt, and pass along the costs of paying for it to our children and grandchildren. We are now relying on trillions of dollars of money borrowed from China and Middle Eastern oil states to pay our It's time we grow up, act like responsible adults and return to fiscal sanity. With this measure, any new spending we pass must be deficit-neutral. This is the long overdue essential first step towards a return to fiscal responsibility that will assure our creditors and demonstrate to the American public that we deserve to govern. I salute my Blue Dog colleagues for their persistence on bringing this critical issue to a vote. I urge my colleagues to support this (Mr. McCARTHY of California asked and was given permission to address Mr. McCARTHY of California. Mr. Speaker, this morning I opened up my hometown paper, The Bakersfield Californian. On the front page of the local section there is an article, Kern County's unemployment rate for the month of June increased to 14.7 percent. If that's a talking point, it's coming directly from the paper. One year ago the unemployment rate The American people know that if Americans are not working, America is not working. My constituents ask me, Is this Obama economy going to improve? They continue to ask me, If you take more from what people earn, for the energy tax every time you turn on a light, when you go to health care, taxing, are you taking away the choice? But I tell them there is a chance for a better way. There is a better way to work together to focus on small business. Small business creates 70 percent of every job in America. We can do better by working CONGRATULATING THE FRIENDSHIP MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH IN ROSWELL, NEW (Mr. TEAGUE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in Roswell, New Mexico. This year the church will be celebrating 47 years of service to the Roswell community. The Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been dedicated to the faith and well-being of the people of Roswell for nearly a half a century. I would like to especially honor the current serving pastor, Rev. Michael K. Shelton, and the church's former pastor, the Rev. O.C. King, and his wife for 28 years of faithful leadership to the church and the Churches like Friendship Baptist achieve such great distinction because of the hard work, dedication, and compassion of their congregation. The leaders of the church and their staff are also to be Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been and will remain a place for fellowship and a source of hope for the people of southern New Mexico. I am honored to have churches like Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in my district, and I commend them on their years of FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD ENROLL IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH CARE (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, would a government takeover of health care create jobs? The answer is clearly no. We should be focused on job one right now, which is find the jobs. But, Mr. Speaker, if the Energy and Commerce Committee had continued to work today, I would have introduced an amendment to require all Federal elected officials, including the President and Vice President, to set aside our health care benefits and enroll in their new idea of a government-run health care system. If the majority is really so confident that their plan will provide the very best health care to the people we represent, we ought to demonstrate that confidence by enrolling ourselves. I, for one, don't believe the government-run health care plan will be the best for the people we represent, but a government competitor will soon be the only A government competitor, Mr. Speaker, would be like an elephant in a room full of mice. The fast mice can get out of the room as quick as they can. The slow mice get crushed, and only the elephant is left. It is time we put our health care where we want the American health care to be, Mr. Speaker, but it's also time we find the jobs. THE BENEFITS OF HEALTH CARE REFORM FOR ALL AMERICANS (Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we really are on the verge of finalizing groundbreaking health care reform legislation that will benefit healthier generations to come and the 250 million of us who have health care but who are tired of skyrocketing Did your salary go up 114 percent this last decade? It sure didn't, but that's what happened with premiums and deductibles. This is about real reform, not for insurance companies and their bean counters, but I want to emphasize today the importance of including a robust public plan option, relying on the Medicare provider network in the final reform bill. Providing Americans with a real choice in doctors and insurance plans puts Americans back in charge of their health care, not insurance companies, but real people and patients. I would say that for those who believe in the free market, why are you afraid of a public plan? Why are you afraid of something that Mr. Speaker, I think it's time for us to do health care reform to lower costs, to make it affordable, and to benefit those of us who have health care to lower our deductibles and our premiums. (Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the unemployment rate is in double digits around this country. Some States have the highest unemployment rate in history. The economy is bleeding jobs because the trillion- Jobs, jobs, jobs, that's all we heard from the taxacrats as they jammed that bill through Congress. They didn't give anybody a chance to read it. They sure didn't want Members of Congress to read it. The American people didn't get to read it, and they have to suffer the But the stimulus bill did help one city, however. Washington, D.C., has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. Now, how can that be? Well, the stimulus bill stimulated government programs funded at taxpayer expense. These aren't real jobs. Government doesn't create anything. All they do is suck money out of a private economy that could The bureaucrats created more jobs for red tape regulating bureaucrats and forced citizens to subsidize it. All the trillion-dollar stimulus bill did was spend taxpayer money to create more government regulations, more government control, and more government bureaucrats. (Mr. HALL of New York asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to dispel the myth that health care reform will suddenly move the burden of paying for the uninsured onto the rest of us. All Americans are already paying the high costs of a broken health care system with 47 million Americans The cost of caring for the uninsured gets passed on to all of us. The average American family is currently paying more than $1,000 every year to support the uninsured. This $1,000 fee is buried deep in every premium and pays for the broken health care system. Health care costs are soaring out of control. Premiums have doubled in 9 years, growing three times faster than wages. These staggering prices are too high for American families. Members of Congress must come together to address the problem for the health of middle class Americans and the health of their wallets. The cost of inaction is just (Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, Democrats have painted a target on the backs of America's small businesses. As unemployment rises, 2.6 million jobs have been lost since January. Democrats First there was cap-and-tax, which will skyrocket electric bills, gas prices and food prices, and make American businesses less competitive. Now they have a government-run health care full of tax hikes and mandates on small businesses, which the NFIB estimates will cost 1.6 Small businesses create the majority of jobs in this country. They are doing the best they can in this tough economy, but all they hear from Democrats is pay higher taxes. Democrats should stop feeding Big Government and start providing relief to small businesses. Where are the jobs? We need health care reforms that help more Americans regardless of their preexisting conditions, help small businesses provide insurance for their employees, and keep in place an In conclusion, God bless our troops and we will never forget September the 11th in the global war on terrorism. (Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. You've heard the commercial: Don't support So the question that you need to ask yourself then is, Do I feel lucky? Do I feel lucky that I won't be one of the 14,000 people a day who lose their jobs and can't afford health insurance, that I won't have such a high deductible that I avoid preventive care and end up with end-stage cancer because I didn't go to the doctor. Well, am I Do I feel lucky that Junior won't break a bone and I end up in the emergency room with a $5,000 bill? Do I feel lucky that I won't go bankrupt from my health care problems? Do I feel lucky that I won't have some preexisting condition that prevents me from getting a new job? Do I feel lucky that my health care premium won't grow three times The American economy is in the intensive care unit. The disease is the high cost of health care, and the medicine is health care reform. (Mr. PAULSEN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Speaker, last week my home State of Minnesota saw the unemployment rate rise once again, while seeing its exports drop by The number one priority of this Congress and this administration should be job creation. But it's clear that the economic stimulus policies being pursued in Washington are failing. Congress has missed important opportunities to pursue real policies that will put Instead, we've seen reckless spending and reckless borrowing at unprecedented rates, so much so that the fact now is that every man, woman and child in our country owes over $37,000 as their share of the Mr. Speaker, we should be reforming health care without throwing even more new taxes on the backs of families and small businesses, and we should be giving priority to helping small businesses, our number one job creators, to put Minnesotans and Americans back to work. APOLLO MOON LANDING IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ST. LOUIS PRIDE (Mr. CARNAHAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Science and Technology Committee, I rise today to remember the 40th anniversary of the Apollo Moon landing and the deep sense of pride it gave our Nation. I, like all Americans, watched with amazement as Neil Armstrong declared: ``That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.'' That moment demonstrates the magnitude of American know-how, ingenuity, innovation and our ability to rise to a great challenge. My home city of St. Louis, Missouri, was instrumental in the success of that Moon mission, serving as home to then-McDonnell Douglas, which manufactured components for the third-stage booster rocket for Saturn V. That third-stage booster rocket launched those brave astronauts into lunar orbit, making the historic journey possible. Now it's time to lead the world once again in innovation and science technology, especially as we transition to a new clean energy economy. Americans are ready to be called to action for a great challenge again. (Mrs. MILLER of Michigan asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, when the economic stimulus plan was passed earlier this year, the American people were told that we had to act immediately because of our economic crisis. We were also told that that plan would create or save 3 million jobs and that the unemployment rate would not rise above 8 percent, and that we had to act so fast that actually not one Member of this House or the American Well, the economy hasn't gained 3 million jobs. It's actually lost 3 Unemployment is almost 10 percent. In my home State of Michigan, it is 15.2 percent today, and $787 billion has been added to our national debt and we have an annual deficit approaching $2 trillion. Mr. Speaker, now we're being told that we need to pass health care reform immediately because we're in a crisis. We're told that it will be deficit neutral because it includes massive new taxes on individuals and small businesses. But CBO says that it will actually increase the deficit, Mr. Speaker, while others say that it will force millions of We do need to reform our health care system, but doing it in such a (Mr. REICHERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Speaker, our economy is struggling, and unemployment is near 10 percent. Yet the health care proposal being considered in Congress asks our job creators, the small businesses of America across this country, to pay a new 8 percent tax. Last week, in the Ways and Means Committee, I proposed to exempt small businesses from this penalty tax if it would result in businesses having to lay off workers, cut wages, or reduce jobs. America's businesses are hurting, and we're asking them to pay more taxes? Yet, my amendment was rejected. Requiring small businesses to pay a penalty tax is no way to help them stay in business and create jobs. American workers will be harmed. Workers will bear the new cost I urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Americans need the confidence that their jobs are not in jeopardy, that we are working to protect and strengthen their health care, while supporting the small And these aren't speaking points. That's just some straight shooting (Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, President Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, reflected on the administration's lack of focus on the economy earlier this year when he said that our Nation's financial crisis presented an opportunity to accomplish agendas A good example of that was the so-called stimulus bill that had nothing to do with helping to save or create jobs in the private sector, but everything to do with expanding government programs and The Obama administration and the Congress should be focused on one issue and only one issue, and that is stabilizing our Nation's economy so that Americans can keep the jobs they have and get back the jobs they lost. Only when the economy is stabilized should we be debating other issues such as energy policy and health care reform. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting, and it's time that our President and the Democrats in Congress stop ignoring their pain and (Mr. LEE of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. LEE of New York. It amazes me how out of touch we are in Washington. For months now, my constituents in western New York have Well, according to this chart of job postings, we found out where they are: right here in Washington, D.C., as we continue to hire thousands of Federal bureaucrats. It's one of the only cities that's It's appalling that we're continuing to grow the Federal Government When I ran a business, you always had a budget, and you lived within When you look around D.C., you see construction cranes all around the skyline. It's because we can't construct enough buildings to house all these Federal bureaucrats that we're now hiring when we have this We have to stop this excessive spending and work together to create (Ms. SPEIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, the enemies of health reform have scoured all of Canada to find a story that fits with their message of ``no But I only have to look to my district, to Sharon Almeida from San Bruno, who sent me this letter titled, ``What's Wrong With This Each month Sharon and her husband, Frank, net $3,811 from Social Security and pensions. But they pay out nearly $2,800 for Sharon's cancer treatments. That leaves them just $1,000 for food, utilities, gas, insurance, never mind a little something for the grandchildren. Thank God they own their own home and no longer have a mortgage. Mr. Speaker, Sharon and Frank worked hard. They played by the rules and raised a beautiful and supportive family. They do not deserve this. So, to the critics of reform, I say, let the Canadians worry about the Canadians. It's time we come together to provide real health care reform for Sharon and other hardworking Americans. (Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, trouble, oh, we got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and it rhymes with B and that stands for Broke. Right here in Capital City, right here, we've gotta figure out a way to help the Americans we're about to You've got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and that rhymes with D and that stands for debt. Right here in Capital City we've got trouble. Remember the millions, the billions, the trillions. And don't you forget, we've got trouble. We're in terrible, terrible trouble. The game of some 256 Members is a devil's bet. Oh, yes, we've got trouble, trouble. Trouble with a T. It rhymes with D, and it stands (Mr. BROWN of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, it's time for commonsense health care reform that will strengthen free enterprise, lower cost and Unfortunately, at a cost of $1.28 trillion, Democrats wish to create a new government program that will unwillingly force more than 100 million people out of their current coverage, increase taxes by $818 According to CBO, this legislation would also increase the Federal deficit by $239 billion over 10 years and, as a result, would ration care, force doctors out of the profession and hospitals out of business, and ultimately provide fewer options and longer waits for Locally, new health mandates in South Carolina, a State already in financial crisis, would create more unbudgeted costs and reduce funding Spending so much and accomplishing so little, a government takeover of health care is the wrong direction for all Americans. Republicans have a better plan that expands access to affordable health care and allows families to choose the plan that best fits their needs. (Mr. CULBERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, Continental Airlines, one of the largest employers in Houston, has just laid off 1,700 people. And my friend, Mr. Chris Lee of New York, has put together an inspired chart that shows clearly what this liberal leadership of this House and this Congress are doing with our hard-earned tax dollars. They're redistributing the wealth to Washington, D.C., they're creating jobs in the government and Washington and out in Nancy Pelosi land, out in San Francisco and in State capitals across the Nation. But we fiscal conservatives understand, it's common sense: to create jobs, you cut taxes; you get lawyers and bureaucrats and regulators off the backs and out of the pockets of small business people. We need to cut taxes to create jobs. Do so immediately. We need to cut spending at the Federal level to reduce the level of debt that our children and The Inspector General for the Treasury has just reported that these irresponsible bailouts that this liberal majority has passed could cost taxpayers up to $23.7 trillion on top of the $60 trillion in unfunded liability that we have already passed on to our kids. It's time to cut taxes and create jobs and get the government off our PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SUPPORT FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM IS WANING (Mr. FLEMING asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, the more details Americans learn about the government takeover of health care proposed by the President and the liberal leadership of Congress, the less support there is for this A Washington Post-ABC poll shows more than half of this country is opposed to this plan. Yes, support for this crazy deep dive into The nonpartisan CBO says this plan won't reduce the cost as the President suggested; it will accelerate it. And we know that will kill This liberal Congress rammed the stimulus and cap-and-trade, which nobody could read before voting, down the throats of the American people. But they are now fed up and on to their strategy. We don't want DMV, Department of Motor Vehicles, style medicine with long waiting lines, delayed care and skyrocketing cancer death rates as in Canada and the UK. We don't want a system that will bankrupt this country and ignore the elderly, and we sure don't want our tax money Simply put, we want commonsense health care reform, not nonsense (Mr. BUCHANAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, at the start of this year, the focus has I was chairman of the Florida Chamber 4 years ago. We represented 137,000 businesses, and 99 percent of those businesses were small business. They create 75 percent of the jobs. Yet, today, we are going to tax health care. It's not a tax on profit. It's a tax on payroll. If you've got a $1 million payroll making no money, and if you're paying another $80,000 a year you don't have, you're going to put people out The other thing they want to put together is a surtax of 5.4 percent on businesses. They want to get to the millionaires. Do you know who those folks are? They're small business people. You wouldn't know that if you've never been in business. That's the majority of them. So you're going to tax the 8 percent. You're going to add another 5.4 percent. You're going to kill millions of businesses, and you're going to kill millions and millions of more jobs. We need to get focused back on the economy and on jobs in America today, right now. (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker and Members, I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee and on the Health Subcommittee. We were in session last night until 12:30, working on this bill. It was beginning to be a bipartisan bill. We accepted Republican amendments; we accepted Democratic amendments, but we have a long way to go. Let me Forty-three to fifty million people in our country are without health care. They get their health care through the emergency rooms. Do you know who pays for that? Those of us who have insurance, who are fortunate enough to have employer-based insurance, whether you're a Federal employee, a State employee, a city employee or whether you work for some of the large industries. We have insurance, but 43 to 50 million people don't. Our country's employers and employees spend more per capita than anywhere in the world for some of the worst results for We are going to debate a bill in a few minutes by my colleague from California, Joe Baca, on the increase in diabetes in the Hispanic community. Diabetes can be dealt with early on. Our health care system decides to deal with people after they're so ill that it's more expensive. We need health care reform in our country for cost containment but also to make sure that every American doesn't have to get their health care through the emergency rooms. (Mr. MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, Americans all over this country are asking: Where are the jobs? We've been promised jobs over and over by the Obama administration and by the majority in this Congress, but When the President took office, 11.5 million people were unemployed. Six months later, that number now stands at 14.5 million Americans who are unemployed and who are looking for work. Where are the jobs? In February, when the majority rammed through a $1 trillion stimulus bill with zero input from my Republican colleagues, Americans were promised that unemployment would remain at 8 percent. Five months later, unemployment is at 9.6 percent and is climbing. In my home State of Florida, that number is 10.6 percent, the highest it has been in The stimulus bill is not working, and despite what Vice President Biden says, we can't borrow and spend our way out of this recession. Instead of spending trillions of dollars on failed programs and on misled policies, we need to focus on lowering taxes on small businesses (Mr. WAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, the world is looking to us for innovation. That's the goose that lays the golden egg in our country--our free enterprise system, entrepreneurship. They are looking and are saying, American innovation can pull this economy back in a good direction, not regulation. Other governments are moving away from regulation and high taxation. We're moving towards it. It's innovation, not regulation. Look at the new cap-and-trade legislation for energy and the environment. It's a regulatory scheme. It's a taxation scheme, not an innovation scheme. Where is nuclear power? Where are the new energy can lead to a robust, manufacturing-driven, job-creating U.S. economy? Look at the new health care scheme. It's a regulatory scheme, a taxation scheme and, frankly, a litigation scheme. It's protecting the status quo in litigation. The greatest medical centers in America are saying this government insurance scheme is the wrong approach. We need less litigation. We need to unleash the entrepreneurship and the innovation of the United States again so that we can lead. Where are the jobs? They're in innovation and in entrepreneurship. They're in our free enterprise system. The government chokes it with (Mr. REHBERG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Speaker, 5 months after this House passed the so- called ``stimulus'' that shattered spending records, the economy struggles, and unemployment is approaching 10 percent. It's important to remember that Republicans had a different plan for economic recovery. While we didn't have enough votes to pass it, our solution relied on American ingenuity and small business, not on stimulating bigger government by creating government jobs. Our plan would have produced immediate results by putting tax dollars right back in the pockets of American taxpayers and of job creators. Recently, it was reported that someone in the White House sees the need for another stimulus. Instead of doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result, perhaps it's time to give Republican alternatives a serious look. It's not too late to pass a real stimulus (Mr. CHAFFETZ asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise with deep concern about the families of the United States of America. The economics of this credit card Congress are not working. Where are the jobs? We cannot tax and spend our way out of our challenges. I firmly believe that President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress are taxing, spending and borrowing too much money. This credit card Congress has now put us nearly $12 trillion in debt. We are spending nearly $600 million per day just in interest on that debt. Bailouts and stimulus money by the billions of dollars are not helping the average person at home, and now we have a proposal to slam through a government-run, Chinese-financed health care system that puts a Washington, D.C., politician between our doctor and my wife. The tax-and-spend, credit-card-driven, Chinese-financed economics driven by the Democrats doesn't work. We need fiscal discipline, limited government, accountability, and a strong national defense. We need to restore liberty for the American people and for small businessmen and -women. That's where you'll find the jobs. Stand up, America. Let your voice be heard. Put a stop to this credit (Mr. GINGREY of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, one of the American people's biggest fears about the Democratic health care reform plan is the prospect of having some government bureaucrat stand between them and the doctors they trust. I've heard this message time and time again in townhall meetings, in letters and in phone calls from patients The House Democratic leadership has promised the American people that their fears about the bureaucrat-rationed care they will receive are unfounded, even while drafting a 1,000-page bill that creates this Comparative Effectiveness Council to decide which treatments will be Late yesterday evening, I gave my colleagues a chance on the Energy and Commerce Committee to put their money where their mouths were by offering an amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would simply bar Federal political appointees and bureaucrats from An easy vote, Mr. Speaker. Who do you want making your health care decisions--your doctor or a government bureaucrat? However, every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against this amendment. It's time for Congress to focus on strengthening the doctor-patient relationship and not the bureaucratic-patient relationship. (Mr. BONNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BONNER. Mr. Speaker, the people in South Alabama and, really, all across our country want to know: Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs that were promised by the administration and by the Democratic Without a single Republican vote, a $787 billion stimulus bill was forced on the backs of the taxpayers of our country with one simple promise: that it would keep unemployment below 8 percent and that it would create some 3.5 million jobs over the next 2 years. Where are those jobs? Instead of creating new jobs, almost 2.5 million jobs have been lost just since the stimulus bill has been passed. Nationally, the unemployment rate is 9.5 percent, inching up closer and closer to double digits. In five of the six counties that I represent in South Alabama, that unemployment rate is already at Mr. Speaker, there is a serious lack of credibility in our Nation's capital. Don't take my word for it. Just listen to the American people. SUMMERS RELYING ON GOOGLE SEARCHES TO GAUGE RECESSION (Mr. WESTMORELAND asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, when this administration took over on January 20, the unemployment was at about 7.2 percent, and they made a promise that this new stimulus of $787 billion would create or would save 600,000 jobs. Since that point, we've lost 2 million jobs. Where The President's top economic adviser pictured here, Mr. Larry Summers, has made us all feel better in this country by telling us: Of all the statistics pouring into the White House every day, top economic adviser Larry Summers highlighted one Friday to make his case that the economic free-fall has ended. The number of people searching for the term ``economic depression'' on Google is down to normal levels, Summers said. Searches for the term were up fourfold when the recession deepened in the earlier part of the year, and the recent shift goes to show consumer confidence is higher, Summers told Peterson Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I'm telling you that somebody in (Mr. AUSTRIA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. AUSTRIA. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting. Millions of Americans are out of work, and hundreds of thousands continue to lose their jobs each month. In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate reached 11.1 percent in June, the highest it has been in decades. According to the Columbus Dispatch, this adds up to an additional 33,000 jobs in Ohio that have been lost during the month of June, which is up from 8.8 percent in January 2009. The Dispatch article goes on to state that, over the course of the past year, 279,000 Ohioans have lost their jobs, including small businesses, At the end of the day, I trust the American people and our small businesses, the taxpayers, to spend and to invest their own money as they see fit. That is what will get America back to work. Unfortunately, the other side of the aisle's economic policies have this backwards. The government continues to take Americans' tax dollars and to spend those dollars as they see fit. Not only is that inefficient and wasteful; it's just flat out wrong. Where are the jobs? It's time to get Ohio and Americans back to work now. (Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask a simple question: Where are the jobs? My constituents, along with those across Ohio and In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate has risen to 11.1 percent. We have the seventh-highest rate in the Nation. Every single county in my district is equal to or is higher than the national average, and Pike and Scioto Counties are actually above 15 percent, but that number is rather deceiving. Another large percentage of our population has either given up looking for work right now or has taken People in Ohio and in my district are hurting. We need jobs and we need them now. Only $6 million of the Department of Transportation Recovery Act dollars have been spent so far in Ohio. The Recovery and Reinvestment Act was supposed to provide immediate stimulus to create new jobs. Where are those jobs? People are hurting. Five months later, (Mr. ROE of Tennessee asked and was given permission to address the Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, with the national unemployment rate nearing 10 percent and Tennessee's own unemployment rate at over 11 percent, people are outraged that not more is happening in Washington to help them find work. So far, this Congress has provided those who find themselves out of work extended benefits, but it insisted on taxing those benefits. Worse, the majority has not done enough to stimulate the economy and to produce jobs, the best benefit Despite all of the promises of a green job revolution and the millions of jobs that would be saved or created because of the economic stimulus package, the number of jobs since President Obama took office Republicans have called for an immediate end to the tax on unemployment benefits, which would surely help those who have been hurt by this recession. We have also called for tax relief for small businesses who can use that money to create jobs. These measures can American small businesses are the most innovative in the world and will pull us out of this recession if we allow them, but Democrats seem determined to prevent any recovery from occurring. In the past month, they moved to bludgeon our economy with a national energy tax and tax on small business to finance massive new health care entitlements. (Mr. SESSIONS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, over 6 months ago, my Democrat colleagues and the Obama administration told the American people that if we passed the $1.2 trillion stimulus package, it would create jobs, halt the growing unemployment rate, and turn our economy around; yet here we are today with a 9.5 percent unemployment rate--the highest in 26 years-- and a record $1.1 trillion deficit that is growing and expected to be And yet this administration and Democrats want to push through another $1.2 trillion health care package, a health care package that, according to the President's own economic adviser, will result in 4.7 Just a few weeks ago when talking about the stimulus package, Vice President Biden said for the Obama administration, Well, we just Mr. Speaker, I don't think that the American people can really afford for this Congress or this administration to guess wrong again. We need to make sure that we find the jobs in this country, not tax and spend. (Mr. ROSKAM asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, listen. Listen with me and see if we can hear the sounds of jobs. Shhh, shhh, shhh, shhh. You gotta listen real The administration told us in this House months ago that if the American people stood in favor of the stimulus package that unemployment would peak at 8 percent, and yet here in Illinois, the State that I represent, we've now eclipsed 10 percent. We were told that the cost curve would be broken if only we would follow the administration's health care plan and it would be the salvation of small business, and yet the Congressional Budget Office came into the Ways and Means Committee last week, Mr. Speaker, and said The question that has to be asked and has to be answered is one that we've heard no answer today from the other side: Where are the jobs? There are no jobs. This is an administration that has pumped sunshine for months and has failed to follow through, and we ought not follow We know what we need to do, and that is stand for small business and (Mr. HERGER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, rising health care costs are a serious problem, but the Democrat bill being advanced in the House proposes $1.2 trillion in additional spending on health care coupled with massive tax increases that would hurt small business and middle class The Democrat new 8 percent payroll tax will force employers to cut millions more jobs in the middle of the worst recession in decades while their surtax would push my State of California's top income tax rate to over 56 percent, higher than even that of France's. And those tax hikes won't even cover the full costs of this bill. Mr. Speaker, we need real reform that brings down health care costs instead of pouring more money into a broken system. HEALTH CARE PLAN SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR EVERYBODY (Mr. TIAHRT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, on Friday I offered an amendment in the Appropriations Committee that failed because every Democrat voted against it. The amendment simply stated that Members of Congress and the administration should live by the laws they impose on the American Specifically, if you vote for a government-run health insurance plan, you should get a government-run health insurance plan. If it's good enough to impose health care rationing on the American people, it's certainly good enough for you. Because it's hypocritical to vote for a government-run rationed health care plan that will be forced on everyone else while retaining a private insurance plan for yourself. If Members don't believe they should have to live under the rationed health care plan that they're pushing, they should explain why. Kansans are upset by the possibility that they're forced on a rationed public health care plan by this Congress. They believe if it's not good enough for the people who vote for it, it's not good enough for them. Mr. Speaker, it's time for us to reform health care by addressing defensive medicine costs, by offering market-based principles for health care, and by keeping patients and doctors in control, not (Mr. COLE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Well, they certainly aren't in the Democrats' job-killing health care plan. At a time when America is suffering the worst recession in a generation, it's utterly irresponsible to propose a government takeover of our health care system and destroy millions of private sector jobs in the process. Since the Democrats passed their stimulus package, more than 2 million American jobs have been lost, and the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, Dr. Christina Romer, has suggested that the tax hikes on businesses that will be required to pay for the Democratic health care plan will result in the loss of an additional In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Democratic proposal will force drastic cuts in Medicare Advantage, causing millions of seniors to lose their coverage for prescription medicine, the cost of private health care will skyrocket, and the Lewin Group has estimated that nearly 114 million Americans will be forced out of their current private health care coverage and into government-run health care plans. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats' job-killing health care proposal is the wrong prescription. It will cost millions of jobs. Americans need a AMERICANS WANT TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR THEM, NOT AGAINST THEM (Mr. LATTA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, the people of the Fifth Congressional District of the State of Ohio of the United States all want a job. Last year at this time, the Fifth Congressional District, according to the National Manufacturers Association, had the ninth largest number of manufacturing jobs in the country. When the new numbers just came out, When you look at this map of the State of Ohio, looking at Williams, Fulton, Defiance, Paulding, Crawford, and Huron--those are some of my counties--when I've got counties over 15 percent, folks back home want What this Congress passed before we went on the Fourth of July recess was the national energy tax, the largest tax that we're going to see that puts businesses out, that puts people out of work, and that's what People want to know what we're going to do for them, not what we're doing to them. And I'm telling you that folks back home, when I go home every weekend, want to know what are we doing. When you look at the State of Indiana right here, right next to us, they're in as big When the Heritage Foundation came out with their report, of the top 20 congressional districts in the country that had problems under cap- and-tax, Ohio and Indiana ranked right in the top, 16 out of 20. We've got to do something. We've got to act right now. (Mr. McCOTTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They are not in Michigan, my home State, where we have a 15.2 percent unemployment rate. And what could we expect, especially when this was one of the driving forces behind the trillion dollar stimulus package. One could We then saw a national cap-and-tax energy tax did not create jobs, did not help, and now we're on the verge of a radical socialization of America's health care network. And what do we hear from the other side? And do you know why? Because while our health care system needs reform, it is not broken. The one thing that's broken is this Congress. And if this Congress keeps spending people's money and engaging in radical change to our cherished way of life, every single family budget (Mr. LANCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, there is a great debate here in Congress about how we go about reforming health care in the United States. I've tried to work in a bipartisan capacity with the majority, but the Democratic leadership's health care reform plan is a governmental takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and, ultimately, less health care coverage for New Jerseyans. Most disappointing to me is the fact that the Democratic health plan would increase, not reduce, our Nation's burgeoning long-term health costs, a step in the wrong direction. And according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, instead of saving the Federal Government from fiscal catastrophe, the Democratic health care proposal would already worsen the situation that is out of control, an $11 trillion Democrats should put aside their $1.5 trillion health care plan and take a hard look at the affordable and effective Medical Rights and Reform Act put forth by the Republican Tuesday Group. Together, we can find real solutions to make health care affordable. (Mr. ALEXANDER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, several of my colleagues have come to this mike today and said, Where are the jobs? Well, if we pass this government-run health plan with compulsory insurance, it's going to create some jobs. It's going to take a government police force that you won't believe. We're going to have Barney Fifes running all over this Nation forcing people to do things they don't want to do. And how do we pay for it? Well, that's simple. We just go to the small businesses that can't afford to buy insurance for their employees as it is and we increase by 8 percent their payroll taxes. We are going to break the backs of small businesses that are the backbone of this (Mrs. BACHMANN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) As a Senator, President Obama supported the $700 billion bailout Nation strategy that today we're learning will cost the American people President Obama pushed the trillion dollar stimulus that cost our President Obama took over GM and Chrysler, and he gave pink slips to 3,400 car dealerships that cost 150,000 jobs. No jobs. President Obama's national energy tax will double our electricity bills in Minnesota and will cost 2.5 million job losses every year. Now President Obama's economic adviser tells us that the government takeover of our private health care insurance will cost us 5 million This may be called the China-India stimulus plan, but the President Mr. Speaker, let's have real change so the American people can have (Mr. AKIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. AKIN. Americans love records. How fast can you go? How high can you go? How deep can you go? We love to set records. Why, the Democrats just set a fantastic record of the biggest tax increase in the history of our country. And was it clever? It was really clever. All you have to do is flip a light switch to pay a tax. And spending. Oh, we've done a great job of spending it. As a result of taxing and spending, more records. Why, in the last 6 months, we have lost more jobs than any 6- month period since World War II. There's a record for you. Here's another record. We have, in the last 6 months, used up more jobs and lost jobs than we created over the Bush years over the previous 9 years. That's the only time that's happened since the Great And here's another record, too: That is, the jobs that we've lost have been longer than any time since we've been measuring unemployment I wish we didn't set quite so many records. We don't need the (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to address Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Americans have lost millions of jobs in the last 6 months. The unemployment rate today is approaching 10 percent nationwide. And amid all of this, Democrats are proposing a government takeover of health care that would increase taxes, eliminate choices, cut Medicare, force Americans out of their current plans and place billion-dollar job- killing fines and mandates on small businesses, the job creators. Studies estimate that nearly 5 million jobs will be lost as a result of taxes on small business under this Democrat plan. There is a better solution, Mr. Speaker. Rather than penalizing struggling small businesses, Congress must make it easier for them to afford health benefits. We must increase choices, make health costs deductible, expand health savings accounts, end waste, fraud and abuse and control unnecessary lawsuits that drive up costs for everyone. I support reform, Mr. Speaker, that lets Americans keep their doctors, lowers costs and keeps medical decisions between the patient (Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this year, the administration and Speaker Pelosi had this House pass a 1,500-page stimulus bill which no one in either body was able to read before they passed it that spent $800 billion which we did not have, all because they promised that it would create new jobs. In fact, they said it would actually either create or save 2 to 3 million new jobs. Their economic policy adviser at the White House said it would mean an immediate start of creating new jobs and eliminating losing jobs. Even Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was on the floor saying this would be an immediate jolt to the economy, the immediate creation of jobs. Well, it is 5 or 6 months later, and where are we? I just heard from Chairman Bernanke. He says he can't assess where we are right now. But if you look at the numbers, if you look at the chart that I have here, the Democrat projection with stimulus had we done something was here. What actually happened, we have seen as far as jobs, more job losses, more job losses, more job losses, February, March, April, May and June, more job losses. We have lost several million jobs since the stimulus The administration misread the American economy. The administration misread the American public. The American public knows that we need to We spend too much, we borrow too much and we tax too much. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. WITTMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, just a few minutes ago, I finished a lunch with a gentleman who is a business owner in Virginia. And we had a discussion about what are the things that we need to be doing to help As I travel across the First District, the thing I hear time and time again is where are the jobs? What are we doing to help this economy? What are we doing to help small businesses? Folks, that is where this economy is going to be picked up, from the efforts to make sure we help our small businesses. That is what this Congress needs to be focusing on each and every day. When we come here, our focus ought to be what are we doing to help small business? What we doing to create jobs? Obviously, what is happening right now isn't working. People out there are anxious. They are concerned. They are frustrated. They are telling me, as well as the rest of the Congress, get to work, start creating jobs and start turning this economy around. (Mr. SCALISE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, Americans all across the country are asking, where are the jobs? When President Obama brought the stimulus plan before the American people, he said it needed to be rammed down their throats quickly. He didn't allow people even the opportunity to read it. Not one Member who voted for the bill even had the opportunity to read it. But he said, don't worry. Just trust me. It will create Well, now 6 months later, 2 million more Americans have lost their jobs since President Obama took the oath of office. And what's their answer? They're talking about another stimulus bill. In fact, just last week, Vice President Joe Biden said, We have to go spend money to keep The American people are starting to understand what's going on here with this Congress, the liberals that are running this place. They realize all they're doing is taxing and spending, and they're not creating jobs. They're running jobs off. The cap-and-trade energy tax would lose 3 million jobs to countries like China. And then they come back with this plan to have a government takeover of our health care system, a plan that would add another $800 billion of new taxes on the backs of American people and run off even more jobs. The American people know what's going on here. They want jobs, not (Mrs. CAPITO asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, for West Virginia's families, it's jobs, health care and the economy that matters the most to them. They've seen trillions of dollars spent, and they see Washington proposing to spend trillions more. They want to know where are the jobs with the stimulus? They want to know why the only apparent answer here in Washington is My constituents want their voices heard. Recently, I sent a survey out and received 3,500 responses on what do people want on health care. They want to keep the coverage that they have. More than two-thirds are troubled by the idea of a government-run health care. Three-fourths are shocked by the thought of yet another trillion-dollar program. And the vast majority think that this is not the time to be raising taxes. Unfortunately, the plan moving through the House right now fails to address all of these. It fails to control costs. It taxes small businesses. It threatens to force families into government-run health care. Simply put, this is not the health care reform my constituents and I are looking for. What they're looking for are jobs. (Mr. SMITH of Nebraska asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, we were told a $1 trillion stimulus package would create jobs immediately. But since then, nearly 2 million Americans have lost their jobs, and unemployment is at 9.5 percent, the highest in 26 years. Then the House passed cap-and-trade legislation which will cost our country 2.5 million jobs each year. Now we're rushing to take up the Democrats' health care bill, which As House Republicans offer plans and ideas to get our economy moving again, all we get in return is more of the same, spending and taxing, and it keeps yielding the very same results: Longer unemployment lines Mr. Speaker, we need new ideas and new approaches to deliver GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE IS NOT GOOD FOR AMERICA (Mr. TERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TERRY. The House health care bill is a government takeover of your health care and destructive to the economy. It provides perverse incentives to employers to dump their health care plan, forcing their employees into the government health exchange where they will choose the government-subsidized government plan. Oops, there goes the promise This costs you $1 trillion placed on the back of small businesses. After 10 years, the cost of this plan explodes, needing multi- trillions of dollars to continue to fund. More taxes, more debt. Oops, (Mr. CALVERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, around the country, more and more Americans are out of work, struggling to pay their bills. Yesterday, the Web site recovery.gov revealed that your government spent $1.2 million to purchase pork at twice what struggling families would pay at a local grocery store. It would be funny if it weren't so painful. The $787 billion stimulus was sold to the American people as a bill that would put people back to work. But now we see it for what it really is, a massive expansion of social welfare which is doing nothing Where are the jobs? Almost 6 months have passed since the stimulus was signed into law, and unemployment continues to tick upward. It is over 13 percent in my congressional district. The so-called ``stimulus'' was a missed opportunity to provide true tax relief to the American people and for shovel-ready infrastructure projects that would have provided jobs. As more information on this stimulus package is revealed, I'm sure more terrifying news will be before us. (Mr. BISHOP of Utah asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I want to introduce you to Mr. Pitchford. He is a young and exciting teacher who gets 12-, 13- and 14- year-olds to enjoy geography and history. But this September, he is not going to be back in the classroom because his district relies upon resource jobs and royalties and development to fund schools. And this administration, through the arbitrary and unilateral decisions of the Secretary of the Interior, has cut this funding. This is the administration that stopped new uranium development for 2 years, has postponed offshore drilling decisions, and has postponed oil shale development projects. And for Mr. Pitchford, has taken 77 oil and gas leases and suspended them because they don't think 7 years of study was If we do not develop the resources on our public lands, jobs are lost. If we don't have cheap forms of affordable energy, jobs are lost. And those jobs aren't simply a number. They are a face of a real person like Mr. Pitchford, who is no longer a teacher not because of his choice, but because of government decisions. And the collateral damage of these government decisions are the 13- and 14-year-olds in his classroom. Where are the jobs? They're not in Mr. Pitchford's (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, let me ask a question. I don't know if it has been asked yet today. The American people want to know, where are the jobs? We have a Congress that has gone off the tracks. A trillion- dollar stimulus package, that's thousand-dollar bills stacked 63 miles high. Did we get any jobs? No. We have a budget with a $1.2 trillion deficit built into it. Are we going to get jobs? No. We are going to We have a cap-and-tax bill that is going to kill American jobs by raising the cost of our traditional sources of energy, coal, nuclear and oil. We have a health care bill on the agenda before the Congress today that is going to kill jobs and raise the cost of health care to the American people rather than contain the cost and create more choice This Congress is out of control, and the American people want to (Mr. KENNEDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in favor of the health care bill this Congress is considering. It would cap out-of-pocket expenses. It would eliminate preexisting condition discrimination. It would give patients a choice between our own physician and a government plan. It would eliminate lifetime caps for health care. It would eliminate the ability for people to no longer have the choice of having to choose a job and not be able to leave that job because of health care discrimination, no more denial because of a preexisting condition, and mental health parity for all insurance plans, irrespective of mental Mr. Speaker, we need to have mental health screening annually covered, and that is what this bill does so that we treat it as a preventive item. For the 130 million Americans with mental health conditions, this will act as a preventive measure, saving us millions and millions of lives and dollars from suicide and the like. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I offered a bipartisan commission amendment to the stimulus bill when it came before the Appropriations Committee and it failed. Had that amendment passed, we could have helped create jobs, Now 6 months later, we have unemployment rates at a 26-year high, and some say it will go to 11 percent, and some even say 12 and 13 percent. We have piled another $787 billion on top of our children and our grandchildren. Social Security is in trouble. Medicare is in trouble. Medicaid is in trouble. Let's pass this bipartisan amendment so we can get control of the debt, get control of the deficit, create a (Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the health care proposals that are before us have been tried before. Public option was tried in my home State of Tennessee under a plan called TennCare. For more than 10 years, the legislature and three Governors tried to make it work. It has been less than successful. But what has happened is that a program that was supposed to have saved millions, tens of millions of dollars, has never saved one nickel. It also has restricted access. It has driven up the cost of private health insurance, and it has nearly Tennesseeans know that rushing to reform health care and doing that wrong is a very expensive process. We all know that costs and access of health care needs to be addressed. No one seriously believes that any of these plans before this House right now is going to do that. Tennesseeans know the cost of rushing and getting it wrong, and the American people are figuring it out because they have seen the majority rush a stimulus, an omnibus, a housingus and a porkulus that has left the American people saying, where are the jobs? And they do not want The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, in the midst of the worst recession in a generation, so what did President Obama and Speaker Pelosi do? Well, they propose a government takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and less health coverage. As a physician, I know that government-run health care will end quality care. In addition, since the recession began, 6 million jobs have been lost; yet the Democrats' health care plan includes hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes on small businesses, the job engine creation in this Nation, $800 billion in new taxes. According to the economic modeling by the President's own Chief Economic Advisers, the business tax hikes alone would destroy up to 4.7 million jobs, and amazingly, an independent analysis by the nonpartisan Lewin Group found that 114 million Americans would lose their personal, Mr. Speaker, the American people want real solutions to get our economy back on track, not another excuse to raise taxes on small businesses and working families. House Republicans have a plan for reform that expands access to affordable health care and saves jobs. (Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the facts show that Fact: the administration promised that it would create 3.5 million jobs. Instead, we have lost an additional 2 millions jobs. But not only is the administration and this Congress not succeeding in creating jobs; they're actually rushing to pass legislation that would even Look, the Pelosi cap-and-trade bill would cost Americans anywhere between 2 million and 3 million jobs a year in additional job losses. The health care proposal would cost Americans 4.7 million jobs lost and lead to $1.3 trillion in new spending and huge tax increases. Mr. Speaker, it's time to give relief to the job creators like the small businesses; and very respectfully I say, Mr. President, it's time to stop talking. Stop wasting taxpayers' money. Stop irresponsibly borrowing. Stop raising taxes. It's time to focus, focus on creating THE ADMINISTRATION IS HIDING OMINOUS NUMBERS FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC (Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. In case you missed it, there was an ominous report in yesterday's Washington Post that said the administration is delaying for several weeks the congressionally mandated report on economic growth, job creation, and budget deficits, a report that's due The administration said yesterday, We're not going to tell you what's in that report for several more weeks. Why? I will tell you why. They don't want to downplay the politically damaging deficit numbers, the unemployment numbers, and the economic growth, or lack of growth, Why? Because it's an attempt to hide this record-breaking deficit as the Democrat leaders break arms to rush through this government takeover, the experiment in health care. That's why the administration is hiding ominous numbers from the American public. (Mr. RADANOVICH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the devastating job losses in my district in California. This Congress, with the help of the Obama administration, has taken away 40,000 jobs and almost $1 billion of income from the great San Joaquin Valley in California in a foolish attempt to protect a 3-inch fish. The valley's unemployment now is at 20 percent, with some towns as 40 percent. Yet, the mere flick of a switch on the pumps in the delta will restore 40,000 jobs at no cost to the government. In addition to this careless disregard for the farmers in my district, the Democrat leadership is now ramming through a $1.2 trillion health care reform measure that will eliminate 4.7 million jobs, small business jobs, and subject farmers to $500 billion in new taxes. And let's not forget the $846 billion national energy tax that will result in a 2.3 million job loss and cause the price of everything Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The Democrats are giving them to the little fishies in the San Francisco Bay delta. Go figure. (Mr. OLSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the administration argued that an $800 billion taxpayer-funded spending spree was necessary to create jobs. It was rushed through with no time to review the policies that would implement The administration sold this spending spree as a jobs creation measure. Yet, it turns out that jobs weren't a priority at all. A $3.9 billion stimulus funding announcement was made for smart grid investment grants by Vice President Biden in which he stated, ``This is Well, the Department of Energy didn't seem to get the memo. Application forms for grants asked: ``Will DOE use the number of jobs estimated to be created and/or retained as a criterion for rating a proposal for funding?'' The grant guidance says: ``No.'' Where are the jobs? Job creation was supposed to be the primary requisite for receiving recovery funds, and yet it was simply a WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW A RUSHED GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE (Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, as the House leadership prepares to rush to judgment on legislation that will lead to a government takeover of health care, 17 percent of our Nation's economy, it's instructive to look back a few weeks to the cap-and-trade energy debate. Just before the Fourth of July break, leadership set another deadline to pass what will amount to the largest tax hike in U.S. history. With unemployment soaring, policies that impose a national energy tax will only make things worse by increasing energy costs for all Americans, crippling small businesses, and putting more people out of Frankly, the legislation we passed is a gift that keeps on giving to our economic rivals like China and India whose economies are already sucking away U.S. manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate. Needless to say, as we saw from Secretary Clinton's recent visit to India, these nations do not plan to impose restrictions on their emissions. Mr. Speaker, American families are struggling; there's no doubt about it. They're working to make ends meet and they are worrying about their jobs. We should not burden them with a new national energy tax, and we certainly should not allow a rushed government takeover of health care. (Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, our economy is in the midst of a historic recession, and millions of Americans have lost their jobs over the past several months despite promises from Speaker Pelosi and President Obama that their extravagant spending would create jobs. But Americans are a hardworking and resilient people. So I was excited when I heard from a laid off entrepreneurial constituent of mine from Allegheny County, North Carolina, who's working on starting his own business. He plans to hire around 20 people over the next 2 However, he recently wrote to tell me that if the Democrats' health care bill becomes law, the new taxes and burdensome rules will take a devastating bite out of his ability to grow jobs. In fact, he said he would hire only half the workers if this legislation becomes law. Mr. Speaker, this is a travesty. This Congress should be implementing policies that create jobs, instead of burdening entrepreneurs with job- killing taxes and new government mandates and red tape. THE POLICIES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION ARE LENGTHENING AND DEEPENING THIS (Mr. McCLINTOCK asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I was struck by the chilling similarity between the broad-based taxes under the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade tax we passed several weeks ago and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that economists blame as one of the major factors in producing the Another of Hoover's blunders was the Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932. Its centerpiece was a radical increase in income tax rates from 25 percent to well over 50 percent. If that sounds familiar, it should. That's one of the financing proposals in the health care bill that would push State and Federal income tax rates to more than 50 percent in most States. Mr. Speaker, when I see the same policies from this administration that turned the recession of 1929 into the Depression of the 1930s, I'm reminded of Ben Franklin's observation that ``experience keeps a dear Mr. Speaker, these policies are lengthening and deepening this recession because this administration did not even learn from WHERE ARE THE JOBS THE DEMOCRATS SPENT $1 TRILLION TO CREATE? (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, you know, I think pushing government-controlled health care is a way for the Democrats to divert The White House said we had to pass a stimulus because it didn't want unemployment over 8 percent. Unemployment is at 9.5 percent and slated The White House said it didn't want to own General Motors. The The White House said it didn't want any pork in the stimulus. Now, we're paying money to clear away obstacles for fish and to monitor The White House said it didn't want to increase the deficit. The U.S. deficit broke past $1 trillion in June, a grim testament to the I have one question, Where are the jobs the Democrats spent $1 HEALTH CARE REFORM MUST TARGET ACCESS TO QUALITY AFFORDABLE CARE (Mr. BOOZMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, we must reform health care. Too many Americans do not have access to quality, affordable health care. resolving these problems, however, the President prescribes an overhaul that will deny Americans treatments they need and make them wait to get treatments that a new health care commissioner allows. This is not the way to reform our health care system, and my constituents agree. I've received many calls and letters from Arkansans, like Michael who recently told me he owes his life to the fact that we don't have a system like the British-run government health In 2007, Michael was diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma, something he's sure his doctor would not have caught had he had his hands tied in red tape health procedures. He owes his life to the care we were able We cannot rush through legislation that will have serious implications on care Americans like Michael receive. We need to take a reasonable amount of time to listen to the concerns of Americans like Michael and craft a commonsense bill that addresses the real problems. WE SHOULD NOT BE DECIMATING THE CARE OF OUR SENIOR POPULATION (Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, last week the Democrats released a health care bill which essentially said to America's seniors ``drop dead.'' Despite their promise to care for our seniors, Democrats have decided that it's too expensive to care for my senior constituents and everyone else's constituents. This bill would cut an additional $156 billion from the Medicare Advantage program in order to pay for the government expansion of health care for the young, the healthy, and the wealthy. This, by the way, is the second attack on our seniors this year. The first came in March when the administration announced that Social Security recipients would not receive a cost-of-living increase. Listen up, America. Seniors have special needs. This bill ignores the needs of Florida's health care system. We should be fixing what is broke, not decimating the care of our senior population. This is change (Mr. SHUSTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting and they're asking, Where are the jobs? The Obama administration and congressional Democrats promised that the stimulus--the trillion-dollar stimulus-- would create jobs immediately. Last month alone, we lost almost half a million jobs and unemployment now stands at 9.5 percent. It's clear the Democrats' trillion-dollar stimulus package isn't working, and their response is to increase spending in the appropriations process by 12 percent, pass a national energy tax that's going to result in increased energy costs, less competitiveness for American jobs, and drive jobs from American shores. Now they're trying to ram down a health care plan that's going to raise taxes on American business, cost jobs, and force people into a We need to focus on creating jobs--and you do that by holding the line on taxes, controlling spending, and reforming health care. Let's focus on creating jobs and answering the American people's cry for, (Mr. BLUMENAUER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. BLUMENAUER. It's been fascinating watching some of my friends parade to the floor making some pretty outrageous claims. The most recent one was, my good friend from Florida suggesting that by having the administration follow the law, that if the cost-of-living has not increased sufficiently, so that there isn't a cost-of-living increase for Social Security, somehow this is an administration assault on senior citizens. This is a rather bizarre notion when we think about their record when they were in charge, seeking to undercut formulas like the one in question to move them back in the other direction. When it comes to health care, when our friends on the other side of the aisle, strong-armed their prescription Medicare drug coverage program into law; did not seek concessions from the pharmaceutical industry; created the ``doughnut hole'' that has created a massive gap What we're doing at this point is trying to move forward in a constructive fashion to give the American people choices, follow the (Ms. FALLIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FALLIN. Mr. Speaker, the American people are concerned about keeping their jobs and the huge deficit that we have incurred here and in the Senate, and passing that debt on down to future generations of With over a thousand pages, the Democrat health care bill costs too much, spends too much, and will destroy jobs in America. Health care reform should be about lowering costs, providing quality, affordable care for all Americans. And this health care debate must consider that every individual has different health care needs and that Americans are The Democrat leadership has failed to address these needs by supporting the same old, tired proposals of massive Federal new spending and increased Federal regulation, which will cost the United This time, cutting a bigger Federal check won't do it. Their plan amounts to $818 billion in new taxes on individuals, on businesses, and a Federal takeover of our health care system. These taxes will crush our small business owners and destroy thousands of jobs. This plan will put bureaucrats in charge of our health care--and the (Mr. ENGEL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ENGEL. The majority Democrats in this Congress are trying very hard to pass a health care bill that will be a good bill for the American people. Our friends on the other side of the aisle don't seem It's a national disgrace that there are 47 million Americans that have no health care coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that our emergency rooms are being used to help people that have no coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that so many of our health care We are trying to craft a plan that will put America back on the road so that every American will have health care; so that health care as we know it will be improved; so that people that like their health care can keep their health care, but people that don't have health care, can We know that the system is broken. I don't want to hear people on the other side of the aisle talk about deficits because when they were in the majority for 12 years, they gave us the biggest deficits in American history and left us with red ink as far as the eye can see. So I would urge my friends on both sides of the aisle, let's put our (Mr. McHENRY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Unemployment in my district has hit 14 percent--14 percent. Failed stimulus aside, Washington is doing nothing but making matters worse. Put yourself in the shoes of the only people that can lift us out of this economic recession--small business owners. Let's see what they're They're facing higher energy costs because of this Democrat cap-and- trade tax on energy. They're facing higher health care costs because of a government takeover of health care. They're looking at higher energy taxes, higher health care costs, and the kicker is, higher personal income taxes. The liberals are already proposing it. The folks that are running Washington are out of touch with small business owners and are doing the wrong thing on our economy. And I urge the leadership of this Congress to do the right thing. Don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Don't kill small business owners. (Mr. DENT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DENT. The issue is: Jobs, jobs, jobs. A friend of mine who employs many people in my district said this to me the other day, The policy proposals coming out of Washington are impeding job creation and scaring people. He's right. And there are five reasons that are driving One, a stimulus that spends too much, borrows too much, and delivers too few jobs. Two, a budget that doubles the national debt in 5 years and triples it in 10 years. Three, a card check bill that is undemocratic and imposes binding arbitration. Four, a national energy tax, cap-and-trade, that will cost 66,000 jobs in Pennsylvania and jack up electric bills for consumers. And, five, a House health care bill with enormous tax increases and mandates on small businesses and Enough is enough. Time for Washington to get out of the way and let job creators do what they know how to do--create jobs. (Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, we have heard some interesting rhetoric today about the impacts on small businesses and health care reform. Here's a statistic. If we do nothing, the cost of health care on our small businesses in the United States over the next 10 years will increase to $2.4 trillion. That's going to have a crushing burden on the ability of small businesses to do what they do best, which is to Only 48 percent of our small businesses currently provide health care. If we allowed those cost increases to occur by doing nothing in terms of health care reform, we're guaranteeing fewer Americans will have health care, we're guaranteeing fewer successes among small businesses that are the job generator in this economy. Doing nothing has a profound cost. That's why we need health care reform. We need it now. We've waited 6 years. The time has arrived. (Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, does anybody see what's happening? Does anybody even care? The $700 billion TARP program was to buy troubled assets. Did we do that? No. We bought car companies and banks. And we own them. And then we took the money away from the bond holders of the The $787 billion stimulus package only stimulated more welfare. It hasn't created jobs. Not one. And now we have put upon us a government takeover of health care that's going to lose, according to Christina This has never been about jobs for the Democrats. It's never even Who's going to make the decisions over your life, the personal decisions? The Democrats think they can. We think you should. Does anybody see what's happening? Does anyone even care? (Mr. GOHMERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, $700 million for wild horses last Friday; $50 million for rare cranes and rare dogs and cats that don't even live in this country. We've got habitat problems in this country. The $800 billion stimulus hasn't stimulated anything except unemployment. I just left a crime hearing and we found out that out of 207,000 people in Federal prison, 53,000 of them are not citizens. They're non- U.S. citizens. They're here--most of them, they said, were probably illegal. So there's 53,000 jobs Americans didn't want, committing But this is too serious. I know as a former judge, if somebody had come in and said, Here's a mom who has all these kids and grandchildren and she's gone to a bank and said, Give me money, loan me money, I can't control my spending, you would take those beautiful children away and give them to somebody that would be responsible. (Mr. HENSARLING asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, it's time to admit the failure of Obamanomics. Where are the jobs? Since we enacted the President's economic program, 2 million more are unemployed in this land--9.6 percent unemployment, the highest in a quarter of a century. So what do we have to show for Obamanomics? $143 billion more dollars of taxpayer bailout money. The first trillion-dollar deficit in our Nation's history. We had the national debt to be increased, tripled-- We have found the historic debt, we have found the historic deficits, we have found the historic bailouts, Mr. Speaker. But where are the You cannot bail out, borrow, and spend your way into prosperity. It does not work. It is time to put America back to work with tax relief for small businesses and American families. That's the Republican plan. (Mr. LaTOURETTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LaTOURETTE. A number of my colleagues today have asked, Where are the jobs? Well, I don't know exactly where the jobs are because they haven't appeared. But I can tell you where the jobs went, at least in When the Democrats opened this Congress, 4,000 people at Chrysler out of work. We honored a United States Senator. That's a nice piece of But then things began to get serious. Almost 10,000 people out of work. The most important thing they could put on the floor is Supporting the Goals and Ideals of National Teen Dating. Eleven thousand people out of work, we had to pass the Monkey Safety Everybody likes safe monkeys. Thirteen thousand people out of work; Great Cats and Rare Canids Act. Sixteen thousand people out of work; Honoring Arnold Palmer. And 18,000 Chrysler workers out of work, the most important thing the majority could put on the floor is National But now they're getting serious because later today we are going to vote on Supporting the Goals of National Dairy Month. (Mr. FORTENBERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, as Congress takes on the essential task of strengthening America's health care system, we have a choice here to either rush legislation costing more than $1 trillion or to have a serious analysis on the fundamental question as to how we actually improve health care outcomes, reduce costs, and protect vulnerable One major consideration should be how any health care proposal will affect small businesses. Small businesses generate 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs each year in this country. In my hometown of Lincoln, Nebraska, 80 percent of those in the private sector are employed in This current plan would place an 8 percent payroll tax on certain small businesses who do not or cannot provide government-mandated Mr. Speaker, one study suggests that as many as 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a direct result of this overall health care proposal. There are more creative solutions to get people the care they need, help families manage ever-increasing costs, and help small business entrepreneurs provide the benefits for their employees. (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HOYER. I have been listening to this litany of ``Where are the jobs?'' I have been here long enough. Mr. Pence, you opposed the program in 1993. You said it would destroy this economy. You said it would blow deficits sky high. It created 216,000 jobs per month on You then supported an economic program in 2001. You said it would be a haven for jobs and small business and all that. You created not 216,000 jobs per month but 4,240. Those are the figures. I'm sure that you will all want to come here and say, ``No, Hoyer was wrong on those Under the economic program we propose, 216,000 new jobs every month on average. Under your program for the last 8 years under the Bush administration, 4,240 per month. That is a very substantial difference between 20.8 million new jobs under the economic program that you did not support in 1993 that we proposed, passed, and President Clinton So when you talk about jobs, you ought to talk about the experience that you've had under our program and your program. You failed. We succeeded. As a matter of fact, in the last year of the Bush administration, we lost 3 million-plus jobs. During the last year of the Clinton administration, we gained 1.9 million jobs. That's a 5 So keep talking. America knew the difference. America made a decision. They said what you had been doing was not what they wanted so they changed. In 2006, they changed the Congress, and in 2008 they And let me tell you something. We have lost 200,000 less jobs per month than Bush lost in his last 3 months in office, over the last 3 months. Now, is that where we want to be? It is not. But it is 200,000 better than the last 3 months in your administration. Those are the (Mr. McCAUL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Leader and Mr. Speaker, where are those jobs? We have the highest unemployment rate since the 1930s. They say a picture Mr. HOYER. I thought it was since 1982 when Ronald Reagan was Mr. McCAUL. Reclaiming my time, they say a picture speaks a thousand words. Well, look at this picture right here because it says it all. This is a picture of Larry Summers, the President's top economic adviser. Look at him. He's not creating jobs. He is asleep. Mr. Speaker, I would submit to you, this administration is asleep at the The Vice President recently said that we can spend our way out of bankruptcy. What? Really? Spend our way out of bankruptcy? What happened to Economics 101? I think the American people are smarter than Instead of cutting taxes and spending, which has historically worked, instead, we are enacting policies that will devastate our economy; a national energy tax that will kill 2.5 million jobs and, according to the President, skyrocket energy prices. A health care bill that, according to the CBO, will spend over $1 trillion and kill 4.7 million It is time, Mr. Speaker, for the American people to wake up. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully ask, as both I and my record were directly challenged by the distinguished majority leader on the floor, and given the fact that I've already utilized my 1 minute extended during the debate at the opening of this session, when a Member's record is challenged on the floor of the Congress, does a Member, under the Rules of the House, have the opportunity to obtain time when the distinguished majority leader refuses to yield time? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Only if someone yields to the gentleman. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry. Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, is it proper for a Member to direct an entire address to another Member of the body as opposed to the Chair or the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members must direct their remarks to the Mr. PENCE. Further parliamentary inquiry, if I may. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will be heard. Mr. PENCE. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, would it have been in order for the distinguished majority leader to raise questions about my record and the positions that I've taken here in the Congress during the course of my career in the context of floor debate under these rules? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot issue an advisory opinion Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to address the statement that was The SPEAKER pro tempore. Has the gentleman from Indiana previously Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. KING of Iowa. Is there a rule that prohibits this body from to a unanimous consent request to allow a Member to be recognized? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman seeking recognition to Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I am recognized for a parliamentary inquiry, as I understand it. My parliamentary inquiry is: Does there exist a rule that prohibits a Member from being recognized to speak The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a matter of recognition. As the Chair stated before, if the gentleman has already had a 1-minute, he is Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair could recognize for a unanimous consent request that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out of order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would entertain that request from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished majority leader came to the floor moments ago, and he asked the question that Republicans have been asking since midday today. It's a question that millions of Americans Now the leader--I know it was unintentional--misstated my record, saying that when I was here in 1993 that I opposed health care reform. In fact, I was elected to Congress in the year 2000. But it was an honest mistake and a misstatement of fact, and I acknowledge it. But can I just suggest, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the millions of Americans that may be looking in, let's stop looking to the errors of the past by Democrats or Republicans and let's come together today to Republicans are here to say that a government takeover of health care, financed by $1 trillion in tax increases is a disaster for this economy. It is unconscionable for this majority and this administration to insist on the adoption of a government takeover of health care financed by $1 trillion of tax increases during the worst recession in As the distinguished majority leader just said, Republicans say with (Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Well, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? That's what the American people want to know. What they know is the plan that the Democrats have isn't working, spending money we do not have. Not just a little bit of money but trillions of dollars that we don't have. Chairman Bernanke spoke to the House Financial Services Committee today, and he said: Maintaining the confidence of the public and the financial markets requires that policy measures begin planning now for restoration of fiscal balance. Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability, we will have neither fiscal I'll interpret that for you. If we keep spending money we do not have, we are not going to create jobs. We are going to lose more jobs. Last week, the Federal deficit in this country reached $1 trillion. If you started counting to $1 trillion, it would take you 17,000 years. We're talking about real money. We cannot continue on this spending spree that Congress is in, spending money that we do not have. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The American people want their jobs THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST 6 MONTHS SHOULD NOT BE REPEATED (Mr. ROGERS of Alabama asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The President and Speaker Pelosi came to this House early this year and said, if you'll borrow and spend $1.1 trillion, which is the largest spending bill in American history, it's going to save existing jobs and create another 3 million jobs. Well, where are those jobs? They say, Well, you know, we had to spend that money because we couldn't go to the failed policies of the past and repeat those. Well, they would like to rewrite history. But the fact is, in 2003, this Congress passed one of the largest tax cuts on small businesses in America in our history, and it was followed by over 50 months of consecutive job growth, the largest consecutive period of time of I would suggest to you, the only failed policies of the past that we shouldn't repeat are the failed policies of the past 6 months. (Mr. KING of Iowa asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the leader, where are the jobs? I listened attentively. I pricked my ears up. I thought I was going to find out where the jobs are. I didn't hear that answer. I looked back at what happened for the 108th and 109th Congress. Members of the Democrats came down on the floor and they said, Just put us in charge and we'll solve the problem. They won the majority, and we saw a hockey stick graph going downward of industrial investment. That's what happened to our economy; it reacted to the Democrat You elected President Obama. Now you don't have any excuses, and you are angry because we are asking, ``Where are the jobs?'' There are 14.5 to 14.7 million unemployed, another 6.8 million that are simply looking for a job that don't fit into that category, 21.3 million people looking for jobs in the United States, all of this under We had historically low unemployment and a growing economy because we lowered taxes, and we kept the pressure off of regulation. You are turning this into the nationalization of the private sector and the health insurance industry, and the American people don't want to live in the kind of countries that exist on the east side of the Atlantic (Mr. CONAWAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I hear a recurring theme about jobs: Where In a different life, I participate at a needs assessment in a community that I lived in that went through a process of looking at what needs were in families, in neighborhoods, and in the community. Once we distilled that list down to the top 10 needs for this particular community in Midland, Texas, if you looked at them, out of those, nine of those needs would have been positively impacted by a You cannot overstate the importance of jobs in the private sector, because when you have jobs in the private sector, individuals are better, families are better, communities are better, and this Nation, I can tell you where the jobs aren't. Here is a list of 53 new boards, commissions, and bureaucracies that are created under the health care plan that is percolating its way through this system. That plan will cost 4.7 million private sector jobs, but it will do a good job of creating additional bureaucrat jobs that don't create wealth and don't improve the overall economy of this country. ALABAMA IS SUFFERING FROM A HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (Mr. ADERHOLT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, in February, the administration assured us that if Congress would pass the stimulus bill, then we would see immediate relief and halt unemployment at 8 percent; yet it is now 9.5 percent on average, and it's rising. But the jobs have yet to appear. This problem hits home for me because Alabama is suffering from a greater unemployment rate than the national trend. Mr. Speaker, the Alabama unemployment rate topped 10 percent in June. It is the highest level since July of 1984. The June rate of 10.1 percent is up from 9.8 At this time last year, Alabama's jobless rate was half that at only 4.6 percent. The current unemployment rate is 10.1 percent. That represents over 215,000 unemployed Alabamians. The congressional district that I represent is suffering even more with an unemployment rate of about 12 percent, and that's on the average. At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet, the unemployment rate is rising, further evidence that we cannot borrow and (Mr. KING of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, 6 months after the Democratic administration came in with such promise, tens and tens of millions of Instead, during the past 6 months we've seen the systematic mismanaging and dismantling of the American economy. We've seen a stimulus bill which cost over $1 trillion in new spending with almost no tax relief for small business, with almost no needed infrastructure, but again, money on top of money. The President said jobs would come almost immediately. Instead, the situation gets worse by the week. We saw a cap-and-tax so-called energy bill which is going to result And now we see a health care bill which will ration medical care, at the same time, according to the CBO, increase medical costs, the worst Mr. Speaker, it's time for the American people to tell this administration and this Democratic-controlled Congress to work together in a bipartisan way so we can say, here come the jobs, not seeing the jobs leave our country, not seeing millions of millions of people being unemployed because of failed liberal Democrat policies. (Mr. FRANKS of Arizona asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, America is facing an unemployment and mortgage crisis unlike anything we have seen since the Great Only months ago, President Obama pledged that he would create 3\\1/2\\ millions jobs by the end of 2010 and told us that the unemployment rate would stay below 8 percent if we passed the allegedly urgent trillion- But, Mr. Speaker, since the President has assumed office, employment has dropped by over 2\\1/2\\ million jobs. We've lost 8 million jobs since the beginning of the Democrat-led 110th Congress, and half a The jobless rate stands at 9.5 percent, and the President himself This Congress and this administration must be reminded by the American people that what comprises true economic growth are jobs and economic productivity by the people. Higher taxes, increased regulation, reckless spending, bureaucratic selection of economic winners and losers and out-of-control deficit spending, these are the Democrat policies of the last five months, and they diminish productivity instead of encouraging it. They will kill jobs. And unless we change course, Mr. Speaker, this country faces an unprecedented (Mr. LAMBORN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today troubled about the Democrats' proposed government takeover of our health care system. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this legislation will not reduce costs but, rather, drive health costs up higher for American In addition to rising costs, according to the White House's chief economic adviser, Christina Romer, business tax hikes alone could Congress should consider free-market and Tax Code reforms to make our The President and his majority in Congress failed to produce jobs Why should we trust them with revising the one-sixth of our economy based on health care, when their own advisers say it will mean millions (Mr. CASSIDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Speaker, I actually applaud the goal of our Democratic colleagues in terms of the health bill they are putting out. Access, quality, and controlling costs are things that we should all And I agree with parts of the legislation. Guaranteed access, for example, is just wonderful. But, of course our concern is that CBO comment that it's not going to control cost, not achieve one of these goals, but rather, reset it to increase it. And we know as the cost of health care increases, that will be one more thing that inhibits growth So what can we do? One, we do need fundamental reform, which, as the CBO has pointed out, this bill does provide. We need to put the patient in charge of health care decisions and dollars. We need to empower patients to make value-conscious decisions, empower them with the information they need for reasonable decisions by increasing Let's empower them by incentivizing wellness programs at lower costs and improved lives. Let's empower them with things such as HSAs, which have been shown to decrease costs by 30 percent and, indeed, give insurance to those previously uninsured. Empowering patients is the (Mr. BACHUS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACHUS. I just came from a hearing with Chairman Bernanke. There were some questions he could answer, but others he couldn't answer. We asked him, Where are the jobs? He couldn't answer that question. He said unemployment would remain high through 2011. He said he's not sure that the stimulus created any jobs. It might, but he couldn't answer He did answer one important question, though; and he was very certain. He said, if we continue spending like we're spending today, we're on a rendezvous with financial disaster. He said, and he left no doubt, that we had to reduce our spending, that the deficit was going to threaten the prosperity of our Nation, not only our children and our grandchildren, but today, tomorrow. He said, we have to reduce spending. He said, spending is out of control. He said, the baby boomers in the next year or two would overwhelm the Federal budget. He (Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, while our Nation is facing record unemployment, we may well worsen the job situation if the proposed health care bill passes in its current version; 4.7 million more jobs are estimated to be lost and a trillion dollars in more We still have not addressed the hundreds of billions in health care waste, but are proposing spending hundreds of billions more. We should not be substituting the barriers, burdens and, bureaucracy of insurance companies with the barriers, burdens, and bureaucracy of Uncle Sam's I want to get people back to work. I want to make sure they're covered by health care. I want our Committee on Energy and Commerce to reconvene to get to work on this bill. It is going to take time. We need to take the time to fix this. Let's do it right. But let's not work towards artificial deadlines, and let's get America back to work (Mr. SHADEGG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I believe in health care reform. I have I came to the floor this morning to talk about this amendment. It's an amendment that was rejected by the Democrats last night. It says that no Federal employee should be able to dictate how a medical provider practices medicine. And it was rejected by the Democrats. Apparently Democrats in their health care bill want Federal employees, bureaucrats to dictate how your medical provider practices medicine. I think that's shocking. I don't want a Federal bureaucrat between me and But I got here and discovered that we are not supposed to ask, Where are the jobs? I don't get it. What's embarrassing about that question? When the Obama administration was sworn in, unemployment was 7.6 percent. When the stimulus passed, it was 8.1 percent. And today, it's 9.5 percent. And we're not supposed to ask where are the jobs? I think it's a legitimate question. I guess it's an embarrassing question. I'd (Mr. ELLSWORTH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I was sitting in my office, and I heard a I downloaded an article from the Evansville Courier Press, which happens to be in Indiana. It says: ``Stimulus has Hoosiers working.'' I'll make a few quotes out of this article: ``More than 2,400 people are now at work on Federal stimulus-funded roadway projects in Indiana, according to a state report being released today.'' ```Things were slowing down, and the stimulus filled in the gap,' said Tim Mahoney, an economics professor at the University of Southern Indiana. `It's kept the people employed that would be laid off,''' says ``What's clear is that the stimulus projects have boosted an industry ```In general, it definitely puts our people to work,' said Pete Bjorkman, the chief estimator for Evansville-based J.H. Rudolph'' ``Our crews are going to be working more hours and more days because of this . . . ,' he said. `It is creating more crews, more hours for our people that wouldn't have been there before.''' Mr. Speaker, I listened in the office to the stuff being said back and forth. To the folks in the audience and the people that are walking out there, Mr. Speaker, they're tired of this crap that's going on back and forth. We need to work together to put people back to work. (Mr. CAO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAO. Mr. Speaker, the present unemployment rate in the United States is 9.5 percent and climbing, and the American people are hurting. Our economic downturn is a challenge that will require prompt As Congress moves forward with the national debate on the economy, it is imperative that we detract from illogical partisan bickering and avoid the empty political posturing that got us into this mess in the The American people have real problems, and they want real solutions I represent a district that is over 60 percent African American, and I have seen firsthand how this economic slump has disproportionately hurt minorities more than any other group in the United States. Among African Americans, the rate of unemployment and uninsured workers is While there are a number of options for getting our economy back on track, it is important to remember that our Nation's proudest achievements have developed with a bipartisan, solutions-oriented (Mr. McKEON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, my friends are asking, Where are the jobs? It's a good question because we were told in February, when the stimulus package was passed, that four or five million jobs would be It's not bad enough that we're not doing anything to create jobs from the administration's side. But we're actually doing things to kill more I just left a markup for the Education Committee where the majority is killing a program that has been very successful since 1965, has helped millions of students go to college and provided an education for them, and now they're eliminating that program, along with it, 40,000 I have constituents at home that are really suffering. They're asking, Where are the jobs? It's about time you started doing something (Mr. FLAKE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, people are asking, Where are the jobs? And I I myself get a little leery when any administration, any says that they're going to create jobs. They do so for a while, but government jobs don't last very long, or they shouldn't last very long. What the administration should do, and this Congress, is create an environment in which private sector jobs can be created. And that's what we're not doing with this health care bill. This health care bill will kill jobs, not create them. It doesn't create an environment where Now, the administration and this Congress say we've got to get to work. But last week, last Friday we spent an entire day on a welfare- for-wild-horses bill. There's an old Garth Brooks song that says, wild horses keep dragging me away. And, apparently, wild horses keep dragging this Congress away from actually creating an environment where jobs can be created. And this health care bill goes the wrong (Mr. FARR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FARR. I hear from the other side that government takes over health care. I'm just wondering which one of you Members is going to give up your Navy doctors downstairs to take care of you. Which one of you is going to give up your Federal health care plan which insures all the members of your family? Which one of you is going to give up Medicare for all of your constituents? Which one of you is going to give up the veterans' care in the veterans' clinics that are in your districts? Which one of you who loves the military that is doing such a great job of defending our country in Iraq and in Afghanistan is going Yes, government is involved in health care. It sure is. That's what our country is surviving and living on. Let's make this work and stop (Mr. ROONEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, there has been some talk recently about the potential of a second stimulus package. Why would we need such a second stimulus? Because the first one didn't work. It's not rocket science, What the American people don't want to hear is that prior Congresses or that prior administrations used to do this, or that prior Congressmen were engaged in this, that or the other. What Americans want now is leadership and solutions moving forward, not how things I'm new here. I came here because the American people were sick and tired of the way things used to work. Unemployment will soon reach double digits, and it already has in my district, the 16th District of The first stimulus didn't work because the Federal Government is not capable of taking taxpayer money and properly redistributing it. So let's have a second stimulus package. Let's give tax breaks to small businesses and to small business owners. Let them hire and keep the people that they want to work for them. That's the American way. America works when people make it work, not when the government takes The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members--and this is not directed at the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney), who just spoke--that Members should address their remarks to the Chair and not (Mr. HUNTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, California unemployment is at 11.6 percent, and State Democrats in California destroyed the job market and the manufacturing base there through bureaucratic overregulation, unrealistic mandates and punitive fees and taxes. Congressional Democrats here in Washington are following California's lead with the national energy tax that's going to cost every American family $3,000 a year and with the job-killing health care plan projected to cost over 4 I've simply come to the easy conclusion that Democrats don't like small business. I've come to the conclusion that Democrats don't like jobs. Those of us in California have seen this movie before, and it ends like ``Thelma and Louise''--with the economy driving off a cliff in the Grand Canyon. And it's being driven by congressional Democrats. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT KNOW BEST WITH REGARD TO HEALTH CARE (Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, only in Washington, D.C., does government know best. My friends on the other side of the aisle think they know how to create jobs: stimulus I and possibly II, cap- and-trade, health care reform, higher taxes, more regulation, more government intervention. The Democrats think this is going to create Mr. Speaker, we need to be about the business of overhauling taxes, of bringing commonsense regulation reform to the people, of giving people real choice to make decisions for their health care between them and their doctors. It is about empowering people, not government. What I'm talking about, Mr. Speaker, is not socialism. It's freedom. With all that our colleagues on the other side have done, and with all that they propose to spend, I ask a simple question, Mr. Speaker: Where are THE DEMOCRAT SPAGHETTI DINNER OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, this chart is not a spaghetti dinner. It may look like it, but it's the Democrats' health care plan. If you were a person out in the hinterlands, looking at this, you would think, How in the world am I going to get health care coverage for me and for my family if I have to go through all of that? It's going to In addition to that, there are going to be jobs created, 4.7 million jobs in China and in India, and their energy bill, cap-and-trade, is going to create 2.5 million new jobs in India and in China because it's going to drive jobs offshore because the small businesspeople will not be able to afford to pay all of these bills and taxes that the The Democrats need to do something. They need to cut taxes and help the small businessman make a profit and create new jobs. If they do that, we will have jobs, but right now, we don't know where the jobs are. Unemployment was supposed to cap at 8 percent. In Indiana, it's close to 10 percent. It's going to go to 12, 14, 15 percent if they (Mr. LUETKEMEYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, if we're all real quiet and if we turn down the rhetoric and if we listen very attentively, I think we can hear the voices of our constituents back home--the people who pay the taxes of this country. What are they saying? What question are they the jobs? Where are the jobs, Mr. President? Well, we're not hearing They've seen the $800 billion stimulus package that was passed through this House, that was rammed down our throats and that had no effect. In fact, we've gone the other direction. Instead of increasing employment, we've gone the other way. We're now at 9.5 percent, headed towards double digits. What is the solution? A second stimulus is being talked about. Is that really what we need to do? In this last stimulus, there was a little bitty piece for small businesses. They're the ones that generate the jobs. They're the ones that can turn this economy around. They're the ones that can hire the people. Yet we ignore them. Oh, there are those voices again. I think I can hear them. Yes, they're louder this time. They say, Where are the jobs, Mr. President? (Mr. CAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, the chart next to me shows the Obama Misery Index, OMI, which reveals a stunning rise in debt and in unemployment. ``Oh, my,'' I think, is the right title for the index of current and Despite campaign pledges of fiscal responsibility and of job creation, since Inauguration Day, we've seen an $800 billion stimulus bill, massive energy taxes and a legislative agenda that has resulted in a rapidly growing debt alongside rising unemployment. Taken together, these figures define the effect of the President's policies to date, not only revealing their failure to deliver jobs for today's workers but an even larger government tab for our children and grandchildren to pay. Already the unemployment and debt on President Obama's watch is a stunning 40.6 percent--the current Obama Misery After the Vice President's recent claim that the government needs to spend more money to keep from going bankrupt and after the CBO, Congressional Budget Office, Director suggests that the $1 trillion Democrat health care bill will add to the country's budget problems, (Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the issue of job loss at rural hospitals if the current health proposal were to become law. The Democrats' public plan assumes reimbursement In the July letter from the Blue Dog Coalition to Speaker Pelosi, the coalition reported that Medicare reimbursement pays, on average, 20-30 percent lower than private plans. Actual costs are made up through private insurance reimbursement, which will be gone if the Democratic plan plays out. This will have a severe negative impact on rural hospitals, and it will leave us asking: Where are the jobs? Many providers suffer financial losses as a result of treating Medicare patients. The lower rates make it more difficult for rural providers, who serve higher percentages of elderly and low-income patients. A new public plan with rates similar to Medicare's will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the Nation's most efficient, high-quality providers. The result is a loss During this time of economic downturn, we need to be focused on the retention of existing jobs and on encouraging and not discouraging our (Mr. HOEKSTRA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, last week, the President visited Michigan. With an unemployment rate of 15.2 percent, we were hoping that the President would answer the question: Mr. President, where are the jobs? We had hoped that the President would have come to Michigan and would have recognized that raising taxes, that excessive spending and that more regulation wouldn't work, because that is what we've done in Michigan. We now have the highest unemployment rate in the country. Mr. President, take a look at Michigan. Recognize that we need to reduce taxes, that we need to control spending and that we need to America and Michigan will begin moving forward again when we empower its people, not when we empower the bureaucracy and the governments in Washington or in Lansing. It's about freedom. Give our constituents the freedom to spend their money to create their jobs. (Mr. WALDEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to continue this question of: The gentleman who spoke just before me is from Michigan, where their unemployment is upwards of 14 percent. Oregon's unemployment rate is now over 12.2 percent and is second only to Michigan. Our basic industries have been shut down. My part of the State, by Federal policy, prevents us from even harvesting burned dead trees in a timely manner from our Federal forest lands and accessing our resources. Now along comes legislation that says if you take woody biomass off Federal land and use it to make new, clean, efficient energy, if it comes up as certain types of stands, it doesn't count. It's not renewable. So the jobs that would go with the creation of that were really diminished or were taken away fully by the cap-and-tax legislation, which we know is going to cost 1 million or 2 million jobs I was out in John Day and Nyssa and Burns this weekend and Baker City. Everywhere I went at town meetings, the rooms were full, and people were asking, What are they doing to us in Washington? Where are CUT TAXES, CONTROL SPENDING, CREATE A COMMONSENSE ENERGY POLICY (Mr. JORDAN of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the reason our economy is not creating jobs is that small business owners are asking themselves, What's coming next out of this place? Always remember this, Mr. Speaker: The American people are smart. Small business owners are smart, but they're apprehensive; they're anxious about what's coming Is, in fact, this Congress going to pass cap-and-trade that's going to raise the cost of energy? Is, in fact, this cost of energy going to raise taxes? Is this Congress going to federally take over health care and make health care decisions for every single family and for every That's why we're not creating jobs. We need to do what we know always works: cut taxes, get spending under control and enact a commonsense (Mrs. BIGGERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address how this Congress and one concern on the minds of Americans today--jobs. Despite promises of quick action and of immediate returns, hardworking parents in my district and around the country are still staying up nights, worrying about whether they will have jobs in the next month, in the next day or In response, House and Senate leaders' only answer seems to be higher taxes and massive new government spending. Already our children and grandchildren are on the hook for the $1 trillion so-called ``stimulus bill'' that has resulted in almost 10 percent unemployment nationwide, Now the House leadership seems intent on pushing through another $1 trillion-plus health care takeover that only promises more taxes on small businesses and working families. The result: fewer jobs except for Washington bureaucrats who will be rationing out health care Mr. Speaker, we can do better. Let's work together on real solutions to cut taxes, to create the jobs and to rebuild this economy, not just (Mr. TIBERI asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, a hundred of my colleagues have come and asked, Mr. Speaker, ``Where are the jobs?'' We passed a stimulus bill months ago, and in Ohio, we had 33,000 jobs lost just last month. The jobs I see created, Mr. Speaker, are here in Washington--czars, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? We passed a bill on this floor creating a national energy tax which is going to cost Ohioans hundreds of thousands of jobs. We're debating a health care bill where small business owners are concerned that they're going to shed additional jobs at a time when we need small business owners to create more jobs. Mr. Speaker, Ohioans, as this chart points out, are shredding jobs in this administration, are shredding jobs this year. We're creating a record amount of deficits, record debt, higher taxes. All Americans (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, the question of the day is ``Where are the jobs?'' I will tell you where they're not. They're not in Michigan. Our unemployment is 15.2 percent. And sadly, in this House, we passed an awful energy bill a couple of weeks ago called cap-and-trade. That bill will add nearly a trillion dollars to the cost of businesses and homes across this country. Does that help with jobs? Absolutely not. In fact, one of my constituents in Michigan said their utility increases, their electricity costs will go up by nearly 40 percent by the year 2024. Is that going to help with jobs? Absolutely not. Did the Rules Committee allow us to add jobs with an amendment that would build perhaps as many as 100 new nuclear reactors in this country, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of jobs? No. The Rules Now, where are the jobs going? They're going to India and China. Did you happen to see on July 16 The New York Times where Secretary Chu said that if China's emissions of global warming gasses keep growing at the pace of the last 30 years, the country will emit more gasses in the (Mr. DEAL of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, my State of Georgia now has an unemployment rate in excess of 10 percent. As you've heard, other States are in worse condition. We are asking today the question of where are the jobs. We spent millions and billions, and perhaps even now trillions, of dollars throwing money at the problem, and yet the The legislative agenda that's been adopted by this administration and by this House has primarily two pieces of legislation. First is the cap-and-trade, a bill that is setting us on a path that has already been followed by some of our European countries, Spain in particular. They set out on this path of green jobs over a decade ago. The result is 17.5 percent unemployment. The green bubble burst, and for every job The second major approach of this House has been the new health care reform bill, a bill that will tax employers 8 percent of their payroll amounts if they do not provide health insurance for their employees. What does that mean? New jobs? No. It means losing jobs that we already Mr. Speaker, it's appropriate to ask, where are the jobs? THE MORE CONGRESS SPENDS, THE WORSE THINGS ALWAYS SEEM TO TURN OUT (Mr. POSEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, the stimulus bill was advertised as a way to reduce unemployment and help put this economy back on track. The blue line on this chart represents the projected path of the unemployment rate. That was below 8 percent prior to the stimulus being passed. The red line shows, in fact, what actually happened since the stimulus bill was passed. It was well-intended, but surely it was misguided. Now, the more Congress spends, the worse things always seem to turn out. So let's get out of the bailout business. Let's get out of the stimulus business. Let's get out of the national energy tax business, and let's not get into the health care business. Let's let the free enterprise system and the small businesses that made this economy great (Mr. ROYCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, accompanying the spike in the private sector job losses throughout our economy, we have seen a massive government intrusion into the private market. This Chamber recently passed cap- and-tax legislation which gives Washington 17 percent over the economy. If we move towards nationalized health care--the next priority for the administration--it could shift another 16 percent of our economy The Federal Government already runs General Motors and Chrysler. It now has a huge equity stake in dozens of our financial institutions. We've witnessed a massive $800 billion stimulus package that has failed to deliver the promise of an increase in job growth. And this flawed approach has failed to deliver because government spending does not increase the size of the economic pie. What it simply does is take money out of the private sector and shift it to the government. Real economic growth has always and will always come from the private sector. And instead of continuing this trend, shifting our economy to one centered on bureaucrats, which is exponentially increasing our deficit and killing off the private sector, we should be spurring job (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose efforts by the majority to rush through a misguided health care experiment that will greatly increase the already sky-high unemployment in my State. At a time when Floridians are facing double-digit unemployment, Congress should not be pushing through a government takeover of health care that will be paid for by a tax hike on small businesses. And a recession nearing double-digit unemployment nationally will discourage job growth and creation leading to even higher unemployment and people with employer-based health insurance being forced onto the government plan. This job-killing tax, combined with the crushing debt some in Congress have been piling on our children and grandchildren to pay for Big Government programs, will make it much more difficult for I urge my colleagues to reject this small business tax. (Mr. ISSA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say three things: Where are the jobs? Where is the transparency that was promised? And where will the savings come from in a health care proposal that, in fact, starts off by talking about savings while, in fact, increasing spending? You don't need a new tax if everything is already taxed and you are going to save. You only need a new tax if, in fact, you are going to spend more money, create more waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Speaker, the President said we would not go above 8 percent, that the stimulus would in fact drive down the tendency towards unemployment Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They were not created. Mr. Speaker, the President said that this administration would have unparalleled access and transparency, and yet the special IG for the Troubled Asset Relief Program has said just the opposite, that he's being blocked at every step, that, in fact, he's not getting the Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Where is the transparency? (Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I propose that we make August America Right to Know month. That means Americans have a right to know what this Congress is doing in proposals that change their lives, and what I'm talking about is the health care legislation. Just a couple of days ago, we marked up this legislation in the Ways and Means Committee, about a thousand pages, and it came to us 3 minutes before midnight the day prior to us marking it up. We had an amendment in the committee that said, If we're going to impose this new health care system on the American people, Members of Congress, themselves, should be put into this system. What happened to that amendment? It went down by a party-line vote. Republicans said ``yes''; Democrats, except for Mr. Davis of Alabama, said ``no.'' We also said let's recognize the fact that we're taxing people, a lot of taxes on people earning less than $250,000. That violates the pledge people believed they had in the last election. What was the vote? The Republicans said, no, let's not tax people earning less than $250,000; the Democrats said, yes, we will continue to tax those people, violating this pledge, this promise the American people thought that August ought to be the month where America gets to know what's going (Mr. MICA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, my district extends from Orlando to Daytona Beach. The State of Florida now has in excess of 10 percent unemployment. Nationally, 9.5 percent unemployment. Where are Congress passed a $787 billion so-called stimulus package. I took to the floor and spoke from the Democrats' side of the aisle and pleaded with folks that we needed jobs and we needed to invest in America's infrastructure; instead, we put less than 7 percent. So to date, out of $787 billion and $48 billion for transportation highway money, we have Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, where are the jobs? People want to work. They don't want government handouts. They don't want government welfare or food stamps. They want jobs in my district and throughout Where are the jobs, I come back to ask, that this country needs and AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, AND COMMISSIONS BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR (Mr. BRADY of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people in Texas who are worried what kinds of jobs they will have when this new government-run health care plan goes through Congress, 1,018 pages delivered to us a few minutes before midnight. We had until 9 o'clock Here's the plan: Thirty-one new Federal agencies, programs, and commissions in between you and your doctor taking away control of your At the committee, we asked, What does all this cost? They said, We don't know the price tag. We offered amendments. We said, Can you certify that Members of Congress read this bill and let the public read it? They said they thought that was a bad idea. We asked about We were worried about wait times for family physicians and second- class cancer treatment. They said that would be too inconvenient to Then finally we said, Let's strike the taxes on small businesses, and they refused to, saying small businesses have it so easy, they need to Ladies and gentlemen, we don't want the government telling us what doctors we can see, what treatments we can receive, and what medicines (Mr. KINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, last October, President Bush and Hank Paulson said to the Congress we need to bail out the financial services industry. We have to do it bold and we have to do it quick or the financial markets will tumble. Well, we passed the $700 billion TARP program, and still stock portfolios, savings of Americans all through In January, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama told us that we had to act bold and fast to pass the stimulus program because the unemployment rate was 8 percent, and now 2.5 million jobs have been lost since that And now the same Washington-knows-best mentality is telling us to rush through a government takeover of health care by August 1. This will result in a bureaucrat taking the place of your doctor telling you what procedures you will have. It will result in a $1 trillion Federal program. It will result in rationing and a huge tax increase on farmers Ladies and gentlemen, we have to slow down. Let's learn from the stimulus program. Let's learn from TARP. Let's slow down the process. Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, the pending health care legislation does one thing: It does bend the cost curve, but it bends it up. That's not according to me or my colleagues. That's according to the Congressional Budget Office that says private insurance rates will go up and the public option insurance will go up. What does that result in? 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a result of increased taxes, particularly My Blue Dog colleagues are down at the House negotiating some face- saving measure in this bill, and I'm going to include this list of their proposals, but I want to make sure that they comply with their July 9 letter which says it must be deficit neutral, it must protect rural health care, it must ensure bipartisanship, and finally, any health care reform legislation that comes to the floor must be available to all Members and the public for a sufficient amount of time This is government. This is transparency. The Blue Dogs need to (Mrs. LUMMIS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, ``where are the jobs?'' could be answered in one word, in my State of Wyoming. We were hiring people when our energy industry was robust from other States that were losing jobs, like Michigan. But the cap-and-trade bill that passed this House last week changed coal bonus payments from being paid over 5 years to now We are going to destroy jobs in Wyoming. So the people who moved from Michigan to Wyoming to find good-paying jobs are now going to have to return to Michigan or stay in Wyoming and be unemployed. It is because of the activities of this Congress. This Congress has not been happy to watch States like Michigan suffer. They have decided to make States like Wyoming, that were producing energy for this country, suffer right alongside States like Michigan. Our State, which had a healthy economy before cap-and-trade, before the Obama presidency, is now suffering just like the rest of the Nation. Our (Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it was Albert Einstein who said that ``the most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.'' That's great, Mr. Speaker, when compound interest is working for you--in building a nest egg for your children's college costs or for retirement. But when compound interest is working against you, it's It is absolutely devastating, especially for a Nation on the intermediate and long term, when that Nation recklessly spends taxpayers' money and causes huge, unsustainable deficits. As of June 30, the national debt was $11.5 trillion--over $37,000 per person. In June alone, the deficit rose by over $220 billion, a year's worth of deficits in 1 month! Now CBO says that the number, the total debt to the United States, will double in the next 10 years. It took 180 years for us to get to that $11.5 trillion. Under President Obama's massive spending it will double in just 10 years. Nothing puts our economy at greater risk of implosion and job loss than unsustainable COMMONSENSE SOLUTIONS ARE THE CURE TO OUR ECONOMIC WOES (Ms. JENKINS asked and was given permission to address the House for Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, last November, Americans sent a clear message. They wanted change in Washington. But they also asked for accountability, transparency, and for politicians to respect their tax Unfortunately, from the $787 billion so-called ``stimulus,'' trillions in bailouts, and the $3.55 trillion budget, Washington has gone on a reckless spending spree with taxpayer dollars. And now the majority in Congress is trying to pass a government takeover of health care that will add $239 billion to the debt our kids Prime time press conferences don't hide the fact that since January, our Nation's debt has skyrocketed by more than $1 trillion, that our debt to China increases each day, and that our Nation is facing double- Kansans know you can't spend money that you don't have. Congress must learn this lesson. As a CPA, a former State treasurer and a mother of two teenagers, I'm convinced that we need commonsense solutions to rein in spending, keep taxes low and get Americans back to work. JOBS WILL BE LOST AS A RESULT OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. CRENSHAW asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, it's pretty clear that we've lost a lot of jobs in this country, and I think it's pretty clear that we are going to lose a whole lot more jobs if we pass this health care plan. I thought Members might want to just hear a firsthand personal example. I've got a longtime friend that lives in Florida. He has a small business. By the way, he voted for Obama this year. He said, I'm going to vote for Barack Obama, even though I'm a Republican, because I saw him this weekend. He said, hey, have you seen that Obama health care plan? I said, yeah, as a matter of fact, I have. A lot of people have seen it. He said, man, that's not the change that I was voting for. He said, that's going to kill my business. He said, I'm going to see my taxes go up. He said, we're already laying off people, but if they put that penalty on us that I read about, then I'm going to have to lay some more people off. He said, this is killing me. And I'll tell you, that's happening all over the country, not just in Orlando, Florida, but all around the country. So we need some reform, but we need the right kind of reform, and this is not it. (Mr. SCHOCK asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Speaker, in the last 6 months, a lot has changed. We have a new President of the United States, we have a new Congress, the 111th Congress, and we have 3.1 million fewer jobs, and an increase of 28 percent in unemployment just in the last 6 months. What was the reaction? What was the response from the new administration and of this Congress? Well, we need to pass a stimulus bill, and we need to pass it now. No time for debate. No time for amendments. No time for input from the minority. We need to pass it This bill had less than 24 hours of debate on this floor before it was passed out of the floor, and yet the President took 4 days to sign it. What did it do? It spent $787 billion, the largest spending bill in And what have we gotten? The administration says we created 150,000 new jobs after spending $112 billion. Well, get out your calculators. (Mr. SMITH of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll has found that for the first time, less than half of Americans support President Obama's health care plan. Since April, approval of the President's handling of health care has dropped 8 points, while In an example of fair reporting, the Post put the poll results on its front page yesterday. Other news media have not been as candid in their When the Congressional Budget Office director revealed that the health care bill ``significantly expands the Federal responsibility for health care costs,'' the evening news programs on both CBS and NBC failed to report the CBO's key finding, nor have they reported how many jobs will be lost under the President's health care plan. Mr. Speaker, with so much at stake, Americans need the media to (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, President Obama told us that all this reckless spending he was doing was going to create jobs. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Instead of jobs, we get a so-called ``health reform'' bill. And this provision of that bill tells Americans that they will be prohibited from having their own insurance. They will be forced into a government health plan run by something like the IRS. Mr. Speaker, this health plan is socialized medicine, pure and simple. And in addition to that, it will cost more. It will increase taxes on the wealthy and a whole lot of other people. It will increase the deficit. It will lower quality. It doesn't cover everyone. And it is projected to lose another 5 million jobs of Americans. Mr. Speaker, this is not reform. This is just nuts. (Mr. BURGESS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this weekend, I received a communication from a constituent at home who brought to my attention a political cartoon that ran in the Chicago Tribune 75 years ago in 1934. It is often said that history doesn't repeat itself, but if you listen closely enough, it will rhyme. Or said another way, those who do not The constituent who sent this to me is a retired FBI agent. He wrote in his e-mail, ``change the names and the situation looks very familiar.'' Saul Alinsky, the leader of community organizers in Chicago, would be pleased with the current situation. When you look at the caption, spend, spend, spend under the guise of recovery, bust the budget, blame the capitalists for failure, junk the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, this was apropos 75 years ago. It may well be apropos (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would ask my colleagues on the other side if they would tell me, what is their health care plan? Is it just that we shouldn't do health care? What part of it would you not do? is the But I really rise, Mr. Speaker, to take cognizance of a very fine day yesterday of bipartisanship. A former colleague of ours, the now- Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, came to south Florida along with FAA Director Randy Babbitt to meet with several of us regarding radar in south Florida. On the flight from USAir here, Administrator Babbitt and I had an opportunity to hear a flight attendant do something very nice. She recognized and complimented 30 members of the Booker T. Washington High School class of 1949 in Miami who were en route here to Washington. It was a wonderful gesture, and it made for a My colleagues here who continue to rant about us not having health care, I wonder what they would say if we do nothing? Will health care (Mr. INGLIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. INGLIS. Mr. Speaker, I'm not here to ask the President to make good on his promise about those jobs, because I don't believe that government creates jobs. Government doesn't create wealth. All it does But I am here to ask the President to make good on the idea of producing the right policies that would create jobs by creating wealth in the private sector. And I would suggest to my colleagues that the way to do that is to have a low-tax situation, a lighter touch on regulation and less litigation. It's really those three things. If you have low taxes, light-touch regulation, and less litigation, we will expand the American economy, we will create wealth, and we will create That is something that we can be doing here in this Congress. It is something that we can cooperate on getting done, and we can serve the American people. We can deliver American solutions. (Mr. MORAN of Kansas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I for one believe that the health care system must be reformed. I've said that and have worked in that regard during my time in Congress. But I'm greatly concerned about the plans that I see coming forth for us to consider in this Congress. The single-payer plan raises concerns with me on behalf of senior citizens across the country, especially those I represent in Kansas. The plan that we are currently operating under, Medicare, provides wonderful services for many Americans, for senior citizens. But the reality is, that plan is bankrupt. We will spend $38 trillion more than The plan is expected to be bankrupt by 2017. So the idea that we would expand the plan when it already is in financial difficulty baffles my mind. The plan is to raise $820 billion in taxes, and we still leave the national debt increasing by $239 billion. This plan needs attention, and we need to make certain that what we do does not wreck the health care delivery plan we have in place for seniors today, especially in places like Kansas, where senior citizens are dominant. (Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I rise today to discuss the rising unemployment in my congressional district of south Florida. Last week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released data indicating that unemployment in Miami-Dade County was at nearly 11 percent. This represents a notable increase from 9.9 unemployment just Mr. Speaker, south Floridians are hurting. In Miami, workers in the food service and hotel industries have had their hours cut in half because of a reduction in tourism. These workers are working two, three In the Florida Keys, recreational fishermen are docking their boats permanently as the industry grapples with one of its slowest seasons in There is serious trouble in paradise as hardworking small businesses and middle-class families remain uncertain about their economic future. That is why it's imperative that this Congress gets serious about providing real solutions for our constituents. They cannot afford to WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS HAVING DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES ON THIS (Mr. SULLIVAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President and the Democrat majority, where in the heck are the jobs? With this stimulus bill and more than $1 trillion With the national energy tax passed by this House, it levies billions of new energy taxes on the American people, costing the average American family $3,100 more a year to heat and cool their home and put On health care, our Democrat majority's $1.2 trillion government takeover of our health care system mandates a one-size-fits-all, government-run health care plan on most Americans. Their plan is to nationalize our health care system and create new mandates, government bureaucracy and inefficiency that will only serve to drive up costs of Wasteful government spending is having devastating consequences on this country. It also could cost 4.7 million more jobs and hurt small WE NEED TO FOCUS ON SAVING THE COUNTRY'S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM (Mr. YARMUTH asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, when I was a young boy, a radio station went on the air in Louisville, Kentucky, and for the first week of its existence played one song over and over. It was called ``Purple People I am reminded of that event today as we've heard speaker after speaker from the other side repeat the same tired Republican talking points. What we haven't heard is one idea about how to fix our dysfunctional health care system which is threatening every business in this country, threatening our competitiveness and our long-term It is time that this Congress and our colleagues from the other side focus on saving this country's health care system. We heard one gentleman from the other side saying we're facing $38 trillion in additional debt in Medicare. We're trying to make sure that that I wish our colleagues on the other side would help us in that task. (Mrs. EMERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, in southern Missouri, rural families are struggling with job losses. We are a vibrant district with a time- honored work ethic, but job losses have hit us especially hard during a Constituents call my office every day, and they're asking what is Congress doing for them, how are we helping the manufacturing worker who doesn't want to go to the unemployment office because he really just wants to go back to work. And I hear a lot of justifiable anger from the same callers about Congress' policies that are going to make it tougher for them to get back to work. Cap-and-trade is the focus of Today, unemployment is still severe in southern Missouri with the potential to go much higher, much higher, if the cap-and-trade bill becomes law. More than 3,000 jobs could be lost in the Eighth District in a single year, and the few new green jobs this bill would create Mr. Speaker, this bill will leave with us a legacy of energy cost increases that will kill generations of jobs in rural America and in southern Missouri. Like my constituents, I am ready and willing to get Good energy policy is good jobs policy. I hope we can reverse course on cap-and-trade so it doesn't destroy our rural economy. THE HEALTH CARE BILL WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL TAXPAYER EXPENDITURES (Mr. WHITFIELD asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. WHITFIELD. Last night, as the Energy and Commerce Committee met to debate the new health care reform bill offered by the Democratic Party, as I looked through the analysis by CBO, I discovered that there was a reduction in Medicare benefits over the next 10 years in excess In addition to that, there was a reduction in reimbursements to The part of it that bothered me most is that in so many rural areas, programs like Medicare Advantage, home health care, skilled nursing In addition to that, this bill provides for an additional tax on employers, a tax on individuals that do not go out and buy health insurance once the mandate goes into effect; and, still, the bill is not paid for. And as the CBO director indicated, this bill will not save taxpayer money. This bill will create additional taxpayer WE DON'T NEED A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE AND WE DON'T NEED (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SOUDER. Where are the jobs? Last week, the health care bill was passed through the Education and Labor Committee, jammed through in an all-night session; and, supposedly, it offered a public-private option. Just a few minutes ago, we finished an Education and Labor markup. Where we once had a public-private option in direct lending, 80 percent chose the nonpublic option. So what did we just do? We eliminated the private option, and the Federal Government is going to be a giant bank, one of the biggest banks in the world, taking over all student lending. When we talk about the needs in health care, we need to address the problems that we're facing, the gaps in the health care system, how to make it more efficient. What we don't need is a government takeover of health care with no private options. We don't need higher taxes on the small businesses and the people in my district who are struggling with a mean of 15 percent unemployment in my eight counties. We don't need And this bill unbelievably had a clause added that will add more jobs for ACORN. When people in my district said they wanted more jobs, they (Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, it's an outrage the way health care is being approached in this country. Voters did vote for change; but, apparently, that's all they're going to have left in their pocket. I sat through a 17-hour markup on the Ways and Means Committee last week, and I didn't see one constructive process. I didn't see the voices of Democrats and Republicans heard on addressing the delivery system for Medicare to re-engineer it to reduce billions of dollars in Instead of reforming the private insurance industry that many of us want to do on both sides, Speaker Pelosi's response to that and the Democratic response to that is we'll legislate them out of business by undercutting them with a Medicare-like system which will punish rural And finally, egregiously, there's been no addressing of liability reform that punishes our doctors and health care providers with junk America demands real reform. We want real reform. Slow this thing down and give account to America for the kind of health care people need and want and that's affordable and accessible and not a GREATEST THREAT TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY FROM CAP-AND-TRADE BILL (Mr. BILBRAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, the American people were promised a climate change bill that would address the emissions problems. The problem is that their greatest threat to the environment and the economy from the so-called cap-and-trade bill was the smoke coming out of the back-room deals that were cut to create this monster that's being called cap-and- Frankly, I will just tell you the whole concept that when we had a chance to get government out of the way and build new zero emission generating facilities to be able to provide clean energy for the economy and for the environment, instead of that, this Congress decided And anyone that's worked on emissions issues will look at this bill in the future and say how could somebody with a straight face go back to their district and say that this bill is going to clean up the environment and help the economy? It is going to continue the pattern of a massive emission while we get the economy driven down. WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THE STIMULUS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME (Mr. KLINE of Minnesota asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, people are asking where are the As my friend from Indiana said moments ago, we just came out of amending a bill in the Education and Labor Committee where we wiped out the private sector in the student lending business, tens of thousands As all my colleagues know, this House, this Congress, passed a stimulus bill which was supposed to create jobs. Instead, we've been I find it interesting that the Republicans offered an alternative to that stimulus bill which would have cut taxes and created twice as many jobs, and now Christina Romer, the President's economic adviser, when she's been pressed on news interviews on two separate occasions in May and again in July about where are the jobs and why isn't the stimulus working, she said, well, the tax cuts in the stimulus bill are working. How ironic. We should have done it right the first time. WE NEED A PRESCRIPTION OF LOWER TAXES AND LOWERING SPENDING (Mr. GUTHRIE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GUTHRIE. I remember walking into my home one night when I was a senior in high school after school, 1982. My father and mother were talking with each other with a distressed look on their faces, and my dad was telling my mother that he was losing his job. The factory where he expected to work his entire life was shutting down. This was 1982, the recession, a recession like we find ourselves in today; and the prescription from Washington was to lower spending and to cut taxes. In the late 1980s, my father decided to take advantage of the economy and create a plant that he used to work at; and he decided to start a new plant, created over 500 jobs because Washington's prescription was The prescription today coming out of Washington to try to get out of this recession is to raise regulation and to raise taxes; and, Mr. Speaker, I believe that's why we're lingering in this recession, because people don't want to invest, because they're concerned about (Mr. PLATTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives addresses the very important issue of health care reform, we need to adhere to the principles of all physicians: first, do no harm. Unfortunately, the legislation that came out of the House Education and Labor Committee late last week does not adhere to this principle. CBO tells us it will drive up the costs of health care in the United States. In fact, when it's fully implemented, over $200 billion a year this plan will cost, it will not protect the right to keep the insurance coverage that you currently have. If you like it--that was one of the underlying principles of the administration--this bill will It will not adhere to that principle: do no harm. It will drive up costs. It will take away freedom of choice of the American citizens, and it is also going to have an impact on the ability for small businesses to provide insurance because of the taxes included in this bill. It's going to cost people insurance because small businesses will not be able to continue to afford the 8 percent payroll tax as well as an increase on small businesses filing a subchapter S. First, do no harm. We need to adhere to that principle. (Mr. NUNES asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, I wasn't going to come down here, Mr. Speaker, but then I heard the distinguished Democrat leader, Mr. Hoyer, come down and chastise us for using 1-minutes. Mr. Hoyer, you know why we're using these 1-minutes. It's because you've cut us out of the For the first time in this Nation's history, appropriations bills aren't under open rules. So we have no opportunity to offer amendments So you can understand why, in my district, having almost 20 percent unemployment, some of the highest unemployment in the country because this government fails to act to get water to the people to provide for the general welfare of the people of my district, this is why we come So I would suggest that we probably won't do this again because you will probably take away this advantage that we have of using these 1- minutes to make our case before the American people. I assume this will be the last day we have unlimited 1-minutes, but I can promise you that if you just go back to the open rules process on the appropriations bills, we will gladly not use these unlimited 1-minutes this way. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will kindly remind Members that remarks in debate should be directed to the Chair and not to others in NEVADA'S ECONOMY IS THE MOST DISTRESSED IN THE NATION (Mr. HELLER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, in a recent study Nevada's economy is now determined to be the most distressed in the Nation; and if you recall, 4 months ago we passed a stimulus package and we were promised by this administration, and by the majority, if we do this, if we pass this stimulus package, that we'd only have 8 percent unemployment. It would never exceed 8 percent unemployment. Yet we had to do it right now. We Well, I'm here to tell you today that Nevada's unemployment is at 12 percent, and that this administration says that the unemployment is So the question is, What did the stimulus do for Nevada? Well, in Las Vegas, Las Vegas has received to date $4,833. So the question is, Where's the money? $4,833 to Nevada and to Las Vegas. Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said, ``I bet more on a football game I ask the Speaker: Where's the money and where are the jobs? (Mr. BROUN of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I want someone to show me the jobs that we have been promised by the Democrats. Many counties in my district have unemployment rates of more Show me the jobs, Mr. Speaker. My colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle promised that their trillion-dollar stimulus would immediately create jobs and unemployment would not rise above 8 percent. Nothing could be further from the truth. In June alone, almost half a million jobs were lost, driving unemployment to its highest Now, after shoving a $646 billion energy tax down the throats of the American people, liberal leadership is now shoving a multitrillion- dollar health experiment. According to the CBO, this will cost 750,000 more jobs and push 100 million Americans off of their private health Mr. Speaker, I ask you to show me the jobs and show me why the American people should believe once again that a trillion-dollar The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings now will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 596, had I been present, I The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2729, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 330, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. PROVIDING FOR NATURAL GAS VEHICLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1622, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 393, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 507, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 428, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 658, this time has been designated for the taking of the official photo of the House The House will be in a brief recess while the Chamber is being As soon as these preparations are complete, the House will immediately resume its actual session for the taking of the photograph. About 5 minutes after that, the House will proceed with the business For the information of the Members, when the Chair says the House will be in order, we are ready to take our picture. That will be in The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess while the Chamber is being prepared. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 18 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the (Thereupon, the Members sat for the official photograph of the House The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair in 2 or 3 minutes. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 27 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Blumenauer) at 4 o'clock and 29 minutes p.m. NOTICE OF INTENTION TO OFFER RESOLUTION RAISING A QUESTION OF THE Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intention to raise a question of the privileges of Whereas, on May 25, 2007, U.S. District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger issued a ruling that directed the Bureau of Reclamation to reduce water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to protect a three-inch minnow called the Whereas, on December 15, 2008, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, based on the Wanger Ruling, issued a Biological Opinion on the Delta smelt that permanently reduced water export from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta which is traditionally delivered to cities and farms in the San Joaquin Valley and the Los Angeles and San Diego Whereas according to a University of California at Davis study, based on the water reductions outlined in the Delta smelt Biological Opinion, revenue losses in the San Joaquin Valley of California for 2009 will be $2.2 billion and job Whereas according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the San Joaquin Valley has reached Whereas region wide unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley of California is nearly 20 percent and some cities have an Whereas thousands of people who once relied on employment in the agricultural sector are now unemployed and struggling to meet their most basic needs, such as providing food for Whereas, on March, 1, 2009, the Sacramento Bee reported thousands of people have been turned away from local food banks as supplies are not ample enough to meet local needs; Whereas, on April 14, 2009, the Fresno County, California, Board of Supervisors proclaimed that the man-made drought has Whereas on June 4, 2009, despite the ongoing man-made drought in California, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a new Biological Opinion on the spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, the southern population of North American green sturgeon, and Southern Resident killer whales which further reduces water supplies to Californians; Whereas, on June 19, 2009, California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a state of emergency for Fresno County, California, and petitioned President Barack Obama to Whereas on June 28, 2009, the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar visited Fresno, California, and held a town hall meeting in which nearly 1,000 people attended to express their dissatisfaction with the lack of action by the Obama Whereas, on July 6, 2009, the Los Angeles Times reported that during Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's town hall meeting on June 28, 2009, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Mike Connor, pledged to provide financial aid to starving families and an audience member replied ``we don't Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that hundreds of San Joaquin Valley farmers protested outside the Federal Building Plaza in San Francisco which houses Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported the protestors blamed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman George Miller for the water shortage in the San Joaquin Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that protestors were holding signs that said ``ESA Puts Fish Ahead of People'', ``Congress Created Drought'', and ``New Whereas, on July 1, 2009, the Fresno Bee reported that a crowd of 4,000 marched through the streets of Fresno, California, to demand that the Federal Government end the Whereas, on June 18, 2009, the Democrat leadership held open Roll Call Vote 366 for the purpose of changing the Whereas during this vote, House Democrat leadership was seen on the House floor pressuring Members of Congress to change their Aye vote to a Nay vote in order to defeat the Nunes Amendment which would have helped to relieve the water Whereas, on July 8, 2009, during the mark-up on the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, a debate was held on the Calvert Amendment which would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Appropriations Committee, David Obey, said ``Recognize there are certain actions, that if you take, this bill won't pass, Whereas Chairman Obey violated Clause 16 of House Rule 23 by linking passage of the Calvert Amendment to loss of Whereas, on July 14, 2009, despite historical tradition of open rules during the appropriations process, the Rules Committee blocked an amendment to the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 that would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Whereas, for two years, the House of Representatives has known about the man-made drought in California without taking Whereas the lack of action by the House of Representatives has demonstrated that fish are more important than families; Constitution enumerates that the Congress shall have the power to provide for the general welfare of the United Whereas the House of Representatives has willfully and knowingly failed to provide for the general welfare of the Whereas the failure of the House of Representatives to carry out its duties has subjected the House to public ridicule and damaged the dignity and integrity of the House Resolved, That the Committee on Natural Resources is instructed to discharge H.R. 3105, the Turn on the Pumps Act of 2009, for immediate consideration by the House of The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under rule IX, a resolution offered from the floor by a Member other than the majority leader or the minority leader as a question of the privileges of the House has immediate precedence only at a time designated by the Chair within 2 legislative days after Pending that designation, the form of the resolution noticed by the gentleman from California will appear in the Record at this point. The Chair will not at this point determine whether the resolution constitutes a question of privilege. That determination will be made at the time designated for consideration of the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX. Record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PRICE DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2938) to extend the deadline for commencement of Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered 12187, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend the time period during which the licensee is required to commence the construction of the project for up to 3 consecutive 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the extension (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the period required for commencement of construction of the project described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the license effective as of the date of its expiration and the first extension authorized under subsection (a) shall take The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2938 would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the construction deadline for a hydroelectric power plant at the Melvin Price Locks and Dam in Alton, Illinois. Over the past 20 years, there has been great interest in building a hydroelectric plant at this site on the Mississippi River; however, construction of the hydroelectric plant has not happened on Last October, Brookfield Power acquired the license to proceed with the construction of the site. When Brookfield applied for an extension of the construction deadline, the company was informed that because of the administrative extensions granted to the previous licensee, congressional action is needed to grant an extension. Brookfield will lose this license at the end of this month, July 2009. For that reason, Brookfield and the City of Alton, Illinois, requested legislation to extend the deadline for 6 years. Passing this legislation is necessary to ensure that Brookfield can bring renewable energy to Illinois and create green jobs. The hydroelectric project will create 404,000 megawatt hours of electricity, the equivalent of 283 barrels of oil. Further, Brookfield will hire 125 workers over a 3-year period and invest over $400 million This bill is cosponsored by my friend and colleague from Illinois, Congressman John Shimkus. Both the majority and minority staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee have reviewed and accepted the legislation. FERC has also reviewed the legislation and does not oppose Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2938. Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2938, a bill that extends the timeline to bring this hydroelectric power plant project in Illinois on line. It gives them another up to 6 years, and ultimately, this would be the decision of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. But as they're going through the process right now of permitting and approval, this provides them an additional 6 years to make sure that the project has enough time to get approved and completed and bring I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Oregon (Mr. Mr. Speaker, I rise today also in support of this legislation. I think it's a good bill because I think hydroelectric power is a good thing for our country, and when we're concerned about getting renewable energy online, there's probably nothing better than hydropower for Unfortunately, in the cap-and-tax bill that was passed by this House over my objection and over the objection of the gentleman from Illinois, there is a provision on page 19, line 12, sub 3, that says, The hydroelectric project installed on the dam is operated so that the water surface elevation at any given location and time that would have occurred in the absence of the hydroelectric project is maintained. Now, I share this language with you because the gentleman from Illinois, my friend, talked about the 404,000 watts or megawatts, whatever it is--I didn't jot down the exact amount--would be produced as hydroelectric power and, therefore, renewable energy and create new jobs. My concern is this: that hydropower is being added after this Should the cap-and-tax bill become law, that hydropower, according to this language, would not be considered as renewable energy for purposes of Illinois meeting the new Federal standard on renewable energy. Because in consultation with two civil engineers I've spoken with who operate hydro projects--many of them and large-scale hydro projects-- when I shared this language with them about maintaining the surface elevation at any location in time, they laughed. They said you can't operate a hydro system and not affect the water behind the dam in some And so to disqualify the new hydro--like the gentleman from Illinois Now, there is another provision in this bill, the cap-and-tax bill, that said hydro that came online after 1988 is renewable but hydro before 1988 is not. Now, you have got water flowing down a river. You've got multiple dams along the way with hydro generation facilities. It's the same water. It just depends on what year the dam was built whether or not that hydropower is considered renewable or Nor do the provisions in the cap-and-tax bill that said, if woody biomass off a Federal forest comes off of a late successional stand, you can't count the burning of that to produce green energy as renewable energy, but if it came off of a severely damaged tree, it is, although there is no definition for that. And if any woody biomass comes off private, county, State lands, it's all considered renewable energy when it produces electricity when it's burned, but yet there is I share that with you because America's Federal forests are terrifically overstocked and subject to catastrophic fire. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. WALDEN. We could create more real jobs cleaning up the forest in very depressed communities. I was just out in four counties in my district. I think two, maybe three, are now at over 20 percent unemployment. They have 70, 50 and 80 percent Federal land. This is the great forests of our country that are left to burn up. The woody biomass could be put into clean energy. There are firms willing to invest if they could get supply. Again, the cap-and-trade, cap-and-tax So I share the gentleman's support of this legislation to create and move forward on the hydro project. It's unfortunate if the cap-and-tax bill that passed the House becomes law that hydro will not be considered renewal. That doesn't make sense. And I hope that the Senate Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my colleague for supporting this legislation. I share the same concern that you have with the section that you quoted in the energy bill, and we hope that our friends in the other body will address that issue so that it is not a With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SCALISE. I would like to yield 3 minutes to a cosponsor of this Mr. SHIMKUS. Melvin Price Locks and Dam is named after an historic member of this Chamber, Mel Price, who gave me my nomination to West Point. So it is with great affinity that I just mentioned that. But now that district is ably represented by my friend and colleague, Jerry Costello, and I thank him for including me on this reauthorization The Republicans have already talked about an all-of-the-above energy strategy which talks about nuclear, wind, solar and hydroelectric. And no one is really more knowledgeable on the hydroelectric issue than the colleague who preceded me, Greg Walden. There is a concern about if we want these programs, these licenses, to actually become real projects in the whole credit issue, then this has to qualify for renewable, and that will help bring some dollars to help effect this instead of just worrying about relicensing, then we can actually get it built. But if we don't do this process, then we have to go through the whole I'm very happy to be here with my friend who, again, worked hard and diligently for southern Illinois. And this is all part of that all-of- the-above energy strategy that will help us decrease our reliance on imported crude oil. Thank you for letting me join you in this Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise really in amazement today to hear our colleagues on the other side talk about hydroelectric power being a renewable energy source, because we have seen multiple venues here in the House Mr. Speaker, we have a tremendous need in this country for alternative sources of energy, renewable sources of energy. Nuclear energy is one of those renewable sources of energy, or a source of energy that is one that makes the most sense from an environmental We have many members of the opposition on the other side that want to deny us going into a nuclear age. France gets over 80 percent of its electric power from nuclear sources. The United States should do the same thing. In my home State of Georgia, the Georgia Power Company for a long period of time now has been trying to get permitting for two new nuclear reactors at their plant in Vogel just south of my district, just south of Augusta, Georgia. They already have two. They want two more. But, Mr. Speaker, they have had a great deal of difficulty because the regulatory commission and various environmental groups have They are not alone. All over this country, there are electric power companies that want to put in electric power plants that are nuclear- fueled. Mr. Speaker, they have great difficulty doing so. We need to use our renewable resources, not only for hydroelectric power, but for nuclear power. We need to look to wind and solar. We need to look to biomass. We need to stop this idiocy of a corn-based ethanol source of energy. Mr. Speaker, I'm from Georgia, and I love my cornbread and grits. It makes no sense to me to drive down the road burning up my food. But we've done that. And it has driven up the cost of corn for the chicken producers that produce most of the chicken for the world, all over the world in my district, and in my friend Nathan Deal's district from Gainesville in the Ninth and Tenth Congressional Mr. Speaker, we have an energy policy that is broken. Republicans have presented bill after bill that would solve the energy crisis. The American Energy Act is one. It is an all-of-the-above energy plan that would stimulate hydroelectric power. It would stimulate nuclear power. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. BROUN of Georgia. But our plans are not being heard on the floor of this House. Why is that? Why are the American people's It is because the leadership on the Democratic side wants to stifle debate, wants to shut off any alternative ideas. They call the Republican Party the ``Party of No,'' but the Democratic Party has been the Party of No, whereas the Republican Party is the Party of k-n-o-w Know because we know how to solve the energy crisis. We know how to solve the health care financing crisis. We know how to solve the economic crisis. But those ideas are not being heard. Mr. Speaker, it is time for the American people to wake up and demand that the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my friend from Louisiana if he Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I again rise in support of the legislation dealing with hydroelectric power. I think it is important, as we are talking about energy, that we really talk about the need to get a comprehensive national energy policy in our country. It is not just enough to promote hydroelectric power. It is not just enough to look at any one significant source of power. We need to look at all of the resources in our land. In fact, the inscription by Daniel Webster right above the Speaker's rostrum talks about the need to explore the resources of our land. Unfortunately, there are many Federal laws and barriers in place that prevent us from doing just that. This cap-and-trade national energy tax imposes even more barriers. In addition to imposing significant taxes on to the backs of American people in the form of higher utility rates and bureaucratic regulations, it will run millions of jobs out of this country. That's not the right approach. What we need is a comprehensive energy policy. I'm proud to be a cosponsor, with many other of my colleagues, of the American Energy Act, a bill that we filed earlier this year to take that comprehensive approach to a national energy policy, one that looks at all of the alternatives. We explore more technologies for wind, for solar, for hydroelectric and for nuclear power. We use our natural resources, like oil and natural gas, to get to that bridge to fund those other alternatives. We use the things that we have here today to get us to those technologies that aren't yet readily available to power our homes or to run our cars. But hopefully one day, through the use of these technologies, we will advance the utilization of the natural resources we have in our country to create jobs. Our bill would actually create jobs and generate billions of dollars to the Federal Government, not by raising taxes, but by actually creating more economic opportunities by creating jobs and getting people back to work so that they can contribute and pay into and pay down this debt as opposed to raising the debt and running off jobs. So I would hope that we would support and get to a place where we can actually get agreement in a bipartisan way to pass a bipartisan bill like the American Energy Act that actually takes a comprehensive approach to solving our national energy needs and reducing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil--rather than this tax approach, this cap-and-trade energy tax that actually would make countries in Europe, the Middle East and China more powerful and put America further at risk--so we can get our strengthened energy policy and we can get energy independence. But we need to have a bipartisan approach, not this cap-and-trade energy tax that literally would run millions of jobs Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend from Louisiana and the minority for supporting this legislation. In particular I would like to thank my colleague from Illinois, Congressman Shimkus, not only for his kind words, but for cosponsoring this legislation. I urge passage of H.R. 2938, and with that I yield back the balance The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 69) recognizing the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for diabetes, Whereas diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease caused by the inability of the pancreas to produce insulin or to use Whereas in the case of Type I diabetes or insulin-dependent diabetes, formerly called juvenile-onset diabetes because it tends to affect persons before the age of 20, the pancreas Whereas in the case of Type II diabetes or non-insulin- dependent diabetes, which comprises about 90 percent of all cases of diabetes, the pancreas produces a reduced amount of insulin or the cells do not respond to the insulin; Whereas this year 23.6 million Americans suffer from one form or another of this disease, and 5.7 million people go Whereas 2.0 million or 8.2 percent of all Latino Americans aged twenty years or older have diabetes, and Latino Americans are 1.5 times more likely to have diabetes than Whereas Mexican-Americans, the largest Latino subgroup in the United States, are more than twice as likely to have Whereas residents of Puerto Rico are 1.8 times more likely to have diagnosed diabetes than United States non-Latino Whereas diabetes affects individuals in different ways, and Whereas diabetes in the Latino community can result in a high prevalence of complications, such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in the legs, heart attacks and strokes, and Whereas individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease; learn and practice the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol Whereas targeted health communications to the public are vital in disseminating information about diabetes and the Whereas the Latino Diabetes Association, a nonprofit organization devoted to aggressive diabetes education, has worked tirelessly to raise funds for diabetes education and Whereas the month of July of 2009 would be an appropriate month to recognize Latino Diabetes Awareness Month in order to educate Latino communities across the Nation about diabetes and the need for research funding, accurate diagnosis, and effective treatments: Now, therefore, be it (1) recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for educational institutes, and other organizations that are-- (A) working to increase awareness of diabetes; and (B) conducting research for methods to help patients and families in the Latino community suffering from diabetes; Association for its great efforts to educate, support, and provide hope for individuals and their families who suffer (4) supports the designation of an appropriate month to recognize ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month''; and (5) calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with appropriate programs and activities. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I would like to thank Majority Leader Hoyer, Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Barton and Health Subcommittee Chair Pallone and, of course, my colleague from Louisiana, a good baseball player, for their support of this resolution. I also want to take the time to thank all my colleagues in the House of Representatives for their bipartisan I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 69, the Latino Diabetes Awareness Resolution. The resolution recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education and an eventual cure for diabetes and commends those organizations that are working to increase awareness of diabetes and conducting research for methods to help patients and families in Latino It also congratulates the work of the Latino Diabetes Association for its great efforts to educate, support and provide hope for individuals and families who suffer from diabetes. The resolution also supports the designation of July 2009 as ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month.'' It calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with It is critical for the long-term sustainability of any health care reform plan to make sure that steps for the prevention of diseases, like diabetes, are encouraged by Congress. This prevention of disease would do a great deal in helping keep costs down for current patients, as well as favorably changing the attitudes and behavior of diabetes patients and their families, thereby improving their quality of life. We can take a good first step in achieving these goals by passing this resolution here today. Diabetes is a chronic disease of the pancreas and adversely affects its ability to produce and use insulin Diabetes has no cure, treatment varies from patient to patient, and it is quite often very painful. Some side effects of treatment include weight gain, skin rash or itching, various stomach problems, tiredness The impact of diabetes is not focused solely on the patient; family members and immediate care takers also suffer greatly from the effects of diabetes on their loved ones. I say this from personal experience. In the Latino community, diabetes can result in high prevalence of foot problems, kidney failure, renal disease, blindness, heart attacks, What's scariest is that diabetes patients who need to take one or more insulin shots daily, and for whatever reason do not, greatly One of the reasons I believe diabetes disproportionately affects the Latino community is the lack of sound health communication that speaks to those Hispanics who are most at risk of coming down with diabetes, or who already suffer from it. This means targeting communications efforts to both English- and Spanish-speaking communities and specifically referencing these efforts towards the area of our culture Over 23.6 million Americans suffer from diabetes, and of these, 2 million are Latinos or of Latino descent; 8.6 of all Latinos over the age of 20 live with this disease. However, Latinos are almost twice as likely to have diabetes as non-Latino whites of similar age. Individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease and take the proper steps to care for themselves. This means learning and practicing the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure and cholesterol levels. They must exercise and receive regular checkups, as well as maintain a healthy, balanced diet, as well as maintaining willingness to change these dangerous eating habits. And that becomes very difficult for a lot of us because we like our frijoles, our tortillas, our tamales, our enchiladas, our menudo; but we have to put that aside. This could include eating meals prepared healthier, eating more moderate portions, or a combination of these. Two people ought to be commended for their hard work in the attempts to educate the public about diabetes and treatments for patients, and that's actors Rita Torres and Edward Olmos. A few years ago, I worked with Rita Torres and Edward to help put together a short documentary highlighting the day-to-day lives of different diabetes patients, regardless of age or ethnicity, and they ought to be recognized for their tireless efforts to raise diabetes awareness. I have been affected personally by diabetes through the loss of five members of my immediate family. My father was a proud, hardworking man, never missed a day of work for any reason until he was struck down by diabetes and ultimately needed to have a leg amputated. It originally started with a toe, half a leg, and then the leg itself. My mother also was very strong, was never sick until she, too, came My two brothers, Abelio and Tanny, and my sister Annie fought with diabetes but ultimately lost their battle largely due to lack of education and awareness of how the disease would affect their lives and Tanny recently passed away due in part to the fact that he could no longer afford all the necessary treatment to keep his diabetes at bay. He is not only a victim of diabetes but of the high cost of health care My brother-in-law, Ted Dominguez, was also a victim of diabetes. Ted was a great athlete back in his day, always in great physical shape. His lesson to us is that anyone, regardless of age, weight or physical condition, can get diabetes. He eventually went through dialysis and Also, a former staff member of mine who has been a close friend for many years, Daniel Hernandez, is a testament to us and to many other folks. He worked for me because he needed coverage for diabetes. He left my office after 2 years and became an independent consultant. He came back, however, and approached me one day and told me that the only reason he was willing to come back to work was to qualify for health care benefits that he would not be able to receive otherwise. It was their fight and their example that opened my eyes to the horrid realities and difficulties of this disease and the need for education and awareness about diabetes and ultimately to introduce this However, a great diabetes success story and a perfect example to prove that diabetes can be beat is Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor was diagnosed and has lived with type 1 diabetes since the age of 8 years of age. Due to carefully monitoring her condition, she fought the disease head-on and continues to be a great example of someone who can live with diabetes. She will soon not only be the first Latina to become a Justice on the Supreme Court, but Another example of a remarkable type 1 diabetes patient is Sara Rodriguez. Sara is a constituent of mine, a rising junior at Rancho Cucamonga High School, a straight A student, and letter winner in basketball, volleyball, and track. In order for Sara to lead as normal a teenage life as possible, she must test her blood sugar levels eight to 20 times per day, every day. She will never outgrow her disease and will require care and medication for the rest of her life. She is a very brave and courageous young woman whose fight and determination should not only be an example to diabetes patients everywhere, but to On behalf of all of the other young people like Sara Rodriguez, Congress recently reauthorized the special diabetes program. This is a wonderful example of the government's commitment to cure diabetes for people like Sara and the millions of others who live with the disease and its complications. This program funds $150 million a year in type 1 diabetes research and is aligned with the goals of this resolution to Yet another great example of a person living a healthy life with diabetes is Roque Martin, the grandfather of Matt Gomez, one of my interns, who has been instrumental in assisting with this resolution. Roque was diagnosed with diabetes over 25 years ago and continues to live a healthy life even at the age of 78. He eats rights and checks his blood sugar level three times a day and is a great example, along with Sara and Judge Sotomayor, for all diabetes patients that with proper care, diet and exercise, one can survive with diabetes. That is why it's so important to pass this resolution, which I introduced in the hopes of bringing awareness to those lucky enough to not have to face the disease firsthand, or through the fight of a loved It takes a small, but a critical, first step to help raise awareness about diabetes for not only the Latino community, but for all Americans But, also, it's a giant step for those individuals that have suffered from diabetes for many years and lack the ability to tell their stories firsthand, along with families and immediate caretakers of diabetes patients, who oftentimes suffer the impacts of the disease more so than Diabetes is a disease that can, and does, affect anyone: Democrats, Republicans, black or white, Latinos, Asians, American Indians, all nationalities. The alarming statistics regarding diabetes are on the rise. With the greater scope of the health care debate, there is no better time to raise the awareness for a preventable disease than right now. And there is no better time than right now to stress that no diabetes patient should be denied health care coverage because of their For these reasons, I ask you to stand with me and fight against Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 69. I want to congratulate the gentleman from California on his leadership on this bill, building a bipartisan coalition to bring it to the floor under suspension. I want to recognize the 23.6 million Americans that suffer from diabetes. Diabetes can lead to serious complications and premature death, but people with diabetes can take steps to control the disease and lower the risk of complications. The Centers for Disease Control has stated that progression to diabetes among those with pre-diabetes is not inevitable and that studies have shown that people with pre-diabetes who lose weight and increase their physical activity can prevent or delay diabetes and return their blood glucose levels to normal. Through regular exercise and a steady diet, Americans can get to a healthier state of living and avoid diabetes, and that's what we're trying to raise awareness about. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Houston, Texas (Mr. Gene Green), also an outstanding basketball player. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 69, which recognizes the increased rates of diabetes in the Hispanic community and calls for increased research to combat and And I want to thank my good friend Joe Baca for sponsoring this resolution and also for the compliment. I think you're the first person in history who ever said I was a good basketball player. Thank you, According to the Office of Minority Health, Mexican Americans are twice as likely as non-Hispanic whites to be diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. They have higher rates of end-stage renal disease caused by diabetes, and they are 50 percent more likely to die from diabetes Mexican American adults are two times more likely than non-Hispanic white adults to have been diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. In 2002, Hispanics were 1.5 times as likely to start treatment for end- stage renal disease related to diabetes, compared to non-Hispanic white men. In 2005, Hispanics were 1.6 times as likely as non-Hispanic whites In our district, it is predominantly Hispanic. We have a large number of individuals with type 2 diabetes, which is often referred to as late-onset diabetes. Because of this, many individuals in our district have diabetes-related complications, including illnesses such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end-stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in However, type 2 diabetes is preventable with a good diet and exercise. It is important we have targeted educational campaigns in the Hispanic community to help combat the diabetes epidemic. I would like to commend the Latino Diabetes Association and other diabetes research groups for their work in educating the Hispanic community on diabetes-related issues. Groups like these are crucial to the reduction of diabetes in the Hispanic community. I would also like to extend my support towards designating July 2009 as Latino Diabetes Awareness Month to help raise awareness of the high Through education and prevention and wellness programs we can drastically reduce the number of Hispanic individuals with diabetes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. BACA. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. This is probably the most important part, That is why this Congress needs to pass comprehensive health care reform that covers everyone so we can deal with the diabetes epidemic in our Hispanic community, our African American community and also in our low-economic community, because we can deal with this if we push the envelope back to deal with it before it gets to be where people Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I'm a medical doctor. I've treated diabetes for 3\\1/2\\ or more decades. I congratulate my good friend Joe Baca for bringing this issue to the forefront because it is extremely important for all Americans, not just only the Latino community that he's focusing on here. I've seen many patients in my overall medical career that are Latino, as well as blacks and Caucasian and people from all ethnic groups. It affects everybody no matter who their forefathers, what their skin color is, and I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this God tells us in Hosea 4:6, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. And as a medical doctor, I've tried to instill knowledge into my patients over the years, and this, of course, is what this resolution is all about, and I do congratulate the gentleman for bringing it forward because we do have a problem with people being knowledgeable about diabetes and the effect that it has upon them, Diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in the adult population. It leads to many health problems. It leads to heart attacks and As I sat here listening to Mr. Baca, I recalled an elderly black gentleman who came to see me as a patient that I diagnosed as having diabetes, and I started talking to him about diet and exercise and those types of things. Well, he didn't take care of himself, in spite of all my warnings and all of the consequences that he was headed towards. He wound up having a foot cut off, and he had that leg cut off. I kept talking to him. His blood sugar was continuing to be extremely high. Wound up having a second leg cut off, and eventually he had both arms and both legs removed, and he was sitting in a wheelchair when he finally got the message and started controlling his diet, taking his medications as prescribed, and we finally got his blood That's a sad story. I've seen many, many patients over the years that have developed renal failure, which is what diabetes leads to. It leads to the nerves in people's legs dying so that they have no feeling in their legs so they can get cuts or even the simplest little puncture or a cut on their foot may lead to gangrene that leads to amputation, maybe even lead to what we call in medicine septicemia, which is where you have bacteria in your bloodstream, and it can go to your heart and affect the valves in your heart. Septicemia itself can lead to death, Diabetes afflicts many of our population, and it's sad that people don't have the knowledge of what that disease will lead to. That's why I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this forward, and I Mr. Speaker, when I was practicing medicine in rural south Georgia, I had a small automated lab in my office down there, and Congress passed a bill called the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act. My lab was totally automated. I had quality control to make sure that the results were absolutely accurate so that when I checked a patient's blood sugar, I would know what it was to know if they had the potential for prediabetes or whether they had frank diabetes. I would do a fasting blood sugar that would help me diagnosis their condition. Well, Congress passed CLIA, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act, that closed my lab and every single doctor's lab in this country. Closed our labs. Eventually, I got my lab back up after I jumped through the hoops that were required by the legislation, by the regulatory burden placed on me and all doctors in this country. Prior to CLIA, a patient would come in and I would take a history and physical and would suspect that they may have diabetes. Some patients would get a family history of diabetes, and so I would do a screening I charged $10 for that test, Mr. Speaker. After CLIA shut me down, I had to send patients over to the hospital. The hospital was charging $35 for the same test. Once CLIA came along, it actually increased, and I got my lab opened back up, I had to charge $35, but the hospital, I The point I want to make here is this regulatory burden on the health care industry markedly raised the price for that one test. What we see across the health care industry when government gets involved in health care decisions, such as it did with CLIA, it drives up the cost for all As a physician who used to be a preferred provider for Medicare patients--I'm not now, for many reasons--but as a preferred provider, I could not see many patients, as I did previously, for free. Many, many patients, poor patients, people that had no insurance would come into my office, and I would see them for free. I have literally given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of free health care provision in my office; give free tests, free screening for diabetes, for many conditions. But under current Federal law, physicians who accept Medicare cannot do that. That makes no sense, Mr. Speaker. It is so today because of Federal regulation. Congress passed HIPPA, the Health Insurance Portability and Privacy Act. That has cost the health care industry billions of dollars and has not paid for the first aspirin to treat the headaches that it's created. And it was totally Mr. Speaker, the point I'm trying to make is the American people need to know that the more the Federal Government gets into the health care business, the more regulatory burden is placed on physicians and In the non-stimulus bill we put a chunk of money, a huge chunk of money, for something called comparative effectiveness research. What I'd like my colleagues and the American people to know, Mr. Speaker, is that this is a process put into place by the Democratic majority. This could have prevented those 78-year-old people that my friend Mr. Baca talked about from getting the care that they need because it is going to be deemed, as some Federal bureaucrat says, it's not effective comparatively to provide the dialysis for that 78-year-old that Mr. Baca was talking about. It's not going to be effective to try to prevent the blindness. It's not going to be effective to provide care to people who now are getting care. And we're going to have a I have said on this floor in Special Orders that this comprehensive health care bill that's being debated right now in committees and is going to be presented on this floor eventually--the Speaker wants to have it come up before we leave for the August recess--it's literally Now I have been chastised in the liberal media for making that claim, but it's going to kill people for this simple reason, Mr. Speaker. And the American people need to understand this. People are going to be denied services. They're going to have a marked delay in their being able to get the screening tests that they need for colon cancer or for evaluation of their chest pain or they're going to have a marked delay, as we see in Canada and Great Britain today, of being able to get their So diabetic patients who have developed coronary artery disease and have angina pectoris and maybe even had a heart attack are going to have marked delay in being able to get the stints put in or their bypass surgery that they desperately need, and people are going to die. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I have seen patients over and over again with Mr. Speaker, I've given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of my services over my career. I want people to have access to health care-- but they do today. EMTALA requires every emergency room in this country to evaluate and treat everybody who walks in. So the question of access We hear about 47 million people. The numbers keep growing by the Democratic side. The American people need to understand that a lot of those people are illegal aliens who have come here illegally. I understand why. They come here for work, for their families. And I feel American citizens are going to be denied treatment, denied x-rays, denied their coronary bypass surgery, denied their dialysis, and all these things because of this comprehensive health care plan that's being shoved down the throat of the American people. This is not the CBO just last week said it's not going to lower the cost of health care. CBO just last week said it's not going to put people in the insured category. CBO last week said it's going to cost at least The more government gets involved in the health care business, the higher the cost goes, the less efficient it is, and the Democratic plan The American people, Mr. Speaker, need to stand up and say ``no,'' and say ``yes'' to a health care plan that makes sense, that lowers the Mr. BACA. First of all, I appreciate some of the comments that my colleague, the doctor from Georgia, ended up making. And it is about knowledge, education, and awareness, and it's about preventive, because preventive is really the key to saving money. Once you do the early detection, early prevention, then we could save a lot of lives on account of treatment, because in his statement he indicated many of the people that he treated--those are people that I recognize in terms of my own personal family that lack that kind of knowledge, that kind of awareness, and did not follow the doctor's orders in terms of what they should have been doing to preserve their life. That's why it's very important that we create this kind of legislation to recognize diabetes awareness for all America, because it impacts all of us. Mr. SCALISE. It's important that we continue working to find the causes and the treatments, education, and make sure that we are researching properly to find cures for diseases like diabetes. The broader question of health care reform--I think my friend from about the challenges and the concerns that so many over on this side have of this proposal that's before us. Not here in this bill, but being debated here in this Congress in these coming weeks, this week, last week, this proposal to have a government takeover of our health I think it shows that while there are definitely ways to approach this in a bipartisan fashion, where there are many areas of health care reform that many of us agree need to be made to improve outcomes, to improve access, to focus on that narrow group of people who don't have I think the real danger is going down the road of a government takeover where government literally is interfering in the relationship between a doctor and their patient, as this bill would do, the bill that's been filed by the administration, by some of the members of this I think there's real problems, and we can only look at the neighbors that have gone down the same road. Look at Canada. Canada has a government-run health care system. Many people with the means from Canada come to America to get good care. The same thing in England. There was a tragic story in England, which has a government-run system. Just yesterday, there was a young man, a 22-year-old, who died because he was not allowed to get a liver transplant. ``He did not qualify for a donor liver under strict NHS rules.'' His own mother They have a government-run system that's very similar to the proposal that's being pushed by the President to have this government takeover We actually had an amendment in committee last night in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would have prohibited a government-run system from having a bureaucrat interfere in the relationship between a patient and their doctor. Unfortunately, our amendment was defeated. So clearly it shows that a government-run system would allow a doctor-patient relationship to be interfered with by a government bureaucrat here in Washington. That's not health care reform. That's So we need to, hopefully, go back to the table and have a true bipartisan debate because there are many proposals that are on the table, bills that have been filed--I'm cosponsor of a number of them that actually address some of the problems that exist in health care-- to allow companies to pool together so they can get the same buying power as a small business, as a large business does; to allow individuals to buy insurance across State lines so they don't have to rely on their employer if they don't like their employer's plan; and then also open up and address those areas of waste, fraud, and abuse I do think it's very important that we raise awareness and education for diseases like diabetes. And I do want again to thank the gentleman with the ``good arm'' from California for his leadership on this issue because he has, I think, taken this issue and approached it in a good bipartisan way. Hopefully, we can do the same with the broader area of Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank both sides for bipartisan support on this resolution. I look forward to the strong The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. Senate Concurrent Resolution 30, by the yeas and nays; House Concurrent Resolution 123, by the yeas and nays; The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF HUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 270, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418, So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas). The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30, on which the yeas and nays The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 421, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The amendment was rejected by every single Democrat on the committee.",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee vote against Steve Scalise's amendment regarding nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://waysandmeans.house.gov/brady-nunes-reed-call-for-investigation-into-new-york-nursing-home-deaths-data-cover-up/",
                "scraped_text": "Brady, Nunes, Reed Call for Investigation Into New York Nursing Home Deaths, Data Cover-Up WASHINGTON, DC – Ways and Means Republican Leader Kevin Brady (R-TX) sent a letter to House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal (D-MA) calling for an immediate hearing to investigate New York nursing home deaths. The letter was joined by Ways and Means Health Subcommittee Republican Leader Devin Nunes (R-CA) and Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY). In New York, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s disastrous March 15th order knowingly sent thousands of COVID-19 positive patients back into nursing homes across the state, which spread the virus and killed thousands of New York’s parents and grandparents. In January, the New York State Office of the Attorney General’s report stated that nursing home deaths had been undercounted by “approximately 50 percent.” The death toll has now risen to approximately 15,000 souls. In February, Governor Cuomo’s top aide then admitted that numbers were not accurately reported out of fear that the accurate numbers would be “used against us by federal prosecutors.” “Given the committee’s jurisdiction over Medicare reimbursement to skilled nursing facilities and continued role in providing COVID-19 financial aid to states, it is imperative that we use all the tools at the Committee’s disposal to determine if the state of New York deliberately provided false data to the federal government and the public,” said the Ways & Means Republicans. The request for an investigation comes after Rep. Reed provided Democrats with the opportunity to add to their partisan $1.9 trillion spending bill an amendment to ensure honest COVID-19 information from states. The amendment would have specifically required governors to attest that the data their states have been reporting is accurate now and moving forward. The House Ways and Means Committee has oversight of Medicare reimbursements to skilled nursing facilities. A copy of the letter can be found here. The text is below. We write to request you schedule a full committee hearing in the next 15 days on the integrity of the nursing home COVID-19 deaths data reported by the State of New York. Since last summer, committee Republicans, led by Mr. Reed, have been raising alarms about the decision made by several governors, including New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, to require nursing homes to admit or readmit COVID-19 positive patients from hospitals.[1],[2] The tragedy of the deaths that resulted from these fatal decisions have been compounded by a lack of transparent, accurate data. A January 28, 2021, report from the New York State Office of the Attorney General found “… preliminary data for [a sample of] 62 facilities [for the week of March 1 to the date of the facility’s response, which varied from the week of April 12 to July 19] suggests that COVID-19 resident deaths associated with nursing homes in New York state appear to be undercounted by [the New York State Department of Health] by approximately 50 percent. ”[3] Exposed by the New York Attorney General, Governor Cuomo’s administration confirmed the findings, with the Associated Press reporting, “[t]he surprise development, after months of the state refusing to divulge its true numbers, showed that at least 12,743 long-term care residents died of the virus as of Jan. 19, far greater than the official tally of 8,505 on that day, cementing New York’s toll as one of the highest in the nation.”[4] On February 11, 2021, Mr. Reed gave committee Democrats the opportunity to add to their partisan, ostensibly COVID-19-focused $1.9 trillion spending bill legislative language to ensure honest COVID-19 information from states. The amendment would have required governors to attest that the data their states have been reporting is accurate and would remain that way moving forward. The amendment was rejected by every single Democrat on the committee. Mere hours later, the New York Post reported “Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top aide privately apologized to Democratic lawmakers for withholding the state’s nursing home death toll from COVID-19 — telling them ‘we froze’ out of fear that the true numbers would ‘be used against us’ by federal prosecutors. ”[5] If this reporting is accurate, then the blatant admission of a cover-up is shocking. Given the committee’s jurisdiction over Medicare reimbursement to skilled nursing facilities and continued role in providing COVID-19 financial aid to states, it is imperative that we use all the tools at the Committee’s disposal to determine if the state of New York deliberately provided false data to the federal government and the public. We hope this can be an area of bipartisanship given your personal concern with nursing home reporting. In a letter to the then-Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Seema Verma, you wrote, “…there are reports of insufficient survey activity and unreliable data across nursing homes – the very oversight activities necessary to keep patients safe” and that there was a “…clear congressional imperative for nursing facility surveys and reliable data, as well as the concerns for families and patients around the country about long-term care facilities and COVID-19…”[6] Given the urgency of our request, we ask you confirm the scheduling of a full committee hearing examining the accuracy of New York’s nursing home COVID-19 deaths data reporting by Wednesday, February 24, 2021. Ways & Means Committee Ways & Means Committee, Health Subcommittee [1] https://waysandmeans.house.gov/nunes-opening-statement-at-subcommittee-hearing-on-examining-the-covid-19-nursing-home-crisis/ [2] https://reed.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=3192 [3] https://ag.ny.gov/sites/default/files/2021-nursinghomesreport.pdf [4] https://apnews.com/article/new-york-nursing-home-coronavirus-deaths-a6c214f4467976efdfca9ba75f8adaef [5] https://nypost.com/2021/02/11/cuomo-aide-admits-they-hid-nursing-home-data-from-feds/ [6]https://waysandmeans.house.gov/sites/democrats.waysandmeans.house.gov/files/documents/07%2010%2020_COVID_SNF_Survey%20and%20Data%20Letter%20to%20CMS_FINAL.pdf"
            },
            {
                "answer": "House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) offered an amendment to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's portion of the \"Build Back China Act\" that would prevent the oil and natural gas tax in the underlying bill from going into effect until the Environmental Protection Agency can ensure that it won't cause increased health care costs, but Committee Democrats blocked the amendment.",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee block Steve Scalise's amendment related to New York nursing home death data?",
                "url": "http://scalise.house.gov/media/press-releases/heat-report-13",
                "scraped_text": "The HEAT Report is a weekly newsletter focusing on how members of the House Energy Action Team (HEAT) promote American energy security, and an all-of-the-above energy economy. Speaker Pelosi and her liberal lieutenants are determined to shove $3.5 trillion worth of socialist spending down the throats of the American people which will pour gasoline on already rising inflation and deliver a death blow to American energy dominance. Simply put, this amounts to economic surrender and a handout to Communist China. Over several days of markups, Democrats rejected hundreds of Republican amendments that made clear how much we have to lose from their plan. In the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Democrats ignored the reality that their new natural gas tax would negatively impact GDP by $9.1 billion and kill up to 90,000 jobs — in the first year of the program. In addition, the Committee's Clean \"China\" Electricity Payment Program provides $150 billion to mandate deployment of clean energy technology, primarily manufactured in China, while blocking amendments that prohibit the use of Chinese critical minerals or products produced by child or slave labor. While Democrats have chosen to punish American energy companies, which produce some of the cleanest and most reliable fossil fuels in the world, America's adversaries like China and Russia stand at the ready to benefit from these new taxes and mandates. The evidence is clear that both countries emit more carbon during manufacturing and resource production than in America and use these resources to bend the will of countries in need. Instead of using American resources to maintain our energy dominance, and as a tool for diplomacy, the Democrats' proposals will send our high-paying jobs overseas, and give our adversaries a competitive edge while reducing America's competitiveness globally. The Democrats war on American fossil fuels will have an inevitable outcome — higher costs for American households and consumers and fewer well-paying jobs throughout our economy. Instead of waging an irresponsible and unnecessary war on fossil fuels and breaking his promise not to raise taxes on families making less than $400,000, the Biden Administration should utilize our resources to meet America's needs and those of our allies, lower the cost of energy for working families, and allow our country to become energy dominant once again. House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) offered an amendment to the House Energy and Commerce Committee's portion of the \"Build Back China Act\" that would prevent the oil and natural gas tax in the underlying bill from going into effect until the Environmental Protection Agency can ensure that it won't cause increased health care costs, but Committee Democrats blocked the amendment. HEAT Co-Chair Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.)joined Rep. Dan Newhouse and U.S. Nuclear Industry Council President and CEO Bud Albright on the Congressional Western Caucus podcast, \"A Voice for Rural America,\" to discuss nuclear energy's role in a clean energy future. Representative Fred Keller (R-Pa.) visited the Marcellus Gas Coalition in Williamsport to celebrate the work they are doing to grow Pennsylvania's energy industry. Additionally, Rep. Keller traveled to Tunkhannock, Wyoming County to spotlight the great work being done in northeast Pennsylvania to develop domestic energy and prepare the next generation of energy workers with the technical skills for meaningful careers. Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change Ranking Member David McKinley, P.E. (R-W. Va.) participated in Siemens' North America Energy Week to discuss the need for a bipartisan, innovation-focused energy approach. Rep. McKinley also participated in a roundtable discussion with the West Virginia Manufacturers Association Chemical Industry Council in August. Representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) joined the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program to host a roundtable discussion about the important role Ohio's smaller and mid-size oil and gas operators play in protecting American energy security. Afterward, Rep. Balderson stopped by a conventional rig drilling site in Licking County to meet with workers and learn more about the science behind energy exploration and extraction. Representative Greg Pence (R-Ind.) delivered remarks at the House Energy and Commerce Committee's markup of the \"Build Back China Act,\" noting that this reckless bill will cause inflation to skyrocket. Representative Garret Graves (R-La.) called upon Energy Secretary Granholm to consider authorizing the release of crude oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) to relieve fuel supply shortages in Louisiana. The next day, Secretary Granholm approved the SPR release. This was a quick and appropriate solution to help address fuel shortages across South Louisiana. Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) penned an op-ed in the Washington Examinerbashing the radical Left's ridiculous attempt to implement their Green New Deal agenda in their reckless $3.5 trillion spending package. Rep. Johnson also visited Harrison County on August 30 to highlight the important impacts that oil and gas has on Ohio and the United States of America. Representative Ron Estes (R-Kansas) offered an amendment to the House Ways and Means Committee's markup of the \"Build Back China Act\" to strike the green energy tax subsidies and avoid hundreds of billions in offsetting tax increases that will be borne by ordinary Americans. Rep. Estes also highlighted energy independence and the problems with Green New Deal policies in a Joint Economic Committee hearing. Representative Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) introduced bicameral legislation to streamline the discovery and permitting process for geothermal energy projects. In an Energy and Commerce Committee markup, Representative Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) offered an amendment to the \"Build Back China Act\" to prohibit the use of funds in the Energy Subtitle to be used for the purchase of critical minerals mined using forced labor in any foreign country, including China. China produces 90 percent of the world's solar panels using slave labor in the Xinjiang region. Rep. Walberg's amendment would have simply ensured the materials needed to responsibly build out our energy sector are sourced by the United States, or our allies—not by communist China. Even though a similar amendment passed in the Science, Space, and Technology Committee just weeks prior, Committee Democrats rejected it. Representative Bob Latta (R-Ohio) introduced a resolution condemning the Biden Administration's hypocritical energy agenda and urged President Biden to start investing in American energy. Representative Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) slammed Congressional Democrats for decimating oil and gas producers by slapping punitive taxes on them and making America more energy reliant on foreign countries to produce our energy for us. Representative John Joyce (R-Pa.) toured Heritage Coal's Meyersdale Mine to learn more about their vital work to promote our energy independence and discuss how he is working to protect the Pennsylvania coal industry as a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Rep. Joyce also toured the Hoover Conveyor & Fabrication Corp. in Meyersdale in August. - Democratic infighting threatens Biden's big agenda (Washington Examiner) - What's causing soaring energy prices in Europe (Washington Examiner) - Biden says U.S. will quadruple climate aid to poor countries (POLITICO) - Analysis: Norway, Russia reap rewards from Europe's flexible gas market (Reuters) - Iran intends to resume nuclear talks in the near future (Wall Street Journal) Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) criticized the Biden Administration and Congressional Democrats for ramming through a $3.5 trillion tax-and-spend bonanza as the price of gas, food, and rent skyrocket under President Biden's economy. HEAT Co-Chair Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) spoke in support of an amendment during the Energy and Commerce Committee reconciliation markup that would prohibit the use of critical minerals mined using forced labor in any foreign country. China produces 90% of the world's solar panels using slave labor in the Xinjiang region. All of the Democrats voted to BLOCK the amendment, so much for environmental justice. Representative Greg Pence (R-Ind.) posted about his visit to Honda's Indiana Plant in Greensburg to celebrate the launch of Honda's Civic Hatchback being built in Indiana's Sixth Congressional District. Representative Tim Walberg (R-Mich.) offered his support for an amendment to protect farmers and agricultural businesses from a natural gas tax (\"cow tax\") that would raise the price of essential foods like meat and milk. Once again, Democrats rejected the amendment, continuing their assault on American energy. Representative French Hill (R-Ark.) co-sponsored a resolution recognizing and celebrating the 75th anniversary of the National Association of Conservation Districts and their commitment to our lands. Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change Ranking Member David McKinley, P.E. (R-W. Va.) bashed Committee Democrats for their natural gas tax which will increase energy costs for American families and gut jobs across America. Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio) tweeted out his interview with Maria Bartiromo on Fox Business where they discussed Joe Biden, Speaker Pelosi and Bernie Sanders' $3.5 trillion budget that is full of massive tax increases and attacks on the production and use of coal, oil and natural gas. Bartiromo also highlighted Johnson's op-ed entitled \"Don't buy what the radical left is selling on climate change.\" Rep. Johnson also delivered remarks at the House Energy and Commerce Committee's hearing to consider Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Bernie Sanders' \"Build Back China Act.\" This $3.5 trillion trojan horse would fundamentally change America for the worse. This disastrous bill would end the production and use of coal, oil and natural gas - and the jobs that go with it. Representative Ron Estes (R-Kansas) noted that he spoke at the Kansas Independent Oil and Gas Association's annual meeting. Representative Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) pointed out the hypocrisy of Congressional Democrats paying workers to stay home while canceling critical energy projects like the Keystone XL pipeline and ruining thousands of families' livelihoods."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against this amendment.",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee vote against Steve Scalise's amendment regarding nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRECB-2009-pt14/html/CRECB-2009-pt14-issue-2009-07-21.htm",
                "scraped_text": "[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 14] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois. The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer: God of grace and glory, in the darkness of our limited knowledge, we Today, send our lawmakers forth with Your light to do the right as You give them the ability to see it. Lord, help them to keep their minds on You so that Your peace will provide the foundation for their confidence. In their dealings with each other, keep them from unkind words and unkind silences. Kindle on the altar of their hearts a devotion to freedom's cause in all the world, as You bring their thoughts and actions into conformity to Your will. Lord, lift their hearts in gratitude to You for our heritage in this land of rich The Honorable Roland W. Burris led the Pledge of Allegiance, as I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd). Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois, to Mr. BURRIS thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized. Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, if any, the Senate will resume consideration of the Defense authorization bill. There will be 2 hours of debate prior to a vote on the Levin-McCain amendment regarding F-22 funding. Senators should expect the first vote to begin shortly after 12 today. The Senate will recess from 12:30 to 2:15 for our weekly caucus luncheons. After that time, the bill will be open for further amendment. I hope Members who have amendments they wish to The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1390, which the clerk will A bill (S. 1390) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other Thune amendment No. 1618, to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1469. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so The Senator from Michigan [Mr. Levin], for himself and Mr. (Purpose: To strike $1,750,000,000 in Procurement, Air Force funding for F-22A aircraft procurement, and to restore operation and maintenance, military personnel, and other funding in divisions A and B that was reduced in order to authorize such appropriation) At the end of subtitle A of title I, add the following: SEC. 106. ELIMINATION OF F-22A AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT FUNDING. (a) Elimination of Funding.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 103(1) for procurement for the Air Force for aircraft procurement is hereby decreased by $1,750,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for F-22A aircraft procurement. (1) Operation and maintenance, army.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army is hereby increased by $350,000,000. (2) Operation and maintenance, navy.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy is hereby increased by $100,000,000. (3) Operation and maintenance, air force.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby increased by (4) Operation and maintenance, defense-wide.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities is hereby (5) Military personnel.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 421(a)(1) for military personnel is (6) Division a and division b generally.--In addition to the amounts specified in paragraphs (1) through (5), the total amount authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense by divisions A and B is hereby increased by The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there is Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this amendment will strike $1.75 billion in additional funding for F-22 aircraft that was in the committee-reported bill. It will also restore serious cuts that were made in readiness and military personnel accounts and across-the-board cuts. These cuts were made in order to shift funds to support F-22 production. It is appropriate that the F-22 issue receive the full consideration by the Senate that it has received. The F-22 debate is among the most important debates we will have on the DOD authorization bill this year. Stating what may be one of the worst kept secrets in Washington today, the Department of Defense budget request called for ending production of several programs, including the F-22 program. I suspect the Department of Defense will seldom shut down any major acquisition program without a fair amount of controversy, and I agree with the Senator from Georgia that Congress should never be a rubberstamp for the executive branch. But neither should we object to terminating production of a weapons system because of parochial reasons. Terminating production, such as closing a base, can involve some economic loss for communities involved. I know that very personally. But we must do so from time to time and make these difficult decisions based on what is best for the Nation and what is best for the men and As President Obama said the other day, in strong support of ending To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do The Senate has heard from the senior leadership of the Defense Department, both civilian and military, that we should end F-22 production. The recommendation is strong and clear, as strong and clear as I have ever heard when it comes to ending the production of a The Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force sent me and Senator McCain a letter on this matter. This letter is already part of the Record. It reads, in part, as follows: This review concluded with . . . a balanced set of recommendations for our fighter forces: 1) focus procurement on modern 5th generation aircraft rather than less capable F- 15s and F-16s; 2) given that the F-35 will constitute the majority of the future fighter force, transition as quickly as is prudent to F-35 production; 3) complete F-22 procurement at 187 aircraft, while continuing plans for future F-22 upgrades; and 4) accelerate the retirements of the old 4th generation aircraft and modify the remaining In summary, we assessed the F-22 decision from all angles, taking into account competing strategic priorities and complementary programs and alternatives, all balanced within the context of available resources. We did not and do not recommend F-22s be included in the FY10 defense budget. This comfortable. Most importantly, in this and other budget decisions, we believe it is important for Air Force leaders to make clear choices, balancing requirements across a range The Senate has also heard from the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In their letter to me and Senator McCain on July 13, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen wrote the There is no doubt that the F-22 is an important capability for our Nation's defense. To meet future scenarios, however, the Department of Defense has determined that 187 aircraft are sufficient, especially considering the future roles of Unmanned Aerial Systems and the significant number of 5th generation stealth F-35s coming on-line in our combat air It is important to note that the F-35 is a half generation newer aircraft than the F-22, and more capable in a number of areas such as electronic warfare and combating enemy air defenses. To sustain U.S. overall air dominance, the Department's plan is to buy roughly 500 F-35s over the next five years and more than 2,400 over the life of the program. Furthermore, under this plan, the U.S. by 2020 is projected to have some 2,500 manned fighter aircraft, almost 1,000 of them will be 5th generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is expected to have only slightly more than half as many manned fighter aircraft by 2020, none of them 5th The F-22 program proposed in the President's budget reflects the judgment of two different Presidents, two different Secretaries of Defense, three chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the current secretary and chief of staff of the Air Force. If the Air Force is forced to buy additional F-22s beyond what has been requested, it will come at the expense of other Air Force and Department of Defense priorities--and require deferring capabilities in areas we believe are much more critical for our Nation's defense. For all these reasons, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of [W]e strongly believe that the time has come to close the F-22 production line. If the Congress sends legislation to the President that requires the acquisition of additional F- 22 aircraft beyond Fiscal Year 2009, the Secretary of Defense You do not get much stronger statements than that from a Secretary of The Secretary of Defense, just last Thursday, expanded on those thoughts at the Economic Club in Chicago, when he said the following: . . . supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were The Senate has also heard, of course, from President Obama, as In December 2004, the Department of Defense determined that 183 F-22s would be sufficient to meet its military needs. This determination was not made casually. The Department conducted several analyses which support this position based on the length and type of wars that the Department thinks it might have to fight in the future, and an estimate of the future capabilities of likely adversaries. To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops So the President, based on his uniformed and civilian advisers' recommendations, has now said he will veto this bill if we keep the additional $1.75 billion in the bill to buy the additional seven F-22s those military leaders--uniformed and civilian--strongly say we do not I know my friend from Georgia has quoted some private sector individuals and one senior military official in particular, GEN John Corley, the Commander of the Air Force's Air Combat Command. I do not take lightly the recommendations and advice of someone with a distinguished career such as General Corley. However, General Corley's assessment of a high military risk if we end the buy of F-22s at 187 is not shared by the most senior leadership of the Department that is responsible for viewing the F-22 program, and all other Department of Defense programs, from a broader perspective. These same leaders from the previous administration--the previous Secretary of Defense, the previous Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-- recommended termination to President Bush, and President Bush also General Cartwright said at his confirmation hearing--or reconfirmation hearing--2 weeks ago the following: . . . I was probably one of the more vocal and ardent supporters for the termination of the F-22 production. The reason's twofold. First . . . there is a study in the Joint that we just completed and partnered with the Air Force on that, number one, said that proliferating within the United States military fifth-generation fighters to all three services was going to be more significant than having them based solidly in just one service, because of the way we deploy and because of the diversity of our deployments. Point number two is, in the production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the first aircraft variant will support the Air Force replacement of their F-16s and F-15s. It is a very It is 10 years newer in advancement in avionics and capabilities in comparison to the F-22. It is a better, more Well, that F-35 is in production now. In fact, there are 30 being paid for and bought and produced in the very budget for the Department President Eisenhower noted, from time to time, the military industrial complex will push for more and more, more than is needed. In this case, however--in this case--the senior military leadership is not Finally, to quote again from Secretary Gates's speech last week--this The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. So, Mr. President, the time has come to end F-22 production at 187 F- 22As. That is all we need to buy, that is all we can afford to buy, and Mr. President, I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of our The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I am going to proceed on my leader The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, Americans are eager for health care reforms that lower costs and increase access. This is why many of us are proposing reforms that should be easy for everyone to agree on, such as reforming our medical liability laws, strengthening wellness and prevention programs that would encourage people to make healthy choices, such as quitting smoking and losing weight and addressing the needs of small businesses without imposing new taxes that kill jobs. The administration is taking a different approach to health care reform, and the more Americans learn about it, the more concerned they become. So it is good the President plans to spend a lot of his time in the days ahead discussing the administration's plan for reform because people need to know what the administration's plan is. Specifically, Americans have concerns about losing the care they have and spending trillions of dollars for a so-called reform that could leave them with worse care than they have now, especially if it is paid One prospect Americans are extremely concerned about is that they will be forced off of their current plans as part of a government takeover of health care. Despite repeated assurances from the administration to the contrary, the independent Congressional Budget Office says that just one section of one of the Democratic proposals we have seen would force 10 million people off their current health plans. Americans do not want a government takeover, and they certainly do not want the government to spend trillions of their tax dollars to pay for it, especially if the care they end up with is worse than the care they already receive, and especially if the money that is spent on these so-called reforms only adds to the national debt. The President has repeatedly promised that his reform would not add to the debt. Yet both the House and Senate reform bills we have seen would do just that. This is why even Democrats have started to One reason Democrats are having second thoughts is because the Director of the Congressional Budget Office has sounded the alarm over the administration's claims that its reforms would cut long-term overall health care costs. On the contrary, he said the administration's reforms would actually lead to an increase in overall costs. Concerns like these about costs and debt have been building Another growing concern even among Democrats is the impact these higher costs would have on States in the form of higher Medicaid costs. At a time of tight budgets, this is something that Governors from both For example, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has said, and I am I'm personally very concerned about the cost issue, particularly the $1 trillion figures being batted around. Expanding Medicaid might look like an easy way to expand access, but it will actually mean massive spending increases for both Federal and State taxpayers. This could be a devastating blow to States such as Kentucky and many others which are already struggling to pay the The administration's efforts to pay for its plans are not the least bit reassuring. The two main groups they are targeting are the last two that should be expected to pay for it: seniors, through Medicare cuts, To me, it is just common sense that in the middle of a recession the last thing--the last thing--we should be doing is raising taxes on small businesses. Yet both bills we have seen would do just that. Indeed, under the House bill, taxes on some small businesses would rise as high as roughly 45 percent. This means in order to pay for health care reform, Democrats would increase the tax rate on some small businesses to about 30 percent higher than the rate for big corporations. Taxes would go up so much, in fact, under the House proposal that the average combined Federal and State top tax rate for individuals would be about 52 percent--52 percent, Mr. President. Let's consider that figure for a moment. To repeat: In order to pay for a health care proposal that would not even address all the concerns Americans have about access and cost--and which might even increase overall health care costs--Democrats in the House would raise the average top tax rate in the United States to about 52 percent. The chart behind me was created by the Heritage Foundation and appeared last week in the Wall Street Journal. It shows that the House bill would raise the top U.S. rate above even France. Of the 30 countries the OECD measures, only Belgium, Sweden, and Denmark have higher rates, and five U.S. States would have tax rates even higher The United States is in the middle of a recession. We have lost more than 2.5 million jobs since this January. Families are losing homes. The last thing they need is a government takeover that kills even more jobs, adds to the ballooning national debt, increases Americans' long- term health care costs, and leaves Americans paying more for worse care than they now receive. The proposals we have seen are not just incomplete, they are indefensible, particularly at a time of spiraling Maybe this is why the administration has started to insist on an artificial deadline for getting its reform proposals through. We certainly do not need to rush and spend $1 trillion to enact this flawed proposal by the August recess. The American people and members of both parties in Congress are calling on us to slow down and take the Health care reform is too important to rush through and get it wrong. We saw what happened when some rushed and spent $1 trillion on an artificial deadline with the stimulus. The American people do not want the same mistake to be made. Instead of setting a 3-week deadline on legislation that would end up affecting one-sixth of our economy, the administration should focus on meeting existing deadlines. The Mid-Session Review of the administration's earlier predictions about unemployment, economic growth, government spending, and the outlook for the Federal deficit has traditionally been released in mid- July. Yet now we are hearing the administration may not release its midsession review until August, after Congress has adjourned and after the administration's artificial deadline for a Senate bill on health The administration is also struggling to meet its decision to close Guantanamo by January 2010. The administration's task force on detainee policy has said it will miss its deadline for making recommendations. It seems premature to announce a closing date for Guantanamo without knowing where these detainees may be sent. The most recent delay is even more reason for the administration to show flexibility and reconsider its artificial deadline for closing Guantanamo. Americans want Republicans and Democrats to enact real health care reform that reduces costs and makes health care more accessible. They don't want a government takeover of the health care system that costs trillions of dollars, is paid for by seniors and job-killing taxes on small businesses and that leaves them paying more for worse care than they currently have. Before the administration rushes to spend another trillion dollars, it needs to slow down and focus on fixing our economy and addressing the issues it is already falling behind on. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Georgia. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the Levin- McCain amendment on the F-22. I was listening with interest to the chairman speak a little bit earlier when he raised several points that I am going to address specifically as I get into the guts of the argument. I think it is kind of interesting when he gives a list of those individuals in the Pentagon and in the White House who are now in opposition to continued production of the F-22. Interestingly enough, everybody he talked about--from the President to the Secretary of Defense, to the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs--every single one of those individuals is political. They are appointed. They are appointed by the I am going to talk about some individuals who are in support of the F-22 who are not appointed. No. 1, they are the men and women who fly the F-22. Secondly, it is men who have had the courage to wear the uniform of the United States of America in an unparalleled way that I have seen since I have been here, who have been willing to stand up to that political leadership and say: You guys are wrong. They have been willing to stand and say that if you cut off production of the F-22 at 187, you are going to put this country at a high risk from a national As we go through the debate, it is going to be interesting to contrast the statements and the letters that every Member has received a flurry of over the last several days. I have never seen the White House lobby such as they have lobbied on this issue. For a White House that was not supposed to be a lobbying White House or in support of lobbyists, it has been unparalleled in my now going on 15 years as a Senator Levin spoke earlier about the F-35: We are going to ramp up production. We are going to buy 30 airplanes, 30, in this budget. Well, guess what we are paying for those airplanes. We are paying $200 million a copy. Guess what we are buying an F-22 for today--an airplane that has been through the test phase; an airplane that has proved itself. We are under a multiyear contract that calls for payment by the Air Force to the contractor of $140 million a copy. There is going to be a lot of conversation on this floor about the cost of the F-22, and it is expensive: $140 million a copy is very expensive. But to come in here with a straight face and say we are going to save taxpayers' money by moving to the F-35 and then turn around and say we are going to pay $200 million a copy in this bill for F-35s, something about that Well, let me just say we are in a debate with the Pentagon with respect to budgetary issues submitted by the Pentagon to Congress. There are a lot of people who think we ought to step in line, salute the Pentagon and move ahead and do exactly what the Pentagon says with respect to the purchase of weapons systems. Well, that is not the way the Framers of the Constitution intended the Senate and the House to work. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution provides Congress with the power to levy and collect taxes, provide for the common defense of the United States, to raise and support armies and to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Clearly, we in Congress have a role in overseeing the Department of Defense, reviewing budgets, and questioning budget and policy recommendations. Our interest and involvement in these issues are appropriate and not just based on parochial issues. We are charged with the responsibility of reviewing DOD policies, whether fiscal policies I think it is important to note that on several occasions in recent years, Congress has authorized policy or funding initiatives that DOD has strongly opposed and, in retrospect, Congress was right and DOD was wrong. Perhaps the most similar example to the F-22 is the battle over the F-117 that occurred many years ago when the Air Force wanted to stop buying F-117s. Thank goodness my predecessor, Senator Sam Nunn, who was then chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, forced the Air Force to buy more F-117s. Ironically, part of the Air Force's argument was that they wanted to shift funding and focus to buying more F-22s. The F-117 was critical to establishing air dominance over Iraq in Desert Storm, and we can thank Congress for recognizing the need for There are several other examples, such as the Goldwater-Nichols Reorganization Act of 1986 and the establishment of Special Operations Command in 1987, both of which were strongly opposed by the Pentagon. Other examples are continuation of the V-22 program and prohibition against retiring U-2s and B-52s, all of which are paying dividends beyond what the military expected, including in Iraq and Afghanistan I wish to address a comment Senator Levin and others have made regarding previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supporting only 183--or 187 now, with the addition of four F-22s we are buying in the supplemental. First, that number of 183 originally was established not on the basis of any study or analysis--never a study that came out and said we need 183 and we are going to be basing our decision on that--but it was based on PBD 753, which is inside Washington baseball, which was an OSD budget drill 2 days before Christmas in 2004, in which the Air Force had absolutely no input. Neither the Chief of Staff nor the Secretary was involved. A number of ``183'' or ``187'' has always been budget driven and not strategically There have been at least 10 studies done on F-22 numbers over the past 10 years. Of those, only one, the Joint Air Dominance Study done by DOD in 2005, recommended 183 F-22s. However, that study was based on only needing F-22s in a single-threat scenario and which also used a Senator Levin mentioned the comments General Cartwright made in the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing 2 weeks ago. And he relies heavily on the statement General Cartwright made. General Cartwright question to General Cartwright was: General, you say you support terminating the F-22 program at 187. Has there been any one single study, in the Air Force or outside the Air Force, any analysis done that recommends we terminate the program at 187? General Cartwright's statement to me was: Yes; there is a study going on in the Air Force right now that says we should terminate the program at 187. Well, unfortunately for General Cartwright, we now know no study was done. It is our understanding that the comment of General Cartwright is being corrected for the record and that we are receiving a corrected I wish to quote from a statement by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell that was made last Tuesday with respect to the comments of General Cartwright. This comment is quoted in the Daily Report. It now turns out that a recent study touted by Pentagon leadership as the justification for terminating the F-22 fighter isn't a study at all but a series of briefings by DOD's program analysis and evaluation shop in the Air Force. That word comes from the Pentagon's top spokesman, Geoff Morrell, who told the Daily Report late Tuesday that the study, or whatever it is, is: Not so much a study as work products. Asked to describe the nature and timing of this study, Morrell told What I think General Cartwright was referring to . . . is Since PDB 753, only 183 F-22s have been programmed in the budget, with fiscal year 2009 being the last year of funding. To say previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supported this is misleading since, until the fiscal year 2010 budget bill process, a decision on whether to buy more F-22s would be deferred to future decisionmakers. It is perhaps with this in mind that Secretary Gates himself decided last year to request additional F-22s in the fiscal year 2009 supplemental, and he did, in order to keep the line open and preserve the next administration's option for procurement of the F-22. I know the former President, President Bush, did not want to see the program terminated. They can say what they want to on the other side, but having had personal conversations, I know what his feeling was about this great aircraft. He could have terminated the program, but he did not terminate the program. It is this administration that is There have been five previous Secretaries of the Air Force, six previous Chiefs of Staff of the Air Force, seven previous Secretaries of Defense before this one, and eight previous commanders of Air Combat Command who have said we need more F-22s. We have supported this program from day one. We have continued to reduce the number from the original 781, now down to 187. The current Chief of Staff of the Air Force, whose letters have been quoted and inserted in the Record where he says we should cap it at 187, has testified time and time and time again in recent days and in recent weeks and who has written me letters stating that the military requirement for F-22s is not 187, it is 243, but he says we can't afford it. Therefore, he has to salute his boss. His boss is a political appointee--Secretary Gates--and the political appointee says we are going to cap it at 187; therefore, that is the direction in which we are going to go and the direction in which you I am going to close my comments at this time and turn to my colleague from Connecticut. Before I do so, I will quote somebody who is not political, somebody who is not an appointee, somebody who is a former Chief of Staff of the Air Force. That is GEN Merrill McPeak, who, last week, in an unsolicited statement, came out and said, when he talked about terminating the F-22 production rate at 187: I think it's a real mistake. . . . The airplane is a game- changer and people seem to forget that we haven't had any of our soldiers or Marines killed by enemy air since 1951. . . . It's been half a century or more since any enemy aircraft has The F-22 is at the top end. We have to procure enough of them for our ability to put a lid on, to dictate the ceiling of any conflict. We certainly need some figure well above 200. That worries me because I think it is pennywise and pound foolish to expose us in a way this much smaller number General McPeak is a supporter of this administration and, as far as we can tell, he is not a consultant for any major defense contractor. For this reason, I think his comments deserve significant attention and I will stop at this point, but I will say more later. I now turn to my colleague, Senator Dodd, who I will say has been a great champion on this issue, a great partner in support of not just the men and women of the Air Force and our other branches that depend on this weapon system to protect America and our soldiers in the field but also a great The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, how much time remains for those of us in The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is 44\\1/2\\ minutes remaining. Mr. DODD. I ask to be recognized for 10 minutes, and if I need a The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I commend Senator Chambliss for his eloquent and persuasive argument about why this amendment is a dangerous one, and I say that respectfully. I have great admiration for Carl Levin and John McCain, but there are serious problems with this approach, from a national security standpoint as well as a manufacturing and industrial To put this into context for our colleagues, we are being asked to authorize $1.75 billion, or two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget before us of $680 billion. We are told there are at least 25,000 direct jobs and 95,000 direct and indirect jobs at stake for that $1.75 billion--again, two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget--which Senator Chambliss has offset, by the way. It is not an expenditure that is not We are going to put those jobs at risk--not because this industry is in trouble, unlike the automobile industry, which we bailed out to the tune of $63 billion, by the way--understanding the reason many of us supported that was to maintain an industrial manufacturing base. In this case, we lead the world in aerospace. Nobody comes even close to the ability of the United States to produce the most sophisticated aircraft in the world. Yet with an industry doing relatively well-- although commercial orders are way down, which is causing serious problems but that is as a result of the economic conditions. We are unwilling to come up with $1.75 billion or two-tenths of 1 percent to put those many jobs at risk, not to mention retreating on our air One of the critical components of national security is maintaining superiority both at sea and in the air. The F-22, by any estimation, is the most superior aircraft in the world. It is not even close in terms of competitors. Yet with the numbers we have and that we are relying on, we leave ourselves way short of the earlier projected numbers. As Senator Chambliss pointed out, the testimony over the years of those who advocated this program has been significant. In fact, in the letter most recently received from General Corley, head of the Air Combat Command Office, headquartered at Langley, VA, June 9, it points out how serious this would be in terms of exposing our Nation to national security risks. The head of the Air National Guard Bureau, Lieutenant General Wyatt, makes the same claim. Chief of Staff Schwartz, before he changed his mind a week earlier, advocated the F-22 From both a manufacturing perspective and job loss, at a time when body is about to lay off anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 people--at a time when unemployment rates are going up, because we decided that $1.75 billion is too expensive at this juncture, even though we have offset it, and we have put that many jobs at risk, not because the industry is failing or because it is a bad aircraft but because the Secretary of Defense and the administration have decided this program So explain to those 90,000 people--somewhere in that range--once they lose their jobs and get laid off, and they will--why it was we decided today, because of two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget, to move in a different direction. Put aside, if you will, the $63 billion we spent I raised these concerns expressed by our military commanders--again, most notably, GEN John Corley of the Air Combat Command, LTG Harry Wyatt of the Air National Guard--I have mentioned them. In my State, there are 2,000 to 3,000 jobs at risk, and 1,000 of the jobs are down because commercial orders are down. So it is really 2,000 to 4,000 No matter how much I care about the people in my State, I could not oppose this exclusively on that basis. You ought to look nationwide. It is not just my State; it is all across the country. I raised concerns about what this amendment would do to our global competitiveness and discussed the potential harm to our economy posed by terminating the world's most advanced fighter jet. I raised concerns over the industry's ability to build the less sophisticated F-35--which has only one engine not two, and the word ``stealthy'' applied to the F-35 is a myth; it is not as stealthy, even remotely, as the F-22--that the United States and its allies are Mr. President, before I revisit these critically important arguments, let's be clear on the context in which we are having this debate. The proponents of this amendment suggest they are saving taxpayers valuable resources in terminating the F-22. They claim such cost savings are well worth the risk Generals Corley and Wyatt have warned us about. But out of a total of $680 billion in the Defense authorization bill, this amendment is valued at $1.75 billion. That is two-tenths of 1 percent of the total authorization. Since the planes are fully offset, Instead, this amendment will come at enormous cost to our security and our economy. We are in the midst of a national manufacturing crisis. Everybody has talked about it. It is why we voted for so much support for the automobile industry only a few weeks ago right here in According to the Federal Reserve's July 15, 2009, Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization Report, manufacturing production has declined 15.5 percent nationwide, between June 2008 and June 2009. I will repeat that: There has been an over 15 percent decline in our manufacturing sector. This quarter's manufacturing production is the lowest in 27 years, which was the previous low point in production since 1967, when the Fed started to keep track of the data. We in Congress tried to respond to this crisis. We passed the Emergency Economy Stabilization Act, designed to relieve credit markets We passed the $787 billion American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to stimulate the economy and boost demand in various sectors and put We have provided $63 billion to Chrysler and General Motors to keep their production lines running--companies that were brought to their knees, in part, due to dismal business planning and severe Additionally, the government has acquired unprecedented equity stakes in these companies--8 percent in Chrysler and a whopping 60 percent in I have not opposed these efforts. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I worked with my colleagues who represent those States to provide Federal assistance through the legislative process. But we took this step because we were responding to a national manufacturing crisis. We did it because we are responding to the dire and credible warnings about the potential impact of the auto industry's collapse-- particularly in Midwestern States, which greatly depend on the auto I will discuss briefly another critically important manufacturing base and its economic impact: the aerospace industry. While my home State of Connecticut ranks 29th in total population, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it ranks sixth in total In 2008, according to the Connecticut Department of Labor, aerospace employed over 36,000 residents of my State. So any discussion of terminating the fighter jet production has an outsize effect on the I would not be arguing this case for the F-22 if it were strictly a parochial matter. We don't have a right to ask 99 other people exclusively because of something happening in our own States. The truth is, halting this production will have consequences for our industry's ability to continue to build aircraft for our military. I will lay out The expertise of these people cannot be duplicated overnight. These trained engineers, scientists, manufacturers, and machinists are highly skilled and trained. I am concerned their skill sets and experience are being taken for granted, without consideration for the peculiarities of jet engine construction. That doesn't just hurt the workers and their According to the Defense Contract Management Agency, there is a 20- to 24-month lag between payment for and production of jet engines. So the number of planes ordered in any 1 given year doesn't correspond Under Secretary of Defense Gates's plan in calendar year 2010, Pratt & Whitney is expected to make 48 F-22 engines and 19 F-35 engines, for a total of 67 fighter jet engines. The following year, the number will drop precipitously to a total of 43 engines, since the F-35 is not scheduled to begin what is called ``full-rate production'' until 2014. Thus, in calendar year 2011, Pratt & Whitney will be producing 11 F- 22 engines and 32 F-35 engines, for a total of 43 fighter engines. In 2012, since there will be no F-22 production, there will only be 41 F- The problem is even more acute when you compare overall military engines being built in 2010 versus 2011 and 2012. Under current plans, Pratt & Whitney is expected to go from building 194 military engines to 130 in 2011. That is an average drop of 33 percent in work volume. What will happen? It is the same thing occurring in manufacturing States all across the country: layoffs. Thousands and thousands of people--not just in my State but across the country. In the absence of military aircraft work orders for 3 years, companies will be forced to tell the legions of highly skilled engineers, technicians, and machinists--workers such as the Pratt & Whitney mechanics I introduced and mentioned last week--that they are not needed now. They need to retrain. They need to find another Then, 3 years later, after these workers have settled in a new job, or have retired, the Department of Defense and our allies will try to ramp up production of the F-35. But they will not be able to. They will be left scratching their heads, wondering: Why can't industry meet our production needs right now? No doubt, we will ask the same question on To assume that the thousands of workers across the Nation who work on the F-22 will stand idly by until 2014 when we begin to build the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is naive at best. This argument I make is not new at all. The Defense Department recognized this point in the 2006 Review, published by the military to identify the needs and strategy of The report stated that F-22 production should be extended ``through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in fifth generation stealth At the same time, the F-35 was scheduled to begin construction in 2010. Since then, of course, it has been pushed back 4 years to 2014. There are some rumors that this date may be pushed back even further. This means the military identified only 3 years ago--36 months ago-- the most recent published report of this type, that our Nation would suffer a loss in aerospace manufacturing capability if fighter Their response was to ensure that we keep building F-22s until the F- 35 reached full-rate production. Yet when the F-35 production schedule was pushed back 4 years, we did not extend the F-22 production to stabilize our industrial base. That is why you have the job losses I Now we find ourselves in the very situation the Department of Defense was trying to avoid 36 months ago, as we face looming job losses across our Nation, commercial orders down--losing these people on that basis and now because of the vote we may take on this issue--and thus a degradation of our ability to meet the aerospace production capability our national security requires. So I believe it is our duty and responsibility to protect these workers from losing their employment and make sure our country retains a viable and competitive capacity in Let me also point out--and I did the other day on a national security basis--that, again, superiority is critical. Right now, there are some 40 nations that have the SU-27, which is a sophisticated aircraft, and the MiG-29, which competes with the F-15 and the F-16. Forty nations have that capability. I had a larger chart earlier--I don't have it with me today--but there are little red and yellow dots all over this map that indicate advanced surface-to-air missile capability where there have been orders made or they have already been acquired. Our F- 15s and F-16s are vulnerable to those surface-to-air missiles. All over The F-22 literally could avoid the kind of detection these surface- to-air missiles provide. So we now have a capacity to be able to respond. Now we may not--and as long as we are dealing with Afghanistan and Iraq, that is one issue. But, frankly, we have to prepare for situations that could get a lot more dangerous for our Nation. The Chinese and the Russians are aggressively pursuing a fifth generation aircraft to compete with the F-22. And to say that the F-22 and the F- 35 are virtually alike I think is a mistake. That is not the case at From a national security standpoint as well, there was a reason why General Corley and General Wyatt and others have made a case on these aircraft. There is a reason why we invested some $65 billion to develop this aircraft. There is a reason why the quadrennial report 36 months ago warned about these gaps and what it would do to our industrial base I hope our colleagues, in the midst of all of this, would understand what is at stake. Again, here we are, on an economic basis, where many jobs could be lost in our country with critical technology that hangs in the balance. It would be one thing if we were arguing here this plane was no longer needed, it was not going to do the job we thought it would do, it wasn't as sophisticated as we hoped it would be. Then you might decide dropping this, giving up some jobs, may make some sense. But to give up an aircraft of this sophistication and this capability, and simultaneously, in an economic situation such as we are in, to lose as we are predicting somewhere between 25,000 and 90,000 jobs with this decision, for $1.75 billion in this budget--two-tenths of 1 percent out of a $680 billion authorization bill, I think is I hope my colleagues would listen to these arguments, would debate and understand there is an ability, to reach a compromise where we can go forward with production, reduce some of the cost that the proponents argue for in this amendment, and then move toward together. But to make the decision that we may make in the next hour and a half or so would I appreciate my colleague Senator Chambliss giving me the opportunity to respond on this issue, and I thank him for his work as well in making the case to our colleagues, Democrats and Republicans. This ought not to be an issue that divides along those lines at all. We need to understand what is at stake for our Nation, both in terms of our manufacturing base as well as the national security needs that have Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the two letters, one from General Corley and one from General Wyatt. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to comment on the critical issue of F-22 fleet size. At Air Combat Command we have held the need for 381 F- 22s to deliver a tailored package of air superiority to our Combatant Commanders and provide a potent, globally arrayed, asymmetric deterrent against potential adversaries. In my opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near to mid- To my knowledge, there are no studies that demonstrate 187 F-22s are adequate to support our national military strategy. Headquarters Air Force, shows a moderate risk force can be obtained with an F-22 fleet of approximately 250 aircraft. While OSD did not solicit direct input from Air Combat Command, we worked closely with our Headquarters in ensuring our views were available. We realize the tough choices our national leadership must make in balancing current warfighting needs against the fiscal realities our Nation The F-22, a critical enabler of air dominance, plays a vital role and indispensable role in ensuring joint freedom of action for all forces and underpins our ability to dissuade and deter. Thank you for your continued support of Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your inquiry and the opportunity for me to discuss what I believe to be a serious threat to the Air National Guard's ability to fulfill our Nation's highest strategic priority; defending the Homeland. The ANG has proudly performed the bulk of this mission, while simultaneously participating in overseas contingency operations, with aircraft that are rapidly nearing the end of their service life. While I believe our Nation has the capacity to recapitalize the ANG, I am not aware of any plan that commits to doing so. As such, we are in need of an immediate solution in order to ensure that America's most cost effective force can continue to perform its most While a variety of solutions abound, I believe the nature of the current and future asymmetric threats to our Nation, particularly from seaborne cruise missiles, requires a fighter platform with the requisite speed and detection to address them. The F-22's unique capability in this arena enables it to handle a full spectrum of threats that the ANG's current legacy systems are not capable of addressing. I am fond of saying that ``America's most important job should Indeed, I am keenly aware of the severe strain that our current economic situation has placed on the Department of Defense as it attempts to modernize for an ever evolving threat environment. Given this reality, finding more efficient ways to protect our Nation's interests at home and abroad is the new imperative. Many say this will mean making tough choices, but I believe we can maintain our vitality by making smart choices; leveraging the cost effective and dual use nature of the ANG is the answer. Basing F-22s (and eventually F-35s) at strategic ANG locations throughout the United States while simultaneously making them available to contingency operations is the most responsible approach to Again, thank you for your inquiry and your continued The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield myself 1 minute to give the figures relative to the F-35 production, which are the Pentagon figures. I am not sure where my good friend from Connecticut got his figures on future F-35 production. But the figures from the Pentagon are that there are 30 in this year's budget; in next year's budget, fiscal year 2011, they plan 70 F-35s; in fiscal year 2012, 109 F-35s; in fiscal year 2013, 119 F-35s. Those are far different than the numbers which my friend from Connecticut just gave. I am not sure the source of his numbers. Perhaps he can give us those At this point, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Delaware. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. DODD. I wanted to state where the numbers came from. They are from the Defense Contracting Management Agency. That is where the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware is recognized. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, today, I would like to speak in strong support of the Levin-McCain amendment which strips $1.75 billion in spending for additional F-22s. These are fighter jets the military does not want and does not need. This is a Cold War system, in a post-9/11 world, that is underperforming and overpriced. To force this purchase, against the best judgment of our military leadership and Commander in Chief, weakens our ability to keep our Nation safe. The White House and Pentagon agree that continuing the F-22 production line decreases our military readiness by wasting resources that could be much more usefully employed. And it is not a partisan issue. Presidents Obama and Bush; Defense Secretaries Gates and Rumsfeld; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, and his two predecessors; and the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force all agree that the F-22 is not the most efficient or effective warplane to meet our current and future defense needs. The F-22 has not flown one mission over Afghanistan or Iraq, because it is not the best weapon to meet the challenges we are currently This system was designed to counter Soviet fighters at the end of the Cold War. And its continued purchase deprives the military of $1.75 billion it requested for other critical priorities, such as building the capability to protect our troops and defeat insurgencies. With ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we cannot afford to disregard the views of our military. And in these tough economic times, we cannot afford to adopt an irresponsible approach to defense spending. These facts speak for themselves, and the stakes are simply The F-22 prepares us for the wars of the past; the wars we have already won. Today, we must look forward and make tough decisions for the future. We must heed the advice of our military leaders, such as Secretary Gates, to rebalance our defense budget and enhance our capabilities to succeed against current and future threats. This includes preparing for a wide spectrum of conflict and continuing to Madam President, this debate is not just about the future of F-22s. It is about changing the way we do business. It is about accepting this rebalancing and ending unnecessary waste. And it is about matching vital national security interests with commensurate levels of funding. The F-22 is the first test of our willingness to make the tough choices necessary to truly prioritize defense spending. The grim reality is that with regard to the budget, we have entered into a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. Madam President, I want to align myself with the remarks of Secretary Gates, and reiterate to my colleagues that this is a risk none of us Many of my colleagues have spoken of the sacrifice and cost such a decision incurs in terms of jobs. They are right, and I share their concern about jobs; especially in these tough times. I know this makes our decision today hard, and no one wants to do anything that will hinder job creation and growth. But it is with these economic constraints in mind that we must also consider the implications of spending nearly $2 billion on a defense program that our military Building more F-22s does not allow for smart or efficient growth of our workforce. Moreover, the number of jobs lost on the F-22 will likely be matched by increased production of the F-35, which is a newer and more capable warplane. American workers are needed to meet this and other defense priorities, which strengthen our national security. Jobs should follow, as opposed to dictate, our defense needs. For those concerned about cuts, I point out that the budget proposed by the President and Secretary Gates represents an increase, not a decrease, in defense spending. But this is not just an increase for the Rather, it is a budget that recognizes that over the last two decades, the nature of conflict and war has fundamentally changed. It recognizes that we must continue to build the capacity to confront a wide spectrum of challenges--conventional and unconventional; regular and irregular--and better prepare for a future in which we will Today, we must do what is in America's best interest. Today, we must focus on weapons systems that offer the maximum versatility and effectiveness, and prepare the military against the widest range of threats. And today, we must plan for our current and future counterinsurgency needs, as shaped by our experiences in Afghanistan It is in this regard that I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Levin-McCain amendment, and adopt a better approach to Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be charged equally on both sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized. Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I thank the Senator for yielding time As we consider the future of the F-22 program, it is important for us to remember the most fundamental goal we have for our defense industry way we have met that goal for many decades. That goal is to give our men and women in uniform technology and equipment that is far superior to that of our enemy so they can protect themselves and defend our Nation. It has been our mission from the time of the Wright brothers to the days of Rosie the Riveter, to the era of stealthy technology. But maintaining that technology has depended on an important partnership and that is a partnership between the Pentagon, which determines the needs of our war fighters, and industry, which does the research and design and builds the next generation of military equipment that meets those needs. It is a partnership that is vital to our military strength, to our economy, and to the health of our Unfortunately, it is also a partnership that is being weakened by amendments such as the one we are considering today. Instead of treating military procurement such as the partnership that it is, this amendment envisions it as a one-way street. This amendment cancels a vital military program without adequate thought of the men and women we rely on to design and build the equipment our war fighters depend on without any consideration of the fact that if we end the F-22 program, we are cutting a link in technology that we will not be able to repair As many of you know, this is not the first time I have come to the floor to talk about the erosion of our Nation's industrial base. It likely will not be the last. That is because protecting our domestic base is not about just one company or one program or one State or one industry. This is about our Nation's economic stability, it is about our future military capability, and it is about the ability to retain skilled family-wage jobs in communities throughout the country. Just last week, the Aerospace Industries Association issued a major report that finds the Pentagon failed to consider industrial effects when choosing strategies. That report urged the Pentagon to take into account the impact decisions such as the one to stop production of the F-22 make on our manufacturing base. That report also noted that our manufacturing base was not taken into account in past Quadrennial Defense Reviews, and when Secretary Gates unveiled his program cuts in April, he specifically said defense industry jobs were not a factor in As our country faces two difficult but not unrelated challenges-- safeguarding our country in a dangerous world and rebuilding a faltering economy--ignoring the needs of our industrial base should not be an option. Whether it is the scientists who are designing the next generation of military satellites or whether it is the engineers who are improving our radar systems or the machinists assembling our war planes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest strategic assets. What if they, all of a sudden, were not available? What if we made budgetary and policy decisions that did not take into account the need of making sure we have a strong domestic workforce in Actually, that is not impossible or even unthinkable. It is actually happening today. We need to be clear about the ramifications of amendments such as the ones we are considering today because once we give up on producing this technology, once we say that certain research and development is no longer needed, we lose that. We lose it and we Today, as we consider a critical tool for the future of our military across the globe, we have to also remember the partnership we have built with our industrial base because, unless we consider the needs of that partnership, we are not only going to continue to lose some of our best-paying American jobs, we are going to lose the backbone of our Supporting continued F-22 production will help defend against potential threats, it will protect family-wage jobs, and, most importantly, it will preserve our domestic base. That is important because we do not know what conflict will come in the future. We don't know what our challenges will be 10 or 15 or 20 or 30 years from now. If we lose our engineering or our production base and we face a challenge in the future and go back to rebuild that, it will never happen. We will be at a disadvantage in whatever future conflict we I urge our colleagues to think about the long-term interests of this decision. I oppose the amendment and I look forward to further debate. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains on our side? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The proponents have 35\\1/2\\ minutes, the Mr. LEVIN. I yield to the Senator from Arizona as much of that time The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank the chair. I, again, thank my friend, the distinguished chairman, for proposing this amendment. I thank the distinguished chairman for being the sponsor of this amendment. It is a privilege to work with him on this as well as many This amendment is probably the most impactful amendment I have seen in this body on almost any issue, much less the issue of defense. It boils down to whether we are going to continue the business as usual of once a weapons system gets into full production it never dies or whether we are going to take the necessary steps to reform the The F-22, in itself, is $1.75 billion. That is an impressive number anyplace outside the beltway. But more important than that, it is a signal that we are not going to continue to build weapons systems that are plagued with cost overruns, which outlive their requirements for defending this Nation and, very frankly, starts to gain control of the acquisition process which is completely out of control. The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that there were over $295 billion in cost overruns in the last several years--$295 billion in cost overruns. Recently, a close friend of mine and great leader and former Secretary of the Navy wrote an article in the Wall When John McCain was shot down over Hanoi in 1967, he was By the way, I didn't know that cost to the taxpayers I had caused. Inflation has risen by 700 percent since then. So Mr. McCain's A-4 cost $6.1 million in 2008 dollars. Applying a generous factor of three for technological improvements, the price for a 2008 Navy F-18 fighter should be $18 million. Instead, we are paying about $90 million for each new fighter. As a result, the Navy cannot buy sufficient numbers. In 1983, I was in the Pentagon meeting that launched the F- 22 Raptor. The plan was to buy 648 jets beginning in 1996 for Now they cost $350 million apiece and the Obama budget caps At least they are safe from cyberattack since no one in China knows how to program the '83 vintage IBM software that He then goes on to cite other problems, including Navy shipbuilding . . . the Army's Future Combat System that was meant to re- equip the entire Army, the 400 percent cost overrun of the It is out of control, I say to my colleagues. I will match my commitment to equipping the men and women in the military with that of anyone in this body, but it has to stop, and this vote on the F-22 will determine whether it is business as usual with the earmarking and pork- barreling of billions of dollars which has bred corruption--we have former Members of the Congress residing in Federal prison--or whether Who better to be a spokesperson, in my view, than our Secretary of Secretaries of Defense. I know of no one whom I admire more than Secretary Gates. He gave a very important speech, on July 16, at the Economic Club of Chicago--a remarkable speech. I hope all my colleagues would have the chance to read it. In part of it he says, about the First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless, I determined in a triumph of hope over I wish to emphasize my strong support and appreciation for the --and the President agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move ahead with business Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy. For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles The President's budget would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- He goes on to say how important the F-35 is, and then he says: The F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios-- specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense I ask my colleagues, would you ask yourselves why the F-22 has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. It has been in production for nearly 5 years. It has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. And I want to emphasize that I think it is an important fighter. We are building 187 of them. The question before this body is why we continue to build more, whether we continue to build more, or the F-35, the Joint Strike Fighter, which goes to the Marine Corps and the Navy and the Air Force. Is this the weapons system we need to balance our entire capability of I would ask my colleagues, since the F-22 was on the drawing boards and moved into production, look at the advancement in unmanned aerial vehicles. I say that as an old pilot. The unmanned aerial vehicles have been performing a magnificent job both in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have been a critical element sometimes on the battlefields. And this President's budget understands that and gives extreme priority to that. So as we go on, in light of these factors, Secretary Gates goes on to With the support of Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries The fact is, in the view of the President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and most any objective observer of the military scene, they believe the F-22 is important, we need to have what we have, but it is now time to move on to the F-35, the Joint So this amendment really means, are we going to look at the real and compelling needs we have to have in order to win the war in Afghanistan, continue our success in Iraq, and put our funds into that kind of equipment and weapons systems or are we going to continue? Finally, I have great sympathy for the Senator from Georgia and other Senators who have come to the floor. I understand the sincerity of their views. I respect them. I would also point out, though, that to argue we should build weapons systems in the name of jobs is not what we should be about. What we should be about is procuring and building the best weapons systems to ensure our national security and how we can best equip the men and women who are in harm's way all around the world So I understand the economic impact, particularly in these hard times. My sympathy goes out to the communities that are dependent on the contracts for the F-22 aircraft. All I can say to them is we will do everything we can to help you and your families and make the adjustments, and there will be--we continue to increase spending on defense. We hope that we will be able to provide you with the necessary jobs and manufacturing that would be devoted to what we have ascertained as our national defense weapons systems procurement priorities, I say with sympathy to my colleagues who are deeply concerned about the loss of jobs in these difficult economic times. But this is not the way to provide jobs. Our obligation is to defend this So I think this amendment is overdue. I think it will be a significant, a very significant amendment, as I said before, as to whether we will get our priorities straight and listen to our esteemed Secretary of Defense, our President, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other military leaders in whose hands we entrust to make the tough decisions. I understand the final decision is here in Congress, but I also don't think we should dismiss the arguments that have been made by I think one of the finest men to ever serve this THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time to the Senator from Utah? Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to yield 7 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized. Mr. HATCH. Madam President, during his July 16 address, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, said the military needed maximum versatility to bring to bear in a wide range of armed conflicts. Last January, he argued that ``our military must be prepared for a full spectrum of operations, including the [insurgent] type of combat we are facing in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as large-scale threats that we face from I could not agree more with Secretary Gates. However, just as our Nation unwisely disregarded the hard-learned lessons of how to fight counterinsurgency operations after Vietnam, the Defense Department seems poised to make similar errors by limiting our capability to defeat the air threat of today and tomorrow: the integrated air defense This advanced system is composed of extended-range Russian surface- to-air missiles such as the S-300 and advanced fighters such as the Su- 30, which have already been sold in large numbers to China and India. Together, these systems make penetrating hostile airspace extremely difficult, if not deadly, for aircraft lacking the F-22's advanced stealth technology and capability for sustained supersonic speeds. It is these capabilities that enable the Raptor to have the unique capability to conduct stealth operations at any time of day or night. Secretary Gates argues for ceasing production of the F-22 after only are built because we will not face what the Pentagon refers to as a ``near-peer adversary'' for the foreseeable future. For the sake of our Nation, I hope he is right. However, I believe this statement misses a critical point: advanced integrated air defense systems are comparably inexpensive and readily affordable by nations such as Iran, with its insistence on developing nuclear weapons. History provides ample examples of the effective use of integrated air defense systems by nations that lack the resources to be considered a near-peer adversary of the U.S. As retired LTG Michael Dunn recently noted, North Vietnam defended its territory during the Vietnam war with what, at the time, was an advanced air defense system. This system, comprised of surface-to-air missiles and fewer than 200 fighters, was The 1973 War between Israel and Egypt is another example. The Egyptians learning from their recent defeats built an integrated air defense umbrella under which its forces were able to initially make significant territorial gains, while the Israeli Air Force faced serious losses. Only when the Egyptians advanced beyond the range of their surface-to-air missiles' umbrella was the Israeli Air Force able A more contemporary example is the loss in the 1990s of an F-117 Nighthawk to the Serbians, who were not equipped with the latest air Despite such examples, some argue additional F-22s are not necessary since stealthy jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs, which are still under development, will play an increasingly vital role in destroying critical ground targets. This is true for threats on the ground, but I am unaware of any plans to operationally deploy a UAV that can dogfight existing or next-generation Russian and Chinese jet Our forces could be confronted with the next generation Russian and Chinese fighters soon. There have been numerous media reports the Russian Government is developing a new stealthy aircraft, presumably to counter the F-22. This aircraft called PAK-FA, is being developed jointly with the Indian Government. Additional media sources cite China's development of a similar twin engine, stealth aircraft known as Some argue that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter can tackle those threats and defeat this new generation of advanced aircraft. While the F-35 is a very capable stealth aircraft, it was designed to complement the F-22, not replace it. The fact is the F-35 is neither as capable a fighter nor as stealthy as the F-22. For example, the F-35 does not have, nor can be upgraded to use, the supercruise engines increasingly Remember the F-22 is the NASCAR racer of this air-dominance team. Fast and unseen, the Raptor will punch a hole in an enemy's defenses, quickly dispatching any challenger in the air and striking at the most important ground targets. The Joint Strike Fighter is the rugged SUV of the team. Impressive, but not as maneuverable or capable of sustained supersonic speeds, the F-35 will exploit the hole opened by the F-22 and attack additional targets and directly support our ground forces. This is not to say the F-35 is not a highly capable stealthy aircraft. But the F-35's role is to supplement the F-22, not substitute for it. Only by utilizing the strengths of both aircraft do we ensure air Furthermore, if the F-22 is such a boondoggle, why do our allies such as Japan and Australia want to spend billions to purchase the aircraft? Why does Australia, for instance, plan to purchase up to 100 F-35s and large numbers of UAVs, and yet remains interested in the F-22? Perhaps it is because Australia understands the Russians and the Chinese are developing even more sophisticated surface-to-air missile systems and stealth fighters, threats the F-22 is uniquely designed and equipped to Others point out the F-22 has not been deployed in support of our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is true. However, there were recent plans to deploy the F-22 to the Persian Gulf. But according to the July 9, 2008, edition of the widely respected Defense News, the Pentagon overruled those plans, citing concerns about ``strategic dislocation.'' This means the F-22 is hardly a dinosaur. It is a weapon that can change the balance of power in a region and deter our In conclusion, I am reminded of a point author Michael Korda made in his book about the Battle of Britain. He observed that even though the two British prime ministers before Winston Churchill pursued a policy of appeasement, they also committed their government to develop and procure the three pieces of equipment: the Spitfire fighter, Hurricane fighter and radar, which were to ensure that nation's survival during I hope the Senate will profit from these lessons of history and vote I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. LEVIN. How much time remains for the proponents? The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 21 minutes remaining. Mr. LEVIN. I ask Senator Wyden, how much time does he need? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon is recognized. Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I rise this morning to support the Levin- McCain amendment. It seems to me that buying more F-22s at this point would meet the very definition of government waste. What you have is a situation where the Pentagon, which, suffice it to say, has not exactly been shy over the years in terms of calling for additional weapons, is on record as saying this is unnecessary. Further, I have been out talking with members of the Guard at home and trying to get their sense of what is needed in this dangerous time, and they have never once mentioned something like this. They talk, for example, about body armor. They talk about boots. They don't talk about more F-22s. Suffice it to say, when the Congress is now having a debate about trying to find additional money for health care, for example, to go out and spend close to $2 billion to buy seven more F-22 fighters the Air Force says it doesn't want defies common My home State, for example, would love to hire back police and other essential workers who have been laid off. Instead of building seven planes, we could be restoring infrastructure and developing renewable energy. Again, in my home State, we have had budget shortfalls. We have seen reductions in essential services, law enforcement being one. The debate is not about necessary steps to ensuring a strong national defense. The question is about whether the U.S. Congress wants to spend close to $2 billion to pay for more fighter jets the Air Force does not It is also important to remember that the F-22 is not being purchased for wars the United States is currently fighting. Certainly, the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents do not have an Air Force. The F-22 is being purchased to fight in possible future conflicts with other countries that may have an air force. While I strongly believe the Pentagon ought to be able to prepare for such possibilities, it is the Pentagon that is telling us we don't need these additional F-22s. It is also important to note that the Pentagon has purchased 187 F- 22s. There is not a debate about whether the United States ought to have fighters in our arsenal. The question is whether the Air Force needs 194 of them instead of 187. We have a very good Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. The Secretary has said that 187 is sufficient to combat current and future threats. He is the one who said that more are We must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built, and that are then usable only in a narrow range of low probability scenarios. Secretary Gates has hit the nail about as perfectly on the head as one can. He and our country want the strongest defense possible. But there are ways to make better use of that $1.75 billion than on seven I serve on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I know there are threats to our forces every single day. I see the Senator from Georgia who serves on the Intelligence Committee. He believes strongly about this as well. We need to make sure we are protecting our troops in harm's way, but we have a variety of choices in order to secure the protection our troops have been in need of. I intend to work with Chairman Levin, Secretary Gates, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and the President to ensure we replace the current F-15 with Last month, I visited with some of the 3,000 members of the Oregon National Guard's 41st brigade combat team, as they trained for their current deployment to Iraq. Not a one of the soldiers told me that their big concern was whether the Air Force would have 194 F-22s instead of 187. They talked to me instead about the best vehicles, the best medical care if they are injured, about the best body armor. Not I am not voting against the F-22. I am voting for the soldier, the taxpayer. They both deserve our government's greatest protection at I urge colleagues to support the Levin-McCain amendment. Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to address the F-22 program. For the past week as the debate has swirled around on this program I have not spoken on the subject. My colleagues know that I have strongly supported the F-22 program over the past two decades. Why? Because it is without question the world's most advanced fighter aircraft. It's capabilities far outstrip anything else in the world. There simply is When the Advanced Tactical Fighter Program began more than 20 years ago, no one could foresee what the world would look like in 2009. We planned to build 750 F-22s in order to match the Soviet Union's assumed far greater number of advanced fighters. The F-22 was designed with a goal of defeating 10 Soviet fighters apiece. The strategy was that using a combination of stealth and an advanced radar the F-22 would be able to attack Soviet fighters long before the adversary knew they were I am pleased to note that 20 years later as we train with the F-22 our Air Force pilots report that is exactly what it can do. Time after time as we exercise with the F-22, the results are nearly the same. The F-22 defeats all adversaries nearly with the same predictions as the What has changed, however, is that the Soviet Union no longer poses the threat that was assumed by the Defense Department in the 1980s. So then, critics say, why do we need to continue to buy more? We will soon They note that the F-22 hasn't been used in Afghanistan. While that is considered a clear argument that it isn't needed, it is laughable. As far as I know al-Qaida and the Taliban don't have an air force. The F-22 is designed to defeat conventional military forces. It is designed, for example, to counter a conventional attack by an adversary against one of its neighbors. Were the Chinese to attack Taiwan, the F- 22 would provide an incredible counter to the Chinese. The same would be true if a resurgent Russia were to try to reclaim countries in the Baltics. Unless we truly believe that we will never face another nation state in a conventional conflict then the F-22 is indeed necessary. At 187 aircraft, the F-22 provides a very credible deterrent to those nations. Is it sufficient? Perhaps. Will the Joint Strike Fighter replace it, not a chance. The Joint Strike Fighter, we expect, will be a terrific aircraft, but it is designed primarily to attack ground targets. In a battle against the F-22, it would likely lose each engagement. With better trained pilots and tactics, the Joint Strike Fighter could probably give the F-22 a run for its money, but it was never designed to replace the F-22 and should not be viewed as such. To me what is maddening about this debate is the sense that the decision is so clear cut that the F-22 program should be killed that it is only parochial politics that could keep it alive. That is pure The Nation has invested more than $65 billion to develop and buy 187 aircraft. If we choose to buy more F-22s we will do so at a very reasonable price--about $150 million. While that is not cheap by any stretch of the imagination, it is far cheaper than what we paid to initiate the program. And, if we kill the program and decide that we need to restart it in a few years, it is far cheaper than we would have This is not a boondoggle. We don't have critics saying the program is flawed and should be killed. Everyone agrees it is a great aircraft. While some of my colleagues obviously support the program because it means jobs in their States, others like myself who have no F-22 jobs in their States support the program because of its capabilities and their concern for the future. Why then has it become an issue over which to veto a bill? Why are the stakes so high with this program? I have the greatest respect for the President and the current Secretary of Defense. I have supported both in almost every initiative they have advocated. But I see in this case a pattern that I have Time after time our new leaders, both civilian and military, look at a program and see all the reasons why it isn't the right one. For example, in the early days of the Clinton administration the C-17 program was nearly terminated because the production of the aircraft wasn't performing up to expectations. I recall 2 years prior to that the Appropriations Committee recommended a pause in funding for the C- 17, not because we had lost confidence in the program. We still believed in the requirement for the aircraft, but the program wasn't performing. Up to that point, we had appropriated funds for 16 C-17s in total, but not a single one had been delivered, and there were very few coming together on the factory floor in Long Beach. We weren't recommending cancellation, but it served notice that attention was needed. However, the attention that the program received was mostly When the Clinton administration came into office many of the new officials were convinced that the C-17 should be terminated. In that instance the Pentagon mandated a study to determine whether the C-17 was still required. Luckily the conclusion was that yes the plane was still needed and those who were calling for its cancellation, including It was only a few years earlier that Secretary Cheney determined that the V-22 should be terminated. He was justifiably concerned that the price was increasing and that the program was taking longer than planned. It took the concerted effort of the Congress to stand up and say that we would not allow the program to be terminated. Certainly there were those in the Pentagon who agreed with the Secretary, but the I am told that a few years prior to that my good friend Senator Rudman weighed in with Chairman Stevens to overrule the Air Force who wanted to kill the F-117 after the production of only one squadron of aircraft. I should point out that the F-117 was not built in New Hampshire. There might have been some modest amount of work associated with the plane in his state, but the reason that Senator Rudman insisted that we keep buying the F-117 was because of its unique My colleagues all know the history of the B-2 program. It was started classified program in 1981. The Air Force was going to build 132 bombers. We expected it to cost between $20 and $25 billion in total. The contractor built a huge state of the art factory out in the high desert of California to handle the production of the aircraft. Because it was highly classified every precaution had to be taken to protect national security all of which dramatically increased the cost to Clearly the contractor and Air Force were overly optimistic on the cost and schedule of the program. Within 5 years it was clear that the program was not going to be completed within $25 billion. As development delays occurred, costs continued to escalate. The Air Force was unwilling to devote more resources to the program so in a series of moves it consistently delayed production of the aircraft and transferred dollars appropriated to build the aircraft to be used instead to cover higher development costs. By the time I became chairman, it was clear that the program would exceed its budget, but it was also clear that if it were successful it would provide an unmatched capability to this Nation. As costs mounted, the Defense Department determined that it would not be able to purchase all 132 aircraft. First production was cut to 75 and eventually it dropped to 20. In 1996 as the program was being killed, the contractor offered to produce three per year for several years at a price of about $600 million per copy. However, by that time support for the program had eroded so that neither the Pentagon nor the Congress would take up the offer. Instead, by only buying a total of 21 aircraft, we invested over $2 billion per plane making it the most costly aircraft in history. This situation isn't unique to aircraft programs. In the case of shipbuilding, I remember vividly Secretary Cheney's decision to cancel the Seawolf submarine. As a result of that decision, the three Seawolf- class submarines that were eventually built were very expensive. Because we only bought three, the average cost of each submarine was more than $4 billion. Had we built the 29 originally planned, I can only speculate about the cost, but it would certainly have been less than the price we are now paying for its replacement. What is even more galling is that during that time we were still building the capable SSN-688 Los Angeles class submarines and only paying about $800 million apiece for them. Instead of reinvigorating that program, we cancelled the Seawolf program and proceeded with the New Attack submarine, now called the Virginia class, in order to move to a cheaper submarine. Regrettably, I have to report that the cost of the Virginia class submarine is so high that we have only been able to afford to purchase one per year. When I became chairman we were buying four Los Angeles class submarines a year and paying only 1/3 the cost of the Virginia class. Is the Virginia a better submarine? Surely it is. The technological advances that the Nation has developed between the time the Los Angeles subs were designed and this decade have allowed for substantial improvements. Is it better than the Seawolf? That is The pattern I have watched during my tenure is a mix of four things. First, programs are cancelled before or as they reach maturity. Why? Sometimes because new leadership wants to go in a new direction more often, and important costs increase and schedules are delayed which erode the support for the programs. Sometimes programs are cancelled because we believe the promised replacement will be more capable or cheaper. And sometimes we argue times have changed and we don't need them. In a few cases it is clear that the program wasn't performing as For the F-22 some will argue it is too expensive. That was the argument against the V-22 program. Some say we simply don't need any more. That was the argument used to kill the B-2. Would we like to have more B-2s in the inventory today? I, for one, surely would. Others will say the threat doesn't warrant buying more F-22s. This is where I have my gravest concern. Some experts will tell you that we know that potential adversaries are working on fifth generation fighters. If in 5 years the Chinese unveil a new fifth generation fighter and begin to produce it in numbers will we regret the decision I am told that no one is likely to be able to develop and build an F- 22 equivalent aircraft for a generation. The skill and funding required to do so exceeds any foreign nation's ability. But in my view, they might not be able to design an F-22 themselves, but that doesn't mean We were told that the North Koreans were years away from a long range missile, then were surprised when they unveiled the Taepo dong. We were surprised when Pakistan conducted a nuclear test. We were shocked when the Soviet Union collapsed and most Americans were shocked when they learned about al-Qaida after 9/11. if there is one thing that shouldn't surprise us is that we cannot foretell the future. So as my colleagues deliberate on the F-22 program I come down on the side of caution. I believe it makes more sense at this time to continue to produce the program to hedge our bets against the future. To my knowledge there isn't a single worker in the State of Hawaii whose job is dependent on continuing production of the F-22, but I I believe it is unfortunate that the debate on this matter has taken on an overblown proportion. One can make the case that 187 could be sufficient. Our Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree that is the case. But just like the Marines argued for continuing to produce the V-22, the leaders of our Air National Guard and those in charge of flying the aircraft argue that we need more--even though the Defense When some say well, the Air Force leaders say they have enough, I will remind my colleagues that the Air Force said the same thing about When some say we should kill this and move on to the Joint Strike Fighter, I remember the Seawolf debate. We killed that submarine to build a cheaper alternative. Will we do the same thing here and be disappointed in the cost of the so-called alternative? On February 2, 1989, I was selected as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Appropriations Committee. For the past 20 years, it has been my distinct honor to serve either as the chairman or the ranking member of this subcommittee. As my colleagues all know, the defense subcommittee has the largest budget of any of our appropriations subcommittees, and to many of us it is probably the most important of our subcommittees. It has required a great deal of my time and attention over the past 20 years. For me it has been a labor of love. I have the greatest respect for the men and women of this Nation who are willing to serve and who guarantee constitutional freedoms for the rest of us. It has been my priority to support their cause during As I consider the F-22, I do so with the past twenty years as my guide. In my opinion what I have learned has taught me to be cautious as we kill programs. Therefore today I will cast my vote to continue Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I am going to continue to support production of the F-22 Raptor because we are still hearing strong indications from top military leaders that we need additional aircraft. Last month, General Corley, the Commander of the Air Force Air Combat Command, wrote that ending procurement of the F-22 would put our ability to execute our nation's military strategy at ``high risk'' over In addition, LTG Harry M. Wyatt III, the Director of the Air National Guard, has stated that these aircraft are particularly important for homeland defense missions, including addressing potential threats from GEN Merrill McPeak, retired, the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, also recently added that ending F-22 procurement ``is a real mistake,'' and that ``we certainly need some figure well above 200.'' I am also not prepared to vote to end production because I have yet to see a conclusive study indicating that 187 F-22s are enough. In fact, as late as May 19 of this year, GEN Norman A. Schwartz, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, told the House Armed Services Committee that The United States has made a significant investment in the F-22 program. Before terminating it, we must see in unequivocal terms how the defense planning process has determined that requirements and The next Quadrennial Defense Review--QDR--which outlines our national security strategy--is scheduled for submission by the Department of Defense in early 2010. This important document shapes how our military will respond to threats to our national security. The timing of today's I will feel more confident making a decision on this important program after reading the QDR, as it will shape our national security strategy for years to come. As GEN James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during his confirmation hearing for his second 2-year term, ``The military requirement right now [for the F-22A] is associated with the strategy that we are laying out in the While I realize that there are compelling arguments on both sides of this issue, I do not believe we have enough information at this time to shut down the F-22 line and terminate the program at 187 aircraft. Mr. CHAMBLISS. How much time remains on both sides? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 11 minutes; the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I am not sure how many other Senators want to speak or whether the opponents have speakers remaining on their Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, Senator Inhofe indicated a desire to speak. He is tied up in an EPW Committee hearing. He may be able to get Mr. LEVIN. We would like to be at the end of the line, Senator McCain Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to make some comments. Then Senator McCain and Senator Dodd and the Senator from Michigan could close it out. If Senator Inhofe comes in, we will give him a couple of minutes. Madam President, would the Chair notify me when I have used 5 Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I want to make a couple of quick comments relative to some of what has been said. First, with regard to Senator Wyden's comments concerning the National Guard, sure, all of us want to make sure we equip our Guard, our Reserve, as well as our active-duty force with all the needs they have. I would cite him to the letter of General Wyatt, who is the head of the Air Force Guard. General Wyatt says the F-22 is uniquely qualified to fill the needs the Guard has for its national security mission. To even slightly indicate that the Guard has issues with this program is simply not correct. The Guard is on record as being a strong supporter of this program. I have a letter from retired GEN David Bockel, retired from the United States Army. He now is the acting executive director of the Reserve Officers Association. Let me quote part of this: War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22s is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede the U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of F-22s required to ensure a strong defense is 250. I ask unanimous consent that the letter of retired General Bockel be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: The Reserve Officers Association, representing 65,000 Reserve Component members, supports additional procurement of the F-22 Raptor Aircraft. ROA urges Congress to authorize and appropriate funds for continued War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22 is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of Potential adversary nations are committed to producing their own fifth-generation aircraft in the immediate future. Not providing further funding for this crucial weapons system places at risk our nation's ability to meet known and near future threats. The United States can ill afford a fighter Thank you for your efforts on this key issue, and other support to the military that you have shown in the past. Please feel free to have your staff call ROA's legislative director, Marshall Hanson, with any question or issue you Mr. CHAMBLISS. I also have quoted earlier the comments by an active- duty general, a guy I consider a great American hero, not just because he falls in that category of wearing the uniform of the United States, but he is standing up to the personnel at the Pentagon. He is saying: For an active-duty general to do that takes significant courage. This is a guy I want in the foxhole with me. That is General Corley, commander of Air Combat Command, who very clearly says in a letter that we have previously entered into the Record that a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our national military strategy at high risk in the near to midterm and that the minimum number of F-22s we need, in his I want to also talk for a minute about Senator McCain's comments on the cost. This is an expensive weapons system, but it is also the most sophisticated weapons system ever designed by mankind. Most importantly, it is doing its job. It is doing its job in a very professional way. Instead of costing the $350 million Senator McCain stated in his earlier statements, because of a multiyear procurement contract we entered into between the Pentagon and the Air Force, as approved by this body--and I know Senator McCain objected to that and I understand that--but by a vote of 70 to 28, that multiyear contract was approved by this body as well as by the House. As a result, instead of paying the $350 million per copy he alluded to, we are today, under that multiyear contract, paying $140 million a copy. That is in comparison to the $200 million a copy that will be paid for every single F-35 we are buying in this budget. The figure for 200 F-35s in There are a number of people who are watching this debate out there today. Certainly those folks at the Pentagon are anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The White House is anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The Chinese are anxiously awaiting this vote. Let me tell colleagues why. I want to quote from an article of July 19 from a gentleman named Robert D. Fisher, Jr., who is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center. He writes: Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. Government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it I ask unanimous consent that that article be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in If Japan's long-standing effort to acquire the Lockheed- Martin F-22 Raptor fifth-generation superfighter falls victim to Washington power politics, the United States may inadvertently encourage an Asian arms race over which it may It is fortunate for the United States that in what may be the last year a deal is possible, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye and his supporters have decided to lead an effort to reverse a 1998 law barring Through Mr. Inouye's efforts Japan now knows a slightly degraded export model of the Raptor may take five years to develop and cost about $290 million a plane for about 40, compared to the estimated $150 million the U.S. Air Force Japan's long-standing quest to obtain the F-22, however, may be shot down amid the intense political struggle over the F-22s very future. President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have made termination of F-22 production at 187 planes a symbolic goal of their effort to cut defense spending and reorient U.S. military strategy. This has been challenged recently by the House Armed Services Committee, which approved the production of 12 more Raptors, and a Senate committee that approved production of seven more. However, the administration immediately threatened a veto, and the F-22's opponents are working hard to ensure that After 2011, the F-22's costs will grow significantly, so Japan and its U.S. supporters have little time to nail down a deal. However, some U.S. officials have long doubted that Japan can afford to pay for the F-22, which is why the George W. Bush and Obama administrations have not seriously promoted the F-22 for Japan. Mr. Gates reportedly favors selling Tokyo the smaller, somewhat less capable and less expensive While Japan may also purchase the F-35, there are two important reasons Washington should fully support Japan's goal to acquire the F-22. First, the F-22 will be the only combat aircraft capable of countering China's expected fifth- generation fighters. Second, selling Japan the Raptor may become a critical nonnuclear means for Washington to help Japan deter a China on its way to becoming a military superpower by the 2020s. If Washington cannot provide decisive nonnuclear means to deter China, Japan may more quickly consider decisive deterrents such as missiles and Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it capabilities such as anti-ship ballistic missiles, its buildup of nuclear-missile and anti-missile capabilities and space-warfare weapons will increasingly undermine U.S. strategic guarantees for Japan. China's development of long- range anti-air and surface-to-air missiles also threatens the electronic support aircraft critical to the ``networked'' U.S. air-warfare paradigm, meaning that jet fighters could quickly lose force-multiplying radar aircraft, tankers and communication satellites. As such, Japan is correct to prefer the F-22, which reportedly can fly 300 to 400 mph faster and two miles higher than the F-35--an aircraft optimized for If Japan is serious about the F-22 and its military security, it will have to pay for both. But if Washington is serious about sustaining a strategic alliance, it should sell the Raptor to Japan and be prepared to do more as China's Mr. CHAMBLISS. There is another group watching very anxiously out there. It is a group of men and women who wear the uniform of the U.S. Air Force. They are lieutenants, captains, and majors. They are watching this anxiously because they are saying to themselves: I signed up to be a part of a U.S. Air Force that believes in putting men and women in cockpits, men and women who are going to carry the fight to the enemy. What am I hearing from Members of Congress? What am I hearing from the leadership at the Pentagon? That we are going to move away from the most advanced fighter in the world today and move to a smaller fighter? That we are going to move away from fighters maybe even altogether by going to UAVs? Is this the Air Force I signed up I can tell my colleagues why they are anxiously awaiting the outcome. They have talked to me time and time again about the fact that they are concerned about their future in the U.S. Air Force. The worst thing we can do is to discourage those brave men and women who want to make a career of the Air Force and want to be wearing the two, three, and four stars one of these days. I assure my colleagues those lieutenants and those captains and those majors are watching what this body does from a policy standpoint today. They know where their leadership at the Pentagon is coming from. They don't like what they are hearing. They are now looking to Congress to fulfill the role that John Hamre, the director of CSIS, has said time and time again, and that is to objectively review the budget the Pentagon sends to the hill. We are in the process of doing that and exercising the type of oversight we I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I know almost everything that can be said has been said. Having served on the Armed Services Committee for quite some time and having watched this, what is kind of worrisome to me is that when we started out the F-22 program, the fifth generation fighter program, at that time they were talking about 750. Then the numbers started coming down and approached, I guess, 243. The Air Force officials have repeatedly stated that no fewer than that would be My concern has been the same concern I have when we are talking about ground capability, when we see countries such as China and Russia passing us up in areas. I will not bring up the NLOS cannon right now. But there are many places where our prospective enemies have better equipment than we do. We do know China has their J-12s; and Russia, I believe they are calling theirs the T-50s. We do know those are fifth- generation fighters. It is very disturbing to me that we would consider stopping at this point when this is not going to be adequate to get us So I certainly support the effort to maintain those seven. Quite frankly, when Senator Chambliss offered the amendment to expand it by seven, I was thinking we should really be shooting for more, and I think he agreed with that. However, apparently with the exports out there and with the additional seven that were put in, in the committee, that would be enough to keep the line open. So I strongly support the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Fourteen minutes 45 seconds. Mr. LEVIN. Well, if the Senator from Arizona would go, and then Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, how much time do we have remaining? Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, we would be glad to yield a couple more Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 additional minutes to the Mr. McCAIN. Three, four. I ask the Senator, do you want to go ahead Mr. DODD. Madam President, I will wait a couple of minutes. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I will be fairly brief. This argument has been made, and we pretty well covered most of the issue. I would remind my colleagues that all the things we do are a matter of choice have unlimited amounts of funding, obviously, and if you spend money on one project, then obviously you may have to spend less on another. That is the case of the F-35, if we do not eliminate this $1.75 billion. But most importantly, I want to point out again, this amendment is more than just about a weapons system. This amendment is about whether we will stop doing business as usual; that is, continuing to fund weapons systems that are no longer needed and unnecessary. We are not saying the F-22 is not a good aircraft. We are saying it is time to end The President of the United States has threatened to veto this entire bill. That is not good for the men and women in the military to have to go through this whole process over again. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and, very importantly, the Secretary of Defense, who has served now under two Presidents and has gained the respect and appreciation of all of us for his service--Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Secretary of Defense Gates' speech last July 16 to the Economic Club of Chicago be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant (As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Chicago, IL, Thank you, Secretary Daley, for that kind introduction. It's an honor to be at the Economic Club of Chicago. I certainly appreciate the special arrangements you made to I thank all the distinguished citizens of this great city who came here today. I am mindful I am speaking in the adopted hometown of my boss. President Obama sends his greetings, as do Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod and the rest of the Chicago crew. They are no doubt discovering that The issue that brings me here today is central to the security of all Americans: the future of the United States military: How it should be organized, equipped--and funded-- in the years ahead, to win the wars we are in while being prepared for threats on or beyond the horizon. Earlier this enthusiastically agreed--that we needed to fundamentally reshape the priorities of America's defense establishment and reform the way the Pentagon does business--in particular, the weapons we buy, and how we buy them. Above all, to prepare to wage future wars, rather than continuing the habit of I am here on relatively short notice to speak publicly about these matters because Congress is, as we speak, debating the president's defense budget request for the next fiscal year, a budget request that implements many needed reforms and changes. Most of the proposals--especially those that increase support for the troops, their families, and the war effort--have been widely embraced. However, some of the crucial reforms that deal with major weapons programs have met with a less than enthusiastic reaction in the Congress, among defense contractors, and within some quarters of the Pentagon itself. And so I thought it appropriate to address some of these controversial issues here--in a place that is, appropriately enough not only the adopted home of our Commander-in-Chief, but also a symbol of America's industrial First, some context on how we got to this point. President Obama's budget proposal is, I believe, the nation's first truly 21st century defense budget. It explicitly recognizes that over the last two decades the nature of conflict has fundamentally changed--and that much of America's defense establishment has yet to fully adapt to the security realities of the post-Cold War era and this complex and During the 1990s, the United States celebrated the demise of the Soviet Union and the so-called ``end of history'' by making deep cuts in the funding for, and above all, the size of the U.S. military, including a 40 percent drop in the size of the Active Army. This took place even as a post-Cold War world grew less stable, less predictable, and more turbulent. The U.S. military, with some advances in areas such as precision weaponry, essentially became a smaller version of the force that held off the Soviets in Germany for decades and expelled Iraq from Kuwait in 1991. There was little appetite for, or interest in, preparing for what we call ``irregular warfare''--campaigns against insurgents, terrorists, militias, and other non-state groups. This was the bipartisan reality both in the White House and in Of course, after September 11th, some things did change. The base defense budget--not counting spending for the wars-- increased by some 70 percent over the next eight years. During this period there were important changes in the way U.S. forces were organized, based and deployed, and investments were made in new technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles. However, when all was said and done, the way the Pentagon selected, evaluated, developed, and paid for major new weapons systems and equipment did not fundamentally Indeed, the kinds of equipment, programs, and capabilities needed to protect our troops and defeat the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan were not the highest priority of much of the Defense Department, even after several years of war. I learned about this lack of bureaucratic priority for the wars we are in the hard way--during my first few months on the job as the Iraq surge was getting underway. The challenges I faced in getting what our troops needed in the field stood in stark contrast to the support provided conventional modernization programs--weapons designed to fight other modern armies, navies, and air forces--that had been in the pipeline for many years and had acquired a loyal and enthusiastic following in the Pentagon, in the Congress, and in industry. The most pressing needs of today's warfighter--on the battlefield, in the hospital, or at home-- simply lacked place and power at the table when priorities were being set and long-term budget decisions were being So the most important shift in President Obama's first defense budget was to increase and institutionalize funding for programs that directly support those fighting America's wars and their families. Those initiatives included more helicopter support, air lift, armored vehicles, personnel protection equipment, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, we also increased funding for programs that provide long-term support to military families and treatment for the signature wounds of this conflict--such as traumatic But, while the world of terrorists and other violent extremists--of insurgents and IEDs--is with us for the long haul, we also recognize that another world has emerged. Growing numbers of countries and groups are employing the latest and increasingly accessible technologies to put the United States at risk in disruptive and unpredictable ways. Other large nations--known in Pentagon lingo as ``near- peers''--are modernizing their militaries in ways that could, over time, pose a challenge to the United States. In some cases, their programs take the form of traditional weapons systems such as more advanced fighter aircraft, missiles, and But other nations have learned from the experience of Saddam Hussein's military in the first and second Gulf wars-- that it is ill-advised, if not suicidal, to fight a conventional war head-to-head against the United States: fighter-to-fighter, ship-to-ship, tank-to-tank. They also learned from a bankrupted Soviet Union not to try to outspend us or match our overall capabilities. Instead, they are developing asymmetric means that take advantage of new technologies--and our vulnerabilities--to disrupt our lines of communication and our freedom of movement, to deny us access, and to narrow our military options and strategic At the same time, insurgents or militias are acquiring or seeking precision weapons, sophisticated communications, cyber capabilities, and even weapons of mass destruction. The Lebanese extremist group Hezbollah currently has more rockets and high-end munitions--many quite sophisticated and In sum, the security challenges we now face, and will in the future, have changed, and our thinking must likewise change. The old paradigm of looking at potential conflict as unconventional, high end or low--is no longer relevant. And as a result, the Defense Department needs to think about and prepare for war in a profoundly different way than what we have been accustomed to throughout the better part of the What is needed is a portfolio of military capabilities with maximum versatility across the widest possible spectrum of conflict. As a result, we must change the way we think and the way we plan--and fundamentally reform--the way the Pentagon does business and buys weapons. It simply will not do to base our strategy solely on continuing to design and buy--as we have for the last 60 years--only the most technologically advanced versions of weapons to keep up with or stay ahead of another superpower adversary--especially one To get there we must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of cost, complexity, and delay to systems that are number can be built, and that are then usable only in a We must also get control of what is called ``requirements creep''--where more features and capabilities are added to a given piece of equipment, often to the point of absurdity. The most flamboyant example of this phenomenon is the new presidential helicopter-- what President Obama referred to as defense procurement ``run amok.'' Once the analysis and requirements were done, we ended up with a helicopter that cost nearly half a billion dollars each and enabled the president to, among other things, cook dinner while in flight We also had to take a hard look at a number of weapons programs that were grotesquely over budget, were having major performance problems, were reliant on unproven technology, or were becoming increasingly detached from real world scenarios--as if September 11th and the wars that followed manufacturing sectors have at some point probably faced some combination of these challenges in your own businesses. But in the defense arena, we faced an additional, usually insurmountable obstacle to bring rationality to budget and acquisition decisions. Major weapons programs, irrespective of their problems or performance, have a habit of continuing long after they are wanted or needed, recalling Ronald Reagan's old joke that a government program represents the closest thing we'll ever see to eternal life on this earth. First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless I determined in a triumph of hope over experience, and the president agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move To this end, the president's budget request cut, curtailed, or ended a number of conventional modernization programs-- satellites, ground vehicles, helicopters, fighters--that were either performing poorly or in excess to real-world needs. Conversely, future-oriented programs where the U.S. was relatively underinvested were accelerated or received more For example, we must sustain and continually improve our specialized strategic deterrent to ensure that our--and our allies'--security is always protected against nuclear-armed adversaries. In an initiative little noticed, the President's program includes money to begin a new generation of ballistic missile submarines and nearly $700 million in additional funds to secure and assure America's nuclear deterrent. Some of our proposed reforms are meeting real resistance. They are called risky. Or not meeting a certain military requirement. Or lacking in study and analysis. Those three words--requirements, risk, and, analysis--are commonly invoked in defense matters. If applied correctly, they help us make sound decisions. I've found, however, that more often they have become the holy trinity of the status quo or In truth, preparing for conflict in the 21st century means investing in truly new concepts and new technologies. It means taking into account all the assets and capabilities we can bring to the fight. It means measuring those capabilities against the real threats posed by real world adversaries with real limitations, not threats conjured up from enemies with unlimited time, unlimited resources, and unlimited Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future potential conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy? For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles that can simultaneously perform intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance missions as well as deliver precision-guided bombs and missiles. The president's budget request would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs--aircraft that have a greater range than some of our manned fighters, in addition to the ability to loiter for hours over a target. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- 22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F-22, and can be produced in quantity with all the advantages produced by economies of scale--some 500 will be bought over the next five years, more than 2,400 over the life of the program. And we already have eight foreign development partners. It has had development problems to be sure, as has every advanced military aircraft ever fielded. But if properly supported, the F-35 will be the backbone of America's tactical aviation fleet for decades to come if--and it is a big if--money is not drained away to spend on other aircraft that our military leadership considers of lower Having said that, the F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios--specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense anyplace else in the spectrum of conflict. Nonetheless, supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less cost by three Navy SEALs. These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were sacrificed to help pay for it. In light of all these factors, and with the support of the Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s and The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries Consider that by 2020, the United States is projected to have nearly 2,500 manned combat aircraft of all kinds. Of those, nearly 1,100 will be the most advanced fifth generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is projected to have no fifth generation aircraft by 2020. And by 2025, the gap only widens. The U.S. will have approximately 1,700 of the most advanced fifth generation fighters versus a handful of comparable aircraft for the Chinese. Nonetheless, some portray this scenario as a dire threat to America's Correspondingly, the recent tests of a possible nuclear device and ballistic missiles by North Korea brought scrutiny to the changes in this budget that relate to missile defense. The risk to national security has again been invoked, mainly because the total missile defense budget was reduced from In fact, where the threat is real or growing--from rogue states or from short-to-medium range missiles that can hit our deployed troops or our allies and friends--this budget sustains or increases funding. Most of the cuts in this area come from two programs that are designed to shoot down enemy missiles immediately after launch. This was a great idea, but the aspiration was overwhelmed by the escalating costs, operational problems, and technological challenges. Consider the example of one of those programs--the Airborne Laser. This was supposed to put high-powered lasers on a fleet of 747s. After more than a decade of research and development, we have yet to achieve a laser with enough power to knock down a missile in boost phase more than 50 miles from the launch pad--thus requiring these huge planes to loiter deep in enemy air space to have a feasible chance at a direct hit. Moreover, the 10 to 20 aircraft needed would cost about $1.5 billion each plus tens of millions of dollars each year for maintenance and operating costs. The program and operating concept were fatally flawed and it was time to face reality. So we curtailed the existing program while keeping the prototype aircraft for research and development. Many of these decisions--like the one I just described-- were more clear-cut than others. But all of them, insofar as they involved hundreds of billions of dollars and the security of the American people, were treated with the utmost seriousness by the senior civilian and military leadership of the Pentagon. An enormous amount of thought, study, recommendations including the National Defense Strategy I Some have called for yet more analysis before making any of the decisions in this budget. But when dealing with programs that were clearly out of control, performing poorly, and excess to the military's real requirements, we did not need more debate, or more delay--in effect, paralysis through analysis. What was needed were three things--common sense, political will, and tough decisions. Qualities too often in All of these decisions involved considering trade-offs, balancing risks, and setting priorities--separating nice-to- haves from have-to-haves, requirements from appetites. We cannot expect to eliminate risk and danger by simply spending more--especially if we're spending on the wrong things. But more to the point, we all--the military, the Congress, and industry--have to face some iron fiscal realities. The last defense budget submitted by President George W. Bush for Fiscal Year 2009 was $515 billion. In that budget the Bush administration proposed--at my recommendation--a Fiscal Year 2010 defense budget of $524 billion. The budget just submitted by President Obama for FY 2010 was $534 billion. Even after factoring inflation, and some of the war costs that were moved from supplemental appropriations, President Obama's defense request represents a modest but real increase over the last Bush budget. I know. I submitted them both. In total, by one estimate, our budget adds up to about what the entire rest of the world combined spends on defense. Only in the parallel universe that is Washington, D.C., would that be considered ``gutting'' defense. The fact is that if the defense budget had been even higher, my recommendations to the president with respect to troubled programs would have been the same--for all the reasons I described earlier. There is a more fundamental point: If the Department of Defense can't figure out a way to defend the United States on a budget of more than half a trillion dollars a year, then our problems are much bigger than anything that can be cured by buying a few more ships What is important is to have a budget baseline with a steady, sustainable, and predictable rate of growth that avoids extreme peaks and valleys that are enormously harmful to sound budgeting. From the very first defense budget I submitted for President Bush in January 2007, I have warned against doing what America has done multiple times over the last 90 years by slashing defense spending after a major conflict. The war in Iraq is winding down, and one day so too will the conflict in Afghanistan. When that day comes, the nation will again face pressure to cut back on defense spending, as we always have. It is simply the nature of the beast. And the higher our base budget is now, the harder it will be to sustain these necessary programs, and the more So where do we go from here? Authorization for more F-22s is in both versions of the defense bill working its way through the Congress. The president has indicated that he has real red lines in this budget, including the F-22. Some might ask: Why threaten a veto and risk a confrontation over a The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. And, with regard to something like the F-22, irrespective of whether the number of aircraft at issue is 12 planes or 200, if we can't bring ourselves to make this tough but straightforward decision--reflecting the judgment of two very different presidents, two different secretaries of defense, two chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff, and the current Air Force Secretary and Chief of Staff, where do we draw the line? And if not now, when? If we can't get this right--what on earth can we get right? It is time to draw the line on doing Defense business as usual. The President has drawn that line. And that red line is a veto. And it is real. On a personal note, I joined CIA more than 40 years ago to professional career in government I have generally been known as a hawk on national security. One criticism of me when I was at CIA was that I overestimated threats to the security Well, I haven't changed. I did not molt from a hawk into a dove on January 20, 2009. I continue to believe, as I always have, that the world is, and always will be, a dangerous and hostile place for my country with many who would do America harm and who hate everything we are and stand for. But, the nature of the threats to us has changed. And so too should the way our military is organized and equipped to meet them. I believe--along with the senior military leadership of this nation--that the defense budget we proposed to President Obama and that he sent to Congress is the best we could design to protect the United States now and in the future. The best we could do to protect our men and women in uniform, to give them the tools they need to deter our enemies, and to win our wars today and tomorrow. We stand by this reform A final thought. I arrived in Washington 43 years ago this summer. Of all people, I am well aware of the realities of Washington and know that things do not change overnight. After all, the influence of politics and parochial interests in defense matters is as old as the Republic itself. Henry Knox, the first secretary of war, was charged with building the first American fleet. To get the support of Congress, Knox eventually ended up with six frigates being built in six But the stakes today are very high--with the nation at war, and a security landscape steadily growing more dangerous and unpredictable. I am deeply concerned about the long-term challenges facing our defense establishment--and just as concerned that the political state of play does not reflect the reality that major reforms are needed, or that tough We stand at a crossroads. We simply cannot risk continuing down the same path--where our spending and program priorities are increasingly divorced from the very real threats of today and the growing ones of tomorrow. These threats demand that all of our nation's leaders rise above the politics and parochialism that have too often plagued considerations of our nation's defense--from industry to interest groups, from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other. The time has come to draw a line and take a stand against the business-as-usual approach to national defense. We must all fulfill our obligation to the American people to ensure that our country remains safe and strong. Just as our men and women in uniform are doing their duty to this end, we in Washington must now do ours. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I am a student of history, and there is one particular President whom I have grown, along with historians, to appreciate more and more for his two terms as President of the United States; that is, Dwight David Eisenhower. We were at peace during President Eisenhower's term, and many believe that perhaps the war in Vietnam might have been avoided if we had heeded his wise counsel. There are many things President Eisenhower did to contribute to this On several occasions, I have reread his farewell speech of January 17, 1961. In his speech, President Eisenhower said: In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex I would only add to President Eisenhower's farewell address to the Nation--which is compelling in many ways--that the words should be changed from ``military-industrial complex'' to ``military-industrial- What we are seeing here, with the advice and counsel of our President, of our Secretary of Defense, of our uniformed military, with rare exception, is a recommendation that we stop with this aircraft and build another--not that we stop building fighter aircraft for our inventory, not that we stop defending this Nation with weapons systems we need. We are even defending a weapons system's continued production that has never flown in the two wars in which we are engaged. So I urge my colleagues to understand the impact of this amendment. If we are able to succeed, it is going to send a signal that we are stopping business as usual, and we must move forward providing the men and women with the necessary means to win the struggles we are in throughout the world, especially two wars. So I urge my colleagues to understand that sacrifices will be made. Jobs will be lost. It will cause disruption in some communities. But our first obligation is the defense of this Nation and the use of scarce defense dollars in the I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. Mr. DODD. Madam President, I have 2 minutes; is that correct? Mr. DODD. Madam President, first of all, let me begin where I did a few moments ago; that is, with my great respect for Carl Levin and John Let me begin with a point my friend from Arizona has made. There is nothing more important than the national security of our Nation. It is that very argument which brings those of us on this side of the table in support of this program and in opposition to this amendment. This program is a critically important program to maintain superiority--not parity but superiority--which has always been our goal in protecting our national security interests. It was the very Pentagon itself which advocated we move forward with this program only 36 months ago. Obviously, people can change their minds. But over the months, when they were preparing for the needs of our Nation, it was the Commission on the Future of Aerospace, authorized by this Congress, which concluded the following. They said that ``the Nation immediately reverse the decline in and promote the growth of a scientifically and technologically trained U.S. aerospace workforce,'' adding that ``the breakdown of America's intellectual and industrial capacity is a threat to national security and our capability to continue as a world It was the Pentagon, only 36 months ago in their Quadrennial Review, that said the following--and they said in this report--that: The F-22 production should be extended through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in There are reports that the F-35 could be delayed an additional 11 months--what we have already heard about. That creates a gap of 5 years that we are talking about. The danger of losing not just any jobs, anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 aerospace workers is not insignificant. Four days ago, we were warned there has been in excess of a 15- percent decline in our industrial capacity in the aerospace industry. This will hit us even further. The ability to have a workforce capable of building these aircraft we need in the 21st century is at risk. That is why the issue not only of the technical capability of the aircraft but the workforce to produce it is at stake with this amendment. And I say that respectfully. But we have this gap in production, which we have been warned about now by the Pentagon--not by the industry itself, by the Pentagon, by the very Commission this Congress authorized to determine what our capacities were and the industrial capacity in aerospace. We are defying both reports and both recommendations by canceling this program at this number and placing at risk the future generation of superior aircraft that we need in the 21st century. So again, Madam President, I urge my colleagues, respectfully, to reject this amendment. There is a compromise, in my view, available to end up with a number far less than the originally projected numbers. But to cancel the program prematurely and create the gap in our production capabilities is a great danger for our Nation, not to mention these jobs which are critically important to our Nation and its For those reasons, I urge the rejection of the amendment. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I commend the leaders of the committee. I also commend Senator Chambliss and Senator Dodd for their Herculean efforts here to try to stave off the closure of the line. I try to put myself in the shoes of others when I take a position on an issue. What I say comes from the heart and not because of a lack of respect for the efforts they have shown in support of their constituents. We have just come out of 8 years where we have seen our national debt double. We have incurred as much new debt for our country over the last 8 years as we did in the previous 208 years. We are looking, this year, at a 1-year deficit higher than any in the history of our country. It If you go back to 2001 and look at the cost overruns for major weapons systems, in 2001 it was about $45 billion. Last year, that number had grown to almost $300 billion. We say to our folks who are running the Pentagon, the Department of Defense: Tell us which weapons systems you need and those you do not. And Secretary Gates has said very clearly, as Gordon England did as well, his deputy, and the last President and this President: We do not need more F-22s. We have F-15s. We have F-16s. We have F-18s. Before too many more years, we will have My hope is we will be smart enough--if people are displaced, if the F-22 is not continued in production--my hope is we will be smart enough, since Lockheed has a role in building the F-35, some of the folks--hands that can build an F-22 can certainly help build F-35s. I The last thing I would ask everyone to keep in mind--as an old naval flight officer, I used to think about and I still think about how much it costs to fly an aircraft for an hour. It is anywhere from $20,000 to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, in terms of the alleged gap, there is no gap. The QDR said we should be building fighters, F-22 production, into fiscal year 2010. As a matter of fact, what we are now doing is exceeding that production with F-35s. We have 30 F-35s in this fiscal year 2010 budget. There is no gap in fighter production. As to whether the F-35 is a capable fighter, let me just read from The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F-22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F- The F-22 is costing an awful lot more than has been represented here because they are asking now, if this amendment is defeated, that we would be spending $1.75 billion for seven F-22s, which is approximately $250 million a copy for the ones the opponents of this amendment want The President of the United States, the last President of the United States, the previous one; two Secretaries of Defense, this one and the previous one; two Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force say it is time to end production of the F-22 to move into greater production of the F-35 which will serve three services, not just one. If not now, when? If not now, when? When will we end production of a weapons system, if not now, when we have both President Obama and President Bush trying to end it, Secretaries of Defense trying to end it, Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs trying to end the production of the F- 22? We must now do what is sensible, that which is requested by Secretary Gates, not because he is saluting the Commander in Chief, as has been suggested. He is not just saluting the Commander in Chief; he feels deep in his gut that we must change the way we do business. We must finally bring some of these systems to an end. That is why Secretary Gates so passionately believes we must bring production of the F-22 to an end and move into greater production of the F-35--more F-35s produced in this budget than would be produced of the F-22 if Madam President, I don't know if there is any more time. If there is, I yield back the remainder of my time, and I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1469. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) and the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 58, nays 40, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote. Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:39 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Acting President pro tempore. NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010--Continued The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I will make some brief remarks here, and at the conclusion we will determine whether there is an agreement on the other side so I can go ahead and lay down an amendment. But first I want to discuss what that amendment will be. It is amendment No. 1628, and in a moment I will seek to offer it and get it pending. It is an amendment I introduced with Senator Lieberman, Senator Bayh, and Like other Members of this body, we have watched recent events unfold in Iran with great concern. This year began with talk of warming ties and potentially reestablishing contact with Iran; that we would no longer be afraid to talk to Iran and perhaps to even reach some kinds of agreements. In recent months, however, the Iranian regime has continued its support of terrorism, its illegal nuclear weapons program in defiance of its NPT obligations, and its engagement in violent and While the administration has made clear its intention to continue to pursue high-level talks with Iran, an overture which the regime has not seen fit to even respond, the President has indicated that the window for Iran to negotiate and demonstrate progress toward complying with its international obligations is not open indefinitely. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all In May, the President indicated that Iran would have until December to show meaningful improvement. More recently, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on behalf of the G8 nations that they will give Iran until September 2009 to agree to negotiations with respect to its nuclear If negotiations do not prove fruitful, the United States must be ready to act quickly to increase pressure on Iran to end its support for terrorist groups and its illegal nuclear program. The Kyl-Lieberman amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should sanction the Iranian Central Bank if, by December, Iran has not verifiably halted its uranium enrichment activities, as well as come into full compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation By sanctioning the Central Bank of Iran--Bank Markazi--our Nation would send the message that we will use all methods at our disposal to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and oppose The case against the Iranian Central Bank is strong. It is knee-deep in the regime's illicit activities. Last year, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmit revealed that between 2001 and 2006 the bank had moved $50 million from banks in London to Hezbollah front organizations in Beirut. Hezbollah, of course, is a terrorist organization. It also processes transactions for Iranian banks that already face U.S. sanctions. The Central Bank of Iran is instrumental in helping Iranian banks--the very ones this body voted overwhelmingly to sanction in 2007--to avoid sanctions. In March 2008, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury warned financial institutions about the illicit behavior of the Central Bank of Iran. The Central Bank of Iran and Iranian commercial banks have transactions in order to make it more difficult for intermediary financial institutions to determine the true parties in the transaction. They have also continued to provide financial services to Iranian entities designated by the U.N. Security Council in its Resolutions 1737 and 1747. The U.S. Department of Treasury is particularly concerned Under U.S. law, institutions that aid entities covered by financial sanctions are liable to penalties. The Central Bank's activities clearly warrant such action, and sanctioning the bank would increase the effectiveness of existing measures. I urge my colleagues to support our amendment at such time as we are able to get a vote on it. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and I thank my friend from Arizona, Senator Kyl, for his very strong statement. I rise to speak in support of this bipartisan amendment which I have cosponsored along with Senator Kyl, Senator Bayh, and Senator McCain. As you know, President Obama has made a historic offer to Iran's leaders, inviting them to engage in direct diplomacy to resolve the outstanding differences between our two countries. As the President has repeatedly said, the door is open for the Iranians to come in out of the cold, if they choose to do so. It is by suspending their illicit nuclear activities and ending their support for terrorism that the Iranians have a clear path to ending their international isolation and taking their rightful place in the community of nations. Unfortunately, as Senator Kyl said, it has now been more than 3\\1/2\\ months since the formal offer of engagement was made by President Obama, and there has been no reply from the Iranians. Meanwhile, Iran's illicit nuclear activities have continued to speed forward, in violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions. Thousands of additional centrifuges are being installed, and more and more At the same time, Iran's support for terrorist proxies in Iraq, in Lebanon, and in the Palestinian Authority areas has continued. And, of course, over the past month we and the rest of the world have watched with horror as the Iranian regime has engaged in a brutal crackdown against its own people, who have sought no more than basic human President Obama, together with our international allies, has been very clear that we will not wait indefinitely for the Iranians to respond to our offer of talks, nor will we enter into negotiations--if that is the willingness of the Iranians--that go on without end. Two weeks ago, at the annual G8 summit in Italy, the President joined with other world leaders to make clear to the Iranians that they have until the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, at the end of September, to return to the The amendment Senators Kyl, Bayh, McCain, and I have put forward would place the full weight of the U.S. Senate behind the time frame that the President and the G8 have articulated. Our amendment expresses our strong hope that Iran seizes this historic opportunity for direct We also make clear that if the Iranians have failed to engage with us diplomatically by the time of that G20 summit 2 months from now, it is our preference that multilateral sanctions be imposed through the United Nations Security Council. However, the Iranian Government--the regime that controls the people of Iran--must also understand that the United States is itself prepared to put in place what Secretary of State Clinton a while ago referred to as crippling sanctions in the event that they in Tehran continue to flaunt the will of the Specifically, our amendment asks the President to impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and other banks involved in proliferation and terrorist activities, in the event that the Iranians haven't entered into negotiations that are serious by the time of the Pittsburgh summit or if they haven't suspended enrichment and reprocessing activities The Central Bank of Iran is the financial lifeline of that regime. It is an entity that our own Treasury Department says has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the efforts of other Iranian banks that are involved in bankrolling proliferation and terrorist activities to avoid international sanctions, and that have themselves been sanctioned by the U.N. and our Treasury Department as a I will say this. The idea of imposing sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank is not new. It has already been endorsed by a bipartisan majority in this Chamber. Last year, the Senate Banking Committee, under Chairman Dodd, adopted bipartisan legislation by a vote of 19 to 2 to urge the President to immediately impose sanctions against the Central Bank. Also last year, the House of Representatives passed such More recently, the legislation that Senators Bayh, Kyl, and I introduced this spring--the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, S. 908--in addition to the other steps it takes--also expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should impose sanctions against the I am very grateful to report that S. 908, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, now has 67 Members of the Senate, a strong bipartisan group of 67, or two-thirds, as cosponsors of that legislation. These cosponsors range all across the ideological spectrum of Members of the Senate, and clearly make the point to Iran and to the rest of the world that whatever other differences we have, we stand together here as a strong majority and beyond the Senate in our concern about the nuclear proliferation and terror-sponsoring activities of the Iranian You might say, if you are one of the 67 cosponsors of S. 908--which does more than this amendment does but includes it--you have already This amendment, I want to point out and make clear, in no way ties the President's hand in his diplomacy with Iran. That is not our intent. The amendment is about empowering the President, giving him additional leverage in his diplomacy, by endorsing the same timetable that came out of the G8 summit a short while ago. The effect is this, and I will repeat: The Iranians must appreciate that there will be consequences if they fail to respond to the international community's diplomatic initiatives; in other words, if they continue to speed their I think this amendment will send an unmistakable message to the fanatical regime in Tehran, in support of the G8, in support of President Obama: Either you can engage with the United States and the world community and take steps to suspend your nuclear activities or you can continue on your current course, in which case you will face the crippling sanctions this sense-of-the-Senate resolution calls for. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, before my colleague Senator Lieberman leaves the floor, I wish to thank him for this amendment. We are working right now to see if we can get the amendment pending and possibly a voice vote, because it is clear it is a very important amendment and one where I think we need to express very strongly the sense of the Senate, given the situation as it exists in Iran. I wish to thank Senator Lieberman, and right now it is my understanding that your side is checking to see if it is an agreeable amendment. Hopefully, we will get that decision and move forward with it right away on a voice vote, if that is agreeable to the Senator from The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. I am encouraged by that. And in talking to the other cosponsors, we would be happy to have The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the amendment is straightforward and expresses the sense of the Senate that there should be a date certain-- and soon--by which Iran is required to end its nuclear program or face severe sanctions. The amendment expresses that if the Iranian regime has not accepted the offer of the United States of direct diplomatic talks by the time of the G20 summit in late September or if it has not suspended all of its nuclear enrichment and reprocessing activities within 60 days after the summit, and if the U.N. Security Council does not adopt new and significant and meaningful sanctions on the regime, the President should sanction the Central Bank of Iran. The situation with respect to Iran is nearing the crisis point, if it is not there already. We have all watched the brutal crackdown in the streets of Tehran and elsewhere as the Iranian regime imposed the results of a fraudulent election. We have been astonished by the courage and resolve of those Iranian citizens who have protested for their own inalienable rights in the face of repression. And we have known that, while these dramatic events have played themselves out, the Iranian regime has continued its enrichment of uranium, growing ever closer to the day on which it has a nuclear weapons capability. The Iranian regime has gotten away with too much for too long. Its illicit nuclear activities, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles, support for Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, and its repeated threats against Israel and the United States, represent a real and growing threat to the security of the United States and the Middle East. It is in the interest of the United States, and the world's other great powers, to achieve an end to The administration has held out an ``open hand,'' making clear that it intends to open direct talks with Iran. Yet 3\\1/2\\ months since the President's formal offer, the Iranian government has made no response, nor has it suspended its enrichment activities, as required by U.N. Security Council resolutions. Time is not on the side of those pushing the Iranians to cease these dangerous actions. Administration officials and others, including the French President, have stated that they will not wait interminably while the Iranian nuclear program proceeds. At the G-8 summit 2 weeks ago, the assembled leaders agreed that the Iranians do not have forever, and that they should return to the negotiating table by the time of the G-20 summit in September. This amendment puts the Senate on record behind that timeframe, irrespective of any Senator's individual view about the likelihood of agreement Make no mistake: we must not wait interminably. According to the IAEA's latest report, Iran has increased its stockpile of low enriched uranium by some 60 percent in the previous 6 months, and has brought the number of active centrifuges above 7,000. The IAEA also reported that Iran denied inspectors access to the Arak heavy water reactor. As the threats--including to the State of Israel--continue. As the Secretary of State has recently articulated, should Iran continue to defy the international community, it must face severe sanctions. Should the regime not take up the historic offer extended to it, this resolution advocates sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank, the country's major connection to the international financial system. The U.S. Treasury Department has stated that the central bank has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the movement of funds to those involved in proliferation and terrorist activities. This must end, and in fact 67 Senators have cosponsored legislation-- the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act--that urges the President to By adopting this resolution, we will send an unmistakable message to the government of Iran that its actions are unacceptable and will result in real and severe consequences if continued. The administration has offered to talk; the ball is in the Iranian court, and if that regime continues down its destructive path, we have no choice but to impose crippling sanctions for its continued defiance. Let me point out again, this amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment, an important sense of the Senate but certainly one that allows the administration the latitude it needs in its handling of its Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I would first ask to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to recognize that tremendously hard work both the chair of the Armed Services Committee and ranking member are doing. We are very proud of the chairman, coming from Michigan, and of all of his excellent work in standing up for the I would like to congratulate him and the Senator from Arizona for Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to speak for a moment on health care. We are hearing a lot, as we hear from colleagues, many colleagues--not every one but many colleagues on the other side of the aisle--about the need to be against health care reform, to be a ``no.'' We all know that saying no to health care reform means we are going to have the status quo. ``No'' equals the status quo. For too many families, too many businesses all across this country, that is The status quo works, it is good--for special interests making profits off the current system. But it is bad for American families, American small businesses, American manufacturers that are trying to pay the bills and trying to make sure health care is available for the We need change. We are here because the system, with all of its good parts--and there are many strengths in the American system--is also broken in too many cases for people. We want to build on what works and Right now our current health care system is bankrupting too many families. We know over 60 percent of bankruptcies are linked to medical expenses, and 75 percent of families who file bankruptcy actually have health insurance. Those with insurance, on average, are putting out medical expenses of over $18,000 when they file--even though they have There are many families--we are not only talking about those who do not have health insurance, but those who do who find themselves in very I am constantly amazed when I hear the argument about: We can't do any kind of reform because reform means putting a bureaucrat between your doctor and yourself. You and your doctor can't make decisions Do you know who stands between you and your doctor right now? An insurance company, an insurance company bureaucrat. Your doctors can't just give you whatever tests they wish. You are not able to get whatever care you need for your family. The first call they make is to Reform is about putting health care decisions back in the hands of doctors and patients and being able to create a system that actually I set up online the Health Care People's Lobby for those I represent in the State of Michigan so they could share their stories. We have a lot of folks lining the halls who represent all kinds of interests, all kinds of special interests, and they tell us what they think should be happening or not happening. But in Michigan we have set up the Health Care People's Lobby so people can share their stories about the real If the system worked today, there would be no reason for us to be here. We would be working on something else. But the fact is, we are spending twice as much on health care as any other country and have 47 million people at any one time who do not have health insurance. Those On top of that, people who are currently covered are battling every day to try to get what they thought they were paying for or to make sure their family is covered or that test or procedure or medicine can One constituent of mine in Michigan, Sandra Marczewski from Waterford, MI, wrote to me that she and her husband have been without You have no idea the fear I walk around with every day. That is too many people in Michigan, over a million people in Michigan, without insurance altogether, and millions more who are fearful every day if they lose their job, their health care goes with it, for themselves and their families. People every night are putting the kids to bed and worrying about whether someone is going to get sick, saying a prayer: Please, God, don't let the kids get sick. Don't let me get sick. I have to be able to go to work so I can make sure we There are a lot of people, as I mentioned before, who make a lot of money off of the status quo, off of the current system. It is no surprise they don't want to change it. All the ads we see, all the things going on, all the scare tactics that are going on--and there are plenty of scare tactics going on right now--all of that is about trying to scare people and raise red flags. It is easy just to be no, no, no. We certainly hear that around here all the time, people who are just saying no to any kind of progress or change or making things better for The reality is, the status quo for a lot of folks means more profit, that is underlying a lot of the motivation of what is going on right now. Our job is to make sure the American people can afford health care and have the care they need for their families. For too many families, the status quo means insecurity, expenses, and fear that come along with not knowing whether they are going to be able to afford the health care they have from month to month and whether they will, in fact, even We are here because when it comes to health care, American families and businesses are in a serious crisis, and they are asking us for action. The status quo is not good enough anymore. It is not working. It is going to bankrupt families, businesses, and the country. High health care costs are causing cuts in benefits, increases in premiums, adding to the ranks of the uninsured at alarming rates. Even those who have insurance, as I indicated before, are feeling the pain of the current system. Every day in America families are forced to choose a different doctor because their health care plan was changed, because their employer can no longer afford the old plan they had. Skyrocketing health care costs make American businesses less competitive in the global economy. It costs us jobs, and I can speak directly to that coming from the great State of Michigan. Every day in America, families see their health care plan benefits eroding because they cannot keep up with high premiums, copays, and deductibles. Every day in America, people decide to skip a doctor visit and the medication and treatment they know they need because they cannot afford the payment--in the greatest country in the world-- because the expense is too high. Year after year, as health care costs increase, American families are losing the very parts of their health care they value most: their choice of doctor, hospital, and insurance plans; their choice of treatments; the security and stability that comes from knowing they are covered if anything goes wrong. That is what we are about fixing. That is what we will fix as we do health care Recently, Families USA found that the average costs of family coverage in the workplace rose 78 percent in 7 years--78 percent. During those years, health insurance company profits ballooned 428 percent. At the same time, wages went up about 15 percent. So wages go up 15 percent, health insurance profits go up 428 percent, and premiums The fact is, we cannot wait to get started on reform. The status quo is not acceptable and ``no'' equals the status quo. So we are here working with colleagues to get it done. Doing nothing is not Recently, the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation released a report that projects if Federal reform efforts are not enacted within 10 years, the cost of health care for businesses could double and the number of uninsured could rise to over 65 million people with middle- class families being hit the hardest. The report shows if health care reform is not enacted, individuals and families would see health care Total individual and family spending on premiums and out-of-pocket costs could increase 68 percent in the next 10 years. I cannot imagine 68 percent out-of-pocket costs. That is if we do nothing, if we listen to those just saying no. Even under the best-case scenario, health care costs would likely increase, according to this report, at least 46 percent. And I can tell you absolutely wages are not going to go up 46 percent. Businesses could see their health care costs doubled within 10 years. The report found that employer spending on premiums would more than double, and even in the best-case economic condition, employer spending on health care will rise 72 percent. The result would likely be far fewer Americans being able to be offered insurance or accepting employer-sponsored insurance. Estimates suggest a drop of 56 percent of Americans who are now covered by their employers, dropping from 56 to So there are many numbers. There are numbers that relate to the public programs of Medicaid and children's health insurance and the increased cost there as well and what will happen if we do nothing. The amount of uncompensated care in the health care system will increase, and the worst-case scenario: the total of uncompensated care could By the way, when we say ``uncompensated care,'' that does not mean somebody is not paying for it. That is why our premiums, if you have insurance, go up so much. It means someone can't afford to see a doctor, can't take their children to the doctor, so they don't get the tests on the front end that they need or they don't see a doctor. They wait until they are really sick, and then they go to the emergency room. They are served, as they should be, and it is the most expensive venue in which to do ongoing care for people. But they are served, and then guess what happens. Everyone who has insurance sees their rates go That is what it means when we say that covering the uninsured will lower costs as we go out. I mean it will take time to do this, but over time what we are doing is working to change the way we pay for health care now because we pay for it in the most expensive way, by ignoring the problem, not focusing on health and wellness and primary care but waiting until people are in the worst possible situation: they go to the emergency room, they get care when they are sicker than they otherwise would be if they could see a doctor. And then we pay for it. That is what we want to change and will change under health care So this is about many facets. We know we have a system in America that works for many; they are blessed. We are blessed to have health insurance. For the many who have insurance, it allows them to cover their family needs. The system works well. But for many others it does not. And the reality is, we all pay for a system that does not work effectively for everyone. We all end up paying because the reality is, you can say: Well, I am not going to buy a car, I do not need car insurance; I am not going to buy a house, I do not need house insurance, but sooner or later, you are going to get sick, and just because you don't have health insurance does not mean there is not We are a great country. We can do better than what we are doing today. We have to do better. We are working hard to have a bipartisan effort that will move reform forward in this country, to make a real difference to change the system so it works for everyone and begins to lower the cost over time of what is happening, the explosion in health The option of saying no is not good enough. ``No'' equals the status quo. We just cannot have that. The public gets it. It is time for us to get it as well and move forward. I yield the floor. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona is Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I call up the Lieberman-Kyl amendment and ask for its immediate consideration. It is at the desk. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report. The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Mr. Kyl, for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. McCain, proposes an (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on imposing sanctions with At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPOSING SANCTIONS WITH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The illicit nuclear activities of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles and support for international terrorism, represent a grave threat to the security of the United States and United States allies in (2) The United States and other responsible countries have a vital interest in working together to prevent the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a (3) As President Barack Obama said, ``Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all concerned, (4) The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly called attention to the illicit nuclear activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and, as a result, the United Nations Security Council has adopted a range of sanctions designed to encourage the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease those activities and comply with its obligations under the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968, and entered into force March 5, 1970 (commonly known as the (5) The Department of the Treasury has imposed sanctions on several Iranian banks, including Bank Melli, Bank Saderat, Bank Sepah, and Bank Mellat, for their involvement in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups. (6) The Central Bank of Iran, the keystone of Iran's financial system and its principal remaining lifeline to the international banking system, has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated such practices among banks involved in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, including Bank Sepah and Bank Melli, in order to evade sanctions imposed by the United States and the (7) On April 8, 2009, the United States formally extended an offer to engage in direct diplomacy with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran through negotiations with the five permanent members of the United States Security Council and Germany (commonly referred to as the ``P5-plus-1 process''), in the hope of resolving all outstanding disputes between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States. (8) The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has yet to make a formal reply to the April 8, 2009, offer of direct diplomacy by the United States or to engage in direct diplomacy with the United States through the P5-plus-1 (9) On July 8, 2009, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France warned that the Group of Eight major powers will give the Islamic Republic of Iran until September 2009 to accept negotiations with respect to its nuclear activities or face (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran should-- (A) seize the historic offer put forward by President Barack Obama to engage in direct diplomacy with the United (B) suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, and work on all heavy-water related projects, including the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water, as demanded by multiple resolutions of the United Nations Security (C) come into full compliance with the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, including the additional protocol to (2) the President should impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian bank engaged in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, as well as any other sanctions the President determines (A) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran-- (i) has not accepted the offer by the United States to engage in direct diplomacy through the P5-plus-1 process before the Summit of the Group of 20 (G-20) in Pittsburgh, reprocessing activities and work on all heavy-water related projects within 60 days of the conclusion of that Summit; and (B) the United Nations Security Council has failed to adopt significant and meaningful additional sanctions on the Mr. McCAIN. The amendment is in the name of Senators Kyl and The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further debate? If not, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee. Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I listened carefully to the Senator from Michigan. Republicans and I believe most Democrats want health care reform this year. The President said he wants health care reform this year. Republicans want health care reform this year. We want to make sure it is done right. Let me put it this way: If we were in an operating room and a seriously ill patient came in and we knew we had only one chance to save that patient's life and to make that patient healthy, our goal would not be to see if we could do it in the next week, it would be to see if we could get it right. So far, the proposals we have seen coming out of the committees have not gotten it right. One might say: Well, that is a Republican view of Democratic proposals. Perhaps it is. But the proposals we have seen coming out of the Senate HELP Committee and out of the House of Representatives flunk the most important test, which is cost. The most important test is whether Americans can afford their health care and, after we get through fixing it, whether they can afford their government. According to virtually everyone we have heard from, the legislation we have seen simply does not meet that test. In my opinion, what we should do instead is start with the framework of the bill sponsored by Democratic Senator Wyden and Republican Senator Bennett which has 14 cosponsors--8 Democrats, 6 Republicans. This is a different sort of framework that offers virtually every American coverage, does so without any Washington takeover or government-run programs without raising the debt one penny, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Remember, I said that is a framework. I do not agree with every single part of that bill, although I am a cosponsor, but it may be a much better place to start than what That is not just my opinion. Lately, we have heard a lot about the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. President Obama has talked a lot about the Mayo Clinic. The point is, at the Mayo Clinic and a few other clinics around the country, there have been significantly better outcomes. In other words, if you go there and come out, you are more likely to be well, and at a lower cost. And the question is, Why? The President has repeatedly pointed to the Mayo Clinic, Democratic Senators point to the Mayo Clinic, and Republican Senators point to the Mayo Clinic. Here is what the Mayo Clinic had to say on Friday about the legislation that is being considered in the House of Although there are some positives in the current House Tri- committee bill, including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects--the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever--a change in Medicare payment policy--to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States of America. That is the Mayo Clinic talking about the bill we are beginning to I think the prudent thing to do is to try to make that bill better or start over and certainly not try to pass a 1,000-page or 2,000-page bill in 1 week or 10 days without knowing what is in it, as we did with That is not just the opinion of the Mayo Clinic. Here is a letter to House Members on July 16, a few days ago, from a number of clinics, including the Mayo Clinic. These are the Intermountain Healthcare, Gundersen Lutheran Health System, the Iowa Clinic, the Marshfield Clinic, the Rural Wisconsin Health Cooperative, ThedaCare, and I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care These are the people whose hospitals we go to, whose clinics we go to We applaud the Congress for working on this. However, we The first is about the Medicare-like public plan, as they call it, a public plan with rates based on Medicare. They say it will have a severe negative effect on their facilities, that they lose a lot of money every year, hundreds of millions of dollars. Because what happens is that Medicare, a government-run plan, pays its doctors and its clinics and its hospitals about 80 percent of what private insurance companies are paying. So roughly 177 million of us have private insurance of one kind or another. If a doctor sees you, he gets paid 100 percent. But if you go to one of these clinics and hospitals, they are paid according to the government rate, which is roughly 80 percent of the private rate. These clinics say that is not sustainable for them, and that if that continues, some of those providers, such as the Mayo Clinic, will eventually be driven out of the market. What market? The market for Medicare patients. Those are the 45 million senior Americans who absolutely depend on Medicare for their service because for most of them, that is their only option. If that is the case, what that means is they will not be able to go to the Mayo Clinic or to the MeritCare Health System or to the Iowa Clinic or to the doctor they choose because that doctor will not be a part of the Medicare system So that is the first objection these clinics make to the bill they see coming because the bill they see coming proposes to create another The second objection they have is geographic payment disparities. They say that we are a big country and there ought to be differences in Third, and maybe this is the most important of all, that the President has said and many of us in the Senate have said we need to change the way we pay for medical care, and we ought to pay more for value, for quality, for results, and less for volume--in plain English, not how many patients a doctor can see but how many of his or her We have talked about that for weeks here in our hearings. But what these respected voices in medicine are saying is that the legislation we see today--and understand, this is not even in a bill that has presented to us in the Senate yet in a way upon which we can act--does not meet the test for that. The legislation we have seen so far is David Broder, the respected columnist from the Washington Post, said that the plans which have been passed in a partisan way are ``badly flawed'' and ``overly expensive.'' I mean, the Democratic plans; we have Republican plans that we would like to be considered. I mentioned that the Wyden-Bennett plan, which is the only really bipartisan plan here, has not been given one bit of consideration so far in the Senate. And then Senator Burr and Senator Coburn have a plan, Senator Gregg has a plan, and Senator Hatch has a plan. We all have different ideas. As I said, we would like for them to be considered, today I'm talking about the Democratic plans that are now being considered. The Congressional Budget Office, of course, is the nonpartisan office in this Congress that we count on as an umpire to tell us what we are really doing. It is not supposed to have any political rhetoric. Last Thursday, the head of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf was asked at a Senate Budget Committee hearing what he thought about the bills which had begun to emerge. In other words, here we go, at a time when we are in a recession and where the President's proposals for other programs will add more to the debt in the next 10 years, three times as much as we spent in World War II, and we are talking about legislation that would add another $2 trillion. We haven't dealt with cost which is where we ought to start. Look at the 250 million who have health care and ask the question: Can you afford it? Then after we get through fixing it, can you afford your government? And what the head of the CBO is saying, as far as the Then the Lewin Group, a well-respected private agency, was asked what would happen if we had a government-run program which many of us believe will lead to another Washington takeover. We are getting accustomed to this, Washington takeovers of banks, of insurance companies, of student loans, of car companies, now maybe of health care. The Lewin Group said 88 million people will lose their private employer-sponsored insurance. How could that happen? It could happen because a small employer or a big employer would see one of these plans that is beginning to come out take place. To be specific, the Senate HELP Committee plan says you either have to provide everybody who works for you insurance or pay $750. There are a lot of employers who cannot afford to provide everybody the kind of insurance that is envisioned. So they will say: OK, we will pay the $750 fine to the government. What happens? All those employees lose their health insurance. Where do they go? Into the Government plan. That is their option. Some of them may have a choice of other plans, but if they do have a choice and one of the choices is a government-run plan, it may have the same future the Mayo Clinic and others were saying Medicare was causing to them. The government will set a low price for the doctors and a low price for the clinics. So all these employees who now have insurance that they like will lose that insurance because of the passage of this bill. The government will set the provider rates and physician rates low, and so they will be part of a government plan for which many doctors and many hospitals and many clinics will not offer services. It is similar to giving somebody a bus ticket to a bus station with no busses. Then there are the Medicare cuts. According to the Washington Post last week, Medicare cuts will pay for one-half the cost of health care for the uninsured in one of the bills being proposed. If we are to find savings in Medicare and take from the 45 million elderly people who depend on Medicare, every bit of those savings ought to be put back into Medicare and not spent on some new program. I don't think legislation that is paid for half by Medicare cuts is going to go Then there are the employer taxes. According to the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the House version has an 8- percent Federal payroll tax. I mentioned the Senate version, a $750 annual fine per employee, if the employer doesn't offer insurance. The NFIB, small businesses, estimates that will lose about 1.6 million How could that be? Well, if a small employer or even a large one has government-mandated costs added and they have less money, they will hire less employees. That is one of the options they have. Then there is the income surtax. There is a whole string of trouble for these bills. USA Today on Monday said: It is the highest tax rate in a quarter of a century that is proposed: A 45-percent top tax rate Then rationing, there are provisions in this bill which would have the government make decisions about which treatment you will have and Finally--I say ``finally'' because this is the subject I want to spend a moment on--there is the Medicaid State taxes. Sometimes this Mr. President, 177 million Americans have private insurance, but a lot of people have government insurance now. Veterans do. Military people have TRICARE insurance. About 45 million older people have Medicare. But then there is a program called Medicaid, which is the largest government-run program. About 60 million people are in it now. The Federal Government pays about 57 percent of it, and the States pay 43 percent. Every Governor I know--and I was once one--has struggled with the Medicaid Program. I once came up here in the early 1980s and asked President Reagan to take it all, let the Federal Government run it and give us Governors all of kindergarten through the 12th grade. I thought I saw a couple of Democratic Governors earlier today, and we talked about the story every Governor faces. If you have an extra dollar and you want to put it in higher education so you can improve the quality of the University of Colorado or Tennessee or keep tuition from going up, what happens to it? That dollar is stolen because it has to go in the increasing Medicaid cost. It is an inefficiently managed program. The Federal Government keeps changing the rules. The Governors have to get permission from Washington whenever they make minor changes. It is If our real goal is to help people, then why under these new plans do we say to low-income people--defined as, say, a family of four who makes less than $32,000--your only option is going to be to go in the Medicaid Program under this plan. It is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office and others that 15 or 20 million Americans will be added to the 60 million in the Medicaid Program. What will they find when they get there? They will find that 40 percent of the doctors don't see Medicaid patients. When we add another 15 or 20 million people to it, it may be a larger number. Why don't they do see Medicaid patients? For the same reason the Mayo Clinic warned about this government plan in its letter. It is because Medicaid only pays its doctors and its If you are confused by that, it works out pretty simply. Medicare pays 80 percent of what the private insurers pay, and Medicaid pays about 72 percent of what Medicare pays. If you are a doctor or a clinic or a hospital, you get paid about 60 percent, if you are helping a Medicaid patient, of what you would if you were helping one of us who has his or her own private health care. You can see that will be a pernicious trend. If we continue to dump low-income people into a government-run Medicaid Program, that is what will happen. There is another thing that happens with Medicaid. Many members of the committees working on this bill said: We can't let that happen. We can't be inhumane and just say we are out here to help people who are uninsured, and we are going to dump 20 million of them into a government-run program that doesn't have enough doctors and hospitals and clinics. We will have to raise what we pay to doctors and clinics. That sounds good, but that is very expensive, particularly for a program such as Medicaid that, according to the Government Accountability Office, $1 out of every $10 is fraudulent, is wasted. That is $32 billion a year. That is the program we are going to expand? That is the program we are going to say to low-income people: Congratulations, go into this program where you are not likely to find a doctor every time you want one, and there are a lot of hospitals and clinics that will not take you because we will not pay them for that. Because Senators and Congressmen hear that, they say: We will raise the rates. Here is the proposal: The proposal is, we are going to increase the number of people who are eligible for Medicaid by 133 to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level. That is a substantial increase. Then, if we are going to do that and put many more people into the program, we are going to have to order an increase in what we pay the doctors and the clinics to serve them, maybe up to 83 or 85 Let me talk about what that would do in one State. We called the State Medicaid director in Tennessee. Our program is called TennCare. We said: What would it cost Tennessee if we increase coverage of Medicaid up to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level? The answer came back, nearly $600 million a year. That is the State's share of the cost which is a little more than a third. The Federal Government's share is twice that. So the Federal Government is saying: That is all right. We know Tennessee doesn't have the money to do that, so we will pay it all for the first 5 years. Then, after 5 years, so the talk goes--and we were told, when we were working on this bill, this is an assumption--we will shift these costs back to Colorado, back to Tennessee. Back comes what in today's dollars is about $600 million to Remember what I said. This is a program doctors don't want to go to because they don't get paid very well. So we will have to increase the amount of money we pay doctors. So if States are required to pay doctors and providers under the Medicaid system 110 percent of what Medicare is paid, that still isn't what doctors and hospitals get, if they see somebody with private health insurance. That is about the same amount of money, about $600 million added just for the State cost, which brings the total new state cost for paying physicians and hospitals more and for all the new people in the Medicaid Program to We throw around dollars up here and figures that make any amount of money seem unimaginable. What is $1 trillion, what is $10 trillion, what is $40 billion. We former Governors can imagine it. I figured it out. If in 5 years you shifted back to the State of Tennessee just its share of those costs from the expansion of Medicaid and paying the doctors and hospitals more, the bill for the State of Tennessee to pay the increased Medicaid costs would be an amount of money that equals a The truth is, for our State--and I believe for almost every State--it is an amount of money that nobody has enough taxes to pay. You can run politicians in and out and defeat them for raising taxes all day long, and they still couldn't come up with ways to pay for it. In other words, these bills are based on a premise and assumption that will either bankrupt the States or, if the Federal Government says we will pay for it all, it will add $5, $6, $700 billion more over 10 years to We need to think that through. Is that the best way to help people who are low income? I don't think so. I think there are much better ways. The Wyden-Bennett framework is a better way. It rearranges the tax deductions we have for people who have health insurance from their employers and it says: Let's take the available money and give the money to low-income people who then buy private health insurance. It may be a very basic plan. But at least they would have health insurance, and they wouldn't be stuffed in a government program 40 percent of the doctors wouldn't see and that many of the best clinics We have been told already by the Congressional Budget Office that proposal would not add a penny to the debt. Not only does it not create a new government program, it actually makes the Medicaid Program, except for Americans with Disabilities, history. In other words, if you are poor, you are not stuffed into a program that nobody else would want to join anyway. You have a chance to buy your own insurance, and you are not consigned to the worst run government program we have So there are some real possibilities with health care, and there are some plans on the table that will lead us in the right direction. We have advice from distinguished Americans with a stake in this--which is every single one of us--but the most distinguished are those who deal with it every day. The Mayo Clinic is saying the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite. Shouldn't we slow down and get it right? Shouldn't we get it right? This is the only chance we have to do this. If we do it wrong, we will not be able to undo it. This is 16, 18 percent of the American economy we are talking about. People have tried to do it for 60 years, and they The only way we will do it is if we do it together. The Democrats have big majorities over on that side. They do in the House. But that is not the way things usually happen around here. The President has said--and I take him at his word--and many of the leaders have said-- and I take them at their word--that we would like to get 70, 80 votes But in order to do that, we are going to have to do it the way we usually do when we have bipartisan events around here. We get some Democrats and some Republicans and they sit down with the President and they share ideas and they agree on some things. They don't just say: OK, here it is, and we are going to vote down almost every significant I respect the fact that Senator Baucus is trying to do that in the Finance Committee, and perhaps he will succeed, working with Senator Grassley and others. But this is going to take some time. It cannot be done overnight. There are many sections to this bill. Each of them might be 500 pages long. They have enormous consequences to individuals. That is why we have all these clinics writing and saying: If you do it the way it looks like you are going to do it, you may drive us out of the business of helping Medicare patients. Do we really want to do that? Do we really want to say to 45 million Americans who depend on Medicare: We are going to pass a bill that will accelerate the process whereby respected clinics and the doctor you might choose will not see you anymore because they cannot afford to because the government will not pay them under the system we have? So I would suggest we start over, literally, conceptually; start over and listen to these clinics and doctors and focus on the delivery system and focus, first, on those 250 million Americans who already have health insurance and ask the question: Can they afford it? And, what could we do to make it possible for those Americans to afford it? And can we do it in a way that permits us to be able to honestly say when we are through that those same 250 million Americans can afford their government when we are through without adding to the debt? Then let's look at the 46 million people who are uninsured. Of course, we need for them to be insured. But the fact is, 11 million of the uninsured are already eligible for programs we already have; 10 million or so are noncitizens--half of them legally here, half of them not; a large number of them are making $75,000 a year and could afford it but just do not buy it; and another significant number are college So we are going to have to go step by step by step and see in what low-cost way we can include a large number of these 46 million Americans, who are not part of the system, in the system. But that is the wrong place to start. That is the place to end. So, Mr. President, all I am saying is, on the Republican side of the aisle we can tell you what we are for. Some of us are for the Wyden- Bennett bill with our Democratic colleagues. That is the only bipartisan bill before us today. It has not even been seriously considered by this body, but it is there, and it has significant support in the House. We have two doctors over here: Dr. Barrasso, who has been an orthopedic surgeon for 25 years, and Dr. Coburn from Oklahoma, an OB/GYN doctor. They would like to be involved in the process. So far their ideas are not really being adopted in the result we might have. We have Senator Gregg from New Hampshire, one of the most respected Senators, who has been a part of many bipartisan efforts, and he has his own bill. He would like to be more a part of it, but his ideas do not fit the way things are going. But the way things are going are too expensive for the Congressional Budget Office and take us in the wrong direction, according to the Mayo Clinic. So maybe we ought to step back and say: Well, let's listen to these other ideas. Let's go very carefully. Let's work with the President. Let's see if we can get a result. Let's keep a four-letter word out there that is a good word; and that is ``cost,'' and make sure we focus first on the 250 million Americans who have health insurance and make sure they can afford it; and, second, make sure when we finish fixing health care that those same Americans can afford their government. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor. Dear Congressman Kind: On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care delivery, we write to you today to comment on the House health care reform bill introduced earlier this week. We would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on this legislation. We applaud the Congress for its commitment to passing comprehensive health care delivery system reform this year. However, we have significant concerns about the current language of the bill and we ask that these concerns, set forth below, be addressed First, we are concerned that a public plan option with rates based on Medicare rates will have a severe negative impact on our facilities. Today, many providers suffer great financial losses associated with treating Medicare patients. For example, several of the systems that have signed onto this letter lost hundreds of millions of dollars under Medicare last year. These rates are making it increasingly difficult for us to continue to treat Medicare patients. The implementation of a public plan with similar rates will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the nation's most efficient, high quality providers, eventually driving them out of the market. In addition, should a public plan with inadequate rates be enacted, we will be forced to shift additional costs to private payers, which will ultimately lead to increased costs for employers who maintain insurance for their employees. We believe all Americans must have guaranteed portable health insurance, but it is critical that we not lose sight of the need to ensure Second, our health care systems are among the most cost- efficient in the country in caring for Medicare patients. However, many of us operate in states with some of the lowest Medicare reimbursement rates in the nation. Current physician payments due to geographic disparities are actually greater under Medicare than under commercial insurance. This may be difficult to believe, given the government's rate-setting power, but flows from the fundamentally flawed payment methodology. To date, health care reform proposals simply continue the current payment methodology, despite the fact that formula changes have been identified to address this problem. We support payment changes that work to reduce geographic disparities, rather than perpetuating the flaws in the current payment system. While we believe that the Institute of Medicine study is a good first step, we encourage Congress to take this further and enact payment reforms that will address the existing disparities. Third, consistent with statements from President Obama, we believe that focusing on, defining, measuring, and paying for value is essential for controlling cost within the U.S. health care system. The system must be reformed to compensate for value instead of volume. We believe inserting a value index into various aspects of the Medicare payment system (e.g., physician fee schedule, hospital rates) is the means to accomplish this end goal of compensating for quality legislation. We urge you to address the above-stated concerns, which will demonstrate that Congress is serious about preserving the best parts of the existing health care delivery system. If we can be of assistance to you moving HealthPartners, Intermountain Healthcare, Iowa Clinic, MeritCare Health System, Park Nicollet Health System, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, throughout this Nation's history, our freedom--and at times our very survival--has rested squarely on the shoulders of the men and women of our Armed Forces. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I am proud to know many of these brave warfighters we have. We rely upon their training and discipline. We depend upon their service and their sacrifice. In That means keeping our commitment to every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine at every stage in their career--from the day they report for We can start to honor this commitment in the most basic way by ensuring that their facilities are safe and adequate. That is why I plan to offer an amendment that would help eliminate vegetative encroachment on training ranges. Excessive vegetation can actually render training grounds unusable. If a training range is heavily overgrown, it can lead to dangerous situations, including fires and In a recent study by the U.S. Army, 70 percent of the facilities surveyed are experiencing limitations due to uncontrolled vegetation. My amendment calls upon the Secretary of Defense to perform a comprehensive study of training ranges across every branch of the military. We must develop a plan to reclaim any overgrown land for its rightful use by our fighting men and women of America. This will help us ensure that we can train them adequately and safely so they can fully prepare for any mission they are assigned to perform. But we cannot stop there. Our commitment begins on the day someone volunteers for service in the Armed Forces. But it does not end, even after their service has drawn to a close. That is why I believe it is important to extend dislocation benefits to every servicemember, including those whose service is coming to an end. Over the course of a career in the American military, a service man or woman and their family may be ordered to relocate a number of times--moving here, moving there, this assignment, that assignment. Each move can be quite costly. From basic travel expenses to the purchase of household goods to utilities to rent, it takes a lot to Since 1955, Congress has helped members of the service defray these costs by paying a ``dislocation allowance'' to each person we reassign to a new duty station. This eases the financial burden on military families and means that personnel decisions can be made without fear of breaking the bank--at least for most servicemembers, that is. Unfortunately, those who retire are not covered under the current system, despite the fact that their final orders may require a permanent change of station. So after years of supporting service men and women when we ask them to relocate, we abandon them at the time of their final move. We leave them to fend for themselves, even though the expenses they incur will be as high as ever, and even though their income has been reduced to half of what they had been paid during So we simply cannot stand for this. We cannot allow those who have served us honorably to be left out in the cold at the end of their careers. We must offer these benefits to all Members of our Armed Forces, even those who have been asked to move for the last time. That is why I am calling for a study to examine the feasibility of extending the dislocation allowance to retiring servicemembers. We should find a way to make this work. The cost of moving demands it. Our servicemembers support it. And, most importantly, it is the right thing Colleagues, Members of this great body, let's come together to stand for those who sacrifice on our behalf and protect this great country of ours that allows us to do what we do in America, with freedom and opportunity. Let's provide our men and women in uniform with the support they need at every stage of their careers--from the first day Cutting down on vegetation encroachment will keep our trainees safe and help prepare them for years of honorable service. When that service ends, dislocation benefits will help them retire with some measure of So I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting these initiatives I put forth. We owe our troops nothing less. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I wish to speak for a few minutes about health care and the need for health care reform in the country today. I think most Americans would agree we need to do everything we can to make affordable health insurance available to every American and, hopefully, that is what this health reform debate will be about. Unfortunately, we are seeing a pattern develop here that has been going on all year--since the President took office--that has many Americans alarmed at the rapid pace we are spending and borrowing, imposing new taxes, and taking over various aspects of the American economy. I know a lot of Americans are alarmed and some are outraged. More than any other comment, I am hearing Americans say: Why don't you slow down and read the bills before you continue the expansion of Now we are talking about health care, and we see that same pattern of crisis and rush and it ``has to be done today, hair's on fire'' type of mentality here in Washington so that we almost have to call this a ``son of stimulus'' health care bill. Because certainly the last time the President tried to ram a massive bill through Congress before we had a chance to read it, we ended up with this colossal stimulus failure that has actually resulted in the loss of jobs in America and a burden of debt on our children that is almost unimaginable. It makes no sense for us to follow that same pattern with health care--nearly 20 percent of our economy--to have a government takeover with a bill we haven't even completely seen yet, that is supposed to be passed in the next 2 weeks, even though the bill wouldn't take effect until 2013. What is the rush? The whole purpose of the Senate is to be the place where the legislation comes to cool down, where we deliberate, we look at the details. The President himself has admitted he is not aware of the details of the bill he is out selling every day. We do have serious problems in health care that we need to fix. The unfortunate thing is I have no confidence that the President actually wants to make health insurance affordable and available to all Americans because when he was in the Senate, Republicans proposed a number of alternatives that would have done that. Yet in every case-- every opportunity he had to make health insurance more available and affordable to Americans--he voted no. Let's review some of them, because I think we have to recognize that the point of this health care debate is not to make sure every American is insured, but to make sure the government is running our health care system. The most personal and private part of our lives they are talking about turning over to bureaucrats at the Federal level. This makes no sense. What we could do is be fair to those who don't get their health work. If people get their health insurance at work, as we do here in Congress, your employer can deduct the cost of it and the employee is exempt from paying taxes on those benefits. That is equivalent to about a $5,000 a year benefit to families who get their health care or health insurance at work. Why can't we offer that same fairness to Americans who don't get their health insurance at work? It is something I actually proposed here in the Senate while President Obama was a Senator, that we would give fair tax treatment; at least let them deduct it from their taxes. He voted no, as did I believe every Democrat, and they killed the bill in the House. This was basic fairness to make health insurance a little more affordable to people who didn't get it at work. The President voted no. We hear a lot of talk about how we need a government plan to make the private plans more competitive. Why not make all the insurance companies compete with insurance companies all over the country instead of what we do now? A lot of Americans don't know that the reason we don't have a competitive private health insurance market is that the Federal Government makes it impossible. You have to buy your health insurance in the State where you live, so a few insurance companies basically have monopolies in every State of the country. What if someone such as myself who lived in South Carolina could look all across the country, find a policy I wanted at a better price, and buy it? Why can't we do that? Well, I proposed we do that. We introduced it on the Senate floor. It would have created a competitive health insurance market and allowed people to buy all over the country. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, to kill the bill. Now they are talking about: Well, we need a government option to create some competition, to have a real competitive market. He voted against it. What about allowing Americans who put money in a health savings account, or their employer puts it in there for them--their own money-- why not let them use that money to pay for a health insurance premium if they don't get it at work? It sounded like a good idea to me, to make it a little bit easier, a little more affordable to have your own health insurance, so I proposed that bill here in the Senate. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, and they killed the bill. What about the idea of allowing a lot of small employers--I was a small businessman for years. It was hard to buy health insurance as a small employer, but I did. It cost me a lot of money, a lot more than the big employers. But what about allowing a lot of small employers to come together and form associations and buy health insurance so they could offer it to their employees less expensively? Well, it is a good idea that was offered right here on the floor of the Senate by Republicans. Barack Obama voted no, as did most of the Democrats, and There is a long list here I could go through, but every single bill, every single health reform idea that has been proposed here, the President, when he was in the Senate, voted against. Everything that would have made health insurance available and affordable to the average American who doesn't get their insurance at work was voted no Now he is saying, We need the government to take it over because it is not working. The reason it is not working is we won't let it work. The part of health insurance, the health care system that works the best today is when you have your own health insurance and you pick your own doctor and you and your doctor decide what kind of health care you are going to get. It is not a perfect system, and insurance companies have a lot of work to do to make things work better because I have to argue with them a lot myself. But the part of the health care system that doesn't work is the part that the government runs, Medicaid and Medicare, the SCHIP and TRICARE. Some of the people who get those benefits such as our seniors say Medicare works fine, but, unfortunately, doctors don't want to see them coming because Medicare and Medicaid don't cover the cost of even seeing a patient. So many physicians are closing their practices to our seniors because they have government health insurance. Government health care does not pay enough for the physician and the hospital to see the patient, so they shift The worst part of all of these government plans is they are trillions of dollars in debt--debt that our children are going to have to pay back. These programs are broke. Yet they want to expand these programs. They want to take the part of health care that is not working and essentially force it on every American. They want every American to have a Medicaid plan where doctors don't want to see us coming because As I look at this whole health care reform debate--and I am glad to see the President out taking shots at me for saying we have to stop him on this, because we have been on a rampage since he took office, passing one government program after another, expanding spending and debt at levels we have never imagined in this country. It is time to slow down and take stock of where we are. Other countries that have to lend us money to keep us going are beginning to wonder, Can we pay our debts? We have doubled our money supply by the Federal Reserve, and that means big inflation, higher interest rates. Yet we are moving ahead with this health care plan that is going to expand our debt as a nation, raise taxes on small businesses that create the jobs. It looks as if we are going to penalize Americans who don't decide to buy health insurance, and we are moving again toward a government program that we know won't work. There is not one Federal program that has worked as advertised, that has worked to the budget we said it would be to. This week we have had announcements of what we have already passed as far as stimulus over the last year is going to mean trillions of dollars-- trillions of dollars--we are going to have to borrow and that our I appeal to my colleagues: We don't need to rush through a bill in the next 2 weeks before we go on our August break that affects one- fifth--20 percent--of our total economy, that gets the government to effectively take over the most personal and private service that we ask for as Americans. We don't need to pass a bill such as that, that we won't even have time to read. What the President and I think a lot of the proponents of this bill are afraid of is if we are able to go home on the August break and we take this bill and we put it on the Internet where people can read it, and radio talk shows and bloggers all around the country are able to tell the American people what this bill is and what it will do, and get past this utopian rhetoric that we are hearing from the President and look at the nuts and bolts, because everything he is saying this bill is going to do the Congressional Budget Office and other experts are saying, No, it isn't going to work that way. It isn't going to save us money, it is going to raise our taxes, it is going to cost jobs in America, and it isn't going to fix health care. We need to go back to the basics, including some of what I have mentioned already, that would reform health care and make private health insurance work better, make it more affordable, and get it into the hands of more Americans. Why should we give up on freedom and move to a government plan when we haven't even given freedom a chance to I know the government can't run health care and I don't want them running my plan. One of the best ideas I have heard in this debate is whatever we pass, Congressmen and Senators ought to have to take that health plan. I am going to have an amendment to that effect if they try But I appeal to my colleagues: Let's listen to the American people. Let's stop this rampage toward bigger and bigger government. Let's take our time and look at this bill and, for once, do something right. Our The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be laid aside in order that I might call up The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson] proposes an amendment Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To repeal the requirement for reduction of survivor annuities under the Survivor Benefit Plan by veterans' dependency and indemnity At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. ___. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT OF REDUCTION OF SBP SURVIVOR (1) In general.--Subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, (ii) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) Conforming amendments.--Such subchapter is further (B) In section 1451(g)(1), by striking subparagraph (C). (i) in subsection (f)(2), by striking ``does not apply--'' and all that follows and inserting ``does not apply in the case of a deduction made through administrative error.''; and (D) In section 1455(c), by striking ``, 1450(k)(2),''. (b) Prohibition on Retroactive Benefits.--No benefits may be paid to any person for any period before the effective date provided under subsection (f) by reason of the (c) Prohibition on Recoupment of Certain Amounts Previously Refunded to SBP Recipients.--A surviving spouse who is or has been in receipt of an annuity under the Survivor Benefit Plan under subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United States Code, that is in effect before the effective date provided under subsection (f) and that is adjusted by reason of the amendments made by subsection (a) and who has received a refund of retired pay under section 1450(e) of title 10, United States Code, shall not be required to repay such (d) Repeal of Authority for Optional Annuity for Dependent Children.--Section 1448(d) of such title is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Except as provided in paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary concerned'' and inserting (A) by striking ``Dependent children.--'' and all that follows through ``In the case of a member described in paragraph (1),'' and inserting ``Dependent children annuity when no eligible surviving spouse.--In the case of a member (e) Restoration of Eligibility for Previously Eligible Spouses.--The Secretary of the military department concerned shall restore annuity eligibility to any eligible surviving spouse who, in consultation with the Secretary, previously elected to transfer payment of such annuity to a surviving 1448(d)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the effective date provided under subsection (f). Such eligibility shall be restored whether or not payment to such child or children subsequently was terminated due to loss of dependent status or death. For the purposes of this subsection, an eligible spouse includes a spouse who was previously eligible for payment of such annuity and is not remarried, or remarried after having attained age 55, or whose second or subsequent marriage has (f) Effective Date.--The sections and the amendments made by this section shall take effect on the later of-- (1) the first day of the first month that begins after the (2) the first day of the fiscal year that begins in the Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this is the widows and orphans amendment. This is the dastardly subject we have been dealing with for years, where there is an offset from an insurance payout, that servicemembers pay insurance premiums and/or retirees pay premiums, which is offset by Veterans Department disability compensation, which otherwise the veteran's surviving spouse and children would be able to, under existing law, be eligible for both, but there is an offset. This particular amendment is going to eliminate that offset. Every year, we come to the floor on the Defense authorization bill and we offer the amendment and we have an overwhelming vote in the Senate. Every year, it goes to conference and, for years and years, in the conference committee with the House, they would say you cannot pass an amendment that would even reduce the offset for widows and orphans. Only in the last couple years have we had some modest reduction of the offset. Then, on an earlier piece of legislation this year, we had a little bit more reduction of the offset. What this amendment will do is I wish to point out at the outset, I have a letter from the Military Coalition, and I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Nelson: The Military Coalition (TMC), a consortium of nationally prominent military and veterans organizations, representing more 5.5 million members plus their families and survivors would like to thank you for your sponsoring of Amendment No. 1515 of FY2010 NDAA (S. 1390). This Amendment, like your bill, S. 535, would repeal the law requiring a dollar-for-dollar deduction of VA benefits for service connected deaths from the survivors' SBP annuities. The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is a top We strongly believe that if military service caused a member's death, the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) the VA pays the survivor should be added to the SBP benefits the disabled retiree paid for, not substituted for them. In the case of members who died on active duty, a surviving spouse with children can avoid the dollar-for- dollar offset only by assigning SBP to the children. That forces the spouse to give up any SBP claim after the children attain their majority--leaving the spouse with only a $1,154 monthly annuity from the VA. Those who give their lives for their country deserve fairer compensation for their surviving spouses. Your amendment would also end this inequity. The Military Coalition again thanks you for sponsoring this Amendment to restore equity to this very important survivor program and encourages your colleagues vote for its passage. Air Force Association, Air Force Sergeants Association, Air Force Women Officers Associated, American Logistics Association, AMVETS, Army Aviation Assn. of America, Assn. of Military Surgeons of the United States, Assn. of the US Army, Association of the United States Navy, Commissioned Officers Assn. of the US Public Health Service, Inc. CWO & WO Assn. US Coast Guard, Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the US, Fleet Reserve Assn., Gold Star Wives of America, Inc., Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America, Jewish War Veterans of the USA, Marine Corps League, Marine Corps Reserve Association, Military Officers Assn. of America, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Association for Uniformed Services, National Guard Assn. of the US, National Military Family Assn., National Order of Battlefield Commissions, Naval Enlisted Reserve Assn., Non Commissioned Officers Assn. of the United States of America, Reserve Enlisted Assn. of the US, Reserve Officers Assn., Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces, The Military Chaplains Assn. of the USA, The Retired Enlisted Assn., USCG Chief Petty Officers Assn., US Army Warrant Officers Assn., Mr. NELSON of Florida. This letter supports this legislation. It is from the Military Coalition. The Military Coalition is a group of 34 organizations, and their signatures are on the letter--alphabetically, from the Air Force Association all the way to the last one on the list of 34, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. All those organizations that you would expect are in between; there are 34 I wish to tell you about this particular amendment. I filed this bill--and this is nonpartisan--years ago with Senator Sessions and eight other original cosponsors. It will repeal the law that takes almost $1,200 per month from families who have lost a loved one because of military service. This survivors benefit plan, otherwise known by its initials as SBP, is an annuity paid by the Defense Department. Survivors receive the benefit when either a military retiree pays a premium as income insurance for their survivors or when a servicemember The other law is dependency and indemnity compensation, referred to by its initials DIC. It is a survivor benefit paid by the Veterans' Administration. Survivors receive this benefit when the military What this amendment will do is fix this longstanding problem in the military survivor benefits system. The problem is, it requires a dollar-for-dollar reduction of the survivor benefits from the SBP, paid by the Department of Defense, offsetting against the dependents and indemnity compensation, DIC, paid by the Veterans' Administration. You know the great quote, following one of America's bloodiest wars, by President Lincoln in his second inaugural address--and the war was still raging at that point. He said that one of the greatest obligations in war is to ``finish the work we are in; to bind up the Nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle''--in other words, the veterans--``and for his widow and his orphan.'' Following Lincoln's advice to honor truly our servicemembers, they need to know their widows and orphans, their survivors, will be taken care of. We certainly agree that the U.S. Government must take care of our veterans, their widows, and their orphans. In keeping with that principle, we need to repeal this offset that denies the widows and orphans the annuity their deceased loved ones have earned on Active Duty or have purchased for them. A retired military member can purchase this SBP, and it is an insurance policy so their survivors will have Over in the Veterans' Administration, we have a law that says, if you are disabled a certain percentage, we are going to take care of you. One should not offset the other--particularly, when somebody has paid Well, that dollar-for-dollar offset is what has me so agitated for a decade now. I have already explained that, for the survivors benefit plan, there are two ways to qualify: The military retiree goes out and voluntarily pays into an insurance program with their retirement income. Later, the statute was added that the survivors benefit plan is available to an Active-Duty servicemember if they are killed as a result of military service. For retirees, the SBP is an insurance program that protects the income of survivors; and for Active-Duty military members, SBP is compensation for the servicemembers' On the other hand, the dependents indemnity compensation is a benefit payment to the survivors of a servicemember who dies from a service- connected condition. For almost a decade, I have fought to repeal the law that requires the dollar-for-dollar offset of these two very different benefits. Back in 2005, the Senate took the step in the right direction and passed, by a vote of 92 to 6, my amendment to repeal that offset. When it got down to the conference committee, you know what happened. In the 2008 Defense authorization bill, we cracked the door to eliminating the offset. In the conference committee negotiations with the House, we made some progress when we got a special payment of $50 per month, which would now increase to $310 per month by 2017 because of money savings found in the tobacco legislation passed Our efforts have been important steps in the right direction, but they are not enough. We must meet our obligation to the widows and orphans with the same sense of honor as was the service their loved ones had performed. We need to completely offset this SBP and DIC. We must continue to work to do right by all those who have given this Nation their all and especially for the loved ones they may leave to In that letter that I have had entered into the Record, it says: The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is the top legislative goal for [the Military Coalition] in 2009. I will not take the time to read the names of the 34 organizations that signed the letter, but they are all fairly well known to every one On February 24 of this year, during a joint session of the Congress, To keep our sacred trust with those who serve, we will raise their pay, and give our veterans the expanded health I say amen to that. I ask that President Obama help us end this injustice to widows and orphans of our Nation's heroes. Mr. President, may I inquire if there is someone else who wants to speak now, because if there would not be, I would like to speak as in Mr. McCAIN. I object. Let's dispose of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona objects. Mr. McCAIN. I object to the Senator from Florida going into morning business until we dispose of the amendment. Then he can do it right Mr. NELSON of Florida. I merely inquired if another Senator wants to speak. Certainly, I would withhold asking for a unanimous consent. Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I intend to speak on the Thune amendment and was scheduled to speak in the next few minutes. If it is OK with the floor leaders, if my colleague will speak for a brief amount of time, I am happy to go after him. It is up to the floor managers. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Florida, we will find out if there are others who want to speak on his amendment. If not, we are in favor of disposing of his amendment. Part of the agreement we made, in order for us to proceed, was that if anyone came to the floor to speak on the pending amendment, that Senator would have priority. If it is agreeable to the Senator from Florida, the Senator from New York would go ahead and then we could go back to him speaking Mr. NELSON of Florida. Of course. It is my understanding the Senator from South Carolina had just spoken as in morning business. That is why I was inquiring. I am very grateful to the ranking member of the committee for us to go ahead and dispose of this amendment. Mr. McCAIN. Why don't we wait until after the Senator from New York finishes, to make sure there is no one else who wants to speak on the Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, if my colleague needs 5 minutes, I am happy to yield to him, if I would come after that. I ask unanimous Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman). Without objection, it is so (The remarks of Mr. NELSON of Florida pertaining to the introduction of S. 1484, S. 1485, S. 1486, and S. 1487 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Mr. REED. Mr. President, if the Senator from Florida is prepared, I have conferred with the ranking member, the Senator from Arizona, and The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I know we are not now on the Thune amendment. I know we have gone aside to other amendments and that we will be debating Thune tomorrow morning, but there are so many of my colleagues who want to speak, and I have a lot to say. So I will speak for 5 minutes tomorrow morning, but I will give the bulk of my speech Mr. President, I rise in staunch opposition to the Thune amendment. I believe it is a dangerous amendment that would go far beyond authorizing gun possession for self-defense and not only create a serious threat to public safety but also severely undercut American Amendment No. 1618, authored by Senator Thune, would force States and localities from across the Nation to permit individuals from other States to carry hidden and loaded handguns in public, even where the elected representatives of those States have chosen to bar these persons from possessing firearms. The legislation would require every State with concealed carry legislation to honor concealed carry licenses issued by any other State so long as they abide by the State's This amendment is a bridge too far and could endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Each State has carefully crafted its concealed carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. It is obvious what is good for the safety of people in New York City or Philadelphia or Chicago or Miami or Los Angeles is not the same thing that is needed in rural Idaho or rural Tennessee. Yet this amendment, in one fell swoop, says the protections some States feel they need to protect law enforcement, to protect its citizenry, would The amendment will incite the dangerous race to the bottom in our Nation's gun laws. Let's examine the lineup of people who could carry concealed weapons in 48 States under this amendment. And I don't disparage each State for doing what it wants within its own borders, but why impose that on States outside their borders? Arizona law allows a concealed carry permit to be issued to an applicant who is a known alcoholic. So alcoholics would be in the lineup. They could carry a concealed weapon in States outside of Arizona simply because Arizona allowed them to do so. Texas, which is one of the top 10 sources of guns recovered in crimes in New York City, a city in which I reside, is obliged to issue a permit to a person who has been convicted repeatedly of illegally carrying a handgun. Therefore, we can place arms traffickers in this Mississippi law leaves access to concealed carry permits for members Alaska and Vermont allow adult residents of their States to carry a concealed weapon without a license or background check as long as they are allowed to possess a gun, even if they have committed violent misdemeanors, have committed misdemeanor sex offenses against minors or are dangerously mentally ill and have been voluntarily committed to a Again, each State has its own views. The State of Vermont is a beautiful State. It is different from New York State in many ways, and the laws that fit for Vermont don't necessarily fit for New York. A 17-year-old Crip or Blood from New York--a member of a gang; dangerous, maybe violent--could head to Vermont, obtain a Vermont driver's license, buy a gun, and return to New York or he could buy a whole bunch of guns and return to New York. When law enforcement stops him, a loaded gun tucked in his pants or a whole bunch of guns in his backpack, all he would have to do is claim he is a Vermonter visiting New York, show his Vermont ID, and the New York Police Department would be unable to stop him. This runs shivers down the spines of New York police officers, of New York sheriffs, of New York law enforcement. And it doesn't just apply to New York. This could apply to any large State. Imagine law enforcement stopping one of these characters with a backpack full of guns--a known member of a major gang--and having to let them go. Imagine how empowered gun smugglers and traffickers would feel. Their business would boom. These are people who make money by selling guns illegally to people who are convicted felons. They could go to the State with the weakest laws, get a concealed carry permit--if that State allowed it, and in all likelihood it might--and then start bringing concealed guns into neighboring States and States across the country. Their business would boom, but our safety would be impaired. Imagine routine traffic stops turned into potential shootouts. Police officers in New York have the safety and the peace of mind in knowing that the only people who might legally have a gun are those who have been approved by the police department. That is how we do it in a city such as New York. We have had our problems with crime. Thank God it is much lower now, due to the great work of the New York City police. But now they would be totally unprepared, walking on tiptoe. And if the criminal simply said: I am from this State--wow. I shudder Beyond the very real threat this poses to law enforcement and the safety of our police officers and the safety of our citizens, it would create a logistical nightmare. A police officer making a stop of a car would have to have in front of him or her the laws of all 45 States that now allow or whose residents would now be allowed or even whose people had gotten carry permits who would now be allowed to carry What about States rights? I have not been on the side--it is obvious--of the gun lobby for as many years as I have been here in the House and Senate. I have always believed, though, there is a right to bear arms and that it is unfair to say the second amendment should be seen through a pinhole and the first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth amendments should be seen broadly. I don't think But every amendment has limitations. Through the years when I have been involved in this issue, the NRA and other gun groups have argued, frankly, that the States ought to make their own decisions. All of a sudden we see a 180-degree hairpin turn. Now they are saying that the States cannot make their own decisions. Why is it that every other issue should be resolved by the States except this one? The amendment flies in the very face of States rights arguments and takes away I say to my colleagues who have laws and citizenry who probably want the laws not drawn as tightly as my State, if you open up this door, one day you will regret it. Because if you say that the Federal Government should decide what law governs, you are taking away States' In the 1990s, after the passage of the Brady Act, the National Rifle Association funded multiple legal challenges to it, citing the 10th amendment, that the right to bear arms therefore resided in the States. Indeed, Mary Sue Falkner, who was then a spokesman for the NRA, said at This is not a case about firearms per se, but about whether the Federal Government can force States and local governments Similarly, in reference to Brady, the NRA's chief lobbyist said that the Federal Government was getting too much involved in State affairs. The gun lobby's rallying cry has always been, ``Let each State decide.'' But with this amendment, again, a 180-degree flip. Clearly, large urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas. To gut the ability of local police and sheriffs to determine who should be able to carry a concealed weapon makes no sense. It is wrong to take away any State's rights to make decisions about what can make a resident safer. A one-size-fits-all approach to community safety leads Make no mistake, this is a serious amendment. It is, even though not the intention of the author, a dangerous amendment. There will be needless suffering, injuries, and deaths if this amendment is agreed I talked to my colleague Senator Thune. We are friends. We saw each other in the gym this morning. He said to me: What about truckdrivers who have the gun in the cab of their truck and ride across State lines? I am sympathetic to that. I supported laws that allow police officers in New York to carry their gun when they cross over into New Jersey to shop or whatever. But you do not need this law to deal with that problem, because it creates so many other issues. There are ways we can deal with the problem that the Senator from South Dakota brought up to me in the gym this morning, without decimating State laws that protect Make no mistake about it, this amendment would affect every State in the country, but I do not see the Governors on board. It would affect every city in the country. I don't see the mayors on board. It would affect every county in the country, but I don't see the sheriffs on board. It would affect every town in the country, but I don't see Before we rush to judgment, shouldn't we ask our Governors, our mayors, our sheriffs, our police chiefs if this will make our communities safer or less safe? If this will put the men and women, the brave men and women who defend us and protect us on police forces, in I urge my colleagues to give thoughtful and careful consideration to the consequences of the Thune amendment. I believe if they do, they The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, as we meet here today we are discussing the Defense authorization bill. We debate it each year. It is basically an authorization for the expenditure of funds in defense of America. It is a significant bill with a lot of different parts. I commend the Senators who have brought this to the floor, Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and his Republican I know this bill is important and I know we will be returning to substantive amendments on this bill very shortly. But while we have this break in the action, I want to address another issue which is being debated in almost every corridor on Capitol Hill, and that is the issue of health care reform. It is an interesting issue and an amazing challenge to this Congress, to try to grapple with the health care Despite our prosperity, we know there is something fundamentally flawed with our health care system. We spend more than twice as much per person in America on health care as any other country, and the results do not show that money is being well spent. Many other countries, spending a fraction of what the United States spends, end up with very different and much better results in terms of survival from certain diseases and illness, and mortality rates. There is something to be learned here about how we can be more effective in providing health care for our citizens and not break the bank. Most Americans know what I am talking about when I talk about cost, because they are facing cost issues every day. They know health insurance premiums in America in the last several years have gone up three times faster than the incomes and wages of Americans. We have learned it is not unusual for one-fourth of Americans to spend 1 out of every $10 in income for health insurance. Some, a smaller group but a significant group, spend up to $1 out of every $4 in income on health insurance. The number keeps going through the roof with no end in sight. It worries us, not just as individuals and members of families, but businesses that are trying to do the right thing for their It worries units of government because, whether it is your State government providing assistance for Medicaid or whether it is the Federal Government concerned about Medicare and Medicaid, the costs of health care are growing so quickly that they could easily put us into a perpetual debt situation, something we do not want to see, something we Now we are debating in the House and in the Senate, in a variety of different committees, how to change this health care system. Needless to say, it is a contentious debate. There are a lot of different points of view. There are some people and companies in America that want no change in our health care system. Most people do. Some don't. Many of those who are resisting change, who are unwilling to support the President's efforts to move us in this direction, are the very same companies and people who are profiting from the current system. Make no mistake, when you spend billions of dollars on a system, much more than any other country, you are going to end up in a situation where many people are profiting handsomely from the current system. When you talk about reform--reducing the cost, reducing the payments, being more cost effective--these people see money going out the window, That is what the battle is all about. We have been through it before, and now we have returned to it. But in addition to cost, there is also the issue of the availability of health insurance. This morning's Chicago Tribune, on the front page, told the story of a man who sadly is one of the victims of this situation. He lives in a suburb of Chicago, and he works as a doorman at one of the buildings. He had a bad back. He finally was told--he tried a lot of conservative treatment; it just did not work--you are going to have to have back So he did what he was supposed to do. He went to his insurance company and said: The doctor is recommending a surgery, and I want to know if it will be covered by my health insurance. Well, the health insurance company sent back to him written confirmation that the costs of the surgery would be covered by his health insurance. So he went through with the surgery and ended up incurring $148,000 in medical I think you know how this story ends. They turned in the bills to the insurance company, and they denied them. They said: We did not really approve this surgery. You should have taken a more conservative Well, he thought he had done everything he was supposed to. What followed was a battle with this insurance company, day after day, month after month, while people were saying: Send us the $148,000. This man of limited means was fighting to finally get this health insurance company to pay what they promised to pay. It took him months. When it was all over, Mr. Napientek, Michael Napientek, ended up with coverage. Had he failed to get the coverage for that surgery, it would have wiped out his entire life's savings. That is the reality of health care. That is the situation too many people find themselves in, so vulnerable in a situation where one medical bill denied by an insurance company bureaucrat can literally wipe out their life's savings. We can do better. We have to do better. That is what this debate is all about. First, we have to reduce the cost of health care for families and businesses and governments across America. There are ways to do that. We can lower costs to make sure every American has access to insurance. We can make it clear that no one can be turned down for insurance coverage because of a preexisting condition. We can make certain there is no discrimination in the premiums that are charged individual Americans because one is a male and another female; one is a certain age and another not. We can make certain there is more fairness in the way people are treated by these health insurance companies. This idea of denying coverage for preexisting conditions, imagine how frustrating that must be to realize that if you turned in a claim this year on your health insurance because you had a bad back, and you went to the doctor next year, when it came time for surgery they would not This happened to a friend of mine, a fellow I grew up with in East St. Louis, IL, in the trucking business. He not only owned the business, he drove the trucks. When he reached 60 years of age, his back was killing him. Well, at that point his company had lost its health insurance. Why? Because the wife of one of the employees had a sick baby. Her sick baby incurred a lot of medical bills, and the cost of health insurance went through the roof. They had to cancel the company's health insurance, give the employees some money, and say: He was in the same boat. He went out to get private health insurance, complained about a bad back. The following year when the doctor said he needed back surgery, he turned in a claim to his health insurance company, and they said: No, it is a preexisting condition. We will not Do you know what he had to do? He ended up filing a worker's compensation claim claiming that his back injuries had to do with bouncing around in a truck for 30 or 40 years, not an unreasonable conclusion. Do you know who he sued? He sued himself. He sued as an employee of the company. He sued himself as owner of the company. Is that crazy to reach that point? And he won, incidentally. They said it is subject to worker's compensation. We will pay for the He had done everything right, providing health insurance for his employees until he could not afford it, trying to get private insurance for himself at the age of 60, then turning in a claim and being turned down. He could have been wiped out by that surgery, just as the man on We are all in this vulnerable situation because the health insurance companies have so much power over our lives. I listen to those on the other side of the aisle who come--not all of them but many--every single day and say we do not need to change this system. Who are they talking to? Who are they listening to? They are not listening to people like these who find out every day that they do not have coverage, that the cost of insurance is too high, that their doctor is in a debate with a clerk at an insurance company over whether they are going to get the necessary and proper treatment for a medical condition. That is the There are many ways to address this, and we should. We have to address it by making sure everyone has access to health insurance regardless of preexisting conditions, health status for a medical condition. We have to get rid of the so-called lifetime caps. Imagine that a diagnosis tomorrow that you or someone you love in your family has a chronic condition that is going to call for medical treatment for a long period of time, and then you realize there will come a moment when that health insurance company would say: We are out of here. You just broke the bank. You hit the cap on your policy. We have to put an end to that. We also have to limit the out-of- pocket expenses individuals have to pay. There comes a point where people cannot afford this expense. We have to require equal treatment for men and women--Black, White, and brown, young and old, whether they We have to make sure if a health insurance policy in America is offered, it is a good policy that covers the basic needs. There are policies that do not. They sell health insurance you can afford, and guess what. It is worthless. That is not good for America and it is not There are ways to lower costs. We ought to be pushing for prevention. We ought to be trying to find ways to keep people well, incentives for the right conduct and healthy outcomes. Right now there is not much of a reward or an incentive for wellness. We also have to give support to small businesses. When we look at the insured in America, most of them are small business employees and their children. The poorest people in America are covered by Medicaid, the government health insurance, as Folks are fortunate, like myself, under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and most others who have health insurance policies, to have coverage. But the folks in the middle who get up and go to work every day for the small businesses of America--and their kids--are the One of the proposals before us in Congress is to make sure small businesses can start getting into pools where they can use that pooling power to reach out and have health insurance coverage that is Senator Reed is on the Senate floor today. He and I were fortunate enough to be at lunch today when our colleague from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, got up and spoke about what had happened in the HELP Committee, the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, in preparing a bill on health care reform. There were 800 amendments filed. They met for 61 days. Some 400 amendments were considered and voted on. Over 100 of those were from the Republican side of the aisle. They were trying their best to create a bipartisan compromise to get through the bill. But Senator Dodd came up and talked about this, not in terms of a specific bill and its provisions; he talked about the historic opportunity we have. He said for many of us, for most of us now serving in the Senate, this may be the only time in our political careers when we can change the health care system for the better; when we can make sure that people in America have a better chance to be able to afford He certainly inspired us when he pulled out this magazine and showed us a picture of our colleague, Senator Teddy Kennedy, on the cover of Newsweek, and the quote from Ted Kennedy that says: ``We're almost There is a long essay in here about Ted Kennedy's terrific public career and how much of it has been spent on this issue of health care; what it meant to him personally when his son was diagnosed with bone cancer and had to have his leg amputated; what he went through in a plane crash; when he has seen others and what they have gone through. Teddy Kennedy reminds us that these opportunities do not come around very often. There is lots we can debate and argue about, but at the end of the day the American people want to see the debate end. They want to see us acting together responsibly for health care that is centered on patients; to make sure they have a health insurance policy they like, that they can keep; to make certain they have a good strong confidential relationship with their doctors for themselves and their families; to make sure, as well, they are not excluded from coverage for preexisting conditions; to make sure that health insurance is going to be affordable; and to make sure it covers all Americans. We can do it. We are a great and prosperous nation. We have a President who is committed to it. And working with him on a bipartisan basis we can get this done. We can work with the health care professionals--the doctors, the nurses, those leading hospitals--who This is our chance. For those who are saying no, that they want the status quo, they do not want to change it, only a small percentage of Americans agree with them. Most Americans agree what I have talked about today needs to be done. We have to overcome those voices of negativity and doubt who continue to come to the Senate floor, those Let me tell you, this is a great, strong country that tackles big problems. We have never been assigned a bigger assignment than this one, health care for America. It touches all 300 million of us. We have to make sure it is done fairly, done effectively, and done quickly. If we let this drag out for months beyond this year, it is going to be I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work toward that goal, make certain that President Obama's leadership is rewarded with health care reform that does make a difference. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an amendment that I am cosponsoring with my friend and fellow cochair of the Senate National Guard Caucus, Senator Leahy. We will be introducing a bipartisan amendment to strengthen one of our Nation's most important military and civilian resources, the National Guard. The National Guard, as I think everybody in this body knows, has a long and proud history of contributing to America's military operations abroad while providing vital support and security to civil authorities Since September 11, 2001, our citizen soldiers and airmen have taken on greater responsibilities and risk, from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan to providing critical disaster assistance in the United Now we see the tremendous value of the National Guard forces every time we look as they confront terrorists, provide critical support in unique areas such as Afghanistan where the agribusiness development teams are working to help provide agricultural know-how and better income to the farmers of Afghanistan, to areas where they provide water, food, and health supplies to victims of natural disasters. Furthermore, the Guard is a tremendous value for the capability it provides our Nation. It provides 40 percent of the total military force for around 4.5 percent of the budget. In other words, the Guard There is no doubt today we are asking more from the men and women of the National Guard than ever before, often at great cost to their I think this means we have a heavy responsibility to support our citizen soldiers and airmen in their unique dual mission of developing military support abroad and providing homeland defense stateside. While serving abroad, National Guard troops serve under Air Force and Army Commands in what is known as title 10 status, which refers to the section in the U.S. Code dealing with the military. But when the Guard operates at home, they serve under the command and control of the I had the honor of serving as commander in chief of the Missouri National Guard for 8 years. I can tell you that Missouri has a wide range of natural and sometimes human disasters ranging from tornadoes and floods to blizzards and ice storms. I called out the Guard for every single one of those and several more I probably cannot even remember: threatened prison insurrections, other civil disobedience, to tracking down escapees from prison. Right after Katrina--I think it was about a year after Katrina--I visited Jefferson Barracks, MO, where one of our National Guard engineer units is stationed. They told me proudly that when Katrina hit, they immediately sent one of their National Guard battalions to Katrina. They had all the equipment, the high-wheeled vehicles, the communications equipment. They did such a wonderful job, the adjutant general of Louisiana called and said: You have two more battalions; send us another one. They said: That is where the problem comes in. We only have equipment for one out of three battalions. The Guard was one-third resourced. We could have sent them down there in tennis shoes and a taxicab, but they needed the equipment that an engineer battalion has to deal with the problems of the aftermath of the floods and the hurricane. I think there is a lot more we can do to make this unique arrangement work more smoothly. The Guard will continue to play a critical role in response to another natural disaster or, heaven forbid, terrorist attack. To the men and women of the National Guard, we say: Thank you for that support. But more needs to be done. The amendment we are introducing today to strengthen the Guard consists of two planks which are designed, first, to increase the Guard's voice inside the Pentagon and, second, to clarify how the Federal military support to civil authorities will We would give the Chief of the National Guard more muscle in the Pentagon, providing a seat for him on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. With 40 percent of the force, one would think that big a portion of our total military capability would deserve to sit with the outstanding leaders of the Army, the Air Force, the Marines, and others who are there. One would think this large a segment of our force would be represented. When we have big decisions on the future of our resource allocation for the military--title X and, in this case, also title Last year--I thank my colleagues--we successfully authorized the promotion of the Chief of the National Guard to the rank of four-star general in last year's empowerment legislation. Additionally, this year's empowerment amendment will make certain that the Chief of the National Guard Bureau has a Vice Chief in the grade of lieutenant general. When you are dealing with that many problems, there is a major operation that needs to be handled by a deputy to the four-star Chief of the National Guard. It is critical to the day-to-day operations of the National Guard Bureau and to ensure the Guard is adequately This amendment will also fill the gaps between civilian and military emergency response capabilities. We would give the National Guard Bureau, in consultation with the States' adjutant generals, budgetary power to identify, validate, and procure equipment essential to their unique domestic missions so they will be better prepared to respond to emergencies here at home. The next time they call for a second engineer battalion, I hope we have the equipment to send one to whatever State The amendment also supports the designation of National Guard general officers as commanders of Army North and Air Force North commands. This will ensure unity of effort and of command between the National Guard in the 54 States and territories and the very important U.S. North command which protects the United States in the continental United Finally, our amendment gives State Governors tactical control of Federal troops responding to emergencies inside their State or territory. Time and time again, we have seen Reserve units stationed within close proximity to a natural or manmade disaster forced to stand by and watch when they could have been assisting injured victims in preventing loss of property. This amendment ensures that all available military forces be utilized as early as possible in an emergency situation. This way, our State leaders can act more quickly and decisively to mitigate disasters at home. Our citizen soldiers stand ready to defend the Nation, secure our homeland from natural disasters and terrorist attacks, and are now fighting overseas in the war on nor the Federal military support missions of the Guard are likely to diminish in importance at any time in the foreseeable future. In fact, the need for the National Guard is greater now than ever before. Now more than ever, as budgets are constrained and entitlements continue to grow at alarming rates, we should not be looking to reduce the Guard We have a responsibility to give the Guard the equipment, resources, and bureaucratic muscle they need to meet their critical dual mission. In order to do so, it is imperative we strengthen the decisionmaking capability of Guard leaders within the Department of Defense and make As one former leader of the Guard said: If you want us in on the big plays, at least let us in the huddle when you are planning to call I thank my colleagues for their past support of the Guard. I join with Senator Leahy in asking for continued support of the National Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending Thune amendment and call up my amendment No. 1597. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Brownback], for himself, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Inhofe, proposes an amendment numbered Mr. BROWNBACK. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism) At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REDESIGNATION OF NORTH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) On October 11, 2008, the Department of State removed North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, on (2) North Korea was removed from that list despite its refusal to account fully for its abduction of foreign citizens, proliferation of nuclear and other dangerous technologies and weapon systems to terrorist groups and other state sponsors of terrorism, or its commission of other past (3) On March 17, 2009, American journalists Euna Lee and Laura Ling were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border subsequently sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in a prison (4) On April 5, 2009, the Government of North Korea tested a long-range ballistic missile in violation of United Nations (5) On April 15, 2009, the Government of North Korea announced it was expelling international inspectors from, and recommissioning, its Yongbyon nuclear facility and ending its (6) Those actions were in violation of the June 26, 2008, announcement by the President of the United States that the removal of North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism was dependent on the Government of North Korea agreeing to a system to verify its declarations with respect (7) On May 25, 2009, the Government of North Korea conducted a second illegal nuclear test, in addition to conducting tests of its ballistic missile systems launched in (8) North Korea has failed to acknowledge or account for its role in building and supplying the secret nuclear facility at Al Kibar, Syria, has failed to account for all remaining citizens of Japan abducted by North Korea, and, according to recent reports, continues to engage in close cooperation with the terrorist Iranian Revolutionary Guard (9) There have been recent credible reports that North Korea has provided support to the terrorist group Hezbollah, including by providing ballistic missile components and personnel to train members of Hezbollah with respect to the development of extensive underground military facilities in (10) The 2005 and 2006 Country Reports on Terrorism of the Department of State state, with respect to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, ``Most worrisome is that some of these countries also have the capability to manufacture WMD and other destabilizing technologies that can get into the hands of terrorists. The United States will continue to insist that these countries end the support they give to terrorist (11) President Barack Obama stated that actions of the Government of North Korea ``are a matter of grave concern to all nations. North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security. By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council, North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community. North Korea's behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia. Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea's isolation. It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should designate North Korea as a country that has repeatedly provided support for acts of (1) section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)) (as continued in effect pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. (2) section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. (3) section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, this is a bipartisan amendment put forward by Senator Bayh and myself. I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. This is a bipartisan resolution and sense of the Senate that the administration should relist North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. As my colleagues know, the Bush administration, through a great deal of hoopla, listed North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. They took them off the list in spite of such terrible and erratic behavior as nuclear weapons, missile technology, and now taking U.S. citizens hostage and holding them. Nonetheless, the Bush administration, as part of the six-party talks, did an agreement, a deal to delist them as a state sponsor of terrorism. All that got us was more nuclear weapons, more missiles being sent off, more provocative action by the North Koreans, and a dismal situation. What we are asking with the amendment is that it is a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of In that regard, I wish to enter a few items in the Record to be printed at the end of my presentation that are currently in the news. This is yesterday's front page of the Washington Post where it talks about ``[North] Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back I ask unanimous consent that this full article be printed in the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. That is an old story. Unfortunately, we know very well about the gulags that exist in North Korea and the 200,000 people we believe are in those. Here is today's Washington Post. This was new information I found shocking: North Korea building mysterious military ties with the military junta in Burma now taking place and the possibility of them giving military equipment and supplies, I suppose possibly even nuclear arms and missile technology, to the military I ask unanimous consent that this be printed in the Record at the end The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. If that is not enough to relist them as a state sponsor of terrorism, I don't know what is. But there is a full record we can go forward with on relisting North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. At the outset, I think we ought to look at this and say this is an extremely tough situation for the United States. It is one on action to confront them on what they are doing to militarize some of the worst places and worst actors around the world and what North Korea is doing to threaten interests of the United States. All this is taking place while Kim Jong Il is ill. To what degree, we don't know for sure. A succession is being discussed. Of what nature, we are not sure. But clearly North Korea is doing the most provocative things they have probably done in the history of that provocative nation. It is taking place right now. We should notice it and recognize these are terrorist actions. We should clearly call for them to be I have, many times, spoken before regarding the long and outrageous list of crimes of the Kim regime. I will not go through those again at great length. But I will say the crimes committed by the North Korean regime include not only those external and diplomatic of nature-- violating agreements, treaties, conventions, and proliferating dangerous technologies to the world's worst actors--but the regime has also committed massive and unspeakable crimes against the North Korean people themselves who for decades have been beaten, tortured, raped, trafficked, starved, used as medical experiments, subjected to collective familial punishment, and executed in the most brutal and painful ways. If you want further details on that, read yesterday's Hundreds of thousands languish in the gulag and concentration camps spread out over the entire country. All the while, the world watches and wrings its collective hands. As we pledged never again, we watch as yet again another criminal regime commits a genocide. Never again I have introduced legislation to address these issues. I hope the Foreign Relations Committee can find time to take it up. The amendment before us today deals with another aspect of the North Korean criminal state, its longstanding and robust sponsorship of international terrorism. The amendment would place the Senate on record as standing for the proposition that North Korea's hostile and provocative actions will not be ignored. Indeed, they will have meaningful consequences under the law. This amendment, of which Senator Bayh is the lead cosponsor, expresses the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism based on its nuclear and missile proliferation, abductions, On October 11, 2008, the State Department removed North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism on which it had been placed since 1988. At the time, this is what President Bush said to the North Korean regime upon announcing that North Korea would be removed. He We will trust you only to the extent that you fulfill your promises. If North Korea makes the wrong choices, the United They have made the wrong choices. We should act accordingly. Sanctions are a critical part of our leverage to pressure North Korea to act. They should only be lifted based on North Korean performance. If the North Koreans do not meet their obligations, we should move quickly to reimpose sanctions that have been waived and consider new restrictions going They have not lived up to their obligations. They have continued Let's examine how well the North Korean regime has lived up to its commitment since being removed from the list. Since removal last October, the North Korean regime has done the following: launched a multistage ballistic missile over Japan in violation of U.N. Security Council sanctions; kidnapped and imprisoned two American journalists and sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in a North Korean prison camp; pulled out of the six-party talks vowing never to return; kicked out international nuclear inspectors and American monitors; restarted its nuclear facilities; renounced the 50-year armistice with South Korea; detonated a second illegal nuclear weapon; launched additional short-range missiles; is preparing to launch long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States; and today news accounts are reporting about North Korean proliferation to the Burmese junta, Add to this a long history of other ongoing illicit operations that finance the North Korean regime's budget, including the following: extensive drug smuggling; massive and complex operations to counterfeit U.S. currency, many of which are believed to be in wide circulation; money laundering; terrorist threats by the regime against the United States, Japanese, and South Korean civilians. That is what this regime and group has done and is doing. That is some of what they have done What have we done in response? The U.N. Security Council has passed another sanctions resolution similar to the same resolution North Korea has brazenly violated to get us to this point. In 2006, the State Department, in its terrorism report, said this about keeping North Korea on the list: North Korea ``continued to maintain their ties to Most worrisome is that some of these countries [including North Korea] also have the capability to manufacture [weapons of mass destruction] and other destabilizing technologies If that was the justification for the terror list in 2006, certainly North Korea's actions today fit that standard--perhaps even more so We cannot have it both ways. If we removed North Korea from the terrorism list last year as a reward for its dubious cooperation on nuclear weapons, we would only be reversing that step by adding it back after the regime betrayed its commitments and followed up with hostile I would also like to address this issue: It often has been raised with me--and the Secretary of State herself has raised this indirectly with me--that the multiple statutes that control the list of state sponsors of terrorism do not provide the legal ability for the Secretary of State to redesignate. I think this argument is flawed, and I would like to summarize that by reading the relevant portions of each of these acts, because here is the key point on it, that they are saying: Well, we have to find factual basis that is different from the first round for us to do that. We are going through a legal review of doing this. But here the state sponsor of terrorism list is controlled under two different acts: the Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign As to countries covered by the prohibition, it says this. This is The prohibitions contained in this section apply with respect to a country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided That is what it says in the Arms Export Control Act. The list I have just read goes through what has taken place, and they are clearly and repeatedly providing support for acts of international terrorism. It does not say anything about they cannot be relisted or we have to go through some elaborate finding process, that it cannot be based on actions they have done. These are the actions they have done in the last 6 months that are of public record. And it says the Secretary of State makes this determination and has fairly wide discretion to be Under section 628 of the Foreign Assistance Act, it says: The United States shall not provide any assistance to any country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. Again, the statute is very broad in its statement. It does not say anything about they cannot relist them. It says they can do this on the I do not know why we need to wait any longer, with the actions this government has taken and even with these most recent ones reported today of working with Burma or of the publicly done ones we know about of nuclear weapons detonation or the ones of missile technology being I recognize this is a sense of the Senate, so it is just a sense of this body. But this body has had a strong impact in prior actions when we took a sense-of-the-Senate resolution to list the Revolutionary Guard in Iran, that we believed they should be listed as a state sponsor of terrorism. The administration acted not long after that to I believe if this body took strong action here now and said we believe North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism, it would send a very strong and proper signal to the administration-- not that we are doing your job, but we believe this is the case and this is something that is meritorious toward North Korea and its That is why I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan Bayh- Brownback amendment and vote for this amendment to the Defense N. Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back Burner Seoul.--Images and accounts of the North Korean gulag become sharper, more harrowing and more accessible with each A distillation of testimony from survivors and former guards, newly published by the Korean Bar Association, details the daily lives of 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps: Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, as they age, they hunch over at the waist. Most work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition- related illnesses, usually around the age of 50. Allowed just one set of clothes, they live and die in rags, without soap, The camps have never been visited by outsiders, so these accounts cannot be independently verified. But high- resolution satellite photographs, now accessible to anyone with an Internet connection, reveal vast labor camps in the mountains of North Korea. The photographs corroborate survivors' stories, showing entrances to mines where former prisoners said they worked as slaves, in-camp detention centers where former guards said uncooperative prisoners were tortured to death and parade grounds where former prisoners said they were forced to watch executions. Guard towers and electrified fences surround the camps, photographs show. ``We have this system of slavery right under our nose,'' said An Myeong Chul, a camp guard who defected to South Korea. ``Human rights groups can't stop it. South Korea can't stop it. The United States will have to take up this issue at But the camps have not been discussed in meetings between U.S. diplomats and North Korean officials. By exploding nuclear bombs, launching missiles and cultivating a reputation for hair-trigger belligerence, the government of Kim Jong Il has created a permanent security flash point on the Korean Peninsula--and effectively shoved the issue of ``Talking to them about the camps is something that has not been possible,'' said David Straub, a senior official in the State Department's office of Korean affairs during the Bush and Clinton years. There have been no such meetings since ``They go nuts when you talk about it,'' said Straub, who is now associate director of Korean studies at Stanford Nor have the camps become much of an issue for the American public, even though annotated images of them can be quickly called up on Google Earth and even though they have existed concentration camps and twice as long as the Soviet Gulag. Although precise numbers are impossible to obtain, Western governments and human groups estimate that hundreds of thousands of people have died in the North Korean camps. North Korea officially says the camps do not exist. It restricts movements of the few foreigners it allows into the country and severely punishes those who sneak in. U.S. reporters Laura Ling and Euna Lee were sentenced last month to 12 years of hard labor, after being convicted in a closed trial on charges of entering the country illegally. North Korea's gulag also lacks the bright light of celebrity attention. No high-profile, internationally recognized figure has emerged to coax Americans into understanding or investing emotionally in the issue, said Suzanne Scholte, a Washington-based activist who brings camp survivors to the United States for speeches and marches. ``Tibetans have the Dalai Lama and Richard Gere, Burmese have Aung San Suu Kyi, Darfurians have Mia Farrow and George Clooney,'' she said. ``North Koreans have no one like that.'' Before guards shoot prisoners who have tried to escape, they turn each execution into a teachable moment, according to interviews with five North Koreans who said they have Prisoners older than 16 are required to attend, and they are forced to stand as close as 15 feet to the condemned, according to the interviews. A prison official usually gives a lecture, explaining how the Dear Leader, as Kim Jong Il is known, had offered a ``chance at redemption'' through hard The condemned are hooded, and their mouths are stuffed with pebbles. Three guards fire three times each, as onlookers see blood spray and bodies crumple, those interviewed said. ``We almost experience the executions ourselves,'' said Jung Gwang Il, 47, adding that he witnessed two executions as an inmate at Camp 15. After three years there, Jung said, he was allowed to leave in 2003. He fled to China and now lives Like several former prisoners, Jung said the most arduous part of his imprisonment was his pre-camp interrogation at the hands of the Bowibu, the National Security Agency. After eight years in a government office that handled trade with China, a fellow worker accused him of being a South Korean ``They wanted me to admit to being a spy,'' Jung said. ``They knocked out my front teeth with a baseball bat. They fractured my skull a couple of times. I was not a spy, but I admitted to being a spy after nine months of torture.'' When he was arrested, Jung said, he weighed 167 pounds. When his interrogation was finished, he said, he weighed 80 pounds. ``When I finally got to the camp, I actually gained weight,'' said Jung, who worked summers in cornfields and ``Most people die of malnutrition, accidents at work, and during interrogation,'' said Jung, who has become a human rights advocate in Seoul. ``It is people with perseverance who survive. The ones who think about food all the time go crazy. I worked hard, so guards selected me to be a leader in my barracks. Then I didn't have to expend so much energy, and Human rights groups, lawyers committees and South Korean- funded think tanks have detailed what goes on in the camps based on in-depth interviews with survivors and former guards who trickle out of North Korea into China and find their way The motives and credibility of North Korean defectors in the South are not without question. They are desperate to make a living. Many refuse to talk unless they are paid. South Korean psychologists who debrief defectors describe them as angry, distrustful and confused. But in hundreds of separate interviews conducted over two decades, defectors have told similar stories that paint a consistent portrait of The number of camps has been consolidated from 14 to about five large sites, according to former officials who worked in the camps. Camp 22, near the Chinese border, is 31 miles long and 25 miles wide, an area larger than the city of Los Angeles. As many as 50,000 prisoners are held there, a former There is a broad consensus among researchers about how the camps are run: Most North Koreans are sent there without any judicial process. Many inmates die in the camps unaware of the charges against them. Guilt by association is legal under North Korean law, and up to three generations of a wrongdoer's family are sometimes imprisoned, following a rule from North Korea's founding dictator, Kim Il Sung: ``Enemies of class, whoever they are, their seed must be eliminated Crimes that warrant punishment in political prison camps include real or suspected opposition to the government. ``The camp system in its entirety can be perceived as a massive and elaborate system of persecution on political grounds,'' writes human rights investigator David Hawk, who has studied the camps extensively. Common criminals serve time elsewhere. Prisoners are denied any contact with the outside world, according to the Korean Bar Association's 2008 white paper on human rights in North Korea. The report also found that suicide is punished with longer prison terms for surviving relatives; guards can beat, rape and kill prisoners with impunity; when female prisoners become pregnant without Most of the political camps are ``complete control districts,'' which means that inmates work there until death. There is, however, a ``revolutionizing district'' at Camp 15, where prisoners can receive remedial indoctrination in socialism. After several years, if they memorize the writings of Kim Jong Il, they are released but remain monitored by Since it offers a safe haven to defectors, South Korea is home to scores of camp survivors. All of them have been debriefed by the South Korean intelligence service, which presumably knows more about the camps than any agency outside But for nearly a decade, despite revelations in scholarly reports, TV documentaries and memoirs, South Korea avoided public criticism of the North's gulag. It abstained from voting on U.N. resolutions that criticized North Korea's record on human rights and did not mention the camps during leadership summits in 2000 or 2007. Meanwhile, under a ``sunshine policy'' of peaceful engagement, South Korea made major economic investments in the North and gave huge, unconditional annual gifts of food and fertilizer. The public, too, has been largely silent. ``South Koreans, who publicly cherish the virtue of brotherly love, have been inexplicably stuck in a deep quagmire of indifference,'' according to the Korean Bar Association, which says it publishes reports on human rights in North Korea to ``break Government policy changed last year under President Lee Myung-bak, who has halted unconditional aid, backed U.N. resolutions that criticize the North and tried to put human rights on the table in dealing with Pyongyang. In response, North Korea has called Lee a ``traitor,'' squeezed inter- An Myeong Chul was allowed to work as a guard and driver in political prison camps because, he said, he came from a intelligence agent, as were the parents of many of his fellow In his training to work in the camps, An said, he was ordered, under penalty of becoming a prisoner himself, never to show pity. It was permissible, he said, for bored guards ``We were taught to look at inmates as pigs,'' said An, 41, adding that he worked in the camps for seven years before escaping to China in 1994. He now works in a bank in Seoul. The rules he enforced were simple. ``If you do not meet your work quota, you do not eat much,'' he said. ``You are not allowed to sleep until you finish your work. If you still do not finish your work, you are sent to a little prison inside the camp. After three months, you leave that prison An said the camps play a crucial role in the maintenance of totalitarian rule. ``All high-ranking officials underneath Kim Jong Il know that one misstep means you go to the camps, Partly to assuage his guilt, An has become an activist and has been talking about the camps for more than a decade. He was among the first to help investigators identify camp buildings using satellite images. Still, he said, nothing will change in camp operations without sustained diplomatic In the Clinton years, high-level diplomatic contacts between Washington and Pyongyang focused almost exclusively on preventing the North from developing nuclear weapons and President George W. Bush's administration took a radically different approach. It famously labeled North Korea as part of an ``axis of evil,'' along with Iran and Iraq. Bush met with camp survivors. For five years, U.S. diplomats refused After North Korea detonated a nuclear device in 2006, the Bush administration decided to talk. The negotiations, however, focused exclusively on dismantling Pyongyang's In recent months, North Korea has reneged on its promise to abandon nuclear weapons, kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors, exploded a second nuclear device and created a major security administration's dealings with North Korea. The camps, for the time being, are a non-issue. ``Unfortunately, until we get a handle on the security threat, we can't afford to deal with human rights,'' said Peter Beck, a former executive director of the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Kim Young Soon, once a dancer in Pyongyang, said she spent eight years in Camp 15 during the 1970s. Under the guilt-by- association rule, she said, her four children and her parents At the camp, she said, her parents starved to death and her eldest son drowned. Around the time of her arrest, her husband was shot for trying to flee the country, as was her It was not until 1989, more than a decade after her release, that she found out why she had been imprisoned. A security official told her then that she was punished because she had been a friend of Kim Jong Il's first wife and that she would ``never be forgiven again'' if the state suspected She escaped to China in 2000 and now lives in Seoul. At 73, she said she is furious that the outside world doesn't take more interest in the camps. ``I had a friend who loved Kim Jong Il, and for that the government killed my family,'' she Clinton: U.S. Wary of Growing Burmese, North Korean Military Bangkok, July 21.--The Obama administration is increasingly concerned that nuclear-armed North Korea is building mysterious military ties with Burma, another opaque country with a history of oppression, Secretary of State Hillary ``We know that there are also growing concerns about military cooperation between North Korea and Burma, which we take seriously'' Clinton told reporters after talks in the Thai capital. ``It would be destabilizing for the region. It would pose a direct threat to Burma's neighbors.'' U.S. officials traveling with Clinton, who is in Thailand to attend a regional security forum, said the concerns about Burma and North Korea extend to possible nuclear cooperation. North Korea has a long history of illicit missile sales and proliferation, including secretly helping to build a Syrian nuclear reactor that was destroyed in 2007 by Israeli jets. ``This is one of the areas we'd like to know about,'' said one official. ``We have concerns, but our information is Burma, also known as Myanmar, is regarded as one of the world's most oppressive nations, run by generals who have enriched themselves while much of the country remains desperately poor. North Korea is an equally grim country, with vast prison camps and an ailing dictator, Kim Jong Il. The evidence of growing Burmese-North Korean cooperation since formal ties were restored in 2007 is extensive, but the full extent of the military relationship is unclear. The nuclear connection is even murkier, but intelligence agencies have tracked suspicious procurement of high- precision equipment from Europe, as well as the arrival in Burma of North Korean officials associated with the company connected to the Syria reactor, according to David Albright, director of the Institute for Science and International ``Something may be going on, but no one has any proof. It is a mix of suspicions and concerns,'' Albright said, adding that close examination of satellite imagery of suspected nuclear sites has turned up no evidence. But he said that the purchases of high-precision equipment were especially troubling because the equipment did not make sense for use in missiles and it was shipped to educational entities that had Japanese officials last month also arrested three people for attempting to illegally export dual-use equipment to Burma, via Malaysia, under the direction of a company involved in the illicit procurement for North Korean military Moreover, Albright said, European and U.S. intelligence agencies have identified people associated with Namchongang Trading Corp., a North Korean company also known as NCG, as working in Burma. NCG reportedly provided the critical link between Pyongyang and Damascus, acquiring key materials from vendors in China and probably from Europe and secretly transferring them to a desert construction site near the The State Department last month cited NCG for being ``involved in the purchase of aluminum tubes and other equipment specifically suitable for a uranium enrichment U.S. officials have observed other troubling connections. The U.S. Navy last month closely tracked Kang Nam 1, a rusty North Korean freighter, after the government in Pyongyang tested a nuclear weapon. Although U.S. officials were never completely certain the ship was headed to Burma, the ship returned to North Korea after the United States, China and other countries put pressure on Burma to respect a United Nations resolution barring most North Korean weapons exports. Photographs that have emerged in recent weeks also show an extensive series of 600 to 800 tunnel complexes and other underground facilities built in Burma with North Korean technical assistance near its new capital, Naypyidaw. North Korean officials can be spotted in the photos, which were taken between 2003 and 2006 and posted on the Web site of YaleGlobal Online by journalist Bertil Lintner, an expert on Burma has uranium deposits, but as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is required to allow any nuclear facilities. Russia in 2007 agreed to help build a 10-megawatt light-water reactor in Burma, but little appears At the news conference, Clinton also strongly criticized the Burmese government for its well-documented use of gang rape as a military tactic, organized by Burmese officers, against ethnic minorities. A new offensive against the Karen ethnic group has sent more than 4,000 refugees fleeing across ``We are deeply concerned by reports of continuing human rights abuses within Burma, particularly by actions that are mistreatment and abuse of young girls,'' Clinton said. The Obama administration is conducting a review of its Burma policy, which Clinton said has been placed on hold while Washington awaits the outcome of the trial of Nobel ``We have made clear we expect fair treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi, and we have condemned the way that she has been treated by the regime in Burma, which we consider to be baseless and totally unacceptable,'' Clinton said. The National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party, won a landslide electoral victory in 1990, but the military leadership refused to accept it. Since then, she has been under house arrest for most of the time, as have hundreds of In May, just days before Suu Kyi's six-year term under house arrest was due to expire, the government put her on trial for an incident involving a U.S. citizen who swam across Rangoon's Lake Inya to reach Suu Kyi's lakefront bungalow and allegedly stayed there one or two nights. Suu Kyi was taken to Rangoon's notorious Insein Prison on charges of violating the terms of her detention by hosting a foreigner, which could bring a three- to five-year prison term, according to Burmese opposition officials. Suu Kyi, 63, is said to be in poor health and has recently been treated ``Our position is that we are willing to have a more productive partnership with Burma if they take steps that are self-evident,'' Clinton said. She called on Burmese authorities to ``end the violence against their own people,'' including ethnic minorities, ``end the mistreatment of Aung The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Kerry, is prepared to comment and speak. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of his remarks, the Senator from Delaware be recognized as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, obviously North Korea's actions in recent weeks--months, really; testing a nuclear device on May 25 and launching ballistic missiles on July 4--received the appropriate objection in many different ways of China, Japan, South Korea, the United States, and many other countries. Clearly, those actions threaten to undermine the peace and security of northeast Asia, and the U.S. response to those actions ought to be and, I believe, is already resolute. China responded very clearly. The sanctions have been toughened--individual sanctions for the first time. A number of steps were taken by both the United Nations and China. China, incidentally, has been unprecedented in the personalization of some of the sanctions that it has put into I know the Senator from Kansas cares, obviously, enormously about the underlying issue here. But I have to say this amendment, while well intended, simply does not do what it is supposed to do. It has no impact other than the sense of the Senate: sending a message which at this particular moment, frankly, works counterproductively to other Right now, the Secretary of State is meeting at ASEAN. Right now, the various countries involved in this delicate process are working to determine how to proceed forward with respect to getting back to talks and defusing these tensions. For the Senate just to pop on an amendment like this at this moment in time not only sends a signal that complicates that process, but I think it also, frankly, will make it more difficult to secure the return of two American journalists, Laura It simply is an inappropriate interference without a foundation, I might add--without a foundation--in the law. Let me be very specific. When President Bush lifted the designation of terrorism--in fact, nothing that the Senator from Kansas has laid out here actually is supported either by the intelligence or by the facts. I could go through his amendment with specificity. Let me give an example. This is On March 17, 2009, American journalists . . . were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border by agents. . . . He is citing that as a rationale for putting them back on the list. Well, the fact is, the families themselves, as well as the two journalists--but the families--have acknowledged that they, in fact, were arrested for illegally crossing the border. So that is inappropriate. But not only is it inappropriate to cite a fact that is not a fact, but it is not a cause for putting somebody on the terrorism Nowhere do any of the actions cited here fit into the statutes that apply to whether somebody is designated as appropriately being on the terrorism list. Let me be more specific about that. When President Bush took them off the list, here is what they said. This is the President's The current intelligence assessment satisfies the second statutory requirement for rescission. Following a review of all available information, we see no credible evidence at this time of ongoing support by the DPRK for international terrorism, and we assess that the current intelligence assessment, including the most recent assessment published May 21, 2008, provides a sufficient basis for certification by the President to Congress that North Korea has not provided any support for international terrorism during the There is no intelligence showing to the contrary, as we come to the floor here today, and it is inappropriate for the Senate simply to step Our review of intelligence community assessments indicates there is no credible or sustained reporting at this time that supports allegations (including as cited in recent reports by the Congressional Research Service) that the DPRK has provided direct or witting support for Hezbollah, Tamil Tigers, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Should we obtain credible evidence of current DPRK support for international terrorism at any time in the future, the Secretary could again designate DPRK a state sponsor of terrorism. Well, we have not. It simply does not fit under the requirements. We need to use the right tools. This amendment is flawed and I am convinced could actually undermine what I know is going on right now in terms of efforts by a number of different parties to try to move this process forward. This is not the way a responsible Senate ought to go about trying to deal with an issue with this kind of diplomatic The relisting, incidentally, has no practical effect in terms of anything it would do with respect to our current policy other than raise the issue with respect to the Senate at this moment but, as I say, inappropriately with respect to the statutes it concerns. President Bush actually preserved all the existing financial sanctions on North Korea at the time he lifted the terror designation, and he kept them all in place by using other provisions of law. The fact is, this administration has, in fact, responded in order to put real costs on North Korea for its actions. We led the international effort at the United Nations Security Council, and we did enact sweeping new sanctions on North Korea, and by all accounts they are The U.N. Security Council resolution 1874, passed unanimously, imposed the first ever comprehensive international arms embargo on North Korea. Those sanctions are now beginning to take effect. A North Korean ship suspected of carrying arms to Burma turned around after it was denied bunkering services in Singapore, and the Government of Burma itself warned that the ship would be inspected on arrival to ensure that it complied with the U.N. arms embargo. So that is real. That is happening. Significantly, China has agreed to impose sanctions both on North Korean companies and individuals involved in nuclear and So the sanctions that were recently imposed by the Obama administration, in concert with the international community, are having a real impact. So I think we ought to give them time to work. I do not think we ought to come in here and change the dynamics that, as I say, I know are currently being worked on by the Secretary of State. As we are here in the Senate today, those meetings are taking place. It is better for the United States and the international community to focus our efforts on concrete steps rather than resort to a toothless and symbolic gesture. This will have no impact ultimately because we are still going to go down our course, but it can ripple the process which I might also point out, the President and Secretary of State have been closely communicating with allies and with partners in the region. They are currently involved in discussions with China, Russia, South Korea, and Japan on this issue. Even as we debate the issue here, the effort at the ASEAN Forum is specifically geared to try to coordinate our approach with our treaty allies and with others. We ought to give Third, obviously all of us reject the recent actions taken by North Korea. There is no doubt about that. But it was not so long ago that we were actually making some progress on the denuclearization effort. And observers of the region--those who are expert and who follow it closely--are all in agreement as to the rationale which has driven North Korea to take some of the actions it has taken. I was in China about a month and a half ago. I spent some time with Chinese leaders on this issue because one of the tests took place while I was there and I saw the Chinese reaction up close and personal. I saw the degree to which they were truly upset by it, disturbed by it, and took actions to deal with it. The fact is that they explained it, as have others, as a reaction by North Korea to perhaps three things: No. 1, the succession issues in North Korea itself; No. 2, the policies of the South Korean Government over the course of the last year or so; and No. 3, the fact that while they had nuclear weapons and had been engaged in a denuclearization discussion with the United States, most of the focus appeared to have shifted to Iran, and there was some sense that the focus should have remained where those nuclear weapons So I believe we need to preserve diplomatic flexibility in the weeks and months ahead. There is an appropriate time for the administration to come to us. There is an appropriate way for us to deal with this issue, to sit down with the administration, to make it clear to them that we think we ought to do this, to talk with them about it, to engage in what the rationale might be under the law. But as I say, none of the reasons that are legitimate under the law for, in fact, a designated country as going on the terrorist list is appropriate or fit here. I think that is the most critical reason of all. Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, thank you very much. I thank the floor manager on the majority side for this unanimous consent which allows me I wish to say a word or two about the Defense authorization bill which is before us, and then I want to pivot. I will talk about the health of our Nation's defense, but also about the health care of our Let me start off by extending my thanks to the leaders of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Levin and Senator McCain, and their staffs for the good work they have done. I wish to thank Senator Reed of Rhode Island for his contributions as well. Standing here on the floor, I am looking at Senator Reed, a graduate of the Military Academy at West Point, and right across the aisle, at Senator McCain, a graduate of the Naval Academy. It is great to have that kind of experience here in the Senate. They are sitting on opposite sides of the aisle, coming from schools that are sometimes thought to be rivals, but they are able to I wish to express my thanks to the President and to the Secretary of Defense Bob Gates. We have learned that in the last 7 years, cost overruns from major weapons systems in this country grew from about $45 million in 2001 to last year almost $300 billion, a growth over 7 years in cost overruns for major weapons systems in 2001 of $45 million and last year almost $300 billion. What we need is for the administration as well as the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs to say to the folks on the Armed Services Committee, but also to say to us in the Senate and in the House: These are the weapons systems we need, these are the threats we believe we face as a nation, and to give us some sense of priorities of the weapons systems we should support and fund, the troop levels we need and, frankly, the weapons systems we don't I was privileged to follow on the heels of the Presiding Officer, Senator Kaufman, about a month and a half ago to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He and Senator Reed, I think, led that CODEL and shared with us our needs in that part of the world. We need a military strategy and we also need a civilian strategy in Afghanistan, and I think this administration has given us a good two-pronged approach. We have good new leadership there on the military side. Basically, though, they said our job here is counterinsurgency. We need more troops, more trainers to train the Afghans and to train the military side, and then the civilian side. We also need mobility in terms of a lot of additional helicopters, about 150 new helicopters or additional ones coming in to provide the mobility to move our men and women all over the southern part of Afghanistan, and to meet the Taliban threat. The kind of weapon we don't use there or don't need there, I will be very blunt, is the F-22 which we discussed and debated here for the last several days, a fighter aircraft that has been around for a dozen or so years. We are still building more of them, but they have never flown a flight mission in Iraq and never flown a flight mission in Afghanistan either. The F-22 is limited in what it can do. It basically is a fighter, air-to-air combat. The Afghans, the Taliban, don't have fighter aircraft. In Iraq, the folks we are fighting there don't have aircraft. Meanwhile, we have F-15s, F-16s, F-18s. We are going to build 2,500 F-35s, for less than half the price of the F-22, which not only do dog fights but can also do ground-to-air support and a variety of different functions that the F-22 cannot for a lot less money. The administration, I think wisely, said as hard as it is sometimes to stop the production line on aircraft, in this case the F-22, in terms of what is cost effective, we need to refocus on the F-35 and on counterinsurgency, preparing for those kinds of challenges we face. We voted to do that, a 58-to-40 vote. I was very pleased with the vote and I commend everyone who voted as they did, and, frankly, the people who took the opposite view. There were some tough issues to deal with, I know particularly from folks in whose States the aircraft are being produced and systems for those aircraft are being produced. I know it is difficult to accept. But I am encouraged by that vote. My hope is we will pay heed to some of the priorities sent to us by the Secretary of Defense, which are designed to make sure we spend money on weapons systems that we are likely to need in the 21st century--certainly in the next decade or two or three--and I think with Sort of pivoting, if I can, after having said a word about the health of our Nation's defense, let me talk about the health of the people in our country. Some of my colleagues are probably getting tired of hearing me say this, but when talking about health care, I mention four things: No. 1, we spend more money for health care than any other nation on Earth. No. 2, we don't get better results. No. 3, we have people in this country today losing their health care. No. 4, some 47 million Americans today don't have health insurance, don't have health care. We have to do better than this. We have to do better than this. I There has been a big focus, as there should be, on extending health care coverage to 47 million folks who don't have it, and we need to address that, obviously. Having said that, the other concern we need to address is reining in the growth of health care costs. We are getting clobbered as a nation in terms of being able to compete with the rest of the world where we pay so much more money for health care than any other nation, and employers pay, and we are getting clobbered as a Federal Government with the cost of Medicare and Medicaid, and State governments trying to bear their share of the cost of Medicaid. They Over lunch today, I said to my colleagues in our caucus meeting that wouldn't it be great if somehow we could have our cake and eat it too. I said that with a piece of chocolate cake staring me right in the face. But as it turned out, there are delivery systems, if you will, of health care in this country where they are not necessarily having their cake and eating it too, but where they are able to provide better health care, better outcomes, at a lower price. Think about that: better health care, better outcomes, better quality of health care at a The names are beginning to become familiar to us. Some are already familiar: Mayo in Minnesota, and now they have an operation down in Florida too to see if that model will work in Florida, and it has; Kaiser Permanente in northern California, an outfit called Intermountain Health--all of these are nonprofits--Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, OH, an outfit called Geisinger in Hershey, PA; there is what is called a health care cooperative in the State of Washington, I believe it is around Puget Sound, called Puget Sound Cooperative where they have been able to emulate this interesting result of better quality outcomes, better health care, lower prices. What we need to do is to attempt not only to extend health care coverage to folks who don't have it--47 million--but to rein in the growth of health care costs. The idea that health care costs grow at 2 or 3 or 4 percent over the consumer price index, to continue to do that is going to cripple us economically and competitively as a nation. It is going to cripple our ability to rein in our large and growing In the last 8 years in this Nation we ran up as much new debt as we did in the first 208 years of our Nation's history. Think about that: In the last 8 years, we ran up as much new debt in this country as we did in our first 208 years as a nation. This year we are on track to have the biggest single-year deficit we have ever had. We are also in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and we are trying to stimulate the economy and get it moving. I am encouraged that it is starting to move, but that is a huge deficit, coming on the heels of, frankly, 8 years where we spent like drunken sailors, and I know how drunken sailors spend. It is not a pretty sight, and this is, We need to go to school on the Mayos, the Geisingers, the Cleveland Clinics, the Kaiser Permanentes, the Puget Sounds, the Intermountain Healths, and see what we can learn from them. What is their secret? How are they able to do this, better outcomes, less price? As it turns out, there are a number of things they do in common. I wish to mention a few of them today. Among the things they do, they have literally brought on to their staff the doctors at Cleveland Clinic, for example, who provide health care. They are on staff at the Cleveland Clinic. The same is true at Mayo and these other nonprofits. I saw an interesting special on CNN a couple of weekends ago. They were interviewing a number of people who worked at the Cleveland Clinic. They interviewed a fellow who is a doctor, a cardiologist, as I recall. He used to be in private practice. He said, in the old days when I was on my own in private practice or group practice, I got paid, compensated, for the number of hearts I operated on. If somebody came to me and they had a heart problem and it could be addressed by diet or exercise or medicine, he said, usually I didn't prescribe those things. I didn't get paid for doing that. If they needed to have a heart operation and we could address their problem with an operation, he said, I got paid for that. As a result, I was more inclined to operate on people's hearts than to use some approaches that were arguably more cost effective. He went on to say, now I work for the Cleveland Clinic. I am a staff doc here. I don't have to operate on people's hearts to be compensated. I can provide good advice, help people with their diet problems, their exercise problems, their weight problems. I can help people better understand what their opportunities are with medicine. I So a light went off for me. Some of us are hearing quite a bit the need to get away from these fee-for-service deals where we basically incentivize doctors, hospitals, and nurses to ask for and order more visits, more procedures, more MRIs, more lab tests, for imaging, more x-rays, because they get paid for it, because they know that by doing more of everything, they reduce the likelihood that they are going to be sued. That sort of gets us in this conundrum where we overuse health care. If we are going to have real success in drawing down the costs of health care, part of it will be addressing the issue of fee for service, get away from that practice, and get away from the Let me mention some of the things they are doing at these five or six entities I mentioned, these nonprofits. Among the things they do is coordinate care. I use my mom as an example. My mom is now deceased. She lived in Florida for roughly the last 30 or so years of her life. She had dementia; she had congestive heart failure; she had arthritis. She had five doctors. The last years of her life that she was down there, my sister and I would go down to visit my mom about every other month or so. We would take turns, and we would go with our mom to visit her doctors. These five doctors my mom had never talked to each other. In fact, I don't think they knew that the other doctors existed. They were all in the aggregate prescribing something like 15 different kinds of prescription medicines. We kept them at her home in what looked like my dad's old fishing tackle box. It was compartmentalized with medicines to take before breakfast, during breakfast, after breakfast; before lunch, during lunch, and throughout the day. Some of those medicines my mom was prescribed, she didn't need to take. Somebody needed to know what she was taking and say, You shouldn't be taking these two medicines in combination; they are hurting you. We didn't One of the things these nonprofits do is coordinate the care that is provided to my mom or anybody's mom or dad. Another thing that would have been very helpful for my mom or other people in that situation is to have electronic health records. If my mom had an electronic health record such as we have in the VA and like we are developing in Delaware and some other States, when my mom went from doctor's office to doctor's office they would know in each office who else she was seeing and the medicines she was being prescribed, the lab tests and everything. They would have it right there for her when she came for We have a great ability to harness information technology or electronic health care records, which are a big part of that. Our nonprofits I have talked about--the half dozen or so--have that in common. On wellness and prevention, we know it is not just from nonprofits but out in California is Safeway, and these people have supermarkets all over America and several hundred thousand employees. Their health care costs from 2004 to 2008 have been level and flat. They have incentivized employees to do the right thing for themselves, in terms of holding down their weight, helping them get off tobacco, to lethargy, to get off the sofa, and to eat what is right; and there are antismoking campaigns and all kinds of stuff. So we have a good model It is not just the nonprofits but a lot of employers are starting to There are another one or two points I will mention on the nonprofits. On chronic disease management, such as heart disease and diabetes, I am told that about 80 percent of the cost of these chronic diseases can be controlled by four factors: diet, exercise, overweight/obesity, and smoking. Those four factors control about 80 percent of the cost of our expenditures on chronic care. If we work with those four items, we will help reduce the costs and provide better outcomes for people. We will also hold down our costs. There are a couple lessons from the nonprofits and others. Part of it is pharmacy--making sure people who need pharmaceutical medicines, small and large molecules, are taking those, and somebody is checking to make sure they are taking what they Focusing on primary care, many of those people coming out of medical schools want to be specialists. They are not interested in being primary care doctors. We need more primary care doctors. We need to change the incentives to get more primary care doctors, which is what we need. Another idea is for us to pool insurance costs. As my colleagues know, we have the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan. We have an insurance pool where we pool all the Federal employees and their dependents and the retirees and their dependents into one large pool to purchase health insurance. They get it at a not cheap price but a pretty good price. One of the reasons why is, when you have a lot of people in the purchasing pool, you get a good variety and much better costs. If you think about the administrative costs for health insurance, as a percentage of premiums, I am told, in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program, it is about 10 percent. When it comes to people buying individual policies and small businesses, their administrative costs as a percentage of premiums are about 30 percent. So the idea of creating large purchasing pools makes a whole lot of I will close here. The idea that we would pass health care legislation and stop extending coverage for people who don't have it-- if that is all we do, we have failed the American people. We have to do at least two things. One is extend coverage but also make sure the coverage we extend provides better coverage, better quality outcomes and better health care and that we do so at a price that is diminished and does not continue to expand by several times the rate of inflation. We can do that going forward. That is what we need to do. My friends have been generous in allowing me to proceed. I see several Senators are anxious to get back into the debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the Senator from Kansas concerning North Korea. I must say I was entertained by the outlook--as far as North Korea's behavior is concerned--by the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. I can't remember when I have disagreed more. The State Department's 2008 Country Reports on Terrorism stated that ``as part of the six-party talks process, the U.S. reaffirmed its intent to fulfill its commitment regarding the removal of the designation of the DPRK as a state sponsor of terrorism in parallel with the DPRK's actions on denuclearization and in accordance with They certainly haven't taken any action on denuclearization, and it certainly hasn't been in accordance with the criteria set forth by law. There was a problem with this trade, however. We delisted North Korea, and we got something worse than nothing. Facts are stubborn things. In response to our action, Pyongyang has embarked on a pattern of astonishing belligerence and has reversed even the previous steps it had taken toward the denuclearization prior to its removal from the A few facts. In December 2008--just 2 months after the United States removed Pyongyang from the list--North Korea balked at inspections of its nuclear facilities and ceased disablement activities at the Yongbyon reactor. In March, the regime seized two American journalists near the China-North Korean border and subsequently sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in the North Korean gulag. These are two American citizens who may have strayed over a border. Does that mean they are sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in the most harsh prison camps in the world? What are we going to do about it? It is remarkable. Two weeks later, it tested a long-range ballistic missile, in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions, and then announced it was expelling international inspectors from Yongbyon, reestablishing the facility, and ending North Korean participation in disarmament talks. In May, Pyongyang conducted its second nuclear test; in June, a North Korean ship suspected of carrying illicit cargo departed North Korea in likely defiance of U.N. Security Council obligations; and earlier this month, Pyongyang again launched short- and medium-range missiles into the Sea of Japan, including on the Fourth of July. All these are indications that the North Koreans somehow should not be listed as terrorists? I think we ought to, frankly--I respect and appreciate my friend from Kansas. Maybe we ought to have a binding resolution, rather than a sense of the Senate. It is remarkable that these events have taken place against a backdrop of belligerence and intransigence by North Korea. Pyongyang has never accounted for or even acknowledged its role in assisting the construction of a nuclear reactor in Syria, which the Israelis had to bomb. Similarly, it has refused to provide a complete and correct declaration of its nuclear program. Of course, something we all know, which is one of the great tragedies in the history of the world, is this is a gulag of some 200,000 people, where people are regularly beaten, starved, and executed. According to the Washington Post, most of them work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition-related illnesses, usually at around the age of 50. They are allowed just one set of clothes. They live and die in rags, without soap, socks, underclothes or sanitary It is not an accident that the average South Korean is several inches taller than the average North Korean. This regime may be the most repressive and oppressive and Orwellian in all the world today. So the Chinese have been serious--according to Mr. Kerry, the Senator from Massachusetts, the Chinese have been resolute on the issue of the ship inspections. The U.N. Security Council resolution calls for monitoring and following of the ship, and if the decision is made that they need to board a North Korean ship, if the North Koreans refuse, then the following ship cannot board but can follow them into a port, where the port authorities are expected to board and inspect the vessel. And then that violation is reported to the U.N. Security Council. That ought to rouse some pretty quick action. I don't share the confidence of the Senator from Massachusetts that if a North Korean ship goes into a port at Myanmar, you will see likely action, except maybe the offloading of Look, the North Koreans have clearly been engaged in selling anything they can to anybody who will buy it because they need the money-- whether it be drugs, counterfeit currency, nuclear technology or missiles. Every time we have held onto the football, like Lucy, they I think this is a very modest proposal of the Senator from Kansas. I point out that years and years of six-party talks, different party talks, negotiations, conversations, individuals who have been assigned as chief negotiators who then end up somehow negotiating, with the end If the North Koreans continue to test weapons, test missiles, sooner or later, they will match a missile with a weapon that will threaten the United States of America. Right now, those missiles they are testing go over Japanese territory. I think it is pretty obvious we are dealing with a regime of incredible and unbelievable cruelty and oppression of their own people. The newly published Korean bar association details the daily lives of the 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps. Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, This is a regime that, in any interpretation of the word, is an outrageous insult to the world and everything America stands for and believes in. I believe they will pose a direct threat, over time, to the security of not only Asia but the world. They were able to export technology all the way to Syria, obviously. Why should they not be able I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the amendment by the Senator from Kansas, and I hope we can vote on that sooner rather than The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized. Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Bennett from Utah as a cosponsor of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank my colleague from Arizona. I think he understands more than anybody in this body the situation and what happens in a gulag-type situation. That has drawn me to the topic of North Korea for a couple years--the human rights abuses. Hundreds and thousands of North Koreans are fleeing to be able to simply get food, and a couple hundred thousand of them are in the gulag system. It is unbelievable that this can happen in 2009. We have Google Earth that can even show this. But we just say: OK, that is the sort of thing that happens there. It is mind-boggling to me that we wouldn't act I appreciate the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, the Senator from Massachusetts, who is a distinguished Senator and is very bright and experienced in foreign policy. I could not disagree with him more about North Korea. We have had an ongoing dialog and discussion about this. He makes the point that we should not pop this on the bill. I have been trying for months for us to relist them as terrorists. They should not have been delisted in the first place. It was a terrible process move on the Bush administration to try to move the talks forward, saying we are going to delist you and you are going to do something for us. Pyongyang and Kim Jong Il said thank you very much, and now we are going to stick it in your face, which is what they have continued to do. I have listed the things, as the Senator from The thought that we are acting resolutely, to me, is an insult to the people in North Korea who have lived under this oppressive regime. We are not acting resolutely toward North Korea. We are not putting any sanctions on them. We have asked for international sanctions, but why aren't we willing to put sanctions on ourselves? If we think this is such a proper course to follow, and we are willing to push it on an international body, why wouldn't we be willing to do it ourselves? Why wouldn't we be willing to list them as a terror nation, as a state sponsor of terror? I don't understand that; why, if it is good in the Plus, we need to have teeth into this. This is a modest--a modest-- proposal. It is a resolution, a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism. We are not relisting them. That is an administration call. We are saying we, as a body, given the provocative actions that have taken place since they have been delisted clearly merits the relisting of North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. That is our opinion, and that is what we Without a foundation in the law, it is clearly--as I read previously--allowed for the Secretary of State to determine that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. That is the actual wording of the law in the Arms Export Control Act. Clearly, they have acted to sponsor international terrorism with their relation with Burma, with the missiles, with the nuclear weapons, and with the proliferation they He says, and is suggesting, that delisting has no practical effect. I believe it does have a practical effect, and it certainly does on the administration's stance toward North Korea and their international posture toward North Korea. Plus, it has a practical effect on what we can provide for as far as aid from the United States to North Korea. We shouldn't be providing aid to the North Koreans. We should provide food aid, if we can monitor it. We shouldn't be giving oil to the North Koreans. That should be limited so the administration cannot do that. They would not be able to if they are listed as a state sponsor of Mr. President, it will hurt the people of North Korea and those who are in the North Korean gulags if we don't relist them. It recovers any vestige of hope they might have that at some point in time somebody of enough stature, such as the United States Government, is going to take enough notice that they are going to put pressure on the North Korean regime. I have talked with some people who were refuseniks in the Soviet Union, in a Soviet gulag during an era where we had far less communication capacity than we do today, and yet they were able to get messages at that point in time into the Soviet gulag that the Americans were putting pressure on the Soviet Union and the lack of human rights in the Soviet Union, and it gave them hope. It gave them hope in the If we can pass this, it can give people in the gulags in North Korea hope that somebody is at least paying enough attention to put pressure on this, and maybe they may be able to live longer, or actually live at all. It can give them hope, instead of ``abandon hope all ye who enter here,'' as it says at the entrance to Inferno and as it is in the gulag So it is a modest resolution, and I would hope my colleagues would vote overwhelmingly for this resolution to relist North Korea as a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that amendment No. 1528 be called The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Lieberman], for himself, Mr. Graham, Mr. Begich, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hutchison, and Mr. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To provide authority to increase Army active-duty end strengths for fiscal year 2010 as well as fiscal year 2011 and 2012) SEC. 402. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY FOR INCREASES OF ARMY ACTIVE- (a) Authority to Increase army Active-Duty End Strength.-- (1) Authority.--For each of fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012, the Secretary of Defense may, as the Secretary determines necessary for the purposes specified in paragraph (2), establish the active-duty end strength for the Army at a number greater than the number otherwise authorized by law up to the number equal to the fiscal-year 2010 baseline plus (2) Purpose of increases.--The purposes for which an increase may be made in the active duty end strength for the (A) To increase dwell time for members of the Army on (C) To achieve reorganizational objectives, including increased unit manning, force stabilization and shaping, and (b) Relationship to Presidential Waiver Authority.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the President under section 123a of title 10, United States Code, to waive any statutory end strength in a time of war or (c) Relationship to Other Variance Authority.--The authority in subsection (a) is in addition to the authority to vary authorized end strengths that is provided in subsections (e) and (f) of section 115 of title 10, United (1) In general.--If the Secretary of Defense increases active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2010 under subsection (a), the Secretary may fund such an increase through Department of Defense reserve funds or through an (2) Fiscal years 2011 and 2012.--(2) If the Secretary of Defense plans to increase the active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2011 or 2012, the budget for the Department of Defense for such fiscal year as submitted to Congress shall include the amounts necessary for funding the active-duty end strength for the Army in excess of the (1) Fiscal-year 2010 baseline.--The term ``fiscal-year 2010 baseline'', with respect to the Army, means the active-duty end strength authorized for the Army in section 401(1). (2) Active-duty end strength.--The term ``active-duty end strength'', with respect to the Army for a fiscal year, means the strength for active duty personnel of Army as of the last Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased and proud to introduce this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors. To state it briefly, it extends the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army by 30,000 over the next 3 years, effective with the commencement of fiscal year 2010. It doesn't mandate this increase, but it expands the authority of the Secretary of Defense, obviously, with the support and authorization of the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, to extend the end strength of the U.S. Army. End strength means how many soldiers can the U.S. Army have. Of course, it does this to reduce the tremendous stress on the U.S. Army, which is carrying the burden of combat in two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan today, and over the next year or 18 months will be in this unique position. Progress has been made, thank God, in Iraq, and the Iraq Security Forces are progressively taking over responsibility for keeping the security in their country. The drawdown of American soldiers is happening in a methodical and responsible way, and I again express my appreciation to President Obama that it is happening in that way. At the same time, we are increasing our troop presence in Afghanistan. Bottom line: The demand for members of the U.S. Army on the battlefield over the next year, 18 months, at the outside 2 years, is going up. If the supply remains constant, that means the stress on every soldier in the U.S. Army and his or her family will not be reduced. As a matter of fact, it will go up. The term for this--which I will get to in a This is an amendment that began with members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and a comparable amendment in the House Armed Services Committee, recognizing, as we all do, the tremendous stress that our Army is under, the extraordinary job they are doing in Iraq This is really the next great generation of the American military. But we see in it some tough statistics: the increase in mental health problems, the increase in divorces of members of the service, and, There are many things we have supported in this Senate and the Congress--and the administration has--to respond to each one of those problems. But in a way, the most direct thing we can do is to increase the size of the U.S. Army so there is less pressure on every soldier in the Army, in this sense. Every time we add another soldier to the U.S. Army--and we are talking about authorization to add 30,000 more--it means that much more time every other member of the U.S. Army can spend back at base retraining, preparing and, most important of all, spending As I know the Presiding Officer knows--and I know the President of the United States knows it too--the good news is that the Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, who has done and is doing an extraordinary job for our country with, of course, the support and authorization of President Obama, yesterday announced that he would be temporarily increasing the Active-Duty end strength of the U.S. Army by 22,000 soldiers over the I cannot sufficiently express my words of appreciation for Secretary Gates's decision. He acted by employing the emergency authority he has in an authorization of the use of force and a built-in statutory waiver he has up to 3 percent of existing end strength to expand the size of the Army. This amendment, which had been planned, and was in the committee before this great action by Secretary Gates yesterday, is now before us, and I am honored to offer this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors who are listed on this amendment as a way to do two things: The first is that it literally increases from 547,000 to 577,000-plus the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army, and to leave that authority there in case there is a need that Secretary Gates and the President see in the coming 3 years to raise the number. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. McCAIN. It is my understanding that the amendment authorizes the additional forces Secretary Gates said yesterday in his speech that we need--or the day before yesterday. Why do we need to put this into the Mr. LIEBERMAN. Two reasons. The first is that it is a bit beyond what Secretary Gates did. He authorized using the extraordinary powers he possesses as Secretary in this time of conflict up to 22,000 for the next 3 years. The amendment authorizes--doesn't mandate, doesn't appropriate--30,000 for the next 3 years. So it gives some latitude, depending on how conditions go in Iraq and Afghanistan, to go a bit further--8,000 more, if necessary, over the next 3 years. Second, I say to my friend from Arizona, when this amendment started, we didn't know Secretary Gates was going to do this. I am grateful he did, but this amendment now--frankly, as Secretary Gates himself said to me yesterday, and I appreciate it and I don't think he would mind if I repeated it on the Senate floor--gives the Senate and Congress the opportunity to essentially vindicate and support the step that the Secretary has made and, as he put it, send a message from the Senate to the members of the U.S. Army that help is on the way. Mr. McCAIN. And there is no doubt that the Army very badly needs the Mr. LIEBERMAN. My friend from Arizona is absolutely right. There is no doubt, based on the demand, certainly temporarily, over the next 18 months, perhaps 2 years, as we are drawing down in Iraq, but not as rapidly as we are adding forces in Afghanistan, that there is at least a temporary need for more than the authorized 547,000 members of the Mr. McCAIN. And if I could question the Senator further, perhaps this would illuminate any requirement for stop loss or for involuntary Mr. LIEBERMAN. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons The decision to eliminate the routine use of ``stop loss'' authority in the Army requires a larger personnel flow for each deploying unit to compensate for those whose contract So, yes, this makes it possible to end the use of stop loss, which is essentially, in layman's terms, a way to require people to stay actively deployed longer than they originally were going to be Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. We have illuminated most of the reasons in our exchange why this amendment is important. I will simply add a few more things Secretary Gates said yesterday, which The army has reached a point of diminishing returns in their multiyear program to reduce the size of its training That is the training and support which supports the Active-Duty Army. The cumulative effect of these factors is that the Army faces a period where its ability to continue to deploy combat units at acceptable fill rates is at serious risk. Here is the point I just made in response to Senator McCain's Based on current deployment estimates, this is a temporary A temporary point of stress. We hope and pray that is true. It which will peak in the coming year and abate over the course Mr. President, in addition to the Secretary of Defense, we heard from the Army's Chief of Staff, GEN George Casey, and Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, who have been advocates within the Pentagon for this increase in end strength, and I thank them for that. Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told our Armed Services Committee earlier this year that the light at the end of the tunnel, as he put it, is still more than 2 years away, and that is only if everything goes according to plan, which in combat, obviously, often does not. Again, I say this is an authorization; it is not a mandate. I will add that Secretary Gates announced yesterday that he will find a way to fund the additional troops in this year and fiscal year 2010--the one that begins October 1--by reprogramming other funds appropriated to the Pentagon for fiscal year 2011, which is the budget that will be presented to us next year, if it is probable that the Department of Defense will require funding as part of its normal operations, and more likely as part of the OCO fund--the overseas contingency operation fund--which supports our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. I cannot say enough, I know all of us in the Senate believe we cannot say enough, in gratitude to the members of the U.S. Army who are leading the battle for us against the Islamic extremists and terrorists who attacked us on 9/11/01. We owe them a debt we can never fully One thing we can do, that Secretary Gates did yesterday and the Senate can do in this amendment, is to send a message to our troops in the field that help is on the way in the most consequential way, which I ask that when the vote be taken, it be taken by the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? Mr. LIEBERMAN. Again I say to my colleagues I am doing that, although I expect there will be very strong support for this, because I believe it is the most visible way for this Senate to send the message to the U.S. Army of appreciation and gratitude, to them and their families, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me commend Senator Lieberman and others who support this amendment. We in the Armed Services Committee are very supportive of previous increases; indeed, we led the way on some of them. Because of the stress on the Army and the number of commitments which had been made in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must give the kind of support to our troops they deserve and the American people want us to One of the ways we can reduce some of the stress is by increasing the end strength so the dwell time is more sufficient and there are other positive spinoffs as well from this kind of increase in the authorized The Secretary made a very powerful speech the other day when he called for an increase of 22,000, I believe, in the end strength. That end strength is temporary, it is almost as large as this--not quite; this is 30,000, but this is surely in the ballpark. It is appropriate. It is authority, it is not mandatory, and I think it is a very positive signal to send to our men and women in uniform and to their families. I The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, briefly I thank Senator Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, not just for his strong statement of support now but for the support he has given during our committee's deliberations to the goal of achieving an increase in Army Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Begich). Without objection, it is so Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am going to talk about an amendment we have not yet cleared unanimous consent for it to be brought up. I am hopeful that will come. But in order to advance the issue, I intend to talk about my amendment, No. 1475, without offering it at this time. I think it is an appropriate amendment to talk about at this point following Senator Lieberman's amendment because his amendment deals One of the reasons it is important to do that is the stress that the restricted numbers provide on our military personnel. Senator Lieberman mentioned, and I will repeat, the number of suicides and attempted suicides by our young men and women serving in the military has increased and one of the reasons, frankly, is that the repeated deployments and the length of the deployments have added to the stress Health experts agree that there is most likely a combination of factors leading to this increase in suicides. Many of these factors are simply the results of the prolonged conflict that our Nation finds itself in, including multiple deployments, extended separations from family and loved ones, and the overwhelming stress of combat experiences; each placing a unique and tremendous strain on the men and But while Congress has recognized these strains, and acted to help provide relief by increasing the size of our forces and thereby reducing the number and frequency of deployments, we cannot as easily remedy the stress or mental trauma created by combat experience. For those who have had to witness the ugliness and devastation of war first-hand, they have encountered something very unnatural for the human mind to comprehend or accept. For these service members, recovering from these experiences involves a long and arduous journey in learning to identify, control and cope with a wide array of emotions. And this learning process is often only accomplished with the guidance and management of highly trained mental or behavioral health In this light, we in Congress have acted to increase funding for more mental health providers and improved access for our troops and their families, and we have sharpened the focus of the military on addressing these care needs. That is very positive and has had a very positive What we must now focus on, and direct the military's attention to, is the potentially harmful practice of administering antidepressants to a population that frequently moves throughout a theater of war and is therefore susceptible to gaps in mental health management. We are not certain they are getting the follow-up care they need. A 2007 report by the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team survey of U.S. troops, about 12 percent of combat troops in Iraq, and 17 percent of combat troops in Afghanistan, are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope with this stress. This equates to roughly 20,000 troops on such medications in theatre What I find particularly troubling, when reviewing these figures, is that the Pentagon has yet to establish an official clearinghouse that accurately tracks this kind of data. In fact, the Army's best reported estimate can only tell us that the authorized or prescribed drug use by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is believed to be evenly split between antidepressants--mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs--and prescription sleeping pills. My amendment would provide us with the information so we know what is happening with the use of these Providing that this best estimate contains some degree of accuracy, it is important for us to also recognize that many of these same antidepressants, after strong urging by the FDA, recently expanded their warning labels to state that young adults--ages 18-24 years old-- may be at an elevated risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior while using the medication. This same age group--18-24 years old--represents 41 percent of our military forces serving on the front lines in Iraq While keeping this warning label in mind, it is imperative that my colleagues understand that nearly 40 percent of Army suicide victims in 2006 and 2007 are believed to have taken some type of antidepressant drugs--and overwhelmingly these SSRIs. And as I mentioned at the beginning of this statement, the number of Army suicides reported each This class of antidepressants--these SSRIs--are unlike most earlier classes of psychiatric medications in that they were, from their inception, specifically designed for use as an antidepressant --that is, they were engineered to target a particular process in the brain that plays a significant role in depression and other anxiety disorders. More significantly, however, these SSRIs are unlike most other antidepressant medications because they are still allowed by Department of Defense policy to be prescribed to service members while they are deployed and directly engaged in overseas operations. Now, to be fair, there is widespread consensus in the community of professional mental health providers, and empirical evidence to support, that SSRIs do offer significant benefit for the treatment of posttraumatic stress and some forms of depression. And although there are some side effects, they are reportedly much milder and shorter in duration than other antidepressants. Additionally, SSRIs are also believed to potentially prevent, or at least some believe, lesson the more harmful long-term effects of posttraumatic stress disorder. My concern, however, and hopefully that of my Senate colleagues, is not the long-term efficacy of these SSRIs, but more pointedly the volume and manner in which these drugs are being administered to our You see, unlike medications that work on an as-needed basis, SSRIs only begin to work after having been taken every day--at a specific dosage--for a significant period of time. This frequently translates to a 3 to 6 week latency period before the therapeutic effect materializes and patients begin to feel improvement. In light of the population I have been discussing, there are two very readily apparent problems with this shortcoming--first, is that service members serving in forward operating areas, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, are quite frequently subject to moving between bases or into other areas--some so remote that there may be no trained mental health provider available to administer the treatment and to make sure it is effective. Second, and more importantly, is that this initial period is when patients, particularly younger patients, often suffer an escalation in In essence, DOD may be prescribing SSRIs to its service members, without the assurance that they will remain in a capacity to be observed by a highly trained mental health provider. Worse yet, these same patients may very likely find themselves ordered off to conduct combat operations during this same latency period. Let's return our focus back to the alarming increase in the number of military and veteran suicides reported in 2008 and 2009. At what point do we step forward to direct that action be taken by DOD to capture, track and report this data? And at what point do we ensure that DOD is properly prescribing, dispensing and administering these drugs to our troops without having in place the necessary As a first step in this direction, the amendment I intend to introduce will accomplish a better understanding as to the potential magnitude of this issue. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to capture, at a macro level--at a macro level, not individual information, without divulging or violating any protected patient health information--the volume and types of antidepressants, psychotropics or antianxiety drugs being prescribed to our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will also require DOD, beginning in June of 2010 and then annually thereafter through 2015, to report to Congress an accurate percentage of those troops currently and previously deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan since 2005 who have been I wish to reiterate that this measure specifically directs the disclosure of this information by DOD to be done in such a way as to not violate the individual patient privacy rights of our service men or This legislation further directs DOD to contact the National Institute of Mental Health and provide any and all data as determined necessary by the Institute to conduct a scientific peer reviewable study to determine whether these types of prescriptions, and/or the method in which they are being prescribed and administered by DOD, are in any way contributing to the rising number of suicides by I want to specifically address one issue I have heard from some who express concern about this amendment by saying it would stigmatize, in the eyes of our troops, those seeking mental health care. Nothing could be further from what this amendment does. This amendment would collect information in an anonymous manner, and it will be invisible to the The men and women serving in our military, and equally so their families, deserve our utmost assurance that we are doing everything in our power to see that our Nation's warfighters are provided the best medical care available. An integral part of our commitment must also be to ensure that these service men and women volunteering to serve our Nation are not being exposed to what may potentially endanger them when This amendment is very simple. It asks us to gather information so we can make a judgment in a macro sense, without violating the individual privacy of our service men and women. It allows us to gather the information, to have the best information. This Congress has a proud record of providing the necessary resources for the health care of our This amendment will complement that by making sure that we have the analytical tools to make sure we are providing the right type of mental health services to our service men and women who are in theater. It gets us the information in order to judge what is being done today. I would hope my colleagues would agree that we would want to have this information, and I hope at a later time I will have the Mr. LEVIN. First of all, let me commend the Senator from Maryland on his amendment. I support it. I hope it can be cleared or placed in order so that we can adopt it on a rollcall if it cannot be cleared. I ask unanimous consent that we now proceed to a vote on the Lieberman amendment, a rollcall vote on the Lieberman amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter), and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb) are necessarily absent. Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 93, nays 1, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Leahy be added as a cosponsor on the amendment which we just adopted, the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as ranking member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise in support of this vital amendment in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's, SBA, small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the programs, this amendment will create a more equitable and flexible method for Federal agencies to fairly allocate Federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the Nation. Earlier this year, I offered an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. Unfortunately, that amendment was not accepted. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, is the true order of preference when determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone--HUBZone--program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted amendment provides equity for the The amendment provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This amendment makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, service- disabled veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. And of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this amendment brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the amendment authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled veteran and women-owned firms. The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to support the section 1072 of S. 1390, National Defense Authorization Act of 2010. This section authorizes the Comptroller General of the United States to assess As everyone knows, I strongly believe whistleblowers play an important role in the accountability of all government. This should also be true for the men and women who wear uniforms and serve in the In 1988, Congress passed legislation that gave members of the armed services unique whistleblower protections. Despite this military whistleblower law, I have concerns that military whistleblowers could be underserved by the regulations and processes created by the Department of Defense, DOD, and the DOD, Office of Inspector General, During the course of my own investigation of several military whistleblower cases, I learned some matters which may question how effectively military whistleblower reprisal cases are handled by the DOD and DOD OIG. The Government Accountability Office, GAO, has noted in its past work that the effectiveness of the Federal protection for military whistleblowers rests principally on a two-stage process of investigation and administrative review. The first stage involves a DOD, service, or guard inspector general's investigation of the specific facts and interpretation of issues associated with a whistleblower reprisal allegation. In the second stage of the investigation/administrative review process, the DOD OIG reviews and approves the findings of the service or guard inspectors general. This review is designed to provide assurance that the findings and recommendations in a report were made in compliance with applicable investigatory guidelines and meet legal sufficiency. The second stage of this procedure is crucial for the military whistleblower process to In addition to the tasking included in S. 1390, the military whistleblower reprisal appeal process should be examined by the GAO as whistleblower law, 10 USC Sec. 1034, gives the Boards for the Correction of Military Records--BCMR--of each armed service the appeal authority in these often unique and complex matters. I believe the report requested by the underlying bill is important and I support its inclusion. However, it is important for the GAO to also study the effectiveness of the BCMR appeal process to ensure military whistleblowers are afforded a fair administrative process to combat Last year, I first introduced the idea of a GAO military whistleblower study when I requested this work of the Acting Comptroller General Gene L. Dodaro in a letter dated July 18, 2008. I followed up on my letter to the GAO with a legislative proposal through a filed amendment to the Defense Department appropriations bill for 2009 which instructed the GAO to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this issue. Unfortunately, that amendment did not make it through the legislative process. I thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member McCain for including this sensible military whistleblower study in the current Accordingly, I offer this latest amendment to include a review and analysis of the military whistleblower reprisal appeals heard by the Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 authorizes almost $680 billion for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. The bill provides pay and health care to servicemembers and their families; funds troops with the equipment and resources they need to fight and provide security; strengthens our ability to train foreign militaries and protect against IEDs and rogue nuclear threats; and It also includes legislation to complete the James A. Lovell Federal It gives the VA and the Navy the authority they need to finalize a model partnership between the North Chicago VA Medical Center and the This is a model that the Departments hope can be replicated around Combining separate Federal hospitals will provide better care for our servicemembers and veterans while saving valuable taxpayer dollars. Given the conflicts we face abroad, this bill provides the right amount to spend in support of our troops. Today, the United States is the world's leader in defense spending. Last year, U.S. military spending accounted for almost half of the world's total military spending. We spend more than the next 46 countries combined. U.S. military spending, combined with that of our close allies, makes up 72 percent of all military spending in the world. Our defense budget is six times larger than China's and 100 times larger than Iran's. These funds make good on a promise to our men and women in our military. Our troops continue to do everything we ask of them in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These conflicts have taken an extraordinary toll on servicemembers and their families that we cannot The Armed Forces, particularly the Army and the Marine Corps, will continue to be heavily stressed, even as we start to redeploy our forces from Iraq. Servicemembers still do not have enough dwell time between deployments and the Army has seen a troubling rise in the number of suicides. These are indications of the strain that multiple and continued deployments are taking on the force. The President requested increasing the size of the Army to 547,400 soldiers and increasing the Marine Corps to 202,100 Marines, while preventing cuts in Navy and Air Force personnel. This bill supports the President's request. It also authorizes an additional 30,000 soldiers in 2011 and 2012, should the Secretary of Defense believe such troops are necessary. Additional soldiers and marines will help ease the burdens More personnel will give each service more breathing room to care for its wounded warriors. Others can continue the fight while injured and ill servicemembers can recover in wounded transition units. This legislation creates a task force to assess the policies and programs that support the care and transition of recovering wounded and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. The task force will consider whether servicemembers have sufficient access to care for posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, the signature injury of the wars. It will look at how well we help injured warriors transition from the Department of Defense to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The task force will also review the support available to family caregivers as they care for recovering injured and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. For every servicemember successfully recovering from a serious injury or illness, there is often a family member who has put the brakes on his or her life to care for that Last week, my office received a call from the family of Jordan Hoyt, a soldier from Barry, IL. He was seriously injured in Afghanistan and is receiving care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center here in Washington. His wife Haley has moved to Washington to be near Jordan while he goes through months of surgery and rehabilitation. She has brought with her their infant child, who was born while Jordan was away serving his country. Haley is from Quincy. She has left her family behind to help Jordan recover from his injury. She has also delayed her educational plans to study criminal justice. Haley is 19 years old. After Jordan leaves Walter Reed, the couple will return to Quincy to live with her mother, who has already provided them with incredible support. While taking care of wounded servicemembers is our basic responsibility, we also need to support the families whose lives have been up-ended by the wars. I commend the committee for including this task force to look at the needs of family caregivers. This President inherited many challenges at home and abroad, including two wars and a challenging situation in Pakistan. This bill supports President Obama's new direction in addressing these priorities. In June, our military redeployed from Iraq's cities under the Status of Forces Agreement concluded by the government of Iraq and the previous administration. The Iraqis must continue to take I commend the President's increased focus on defense and development in Afghanistan; preventing the reemergence of the Taliban and al-Qaida; and strengthening economic, agricultural, educational, and democratic development. These goals are important to development in Afghanistan, but they are essential to our military's strategy. I support the National Defense Authorization Act and commend Chairman Levin and Almost 3,000 soldiers from the Illinois Army National Guard are currently deployed to Afghanistan. Members of the Illinois Guard's 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team are helping train the Afghan National Police and providing force protection at military bases. It has been a difficult deployment, with many casualties. Gen William Enyart, the Adjutant General of Illinois, has had to attend the funerals of too many of his soldiers. He sent me an article he had written this spring. Why do the young soldiers serve, he asked? This is what he wrote. They They are our kids, they are our protectors. They are what stand between us and chaos. They don't have to be asked to serve. They don't have to be asked to go into danger. They do it, not out of hate, not out of vengeance, but out of love. Love of family, love of community, love of fellow soldier. I think he is right. Members of the Armed Forces and their families make these sacrifices to keep our country safe. We owe them much in return. This bill takes one step by providing them the resources they need. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and to send it to Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senator Hatch to be recognized for 15 minutes, then Senator Murray for 8 minutes, then Senator Burris for 6 minutes, and Senator Brown for 10 minutes. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, there will be, then, no more amendments we will be able to take up tonight on the Defense authorization bill. We Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to express my concerns about the administration's failure to make the deadline of issuing a report on the Guantanamo detainee policy. Today's deadline, similar to the January 2010 closure deadline, was self-imposed. It concerns me that the administration maintains that closure will occur even though the execution of this process has been less than stellar. In January, on his very first full day in office, President Obama signed the order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in 12 months. The President created separate task forces to examine closure and detainee issues. These task forces were developed and staffed by the Obama administration to achieve successful closure in 1 year. The product of this review is to include a report on a broader detainee Today marks the first deadline in this process. It was set to be the date of release and publication of the task force report on a broader detainee policy going forward. The administration's failure to meet the deadline appears to me to be the ``canary in the coal mine'' that a January closure of Guantanamo without a detailed plan is an exercise in Yet the White House downplays the missed deadline and publicly states that the January closure is still on track. Is it? Despite not having a plan and missing a deadline for a key integral part of the closure process, the administration claims it can still meet the overall deadline of closure by January 1. I find that notion suspect at best In May, a Gallup Poll indicated that 65 percent--65 percent--of Americans oppose the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. Even so, the administration intends to follow its timeline and close Guantanamo by January 2010. The task force examining the cases of the remaining 229 detainees has only reviewed half the necessary caseload The Justice Department hopes to complete its review by an October reporting deadline, but that benchmark is quickly slipping away too. This review process has taken twice the amount of time the administration thought it would take. Yet keeping Guantanamo open beyond January is inexplicably still not an option in the Recently, media reports are circulating that the administration's Guantanamo closure plan has been fraught with political miscalculation and internal dissension. Moreover, the complex nature of this issue will undoubtedly force the transfer of detainees inside the United States. Since the announcement of the President's intention to close Guantanamo, I have joined other Senators in pointing out the lack of planning and clear miscalculation of this decision. That pool has grown and a groundswell of bipartisan support is signaling the White House to In May, the Senate voted 90 to 6 to strip out funding in the fiscal year 2010 war spending request that would authorize $80 million for the transfer of detainees to the interior of the United States of America. Now that the failure to meet this deadline has been reported by outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and New York Times, the administration still does not get it. Senior administration officials are letting hubris get in the way. This is neither the proper There should have been more study of this issue prior to setting us on a course for closure. It is easy to say that Guantanamo can be closed when you are a candidate for President. It is even easier to sign an order on your very first full day in office as President that says in 12 months Guantanamo will close. What is hard is taking a deliberative, methodical approach and then formulating the proper plan to balance the safety of this country with the needs of lawful detention. Had the administration conducted a careful and thorough review of this issue, the conclusion would have been that Guantanamo fulfills both requirements. Instead, the administration has painted Clearly, the administration miscalculated and underestimated the depth and breadth of this issue. From the onset, the administration has tried to reverse-engineer the process for closing Guantanamo--starting from the end and working backward. If changes are not made immediately, administration officials will force this issue on American cities and towns in just 185 days. They will limp across the finish line. We have 185 days until Guantanamo is closed. The days until the plan is released ARE a big question mark. They are going to limp across the finish line on January 22, 2010, and herald their accomplishments a victory despite its ill-conceived planning and Three Stooges-like Guantanamo is still an asset to this country. It complies with international treaties and exceeds the standards of domestic corrections facilities. I don't see how anyone who is honest about this matter can characterize it in any other way, especially when there is not a sufficient replacement located domestically to meet the Justice Department's needs. It is my fervent hope that the President and Attorney General will reconsider their ill-considered plan to close Guantanamo and recognize the obvious, that a $200 million facility that is already operational and in compliance with international treaties This is an important issue. I don't think the American people are going to stand to have these very dangerous people brought on shore to our country when we have a $200 million facility that meets international treaty obligations sitting there doing the job. I think the administration needs to get this work done and needs to get it done The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, 3 weeks ago I sent a letter to families across my home State of Washington asking for their help as we reform our broken health care system. I told them I wanted to pass a plan that protects existing coverage when it is good, improves it when it is not, and guarantees care for the millions who have none. I asked them to share their stories with me and ideas about how to make this vision a reality. I told them that I know health care is a very personal issue, but also that personal stories have the power to change minds and transform debates. The response to my request has been simply I wish to share some of the stories that have been pouring into my office--over 5,000 so far--because they underscore not only the desperate need to fix our broken health care system but also the dire For too many families today, health care reform can't wait. I wish to share a story from a letter I received from Rita from Seattle who sent me a story about her sister Janet. Janet was unemployed and had lost her health insurance when her throat began to hurt one day back in 2004. She paid out of her own pocket to visit a health clinic and was sent home with antibiotics. Well, weeks later, she was still in a lot of pain and finally managed to get an appointment with a specialist, to come in to get help. Only after begging them for an appointment was she seen by the specialist 3 days later and was told that the pain she had been living with was in the late stages of an aggressive form of throat cancer. Janet died not long after that. It was a death that would have been prevented had she been able to see a specialist Janet is not alone. A woman by the name of Kathleen from Puyallup, WA, sent in a story about her friend Kelly. Kelly had just been laid off from work when she came down with what she thought was the flu. She didn't have any health insurance because she had been laid off from her job and she couldn't afford to go to the doctor, so she waited. Two weeks later she felt even worse, so she finally made an appointment to go in for a checkup. Kelly never made it to the doctor. Her 7-year-old son found her dead on the couch on the morning she was supposed to go in. She died from an untreated ovarian cyst. Because Kelly didn't have health insurance, that little boy no longer has a mother. I think the fact that these stories are possible in the greatest and richest country in the world is simply shameful. No son should lose a mother simply because she can't afford care. No family should have to watch a loved one suffer because insurance companies instead of doctors are making the decisions. That is why we so badly need to reform our Our country has been working on this issue for over 60 years and we have spent months and months this session alone working to put together a reform package that works for all Americans. We have had over 6 months of hearings. We went through over 50 hours of public markups. We debated over 200 amendments. So when I hear some of my colleagues from across the aisle saying we should slow down, saying we should take more time, or that we are trying to reform health care too fast, and when I see some of them shrugging off every attempt we have made at engaging them and bringing them into the process, I think of Kelly and I think of Janet and I think of all of the families out there right now with sick husbands or sick wives or sick kids. I think of all the small business owners I have talked to who can't cover their employees. I think of the people who have coverage, but are worried about losing it today in this uncertain economy. I think about all the working Americans who are paying a hidden tax today in the form of rising premiums in order to cover those Americans who don't have access to care. As a mother and as a Senator, I say enough is enough. Yesterday we heard some pretty ugly and blatant rhetoric. One Member of the Senate who wants to protect the status quo, who doesn't want to make any changes, said: ``If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will That is playing games with real lives in order to score cheap political points. Bucking health care reform isn't going to break the President of the United States. It will break American families. It will break American businesses. It is going to break the bank. Americans deserve better. The families of Janet and Kelly and the thousands of others who have written me deserve better. We can't play politics with what is most important to our Nation's families--the They say justice delayed is justice denied. Well, health care delayed is often health care denied. It was denied to Kelly, it was denied to Janet, and it gets denied to more Americans every single day we wait. I call on all of our colleagues here in the Senate to work with us to rise above partisanship. We have a good plan right now. We are working to listen and bring everybody in and make it better. It will rein in the costs with the goal of lowering them across the long term. It will make sure all Americans have high quality, affordable coverage. This issue is not going to go away if we don't do anything. It is not going to get better or easier if we wait. In fact, today, costs are rising at an unsustainable rate for those who do have insurance and more and more Americans are losing their insurance every day. We have been talking about reforming the health care system for a very long time. I go home to my home State of Washington every weekend, and I am asked often now if it is the right time to tackle health care reform. In these difficult and challenging economic times when people are worried about paying their bills, worried about losing their jobs, worried about what is coming around the corner, they ask me if we are biting off more than we can chew. I tell them: This is exactly the time we need to act. Premiums are rising three times faster than wages today. Every day, 14,000 more Americans lose their health insurance. In these already difficult times, I don't want to add losing health insurance to the list of concerns our families have to deal with every We know the current system is unsustainable. Even those people with good coverage today are faced with massive costs and rising premiums. That is why tackling this problem now has to be part of our long-term Without health care reform, family budgets are going to continue to be strapped, more Americans are going to lose their care, and we are going to hear more stories like Janet and Kelly. I hope we can put aside the partisan rhetoric, I hope we can put aside the talk of: Slow this down; it is too fast. This issue is imperative, and I urge my Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity. This legislation ignores the explosion of gun crime plaguing America's cities and putting an unnecessary burden on local In my home State of Illinois, an entire generation of young people, many of whom live in urban areas, is being decimated with gun violence. On May 10 of 2007, a 16-year-old honor student named Blair Holt was shot to death while riding a Chicago city bus. When the shooter opened fire, Blair was shot while protecting a young girl with whom he was riding. The shooter was also a 16-year-old boy and an admitted member of the Gangster Disciples national street gang. Just the other day, justice was presented to him when he was given 100 years in prison by Similar tragic stories have only grown more frequent. In the first 6 months of 2009, Chicago alone logged 202 homicides, 84 percent of whom were shot to death. In comparison, in the same period of time, we lost The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Hundreds of Chicago public school students have been shot so far this year. By the end of the school year in June, at least 36 had died. Over the Fourth of July weekend, while most of us celebrated our Nation's independence, Chicago suffered through an almost unparalleled torrent of gun violence: 63 shootings were tallied, and 11 of them were The carnage on Independence Day weekend led the Chicago Tribune to demand on July 10: ``Where is our courage? Where is the indignation This is far too high a price to pay for inaction. I will say it again: The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Students deserve better than being gunned down in the streets after school and parents deserve better than having to raise families in the midst of a bloodbath. We must work vigorously to combat the rampant gun As a registered gun owner myself, I respect the second amendment and responsible gun ownership. However, I am deeply concerned about the devastating consequences of guns falling into the wrong hands. To this end, I strongly believe we should keep firearms out of the hands of children, terrorists, and criminals, and in solving this problem we need to provide local law enforcement officials with Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and States and not the Federal Government. It is our job as Federal legislators to enact measures that strengthen States' law enforcement efforts instead of arbitrarily increasing their burden. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggles with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug dealers in big I am not alone in my opposition to the Thune amendment. I join the International Association of Chiefs of Police and State lawmakers around the country in recognizing that this legislation would severely hamper efforts to combat gun crime in our Nation's urban areas. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have 2 letters from the the mayor of the city of Chicago, Mayor Daley, and the Major Cities Chiefs There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Burris: I am writing to express the City of Chicago's strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity, and to urge you to vote against this amendment as part of the National Defense Although the State of Illinois would not be affected directly by its passage, this amendment runs the possible risk of reinforcing current movements in the Illinois legislature to pass concealed-carry laws, which would greatly set back Chicago's efforts to curtail gun violence. Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and states, and not the Federal government. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggle with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug Pasasge of this amendment would limit the ability of states and local governments to protect their citizens with common- sense and community-specific laws and regulations regarding the carrying of hidden handguns. It would promote gun trafficking by making it easier to transport firearms between states without the fear of being apprehended by law enforcement. The bill would also endanger the safety of our police officers by making it more difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal gun possession--ambiguity that The City of Chicago continues to do all it can to protect our communities from the gun violence of gangs and drug dealers. It is a tireless effort that requires the involvement of the community members, the hard work of local law enforcement and sensible policy decisions made at all levels of government. The Thune amendment would serve as an obstacle to these efforts, and that is why I strongly urge you to oppose this potentially debilitating legislation. Majority Leader, Hart Office Bldg., U.S. Senate, Washington, Speaker, Cannon Office Bldg., House of Representatives, Dear Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi: On behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs, I am writing to express our strong opposition to S. 845 and H.R. 1620, the Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009. Because we are responsible for public safety in the largest jurisdictions in the United States, we recognize that this This misguided legislation would undermine efforts by law enforcement agencies across the Nation and thwart measures already enacted by the states. Please know that we stand with the more than 400 Mayors who have objected to this ill- An oversimplification of carefully reasoned standards and licensing provisions, the proposed measure would arbitrarily overturn laws which have been tailored to the needs of regions and local communities. Passage of this legislation would be an affront to Federalism as it would force a state to accept permits from other jurisdictions--whether or not We are confident that members of Congress will respect the authority of states, counties and cities to adopt their own regulations regarding weapons and will not act with disregard for the many reasonable and prudent laws already in place Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs call upon you to vote against Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, as I said earlier, cities in every State face unique challenges that require tailored solutions. This is never truer than with the issue of gun control. It is imperative that States set their own standards for concealed carry permits and are not obligated to honor permits awarded elsewhere with different, potentially less rigorous requirements. We must not tie the hands of State governments regarding their ability to protect and serve their I think that this legislation moves our national gun policy in the wrong direction. In their assessment of the recent gun violence, the Tribune opined that ``The tragic loss of brave soldiers killed overseas grabs media headlines and fuels the raging fires of political debate. Meanwhile, in another war right here in our own backyard, the killings We cannot ignore this horrific situation any longer. We must not be conned into believing that easier access to firearms will reduce firearm deaths. Rather than making it easier for people to bring concealed weapons into other States, I hope my colleagues will get serious about addressing the urgent problem of gun crime in our cities I urge my fellow Senators to not only vote against this amendment but to join me in working towards a real solution for this senseless cycle The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to congratulate the community and business leaders of Youngstown, OH, for showing the rest of the Nation what so many of us in Ohio already know: Youngstown is one of the I have held some 140 community roundtables across Ohio's 88 counties at least once since I have been in the Senate, where I have met with educators, students, community and business leaders, and entrepreneurs I have held a half dozen roundtables in the Mahoning Valley, including two in Youngstown, and have traveled across towns along the From the autoworker in Lordstown to the electrician in Warren, to the technology entrepreneur in Youngstown, to the small business owner in Salem, I am impressed by their unwavering commitment to rebuilding this Youngstown remains a great city in the face of many challenges, and its dedicated and talented workforce is driving today's innovation and Each time I visit Youngstown, I learn something new--from Mayor Williams, the fine, aggressive, very bright, young mayor of Youngstown, to Chamber of Commerce leader Tom Humphries, to dozens of teachers, It is easy to see why Entrepreneur Magazine lists Youngstown as one of the top 10 U.S. cities to start a business. On the cover it says: In their August issue, Entrepreneur Magazine describes Youngstown as a ``dreamer,'' where technology innovation is driving job growth and Bold plans and visionary leadership have set the stage for sustained economic growth. Youngstown's healthy dose of all-American grit and hard work will turn economic potential into economic reality, driving regional economic expansion that can strengthen Ohio's middle class. It takes what Entrepreneur Magazine called a ``concept revolutionary enough to help ignite a renaissance in this small city.'' It takes a community that understands a transformation must take place from within--from the educators to innovators, from community activists to the industry leaders. Faced with a choice, it takes the foresight to invest in the future and not dwell on the sometimes Today, we are seeing the results of a decade-long process of renewal and rebirth for Youngstown, in Warren, and the entire Mahoning Valley. More than a year ago, I made my first trip to the Youngstown Business Incubator, which is an example of community and business leaders nurturing startup companies that can strengthen the regional economy. Nurtured in the Youngstown Business Incubator in 2002, Turning Technologies, for example, has become one of the fastest growing technology companies in the Nation, according to Entrepreneur Magazine. This is no accident. Mike Broderick, from Turning Technologies, and other emerging businesses, say they have relied on the affordable startup costs, accessible resources, the transportation network that criss-crosses western Pennsylvania and Ohio, and the community An important part of Youngstown's favorable business climate is access to talented workers and students. Kent State's Trumbull campus is a model for workforce training among Ohio's colleges and universities. Their educators are training a legion of highly skilled But more must be done to close the gap between high unemployment in that part of Ohio. My whole State is still afflicted by high unemployment and this terrible recession. More must be done to close the gap between the high unemployment and the shortage of skilled Congressman Tim Ryan, with whom the Presiding Officer and I both served in the House of Representatives, and who represents Youngstown in the House, and I recently introduced the Strengthening Employment Clusters to Organize Regional Success, or SECTORS Act. SECTORS would help allow businesses, workforce development boards, labor unions, and community colleges to connect skilled workers with workforce and community needs. We will see that with Youngstown State University in Youngstown, and with the Trumbull County branch of Kent SECTORS is not only a jobs skill bill, but an economic development bill. It is only one part of the citywide strategy to harness the Youngstown State University is training engineers and contributing to workforce needs of an emerging advanced materials sector, involving advanced chemical and composite engineering and nanotechnology. I have seen some of this technology in the Mahoning Valley, and it is ready to YSU's science, technology, engineering, and math program, or STEM, teaches students the critical skills in the fields of advanced sciences, information technology, and engineering. If our students succeed in the 21st century global economy, we must invest in our young people, who will create the businesses and We must also ensure that our communities are part of economic revival I met with the Mahoning Valley Organizing Collaborative at one of my roundtables. We sat for an hour and a half in the basement of a church, with 15 community activists, who have a focus you wouldn't believe. This is a collective effort of neighborhood groups, churches, and labor unions. It is another example of citizens taking ownership of their community. It is revitalizing neighborhoods, surveying land to determine future economic use, and cleaning up crime-ridden neighborhoods. Ordinary citizens are organizing to make a difference, Yet another example of strategic economic development is the Youngstown 2010 Citywide Plan, which aims to revitalize the city of Youngstown with carefully planned economic development and urban As Ohio cities experience population loss, Youngstown's efforts to modernize infrastructure to serve current population needs is a All of these efforts are part of a collective strategy by workers, entrepreneurs, educators, and elected officials to tap into the region's rich resources and innovative spirit. That is why Entrepreneur Magazine wrote about Youngstown, calling it the ``dreamer.'' Out of these 10 cities, the other 9 are significantly larger than Youngstown, but none could equal Youngstown in hope, focus, and energy. In the last decade, something special happened in this northeast Ohio city. A new generation is envisioning things we wouldn't have talked about 10 years ago. ``Let's clean the slate and start over again'' is the radical transformation I believe in most places we wouldn't have been able to expand with the speed we did. The affordability here really helped fuel our growth. I found Youngstown to be a brilliant It has been my pleasure to work with Congressman Ryan, Mayor Williams, the Youngstown Business Incubator, Turning Technologies, and all of the community activists who are working hard to create new opportunities for a better and stronger Youngstown. Ohio's dedicated workforce and hard-working community leaders are leading examples of how we can turn around our economy, create new jobs, and how we can, across my State, and across the Mahoning Valley in Ohio, and across this country, rebuild our middle class. Mr. President, before yielding the floor, I add that all of us who do this work and are, frankly, blessed enough to get to serve in the Senate spend much of our time away from home or our families are back, in my case, in Ohio, or in Washington. Either way, we are away from families more than we would like. I would like to, because today is my wife's birthday, wish her a happy birthday, if she is home watching this. If she is not, I will tell her later. I could not be with her today in Ohio. I look forward to coming home this weekend. Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today with sadness to honor the life of Mr. Mason Rudd, a good friend who died on July 5, 2009, at the age of 90. He was loved by many in my hometown of Louisville, KY, and Mason will be remembered as an entrepreneur, philanthropist, and family man who did so much to make his adopted hometown a better place. His American dream began at the University of Minnesota, where he funded his college education with help from a tennis scholarship, participation in ROTC, and by selling doughnuts. In 1939, he graduated with a degree in geology and petroleum engineering. After college, his service in World War II led him to believe that he survived the war for one reason--to help others achieve and live better lives. And this he Mr. Rudd spent a few years working as an engineer for Shell Oil and then selling fire engines in Iowa until 1952 when he moved to Louisville. There he established Rudd Equipment Company, which distributed heavy construction equipment. The company he built brought him a large fortune which would serve him well when he undertook his Mason grew to love the city and especially the local university--the University of Louisville. He contributed $1.4 million to the creation of a neurology professorship at the University of Louisville after his first wife Mary suffered a fatal stroke. His help facilitated the $3.6 million Bass-Rudd Tennis Center at the University of Louisville as well as the endowment for the Rudd Program for Young Artists at the Kentucky However, more important than the money, Mr. Rudd contributed invaluable time and effort to the causes of health care and education. Thirty years ago, this passion was clear to me when I served as Jefferson County's judge-executive and it was my responsibility to appoint someone to the county's board of health. I reappointed him to the board, just as those serving before me had and those after me did. While serving on this board as well as in leadership positions at Louisville General Hospitals and Louisville's Jewish Hospital, his efforts provided everyone in the city with a healthier, safer life. His fellow members credit him with creating lead poisoning education programs, a hazardous-materials task force in the health department, a mandate on sewage treatment, and primary care clinics for the His efforts also extended to helping the Louisville Free Library Foundation during his 16 years on the board there. Because of him the library's book endowment is stronger and the children's reading program continues to grow. Most notably, in the year 2000 library fundraising efforts under his leadership made it possible to purchase computers for Mr. Rudd leaves behind his wife Peggy: his daughter Betsy; and his son Michael. The life he led in his 90 years stands out as an example of service to his community and country which all Americans should Command Master Chief Petty Officer Jeffrey James Garber Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Navy Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber who passed away aboard the Originally from Hemingford, NE, Master Chief Garber enlisted in the Navy in December 1983. His career was an impressive one. At sea his assignments included time aboard the USS Worden, USS Nimitz, USS Portland, and Strike Fighter Squadron 34; and he had been assigned to the USS Eisenhower since June 2008. The Eisenhower is currently operating in the Arabian Sea in support of Operation Enduring Freedom Master Chief Garber's military awards include the Meritorious Service Medal: Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal; Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal, six; Meritorious Unit Commendation; Good Conduct Medal, five; Navy Expeditionary Medal; National Defense Service Medal, two; Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal, two; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, six; And Navy Recruiting Service On June 20, Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber was found unresponsive in a berthing space aboard the carrier, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. When he was found unresponsive in his stateroom at approximately 8:15 a.m. local time, a medical emergency was declared; and medical personnel were on the scene within minutes. Sadly, all efforts to revive him were unsuccessful, and Master Chief Garber was pronounced dead of natural causes at 8:23 a.m. He was 43 years old. Command Master Chief Garber has been posthumously awarded the Legion of Merit medal, recognizing his accomplishments as Command Master Chief Command Master Chief Garber leaves behind his wife Amy, (Vogt) Garber, and his three children, Tayler, Paige and Josh, all of Virginia Beach; his parents Larry and JoAnn Kuester of York, NE; and his brothers Joel and Jon. Throughout his career, those who knew him, admired Master Chief Garber's professionalism, but also, genuinely liked him. He will forever be remembered by his family and friends as not only the epitome of what a command master chief should be, but primarily a loving husband, father, and son. I join all Nebraskans today in mourning the loss of Command Master Chief Garber and offering Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 23-26, the residents of Northwood will gather to celebrate their Founded in 1884, Northwood is located in Northeastern ND, and was named after Northwood, IA, a common starting point for pioneers settling in the Dakota Territory. In its early years, the town grew rapidly, and continued to expand over the next century. It was honored in 1993 by the North Dakota League of Cities as City of the Year. In 2007, Northwood was devastated by an EF4 tornado. Not a single building was left untouched by this monstrous storm that wreaked havoc on everything in its path. Homes and businesses were destroyed, yet amidst all of the destruction, this community banded together, and with the assistance of the federal government, it has successfully rebuilt. Today, Northwood is a friendly and welcoming community that includes a nine-hole golf course, a swimming pool, a strong business community, and a high quality education system. Additionally, the town remains true to its agricultural roots through its farming population. The central point of Northwood's 125th anniversary celebration will be the dedication of the new Northwood Public School and the Veteran's Memorial. Other activities, to name a few, include a community picnic, a tractor pull, a teen dance, karaoke, a 5K walk and run, a craft show, a kiddie parade, and a 3-on-3 basketball tournament. I ask the Senate to join me in congratulating Northwood, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Northwood and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Northwood that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine Mr. JOHANNS. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a leader in In February of 2007, Abigail Kimbell became the 16th Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. She was the first female in this role, a job she held until July 5, 2009. During those 2\\1/2\\ years, she served with distinction and accomplished much for the forests, grasslands, and Gail is credited with renewing the emphasis behind the Forest Service's mission of ``Caring for the Land and Serving People'' and reconnecting programs and functions to that mission. She improved firefighter safety and fire suppression cost containment. Gail showed great vision and leadership, pressing the agency to continually strive to meet a standard of excellence in its operations, both internally and Gail emphasized the importance of quality water to the environment and our communities. She directed the agency's investment in the education of children and youth, particularly those in underrepresented communities, to enhance their connection to the natural world. Gail's numerous and significant contributions span more than three decades of public service. As a Forest Supervisor, she focused on community collaboration to build understanding and support for an economically and environmentally viable long-term timber sale program in Alaska. She also made bold land management decisions to ensure forests remained healthy by reducing hazardous fuels. As associate deputy chief for the national forest system, Gail was central to the development of the Healthy Forests Initiative, including the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. She also worked to improve As regional forester in the northern region, she oversaw the development and implementation of community wildfire protection plans in Idaho, Montana, and North Dakota. She also played a leading role in the development of plans to delist the grizzly bear in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. Gail pioneered the implementation of improved forest planning with unprecedented public collaboration and ownership. On July 31, 2009, Gail Kimbell will be retiring from the Forest Service with 35-plus years of service to that agency and our country. Her dedication to the Forest Service mission ``to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations'' will be forever At 2:56 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has passed the following bill, in which it requests the concurrence of the conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American At 4:35 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has agreed to the following concurrent resolution, in which it requests the H. Con. Res. 164. Concurrent resolution recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as EC-2352. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (6) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2353. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (10) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of brigadier general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2354. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (7) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2355. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Federal Acquistion Regulation Supplement; Restriction on Acquisition of Specialty Metals'' ((RIN0750- AF95) (DFARS Case 2008-D003)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 16, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2356. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Requirements Applicable to Undefinitized Contract Actions'' ((RIN0750- AG29) (DFARS Case 2008-D029)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 17, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2357. A communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, a six-month periodic report on the national emergency that was declared in Executive Order 13441 with respect to Lebanon; to the EC-2358. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Qualified Plug-in Electric Vehicle Credit Under Section 30'' (Notice 2009-58) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to the EC-2359. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 2 on Casualty Loss IRC 165'' (LMSB-4-0309-010) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to EC-2360. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 4 on Mixed Service Costs Phase 1'' (LMSB-4-0509-022) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 20, 2009; EC-2361. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a Clarification Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2362. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-124, ``National Law Enforcement Museum Sales and Use Tax Credit Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2363. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-125, ``Records Access Amendment Act of EC-2364. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-126, ``Raze Permit Community Notification Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2365. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-127, ``Citizen-Service Programs Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2366. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-128, ``Child Development Center Directors Relocation Fairness Clarification Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2367. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-133, ``Transportation Infrastructure Improvements GARVEE Bond Financing Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2368. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-134, ``Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2369. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-135, ``Clean and Affordable Energy Fund Balance Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee EC-2370. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-136, ``Neighborhood Development Tax Deferral Temporary Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2371. A communication from the Director, Office of Personnel Management, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Office's report on Federal agencies' use of the physicians comparability allowance (PCA) program; to the Committee on EC-2372. A communication from the Senior Official, Office of Inspector General, Federal Housing Finance Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee on Homeland Security and EC-2373. A communication from the Inspector General, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee EC-2374. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Summer 2009 Fireworks, Coastal Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA08, 1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0422)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2375. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays in Boothbay Harbor, South Gardiner, and Woolwich, Maine'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0526)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2376. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; San Clemente Island Northwest Harbor August and September Training; Northwest Harbor, San Clemente Island, California'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0522)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2377. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Southside Summer Fireworks, St. Clair River, Port Huron, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0478)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2378. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Sigma Gamma Fireworks, Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0477)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2379. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda, New York'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0110)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2380. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; F/V PATRIOT, Massachusetts Bay, Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0512)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2381. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Regulated Navigation Area; Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, Oregon Inlet, North Carolina'' ((RIN1625-AA11)(Docket No. USG-2009-0489)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2382. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Potomac River, Between Maryland and Virginia'' ((RIN1625-AA09)(Docket No. USG-2008-1216)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2383. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York'' ((RIN1625-AA01)(Docket No. USG-2009-0045)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2384. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Closure of the Eastern United States/Canada Area'' (RIN0648-XQ01) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, EC-2385. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; Closure of the Closed Area II Scallop Access Area to Scallop Vessels'' (RIN0648-XQ05) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2386. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Closure of the 2009 Deepwater Grouper Commercial Fishery'' (RIN0648-XP56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2387. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Biennial Specifications and Management Measures; Inseason Adjustments'' (RIN0648-AX96) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2388. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish; Framework Adjustment 2'' (RIN0648-AX56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2389. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Recreational Management Measures for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Fishing Year 2009'' (RIN0648-AX69) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2390. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Greenland Turbot, Arrowtooth Flounder, and Sablefish by Vessels Participating in the Amendment 80 Limited Access Fishery in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area'' (RIN0648-XP97) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2391. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Closure of the Pacific Whiting Primary Fishery for the Mothership Sector'' (RIN0648- XP82) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2392. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper- Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 16'' (RIN0648-AW64) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2393. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast Specifications Modification'' (RIN0648-XO74) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES--THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2009 The following material was omitted from the Congressional Record of Financial Campaign Contributions Report for Daniel M. (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Daniel Milton Rooney: 5/24/2008, Gridiron-PAC, $5,000; 10/ 21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Patricia Regan Rooney: 6/15/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 6/27/ 2008, DCCC, $5,000; 8/03/2005, Patrick Murphy, $2,000; 9/29/ 2005, Patrick Murphy, $1,109; 4/21/2008, Barack Obama, $500; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/14/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,500; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/28/2006, DCCC, $1,500; 12/28/2007, DCCC, $2,000; 9/23/2008, Patrick Murphy, $250; 10/21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Arthur Joseph Rooney II: 9/07/2006, Melissa Hart, $500; 4/ 13/2007, Arlen Specter, $1,000; 6/20/2008, DCCC, $2,000; 8/ 06/2005, Patrick Murphy, $500; 10/27/2006, Mike Doyle, $500; 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/25/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,700; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, ($1,700); 5/02/2008, Tom Patricia Rooney Gerrero: 4/11/2008, Hillary Clinton, $500. Rita Rooney Conway: 8/14/2008, 07/31/2008, John Murtha, Obama Victory Fund (Joint FR Committee), $2,000; $5,000; 6/ 30/2008, Obama for America, $250; 02/12/2008, Hillary Clinton for President, $1,000; 10/14/2005, DSCC, $500; 05/30/2006, DSCC, $250; 10/23/2008, Committee for Change, $10,000; 06/30/ 2006, DCCC, $2,000; 08/31/2007, Obama for America, $250. Daniel Michael Rooney: 05/12/2005, North Side Good Government Committee, $3000; 3/26/2007, Tom Rooney, $400; 3/ 26/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 7/22/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,900; 9/15/2008, Florida 16 Victory Trust (Joint FR Committee), John Thomas Rooney: 11/15/2005, George W. Bush, $1,000; 8/ James Emmett Rooney: 12/20/2005, Mike Doyle, $500; 01/24/ 2008, Arlen Specter, $500; 03/12/2007, Majority PAC, $1,000; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 11/29/2007, Robert Casey, $1,000; 3/04/2008, William Shuster, $500; 4/25/2008, Jason Altmire, $500; 10/29/2008, Jason Altmire, $2,300; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 9/20/ 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/ 28/2006, DCCC, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 10/ 11/2005, Prosperity Helps Inspire Liberty PAC, $1,000; 6/08/ The following executive reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. ROCKEFELLER for the Committee on Commerce, Science, *Polly Trottenberg, of Maryland, to be an Assistant *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term of two years. *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term expiring *Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., of Maryland, to be a Federal Maritime Commissioner for the term expiring June 30, 2012. *Meredith Attwell Baker, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for the remainder of the *Mignon L. Clyburn, of South Carolina, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for a term of five By Mr. KERRY for the Committee on Foreign Relations. *Anne Elizabeth Derse, of Maryland, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 7. Sisters and Spouses: Jane Quasarano (sister), None. Paul Quasarano (brother-in-law): (A good faith effort was made to obtain contribution information from Mr. Quasarano. The following is what is available:) National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009; Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association (MBWWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007 and $3,000 in 2008 and $3,000 in 2009; Michigan Senator Martha Scott: $1,500 in 2008 and $1,500 in 2009; Michigan Lt. Governor John Cherry: $5,000 in 2008 and $5,000 in 2009; Magistrate O'Brien; Michigan State Representative Ed Gaffney; Michigan Senator Mary Waters; Michigan Senator Steve *Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, September 2008, Barack Obama; $250, August of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this *Donald Sternoff Beyer, Jr., of Virginia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Switzerland, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Post: Chief of Mission to the Swiss Confederation and the (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them in the past four years. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this report is complete and 1. Self: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Judy Feder for Congress, $2,000, 2006; Judy Feder for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Al Weed for Congress, $2,000, 2006; John Tester for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2006; Tom Harkin for U.S. Senate, $2,280, 2007; Leonard Boswell for Congress, $2,100, 2006; Tom Perriello for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Paul Hodes for Congress, $2,000, 2007; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Jared Polis for Congress, $500, 2008; Eighth District Democratic Committee, Virginia Democratic Party, $250, 2006; Allan Lichtman for Senate, $250, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $5,000, 2007; Fairfax County Democratic Committee, $1,000, 2008; Philip Forgit for Congress, $1,000, 2007; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,250, 2005; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $500, 2006; Alexandria Democratic Committee, $250, 2005; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $2,300, 2007; John Kerry for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2007; Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Democratic Party of Virginia, $2,500, 2007; Born Fighting PAC, $2,500, 2008; Leslie Byrne for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Mark Udall for Senate, $2,300, 2008; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Jim Webb for U.S. Senate, $2,100, 2006; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $2,000, 2005; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $900, 2006; Ethan Berkowitz for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Gerry Connelly for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Gerry Connelly for Congress, $1,000, 2009; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $26,700, 2005; Moving Virginia Forward, $20,000, 2007; Kaine for Governor, $19,600, 2005; Deeds for Attorney General, $10,000, 2005; Byrne for Lieutenant Governor, $8,600, 2005; Commonwealth Coalition, $5,000, 2006; Virginia 2. Spouse: Megan C. Beyer: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $10,000, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Ronnie Musgrove for U.S. Senate $1,000, 2008; Leslie Byrne for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Gerry Connelly for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $1,000, 2008; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Virginia Senate 2006, $10,000, 2006; Democratic National Committee, $5,000, 2005; Democratic National Committee, $500, 2006; Democratic Stephanie A. S. Beyer: $2,300, 3/2007, Obama for America. 4. Parents: Donald S. Beyer, Sr.: No contributions. 5. Grandparents: Otto S. Beyer Jr.: (deceased 1948). 6. Brothers Spouses: Michael S. Beyer: $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $250, 5/14/07, Whipple for Va Senate. June C. Beyer, spouse: $250, 8/6/08, Obama for America; 7. Sisters and Spouses: Katherine S. Beyer (single): No Marylee B. Hill: $250, 9/27/06, Feder for Congress; $250, 6/14/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $500, 10/3/07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $250, 3/4/ 07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $600, 12/29/05, Kaine Inaugural Committee; $350, 5/30/07, Vanderhye for Va Delegate; $250, 7/2/08, Petersen for Va Senate; $150, 9/24/ *John R. Nay, of Michigan, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To be best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $0--I have never made a political donation. 2. Spouse: $0--She has never made a political donation. 3. Children and Spouses: Janelle V.A. (Nay) Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jamison R. Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jaclyn E.A. Nay: $0--has never made a political donation; Jordan R. Nay: $0--has never 4. Parents: Jack R. Nay: $50, Spring 2006, Joe Schwartz (R- Michigan); Geraldine G. Nay: $0, (made only one political donation in her lifetime--$30 to the Democratic Nat'l 7. Sisters and Spouses: Karen Y. Sefchick: $0--has never *Vinai K. Thummalapally, of Colorado, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $2,200, 6/07, Obama for America; $9,000, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Madia for U.S. Congress; 2. Spouse: Barbara: $2,300, 6/07, Obama for America; $100, 10/08, Josh Segall for Congress (AL); $500, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Obama for America; $500, 8/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $300, 9/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $1,000, 1/09, Ritter for Governor, Colorado; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for U.S. Senate; $25, 3/09, 3. Children: Vishal: $2,500, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,800, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for 6. Brother and Spouse: Ajay K. Thummalapally: None. 7b. Rasika G. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 7/17/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, 7/31/08, Obama for America; $2,300 10/01/08, Madia for U.S. Congress. Girish V. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $28,500, 10/02/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, 11/02/06, Music Row Democrats Federal PAC Inc.; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 04/26/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 10/31/07, Obama For America; $500, 06/14/07, John Edwards For President; $500, 07/31/08, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 10/21/08, Committee For Change (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 10/27/08, Nebraskans For Kleeb. 4. Parents: Clarence Avant (father): 2005/2006, $1,000, 10/ 16/06, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; $1,000, 03/ 22/06, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $2,100, 09/30/06, Tennessee Senate 2006 (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $500, 06/30/05, LA PAC; $1,000, 10/24/05, Berman For Congress; $1,200, 07/14/ 06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $900, 02/27/06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $2,000, 08/20/05, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $1,000, 12/15/05, Cantwell 2012; $1,000, 01/12/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,000, 06/05/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,100, 08/16/06, Mfume For US Senate; $500, 04/01/06, Schiff For Congress; $1,000, 11/01/05, Schiff For Congress; $5,000, 05/20/05, Hopefund, Inc.; $500, 11/01/06, Mejias For Congress; $500, 09/30/06, Mejias For Congress; $1,000, 09/26/ 05, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 04/18/06, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 05/01/05, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 06/26/06, Mary Bono Committee; $500, 02/12/ 06, Hackett For Senate; $1,000, 03/14/06, Carter For Senate Committee; $500, 05/30/06, Friends Of Tammy Duckworth; $2,000, 08/25/05, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 03/23/06, Feinstein For Senate; $250, 03/24/06, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $250, 11/07/05, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 06/22/06, Klobuchar For Minnesota; $500, 04/25/05, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $500, 03/31/06, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $400, 10/20/05, Friends Of Hillary; $1,000, 06/14/05, Friends Of Hillary; $4,200, 04/04/ 06, Friends of Hillary; $1,000, 07/11/05, Friends Of Hillary; -$3,500, 05/02/06, Friends Of Hillary; $2,500, 10/19/06, Hill PAC; $500, 07/25/06, Lawless For Congress; $500, 03/19/06, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $500, 12/03/05, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $1,900, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $2,100, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $1,000, 11/04/05, Steele For Maryland Inc.; $1,000, 02/21/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; $1,000, 11/02/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; 2007/ 2008, $1,000, 08/31/07, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $2,000, 01/23/08, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $1,000, 10/10/07, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $500, 07/14/08, Loebsack For Congress; $500, 09/30/ 07, John Hall For Congress; $1,000, 05/11/07, Richardson For President Inc.; $1,000, 11/23/07, Friends Of Mark Warner; $2,300, 08/28/08, Friends Of Hillary; $5,000, 07/29/08, Hill PAC; $2,300, 07/18/08, Vernon Jones For Georgia; $500, 07/10/ 07, Richardson For Congress; $250, 06/25/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 08/08/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 05/ 19/08, Alaskans For Begich; $750, 06/18/08, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 07/21/07, Citizens For Waters; $500, 10/15/ 08, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 11/09/07, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $1,000, 09/28/07, Friends Of Senator Carl Levin; $1,000, 03/01/07, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 09/06/07, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 03/30/08, Barbara Lee For Congress; $250, 09/30/07, Mary Bono Mack Committee; $500, 09/17/08, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $500, 11/14/07, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 05/ 09/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 06/20/08, Powers For Congress; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $500, 03/ 20/08, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $2,500, 07/16/08, Rangel Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 10/27/08, David Scott For Congress; $500, 08/27/08, Joe Garcia For Congress; $1,000, 03/13/07, John Edwards For President; $1,000, 03/20/08, Al Franken For Senate; $500, 07/ 07/08, Congressman Waxman Campaign Committee; $1,000, 08/16/ 07, LA PAC; $1,000, 11/20/07, Berman For Congress; $300, 06/ 28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; $2,000, 06/28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; -$400, 04/29/08, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $300, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $700, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,000, 06/14/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,300, 05/02/07, Rangel For Congress; $1,000, 08/20/07, Conyers for Congress; $2,500, 08/02/08, Conyers For Congress; $-1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $5,000, 09/ 19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $28,500, 6/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 03/08/07, Obama For America. Jacqueline Avant (mother): 2005/2006, $2,100, 04/19/06, Friends Of Hillary; 2007/2008, $250, 02/14/07, Emily's List; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $4,600, 08/ 31/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $2,000, 12/ 5. Grandparents: Zella Gray (maternal grandmother)-- deceased; Leon Gray (maternal grandfather)--deceased; Gertrude Woods (paternal grandmother)--deceased; Phoenix 6. Brothers and Spouses: Alexander Avant (brother): $500, 6/07/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $500, 09/11/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $250, 12/13/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 06/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $2,500, 09/19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $250, 10/10/08, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $4600, 3/29/07, Obama for America; $1000, 6/30/06, Boswell for Congress; $1000, 9/21/06, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 2/23/08, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 6/30/2006, Friends of Joe Lieberman; $1000, 9/25/2008, Patrick Murphy for Congress; $250, 2/27/06, David Yassky for Congress; $1000, 12/10/08, Mikulski for Senate Committee; $500, 3/01/ 06, Whitehouse for Senate; $2300, 11/24/08, Hillary Clinton for President; $5000, 7/06/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/2006, Forward Together PAC; $2300, 9/24/2007, Friends of Mark Warner; $2300, 1/16/2008, Friends of Mark Warner; $1000, 4/18/07, Friends of Mary Landrieu; $2100, 3/8/06, Miller 2006 (Harris Miller); $2100, 10/31/05, Rales for Senate; $2500, 9/ 2.-Spouse: Michelle Loewinger or Michelle Gutman: $5000, 7/ 6/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/06, Forward Together PAC; 3/29/07, $2300, Obama for America; 5/25/07, $2300, Obama for America; 10/31/05, $2100, Rales for Senate; 9/24/07, $2300, Friends of Mark Warner; 1/16/08, $2300, Friends of 3. Children and Spouses: Collin Gutman--single--none; Chase 4. Parents: Max Gutman--deceased 1973; Roslyn Gutman--none. 5. Grandparents: All grandparents are deceased for decades. 7. Sisters and Spouses: Deborah Studen (Harvey Studen)-- *Vilma S. Martinez, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge the information contained in this 1. Self: $931.00, 1/29/2008, Obama for America; $1,000.00, 10/30/2008, -Obama for America; $250.00, 3/25/2006, Friends of Juan Vargas; $200.00, 10/02/2006, Madrid for Congress. Carlos A. Singer: $1,000.00, 10/11/2004, Democratic Jessica Uzcategui, (Carlos' spouse): $500.00, 1/26/2008, 6. Brothers and Spouses: Salvador Martinez, Jr.: unable to 7. Sisters and Spouses: Rose Linda Hernandez: none. (*David H. Thorne, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Italian Republic, and to serve concurrently Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Self: Democratic National Committee, $100, 2006, David Thorne; Democratic National Committee, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; New Hampshire Democratic Party, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, David Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $2300, 2007, David Thorne; Biden for President, $1000, 2007, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Footlik for Congress, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Young Democrats of America, $500, 2008, David Thorne. Spouse: Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, Rose Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $1300, 2007, Rose Thorne; John Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination list which was printed in the Record on the date indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that this nomination lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. *Foreign Service nominations beginning with Christopher L. Andino and ending with Holly Hope Zardus, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional *Nomination was reported with recommendation that it be confirmed subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate. The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. S. 1478. A bill to strengthen communities through English literacy and civics education for new Americans, and for S. 1479. A bill to provide for the treatment of certain By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bingaman, and Mr. Tester): S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, S. 1481. A bill to amend section 811 of the Cranston- Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to improve the program under such section for supportive housing for persons with disabilities; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Rockefeller, Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and S. 1483. A bill to designate the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Alexandria, Minnesota, as the ``Max J. Beilke Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on S. 1485. A bill to improve hurricane preparedness by establishing the National Hurricane Research Initiative and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, S. 1486. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the creation of disaster protection funds by property and casualty insurance companies for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from future catastrophic S. 1487. A bill to establish a bipartisan commission on insurance reform; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were appointments for the 111th Congress; considered and agreed S. Res. 219. A resolution honoring the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey; to the Committee on S. Con. Res. 33. A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp should be issued to honor the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought and served during World War II; to the Committee on At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 144, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove cell phones from listed At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad) was added as a cosponsor of S. 211, a bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 telephone service for information and referral on human services and volunteer services, and At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 237, a bill to establish a collaborative program to protect the Great Lakes, and for other At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bayh) was added as a cosponsor of S. 254, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for the coverage of home At the request of Mr. Dorgan, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 428, a bill to allow travel At the request of Mr. Webb, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) was added as a cosponsor of S. 572, a bill to provide for the issuance of a ``forever stamp'' to honor the sacrifices of the brave men and women of the armed forces who have been awarded the At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 616, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize medical simulation enhancement At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Thune) was added as a cosponsor of S. 781, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for collegiate housing and At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Barrasso) was added as a cosponsor of S. 812, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the special rule for contributions of qualified conservation contributions. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. 846, a bill to award a congressional gold medal to Dr. Muhammad Yunus, in recognition of his contributions to the fight against global poverty. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) was added as a cosponsor of S. 913, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand workplace health incentives by equalizing the tax consequences of employee athletic facility use. At the request of Mr. Crapo, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 941, a bill to reform the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, modernize firearm laws and regulations, protect the community from criminals, and for At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1026, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of marked absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed service voters, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1055, a bill to grant the congressional gold medal, collectively, to the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, United States Army, in recognition of their dedicated service during World War II. At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1066, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve access to ambulance At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1121, a bill to amend part D of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to provide grants for the repair, renovation, and construction of elementary and secondary schools, including early learning facilities At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1128, a bill to authorize the award of a military service medal to members of the Armed Forces who were exposed to ionizing radiation as a result of participation in the testing of nuclear weapons or under other At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1153, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the exclusion from gross income for employer-provided health coverage for employees' spouses and dependent children to coverage provided to other eligible designated At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Maine (Ms. Snowe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1156, a bill to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to reauthorize and improve the safe routes to school program. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1265, a bill to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to provide members of the Armed Forces and their family members equal access to voter registration At the request of Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, the name of the Senator a cosponsor of S. 1279, a bill to amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to extend the Rural At the request of Mr. Grassley, the names of the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus) and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) were added as cosponsors of S. 1304, a bill to restore the economic rights of At the request of Mr. Isakson, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Kaufman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1312, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage, as supplies associated with the injection of insulin, of containment, removal, decontamination and disposal of home-generated needles, syringes, and other sharps through a sharps container, decontamination/ destruction device, or sharps-by-mail program or similar program under At the request of Mr. DeMint, the name of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1324, a bill to ensure that every American has a health insurance plan that they can afford, own, At the request of Mr. Vitter, the names of the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Bunning), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of S. 1344, a bill to temporarily protect the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. At the request of Mr. Reed, the name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Akaka) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1362, a bill to provide grants to States to ensure that all students in the middle grades are taught an academically rigorous curriculum with effective supports so that students complete the middle grades prepared for success in high school and postsecondary endeavors, to improve State and district policies and programs relating to the academic achievement of students in the middle grades, to develop and implement effective middle grades models for At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1408, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage alternative energy At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of S. 1415, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to ensure that absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters are aware of their voting rights and have a genuine opportunity to register to vote and have their absentee ballots cast and counted, At the request of Mrs. Murray, the names of the Senator from Washington (Ms. Cantwell), the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) and the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Feingold) were added as cosponsors of S. 1422, a bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to clarify the eligibility requirements with respect to airline flight At the request of Mr. Wyden, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1439, a bill to provide for duty-free treatment of certain recreational performance outerwear, and At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1469, a bill to provide for the administration of Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1474, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the provision prohibiting the crediting of interest to the Highway Trust Fund, and for other At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Carper) was added as a cosponsor of S. Con. Res. 25, a concurrent resolution recognizing the value and benefits that community health centers provide as health care homes for over 18,000,000 individuals, and the importance of enabling health centers and other safety net providers to continue to offer accessible, affordable, and continuous care to their current patients and to every American who lacks access At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 210, a resolution designating the week beginning on November 9, 2009, as At the request of Mr. Johanns, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 212, a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that any savings under the Medicare program should be invested back into the Medicare program, rather than At the request of Mr. Leahy, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Bond, the name of the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be At the request of Mr. Sanders, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1514 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the names of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1515 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bunning, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1517 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1528 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1528 proposed to At the request of Mr. Risch, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1543 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1558 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Brownback, the names of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Utah (Mr. Bennett) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1597 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Begich, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1599 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Thune, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1618 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the names of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) and the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1621 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Ms. Collins, her name was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1628 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bennett, his name was added as a cosponsor of At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1635 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Pryor, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1637 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, today I am here to talk about a simple Each year U.S. consumers spend $2.57 billion more than they should for gasoline and diesel fuel. This is because they are buying hot fuel. The physics behind hot fuel are fairly simple. Retailers currently measure our gasoline as it if is stored at 60 degrees Fahrenheit. However, if the temperature increases, as it often does during the summer or in warm climates, the gasoline expands so that consumers are getting less energy per gallon of fuel. Yet, when consumers buy hot fuel, they are paying the same amount even though they are getting less This problem can be easily solved by installing temperature compensating equipment that will regulate the distribution of fuel based on its temperature at the time of purchase. A similar policy was implemented in Canada 15 years ago because retailers were losing money due to the cold temperature of the fuel they were selling; and earlier this year, the U.S. retailer Costco Warehouse, LLC agreed to install this temperature compensating equipment as a result of a legal Today, I am introducing legislation that would require all retailers of gasoline to install temperature compensating equipment on their retail fuel pumps. The Future Accountability in Retail Fuel Act of 2009, or the FAIR Fuel Act, is not intended to be onerous. It would simply require that within 6 years after enactment of this legislation all retail gasoline pumps would include automatic temperature compensating equipment. Prior to that 6 year timeline, if a retailer replaces their pumps, they must replace it with a pump that will be able to compensate for temperature fluctuations. Rural retail gasoline owners are exempt from this replacement requirement and the bill provides grant assistance for small retail owners to retrofit or purchase pumps with temperature compensating equipment. American families deserve to be treated fairly. They deserve to get what they pay for. With the current economic crisis and the high prices of gasoline, every penny we can save the consumer will go along way to them survive these tough times. This legislation will help to achieve this goal. It will finally give consumers the fairness they deserve. I am pleased that this bill has been endorsed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, OOIDA, USPIRG and Consumer Watchdog. I look forward to working with the members of the Commerce Committee and the full Senate in getting this legislation passed. I think we owe it Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Future Accountability in (1) Automatic temperature compensation equipment.--The term ``automatic temperature compensation equipment'' has the meaning given the term in the National Institute of Standards (2) Equivalent standard.--The term ``equivalent standard'' means any standard that prohibits the retail sale of gasoline with energy content per gallon that is different than the energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline stored at 60 degrees (3) Rural area.--The term ``rural area'' means any area (A) a city, town, or unincorporated area that has a (B) the urbanized area that is contiguous and adjacent to (4) Small-volume station.--The term ``small-volume station'' means any retail fuel establishment that dispenses fewer than 360,000 gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel per SEC. 3. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT. (1) New motor fuel dispensers.--Beginning 180 days after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers that are newly installed or upgraded at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment to ensure that any volume of gasoline or diesel fuel measured by such dispenser for retail sale is equal to the volume that such quantity of fuel would equal at the time of such sale if the temperature of the fuel was 60 degrees Fahrenheit. (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), not later than 5 years after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with the automatic temperature compensation (B) Small-volume stations.--Small-volume stations located in rural areas shall not be subject to the requirement under (1) Annual inspection.--Beginning on the date described in subsection (a), State inspectors conducting an initial or annual inspection of motor fuel dispensers are authorized to determine if such dispensers are equipped with the automatic temperature compensation equipment required under subsection (2) Notification.--If the State inspector determines that a motor fuel dispenser does not comply with the requirement under subsection (a), the State inspector is authorized to notify the Federal Trade Commission, through an electronic notification system developed by the Commission, of such (3) Follow-up inspection.--Not earlier than 180 days after a motor fuel dispenser is found to be out of compliance with the requirement under subsection (a), the Federal Trade Commission shall coordinate a follow-up inspection of such (A) In general.--The owner or operator of any retail fuel establishment with a motor fuel dispenser subject to the requirement under subsection (a) that is determined to be out of compliance with such requirement shall be subject to a fine equal to $5,000 for each noncompliant motor fuel (B) Additional fine.--If a motor fuel dispenser is determined to be out of compliance during a follow-up inspection, the owner or operator of the retail fuel establishment at which such motor fuel dispenser is located shall be subject to an additional fine equal to $5,000. (5) Use of fines.--Any amounts collected under paragraph (4) shall be deposited into the trust fund established under (1) Commencement.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, shall commence a rulemaking procedure to (2) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall issue final regulations to implement the requirement under subsection (a), including specifying which volume correction factor tables shall be used for the range of gasoline and diesel fuel products that are sold to retail SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT GRANT (1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the ``Automatic Temperature Compensation Equipment Trust Fund'' (referred to (2) Transfers.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the Trust Fund out of the general fund of the Treasury an amount equal to the amount collected as fines (3) Investment.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest such portion of the Trust Fund as is not required to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be made only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States. (1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund for grants to owners and operators of retail fuel establishments to offset the costs associated with the installation of automatic temperature (2) Maximum amount.--The Secretary may not award a grant (3) Eligible recipients.--An owner or operator of not more than 5 retail fuel establishments is eligible to receive a (4) Use of grant funds.--Grant funds received under this subsection may be used to offset the costs incurred by owners and operators of retail establishments to acquire and install automatic temperature compensation equipment in accordance (5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out (c) Reimbursement of State Inspection Costs.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund to reimburse States for the costs incurred by the States to-- (1) inspect motor fuel dispensers for compliance with the (2) notify the Secretary of Commerce of any noncompliance Nothing in this Act may be construed to preempt a State from enacting a law that imposes an equivalent standard or a more stringent standard concerning the retail sale of S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that would charge a reinspection fee for goods that fail FDA inspection for good manufacturing practices. Currently, businesses do not have to pay for the second inspection if they fail. Essentially, then, the FDA is absorbing this extra cost. This Nation faces difficult enough choices without subsidizing private companies that fail basic inspections. I am pleased to credit the Bush administration for originally proposing this fee, which is again proposed in President Obama's fiscal year 2010 budget. This fee carries proposed savings of an estimated $24 million per year, and could save as much as $115 million over 5 years. We must ensure that U.S. taxpayer money is being used efficiently and effectively, and this measure would help in our ongoing efforts to streamline government programs and reduce the Federal budget deficit. FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach testified about these fees before the House Agriculture, Rural Development, and FDA Appropriations Subcommittee in 2006. He believes, and I agree, that the reinspection fee will motivate businesses to comply with long-established health and that do not meet Federal standards should bear the burden of the reinspection, rather than getting a free pass at the taxpayer's One of the main reasons I first ran for the U.S. Senate was to restore fiscal responsibility to the Federal budget. I have worked throughout my Senate career to eliminate wasteful spending and to reduce the budget deficit. Unless we return to fiscally responsible budgeting, Congress will saddle our nation's younger generations with an enormous financial burden for years to come. This bill is one small By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Kohl to introduce the Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act as part of my continued efforts to improve student achievement in our Nation's schools. One part of student performance that is often overlooked is nutrition, which can have a significant impact on student achievement. I know many of my colleagues share my support for school programs that help alleviate hunger for the most in-need students, such as the Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program, as well as those programs that provide more nutritious food, such as the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Snack I am sure that I am not the only member of this body who grew up hearing that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. I was lucky never to have to worry about going hungry, and my parents did not have to choose between giving their children lunch or breakfast. The fact is, that is a choice many parents do have to make today, even if they get the help of reduced price meals. The current economic difficulties and rising unemployment have only increased the burdens facing low income families in Wisconsin and around the country as they struggle to provide nutritious meals for their children. The Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act would provide grants for schools wishing to begin or expand universal school breakfast programs. Studies show that kids who eat breakfast perform better in school and on tests, and they tend to be less disruptive to the class. I have heard many stories from teachers, school nurses, and other school officials over the years to confirm this. In fact, in my home State of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Public Schools have been working with the Hunger Task Force for the past few years to implement universal school breakfast programs, which they have in place now in more than 80 schools. This program, which has expanded in its second year, has proven popular with students, teachers, and parents. This bill would target the most in-need schools--those with 65 percent or more of students eligible for the free and reduced price lunch program--with the funds necessary to implement a universal free breakfast program. The grants, which could be used in a number of ways, aim to help schools overcome the numerous barriers faced in trying to Our Nation faces a series of pressing education challenges in its schools, including most significantly a large achievement gap and graduation rate gap among minority and low income students. After decades of civil rights struggles, public education should provide all our students with access to equal opportunities, but the quality of public education provided to students of color and low-income students in urban and rural Wisconsin and around the country still does not come close to affording many of these students an equal chance for success. Too often these students learn in crumbling and outdated buildings, they do not have the same access to high quality technology in their classrooms, they are taught by the least experienced teachers, and they often do not have adequate access to important resources like school These and a number of other factors contribute to the achievement gap in our Nation's schools and the Federal Government can help to address this gap by promoting smarter and more flexible accountability structures and increased supports for schools during the upcoming reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Congress should also help to address some of the many other issues facing our nation's students living in poverty issues that may not seem directly related to education, but impact the academic growth of students including hunger, affordable housing, and crime. This bill takes an important step to address hunger and also seeks to improve nutrition education by providing funds to expand school breakfast programs, boost collaboration between local farmers and schools, expand service- learning opportunities in our classrooms, and improve nutrition In this economy, more and more parents are forced to make these kinds of decisions, and the school meal programs can provide a tremendous relief. As we look forward to reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act, it is vital that we take stock of the successes and limitations of existing programs. School breakfast faces a number of hurdles that, quite simply, other school feeding programs do not. Chief of those is time. For some students, getting to school early is impossible; for some, the lure of breakfast is not a strong enough draw to get up earlier. These are problems that schools across the country are facing and solving with creativity and dedication. This legislation will help support the innovative work going on in some of our nation's schools and will help to scale up successful nutrition programs in other schools so that hopefully one day, none of America's students will By Mr. NELSON, of Florida (for himself and Mr. Martinez): S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on Finance. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, last year we were all transfixed by the non-stop news coverage of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike as they grew into monster storms, crossing the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and leaving a trail of misery in their wake. Ike, the third most destructive storm in the history of the U.S., made landfall in Galveston, Texas, and then tracked through Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, killing 112 people and causing more Since 2003, hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have caused more than 2,000 deaths in the U.S. Forty percent of all hurricanes that make Insured losses from hurricanes average more than $5.2 billion per year. A recent study of hurricane-related damages over the last century suggests that economic losses will double every 10 years. With more than 50 percent of the U.S. population living within 50 miles of the coast, and with 180 million people visiting the coast annually, the Hurricanes, however, do not just impact the coasts. These extreme events also have national consequences, such as increased fuel prices, displaced populations, and severe inland flooding. The American public is increasingly aware of the potential for high recovery costs and financing of natural disaster losses. I cannot overstate the importance of prior preparation and insurance coverage for large catastrophic risks--including natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes--as well as efforts to promote a stable, This is why today Senator Martinez and I are introducing four bills: the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, Act of 2009, S. 1486, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009, S. 1484, and the National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009, 1485. These bills take a pro-active approach in addressing these natural The National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009 will expand the scope of fundamental research on hurricanes. The bill is aimed at improving hurricane forecasting and tracking and helping us find better ways to mitigate their impact. The Act will establish a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant program for hurricane and tropical cyclone research and bring together a task force, jointly chaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, and NSF. The second bill, the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, establishes the bipartisan Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance. This commission will assess the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, as well as the four major hurricanes that struck the U.S. in 2004. It will also evaluate the country's ongoing exposure to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods. Finally, the commission will recommend and report legislative and regulatory changes that will improve the domestic and international financial health and competitiveness of property and casualty insurance markets, assuring the availability of adequate insurance when an insured event occurs, as well as the best possible range of insurance products at competitive The Policyholder Disaster Protection Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow property and casualty insurance companies to create tax-exempt disaster protection funds and to make tax deductible contributions to those funds for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from certain catastrophic events, such as windstorms, Finally, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to create tax-exempt catastrophe savings accounts. Individuals could take tax-free distributions from these accounts to pay expenses resulting from a presidentially declared major disaster. The bill limits catastrophe savings account balances to $2,000 for individuals with homeowner insurance deductibles of not more than $1,000, and the lesser of $15,000 or twice the homeowner's insurance deductible for individuals with deductibles of more than As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the entire country experiences financial losses when hurricanes hit. It is time for us to take the bull by the horns and pass legislation that plans in advance As we are in the hurricane season, it will become painfully apparent just how precarious a lot of the construction is, how precarious building codes are not being fairly and judiciously administered, and it will become evident what an economic disaster even a mild hurricane can cause when it hits the coast. And Lord knows, if the big one hits an urbanized part of the coast--and the big one is a category 4 or a category 5 hurricane--it is going to create economic chaos. It is going to cause the insurance industry to be on the brink of total collapse. And it will ultimately, just like Katrina, end up having the U.S. Government pay a major part of the economic bailout consequences of a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or an earthquake hitting the United States. We ought to get ahead of it and we ought to plan for it, and that is what this package of four bills Senator Martinez and I are Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be There being no objection, the text of the bills was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Catastrophe Savings Accounts (a) In General.--Subchapter F of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exempt organizations) is amended by adding at the end the following new part: ``(a) General Rule.--A Catastrophe Savings Account shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, such account shall be subject to the taxes imposed by section 511 (relating to imposition of tax on unrelated business income of charitable organizations). ``(b) Catastrophe Savings Account.--For purposes of this section, the term `Catastrophe Savings Account' means a trust created or organized in the United States for the exclusive benefit of an individual or his beneficiaries and which is designated (in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe) at the time of the establishment of the trust as a Catastrophe Savings Account, but only if the written governing instrument creating the trust meets the following ``(A) no contribution will be accepted unless it is in ``(B) contributions will not be accepted in excess of the account balance limit specified in subsection (c). ``(2) The trustee is a bank (as defined in section 408(n)) or another person who demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the manner in which that person will administer the trust will be consistent with the requirements ``(3) The interest of an individual in the balance of his ``(4) The assets of the trust shall not be commingled with other property except in a common trust fund or common ``(c) Account Balance Limit.--The aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual (including qualified rollover ``(1) in the case of an individual whose qualified ``(2) in the case of an individual whose qualified deductible is more than $1,000, the amount equal to the ``(B) twice the amount of the individual's qualified ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Qualified catastrophe expenses.--The term `qualified catastrophe expenses' means expenses paid or incurred by reason of a major disaster that has been declared by the President under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford ``(2) Qualified deductible.--With respect to an individual, the term `qualified deductible' means the annual deductible for the individual's homeowners' insurance policy. ``(3) Qualified rollover contribution.--The term `qualified rollover contribution' means a contribution to a Catastrophe ``(A) from another such account of the same beneficiary, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account, and ``(B) from a Catastrophe Savings Account of a spouse of the beneficiary of the account to which the contribution is made, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account. ``(1) In general.--Any distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account shall be includible in the gross income of the distributee in the manner as provided in section 72. ``(2) Distributions for qualified catastrophe expenses.-- ``(A) In general.--No amount shall be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) if the qualified catastrophe expenses of the distributee during the taxable year are not less than the aggregate distributions during the taxable ``(B) Distributions in excess of expenses.--If such aggregate distributions exceed such expenses during the taxable year, the amount otherwise includible in gross income under paragraph (1) shall be reduced by the amount which bears the same ratio to the amount which would be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) (without regard to this subparagraph) as the qualified catastrophe expenses bear to ``(3) Additional tax for distributions not used for qualified catastrophe expenses.--The tax imposed by this chapter for any taxable year on any taxpayer who receives a payment or distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account which is includible in gross income shall be increased by 10 ``(4) Retirement distributions.--No amount shall be under paragraph (1) (or subject to an additional tax under paragraph (3)) if the payment or distribution is made on or after the date on which the distributee attains age 62. ``(f) Tax Treatment of Accounts.--Rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 408(e) shall apply (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 4973 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to tax on excess contributions to certain tax-favored accounts and annuities) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (4), by inserting ``or'' at the end of paragraph (5), and by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph: ``(6) a Catastrophe Savings Account (as defined in section (2) Excess contribution.--Section 4973 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: Accounts.--For purposes of this section, in the case of Catastrophe Savings Accounts (within the meaning of section 530A), the term `excess contributions' means the amount by which the aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual exceeds the account balance limit defined in section subchapter F of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new item: (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``National (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act (1) Hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have directly caused more than 2,000 deaths in the United States since 2003 and account for approximately 66 percent of insured losses (2) While the ability to understand and predict hurricanes and other tropical cyclones has improved since 1999, particularly with respect to storm tracking, much remains (A) storm dynamics, rapid intensity change, and impact on (B) the interactions of storms with natural and built (C) the impacts to and response of society to destructive (3) Several expert assessments of the state of hurricane science and research needs have been published, including-- (A) the January 2007 report by the National Science Board titled, ``Hurricane Warning: The Critical Need for a National (B) the February 2007 report by the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research entitled, ``Interagency Strategic Research Plan for (C) reports from the Hurricane Intensity Working Group of the National Science Advisory Board of the National Oceanic (4) In the June 2005 publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council prioritized Federal science and technology investments needed to reduce future loss of life and property caused, both directly and indirectly, by hurricanes and other (5) A National Hurricane Research Initiative complements the objectives of the National Windstorm Impact Reduction It is the sense of Congress that, consistent with the findings of the expert assessments and strategies described in paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 2, a National Hurricane Research Initiative should be established to address the urgent and compelling need to undertake long-term, coordinated, multi-entity hurricane research focused on-- (1) conducting high priority scientific, engineering, and (2) effectively applying the research results of such studies to mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on society. (1) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the National Hurricane Research Task Force established under section 6(a). (2) Eligible entities.--The term ``eligible entities'' means State, regional, and local government agencies and departments, tribal governments, universities, research (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning given the term in section 102 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a). (4) Initiative.--The term ``Initiative'' means the National Hurricane Research Initiative established under section (5) National windstorm impact reduction program.--The term ``National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program'' means the program established by section 204 of the National Windstorm (6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, (7) Tribal government.--The term ``tribal government'' (8) Under secretary.--The term ``Under Secretary'' means (1) In general.--The Under Secretary, in collaboration with the Director of the National Science Foundation, shall establish an initiative to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Initiative'' for the purposes described in (A) the activities of the Under Secretary under this (B) the activities of the Task Force under section 6; and (2) Purposes.--The purposes described in this paragraph are (A) To improve understanding and prediction of hurricanes (ii) forecasting of storm formation, intensity, and wind and rain patterns, both within the tropics and as the storms (iii) storm surge modeling, inland flood modeling, and (iv) the interaction with and impacts of storms with the (v) the impacts to and response of society to destructive storms, including the socio-economic impacts requiring (B) To develop infrastructure that is resilient to the forces associated with hurricanes and other tropical storms. (C) To mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on coastal populations, the coastal built environment, and natural (iv) other natural systems that can reduce hurricane wind (D) To provide training for the next generation of (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall develop a detailed, 5-year implementation plan for the Initiative (A) incorporates the priorities for Federal science and publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards of the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council; establishes benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track progress of the research carried out under the Initiative and the application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related public benefits, as recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(2); and (C) identifies opportunities to leverage the results of the research carried out under section 7 with other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss- (i) the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program established by section 204(a) of the National Windstorm (ii) the National Flood Insurance Program established under chapter 1 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 (iii) the initiatives of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); (iv) wind hazard mitigation initiatives carried out by a (v) the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project fo the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and (vi) the Working Group for Tropical Cyclone Research of the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services (2) Review.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall ensure that the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) is reviewed (A) the Director of the National Science Foundation; (C) the Director of the National Institute for Standards (D) the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (F) the Associate Administrator for Science Mission (3) Revisions.--The Under Secretary shall revise the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) not less frequently than once every 5 years to address and respond to the findings and recommendations of the Task Force. (1) Establishment of research objectives.--The Under Secretary shall, in consultation with the Director fo the National Science Foundation, establish objectives for research carried out pursuant to section 7 that are based on the findings of the expert assessments and strategies (2) Coordination.--In carrying out the provisions of this subsection, the Under Secretary shall coordinate with the (d) National Workshops and Conferences.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Director of the National Science Foundation and the Task Force, shall carry out a series of national workshops and conferences that assemble a (1) to address hurricane-related research questions; and (2) to encourage researchers to work collaboratively to carry out the purposes described in subsection (a)(2). (e) Public Internet Website.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Task Force, shall facilitate the establishment of a public Internet website for the (1) to foster collaboration and interactive dialogues among the Under Secretary, the Director of the National Science (2) to enhance public access to Initiative documents and (A) information about the members of the Task Force, including their affiliation and contact information; (D) the most recent 5-year implementation plan developed (E) the most recent annual report submitted to Congress (1) Requirement for annual crosscut budget and report.--The Under Secretary, in conjunction with members of the Task Force who represent Federal agencies, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Office of Management and Budget, shall submit to Congress each year, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the fiscal year beginning in such year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a coordinated annual report for the Initiative for the fiscal year in which the report is submitted and the last (2) Contents.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall-- (A) document the funds transferred by the Under Secretary to the heads of other Federal agencies under section 8(b); (B) document the grants and contracts awarded to eligible (C) for each agency that receives funds under section 8(b) and eligible entity that receives a grant or contract under section 7, identify what major activities were undertaken (D) for each research activity or group of activities described in section 7(c), as appropriate, identify any accomplishments, which may include full or partial achievement of benchmarks, milestones, goals, performance measure targets established for the implementation plan under (a) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall establish a task force to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Task Force'' to facilitate and coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies and eligible entities in (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of the (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee. (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and (4) The Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary's (5) The Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (6) The Director of the United States Geological Survey, or (7) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space (8) One member shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who shall be a representative of the Office of Naval (9) The Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and (10) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology (11) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, (12) The Chair of the Executive Committee of the Federal Geographic Data Committee, or the Chair's designee. (13) Such other members from Federal agencies as the chairpersons of the Task Force jointly consider appropriate. Government, selected jointly by the chairpersons of the Task Force in consultation with the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, as follows: (A) At least 3 members who are prominent in the fields of hurricane science, engineering, social science, or related (B) At least 1 member who represents a State government agency responsible for emergency management and response. (C) At least 3 members who represent the views of local governments, tribal governments, and nongovernmental (D) At least 2 members who represent private sector interests engaged in hurricane research, preparedness, (E) At least 1 member who represents a State floodplain or (c) Chairpersons.--The concurrent chairpersons of the Task (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or the Director's designee under subsection (d) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Task Force shall hold (e) Meetings.--The Task Force shall meet at the call of the chairpersons of the Task Force, but not less frequently than (f) Duties.--The duties of the Task Force are as follows: (1) To provide assistance to the Under Secretary with the development of the 5-year implementation plan required by (2) Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and in consideration of the expert findings (A) to develop and furnish to the Under Secretary findings and recommendations, as appropriate, for monitoring research progress and for a set of benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track the transition and application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related (B) to identify interim and long-term goals of the research (C) to prioritize the activities of the Initiative over a (3) To improve communication and coordination among Federal agencies with respect to hurricane-related research, developments in hurricane forecasting and operations, and best practices for applying results of Initiative research to reduce loss of life and property damage resulting from (4) To identify opportunities to leverage the activities and products of the Initiative with the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program and other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss reduction (5) To recommend a model described in section 7(c)(1)(A) and monitor progress on development of such model. (6) To make recommendations to the Under Secretary and the Director of the National Science Foundation on research priorities and content and structure of the program (7) To make recommendations on national hurricane research (8) To assess opportunities to leverage the capabilities of (9) To evaluate the extent to which the stakeholders described in paragraph (8) have been engaged as partners and (10) To assist the Under Secretary in facilitating the development of the annual report required by section 5(f). (11) To review such report and provide comments to the (12) To submit to the National Science and Technology Council and to Congress, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the 2012 fiscal year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a report containing a comprehensive review of the progress of the Initiative in meeting the needs of the United States to understand hurricanes, their impacts on natural and built environment, (1) Authority to establish.--The Task Force may establish such advisory bodies as the Task Force considers necessary to assist the Task Force in its duties under subsection (f). (2) Criteria.--An advisory body established under paragraph (1) shall represent a broad variety of private and public (h) Advisors to the Task Force.--The Task Force may seek advice and input from any interested, knowledgeable, or affected party as the Task Force considers necessary to carry (1) In general.--All members of the Task Force who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services as officers or employees of the United States. (2) Travel expenses.--The members of the Task Force shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Task Force. (j) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.-- The Chairpersons may procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such (k) Volunteer Services.--Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Commission may accept and use voluntary and uncompensated services as the Commission (l) Exemption From FACA Notice Requirement for Task Force Advisory Bodies.--An advisory body established by the Task Force under subsection (g) shall not be subject to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. (m) Termination of Task Force.--The Task Force shall (a) National Science Foundation Competitive Grant Research (1) In general.--The Director of the National Science Foundation, in coordination with the Under Secretary, shall establish a program to award grants to eligible entities to (B) other research that is consistent with the research (2) Selection.--The National Science Foundation shall select grant recipients under this section through its merit (b) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall carry out a program of research described in subsection (c) or other research that is consistent with the research objectives (2) Research activities.--Research carried out under (B) awarding grants to eligible entities to carry out (C) contracting with eligible entities to carry out (D) entering into cooperative agreements to carry out (c) Research.--The research described in this subsection is research that is consistent with the purposes described in section 5(a)(2) and is described by one or more of the (1) Fundamental hurricane research.--Fundamental hurricane (A) Community research models.--Research to support continued development and maintenance of community weather research and forecast models recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(5), including advanced methods of observing storm structure and assimilating observations into the models, in which the agency or institution hosting the models ensures broad access and use of the model by members of the Task Force and the civilian research community. (B) Predicting hurricane intensity and structure.--Research (i) storm formation and tracking with extended time scale (ii) rapid changes in storm size, motion, structure, and (iv) the transition to extratropical characteristics as conditions, including the atmosphere, ocean, and land (C) Understanding air and sea interactions.--Research regarding observations, theory, and modeling to improve understanding of air and sea interaction in hurricanes and (D) Predicting storm surge, waves, rainfall, inland flooding, and strong winds produced by hurricanes.--Research to understand, model, and predict rainfall, coastal and riverline flooding, high winds, and the potential occurrence of tornadoes, including probabilistic modeling, mapping, and understanding of the complex relationships between hurricanes and climate on seasonal to decadal time scales, such as research to determine the most effective methods to use observational information and numerical-model simulations to examine short-term and long-term impacts of climate on changes in storm intensity, geographic distribution, and (F) Relationships between hurricanes and ecosystems.-- Research to improve the understanding of how hurricanes affect ecosystems, landscapes, and natural resources and to develop assessments for hurricane vulnerability and risk, (i) how ecosystems have been influenced by past hurricanes and the ability and capacity of ecosystems to recover from (ii) how ecosystem management practices can minimize disruptions to ecosystem functions and dependent economic (iii) the role of natural features, such as barrier (I) acting as natural buffers to wind and flood forces; and (2) Technology assessment and development.--Technology assessment and development, which may consist of the (A) Improved observation of hurricanes and tropical storms.--Research to improve hurricane and tropical storm observations and to improve the understanding of the complex nature of storms and their interaction with the natural and built environment through development and application of new (vi) other geospatial technologies and geospatial data, (B) Computational capability.--Research and development of robust computational capabilities and facilities required to conduct numerical and other types of modeling that support the scientific studies and research carried out under the Initiative as well as data acquisition and modeling during hurricane events, including research to improve understanding of the efficient utility of multiple models that-- (i) require sharing and interoperability of databases, computing environments, networks, visualization tools, and analytic systems that improve on such technologies that are available on the date of the enactment of this Act; and (ii) are used for transitioning hurricane research assets (C) Technologies for disaster response and recovery.-- Research to improve damage assessments after a hurricane and emergency communications during hurricane response and (i) communications networks for government agencies and (iii) cyber-security during hurricane or storm related (iv) use of models, remote sensing, and statistically based ground sampling to support effective and rapid damage assessment to scale disaster response and recovery needs. (3) Research integration, transition, and application.-- Research on integration, transition, and application of research results, which may consist of the following: (A) Transition of research to operations.--Research to develop mechanisms to accelerate the application of improved models, observations, communication, and risk assessment systems, and related research products to forecasting and other operational settings, including use of 1 or more (B) Assessing vulnerable infrastructure.--Developing a national engineering assessment and clearinghouse of coastal infrastructure by leveraging and building upon existing Federal activities, resources, and research, including infrastructure related to levees, sea walls, and similar coastal flood-protection structures, drainage systems, communications, to determine the level of vulnerability of (C) Interaction of hurricanes with engineered structures.-- Research to improve understanding of the impacts of hurricanes and tropical storms on buildings, structures, and housing combined with modeling that is essential for guiding the creation of improved building designs and construction codes in locations particularly vulnerable to hurricanes. (D) Evacuation planning.--Research to improve the manner in which hurricane-related information is provided to, and utilized by, the public and government officials, including research to assist officials of State, tribal, regional, or (i) determining the circumstances in which evacuations are (i) assess the social, behavioral, and economic factors that influence decision making by the public, government officials, nongovernmental entities, the private sector, and other impacted populations before, during, and in the (ii) improve the translation of natural science and engineering research carried out under the Initiative into informed decision making that enables communities, economies, and the man-made and natural environments to become resilient to hurricane impacts, including development of effective risk and vulnerability assessment and risk communication tools; (iii) develop methods of assessing disaster recovery costs, both government and nongovernment, and of comparing the relative benefits of disaster mitigation methods with (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2010 through 2015 amounts as follows: (1) To the Under Secretary, $18,750,000 to carry out sections 5, 6, and 7(b), of which not less than $13,750,000 (2) To the Director of the National Science Foundation, atmosphere.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(1), the Under Secretary may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Under Secretary considers foundation.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(2), the Director of the National Science Foundation may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Director considers appropriate to carry out sections 5 and (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council of the National Academies for the National Research Council to (2) Timing.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into the agreement described in paragraph (1) not later than 180 (b) Independent Review of National Hurricane Research Initiative.--Under an agreement between the Under Secretary and the National Research Council under this section, the National Research Council shall carry out an independent review of the Initiative. In carrying out the review, the National Research Council shall review the following: (1) Whether the Initiative has well-defined, prioritized, (2) Whether the Initiative is properly coordinated among (3) Whether the Initiative has allocated appropriate (4) Whether suitable mechanisms exist for transitioning the research results from the Initiative into operational technologies and procedures and activities in a timely (c) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives a report on the results of the (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the Under Secretary, $750,000 to carry Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Policyholder Disaster (1) Rising costs resulting from natural disasters are placing an increasing strain on the ability of property and casualty insurance companies to assure payment of homeowners' claims and other insurance claims arising from major natural (2) Present tax laws do not provide adequate incentives to assure that natural disaster insurance is provided or, where such insurance is provided, that funds are available for payment of insurance claims in the event of future catastrophic losses from major natural disasters, as present law requires an insurer wishing to accumulate surplus assets for this purpose to do so entirely from its after-tax (3) Revising the tax laws applicable to the property and casualty insurance industry to permit carefully controlled accumulation of pretax dollars in separate reserve funds devoted solely to the payment of claims arising from future major natural disasters will provide incentives for property and casualty insurers to make natural disaster insurance available, will give greater protection to the Nation's homeowners, small businesses, and other insurance consumers, and will help assure the future financial health of the (4) Implementing these changes will reduce the possibility that a significant portion of the private insurance system would fail in the wake of a major natural disaster and that governmental entities would be required to step in to provide SEC. 3. CREATION OF POLICYHOLDER DISASTER PROTECTION FUNDS; (a) Contributions to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Subsection (c) of section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to the taxable income of insurance companies other than life insurance companies) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (12), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (13) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(14) the qualified contributions to a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year.''. (b) Distributions From Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Paragraph (1) of section 832(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at ``(F) the amount of any distributions from a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year, except that a distribution made to return to the qualified insurance contribution (as defined in subsection (h)) for a taxable year shall not be included in gross income if such distribution is made prior to the filing of the tax return (c) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to insurance company taxable income) is amended by adding at the end the following new ``(h) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Policyholder disaster protection fund.--The term `policyholder disaster protection fund' (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the `fund') means any custodial account, trust, or any other arrangement or account-- ``(A) which is established to hold assets that are set aside solely for the payment of qualified losses, and ``(i) the assets in the fund are required to be invested in a manner consistent with the investment requirements applicable to the qualified insurance company under the laws ``(ii) the net income for the taxable year derived from the assets in the fund is required to be distributed no less ``(iii) an excess balance drawdown amount is required to be distributed to the qualified insurance company no later than the close of the taxable year following the taxable year for ``(iv) a catastrophe drawdown amount may be distributed to the qualified insurance company if distributed prior to the close of the taxable year following the year for which such ``(v) a State required drawdown amount may be distributed, ``(vi) no distributions from the fund are required or permitted other than the distributions described in clauses contributions that are not qualified contributions. ``(2) Qualified insurance company.--The term `qualified insurance company' means any insurance company subject to tax ``(3) Qualified contribution.--The term `qualified contribution' means a contribution to a fund for a taxable year to the extent that the amount of such contribution, when added to the previous contributions to the fund for such ``(B) the fund balance determined as of the close of the ``(4) Excess balance drawdown amounts.--The term `excess balance drawdown amount' means the excess (if any) of-- ``(A) the fund balance as of the close of the taxable year, ``(B) the fund cap for the following taxable year. ``(A) In general.--The term `catastrophe drawdown amount' means an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount ``(B) Net losses from qualifying events.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the qualified losses for the taxable year determined without ``(C) Gross losses in excess of threshold.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over ``(I) the fund cap for the taxable year (determined without ``(II) 30 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable catastrophe loss year.--If for any taxable year included in the reference period the qualified losses exceed the amount determined under subparagraph (C)(ii), the `catastrophe drawdown amount' shall be an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount determined under subparagraph (B) or the amount determined under this subparagraph. The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be an amount equal ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over (determined without regard to paragraph (9)(E)), or ``(II) 10 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable ``(E) Reference period.--For purposes of subparagraph (D), the reference period shall be determined under the following ``For a taxable year beginning in-- The reference period shall be-- 2012 and later...................... The 3 preceding taxable years. 2011................................ The 2 preceding taxable years. 2010................................ The preceding taxable year. 2008 or before...................... No reference period applies. ``(6) State required drawdown amount.--The term `State required drawdown amount' means any amount that the department of insurance for the qualified insurance company's jurisdiction of domicile requires to be distributed from the fund, to the extent such amount is not otherwise described in ``(7) Fund balance.--The term `fund balance' means-- ``(A) the sum of all qualified contributions to the fund, ``(B) less any net investment loss of the fund for any ``(C) less the sum of all distributions under clauses (iii) ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified losses' means, with ``(i) the amount of losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred in the qualified lines of business specified in paragraph (9), net of reinsurance, as reported in the qualified insurance company's annual statement for the taxable year, that are attributable to one or more qualifying events (regardless of when such qualifying events occurred), ``(ii) the amount by which such losses and loss adjustment expenses attributable to such qualifying events have been reduced for reinsurance received and recoverable, plus ``(iii) any nonrecoverable assessments, surcharges, or other liabilities that are borne by the qualified insurance company and are attributable to such qualifying events. ``(B) Qualifying event.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term `qualifying event' means any event that satisfies ``(i) Event.--An event satisfies this clause if the event ``(III) Winter catastrophe (snow, ice, or freezing). ``(ii) Catastrophe designation.--An event satisfies this ``(I) is designated a catastrophe by Property Claim ``(II) is declared by the President to be an emergency or ``(III) is declared to be an emergency or disaster in a similar declaration by the chief executive official of a State, possession, or territory of the United States, or the ``(A) In general.--The term `fund cap' for a taxable year is the sum of the separate lines of business caps for each of the qualified lines of business specified in the table ``(B) Separate lines of business cap.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the separate lines of business cap, with respect to a qualified line of business specified in the table contained in subparagraph (C), is the product of-- ``(i) net written premiums reported in the annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable year in such line ``(ii) the fund cap multiplier applicable to such qualified ``(C) Qualified lines of business and their respective fund cap multipliers.--For purposes of this paragraph, the qualified lines of business and fund cap multipliers specified in this subparagraph are those specified in the Fire..............................................................0.25 Allied............................................................1.25 Farmowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.25 Homeowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.75 Commercial Multi Peril (non-liability portion)....................0.50 Earthquake.......................................................13.00 Inland Marine.....................................................0.25. ``(D) Subsequent modifications of the annual statement blank.--If, with respect to any taxable year beginning after the effective date of this subsection, the annual statement blank required to be filed is amended to replace, combine, or otherwise modify any of the qualified lines of business specified in subparagraph (C), then for such taxable year subparagraph (C) shall be applied in a manner such that the fund cap shall be the same amount as if such reporting ``(E) 20-year phase-in.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (C), the fund cap for a taxable year shall be the amount determined under subparagraph (C), as adjusted pursuant to subparagraph (D) (if applicable), multiplied by the phase-in ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2009........................................... 5 percent 2010........................................... 10 percent 2011........................................... 15 percent 2012........................................... 20 percent 2013........................................... 25 percent 2014........................................... 30 percent 2015........................................... 35 percent 2016........................................... 40 percent 2017........................................... 45 percent 2018........................................... 50 percent 2019........................................... 55 percent 2020........................................... 60 percent 2021........................................... 65 percent 2022........................................... 70 percent 2023........................................... 75 percent 2024........................................... 80 percent 2025........................................... 85 percent 2026........................................... 90 percent 2027........................................... 95 percent 2028 and later................................. 100 percent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ``(10) Treatment of investment income and gain or loss.-- ``(A) Contributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money to a fund shall be treated as a sale or exchange of such property for an amount equal to its fair market value as of the date of transfer, and appropriate adjustment shall be made to the basis of such property. Section 267 shall ``(B) Distributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money by a fund to the qualified insurance company shall not be treated as a sale or exchange or other disposition of such property. The basis of such property immediately after such transfer shall be the greater of the basis of such property immediately before such transfer or the fair market value of such property on the date of such transfer. ``(C) Income with respect to fund assets.--Items of income of the type described in paragraphs (1)(B), (1)(C), and (2) of subsection (b) that are derived from the assets held in a fund, as well as losses from the sale or other disposition of such assets, shall be considered items of income, gain, or loss of the qualified insurance company. Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(F) of subsection (b), distributions of net income to the qualified insurance company pursuant to paragraph (1)(B)(ii) of this subsection shall not cause such ``(11) Net income; net investment loss.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B)(ii), the net income derived from the assets in the fund for the taxable year shall be the items of income and gain for the taxable year, less the items of loss for the taxable year, derived from such assets, as described in paragraph (10)(C). For purposes of paragraph (7), there is a net investment loss for the taxable year to the extent that the items of loss described in the preceding sentence exceed the items of income and gain described in the preceding ``(12) Annual statement.--For purposes of this subsection, the term `annual statement' shall have the meaning set forth ``(13) Exclusion of premiums and losses on certain puerto rican risks.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, premiums and losses with respect to risks covered by a catastrophe reserve established under the laws or regulations of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall not be taken into account under this subsection in determining the amount of the fund cap or the amount of qualified losses. ``(14) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this subsection, including regulations-- ``(A) which govern the application of this subsection to a qualified insurance company having a taxable year other than the calendar year or a taxable year less than 12 months, ``(B) which govern a fund maintained by a qualified insurance company that ceases to be subject to this part, and ``(C) which govern the application of paragraph (9)(D).''. (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Commission on Catastrophic (1) Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, which struck the United States in 2005, caused over $200 billion in total economic losses, including insured and uninsured losses. (2) Although private sector insurance is currently available to spread some catastrophe-related losses throughout the Nation and internationally, most experts believe there will be significant insurance and reinsurance shortages, resulting in dramatic rate increases for consumers and businesses, and the unavailability of catastrophe (3) The Federal Government has provided and will continue to provide billions of dollars and resources to pay for losses from catastrophes, including hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, tornados, and other disasters, at huge (4) The Federal Government has a critical interest in ensuring appropriate and fiscally responsible risk management of catastrophes. Mortgages require reliable property insurance, and the unavailability of reliable property insurance would make most real estate transactions impossible. In addition, the public health, safety, and welfare demand that structures damaged or destroyed in a catastrophe be reconstructed as soon as possible. Therefore, the inability of the private sector insurance and reinsurance markets to maintain sufficient capacity to enable Americans to obtain property insurance coverage in the private sector endangers the national economy and the public health, safety, (5) Multiple proposals have been introduced in the United States Congress over the past decade to address catastrophic risk insurance, including the creation of a national catastrophic reinsurance fund and the revision of the Federal tax code to allow insurers to use tax-deferred catastrophe funds, yet Congress has failed to act on any of these (6) To the extent the United States faces high risks from catastrophe exposure, essential technical information on financial structures and innovations in the catastrophe (7) The most efficient and effective approach to assessing the catastrophe insurance problem in the public policy context is to establish a bipartisan commission of experts to study the management of catastrophic disaster risk, and to require such commission to timely report its recommendations to Congress so that Congress can quickly craft a solution to Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance (in this Act (a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of the (1) The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management (3) 12 additional members or their designees of whom one (B) a representative of a primary insurance company; (D) an independent insurance agent with experience in (H) a faculty member of an accredited university with (I) a member of nationally recognized think tank with (L) a nationally recognized expert in antitrust law. (1) In general.--Any member of the Commission described under subsection (a)(3) shall be appointed only upon (C) the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and (D) the minority leader of the House of Representatives. (2) Consultation.--In making any appointment under paragraph (1), each individual described in paragraph (1) (c) Eligibility Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (a), no member or officer of the Congress, or other member or officer of the Executive Branch of the United States Government or any State government may be appointed to (1) In general.--Each member of the Commission shall be (2) Vacancies.--A vacancy on the Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as (1) Majority.--A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold (2) Approval actions.--All recommendations and reports of the Commission required by this Act shall be approved only by (f) Chairperson.--The majority leader of the Senate, the minority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the minority leader of the House of Representatives shall jointly select 1 member appointed pursuant to subsection (a) to serve as the Chairperson of the (g) Meetings.--The Council shall meet at the call of its Chairperson or a majority of its members at any time. (A) the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, and the 4 major hurricanes earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods; and (2) recommend and report, as required under section 6, any necessary legislative and regulatory changes that will-- (A) improve the domestic and international financial health (i) availability of adequate insurance coverage when an appointment of Commission members under section 4, the Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress a final report containing a detailed statement of its findings, together with any recommendations for legislation or administrative action that the Commission considers appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of section (b) Considerations.--In developing any recommendations under subsection (a), the Commission shall consider-- (1) the catastrophic insurance and reinsurance market structures and the relevant commercial practices in such insurance industries in providing insurance protection to (2) the constraints and opportunities in implementing a catastrophic insurance system that can resolve key obstacles currently impeding broader implementation of catastrophe risk (3) methods to improve risk underwriting practices, (A) analysis of modalities of risk transfer for potential (B) assessment of private securitization of insurances (C) private-public partnerships to increase insurance (D) the financial feasibility and sustainability of a national catastrophe pool or regional catastrophe pools designed to provide adequate insurance coverage and increased (4) approaches for implementing a public insurance scheme for low-income communities, in order to promote risk (5) methods to strengthen insurance regulatory requirements and supervision of such requirements, including solvency for (6) methods to promote public insurance policies linked to programs for loss reduction in the uninsured sectors of the enforcement of structural mitigation and vulnerability reduction measures, such as zoning and building code (8) the appropriate role for the Federal Government in stabilizing the property and casualty insurance and (ii) the modernization of Federal taxation policies; and (iii) an ``insurance of last resort'' mechanism; and (9) the merits of 3 principle legislative proposals (A) The creation of a Federal catastrophe fund to act as a (B) Tax-deferred catastrophe accounts for insurers (S. (C) Tax-free catastrophe accounts for policyholders (S. (a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at the direction of the Commission, any subcommittee or member of the Commission, (1) hold such public hearings in such cities and countries, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths or affirmations as the Commission or such subcommittee or member (2) require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, documents, tapes, and materials as the Commission or such subcommittee or (1) Issuance.--Subpoenas issued under subsection (a) shall bear the signature of the Chairperson of the Commission and shall be served by any person or class of persons designated (2) Enforcement.--In the case of contumacy or failure to obey a subpoena issued under subsection (a), the United States district court for the judicial district in which the subpoenaed person resides, is served, or may be found may issue an order requiring such person to appear at any designated place to testify or to produce documentary or other evidence. Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt of that court. (A) In general.--Information obtained under a subpoena issued under subsection (a) which is deemed confidential, or with reference to which a request for confidential treatment is made by the person furnishing such information-- (i) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of (ii) shall not be published or disclosed unless the Commission determines that the withholding of such information is contrary to the interest of the United States. (B) Exception.--The requirements of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the publication or disclosure of any data aggregated in a manner that ensures protection of the (c) Authority of Members or Agents of the Commission.--Any member or agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the Commission, take any action which the Commission is (1) Authority.--Notwithstanding any provision of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, the Commission may secure directly from any department or agency of the United States any information necessary to enable the Commission to (2) Procedure.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, the head of that department or agency shall furnish the information requested to the Commission. (e) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government. (f) Administrative Support Services.--Upon the request of the Commission, the Administrator of General Services shall provide to the Commission, on a reimbursable basis, any administrative support services necessary for the Commission (1) In general.--The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property. (2) Regulations.--The Commission shall adopt internal regulations governing the receipt of gifts or donations of services or property similar to those described in part 2601 (a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission. subcommittees and appoint persons to such subcommittees as (d) Staff.--Subject to such policies as the Commission may prescribe, the Chairperson of the Commission may appoint and fix the pay of such additional personnel as the Chairperson considers appropriate to carry out the duties of the (e) Applicability of Certain Civil Service Laws.-- Subcommittee members and staff of the Commission may be-- (1) appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive (2) paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of that title relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that an individual so appointed may not receive pay in excess of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General objectives, the Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services of consultants and experts under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General (g) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Commission to assist in (2) such detail shall be without interruption or loss of The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date on which the Commission submits its report under section 6. There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period of continuation coverage under group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage provisions so as to provide for a total period of continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on Health, Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, today I rise to address a growing problem resulting from America's high levels of unemployment and economic downturn. Congress is working to design health reform that will provide access to quality, affordable insurance coverage for every American, but as unemployment numbers continue to rise, help may not come in time to avoid coverage denials on the individual insurance market and unbearable economic strain for those job seekers whose COBRA coverage The Comprehensive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 codified 18 months of additional group rate coverage under employer sponsored plans following a triggering event such as job loss. This law has been instrumental in providing continuity of health coverage for families. The measure requires companies with over 20 employees to provide access to 18 months of continued coverage at the employee's expense, except in cases of firing for gross employee misconduct. Beneficiaries cover the additional administrative expense, and may be charged up to 103 percent The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act provided help with health insurance for families who lost their jobs after September 1, 2008 and through December of 2009. For those in this category, the federal government provides nine months of subsidized premiums, with beneficiaries covering 35 percent of premium costs. However, the For those that lost their job before September, and are still looking for work, the situation is dire. Many are quickly facing the end of their 18 month eligibility period for COBRA. They hear about health reform but have no idea when it may come. Insurance exchanges to guaranteeing eligibility and reasonable premiums on the individual market could take years to set up. In the mean time, those who could have afforded coverage under COBRA may instead have to resort to The Emergency COBRA Expansion Act of 2009 will give job seekers the opportunity to continue their COBRA coverage for up to an additional 6 months. The bill applies to all of those utilizing COBRA benefits as of the date of bill passage, and would not extend anyone's coverage beyond 12 months from the date of bill enactment. A year from now, our country will be on the road to economic recovery, but in the meantime we need to help struggling families to stay insured and healthy. S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise to introduce this bill in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the program, this bill will create a more equitable and flexible method for federal agencies to fairly allocate federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the nation. Earlier this year, I filed an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, the true order of preference is for determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone, HUBZone, program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted bill provides equity for the SBA's The bill provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This bill makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, Service Disabled Veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service- disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. Of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this bill brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the bill authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for Federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill. SENATE RESOLUTION 218--MAKING MINORITY PARTY APPOINTMENTS FOR THE 111TH Mr. McCONNELL submitted the following resolution; which was Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th Congress, or until their successors are appointed: COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, SENATE RESOLUTION 219--HONORING THE HOCKEY TEAM OF EAST SIDE HIGH Mr. MENENDEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred Whereas adolescents who lack a structured, after-school environment are at high risk of delinquency, poor academic Whereas the lack of a structured after-school environment is especially prevalent in inner-city communities such as Whereas athletic organizations provide a safe after-school environment in which adolescents learn about commitment, Whereas East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey, formed Whereas members of the East Side High School hockey team Whereas the New Jersey Devils offered assistance to the East Side High School hockey team, including access to the Whereas the nonprofit organization, Hockey in Newark, has joined with the New Jersey Devils and the National Hockey League to collect and distribute donated hockey equipment and uniforms valued at $85,000 to low-income children in Newark, (1) commends the dedication of the players and coaches of the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New (2) wishes the East Side High School hockey team many (3) commends the New Jersey Devils for engaging the local community and providing low-income, at-risk children the SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 33--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT A COMMEMORATIVE POSTAGE STAMP SHOULD BE ISSUED TO HONOR THE CREW OF THE USS MASON DE-529 WHO FOUGHT AND SERVED DURING WORLD WAR II Mr. BURRIS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 was the only United States Navy destroyer with a predominantly black enlisted crew Whereas the integration of the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 was the role model for racial integration on Navy vessels and Whereas the integration of the crew signified the first time that black citizens of the United States were trained to Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 served as a convoy escort in the Atlantic and Mediterranean Theatres during World War II; Whereas, in September 1944, the crew of the USS Mason DE- 529 helped save Convoy NY119, ushering the convoy to safety Whereas, in 1998, the Secretary of the Navy John H. Dalton made an official decision to name an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer the USS Mason DDG-87 in order to honor the USS Whereas, in 1994, President Clinton awarded the USS Mason DE-529 a long-overdue commendation, presenting the award to Whereas commemorative postage stamps have been issued to honor important vessels, aircrafts, and battles in the history of the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the United States Postal Service should issue a postage stamp honoring the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued. SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson, of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 213, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 706. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HEALTH CARE BENEFITS AND (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) Career members of the Armed Forces and their families extraordinary sacrifices, over the course of 20-year to 30- year careers in protecting freedom for all Americans. (2) The nature and extent of these demands and sacrifices are never so evident as in wartime, not only during the current combat operations, but also during the wars of the last 60 years when current retired members of the Armed Forces were on continuous call to go in harm's way when and (3) A primary benefit of enduring the extraordinary sacrifices inherent in a military career is a range of retirement benefits, including lifetime health benefits, that a grateful Nation provides for those who choose to subordinate their personal life to the national interest for (4) Currently serving and retired members of the uniformed services and their families and survivors deserve benefits equal to their commitment and service to our Nation. (5) Many employers are curtailing health benefits and shifting costs to their employees, which may result in retired members of the Armed Forces returning to the Department of Defense, and its TRICARE program, for health care benefits during retirement, and contribute to health (6) Defense health costs also expand as a result of service-unique military readiness requirements, wartime requirements, and other necessary requirements that represent the ``cost of business'' for the Department of Defense. (7) While the Department of Defense has made some efforts to contain increases in the cost of the TRICARE program, too many of those efforts have been devoted to shifting a larger share of the costs of benefits under that program to retired members of the Armed Forces who have earned health care benefits in return for a career of military service. (8) In some cases health care providers refuse to accept TRICARE patients because that program pays less than other public and private payors and imposes unique administrative (9) The Department of Defense records deposits to the Department of Defense Military Retiree Health Care Fund as discretionary costs to the Department in spite of legislation enacted in 2006 that requires such deposits to be made (10) As a result, annual payments for the future costs of servicemember health care continue to compete with other (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that-- (1) the Department of Defense and the Nation have an obligation to provide health care benefits to retired members of the Armed Forces that equals the quality of their selfless (2) past proposals by the Department of Defense to impose substantial fee increases on military beneficiaries have failed to acknowledge properly the findings addressed in (3) the Department of Defense has many additional options to constrain the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage retired members of the Armed Forces who participate or seek to participate in the TRICARE program, and should pursue any and all such options rather than seeking large increases for enrollment fees, deductibles, and copayments for such retirees, and their families or SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which SEC. __. PORT CHICAGO NAVAL MAGAZINE NATIONAL MEMORIAL. (a) In General.--Section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (f); (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall administer the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System in accordance with-- ``(B) the laws generally applicable to units of the ``(i) the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et ``(ii) the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.). ``(2) Administered land.--The land described in subsection (d)(2) shall be administered in accordance with this ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of the Interior providing for the transfer, without reimbursement, of administrative jurisdiction to the Secretary of the Interior of the land described in paragraph (2), if the Secretary of Defense determines that the land is in excess of ``(2) Description of land.--The land referred to in paragraph (1) is the parcel of approximately 5 acres of land, as depicted on the map entitled `Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial, Proposed Boundary', numbered 018/80,001, ``(e) Agreement With City of Concord and East Bay Regional Park District.--The Secretary of the Interior may enter into an agreement with the City of Concord, California, and the East Bay Regional Park District to establish and operate a facility for visitor orientation and parking, administrative offices, and curatorial storage for the Port Chicago Naval (3) in subsection (f), (as redesignated by paragraph (1)), by striking ``Secretary of the Navy to provide public access to the Memorial'' and inserting ``Secretary of Defense to provide the maximum practicable public access to the Memorial (b) Sense of Congress on Remediation and Repair of Port (1) Remediation.--It is the sense of Congress that, to facilitate the transfer of administrative jurisdiction described in subsection (d) of section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; 106 Stat. 4235)(as added by subsection (a)), the Secretary of Defense should promptly remediate any remaining environmental contamination relating to the land. (2) Repair.--It is the sense of Congress that, in order to preserve the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial for future generations, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Interior should work together to-- (A) repair storm damage to the Port Chicago Naval Magazine (B) develop a process by which future repairs and necessary modifications to the Memorial can be achieved in as timely (c) Effect.--Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section affects or limits the application of, or obligation to comply with, any environmental law, including section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)). SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which Section 2473 of title 10, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following ``(c) Small arms Production Industrial Base.--In this section, the term `small arms production industrial base' means the persons and organizations that are engaged in the production or maintenance of small arms within the United (2) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 394, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1032. TRIAL BY MILITARY COMMISSION OF ALIEN UNPRIVILEGED (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged belligerents for violations of the law of war ``(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the preferred forum for the trial of alien unprivileged enemy belligerents subject to this chapter for violations of the law of war and other offenses made punishable by this chapter is trial by military commission under this chapter. ``(b) Reporting Requirement.--For any alien unprivileged enemy belligerent subject to this chapter whom the United States Government decides to try in Federal district court rather than by military commission under this chapter, the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General shall report to Congress, not later than 30 days after such decision is made, ``(1) the criteria used to decide to try such individual in Federal district court rather than by military commission; ``(2) an estimate of the total costs to the United States Government, including costs borne by the judicial branch, attributable to trying such individual in Federal district ``(3) any other information that the Secretary of Defense (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections of the beginning of such subchapter, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding after the item relating to ``948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall give a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is being evaluated by a physical evaluation board for separation or retirement for disability, incurred in the performance of military duties under this chapter or for placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter the option to remain on active duty during the physical evaluation board process ``(A) is cleared by the board for continuation of active ``(B) is separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2) A member may change the election under paragraph (1) at any point during the physical evaluation board process and ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. ``(e) A member contemplating the exercise of an option under subsection (d) may exercise such option only after being afforded an opportunity to consult with a member of the SEC. 653. ENCOURAGEMENT OF USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Assignment to Community Based Warrior Transition Units for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(ii) consistent with the needs of the armed forces. ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 429, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) Building foreign partner capacity is a fundamental cornerstone of the security strategy of the United States. (2) Significant progress has been made in this area over the past several years, but the United States Government must continue to increase its efforts, including improving reliability of funding and late notifications of school availability for the International Military Education and (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on the effectiveness and efficiency (2) Content.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following information broken out by year over the (A) Number of courses in the IMET program available, accomplished, and cancelled and an explanation therefor. (B) Number of students authorized and actual attendance for each course and an explanation for the difference. (C) The total budget and actual budget executed for each course in the IMET program and an explanation for the (D) The process for selecting students for the IMET (E) The process for distributing funding for each school, (F) Lessons learned to ensure student attendance and course SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following: (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) According to the Department of Defense's (DoD) 2009 Annual Report on Military Power of the People's Republic of China, the military balance in the Taiwan Strait has been shifting in China's favor since 2000, marked by the sustained deployment of advanced military equipment to the Chinese (2) Although the DoD's 2002 Report concluded that Taiwan ``has enjoyed dominance of the airspace over the Taiwan Strait for many years,'' the DoD's 2009 Report states this (3) China has based 490 combat aircraft (330 fighters and 160 bombers) within unrefueled operational range of Taiwan, and has the airfield capacity to expand that number by hundreds. In contrast, Taiwan has 390 combat aircraft (all of (4) Also according to the DoD's 2009 Report, China has continued its build-up of conventional ballistic missiles since 2000, ``building a nascent capacity for conventional short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) strikes against Taiwan into what has become one of China's primary instruments of coercion.'' At this time, China has expanded its SRBM force opposite Taiwan to seven brigades with a total of 1,050 through 1,150 missiles, and is augmenting these forces with conventional medium-range ballistic missiles systems and at least 2 land attack cruise missile variants capable of ground or air launch. Advanced fighters and bombers, combined with enhanced training for nighttime and overwater flights, provide China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) with additional capabilities for regional strike or maritime (5) Furthermore, the Report maintains, ``the security situation in the Taiwan Strait is largely a function of dynamic interactions among Mainland China, Taiwan, and the United States. The PLA has developed and deployed military capability to coerce Taiwan or attempt an invasion if necessary. PLA improvements pose new challenges to Taiwan's security, which has historically been based upon the PLA's inability to project power across the 100 nautical-mile Taiwan Strait, natural geographic advantages of island defense, Taiwan's armed forces' technological superiority, (6) The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 requires that, in furtherance of the principle of maintaining peace and stability in the Western Pacific region, the United States shall make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity ``as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability,'' allowing that ``the President and the Congress shall determine the nature and quantity of such defense articles and services based solely upon their judgment of the (b) Report to Congress on Taiwan's Current Air Force and Future Self-Defense Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report, in both classified and (1) A thorough and complete assessment of the current state (2) An assessment of the effectiveness of the aircraft in the face of a full-scale concerted missile and air campaign by China, in which China uses its most modern surface-to-air (3) An analysis of the specific weapons systems and platforms that Taiwan would need to provide for it's self- defense and maintain control of its own air space. (4) Options for the United States to assist Taiwan in (5) A 5-year plan for fulfilling the obligations of the United States under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide for Taiwan's self-defense and aid Taiwan in maintaining control SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. POSTHUMOUS BENEFITS FOR SURVIVING SPOUSE. (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Military Widow and Surviving Spouse Protection Act''. (b) Amendment.--Section 1703(a)(1) of title XVII of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 ( Public Law 108-136) is amended by inserting ``or the citizen died while serving honorably in an active duty status in the military, air, or naval forces of the United States and such death occurred through no fault of the citizen,'' after SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING COMMITMENT TO GLOBAL (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The surge strategy executed in Iraq by General David H. Petraeus and General Raymond T. Odierno in 2007 and 2008 was highly successful in reducing levels of violence and enabling the Iraqi government and security forces to gain credibility (2) President Obama articulated his general strategy for Iraq during a speech at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, on February 27, 2009, stating that a central goal is to ensure that Iraq ``is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant''. During the speech, the President outlined the President's objective to ``transition to full Iraqi responsibility'' through the ``responsible removal of our combat brigades from Iraq''. (3) As part of the President's Iraq strategy, the President also indicated the President's commitment to ensuring that ``we preserve the gains we've made and protect our troops''. Consequently, the United States and our allies have a continued interest in maintaining these hard-fought security gains, especially during the upcoming Iraqi provincial elections, while simultaneously protecting the United States (4) A key component of the President's plan for Iraq is to retain a transitional force there to carry out several distinct functions, including training, equipping, and advising the Iraqi Security Forces, conducting targeted counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilian and military forces within Iraq. In accordance with this policy, United States forces have largely withdrawn from Iraqi cities, but the President expects that the transitional force, to number between 35,000 and 50,000 United States military servicemembers, will remain in Iraq for the (5) President Obama articulated his emerging plan for Afghanistan in a speech on March 27, 2009, stating that the United States goal there is to ``disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future''. To this end, the current surge strategy in Afghanistan, spearheaded by General Petraeus and General Stanley A. McChrystal, the new commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force, is critical to providing security for the Afghan populace, bolstering the Afghan security forces, and waging a successful campaign against Islamic extremists of al Qaeda, (6) President Obama's laudable goals of disrupting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and Pakistan and developing increasingly self-reliant Afghan security forces necessitated the surge of 17,000 additional United States troops to increase the overall size of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. These more robust forces, focusing in the south and east portions of the country, will have an enhanced ability to protect the Afghan population against a resurgence of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their allies, as well as to provide greater ability for the Afghan government (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the global war on terror represents a critical effort to protect the American people and ensure that future generations may continue to enjoy the precious freedoms we (2) the United States must remain committed to succeeding in the global war on terror and fighting the forces of Islamic extremism in Iraq and Afghanistan, including al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other groups, that are intent on the murder of innocent Americans, the destruction of the American way of life, and the global proliferation of radical and (3) our military servicemembers and civilian United States personnel serving in harm's way in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other fronts in the global war on terror must be given any and all resources they need to accomplish the missions that have been asked of them, including the deployment of additional forces, should United States commanders on the (4) in Iraq, the hard-earned security gains won by our servicemembers must be preserved, and the long-term United States strategy there must continue to reflect that essential (5) the President's plan for Iraq is fundamentally sound and represents a responsible and carefully considered strategy that will help Iraq maintain sovereignty, stability, and self-reliance, achievements that were made possible largely through the extraordinary efforts and tremendous sacrifices of United States servicemembers and civilian (6) the President's plan for Afghanistan is clearly intended to improve the overall security situation there and enable the eventual drawdown and withdrawal of United States forces, and the President's near-term strategy to surge forces and provide improved security to the Afghan people by locating United States military personnel among the population, in conjunction with the growing Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, which the United States supports and trains, will increase the security of the Afghan (7) although gains in the global war on terror will not come without a cost, the American people and the Iraqi and Afghan people share a common enemy and a common goal to do whatever is necessary to defeat terrorists and those who SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. REPORT ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF MEMBERS OF (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the efforts of the Air Force to attract and retain qualified individuals for service as members of the Air Force involved in the operation, maintenance, handling, and (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) A description of current reenlistment rates, set forth by Air Force Specialty Code, of members of the Air Force serving in positions involving the operation, maintenance, (2) A description of the current personnel fill rate for Air Force units involved in the operation, maintenance, (3) An description of the steps the Air Force has taken, including the use of retention bonuses or assignment incentive pay, to improve recruiting and retention of officers and enlisted personnel by the Air Force for the (4) An assessment of the feasibility, advisability, utility, and cost effectiveness of establishing additional bonuses or incentive pay as a way to enhance the recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the (5) An assessment of whether assignment incentive pay should be provided for members of the Air Force covered by (6) An assessment of the long-term community management plan for recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the positions described in paragraph SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. NO MIRANDA WARNINGS FOR AL QAEDA TERRORISTS. (1) the term ``foreign national'' means an individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States; and (A) has the same meaning that term has under the law of (B) includes a privileged belligerent and an unprivileged enemy belligerent, as those terms are defined in section 948a of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031 (b) No Miranda Warnings.--Absent an unappealable court order requiring the reading of such statements, no agency or department of the United States shall read to a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), or otherwise inform such a prisoner of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have under the Constitution of the United States or under any Federal statute, regulation, or treaty. No Federal statute, regulation, or treaty shall be construed to require that a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States be informed of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have. No statement that is made by a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States may be excluded from any proceeding on the basis that the prisoner was not informed of a right SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE (a) In General.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representative a report on financial assistance for child care provided by the Department of Defense, including through the Operation: Military Child Care and Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood programs, to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) The types of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in (2) The extent to which such members have taken advantage of such assistance since such assistance was first made (3) The formulas used for calculating the amount of such (5) The remaining costs of child care to families of such members that are not covered by the Department of Defense. (6) Any barriers to access to such assistance faced by such (7) The different criteria used by different States with respect to the regulation of child care services and the potential impact differences in such criteria may have on the (8) The different standards and criteria used by different programs of the Department of Defense for providing such assistance with respect to child care providers and the potential impact differences in such standards and criteria may have on the access of such members to such assistance. (9) Any other matters the Comptroller General determines relevant to the improvement of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a contingency operation. SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. INCREASE IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILD CARE FOR (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to increase financial assistance provided under Operation: Military Child Care to cover not less than 75 percent of the costs of child care provided (b) Operation: Military Child Care Defined.--In this section, the term ``Operation: Military Child Care'' refers to the program of the Department of Defense to provide financial assistance for child care to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. ___. CONSENT OF CONGRESS TO COMPACT AMENDMENTS. amendments of the State of Maryland, the amendments of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the amendments of the District of Columbia to sections 5, 9 and 18 of title III of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact. (b) Amendments.--The amendments referred to in subsection ``(a) The Authority shall be governed by a Board of eight Directors consisting of two Directors for each Signatory and two for the federal government (one of whom shall be a regular passenger and customer of the bus or rail service of the Authority). For Virginia, the Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; for the District of Columbia, by the Council of the District of Columbia; for Maryland, by the Washington Suburban Transit Commission; and for the Federal Government, by the Administrator of General Services. For Virginia and Maryland, the Directors shall be appointed from among the members of the appointing body, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a term coincident with their term on the appointing body. A Director for a Signatory may be removed or suspended from office only as provided by the law of the Signatory from which he was appointed. The nonfederal appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate for each Director. In addition, the Administrator of General Services shall also appoint two nonvoting members who shall serve as the alternates for the federal Directors. An alternate Director may act only in the absence of the Director for whom he has been appointed an alternate, except that, in the case of the District of Columbia where only one Director and his alternate are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate, including the federal nonvoting Directors, shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall be filled in the same manner as an original appointment. ``(b) Before entering upon the duties of his office each Director and alternate Director shall take and subscribe to the following oath (or affirmation) of office or any such other oath or affirmation, if any, as the constitution or laws of the Government he represents shall provide: `I, , hereby solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state or political jurisdiction from which I was appointed as a director (alternate director) of the Board of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and will faithfully discharge the duties of the (2) Subsection (a) of section 9 is amended to read as ``(a) The officers of the Authority, none of whom shall be members of the Board, shall consist of a general manager, a secretary, a treasurer, a comptroller, an inspector general, and a general counsel and such other officers as the Board may provide. Except for the office of general manager, inspector general, and comptroller, the Board may consolidate any of such other offices in one person. All such officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the Board, shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and shall perform such duties and functions as the Board shall specify. The Board shall fix and determine the compensation to be paid to all officers and, except for the general manager who shall be a full-time employee, all other officers may be hired on a full-time or part-time basis and may be compensated on a salary or fee basis, as the Board may determine. All employees and such officers as the Board may designate shall be appointed and removed by the general manager under such subsection (d) to read as follows (and by renumbering all ``(d) The inspector general shall report to the Board and head the Office of the Inspector General, an independent and objective unit of the Authority that conducts and supervises audits, program evaluations, and investigations relating to Authority activities; promotes economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Authority activities; detects and prevents fraud and abuse in Authority activities; and keeps the Board fully and currently informed about deficiencies in Authority activities as well as the necessity for and progress of (4) Section 18 is amended by adding a new section 18(d) to governments for the Authority for the purpose of matching federal funds appropriated in any given year as authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 regarding funding of capital and preventative maintenance projects of 1 the Authority shall be made from amounts derived from ``(2) For the purposes of this paragraph (d), a `dedicated funding source' means any source of funding that is earmarked or required under State or local law to be used to match Federal appropriations authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 for payments to the Authority.''. (c) Right to Alter, Amend, or Repeal.--The right to alter, amend, or repeal this section is expressly reserved. The consent granted by this section shall not be construed as jurisdiction of the United States in and over the region that (d) Construction and Severability.--It is intended that the provisions of this compact shall be reasonably and liberally construed to effectuate the purposes thereof. If any part or application of this compact, or legislation enabling the compact, is held invalid, the remainder of the compact or its application to other situations or persons shall not be (e) Inconsistency of Language.--The validity of this compact shall not be affected by any insubstantial differences in its form or language as adopted by the State of Maryland, Commonwealth of Virginia and District of (f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. INCLUSION OF SERVICE AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, IN Section 12731(f)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, is (1) by striking ``the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008'' and (2) by striking ``in any fiscal year after such date'' and inserting ``in any fiscal year after fiscal year 2001''. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. 617. SPECIAL COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED (a) In General.--Chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring ``(a) Monthly Compensation.--The Secretary concerned may pay to any member of the uniformed services described in subsection (b) monthly special compensation in an amount ``(b) Covered Members.--A member eligible for monthly special compensation authorized by subsection (a) is a member ``(1) has been certified by a licensed physician to be in need of assistance from another person to perform the ``(2) has a serious injury, disorder, or disease of either ``(A) is incurred or aggravated in the line of duty; and ``(B) compromises the member's ability to carry out one or more activities of daily living or requires the member to be constantly supervised to avoid physical harm to the member or ``(3) meets such other criteria, if any, as the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) prescribes for purposes of this compensation payable to a member under subsection (a) shall be determined under criteria prescribed by the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard), but may not exceed the amount of aid and attendance allowance authorized by section 1114(r)(2) of title 38 for veterans in need of aid and attendance. ``(2) In determining the amount of monthly special compensation, the Secretary concerned shall consider the ``(A) The extent to which home health care and related ``(B) The extent to which aid and attendance services are being provided by family and friends who may be compensated with funds provided through the monthly special compensation. ``(d) Payment Until Medical Retirement.--Monthly special compensation is payable under this section to a member described in subsection (b) for any month that begins before the date on which the member is medically retired. ``(e) Construction With Other Pay and Allowances.--Monthly special compensation payable to a member under this section is in addition to any other pay and allowances payable to the ``(f) Benefit Information.--The Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall ensure that members of the uniformed services who may be eligible for compensation under this section are made aware of the availability of such compensation by including information about such compensation in written and online ``(g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall prescribe regulations to carry out this (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall submit to Congress a report on the provision of compensation under section 439 of title 37, United States (2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall (A) An estimate of the number of members of the uniformed services eligible for compensation under such section 439. (B) The number of members of the uniformed services (C) The average amount of compensation provided to members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation. (D) The average amount of time required for a member of the uniformed services to receive such compensation after the (E) A summary of the types of injuries, disorders, and diseases of members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation that made such members eligible for such (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 7 of such title is amended by adding at ``439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring assistance in SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as At the end of subtitle B of title VI, add the following: SEC. 619. MONTHLY SPECIAL PAY FOR MEMBERS RETAINED IN THE (a) Monthly Special Pay Required.--The Secretary concerned shall pay to each member of the Armed Forces described in subsection (b) monthly special pay in the amount specified in subsection (c) for each month or portion of a month of pre- deployment and re-integration duty performed by such member on or after September 11, 2001, while described by subsection (b), regardless of whether or not such duty was performed by (b) Covered Members.--A member of the Armed Forces described in this subsection is any member of the Armed Forces whose enlistment or period of obligated service is extended, or whose eligibility for retirement is suspended, pursuant to section 123 or 12305 of title 10, United States Code, or any other provision of law authorizing the President to extend an enlistment or period of obligated service, or suspend an eligibility for retirement, of a member of the uniformed services in time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress or the President (commonly referred to (c) Amount.--The amount of monthly special pay payable under subsection (a) for a month or portion of a month is (d) Construction With Other Monthly Special Pay.--Monthly special pay may not be paid under both this section and 8116 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2009 (division C of Public Law 110-329; 122 Stat. 3646) for any SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following: (3) Assessments of members discharged or released upon return from deployment.--In the case of a member of the Armed Forces who is discharged or released from the Armed Forces upon the member's return from deployment, the Secretary of Defense shall make available the opportunity for such member to participate in the mental health assessments required under subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) together with the unit with which the member was previously deployed, without SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR MEMBERS OF THE (a) Availability of Defense Health Program Funds.--Subject to the provisions of appropriations Acts, amounts available for Defense Health Program shall be available for programs described in subsection (b) for members of the National Guard not on active duty in the Armed Forces who incurred a psychological or mental illness or injury on active duty in the Armed Forces as demonstrated by existing medical records or, in the absence of such records, by the opinion of a licensed medical provider in the State where the member (b) Covered Programs.--The programs described in this (1) Programs to assist members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) in case management in the receipt of non-clinical care for an illness or injury described in (2) Programs to advise members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) on the receipt of care and treatment for an illness or injury described in that (3) Programs of psychological health treatment for members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an (4) Programs supporting the efforts of the military departments to update and maintain military health electronic (5) Such other treatment programs as may assist a member of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an illness or injury described in that subsection, as determined by the State Surgeon General of the National Guard of the State in which the member reside, the Director of Psychological Health of the State in which the member resides, the mental health or equivalent agency of the State in which the member resides, or the Director of the Psychological Health Program (c) Budgeting.--The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall coordinate with the National Guard Bureau and other personnel and logistical elements of the National Guard in determining the budget requirements of the National Guard for the programs described in subsection (b). SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as (h) Post-Deployment Health Assessments of Guard and Reserve (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned shall administer a Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) to each member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning to the member's home station or county of residence from deployment in connection with a contingency operation within the (A) In the case of a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, the assessment shall be administered by not later than the member's release from active duty following such deployment or 10 days after the member's return to such (B) In the case of any other member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning from deployment, by not later than the member's release from active duty following such (A) In general.--The Post-Deployment Health Assessment required under this subsection shall be performed by a practitioner trained and certified as qualified to participate in the performance of Post-Deployment Health Assessments or Post-Deployment Health Reassessments. (B) Report on availability of trained personnel.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the availability of personnel described under subparagraph (A) to perform assessments pursuant to this subsection at the home stations or counties of residence of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces. If such personnel are not available at such locations, the Secretary shall indicate the additional resources necessary to ensure such availability within one SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, line 12, insert ``18 months,'' after ``12 SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER DEFENSE ARTICLES AND Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the congressional defense committees, may transfer defense articles and equipment used by the United States Armed Forces in Iraq as of the date of the enactment of this Act to the armed forces of the Governments of Lebanon and Jordan in a manner that is SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 713. REDUCTION OF MINIMUM DISTANCE OF TRAVEL FOR (a) Reduction.--Section 1074i(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``100 miles'' and inserting ``50 (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to referrals for specialty health care made on or after such (c) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(a)(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby decreased by $25,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for line item # 320 in the table in section 4301 for advertising. SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 435, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. PAYMENT BY SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OF PLOT (a) Plot Allowance.--Section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following ``(c)(1) In the case of an individual described in paragraph (2) who is buried in a cemetery that is owned by a State or by an agency or political subdivision of a State, the Secretary shall pay to such State, agency, or political subdivision the sum of $300 as a plot or interment allowance ``(2) An individual described in this paragraph is a spouse, surviving spouse (which for purposes of this chapter includes a surviving spouse who had a subsequent remarriage), minor child (which for purposes of this chapter includes a child under 21 years of age, or under 23 years of age if pursuing a course of instruction at an approved educational institution), or, in the discretion of the Secretary, unmarried adult child of any of person described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (7) of section 2402 of this title.''. (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (c) of section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to an individual who dies on or SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON NON-STRATEGIC NUCLEAR (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, chaired by former Secretaries of Defense William Perry and James Schlesinger, recently concluded that there is significant asymmetry between the tactical nuclear weapons arsenals of the Russian Federation (2) The Commission also determined that ``[a]s part of its strategy to assure its allies, the United States should not abandon strategic equivalency with Russia. Overall equivalence is important to many U.S. allies in Europe. The United States should not cede to Russia a posture of superiority in the name of deemphasizing nuclear weapons in U.S. military strategy. There seems no near-term prospect of such a result in the balance of operationally deployed (3) The Commission continued, ``But that balance does not exist in non-strategic nuclear forces, where Russia enjoys a sizeable numerical advantage. As noted above, it stores thousands of these weapons in apparent support of possible military operations west of the Urals. The United States deploys a small fraction of that number in support of nuclear sharing agreements in NATO. Precise numbers for the U.S. deployments are classified but their total is only about five percent of the total at the height of the Cold War. Strict U.S.-Russian equivalence in NSNF numbers is unnecessary. But the current imbalance is stark and worrisome to some U.S. allies in Central Europe. If and as reductions continue in the number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons, this imbalance will become more apparent and allies (4) The Commission stated, ``Some U.S. allies located closer to Russia, however, are fearful of Russia and its tactical nuclear forces. The imbalance in non-strategic nuclear weapons, which greatly favors Russia, is of rising concern and an illustration of the new challenges of strategic stability as reductions in strategic weapons (5) The Commission also stated, ``The combination of new warhead designs, the estimated production capability for new nuclear warheads, and precision delivery systems such as the Iskander short-range tactical ballistic missile (known as the SS-26 in the West), open up new possibilities for Russian efforts to threaten to use nuclear weapons to influence (b) Sense of the Senate.--The Senate strongly urges the (1) to make it a priority in all United States arms control negotiations with Russia to gain a verifiable accounting of the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia, including the types, current deployments, and security from theft of the same; (2) to ensure that reductions in the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia are a top priority in any arms control (3) to assure United States allies that they are protected from any use or threatened use of tactical nuclear weapons SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 68, between lines 12 and 13, insert the following: (6) A description of current and past sales, or contracts for the sale, by the Russian Federation of technology, materials, components, or services related to nuclear weapons or nuclear energy, ballistic missile or space launch capabilities, or advanced conventional weapons systems. SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 424, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following: SEC. 1059. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT REGARDING THE (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense may not carry out any program for the refurbishment, reuse, or replacement of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile unless the Director of the Sandia National Laboratory, the Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and JASON certify to the congressional defense committees that the program-- (1) may be carried out without the need for any testing; (2) will preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and (3) will provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (1) The term ``refurbishment'' means a strategy of, or similar to, the lifetime extension program, whereby individual warhead components are replaced before they degrade with components of nearly identical design or that (2) The term ``reuse'' means a strategy of using surplus pits or secondaries from other warhead types or, in certain cases, a strategy involving the new manufacture of these (3) The term ``replacement'' means a strategy that permits SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON STATUS OF UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WEAPONS (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found that ``the physical infrastructure'' of the United States nuclear weapons complex ``is in serious need of (2) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States also found that ``the intellectual infrastructure is also in serious trouble. A major cause is the recent (and (3) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States stated, ``Once core capabilities are established, the should require that annual NNSA budget submissions include an assessment of whether the budget as proposed will maintain these capabilities. To monitor progress, the NNSA and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should establish a formal mechanism for tracking funding sources for the weapons laboratories, without additional administrative (4) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States recommended, ``The NNSA should conduct a study of the core competencies needed in the weapons complex, and the Congress and Office of Management and Budget should use these (b) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the directors of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities and as part of the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense budget for each fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code), submit a report on the condition and status of the nuclear weapons complex of the United States. The report (1) An assessment of whether the budget is sufficient to preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and certification. (2) A description of the demographics and experience of the nuclear weapons workforce, including the number of individuals who have ever participated in an underground (3) A plan for enabling the design laboratories to grow the required expertise and sustain it over the long term. (4) An assessment of the condition and status of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons (5) A plan to provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (6) An assessment of the condition and status of the nuclear weapons production complex and the ability of the complex to sustain and modernize the nuclear deterrent. (1) The term ``national nuclear weapons laboratories'' includes Sandia National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. (2) The term ``nuclear weapons production facilities'' means the Y-12 complex at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, the Pantex Plant, the Nevada Test Site, SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall ensure that each member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is determined, after a mobilization and deployment to an area in which imminent danger pay is authorized under section 310 of title 37, to require evaluation for a physical or mental disability which could result in separation or retirement for disability under this chapter or placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter is retained on active duty during the disability evaluation process until ``(A) cleared by appropriate authorities for continuation ``(B) separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2)(A) A member described in paragraph (1) may request termination of active duty under such paragraph at any time during the demobilization or disability evaluation process of ``(B) Upon a request under subparagraph (A), a member described in paragraph (1) shall only be released from active duty after the member receives counseling about the ``(C) Each release from active duty under subparagraph (B) ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year SEC. 653. USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR COMMUNITY-BASED CARE Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Use of Local Residences for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community-based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence if residing at that location ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(II) the optimal course of medical treatment of the ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps, or other qualified legal assistance attorney, regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other transitional (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 66, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: (e) Comptroller General Review.--The Comptroller General of (1) review the assessment required by subsection (b) and (2) not later than 120 days after receiving the assessment and the plan, provide to the congressional defense committees SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title II, add the following: SEC. 245. CONTINUED PRODUCTION OF GROUND-BASED INTERCEPTOR (a) Limitation on Break in Production.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Missile Defense Agency does not allow a break in production of the Ground-based Interceptor (1) completed the Ballistic Missile Defense Review; and (2) made a determination with respect to the number of Ground-based Interceptor missiles that will be necessary to support the service life of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System. (b) Limitation on Certain Actions With Respect to Missile Field 1 and Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska.-- (1) Limitation on decommissioning of missile field 1.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that Missile Field 1 at Fort Greely, Alaska, does not complete decommissioning until seven silos have been emplaced at Missile Field 2 at Fort (2) Limitation with respect to disposition of silos at missile field 2.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no irreversible decision is made with respect to the disposition of operational silos at Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska, until that date that is 60 days after the date on which the reports required by subsections (b)(3) and (c)(3) of section 243 are submitted to the congressional SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 321, strike line 18 and all that follows through (1) In general.--Chapter 47A of title 10, United States (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of chapters for title 10, United States Code, is amended by (1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``covered (A) brought before a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act; and (B) in which final judgment has not been entered, or the matter has not otherwise become final, on the date of (2) Dismissal.--Any covered matter shall be dismissed (3) Statute of limitations.--For any offense charged in a covered matter dismissed under paragraph (2), the running of the statute of limitations for that offense shall be tolled during the period beginning on the date on which charges relating to the offense were filed with a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, and ending on the date of enactment of this Act. SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 435, between line 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. INVESTIGATIONS, AUDITS, INSPECTIONS, EVALUATIONS, Section 3518(c) of title 44, United States Code, is (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following: ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), this subchapter shall not apply to the collection of information during the conduct of any investigation, audit, inspection, evaluation, or other ``(A) any Federal office of Inspector General, including-- ``(i) any office of Inspector General of any establishment, Federal entity, or designated Federal entity as those terms are defined under sections 12(2), 8G(a)(1), and 8G(a)(2) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), ``(ii) any office of Special Inspector General established ``(B) the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency established under section 11 of the Inspector ``(C) the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board established under section 1521 of division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1211. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR THE STATE (a) Availability of Appropriated Funds.--The Secretary of Defense may, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, use funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2010 to pay the costs incurred by the National Guard (including the costs of pay and allowances of members of the National Guard) in conducting activities under the (1) to support the objectives of the commander of the combatant command for the theater of operations in which such (2) to build international civil-military partnerships and capacity on matters relating to defense and security. (1) Approval by commander of combatant command and chief of mission.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless such activities are jointly approved by the commander of the combatant command concerned (2) Participation by members.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for the participation of a member of the National Guard in activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless the member is on active duty in the Armed Forces at the time of such (c) Reimbursement.--In the event of the participation of personnel of a department or agency of the United States Government (other than the Department of Defense) in activities for which payment is made under subsection (a), the head of such department or agency shall reimburse the Secretary of Defense for the costs associated with the participation of such personnel in such activities. Amounts reimbursed the Department of Defense under this subsection shall be deposited in the appropriation or account from which amounts for the payment concerned were derived. Any amounts appropriation or account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and subject to the same conditions and limitations, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title VI insert the following: SEC. 635. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF Section 408a(c) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the first sentence the following: ``The regulations may not, for purposes of subsection (a), define normal commuting distance as any distance greater then 100 SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1083. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) President Barack Obama stated in his speech on April 4, 2009, in Prague, Czech Republic, on working toward a world without nuclear weapons, ``as long as these weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies''. (2) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found, in the Commission's final report, that preserving the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is essential to ensuring the reliability and credibility of the nuclear force, and that the nuclear triad becomes even more important as the size of the nuclear force (3) The stabilizing, reliable, and cost-effective Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile is a critically important component of the nuclear triad, essential for the United States to deter its enemies, assure its allies, and (4) The current 450-missile force, with its inherent broad dispersion, low warhead loading, and high readiness and reliability, makes a successful disarming attack nearly impossible and eliminates pressure to maintain a launch-on- (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) as the United States and Russia negotiate further reductions in strategic offensive arsenals, the United States must be certain that the long-term vitality of the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is not threatened; (2) the land-based nuclear force is the most stabilizing portion of the nuclear arsenal of the United States and it becomes even more so as the total number of weapons in the (3) a robust intercontinental ballistic missile force is an essential component of the nuclear triad and must be retained to advance the Nation's nuclear strategy of deterrence, SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Findings.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, any finding by Congress in division ___ of this Act relating to actual or perceived gender identity shall have no (b) Support for Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions.-- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Attorney General may not provide assistance to a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency under section __04 of this Act (c) Federal Offense.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, section 924 of title 18, United States Code, as (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``gender (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``gender identity''; (A) in paragraph (2), by adding ``and'' at the end; (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a (d) Statistics.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note), as amended by section __08 of this Act, is amended by striking ``and gender (e) Rule of Construction.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, division __ of this Act (relating to hate crimes), and the amendments made by that division, shall SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after ``shall (b) Audit.--Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(e) Audit and Report of the Federal Reserve System.-- ``(1) In general.--The audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) shall be completed before the end of ``(A) Required.--A report on the audit referred to in paragraph (1) shall be submitted by the Comptroller General to the Congress before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which such audit is completed and made available to the Speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee and each subcommittee of jurisdiction in the House of Representatives and the Senate, ``(B) Contents.--The report under subparagraph (A) shall include a detailed description of the findings and conclusion of the Comptroller General with respect to the audit that is the subject of the report, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Comptroller SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR COALITION SUPPORT Section 1232(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 392), as amended by section 1217 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``the Secretary of Defense shall submit'' and inserting ``the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Secretary of State, (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively, and indenting each clause, as so redesignated, 6 ems from the left margin; (B) by striking ``shall include an itemized description'' and inserting the following: ``shall include the following: (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: ``(i) is consistent with the national security interests of ``(ii) will not adversely impact the balance of power in SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: (1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean the Small Business Administration and the Administrator (2) the terms ``HUBZone small business concern'', ``small business concern'', ``small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans'', and ``small business concern owned and controlled by women'' have the same meanings as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 (b) Contracting Opportunities.--Section 31(b)(2)(B) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(B)) is amended by (c) Contracting Goals.--Section 15(g)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is amended in the fourth sentence by inserting ``and subcontract'' after ``not less than 3 percent of the total value of all prime contract''. (d) Mentor-Protege Programs.--The Administrator may establish mentor-protege programs for small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans, small business concerns owned and controlled by women, and HUBZone small business concerns modeled on the mentor-protege program participating in programs under section 8(a) of the Small SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON DOCUMENTATION OF SUPPORT PROVIDED BY (a) In General.--Not later than March 31, 2010, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the documentation of the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) An assessment of the mechanisms used by the Secretary, if any, to document the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is provided as a result of operational requirements and outside of the requirements of their participation in operational missions that involve combat (2) Recommendations for the improvement or creation of (3) An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of creating and implementing an experience, service, or skill identifier to identify the support described in paragraph (4) An assessment of whether such identifier could be used effectively and efficiently for the provision of training and (5) An assessment of whether the current chain of command construct allows members described in paragraph (1) who provide support described in such paragraph sufficient opportunity to obtain recognition for their service. (6) An identification of the differences between service in the reserve components of the Armed Forces and service in the regular components of the Armed Forces and how those differences affect the matters described in paragraphs (1) (7) An assessment of how a mechanism described in paragraph (1) could be used to improve determinations of whether a member of the Armed Forces has, for purposes of establishing service-connection for a disease or injury under section 1154(b) of title 38, United States Code, engaged in combat with the enemy in active service with a military, naval, or air organization of the United States during a period of war, Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the Public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nominations of James J. Markowsky, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil Energy), Warren F. Miller, Jr., to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Nuclear Energy) and Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste, Anthony M. Babauta, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior (Insular Areas), and Jonathan B. Jarvis, to be the Director of the Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Amandaxkelly@ For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, immediately The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 committee on commerce, science, and transportation Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, in Russell 253, at The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a hearing on Tuesday, July 21, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. committee on environment and public works and subcommittee on green Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, to hold a hearing entitled ``The National Security Implications of Climate Change.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in SH-216 of the Hart Senate The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Excessive Speculation in the Wheat Market.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 2:15 pm, in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Ensuring a Legal Workforce: What Changes Should be Made to Our Current Employment Verification The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Army fellow in my office, David Evans, be granted the privileges of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Lea Shanley, a congressional science fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of my statement. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate convenes as a Court of Impeachment with regard to the case of Samuel B. Kent, the following list of staff from the House of Representatives be provided floor privileges during those proceedings. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Phil Tahtakran, Branden Ritchie, Ryan Clough, Michael Lenn, Danielle Brown, Alan Baron, Allison Halataei, Jessica Klein, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the majority leader, pursuant to Public Law 111-25, announces the appointment of the following individuals to serve as members of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission: Sig Rogich of Nevada and Frank Fahrenkoph of Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 218, which was submitted The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The resolution (S. Res. 218) was agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 164, at the desk The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the concurrent A concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record, without intervening The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) was agreed to. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, the managers of the Department of Defense authorization measure have asked for a filing deadline of first-degree amendments to the bill. While no consent will be granted tonight, it is expected that tomorrow morning unanimous consent will be requested for a filing deadline of 11 a.m., Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2245, which was received The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I would note that of the four names the clerk read--those four national heroes--two of them are from Ohio, Neil Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill (H.R. 2245) was ordered to a third reading, was read the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, July 22; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of Calendar No. 89, S. 1390, the Department of Defense authorization bill, as provided for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, under the previous order, the time until 12 o'clock will be equally divided and controlled between Senators Thune and Durbin or their designees. At 12 o'clock, the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote in relation to the Thune amendment. Additional As a reminder, at 2 p.m. tomorrow, there will be a live quorum with respect to the Court of Impeachment of Samuel B. Kent. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:40 p.m., adjourned until The House met at 10:30 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following I hereby appoint the Honorable John T. Salazar to act as The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2009, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate. The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with each party limited to 30 minutes and each Member, other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip, limited to 5 minutes. CALIFORNIA'S THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT'S PERSPECTIVE ON HEALTH CARE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with constituents in my district. As I made the call, I informed them that we were going to discuss any subject they wanted, but I wanted to concentrate on health care. As a result, I had one of the largest responses I ever had. Thousands of people got on the line. Most times, there were no less than 1,400 people on the line. I didn't choose them by party. I didn't choose them by income. I didn't choose them by occupation. It was random, calling people in my The response was overwhelming, overwhelmingly negative with respect to the plans they hear about that are coming from the White House, the Senate and the House. Why were they negative? They were negative because the people in my district were concerned about whether or not the government was going to dominate health care in this country, and those who were satisfied with their plans--even though they had some imperfections, even though they had some desire to have them improved, but by and large had made choices with respect to their plans--wondered whether their freedom of choice would be taken away by the government plan presented by the President and by the leadership in both the Senate and the House. It was interesting, they also were very concerned about the cost. When they hear the word $1 trillion, they begin to think that this particular plan has real problems. As we discussed the various aspects of it, they referred me to the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office's report that disappointed the White House and the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate because the report suggested that this program cannot pay for itself, that we're talking about at least $1 trillion to be imposed on the American people. The dialogue that I had with my constituents was very lively. They were also concerned about the fact that we have Medicare and Medicaid-- as we call it in California, Medi-Cal--that is on an unsustainable path to bankruptcy. This has been pointed out by the director of CBO as well as many others outside the halls of Congress and outside the Federal Government. So the American people are trying to tell us that they are concerned that we have an unsustainable program already that we have not faced up to; and on top of that, we're going to impose this new national health plan. It was interesting because the President and the Democratic leadership have said that, look, the public option is just that. It's not going to destroy the private sector. Yet constituents in my district were very, very clear as to their understanding of the necessary impact of this program. They also were concerned about the promises made in this plan. I guess you could sum it up in these words: First entitlement and then rationing. When government takes over a program like medical care, and when it promises everything, and when you see the track record with respect to Medicare and Medicaid, you understand that at some point in time, we're going to hit the fiscal wall, and government's only ability to control cost at that point in time--if you look historically at other government-centered health You can look at it in Canada. You can look at it in Great Britain. You can look at it in every country around the world. And frankly, I do not want--and my constituents told me last night they do not want the imposition of a government bureaucrat between them, as patients, and Interestingly, last night in one of our committees marking up that case, that question was posed: Could we say in the plan that there would not be the intervention of a government bureaucrat to dictate to your doctor as to what your health care should be? That specific amendment was voted down almost on a party-line vote. Every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against that prohibition; and every Republican voted for it. In other words, it was crystal clear. The amendment presented last night before that committee was: In this plan, can we at least promise the American people there will not be intervention by a Federal bureaucrat to dictate the care you will receive or not receive from your doctor? That specific public policy If you believe that health care delivered by the Federal Government is superior to what you get now, go to your local DMV and see if you'd like them making the decision with respect to your medical care. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, this week the House will debate legislation and give the principle of pay-as-you- go, or PAYGO, the force of law. Quite simply, supporting PAYGO means that we agree to pay for what we buy; and it can be one of the most important actions we take for fiscal discipline in this Congress. PAYGO is essential because America faces unprecedented debt and a fiscal year 2009 deficit of $1.7 trillion. A New York Times analysis found that 90 percent of that deficit is attributable to the economic downturn, Bush administration policies, and the extension of those policies. However we got into this hole, it's imperative that we find a way out of it. PAYGO is not a cure-all, not a solution entirely to our deficits. But it is an important and valuable start, and it is a proven first step to In the 1990s, the Clinton administration turned record deficits, administrations, into record surplus; and the PAYGO rule, supported on a bipartisan basis by Republicans and Democrats, was a key part in that fiscal transformation. As President Obama has recognized, and I quote, ``It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved to record surpluses in the 1990s and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt.'' Today we can once again use PAYGO to begin rolling back the dangerous fiscal situation that confronts us. Under statutory PAYGO, Congress will be required to find savings to balance the dollars we spend. On the one hand, it will constrain unnecessary spending and subsidies. On the other, it will force those in favor of tax cuts to explain exactly what they want to go without in return. In other words, pay for them. Of course none of those choices are easy, but it is exactly the avoidance of hard choices that saddles our children and grandchildren with the debt that confronts us. In addition, deficit reduction will mean fewer interest payments on our debt which, in turn, will help us make sustainable entitlements in the priorities that matter most to the American people, including education, clean energy and health care. The PAYGO law would apply to new policies that reduce revenue or expand entitlement spending. It will exempt extensions of current policy on the alternative minimum tax, the estate tax and middle-income tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and Medicare payments to doctors. Some would criticize these exemptions, but I see them as an important way of keeping PAYGO credible and enforceable. It is clear that there is bipartisan support in Congress for extending those policies without offsets. Now, very frankly, I would vote for offsets; but we have seen that that does not happen in the United States Senate; and there is an inclination not to do it here. A PAYGO bill that does not exempt them would have to be waived again and again, turning the cause of fiscal I find it much more sensible to make a fiscal discipline promise we can keep. I would also note that the exemptions in the House legislation are narrower than those sent to us in the President's original proposal. Most notably, they only apply to the middle-class tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and not to tax cuts generally. Mr. Speaker, pay as you go cannot remove us from our deficit hole in a single stroke, nor will it. That will take much hard work. PAYGO is not enough in and of itself, but it is absolutely necessary because it keeps us from digging the hole any deeper. It is tested and proven. We adopted this policy in a bipartisan way in 1990. We reaffirmed that policy in a bipartisan vote in 1997, with Speaker Gingrich and President Clinton reaching agreement on that proposition. Yes, it's tested and proven, as I said. I hope that all of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, will support it when it comes to the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry I don't have the time to respond to the majority leader's comments about PAYGO. But I would just simply say that the Democrats passed a PAYGO policy when they first took over, and we're getting deeper and deeper into debt. If that's what PAYGO does, The President, the Speaker and the majority leader are all in a rush to pass legislation here. So much in a rush, they will not even give Members a chance to read the bills. Why is that? It's perhaps because they don't want people to know what's in the bills. But the American people want to get health reform right, not just fast. Artificial deadlines for passing legislation serve a political purpose, not a legitimate purpose. I have promised that I will not vote for any health care legislation that is not publicly available in its final form for at least 72 hours in advance of a vote. Every Member of Congress should have time to read the health care bill they are asked to vote on, and the American people should be given this same common courtesy. Let's give them significant time to fully understand the details of a health care proposal rather than steamrolling partisan legislation through Congress. We should make August a national health care awareness month so that Americans can let their Member of Congress know where they stand before voting because we already know of many problems in the proposals that are being put forward. Number one, the bill contains zero savings from eliminating or even reducing waste, fraud and abuse. In an attempt to correct this egregious lack of oversight, Ways and Means Republicans offered six amendments during the committee's markup to reduce wasteful spending. All of them were rejected by the We know that the House Democrats' health care plan will increase Federal spending significantly, that coming directly from the CBO, appointed by the Democrats. We know that it's going to raise taxes on small businesses through surtax increases. Of taxpayers who file in the top brackets, more than half of them are small businesses. The Democrat plan, according to a study by the Tax Foundation, would raise the top Significantly, it includes fines of up to $500,000 on employers who make an honest mistake thinking they had provided what the government deemed ``sufficient'' coverage. It will impose an 8 percent payroll tax on employers who can't afford to offer health insurance to their employees, and on employers who do the right thing and offer health coverage to their employees but it is deemed insufficient by the government, and employers who are not paying at least 72.5 percent of an employee's premium or 65 percent for family coverage. What they plan to do is take over more aspects of our life. Every piece of legislation that is passing out of this House this session is aimed at putting the government more in control of our lives and giving us less freedom. The health care bill is the worst of those. Cap-and- We must not rush into passing health care legislation. We must slow down and get things right. The American people are hurting. We know they are hurting. Unemployment is going up dramatically under this Congress and under this President, and we need to be dealing with what we can do to create jobs and help individual families, not make things worse by killing more jobs and raising taxes. That's what PAYGO does. It is hard to make cuts in spending, easy to raise taxes, and that's what they plan to do. We shouldn't let them fool the American people again. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. We have got to stop letting the Democrats do these things, rushing bills through, hiding things in obscure language, and taxing us into high The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition which has long advocated for restoring statutory PAYGO as an important budgetary tool necessary to impose discipline in both chambers of Congress as it regards the collection and use of taxpayer money. I would like to thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his strong, steadfast, and unquestioned support for statutory PAYGO and for his words earlier this As I stated and as the majority leader has, this is an important to impose discipline. It is a tested and proven tool from the 1990s that again, as has been mentioned, President Clinton and former Speaker Newt Gingrich agreed to back in the 1990s. I think it is imperative that opponents of this legislation explain more clearly why they lived with PAYGO with little or no complaint in the last decade, and the surpluses aided by such disciplines, and why they abandoned such discipline which led to a doubling of the national debt over the last 8 We need to make priorities and tough decisions so as to ensure fairness to future generations. It is essential to adopt statutory PAYGO as one step, among many others, to ensure both economic and national security. It is not fair to future generations for the United States to in any way be beholden to foreign creditors. The interest on the national debt alone is more than we spend on education and veterans Statutory PAYGO is necessary to impose discipline in both Chambers. One of the earlier speakers mentioned that since adopting PAYGO in the House rules, that the deficits have worsened. Unfortunately, much of the legislation passed out of this Chamber that abides by House rules for PAYGO come back to this Chamber after action in the Senate that strips how we pay for our priorities. That's why again reinstating PAYGO as a budgetary tool in statute is necessary for both the House and the Senate, and fortunately is supported by the current So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ask the hard questions about what worked in the 1990s to produce budget surpluses, about what didn't work over the past 8 years to result in a national debt, a record national debt, and what tools are necessary to get us back on the path of fiscal discipline and surpluses once again. Statutory PAYGO is one key, one tool, among others, that will lead to the kind of tough decisions and priorities necessary to restore the fiscal health of the country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today at a time of a great moment in the life of this country. The American people are hurting. We are facing in this country the worst recession in a quarter century. We have lost 2 million jobs since this Congress and this administration enacted a stimulus bill. The unemployment rate at the time we passed the stimulus bill was 7.5 percent. We were told that we had to spend that nearly $800 billion, borrowed from future generations of Americans, so the unemployment rate wouldn't go over 8 percent. It We saw this Democratic majority pass a budget that will double the national debt in 5 years and triple it in 10, and that's if the economy starts to grow again, which sadly, few economists believe it will in Now this summer we saw this majority, in the name of global warming, pass a national energy tax that will essentially raise the cost of energy for businesses and individuals by thousands of dollars per year. And now comes health care reform, a government takeover of health care in this country financed with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Yet my colleagues, many of whom I deeply respect, come to the floor this week to talk about something called PAYGO, fiscal discipline. Well, the truth is that in this majority and this administration, PAYGO means you pay and they go on spending. The truth is we have got to come to terms with these difficult times. We have got to begin to demonstrate the priorities that businesses and family farms and working families are demonstrating at this time of national challenge and economic recession. Families and businesses are sitting down and prioritizing what should come first. We ought to have national energy legislation to set us on a pathway toward energy independence. We ought to have health care reform that brings real competition into our economy and lowers the cost for consumers. But the first thing we ought to be doing is coming together We know how to create jobs. John F. Kennedy knew it, Ronald Reagan knew it, George W. Bush knew it when the towers fell: fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C., and tax relief for working families, small The last thing we need right now is one more massive tax increase, one more government takeover of one more American industry. What we need is focus, and we need to prioritize what this Congress is working on. We ought to be asking what the American people are asking today with a heavy heart as they look at Washington, D.C.: Where are the Health care, energy independence, other priorities, other talking points on Capitol Hill are not going to get the American people back to work. Congress should come together, men and women of goodwill and strong principle, and work in such a way that can restore this economy, and then work in a bipartisan way on the other major issues facing our The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, the House will be taking up H.R. 2920 this week, the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2009, otherwise known as This bill, sponsored by our majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), will renew our commitment to fiscal responsibility and protect core democratic values. As the President said less than 2 months ago, the pay-as-you-go rule is very simple: Congress can only spend a dollar in one place if it saves a dollar in another. Just as families cut back on eating out at restaurants to pay for a new amenity, so too must Congress make In fact, this rule was put in place when the country saw record deficits turn into record surpluses during the 1990s. It is no surprise to learn that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record PAYGO legislation will reestablish this requirement that turned deficits into surpluses under the Clinton administration. It is also critically important to pass PAYGO to ensure our fiscal health and stability as Congress considers health care reform legislation, a necessary item. We must be able to pay for this reform without unduly burdening our American taxpayers. To understand this critically important PAYGO legislation and the record deficits this country is facing, we must understand how we got here. We must move toward a more balanced budget which will initiate an era of fiscal responsibility and a stronger long term fiscal position. PAYGO is an important and critical piece of legislation in that process. First, a number of factors have brought us to this cash-strapped position. Under the previous administration, the PAYGO principle was abandoned, reckless tax cuts were passed for the wealthy and two wars were funded outside of the budget process. On top of that, our economy has seen one of the most severe recessions since the Great Depression. Congressional efforts to get the economy moving again have proven to be fairly effective thus far, but they have come at a price. Understanding these problems and the long term fiscal restraints, what does the PAYGO legislation do? It will require that all new policies reducing revenues or expanding entitlement spending enacted during a session of Congress be offset over 5 and 10 years. As Congress did in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, PAYGO will include an exemption for legislation designated as an emergency. PAYGO will require any future extension of upper income tax cuts to be offset, as well as force a serious examination of wasteful subsidies in the budget and tax loopholes that can be eliminated to benefit more will force advocates of tax cuts to acknowledge the costs and show how they will be paid for, as well as ensuring that we can afford to fund America's most important priorities consistently for future Certain exemptions on discretionary programs funded in the appropriations process will be granted under PAYGO. These programs are the low income home energy assistance program, our Head Start program, Pell grants, the special supplemental nutrition program for women, PAYGO will also establish an enforcement mechanism in nonexempt mandatory programs at the end of year if Congress has not already paid for the cost of all legislation enacted during that given year. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a priority for the President. He understands, as we do, that we must balance short-term deficit spending for economic recovery with a commitment to restoring fiscal discipline in the long term. The large deficits that we inherited as a result of the reckless borrow-and-spend policies of the previous administration have put pressure on funding for important priorities such as health care, education and clean energy jobs. We must ensure that regardless of who is in power, PAYGO will be a powerful impediment to reckless tax Mr. Speaker, the people of our country elect us to come to Washington to represent them in the best way that we can. After years of unrestrained spending, budget gimmicks and rampant waste, as well as fraud and abuse in Federal spending, it is clear we cannot continue along that same fiscal path. We are in a deep fiscal hole. However, with the right tools, including a statutory PAYGO budgeting process, we can reverse this dangerous trend and begin to put the country back on a Mr. Speaker, that is why I support H.R. 2920 and encourage our FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM UNDER THE GROWING FED: A RECIPE FOR TOTAL The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to address the critical issue of regulatory reform in our financial markets. In 1912, a year before he became President, Woodrow Wilson ominously stated ``waiting to be solved lurks the great question of banking reform.'' So here we are almost 100 years later, and we are facing the same lurking The Treasury Department recently issued an 85-page white paper containing five main objectives for reforming or financial markets. Although a few of these objectives may sound good on paper, the devil is always in the details. A closer look at this new plan reveals a fundamental change to our financial system and economy that will stifle the innovation and competition fostered by the traditional American free enterprise system, giving way to a future of Big Government propping up all companies that are ``too big to fail.'' Specifically, the Obama financial regulatory reform plan calls for ceding the Federal Reserve a vast amount of additional authority with the power to create new requirements for capital and liquidity and for any firm ``whose combination of size, leverage, and interconnectedness could pose a threat to financial stability if it fails.'' The Fed, which has failed in the past as a regulator, will be allowed to oversee almost all aspects of any financial company in the United States and its foreign affiliates. Specifically, the Fed will be able to regulate, lend to and close down companies not normally under their control if My colleagues, this is total government control. Additionally, the Treasury will be given more powers as well, such as the ability to appoint a conservator or receiver to ``stabilize'' any large financial firm that is failing, any large financial firm. This will be done in lieu of bankruptcy proceedings, and the result will almost certainly lead to those ``too big to fail'' institutions, backed by the United States Government, having the upper hand in the market, particularly when it comes to raising funds, and smaller competitors will be forced out down the line. Thus, we are destined for an economy dominated by what essentially are government-backed entities, like the Fannie Maes Big government backed by an all-powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to our financial problems. We cannot erode the components of our free market economy because we are afraid to let the market work. It will devastate the innovation and competition that has traditionally Another issue worth mentioning when discussing regulatory reform of financial markets is the issue of transparency and possible conflicts of interest. Bill Gross of Pimco, a private financial institution that manages the world's largest mutual fund, is heavily involved in the mortgage securities market and is an open proponent of the Treasury's public-private investment program. Interestingly, in the spring of 2008, Pimco actually presented a plan in Washington, D.C. for a public- private partnership, very similar to the plan that Geithner came out with this year. Pimco is now hoping to be one of the companies that the Treasury picks to help buy up some of the $1.25 trillion in mortgage bonds that have sank big institutions like Bank of America and In addition, the Federal Reserve has also looked to Pimco to specifically ask for advice on which banks needed more taxpayer TARP funds to stay afloat. Pimco's close relationship with the Treasury and the Fed should not allow it to be the beneficiary of billions of dollars gained through Federal contracts and preferential investment opportunities, particularly with Geithner's public-private investment Mr. Speaker, a free market is an economic system in which individuals, rather than the government, make the majority decisions regarding economic activities. In a free-market economy, the government's function is limited, and it should act in a way as an umpire and issue regulatory procedures. The Obama financial regulatory reform plan will move us away from our free-market system and towards a future where the free market is negated by government over-involvement in the private financial sector. We are moving toward a system of permanent interdependence of big companies' reliance on big government. This is fundamentally un-American, and the long-term consequences of Let's not make Washington, D.C. the bailout capital of the world for every private company in America. Let those companies suffer the consequences for their risky actions. Instead, let's be good stewards of taxpayer dollars, keeping in mind that more regulation doesn't mean better regulation and a powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOYD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the pay-as-you-go legislation that the House will be considering later this week. This is a bill that the Blue Dogs and I have endorsed for the last several Congresses. It is a priority of this President and of the House leadership and of more than 165 cosponsors of this legislation. I'm always intrigued by those who would oppose PAYGO, like my friend, Mr. Pence from Indiana, who spoke earlier that basically criticized the deficit spending that has occurred, I assume that he would be critical of that in the last previous administration and this administration, but yet he seems to oppose the one tool that we have that has proven to The principle is simple, Mr. Speaker. If you have new spending then you have to pay for them. It is very simple. PAYGO was one of the tools that led this country in the 1990s to record surpluses. However, that tool, PAYGO, and others that were in place, were allowed to expire under President Bush and the Republican leadership of this body in Those who claim that PAYGO didn't work need simply to look at the numbers. When it was on the books, we had balanced budgets and even record surpluses. But after it was allowed to expire, we saw the explosion of new spending programs and spiraling deficits to go along with it. By putting PAYGO back into law, we will get back on the path toward fiscal responsibility and long-term sustainability. It is no secret by anybody that works in this place and now even out in the country, that we have an unsustainable budget picture looking forward. When you have a budget hole, Mr. Speaker, the first rule of thumb, the first rule you need to follow is stop digging. PAYGO does that by ensuring that new programs that are enacted must be paid for. We owe it to our children and to their children to stop digging this I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this PAYGO legislation in order to return to fiscal discipline. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, I'm here, too, to join in advocacy for the PAYGO legislation that is going to come before the House floor this week. PAYGO is what it sounds like. If we have a new program, we have to find a way to pay for it, either through cuts or revenues. If we have a proposed tax cut, we have to find a way to pay for it, either in a reduction in programs elsewhere or a shifting of priorities and It is a very simple, elemental approach. If you're going to buy something, you have to pay for it. Families know it, in their family budgets, they have to do it all of the time. And government really is no different. It is no different because in the end, if we borrow money, at some point we are going to have to pay it back. We have gotten into a habit in this Congress of not paying for things, in some cases, expenditure programs, and in other cases tax cuts. We have had some back and forth this morning with our friends on the other side of the aisle, and without getting into the blame game, which doesn't get us anywhere, there is an irrefutable fact, and that is that in the past 8 years with the tax cuts, with Medicare part D that was not funded, with a war in Iraq and a war in Afghanistan on the credit card, we have gone from the largest surplus in the history of this country to the largest deficit in the history of this country. What it means is that our kids and our grandkids are the ones who are going to have to pick up the tab. Aside from the fact that that is obviously unfair and none of us wants to pass the burden of debt for our spending on to others, it really is going to restrict what it is that generation can do to meet its own challenges to educate its kids, to provide health care to its kids and themselves and to provide for We have the capacity to impose on ourselves the same rule that families have to impose on themselves every month when they sit around the kitchen table and go over their checkbook and try to figure out how, at the end of the month, they are going to make the checkbook balance. And that is to accept the burden of the discipline of paying for our tax cut proposal or our spending proposal when we make the Voters know that. They want fiscal responsibility. In fact, their concern about the deficit rightly is at the top of their agenda. We have had extraordinary circumstances here that have required extraordinary actions with the economy going off the cliff, with the stimulus spending and with the legacy of a war in Iraq and Afghanistan We have restored truth in budgeting so that those two things, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, are now on the budget. So it is painful because we are seeing in black and white what the cost of those enterprises are, and we know that we are going to have to pay for them. We are not trying to hide it. We are being direct. The American people are entitled to that candor, and they are entitled to have us respond by making certain that we, going forward, adopt pay-as-you-go principles. It is not just good in theory, and it is not just good for conservatives or liberals. It is good for I'm a big supporter, I think most of us are, that in this country we achieve the goal of having all of our citizens covered by health care. Every citizen should be covered and have access to health insurance. Every citizen should help pay for it. And if you lose your job, you shouldn't lose your health care. The President has acknowledged that as worthy as that goal is, we must pay for it. And the health care bill that we are now considering has to be paid for. What a difference from what happened with the prescription drug program that was largely put on the credit card and it is not able to sustain itself or pay for One of the reasons it is so important to have PAYGO is that it imposes the discipline on us to kick the tires of a program. Health care is a great example. We need it. We have good health care in this country. But the cost is going up at two or three times the rate of inflation, two or three times the rate of profit growth, two or three times the rate of wage growth. So people are falling behind. The middle class is getting squeezed. They are facing higher co-pays and deductibles. By adopting PAYGO, it is forcing us to look at our delivery system and ask yourselves how can we reform the delivery of health care to make it more efficient and provide more value for less In fact, there are examples after examples of how we have, in many cases, excess utilization. So this bill is going to be helpful to all of us. And it is very important that we pass this legislation. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, right now Americans all across the country are dealing with this tough economy, many by tightening their belts and by managing their family budgets. Unfortunately, they are looking to Washington, and they are seeing this Congress that is being run by people that don't get what the American people are dealing with across Spending is out of control here in Washington by this administration and by this Congress. Look at the proposals that we are debating today. Health care in America needs reforms. But with all of the problems that exist, we still have some of the best medical care in the world. In fact, people that live in countries that have a government-run plan and who have the means, come to America to get care because in those countries, government takeover of health care has led directly to rationing of care. And so what are we facing today? We are facing a plan by the President, Speaker Pelosi and others here to have a government takeover of America's health care system. When you read this bill, and you hear all of this great rhetoric, you hear the President saying that if you like the plan you have, you can keep it. The problem is, the bill doesn't allow you to keep your health care plan. There is actually a section in their government takeover that allows a health care czar, some bureaucrat in Washington that was never elected to anything, to be able to take away your health care if they don't think that it complies with these new Federal requirements. So if you like what you have, this health care czar can take it away In fact, if you're uninsured--and all we hear about is the uninsured that we need to address the problem of the uninsured, and I agree. The thing is when you really break down the numbers and when you look at who is really uninsured, you get to a number of about 7 million people. Once you strip away the illegal aliens and you take away the people who choose not to get health care who are currently eligible, you end up with 7 million Americans. That is a number we can address without blowing up all of the things that work for over 300 million Americans. But in their plan, they actually tax some of those very people that The Congressional Budget Office just gave testimony last week. Unfortunately the chairman of the committee threw the public out of the meeting. It was a secretive meeting that they wouldn't even allow the public to come into. I guess after they heard the testimony, you can see why, because the testimony said, number one, that the costs in this bill are out of control. All of the savings that we heard, that were promised, don't even exist. That's the Congressional Budget Office's But then they talked about the taxes, over $580 billion in new taxes on businesses in their health care bill. There's over $240 billion of penalties that would be applied to American families that maybe don't go along with this new government takeover of health care. There's $29 billion of taxes on uninsured people in their bill. The Congressional Budget Office gave the specific testimony that this bill, this government takeover of health care, adds $29 billion in new taxes on the backs of uninsured Americans. And this is as they're running around saying that they want to help uninsured Americans. I know a lot of uninsured Americans out there that don't think $29 billion of new taxes on their backs is the kind of help that they want. When you look at this bill, you start to realize that what they're doing, what they're proposing, is the very government takeover where rationing of care would exist, where a government bureaucrat can get in between the relationship of you and your doctor. It's the same thing that's happened in Canada, it's the same thing that's happened in England, where unfortunately just yesterday we saw the story of a 22-year-old who was denied lifesaving care, denied a transplant by this government bureaucracy that exists in England that rations care. I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee where this bill is currently being debated. We were in committee till 12:30 in the morning last night. We had an amendment that would have prohibited a Federal bureaucrat in Washington from interfering between the relationship of an American citizen and their doctor. That's the most sacrosanct relationship that should exist. Nobody should come between the relationship between you and your doctor. Yet they voted down that amendment. So clearly this is about rationing. Their proposal is not about reforming health care, because there's bipartisan agreement on the reforms that need to be made to address the real problems that exist in health care. What their bill is about is a government takeover. It's growing government more. It's adding more to the Federal deficit. Hundreds of billions of dollars by CBO testimony would be added to the Federal deficit, at a time when Americans are saying, Congress, Washington, control spending. Get a grip. People saw that the This bill is a horrible idea. Government should not be taking over our health care system and interfering in the relationship between us The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from If we do not begin paying our bills today, we will continue to short- change future generations who face higher taxes and cuts to Federal investments in priorities such as education, health care and national security. In order to ensure our long-term fiscal sustainability, we must all work together and return to the proven, effective pay-as-you- go rules that brought our Federal budget to balance in the 1990s. We now have a President who is committed to changing the fiscal course of this country. Together, we are committed to putting an end to the reckless fiscal policies and out-of-control spending of the past that has given us the record deficits we see today. To that end, the President has charged Congress with passing statutory PAYGO, and we have an obligation to see that this critical piece of legislation Our Federal Government simply cannot continue to live beyond its means, mortgaging our future on the backs of our children and our grandchildren. Reinstituting statutory PAYGO will send a message to the American people that their government is serious about putting the country back on stable economic footing. The time to act is now. The President has put his words into action and I look forward to working with the Blue Dogs and my colleagues in the House and the Senate to make statutory PAYGO a reality again in this country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, American families and small business owners are struggling with high health care costs. They're also struggling with access to a doctor; getting to see a doctor and establishing a relationship with that doctor so that you can really lead a healthier life-style, building the kind of trust that's necessary so that the doctor knows the patient and knows what it's going to take to lead them along a healthier pathway and having the patient trust the doctor so that the advice that they're being given is something that they will adhere to. American families are struggling, small business owners are struggling, and we have to do something about Republicans believe we should reform health care, but we need to do it responsibly and in a very, very thoughtful way so as to not disrupt the system that we currently have. If you have health insurance that you like that leads to a relationship with a doctor, you can keep it. But we don't want to see a system completely devastated or disrupted. I am a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, and we worked on the bill in the House which outlines the President's plan; and that bill doesn't do near enough to provide good, accessible health care. Furthermore, it's a very expensive bill. The Congressional Budget Office has just started looking at this and it's seeing a very expensive bill that's going to add significantly to the deficit. As a physician who has practiced medicine for over 20 years, I look at this and I say, whoa, wait a minute, let's get this right. It's more important to get it right than to rush into something and do it very hastily and cause disruption in the health care system where we have some things that are working. One of the speakers earlier mentioned the fact that we've got in fact in effect the finest health care in the world. We've got the most highly trained doctors and nurses. We have people from all over the world coming here to train. We have those who live in other countries who come here to get their health care. But we have a cost problem, we have an insurance problem, and we need to fix that, and we need to make sure that insurance coverage is meaningful and really leads to access to a doctor for every American. Republicans have ideas on how to do this. It incorporates three basic principles: Information for you to make decisions for your family or for your small business, to make cost comparisons, to create transparency, information among physicians so that we don't duplicate tests and run up the costs. These are all important things. Information is very important throughout the system and we believe that we can incorporate this in a very cost-effective way. Secondly, choice. Americans want choices. They like to shop. Let's give Americans a wide range of choices to meet their family needs or their small business needs in health care. If we do that, that will create competition and that will start to drive the costs down of health insurance premiums which we're all struggling with. It will make it more affordable and we'll get more people on it. We can address the uninsured by targeting our response as one of the previous speakers Finally, we need to put families back in control of their health care destiny. There should be nothing between the doctor and the patient in this. That's the essence of good, high quality health care, and that's the only way we're going to control the cost ultimately, by fostering and strengthening that doctor-patient relationship and making it something that every American has. That's how we'll fix health care. Republicans have those ideas and many more and we'll be glad to share them as this debate goes further with the American public. INTRODUCING THE ADULT EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you as a member of the Education and Labor Committee. It is a pleasure to stand before you today to speak about the Adult Education and Economic Growth Act of 2009, known as H.R. 3238, legislation that my friend and colleague Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island and I introduced on As we all know, our Nation is facing one of the most difficult economic times in history. Technology and globalization, coupled with the economic recession, are causing low-wage and low-skilled workers to become particularly vulnerable. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment among individuals with less than a high school diploma has risen from 7\\1/2\\ percent in December of 2007 to almost 15 percent in April 2009. The unemployment rate for high school graduates with no college degree has increased from 4.6 percent to 9.3 percent. Currently, the U.S. ranks 11th among OECD countries in the percent of young adults with a high school diploma. We should be especially concerned that we are the only country in which younger adults are less educated than the previous generation. More than 40 million adults across our country have basic skills needs or limited proficiency in English that keep them from participating fully in work, in family and In 2007, more than 25 million adults ages 18 to 64 had no high school credential. In 2006, 18,400,000 adults spoke English less than ``very well'' according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In my congressional district alone, there are 154,000 adults without a high school diploma. In addition, another 444,000 adults speak a language other than English or do not speak English ``very well.'' In Texas, we have 3.8 million adults who do not have a high school diploma. This is unacceptable. We must do much more to educate our adult learners and assist them in acquiring the 21st century skills they need to succeed in the In my conversations with business leaders in my congressional district and across the country, they have shared their desire for a highly educated and trained workforce. Employers need highly skilled workers to compete globally, particularly in high-growth industries and Despite these alarming statistics and realities, we have not made adequate investments in our adult education delivery system. Our adult education and workforce training delivery systems are in great need of reform. In many States, thousands of adult learners are experiencing long waiting lists for adult literacy services to increase their basic literacy skills or improve their English skills. More than 77 percent of community-based literacy programs currently report waiting lists. Current funding reaches only 2.8 million of these adults each year and thousands more are on those waiting lists that I mentioned for adult A report issued this month by the President's Council on Economic Advisers, Preparing the Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow, underscores that our modern economy requires workers with higher skills and the need to employ workers with education and training beyond the In closing, I want to say that the report identifies key limitations to our education and training system, including low completion rates, limited accountability, poor coordination among different programs and excessive bureaucratic restrictions on the use of training funds. If we are to remain competitive in the global economy, we must invest in high quality adult education and workforce training programs that lead to family-sustaining jobs in careers with the promise of Mr. Speaker, I invite Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle The ``Adult Education and Economic Growth Act,'' H.R. 3238, strengthens our adult education and workforce training systems, increases economic growth in local communities and supports President Obama's call to once again lead the world college degrees by 2020. This legislation provides adult learners with greater access to obtain basic literacy or workplace skills, including English as a Second Language. This bill assists adults in gaining admission to job This legislation provides adequate resources for innovative educational and workforce programs, so that states can bridge the gap between adult education and occupational skills training. Our adult learners will be better served by having access to integrated This legislation expands access by ensuring that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills needs of individual states, including the number of adults who This legislation increases access to adult education, literacy, and This legislation increases access to correctional educational programs and provides added accountability in the system. This legislation invests in lower skilled workers by providing We must reform our adult education and workforce delivery systems if we are to provide adults with the educational opportunities and 21st century skills needed to acquire family-sustaining wages and remain The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from I rise today to express the deepest concern for the fact that unemployment rates have risen to 13.7 percent in the Inland Empire. There are those who believe that the solution to almost every problem facing America involves more government spending here in Washington. I am committed to the fact that just the opposite is the case. We must do everything that we possibly can to create a taxing system that The sooner we get back to the point of creating job opportunities in the private sector and recognizing that growth of government for the sake of government is not the answer, the sooner we will solve this problem. The jobs for San Bernardino and Riverside County lie in the private sector. So let's create an environment of opportunity and hope for those who are looking for jobs for the future. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my good friend and colleague, Chairman Ruben Hinojosa, for his work on this issue of adult Just like Ruben Hinojosa and his district in Texas, in my State of Rhode Island where unemployment rates continue to rise, 23 percent of the adult population in my district alone lacks a high school diploma. Last June when the National Commission on Adult Literacy released its report, it served as a wake-up call for all those concerned with the quality of our adult workforce. The commission found that 80 to 90 million adults in this country have deficiencies in basic education and that our investments in adult education and training were reaching less than 3 percent of those who need it. That's why we need to ensure that our adult education and workforce training programs have the tools and resources they need to prepare our workers for the next generation of jobs in energy, in health care and in technology. We need to improve the way we deliver adult education and workforce training programs and the way we provide career paths to higher growth fields through greater involvement with business leaders, State agencies and adult education community and workforce leaders. We need to better leverage employers to provide educational programs to their employees. We need to enhance the use of technology to improve quality learning access and delivery of adult education, literacy and workplace skills services. The Adult Education and Economic Growth Act which Ruben Hinojosa and I are introducing will do all of these things in order to provide those employed and unemployed with the ability to attain the skills they need I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. The Adult Education and Economic Growth (AEEG) Act of 2009 1. Will refocus the adult education and workforce skills system to make postsecondary and job training readiness a 85 percent of GED graduates have to take at least one remedial course before they can enroll in postsecondary education. We need to do a better job preparing them for success in school and in work, rather than getting them to an arbitrary finish line that actually leaves them short of 2. Will give incumbent workers greater access to the workforce skills training and adult education systems. It is too hard for people already on the job to receive workforce skills training and adult education. It's not enough to get someone into a job, we need to get them into a career. That means continued training, even after a worker is Only 3 to 4 percent of the workers with the most limited literacy proficiencies receive basic skills training from their employers. Our bill will create greater incentives for employer involvement in the education of their employees. 3. Will ensure that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills Federal funding formulas are outdated, and especially penalize states with a high proportion of non-native English speakers. Our legislation will ensure a fairer distribution 4. Will increase the use of technology in workforce skills Technology has greatly increased our ability to reach workers at times and places convenient to them. By 2006, 73 percent of American adults were online, including those at the lowest literacy levels. We cannot reach all of those needing services without deploying technology to provide 5. Will increase access to correction education programs and provide for added accountability in the system. Offenders with education and training are statistically less likely to commit crimes after release. There is a direct correlation between education level and recidivism: the higher the education level, the lower the recidivism rate. A decrease in recidivism reduces costs to taxpayers and keeps The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until noon today. Accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 33 minutes a.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following God of mercy and goodness, may this midday moment of prayer and dedication be received as a welcome gift by all, refreshing Your people and clarifying our purpose in serving this Nation. Bless the work that Congress has begun this day. Rectify any defects and strengthen its integrity. Let us finish the tasks You set before us in a way that pleases You and gives glory to this Nation and Your Holy The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. PAULSEN led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate has passed a bill and a concurrent resolution of the following titles in which the concurrence of the House is requested: S. 951. An act to authorize the President, in conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American to orbit the Earth, S. Con. Res. 11. Concurrent resolution condemning all forms of anti-Semitism and reaffirming the support of Congress for the mandate of the special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti- (Mr. WILSON of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. WILSON of Ohio. I rise today in strong support of statutory pay- as-you-go legislation, which will be taken up this week by the House. This bill demonstrates our commitment to fiscal responsibility and will restore the policy that led us from deficit spending to debt to We have to reduce our deficit spending. If we don't, we will not be able to invest in vitally important priorities like health care, PAYGO is very simple: All the policies that cut taxes or reduce revenues must be paid for or offset over 5 and 10 years. All policies that expand entitlement spending must be paid for over 5 and 10 years. Discretionary spending is not subject to PAYGO, and exceptions could be This makes common sense and families live by it every day. If you spend more in one area of the family budget, you have got to cut back in other areas. It's about time that our government start living by the (Mr. BOEHNER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, before I came to Congress, I ran a small business. And in that small business I offered a health insurance benefit to my employees. I offered a pension benefit to my employees. Both of these plans were as a result of a 1974 Federal law called ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, that allows employers to offer health plans to their employees and pension plans to Over the years, employers now provide health insurance to their employees, to the total of about 132 million Americans that today get But in the Democrat health care plan, I noticed this morning in an article from The Wall Street Journal there's a provision in there that, in their bill, after 5 years all employer plans will have to be approved by the Department of Labor and the new Health Choices Commissioner, who will set Federal standards for what is an acceptable Now, these employers are providing these plans to their employees. They're trying to provide a benefit their employees want and need. And now the Federal Government is going to decide what your health plan is I would suggest that a lot of employers in America are going to look at this and decide, You know, this really isn't worth it. Under their plan, if you're an employer and you don't provide health insurance, you have to pay an 8 percent payroll tax to the Federal Government. Eight Now, most employers probably pay more than this for their health care. And so, as a result, I would think a lot of employers are just going to pay the 8 percent tax and allow their employees to be shoved According to the Congressional Budget Office, some 23 million Americans would lose their benefits from their employers and be forced into government health care. According to the Lewin Group, 114 million Americans would be forced into the government plan. This is not what the American people want. And if you put an 8 percent tax on payroll, guess what? Employers are going to hire less people. And most of my constituents are asking, Where are the jobs? And if you tax employment through this health care plan or you tax employment under this crazy national energy tax, you're going to create At a time when we need jobs and we need our economy going again, we don't need to be taxing employers and taxing employment, because we're (Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona asked and was given permission to Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act. This commonsense measure will help bring fiscal responsibility back to Washington. With the national debt at almost $11.6 trillion, Congress needs to start showing some discipline. I launched my ``Do More With Less'' campaign to cut inefficient spending and reduce the debt. I have been proud to support billions of cuts in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills. And I have called on the Treasury Secretary to use returned bailout funds to pay back what I am also pleased to be an original cosponsor of the PAYGO bill. By requiring that Congress offset spending dollar-for-dollar, this legislation will ensure that Washington makes the tough choices it PAYGO helped produce the budget surpluses of the late 1990s, and it I urge my colleagues to stand with me and support passage of this (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, at a time when millions of Americans are losing their jobs and families are desperately seeking employment, this Congress and this administration have made job creation a secondary concern. As a result, they have squandered a golden opportunity to put Frankly, the American people have just had enough. They have had enough of a stimulus bill that has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars and not staved off job loss. They have had enough of the national energy tax that will impose extraordinary job-killing taxes on the people of this country. And now, Mr. Speaker, they have had enough of talk of a health care bill that not only will fail to deliver the access and quality that we need, but it will cripple small businesses Mr. Speaker, the question is: Where are the jobs? Congress and this administration have been asleep for too long--and we can do better. (Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACA. America's health system is not working. We cannot stay with the failing system that we now have. What good is an insurance card if there's no real access to services? What good is the current system if I have a senior under Medicare, like in my district, scared that their We also need a health care reform that gets past the politics and past the rhetoric that every single person is covered. I stand here to advocate for those without a voice, for those who cannot afford to travel to Washington, D.C. I stand here to advocate for a viable public option to compete with the private sector. I stand here to advocate for American families. And I stand for the American families who are busting at the seams, trying to make ends I urge my colleagues to advocate for all American families and pass health care reform that is needed for all American people in this (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PENCE. In the midst of the worst recession in 25 years, after months of runaway Federal spending, bailout, record deficits, and a national energy tax, now comes a government takeover of health care paid for with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Before we move on to the next big government scheme of this administration, the American people are asking, Mr. President, where Make no mistake about it, the President's health care bill would do nothing to lower the cost of health care and would be a disaster for the American economy. If ObamaCare passes--according to the experts--if ObamaCare passes, you will probably lose your health insurance and you The American people know we can do better. We must do better. For the sake of our economy and reform, I implore my Democratic colleagues, say ``no'' to a government takeover of health care and higher taxes and say ``yes'' to a bipartisan majority in this Congress that is committed to fiscal discipline, reform, and putting Americans back to work. (Mr. CHILDERS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHILDERS. It's a privilege to come to this House floor today to you-go legislation that is scheduled to be introduced this week. As a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, I believe reinstituting PAYGO is vital to restoring confidence with the American people that Washington and this Congress are indeed serious about reducing the Federal deficit and not continuing the reckless spending policies so often associated with Washington over the past decade. The people of north Mississippi and the American people all understand that at some point the bills have to be paid. Going from a $5 trillion debt at the end of the Clinton administration to a now over $11 trillion debt, it is not hard to imagine the daily frustrations I see every weekend at home on the faces of individuals and families It is time for Congress to start operating just as the families in my district do and adopt statutory PAYGO as the law of the land. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this landmark HEALTH CARE WITHOUT RAISING TAXES AND COSTING JOBS (Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. We can have health care reform without raising taxes and costing jobs. The health care version currently being debated in Congress is recognized and called by many as a prescription for disaster--disaster as it relates to ensuring quality and affordable health care and disaster as to the impact it would have on our economy. Governors across the country, Republicans and Democrats, are fearful it would only add additional costs to an already unsustainable system. The Mayo Clinic says this bill misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, they CBO last week stated that it would worsen our economic outlook by increasing deficits and driving our Nation more deeply into debt. There are many reasons to be skeptical of this plan: the job loss, the additional debt, the government intrusion between you and your Some continue to say, It's better than nothing. When you are sick or your son or daughter is sick, you don't want the doctor just to do (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, 15 years ago Frank Luntz wrote the speeches for Newt Gingrich to come out here and scare the American people about the Clinton health reform. They succeeded 15 years ago. What have the people gotten since then? Nothing. The number of people have gone up and up and up and up who do not have health insurance. So here they are all arrayed out here again today one at a time. Folks, they are here to scare you again. Mr. Speaker, the people are smarter In the election of 2008, they elected a President who said he would bring health care reform to this country, and they gave the Democrats an overwhelming majority because they are tired of the fear machine. Now I know you all have your talking points. Frank Luntz pulled them out of the drawer, shined them up for 2008 and said, Hey, boys, here's the speech that worked in 1994. Use it again. It won't work, Mr. Speaker. The people want health care reform, and we're going to give it (Mr. CARTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, the lady on television said, ``Where's the beef?'' The American people are now saying, ``Where's the jobs?'' One of the things that the President promised was jobs for this country. The Speaker said, It's about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, but the national unemployment is 9.5 percent, and in the Midwest it's in double digits. Yes, the Democrats have given us some jobs. They've given us this cap-and-tax bill which is going to stick a tax collector in everybody's pocket, destroy small businesses, and destroy jobs in the country. They've given us 33 czars at $170,000 a year to reward their cronies who helped them get elected up here by creating new jobs in Washington Last night the Energy and Commerce Committee voted to put a bureaucrat between a doctor and his patient to tell him how he's going to treat that sick person. That's a new job they want to create. They've got this idea that if they throw enough money to ACORN, they're going to create jobs for ACORN--if they can keep the indictments away (Mr. PERLMUTTER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friends wanting to talk about jobs. They have the arguments that they want to pursue, but they don't want to let the facts get in the way of their argument. Let's start with the report we received today from the Federal Reserve. We know that jobs fell off a cliff last fall and earlier this year as part of the Bush administration's efforts for jobs. Private nonfarm employment fell by 670,000 jobs on average per the month from January to April, but declines slowed to 312,000 in May and 415,000 in June. The May and June declines in construction jobs were the smallest since Job declines and temporary employment applications slowed noticeably, and employment in nonbusiness services turned up in May and increased further in June. That's why we have the stock market going up. That's why consumer confidence is going up is because this is working, even if (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this ain't a talking point. Last night I talked to one of my constituents. This man is an unemployed truck driver. His statement to me was a very clear one: Where are the jobs? He said, You guys back there in Washington have put together a so- called stimulus bill that cost me--he's still a taxpayer--$1 trillion, and now you plan to take over the entire health care system in this country? He said, It would be devastating. I am looking for a job as a truck driver again, and with what you've done on cap-and-trade, it's The message is loud and clear. It's not coming from anyone putting together talking points, Mr. Speaker. It's coming from the American people to Democrats and Republicans alike in this Congress. Where are (Mr. MINNICK asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. MINNICK. Mr. Speaker, today Congress will consider a law requiring us to do what every other American taxpayer must do with its family finances, something very simple and very basic, pay for what we Ten years ago, thinking somehow it didn't need outside fiscal discipline, Congress abandoned this commonsense approach, wasted our budget surpluses, and went on a spending frenzy, doubling our national the largest budget deficit in our Nation's history. Our government cannot continue to borrow and spend, create ever- higher levels of debt, and pass along the costs of paying for it to our children and grandchildren. We are now relying on trillions of dollars of money borrowed from China and Middle Eastern oil states to pay our It's time we grow up, act like responsible adults and return to fiscal sanity. With this measure, any new spending we pass must be deficit-neutral. This is the long overdue essential first step towards a return to fiscal responsibility that will assure our creditors and demonstrate to the American public that we deserve to govern. I salute my Blue Dog colleagues for their persistence on bringing this critical issue to a vote. I urge my colleagues to support this (Mr. McCARTHY of California asked and was given permission to address Mr. McCARTHY of California. Mr. Speaker, this morning I opened up my hometown paper, The Bakersfield Californian. On the front page of the local section there is an article, Kern County's unemployment rate for the month of June increased to 14.7 percent. If that's a talking point, it's coming directly from the paper. One year ago the unemployment rate The American people know that if Americans are not working, America is not working. My constituents ask me, Is this Obama economy going to improve? They continue to ask me, If you take more from what people earn, for the energy tax every time you turn on a light, when you go to health care, taxing, are you taking away the choice? But I tell them there is a chance for a better way. There is a better way to work together to focus on small business. Small business creates 70 percent of every job in America. We can do better by working CONGRATULATING THE FRIENDSHIP MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH IN ROSWELL, NEW (Mr. TEAGUE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in Roswell, New Mexico. This year the church will be celebrating 47 years of service to the Roswell community. The Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been dedicated to the faith and well-being of the people of Roswell for nearly a half a century. I would like to especially honor the current serving pastor, Rev. Michael K. Shelton, and the church's former pastor, the Rev. O.C. King, and his wife for 28 years of faithful leadership to the church and the Churches like Friendship Baptist achieve such great distinction because of the hard work, dedication, and compassion of their congregation. The leaders of the church and their staff are also to be Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been and will remain a place for fellowship and a source of hope for the people of southern New Mexico. I am honored to have churches like Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in my district, and I commend them on their years of FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD ENROLL IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH CARE (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, would a government takeover of health care create jobs? The answer is clearly no. We should be focused on job one right now, which is find the jobs. But, Mr. Speaker, if the Energy and Commerce Committee had continued to work today, I would have introduced an amendment to require all Federal elected officials, including the President and Vice President, to set aside our health care benefits and enroll in their new idea of a government-run health care system. If the majority is really so confident that their plan will provide the very best health care to the people we represent, we ought to demonstrate that confidence by enrolling ourselves. I, for one, don't believe the government-run health care plan will be the best for the people we represent, but a government competitor will soon be the only A government competitor, Mr. Speaker, would be like an elephant in a room full of mice. The fast mice can get out of the room as quick as they can. The slow mice get crushed, and only the elephant is left. It is time we put our health care where we want the American health care to be, Mr. Speaker, but it's also time we find the jobs. THE BENEFITS OF HEALTH CARE REFORM FOR ALL AMERICANS (Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we really are on the verge of finalizing groundbreaking health care reform legislation that will benefit healthier generations to come and the 250 million of us who have health care but who are tired of skyrocketing Did your salary go up 114 percent this last decade? It sure didn't, but that's what happened with premiums and deductibles. This is about real reform, not for insurance companies and their bean counters, but I want to emphasize today the importance of including a robust public plan option, relying on the Medicare provider network in the final reform bill. Providing Americans with a real choice in doctors and insurance plans puts Americans back in charge of their health care, not insurance companies, but real people and patients. I would say that for those who believe in the free market, why are you afraid of a public plan? Why are you afraid of something that Mr. Speaker, I think it's time for us to do health care reform to lower costs, to make it affordable, and to benefit those of us who have health care to lower our deductibles and our premiums. (Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the unemployment rate is in double digits around this country. Some States have the highest unemployment rate in history. The economy is bleeding jobs because the trillion- Jobs, jobs, jobs, that's all we heard from the taxacrats as they jammed that bill through Congress. They didn't give anybody a chance to read it. They sure didn't want Members of Congress to read it. The American people didn't get to read it, and they have to suffer the But the stimulus bill did help one city, however. Washington, D.C., has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. Now, how can that be? Well, the stimulus bill stimulated government programs funded at taxpayer expense. These aren't real jobs. Government doesn't create anything. All they do is suck money out of a private economy that could The bureaucrats created more jobs for red tape regulating bureaucrats and forced citizens to subsidize it. All the trillion-dollar stimulus bill did was spend taxpayer money to create more government regulations, more government control, and more government bureaucrats. (Mr. HALL of New York asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to dispel the myth that health care reform will suddenly move the burden of paying for the uninsured onto the rest of us. All Americans are already paying the high costs of a broken health care system with 47 million Americans The cost of caring for the uninsured gets passed on to all of us. The average American family is currently paying more than $1,000 every year to support the uninsured. This $1,000 fee is buried deep in every premium and pays for the broken health care system. Health care costs are soaring out of control. Premiums have doubled in 9 years, growing three times faster than wages. These staggering prices are too high for American families. Members of Congress must come together to address the problem for the health of middle class Americans and the health of their wallets. The cost of inaction is just (Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, Democrats have painted a target on the backs of America's small businesses. As unemployment rises, 2.6 million jobs have been lost since January. Democrats First there was cap-and-tax, which will skyrocket electric bills, gas prices and food prices, and make American businesses less competitive. Now they have a government-run health care full of tax hikes and mandates on small businesses, which the NFIB estimates will cost 1.6 Small businesses create the majority of jobs in this country. They are doing the best they can in this tough economy, but all they hear from Democrats is pay higher taxes. Democrats should stop feeding Big Government and start providing relief to small businesses. Where are the jobs? We need health care reforms that help more Americans regardless of their preexisting conditions, help small businesses provide insurance for their employees, and keep in place an In conclusion, God bless our troops and we will never forget September the 11th in the global war on terrorism. (Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. You've heard the commercial: Don't support So the question that you need to ask yourself then is, Do I feel lucky? Do I feel lucky that I won't be one of the 14,000 people a day who lose their jobs and can't afford health insurance, that I won't have such a high deductible that I avoid preventive care and end up with end-stage cancer because I didn't go to the doctor. Well, am I Do I feel lucky that Junior won't break a bone and I end up in the emergency room with a $5,000 bill? Do I feel lucky that I won't go bankrupt from my health care problems? Do I feel lucky that I won't have some preexisting condition that prevents me from getting a new job? Do I feel lucky that my health care premium won't grow three times The American economy is in the intensive care unit. The disease is the high cost of health care, and the medicine is health care reform. (Mr. PAULSEN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Speaker, last week my home State of Minnesota saw the unemployment rate rise once again, while seeing its exports drop by The number one priority of this Congress and this administration should be job creation. But it's clear that the economic stimulus policies being pursued in Washington are failing. Congress has missed important opportunities to pursue real policies that will put Instead, we've seen reckless spending and reckless borrowing at unprecedented rates, so much so that the fact now is that every man, woman and child in our country owes over $37,000 as their share of the Mr. Speaker, we should be reforming health care without throwing even more new taxes on the backs of families and small businesses, and we should be giving priority to helping small businesses, our number one job creators, to put Minnesotans and Americans back to work. APOLLO MOON LANDING IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ST. LOUIS PRIDE (Mr. CARNAHAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Science and Technology Committee, I rise today to remember the 40th anniversary of the Apollo Moon landing and the deep sense of pride it gave our Nation. I, like all Americans, watched with amazement as Neil Armstrong declared: ``That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.'' That moment demonstrates the magnitude of American know-how, ingenuity, innovation and our ability to rise to a great challenge. My home city of St. Louis, Missouri, was instrumental in the success of that Moon mission, serving as home to then-McDonnell Douglas, which manufactured components for the third-stage booster rocket for Saturn V. That third-stage booster rocket launched those brave astronauts into lunar orbit, making the historic journey possible. Now it's time to lead the world once again in innovation and science technology, especially as we transition to a new clean energy economy. Americans are ready to be called to action for a great challenge again. (Mrs. MILLER of Michigan asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, when the economic stimulus plan was passed earlier this year, the American people were told that we had to act immediately because of our economic crisis. We were also told that that plan would create or save 3 million jobs and that the unemployment rate would not rise above 8 percent, and that we had to act so fast that actually not one Member of this House or the American Well, the economy hasn't gained 3 million jobs. It's actually lost 3 Unemployment is almost 10 percent. In my home State of Michigan, it is 15.2 percent today, and $787 billion has been added to our national debt and we have an annual deficit approaching $2 trillion. Mr. Speaker, now we're being told that we need to pass health care reform immediately because we're in a crisis. We're told that it will be deficit neutral because it includes massive new taxes on individuals and small businesses. But CBO says that it will actually increase the deficit, Mr. Speaker, while others say that it will force millions of We do need to reform our health care system, but doing it in such a (Mr. REICHERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Speaker, our economy is struggling, and unemployment is near 10 percent. Yet the health care proposal being considered in Congress asks our job creators, the small businesses of America across this country, to pay a new 8 percent tax. Last week, in the Ways and Means Committee, I proposed to exempt small businesses from this penalty tax if it would result in businesses having to lay off workers, cut wages, or reduce jobs. America's businesses are hurting, and we're asking them to pay more taxes? Yet, my amendment was rejected. Requiring small businesses to pay a penalty tax is no way to help them stay in business and create jobs. American workers will be harmed. Workers will bear the new cost I urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Americans need the confidence that their jobs are not in jeopardy, that we are working to protect and strengthen their health care, while supporting the small And these aren't speaking points. That's just some straight shooting (Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, President Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, reflected on the administration's lack of focus on the economy earlier this year when he said that our Nation's financial crisis presented an opportunity to accomplish agendas A good example of that was the so-called stimulus bill that had nothing to do with helping to save or create jobs in the private sector, but everything to do with expanding government programs and The Obama administration and the Congress should be focused on one issue and only one issue, and that is stabilizing our Nation's economy so that Americans can keep the jobs they have and get back the jobs they lost. Only when the economy is stabilized should we be debating other issues such as energy policy and health care reform. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting, and it's time that our President and the Democrats in Congress stop ignoring their pain and (Mr. LEE of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. LEE of New York. It amazes me how out of touch we are in Washington. For months now, my constituents in western New York have Well, according to this chart of job postings, we found out where they are: right here in Washington, D.C., as we continue to hire thousands of Federal bureaucrats. It's one of the only cities that's It's appalling that we're continuing to grow the Federal Government When I ran a business, you always had a budget, and you lived within When you look around D.C., you see construction cranes all around the skyline. It's because we can't construct enough buildings to house all these Federal bureaucrats that we're now hiring when we have this We have to stop this excessive spending and work together to create (Ms. SPEIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, the enemies of health reform have scoured all of Canada to find a story that fits with their message of ``no But I only have to look to my district, to Sharon Almeida from San Bruno, who sent me this letter titled, ``What's Wrong With This Each month Sharon and her husband, Frank, net $3,811 from Social Security and pensions. But they pay out nearly $2,800 for Sharon's cancer treatments. That leaves them just $1,000 for food, utilities, gas, insurance, never mind a little something for the grandchildren. Thank God they own their own home and no longer have a mortgage. Mr. Speaker, Sharon and Frank worked hard. They played by the rules and raised a beautiful and supportive family. They do not deserve this. So, to the critics of reform, I say, let the Canadians worry about the Canadians. It's time we come together to provide real health care reform for Sharon and other hardworking Americans. (Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, trouble, oh, we got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and it rhymes with B and that stands for Broke. Right here in Capital City, right here, we've gotta figure out a way to help the Americans we're about to You've got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and that rhymes with D and that stands for debt. Right here in Capital City we've got trouble. Remember the millions, the billions, the trillions. And don't you forget, we've got trouble. We're in terrible, terrible trouble. The game of some 256 Members is a devil's bet. Oh, yes, we've got trouble, trouble. Trouble with a T. It rhymes with D, and it stands (Mr. BROWN of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, it's time for commonsense health care reform that will strengthen free enterprise, lower cost and Unfortunately, at a cost of $1.28 trillion, Democrats wish to create a new government program that will unwillingly force more than 100 million people out of their current coverage, increase taxes by $818 According to CBO, this legislation would also increase the Federal deficit by $239 billion over 10 years and, as a result, would ration care, force doctors out of the profession and hospitals out of business, and ultimately provide fewer options and longer waits for Locally, new health mandates in South Carolina, a State already in financial crisis, would create more unbudgeted costs and reduce funding Spending so much and accomplishing so little, a government takeover of health care is the wrong direction for all Americans. Republicans have a better plan that expands access to affordable health care and allows families to choose the plan that best fits their needs. (Mr. CULBERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, Continental Airlines, one of the largest employers in Houston, has just laid off 1,700 people. And my friend, Mr. Chris Lee of New York, has put together an inspired chart that shows clearly what this liberal leadership of this House and this Congress are doing with our hard-earned tax dollars. They're redistributing the wealth to Washington, D.C., they're creating jobs in the government and Washington and out in Nancy Pelosi land, out in San Francisco and in State capitals across the Nation. But we fiscal conservatives understand, it's common sense: to create jobs, you cut taxes; you get lawyers and bureaucrats and regulators off the backs and out of the pockets of small business people. We need to cut taxes to create jobs. Do so immediately. We need to cut spending at the Federal level to reduce the level of debt that our children and The Inspector General for the Treasury has just reported that these irresponsible bailouts that this liberal majority has passed could cost taxpayers up to $23.7 trillion on top of the $60 trillion in unfunded liability that we have already passed on to our kids. It's time to cut taxes and create jobs and get the government off our PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SUPPORT FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM IS WANING (Mr. FLEMING asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, the more details Americans learn about the government takeover of health care proposed by the President and the liberal leadership of Congress, the less support there is for this A Washington Post-ABC poll shows more than half of this country is opposed to this plan. Yes, support for this crazy deep dive into The nonpartisan CBO says this plan won't reduce the cost as the President suggested; it will accelerate it. And we know that will kill This liberal Congress rammed the stimulus and cap-and-trade, which nobody could read before voting, down the throats of the American people. But they are now fed up and on to their strategy. We don't want DMV, Department of Motor Vehicles, style medicine with long waiting lines, delayed care and skyrocketing cancer death rates as in Canada and the UK. We don't want a system that will bankrupt this country and ignore the elderly, and we sure don't want our tax money Simply put, we want commonsense health care reform, not nonsense (Mr. BUCHANAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, at the start of this year, the focus has I was chairman of the Florida Chamber 4 years ago. We represented 137,000 businesses, and 99 percent of those businesses were small business. They create 75 percent of the jobs. Yet, today, we are going to tax health care. It's not a tax on profit. It's a tax on payroll. If you've got a $1 million payroll making no money, and if you're paying another $80,000 a year you don't have, you're going to put people out The other thing they want to put together is a surtax of 5.4 percent on businesses. They want to get to the millionaires. Do you know who those folks are? They're small business people. You wouldn't know that if you've never been in business. That's the majority of them. So you're going to tax the 8 percent. You're going to add another 5.4 percent. You're going to kill millions of businesses, and you're going to kill millions and millions of more jobs. We need to get focused back on the economy and on jobs in America today, right now. (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker and Members, I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee and on the Health Subcommittee. We were in session last night until 12:30, working on this bill. It was beginning to be a bipartisan bill. We accepted Republican amendments; we accepted Democratic amendments, but we have a long way to go. Let me Forty-three to fifty million people in our country are without health care. They get their health care through the emergency rooms. Do you know who pays for that? Those of us who have insurance, who are fortunate enough to have employer-based insurance, whether you're a Federal employee, a State employee, a city employee or whether you work for some of the large industries. We have insurance, but 43 to 50 million people don't. Our country's employers and employees spend more per capita than anywhere in the world for some of the worst results for We are going to debate a bill in a few minutes by my colleague from California, Joe Baca, on the increase in diabetes in the Hispanic community. Diabetes can be dealt with early on. Our health care system decides to deal with people after they're so ill that it's more expensive. We need health care reform in our country for cost containment but also to make sure that every American doesn't have to get their health care through the emergency rooms. (Mr. MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, Americans all over this country are asking: Where are the jobs? We've been promised jobs over and over by the Obama administration and by the majority in this Congress, but When the President took office, 11.5 million people were unemployed. Six months later, that number now stands at 14.5 million Americans who are unemployed and who are looking for work. Where are the jobs? In February, when the majority rammed through a $1 trillion stimulus bill with zero input from my Republican colleagues, Americans were promised that unemployment would remain at 8 percent. Five months later, unemployment is at 9.6 percent and is climbing. In my home State of Florida, that number is 10.6 percent, the highest it has been in The stimulus bill is not working, and despite what Vice President Biden says, we can't borrow and spend our way out of this recession. Instead of spending trillions of dollars on failed programs and on misled policies, we need to focus on lowering taxes on small businesses (Mr. WAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, the world is looking to us for innovation. That's the goose that lays the golden egg in our country--our free enterprise system, entrepreneurship. They are looking and are saying, American innovation can pull this economy back in a good direction, not regulation. Other governments are moving away from regulation and high taxation. We're moving towards it. It's innovation, not regulation. Look at the new cap-and-trade legislation for energy and the environment. It's a regulatory scheme. It's a taxation scheme, not an innovation scheme. Where is nuclear power? Where are the new energy can lead to a robust, manufacturing-driven, job-creating U.S. economy? Look at the new health care scheme. It's a regulatory scheme, a taxation scheme and, frankly, a litigation scheme. It's protecting the status quo in litigation. The greatest medical centers in America are saying this government insurance scheme is the wrong approach. We need less litigation. We need to unleash the entrepreneurship and the innovation of the United States again so that we can lead. Where are the jobs? They're in innovation and in entrepreneurship. They're in our free enterprise system. The government chokes it with (Mr. REHBERG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Speaker, 5 months after this House passed the so- called ``stimulus'' that shattered spending records, the economy struggles, and unemployment is approaching 10 percent. It's important to remember that Republicans had a different plan for economic recovery. While we didn't have enough votes to pass it, our solution relied on American ingenuity and small business, not on stimulating bigger government by creating government jobs. Our plan would have produced immediate results by putting tax dollars right back in the pockets of American taxpayers and of job creators. Recently, it was reported that someone in the White House sees the need for another stimulus. Instead of doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result, perhaps it's time to give Republican alternatives a serious look. It's not too late to pass a real stimulus (Mr. CHAFFETZ asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise with deep concern about the families of the United States of America. The economics of this credit card Congress are not working. Where are the jobs? We cannot tax and spend our way out of our challenges. I firmly believe that President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress are taxing, spending and borrowing too much money. This credit card Congress has now put us nearly $12 trillion in debt. We are spending nearly $600 million per day just in interest on that debt. Bailouts and stimulus money by the billions of dollars are not helping the average person at home, and now we have a proposal to slam through a government-run, Chinese-financed health care system that puts a Washington, D.C., politician between our doctor and my wife. The tax-and-spend, credit-card-driven, Chinese-financed economics driven by the Democrats doesn't work. We need fiscal discipline, limited government, accountability, and a strong national defense. We need to restore liberty for the American people and for small businessmen and -women. That's where you'll find the jobs. Stand up, America. Let your voice be heard. Put a stop to this credit (Mr. GINGREY of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, one of the American people's biggest fears about the Democratic health care reform plan is the prospect of having some government bureaucrat stand between them and the doctors they trust. I've heard this message time and time again in townhall meetings, in letters and in phone calls from patients The House Democratic leadership has promised the American people that their fears about the bureaucrat-rationed care they will receive are unfounded, even while drafting a 1,000-page bill that creates this Comparative Effectiveness Council to decide which treatments will be Late yesterday evening, I gave my colleagues a chance on the Energy and Commerce Committee to put their money where their mouths were by offering an amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would simply bar Federal political appointees and bureaucrats from An easy vote, Mr. Speaker. Who do you want making your health care decisions--your doctor or a government bureaucrat? However, every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against this amendment. It's time for Congress to focus on strengthening the doctor-patient relationship and not the bureaucratic-patient relationship. (Mr. BONNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BONNER. Mr. Speaker, the people in South Alabama and, really, all across our country want to know: Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs that were promised by the administration and by the Democratic Without a single Republican vote, a $787 billion stimulus bill was forced on the backs of the taxpayers of our country with one simple promise: that it would keep unemployment below 8 percent and that it would create some 3.5 million jobs over the next 2 years. Where are those jobs? Instead of creating new jobs, almost 2.5 million jobs have been lost just since the stimulus bill has been passed. Nationally, the unemployment rate is 9.5 percent, inching up closer and closer to double digits. In five of the six counties that I represent in South Alabama, that unemployment rate is already at Mr. Speaker, there is a serious lack of credibility in our Nation's capital. Don't take my word for it. Just listen to the American people. SUMMERS RELYING ON GOOGLE SEARCHES TO GAUGE RECESSION (Mr. WESTMORELAND asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, when this administration took over on January 20, the unemployment was at about 7.2 percent, and they made a promise that this new stimulus of $787 billion would create or would save 600,000 jobs. Since that point, we've lost 2 million jobs. Where The President's top economic adviser pictured here, Mr. Larry Summers, has made us all feel better in this country by telling us: Of all the statistics pouring into the White House every day, top economic adviser Larry Summers highlighted one Friday to make his case that the economic free-fall has ended. The number of people searching for the term ``economic depression'' on Google is down to normal levels, Summers said. Searches for the term were up fourfold when the recession deepened in the earlier part of the year, and the recent shift goes to show consumer confidence is higher, Summers told Peterson Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I'm telling you that somebody in (Mr. AUSTRIA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. AUSTRIA. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting. Millions of Americans are out of work, and hundreds of thousands continue to lose their jobs each month. In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate reached 11.1 percent in June, the highest it has been in decades. According to the Columbus Dispatch, this adds up to an additional 33,000 jobs in Ohio that have been lost during the month of June, which is up from 8.8 percent in January 2009. The Dispatch article goes on to state that, over the course of the past year, 279,000 Ohioans have lost their jobs, including small businesses, At the end of the day, I trust the American people and our small businesses, the taxpayers, to spend and to invest their own money as they see fit. That is what will get America back to work. Unfortunately, the other side of the aisle's economic policies have this backwards. The government continues to take Americans' tax dollars and to spend those dollars as they see fit. Not only is that inefficient and wasteful; it's just flat out wrong. Where are the jobs? It's time to get Ohio and Americans back to work now. (Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask a simple question: Where are the jobs? My constituents, along with those across Ohio and In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate has risen to 11.1 percent. We have the seventh-highest rate in the Nation. Every single county in my district is equal to or is higher than the national average, and Pike and Scioto Counties are actually above 15 percent, but that number is rather deceiving. Another large percentage of our population has either given up looking for work right now or has taken People in Ohio and in my district are hurting. We need jobs and we need them now. Only $6 million of the Department of Transportation Recovery Act dollars have been spent so far in Ohio. The Recovery and Reinvestment Act was supposed to provide immediate stimulus to create new jobs. Where are those jobs? People are hurting. Five months later, (Mr. ROE of Tennessee asked and was given permission to address the Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, with the national unemployment rate nearing 10 percent and Tennessee's own unemployment rate at over 11 percent, people are outraged that not more is happening in Washington to help them find work. So far, this Congress has provided those who find themselves out of work extended benefits, but it insisted on taxing those benefits. Worse, the majority has not done enough to stimulate the economy and to produce jobs, the best benefit Despite all of the promises of a green job revolution and the millions of jobs that would be saved or created because of the economic stimulus package, the number of jobs since President Obama took office Republicans have called for an immediate end to the tax on unemployment benefits, which would surely help those who have been hurt by this recession. We have also called for tax relief for small businesses who can use that money to create jobs. These measures can American small businesses are the most innovative in the world and will pull us out of this recession if we allow them, but Democrats seem determined to prevent any recovery from occurring. In the past month, they moved to bludgeon our economy with a national energy tax and tax on small business to finance massive new health care entitlements. (Mr. SESSIONS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, over 6 months ago, my Democrat colleagues and the Obama administration told the American people that if we passed the $1.2 trillion stimulus package, it would create jobs, halt the growing unemployment rate, and turn our economy around; yet here we are today with a 9.5 percent unemployment rate--the highest in 26 years-- and a record $1.1 trillion deficit that is growing and expected to be And yet this administration and Democrats want to push through another $1.2 trillion health care package, a health care package that, according to the President's own economic adviser, will result in 4.7 Just a few weeks ago when talking about the stimulus package, Vice President Biden said for the Obama administration, Well, we just Mr. Speaker, I don't think that the American people can really afford for this Congress or this administration to guess wrong again. We need to make sure that we find the jobs in this country, not tax and spend. (Mr. ROSKAM asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, listen. Listen with me and see if we can hear the sounds of jobs. Shhh, shhh, shhh, shhh. You gotta listen real The administration told us in this House months ago that if the American people stood in favor of the stimulus package that unemployment would peak at 8 percent, and yet here in Illinois, the State that I represent, we've now eclipsed 10 percent. We were told that the cost curve would be broken if only we would follow the administration's health care plan and it would be the salvation of small business, and yet the Congressional Budget Office came into the Ways and Means Committee last week, Mr. Speaker, and said The question that has to be asked and has to be answered is one that we've heard no answer today from the other side: Where are the jobs? There are no jobs. This is an administration that has pumped sunshine for months and has failed to follow through, and we ought not follow We know what we need to do, and that is stand for small business and (Mr. HERGER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, rising health care costs are a serious problem, but the Democrat bill being advanced in the House proposes $1.2 trillion in additional spending on health care coupled with massive tax increases that would hurt small business and middle class The Democrat new 8 percent payroll tax will force employers to cut millions more jobs in the middle of the worst recession in decades while their surtax would push my State of California's top income tax rate to over 56 percent, higher than even that of France's. And those tax hikes won't even cover the full costs of this bill. Mr. Speaker, we need real reform that brings down health care costs instead of pouring more money into a broken system. HEALTH CARE PLAN SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR EVERYBODY (Mr. TIAHRT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, on Friday I offered an amendment in the Appropriations Committee that failed because every Democrat voted against it. The amendment simply stated that Members of Congress and the administration should live by the laws they impose on the American Specifically, if you vote for a government-run health insurance plan, you should get a government-run health insurance plan. If it's good enough to impose health care rationing on the American people, it's certainly good enough for you. Because it's hypocritical to vote for a government-run rationed health care plan that will be forced on everyone else while retaining a private insurance plan for yourself. If Members don't believe they should have to live under the rationed health care plan that they're pushing, they should explain why. Kansans are upset by the possibility that they're forced on a rationed public health care plan by this Congress. They believe if it's not good enough for the people who vote for it, it's not good enough for them. Mr. Speaker, it's time for us to reform health care by addressing defensive medicine costs, by offering market-based principles for health care, and by keeping patients and doctors in control, not (Mr. COLE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Well, they certainly aren't in the Democrats' job-killing health care plan. At a time when America is suffering the worst recession in a generation, it's utterly irresponsible to propose a government takeover of our health care system and destroy millions of private sector jobs in the process. Since the Democrats passed their stimulus package, more than 2 million American jobs have been lost, and the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, Dr. Christina Romer, has suggested that the tax hikes on businesses that will be required to pay for the Democratic health care plan will result in the loss of an additional In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Democratic proposal will force drastic cuts in Medicare Advantage, causing millions of seniors to lose their coverage for prescription medicine, the cost of private health care will skyrocket, and the Lewin Group has estimated that nearly 114 million Americans will be forced out of their current private health care coverage and into government-run health care plans. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats' job-killing health care proposal is the wrong prescription. It will cost millions of jobs. Americans need a AMERICANS WANT TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR THEM, NOT AGAINST THEM (Mr. LATTA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, the people of the Fifth Congressional District of the State of Ohio of the United States all want a job. Last year at this time, the Fifth Congressional District, according to the National Manufacturers Association, had the ninth largest number of manufacturing jobs in the country. When the new numbers just came out, When you look at this map of the State of Ohio, looking at Williams, Fulton, Defiance, Paulding, Crawford, and Huron--those are some of my counties--when I've got counties over 15 percent, folks back home want What this Congress passed before we went on the Fourth of July recess was the national energy tax, the largest tax that we're going to see that puts businesses out, that puts people out of work, and that's what People want to know what we're going to do for them, not what we're doing to them. And I'm telling you that folks back home, when I go home every weekend, want to know what are we doing. When you look at the State of Indiana right here, right next to us, they're in as big When the Heritage Foundation came out with their report, of the top 20 congressional districts in the country that had problems under cap- and-tax, Ohio and Indiana ranked right in the top, 16 out of 20. We've got to do something. We've got to act right now. (Mr. McCOTTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They are not in Michigan, my home State, where we have a 15.2 percent unemployment rate. And what could we expect, especially when this was one of the driving forces behind the trillion dollar stimulus package. One could We then saw a national cap-and-tax energy tax did not create jobs, did not help, and now we're on the verge of a radical socialization of America's health care network. And what do we hear from the other side? And do you know why? Because while our health care system needs reform, it is not broken. The one thing that's broken is this Congress. And if this Congress keeps spending people's money and engaging in radical change to our cherished way of life, every single family budget (Mr. LANCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, there is a great debate here in Congress about how we go about reforming health care in the United States. I've tried to work in a bipartisan capacity with the majority, but the Democratic leadership's health care reform plan is a governmental takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and, ultimately, less health care coverage for New Jerseyans. Most disappointing to me is the fact that the Democratic health plan would increase, not reduce, our Nation's burgeoning long-term health costs, a step in the wrong direction. And according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, instead of saving the Federal Government from fiscal catastrophe, the Democratic health care proposal would already worsen the situation that is out of control, an $11 trillion Democrats should put aside their $1.5 trillion health care plan and take a hard look at the affordable and effective Medical Rights and Reform Act put forth by the Republican Tuesday Group. Together, we can find real solutions to make health care affordable. (Mr. ALEXANDER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, several of my colleagues have come to this mike today and said, Where are the jobs? Well, if we pass this government-run health plan with compulsory insurance, it's going to create some jobs. It's going to take a government police force that you won't believe. We're going to have Barney Fifes running all over this Nation forcing people to do things they don't want to do. And how do we pay for it? Well, that's simple. We just go to the small businesses that can't afford to buy insurance for their employees as it is and we increase by 8 percent their payroll taxes. We are going to break the backs of small businesses that are the backbone of this (Mrs. BACHMANN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) As a Senator, President Obama supported the $700 billion bailout Nation strategy that today we're learning will cost the American people President Obama pushed the trillion dollar stimulus that cost our President Obama took over GM and Chrysler, and he gave pink slips to 3,400 car dealerships that cost 150,000 jobs. No jobs. President Obama's national energy tax will double our electricity bills in Minnesota and will cost 2.5 million job losses every year. Now President Obama's economic adviser tells us that the government takeover of our private health care insurance will cost us 5 million This may be called the China-India stimulus plan, but the President Mr. Speaker, let's have real change so the American people can have (Mr. AKIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. AKIN. Americans love records. How fast can you go? How high can you go? How deep can you go? We love to set records. Why, the Democrats just set a fantastic record of the biggest tax increase in the history of our country. And was it clever? It was really clever. All you have to do is flip a light switch to pay a tax. And spending. Oh, we've done a great job of spending it. As a result of taxing and spending, more records. Why, in the last 6 months, we have lost more jobs than any 6- month period since World War II. There's a record for you. Here's another record. We have, in the last 6 months, used up more jobs and lost jobs than we created over the Bush years over the previous 9 years. That's the only time that's happened since the Great And here's another record, too: That is, the jobs that we've lost have been longer than any time since we've been measuring unemployment I wish we didn't set quite so many records. We don't need the (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to address Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Americans have lost millions of jobs in the last 6 months. The unemployment rate today is approaching 10 percent nationwide. And amid all of this, Democrats are proposing a government takeover of health care that would increase taxes, eliminate choices, cut Medicare, force Americans out of their current plans and place billion-dollar job- killing fines and mandates on small businesses, the job creators. Studies estimate that nearly 5 million jobs will be lost as a result of taxes on small business under this Democrat plan. There is a better solution, Mr. Speaker. Rather than penalizing struggling small businesses, Congress must make it easier for them to afford health benefits. We must increase choices, make health costs deductible, expand health savings accounts, end waste, fraud and abuse and control unnecessary lawsuits that drive up costs for everyone. I support reform, Mr. Speaker, that lets Americans keep their doctors, lowers costs and keeps medical decisions between the patient (Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this year, the administration and Speaker Pelosi had this House pass a 1,500-page stimulus bill which no one in either body was able to read before they passed it that spent $800 billion which we did not have, all because they promised that it would create new jobs. In fact, they said it would actually either create or save 2 to 3 million new jobs. Their economic policy adviser at the White House said it would mean an immediate start of creating new jobs and eliminating losing jobs. Even Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was on the floor saying this would be an immediate jolt to the economy, the immediate creation of jobs. Well, it is 5 or 6 months later, and where are we? I just heard from Chairman Bernanke. He says he can't assess where we are right now. But if you look at the numbers, if you look at the chart that I have here, the Democrat projection with stimulus had we done something was here. What actually happened, we have seen as far as jobs, more job losses, more job losses, more job losses, February, March, April, May and June, more job losses. We have lost several million jobs since the stimulus The administration misread the American economy. The administration misread the American public. The American public knows that we need to We spend too much, we borrow too much and we tax too much. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. WITTMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, just a few minutes ago, I finished a lunch with a gentleman who is a business owner in Virginia. And we had a discussion about what are the things that we need to be doing to help As I travel across the First District, the thing I hear time and time again is where are the jobs? What are we doing to help this economy? What are we doing to help small businesses? Folks, that is where this economy is going to be picked up, from the efforts to make sure we help our small businesses. That is what this Congress needs to be focusing on each and every day. When we come here, our focus ought to be what are we doing to help small business? What we doing to create jobs? Obviously, what is happening right now isn't working. People out there are anxious. They are concerned. They are frustrated. They are telling me, as well as the rest of the Congress, get to work, start creating jobs and start turning this economy around. (Mr. SCALISE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, Americans all across the country are asking, where are the jobs? When President Obama brought the stimulus plan before the American people, he said it needed to be rammed down their throats quickly. He didn't allow people even the opportunity to read it. Not one Member who voted for the bill even had the opportunity to read it. But he said, don't worry. Just trust me. It will create Well, now 6 months later, 2 million more Americans have lost their jobs since President Obama took the oath of office. And what's their answer? They're talking about another stimulus bill. In fact, just last week, Vice President Joe Biden said, We have to go spend money to keep The American people are starting to understand what's going on here with this Congress, the liberals that are running this place. They realize all they're doing is taxing and spending, and they're not creating jobs. They're running jobs off. The cap-and-trade energy tax would lose 3 million jobs to countries like China. And then they come back with this plan to have a government takeover of our health care system, a plan that would add another $800 billion of new taxes on the backs of American people and run off even more jobs. The American people know what's going on here. They want jobs, not (Mrs. CAPITO asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, for West Virginia's families, it's jobs, health care and the economy that matters the most to them. They've seen trillions of dollars spent, and they see Washington proposing to spend trillions more. They want to know where are the jobs with the stimulus? They want to know why the only apparent answer here in Washington is My constituents want their voices heard. Recently, I sent a survey out and received 3,500 responses on what do people want on health care. They want to keep the coverage that they have. More than two-thirds are troubled by the idea of a government-run health care. Three-fourths are shocked by the thought of yet another trillion-dollar program. And the vast majority think that this is not the time to be raising taxes. Unfortunately, the plan moving through the House right now fails to address all of these. It fails to control costs. It taxes small businesses. It threatens to force families into government-run health care. Simply put, this is not the health care reform my constituents and I are looking for. What they're looking for are jobs. (Mr. SMITH of Nebraska asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, we were told a $1 trillion stimulus package would create jobs immediately. But since then, nearly 2 million Americans have lost their jobs, and unemployment is at 9.5 percent, the highest in 26 years. Then the House passed cap-and-trade legislation which will cost our country 2.5 million jobs each year. Now we're rushing to take up the Democrats' health care bill, which As House Republicans offer plans and ideas to get our economy moving again, all we get in return is more of the same, spending and taxing, and it keeps yielding the very same results: Longer unemployment lines Mr. Speaker, we need new ideas and new approaches to deliver GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE IS NOT GOOD FOR AMERICA (Mr. TERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TERRY. The House health care bill is a government takeover of your health care and destructive to the economy. It provides perverse incentives to employers to dump their health care plan, forcing their employees into the government health exchange where they will choose the government-subsidized government plan. Oops, there goes the promise This costs you $1 trillion placed on the back of small businesses. After 10 years, the cost of this plan explodes, needing multi- trillions of dollars to continue to fund. More taxes, more debt. Oops, (Mr. CALVERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, around the country, more and more Americans are out of work, struggling to pay their bills. Yesterday, the Web site recovery.gov revealed that your government spent $1.2 million to purchase pork at twice what struggling families would pay at a local grocery store. It would be funny if it weren't so painful. The $787 billion stimulus was sold to the American people as a bill that would put people back to work. But now we see it for what it really is, a massive expansion of social welfare which is doing nothing Where are the jobs? Almost 6 months have passed since the stimulus was signed into law, and unemployment continues to tick upward. It is over 13 percent in my congressional district. The so-called ``stimulus'' was a missed opportunity to provide true tax relief to the American people and for shovel-ready infrastructure projects that would have provided jobs. As more information on this stimulus package is revealed, I'm sure more terrifying news will be before us. (Mr. BISHOP of Utah asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I want to introduce you to Mr. Pitchford. He is a young and exciting teacher who gets 12-, 13- and 14- year-olds to enjoy geography and history. But this September, he is not going to be back in the classroom because his district relies upon resource jobs and royalties and development to fund schools. And this administration, through the arbitrary and unilateral decisions of the Secretary of the Interior, has cut this funding. This is the administration that stopped new uranium development for 2 years, has postponed offshore drilling decisions, and has postponed oil shale development projects. And for Mr. Pitchford, has taken 77 oil and gas leases and suspended them because they don't think 7 years of study was If we do not develop the resources on our public lands, jobs are lost. If we don't have cheap forms of affordable energy, jobs are lost. And those jobs aren't simply a number. They are a face of a real person like Mr. Pitchford, who is no longer a teacher not because of his choice, but because of government decisions. And the collateral damage of these government decisions are the 13- and 14-year-olds in his classroom. Where are the jobs? They're not in Mr. Pitchford's (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, let me ask a question. I don't know if it has been asked yet today. The American people want to know, where are the jobs? We have a Congress that has gone off the tracks. A trillion- dollar stimulus package, that's thousand-dollar bills stacked 63 miles high. Did we get any jobs? No. We have a budget with a $1.2 trillion deficit built into it. Are we going to get jobs? No. We are going to We have a cap-and-tax bill that is going to kill American jobs by raising the cost of our traditional sources of energy, coal, nuclear and oil. We have a health care bill on the agenda before the Congress today that is going to kill jobs and raise the cost of health care to the American people rather than contain the cost and create more choice This Congress is out of control, and the American people want to (Mr. KENNEDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in favor of the health care bill this Congress is considering. It would cap out-of-pocket expenses. It would eliminate preexisting condition discrimination. It would give patients a choice between our own physician and a government plan. It would eliminate lifetime caps for health care. It would eliminate the ability for people to no longer have the choice of having to choose a job and not be able to leave that job because of health care discrimination, no more denial because of a preexisting condition, and mental health parity for all insurance plans, irrespective of mental Mr. Speaker, we need to have mental health screening annually covered, and that is what this bill does so that we treat it as a preventive item. For the 130 million Americans with mental health conditions, this will act as a preventive measure, saving us millions and millions of lives and dollars from suicide and the like. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I offered a bipartisan commission amendment to the stimulus bill when it came before the Appropriations Committee and it failed. Had that amendment passed, we could have helped create jobs, Now 6 months later, we have unemployment rates at a 26-year high, and some say it will go to 11 percent, and some even say 12 and 13 percent. We have piled another $787 billion on top of our children and our grandchildren. Social Security is in trouble. Medicare is in trouble. Medicaid is in trouble. Let's pass this bipartisan amendment so we can get control of the debt, get control of the deficit, create a (Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the health care proposals that are before us have been tried before. Public option was tried in my home State of Tennessee under a plan called TennCare. For more than 10 years, the legislature and three Governors tried to make it work. It has been less than successful. But what has happened is that a program that was supposed to have saved millions, tens of millions of dollars, has never saved one nickel. It also has restricted access. It has driven up the cost of private health insurance, and it has nearly Tennesseeans know that rushing to reform health care and doing that wrong is a very expensive process. We all know that costs and access of health care needs to be addressed. No one seriously believes that any of these plans before this House right now is going to do that. Tennesseeans know the cost of rushing and getting it wrong, and the American people are figuring it out because they have seen the majority rush a stimulus, an omnibus, a housingus and a porkulus that has left the American people saying, where are the jobs? And they do not want The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, in the midst of the worst recession in a generation, so what did President Obama and Speaker Pelosi do? Well, they propose a government takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and less health coverage. As a physician, I know that government-run health care will end quality care. In addition, since the recession began, 6 million jobs have been lost; yet the Democrats' health care plan includes hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes on small businesses, the job engine creation in this Nation, $800 billion in new taxes. According to the economic modeling by the President's own Chief Economic Advisers, the business tax hikes alone would destroy up to 4.7 million jobs, and amazingly, an independent analysis by the nonpartisan Lewin Group found that 114 million Americans would lose their personal, Mr. Speaker, the American people want real solutions to get our economy back on track, not another excuse to raise taxes on small businesses and working families. House Republicans have a plan for reform that expands access to affordable health care and saves jobs. (Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the facts show that Fact: the administration promised that it would create 3.5 million jobs. Instead, we have lost an additional 2 millions jobs. But not only is the administration and this Congress not succeeding in creating jobs; they're actually rushing to pass legislation that would even Look, the Pelosi cap-and-trade bill would cost Americans anywhere between 2 million and 3 million jobs a year in additional job losses. The health care proposal would cost Americans 4.7 million jobs lost and lead to $1.3 trillion in new spending and huge tax increases. Mr. Speaker, it's time to give relief to the job creators like the small businesses; and very respectfully I say, Mr. President, it's time to stop talking. Stop wasting taxpayers' money. Stop irresponsibly borrowing. Stop raising taxes. It's time to focus, focus on creating THE ADMINISTRATION IS HIDING OMINOUS NUMBERS FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC (Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. In case you missed it, there was an ominous report in yesterday's Washington Post that said the administration is delaying for several weeks the congressionally mandated report on economic growth, job creation, and budget deficits, a report that's due The administration said yesterday, We're not going to tell you what's in that report for several more weeks. Why? I will tell you why. They don't want to downplay the politically damaging deficit numbers, the unemployment numbers, and the economic growth, or lack of growth, Why? Because it's an attempt to hide this record-breaking deficit as the Democrat leaders break arms to rush through this government takeover, the experiment in health care. That's why the administration is hiding ominous numbers from the American public. (Mr. RADANOVICH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the devastating job losses in my district in California. This Congress, with the help of the Obama administration, has taken away 40,000 jobs and almost $1 billion of income from the great San Joaquin Valley in California in a foolish attempt to protect a 3-inch fish. The valley's unemployment now is at 20 percent, with some towns as 40 percent. Yet, the mere flick of a switch on the pumps in the delta will restore 40,000 jobs at no cost to the government. In addition to this careless disregard for the farmers in my district, the Democrat leadership is now ramming through a $1.2 trillion health care reform measure that will eliminate 4.7 million jobs, small business jobs, and subject farmers to $500 billion in new taxes. And let's not forget the $846 billion national energy tax that will result in a 2.3 million job loss and cause the price of everything Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The Democrats are giving them to the little fishies in the San Francisco Bay delta. Go figure. (Mr. OLSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the administration argued that an $800 billion taxpayer-funded spending spree was necessary to create jobs. It was rushed through with no time to review the policies that would implement The administration sold this spending spree as a jobs creation measure. Yet, it turns out that jobs weren't a priority at all. A $3.9 billion stimulus funding announcement was made for smart grid investment grants by Vice President Biden in which he stated, ``This is Well, the Department of Energy didn't seem to get the memo. Application forms for grants asked: ``Will DOE use the number of jobs estimated to be created and/or retained as a criterion for rating a proposal for funding?'' The grant guidance says: ``No.'' Where are the jobs? Job creation was supposed to be the primary requisite for receiving recovery funds, and yet it was simply a WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW A RUSHED GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE (Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, as the House leadership prepares to rush to judgment on legislation that will lead to a government takeover of health care, 17 percent of our Nation's economy, it's instructive to look back a few weeks to the cap-and-trade energy debate. Just before the Fourth of July break, leadership set another deadline to pass what will amount to the largest tax hike in U.S. history. With unemployment soaring, policies that impose a national energy tax will only make things worse by increasing energy costs for all Americans, crippling small businesses, and putting more people out of Frankly, the legislation we passed is a gift that keeps on giving to our economic rivals like China and India whose economies are already sucking away U.S. manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate. Needless to say, as we saw from Secretary Clinton's recent visit to India, these nations do not plan to impose restrictions on their emissions. Mr. Speaker, American families are struggling; there's no doubt about it. They're working to make ends meet and they are worrying about their jobs. We should not burden them with a new national energy tax, and we certainly should not allow a rushed government takeover of health care. (Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, our economy is in the midst of a historic recession, and millions of Americans have lost their jobs over the past several months despite promises from Speaker Pelosi and President Obama that their extravagant spending would create jobs. But Americans are a hardworking and resilient people. So I was excited when I heard from a laid off entrepreneurial constituent of mine from Allegheny County, North Carolina, who's working on starting his own business. He plans to hire around 20 people over the next 2 However, he recently wrote to tell me that if the Democrats' health care bill becomes law, the new taxes and burdensome rules will take a devastating bite out of his ability to grow jobs. In fact, he said he would hire only half the workers if this legislation becomes law. Mr. Speaker, this is a travesty. This Congress should be implementing policies that create jobs, instead of burdening entrepreneurs with job- killing taxes and new government mandates and red tape. THE POLICIES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION ARE LENGTHENING AND DEEPENING THIS (Mr. McCLINTOCK asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I was struck by the chilling similarity between the broad-based taxes under the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade tax we passed several weeks ago and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that economists blame as one of the major factors in producing the Another of Hoover's blunders was the Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932. Its centerpiece was a radical increase in income tax rates from 25 percent to well over 50 percent. If that sounds familiar, it should. That's one of the financing proposals in the health care bill that would push State and Federal income tax rates to more than 50 percent in most States. Mr. Speaker, when I see the same policies from this administration that turned the recession of 1929 into the Depression of the 1930s, I'm reminded of Ben Franklin's observation that ``experience keeps a dear Mr. Speaker, these policies are lengthening and deepening this recession because this administration did not even learn from WHERE ARE THE JOBS THE DEMOCRATS SPENT $1 TRILLION TO CREATE? (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, you know, I think pushing government-controlled health care is a way for the Democrats to divert The White House said we had to pass a stimulus because it didn't want unemployment over 8 percent. Unemployment is at 9.5 percent and slated The White House said it didn't want to own General Motors. The The White House said it didn't want any pork in the stimulus. Now, we're paying money to clear away obstacles for fish and to monitor The White House said it didn't want to increase the deficit. The U.S. deficit broke past $1 trillion in June, a grim testament to the I have one question, Where are the jobs the Democrats spent $1 HEALTH CARE REFORM MUST TARGET ACCESS TO QUALITY AFFORDABLE CARE (Mr. BOOZMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, we must reform health care. Too many Americans do not have access to quality, affordable health care. resolving these problems, however, the President prescribes an overhaul that will deny Americans treatments they need and make them wait to get treatments that a new health care commissioner allows. This is not the way to reform our health care system, and my constituents agree. I've received many calls and letters from Arkansans, like Michael who recently told me he owes his life to the fact that we don't have a system like the British-run government health In 2007, Michael was diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma, something he's sure his doctor would not have caught had he had his hands tied in red tape health procedures. He owes his life to the care we were able We cannot rush through legislation that will have serious implications on care Americans like Michael receive. We need to take a reasonable amount of time to listen to the concerns of Americans like Michael and craft a commonsense bill that addresses the real problems. WE SHOULD NOT BE DECIMATING THE CARE OF OUR SENIOR POPULATION (Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, last week the Democrats released a health care bill which essentially said to America's seniors ``drop dead.'' Despite their promise to care for our seniors, Democrats have decided that it's too expensive to care for my senior constituents and everyone else's constituents. This bill would cut an additional $156 billion from the Medicare Advantage program in order to pay for the government expansion of health care for the young, the healthy, and the wealthy. This, by the way, is the second attack on our seniors this year. The first came in March when the administration announced that Social Security recipients would not receive a cost-of-living increase. Listen up, America. Seniors have special needs. This bill ignores the needs of Florida's health care system. We should be fixing what is broke, not decimating the care of our senior population. This is change (Mr. SHUSTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting and they're asking, Where are the jobs? The Obama administration and congressional Democrats promised that the stimulus--the trillion-dollar stimulus-- would create jobs immediately. Last month alone, we lost almost half a million jobs and unemployment now stands at 9.5 percent. It's clear the Democrats' trillion-dollar stimulus package isn't working, and their response is to increase spending in the appropriations process by 12 percent, pass a national energy tax that's going to result in increased energy costs, less competitiveness for American jobs, and drive jobs from American shores. Now they're trying to ram down a health care plan that's going to raise taxes on American business, cost jobs, and force people into a We need to focus on creating jobs--and you do that by holding the line on taxes, controlling spending, and reforming health care. Let's focus on creating jobs and answering the American people's cry for, (Mr. BLUMENAUER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. BLUMENAUER. It's been fascinating watching some of my friends parade to the floor making some pretty outrageous claims. The most recent one was, my good friend from Florida suggesting that by having the administration follow the law, that if the cost-of-living has not increased sufficiently, so that there isn't a cost-of-living increase for Social Security, somehow this is an administration assault on senior citizens. This is a rather bizarre notion when we think about their record when they were in charge, seeking to undercut formulas like the one in question to move them back in the other direction. When it comes to health care, when our friends on the other side of the aisle, strong-armed their prescription Medicare drug coverage program into law; did not seek concessions from the pharmaceutical industry; created the ``doughnut hole'' that has created a massive gap What we're doing at this point is trying to move forward in a constructive fashion to give the American people choices, follow the (Ms. FALLIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FALLIN. Mr. Speaker, the American people are concerned about keeping their jobs and the huge deficit that we have incurred here and in the Senate, and passing that debt on down to future generations of With over a thousand pages, the Democrat health care bill costs too much, spends too much, and will destroy jobs in America. Health care reform should be about lowering costs, providing quality, affordable care for all Americans. And this health care debate must consider that every individual has different health care needs and that Americans are The Democrat leadership has failed to address these needs by supporting the same old, tired proposals of massive Federal new spending and increased Federal regulation, which will cost the United This time, cutting a bigger Federal check won't do it. Their plan amounts to $818 billion in new taxes on individuals, on businesses, and a Federal takeover of our health care system. These taxes will crush our small business owners and destroy thousands of jobs. This plan will put bureaucrats in charge of our health care--and the (Mr. ENGEL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ENGEL. The majority Democrats in this Congress are trying very hard to pass a health care bill that will be a good bill for the American people. Our friends on the other side of the aisle don't seem It's a national disgrace that there are 47 million Americans that have no health care coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that our emergency rooms are being used to help people that have no coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that so many of our health care We are trying to craft a plan that will put America back on the road so that every American will have health care; so that health care as we know it will be improved; so that people that like their health care can keep their health care, but people that don't have health care, can We know that the system is broken. I don't want to hear people on the other side of the aisle talk about deficits because when they were in the majority for 12 years, they gave us the biggest deficits in American history and left us with red ink as far as the eye can see. So I would urge my friends on both sides of the aisle, let's put our (Mr. McHENRY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Unemployment in my district has hit 14 percent--14 percent. Failed stimulus aside, Washington is doing nothing but making matters worse. Put yourself in the shoes of the only people that can lift us out of this economic recession--small business owners. Let's see what they're They're facing higher energy costs because of this Democrat cap-and- trade tax on energy. They're facing higher health care costs because of a government takeover of health care. They're looking at higher energy taxes, higher health care costs, and the kicker is, higher personal income taxes. The liberals are already proposing it. The folks that are running Washington are out of touch with small business owners and are doing the wrong thing on our economy. And I urge the leadership of this Congress to do the right thing. Don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Don't kill small business owners. (Mr. DENT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DENT. The issue is: Jobs, jobs, jobs. A friend of mine who employs many people in my district said this to me the other day, The policy proposals coming out of Washington are impeding job creation and scaring people. He's right. And there are five reasons that are driving One, a stimulus that spends too much, borrows too much, and delivers too few jobs. Two, a budget that doubles the national debt in 5 years and triples it in 10 years. Three, a card check bill that is undemocratic and imposes binding arbitration. Four, a national energy tax, cap-and-trade, that will cost 66,000 jobs in Pennsylvania and jack up electric bills for consumers. And, five, a House health care bill with enormous tax increases and mandates on small businesses and Enough is enough. Time for Washington to get out of the way and let job creators do what they know how to do--create jobs. (Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, we have heard some interesting rhetoric today about the impacts on small businesses and health care reform. Here's a statistic. If we do nothing, the cost of health care on our small businesses in the United States over the next 10 years will increase to $2.4 trillion. That's going to have a crushing burden on the ability of small businesses to do what they do best, which is to Only 48 percent of our small businesses currently provide health care. If we allowed those cost increases to occur by doing nothing in terms of health care reform, we're guaranteeing fewer Americans will have health care, we're guaranteeing fewer successes among small businesses that are the job generator in this economy. Doing nothing has a profound cost. That's why we need health care reform. We need it now. We've waited 6 years. The time has arrived. (Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, does anybody see what's happening? Does anybody even care? The $700 billion TARP program was to buy troubled assets. Did we do that? No. We bought car companies and banks. And we own them. And then we took the money away from the bond holders of the The $787 billion stimulus package only stimulated more welfare. It hasn't created jobs. Not one. And now we have put upon us a government takeover of health care that's going to lose, according to Christina This has never been about jobs for the Democrats. It's never even Who's going to make the decisions over your life, the personal decisions? The Democrats think they can. We think you should. Does anybody see what's happening? Does anyone even care? (Mr. GOHMERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, $700 million for wild horses last Friday; $50 million for rare cranes and rare dogs and cats that don't even live in this country. We've got habitat problems in this country. The $800 billion stimulus hasn't stimulated anything except unemployment. I just left a crime hearing and we found out that out of 207,000 people in Federal prison, 53,000 of them are not citizens. They're non- U.S. citizens. They're here--most of them, they said, were probably illegal. So there's 53,000 jobs Americans didn't want, committing But this is too serious. I know as a former judge, if somebody had come in and said, Here's a mom who has all these kids and grandchildren and she's gone to a bank and said, Give me money, loan me money, I can't control my spending, you would take those beautiful children away and give them to somebody that would be responsible. (Mr. HENSARLING asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, it's time to admit the failure of Obamanomics. Where are the jobs? Since we enacted the President's economic program, 2 million more are unemployed in this land--9.6 percent unemployment, the highest in a quarter of a century. So what do we have to show for Obamanomics? $143 billion more dollars of taxpayer bailout money. The first trillion-dollar deficit in our Nation's history. We had the national debt to be increased, tripled-- We have found the historic debt, we have found the historic deficits, we have found the historic bailouts, Mr. Speaker. But where are the You cannot bail out, borrow, and spend your way into prosperity. It does not work. It is time to put America back to work with tax relief for small businesses and American families. That's the Republican plan. (Mr. LaTOURETTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LaTOURETTE. A number of my colleagues today have asked, Where are the jobs? Well, I don't know exactly where the jobs are because they haven't appeared. But I can tell you where the jobs went, at least in When the Democrats opened this Congress, 4,000 people at Chrysler out of work. We honored a United States Senator. That's a nice piece of But then things began to get serious. Almost 10,000 people out of work. The most important thing they could put on the floor is Supporting the Goals and Ideals of National Teen Dating. Eleven thousand people out of work, we had to pass the Monkey Safety Everybody likes safe monkeys. Thirteen thousand people out of work; Great Cats and Rare Canids Act. Sixteen thousand people out of work; Honoring Arnold Palmer. And 18,000 Chrysler workers out of work, the most important thing the majority could put on the floor is National But now they're getting serious because later today we are going to vote on Supporting the Goals of National Dairy Month. (Mr. FORTENBERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, as Congress takes on the essential task of strengthening America's health care system, we have a choice here to either rush legislation costing more than $1 trillion or to have a serious analysis on the fundamental question as to how we actually improve health care outcomes, reduce costs, and protect vulnerable One major consideration should be how any health care proposal will affect small businesses. Small businesses generate 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs each year in this country. In my hometown of Lincoln, Nebraska, 80 percent of those in the private sector are employed in This current plan would place an 8 percent payroll tax on certain small businesses who do not or cannot provide government-mandated Mr. Speaker, one study suggests that as many as 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a direct result of this overall health care proposal. There are more creative solutions to get people the care they need, help families manage ever-increasing costs, and help small business entrepreneurs provide the benefits for their employees. (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HOYER. I have been listening to this litany of ``Where are the jobs?'' I have been here long enough. Mr. Pence, you opposed the program in 1993. You said it would destroy this economy. You said it would blow deficits sky high. It created 216,000 jobs per month on You then supported an economic program in 2001. You said it would be a haven for jobs and small business and all that. You created not 216,000 jobs per month but 4,240. Those are the figures. I'm sure that you will all want to come here and say, ``No, Hoyer was wrong on those Under the economic program we propose, 216,000 new jobs every month on average. Under your program for the last 8 years under the Bush administration, 4,240 per month. That is a very substantial difference between 20.8 million new jobs under the economic program that you did not support in 1993 that we proposed, passed, and President Clinton So when you talk about jobs, you ought to talk about the experience that you've had under our program and your program. You failed. We succeeded. As a matter of fact, in the last year of the Bush administration, we lost 3 million-plus jobs. During the last year of the Clinton administration, we gained 1.9 million jobs. That's a 5 So keep talking. America knew the difference. America made a decision. They said what you had been doing was not what they wanted so they changed. In 2006, they changed the Congress, and in 2008 they And let me tell you something. We have lost 200,000 less jobs per month than Bush lost in his last 3 months in office, over the last 3 months. Now, is that where we want to be? It is not. But it is 200,000 better than the last 3 months in your administration. Those are the (Mr. McCAUL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Leader and Mr. Speaker, where are those jobs? We have the highest unemployment rate since the 1930s. They say a picture Mr. HOYER. I thought it was since 1982 when Ronald Reagan was Mr. McCAUL. Reclaiming my time, they say a picture speaks a thousand words. Well, look at this picture right here because it says it all. This is a picture of Larry Summers, the President's top economic adviser. Look at him. He's not creating jobs. He is asleep. Mr. Speaker, I would submit to you, this administration is asleep at the The Vice President recently said that we can spend our way out of bankruptcy. What? Really? Spend our way out of bankruptcy? What happened to Economics 101? I think the American people are smarter than Instead of cutting taxes and spending, which has historically worked, instead, we are enacting policies that will devastate our economy; a national energy tax that will kill 2.5 million jobs and, according to the President, skyrocket energy prices. A health care bill that, according to the CBO, will spend over $1 trillion and kill 4.7 million It is time, Mr. Speaker, for the American people to wake up. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully ask, as both I and my record were directly challenged by the distinguished majority leader on the floor, and given the fact that I've already utilized my 1 minute extended during the debate at the opening of this session, when a Member's record is challenged on the floor of the Congress, does a Member, under the Rules of the House, have the opportunity to obtain time when the distinguished majority leader refuses to yield time? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Only if someone yields to the gentleman. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry. Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, is it proper for a Member to direct an entire address to another Member of the body as opposed to the Chair or the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members must direct their remarks to the Mr. PENCE. Further parliamentary inquiry, if I may. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will be heard. Mr. PENCE. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, would it have been in order for the distinguished majority leader to raise questions about my record and the positions that I've taken here in the Congress during the course of my career in the context of floor debate under these rules? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot issue an advisory opinion Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to address the statement that was The SPEAKER pro tempore. Has the gentleman from Indiana previously Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. KING of Iowa. Is there a rule that prohibits this body from to a unanimous consent request to allow a Member to be recognized? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman seeking recognition to Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I am recognized for a parliamentary inquiry, as I understand it. My parliamentary inquiry is: Does there exist a rule that prohibits a Member from being recognized to speak The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a matter of recognition. As the Chair stated before, if the gentleman has already had a 1-minute, he is Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair could recognize for a unanimous consent request that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out of order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would entertain that request from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished majority leader came to the floor moments ago, and he asked the question that Republicans have been asking since midday today. It's a question that millions of Americans Now the leader--I know it was unintentional--misstated my record, saying that when I was here in 1993 that I opposed health care reform. In fact, I was elected to Congress in the year 2000. But it was an honest mistake and a misstatement of fact, and I acknowledge it. But can I just suggest, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the millions of Americans that may be looking in, let's stop looking to the errors of the past by Democrats or Republicans and let's come together today to Republicans are here to say that a government takeover of health care, financed by $1 trillion in tax increases is a disaster for this economy. It is unconscionable for this majority and this administration to insist on the adoption of a government takeover of health care financed by $1 trillion of tax increases during the worst recession in As the distinguished majority leader just said, Republicans say with (Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Well, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? That's what the American people want to know. What they know is the plan that the Democrats have isn't working, spending money we do not have. Not just a little bit of money but trillions of dollars that we don't have. Chairman Bernanke spoke to the House Financial Services Committee today, and he said: Maintaining the confidence of the public and the financial markets requires that policy measures begin planning now for restoration of fiscal balance. Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability, we will have neither fiscal I'll interpret that for you. If we keep spending money we do not have, we are not going to create jobs. We are going to lose more jobs. Last week, the Federal deficit in this country reached $1 trillion. If you started counting to $1 trillion, it would take you 17,000 years. We're talking about real money. We cannot continue on this spending spree that Congress is in, spending money that we do not have. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The American people want their jobs THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST 6 MONTHS SHOULD NOT BE REPEATED (Mr. ROGERS of Alabama asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The President and Speaker Pelosi came to this House early this year and said, if you'll borrow and spend $1.1 trillion, which is the largest spending bill in American history, it's going to save existing jobs and create another 3 million jobs. Well, where are those jobs? They say, Well, you know, we had to spend that money because we couldn't go to the failed policies of the past and repeat those. Well, they would like to rewrite history. But the fact is, in 2003, this Congress passed one of the largest tax cuts on small businesses in America in our history, and it was followed by over 50 months of consecutive job growth, the largest consecutive period of time of I would suggest to you, the only failed policies of the past that we shouldn't repeat are the failed policies of the past 6 months. (Mr. KING of Iowa asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the leader, where are the jobs? I listened attentively. I pricked my ears up. I thought I was going to find out where the jobs are. I didn't hear that answer. I looked back at what happened for the 108th and 109th Congress. Members of the Democrats came down on the floor and they said, Just put us in charge and we'll solve the problem. They won the majority, and we saw a hockey stick graph going downward of industrial investment. That's what happened to our economy; it reacted to the Democrat You elected President Obama. Now you don't have any excuses, and you are angry because we are asking, ``Where are the jobs?'' There are 14.5 to 14.7 million unemployed, another 6.8 million that are simply looking for a job that don't fit into that category, 21.3 million people looking for jobs in the United States, all of this under We had historically low unemployment and a growing economy because we lowered taxes, and we kept the pressure off of regulation. You are turning this into the nationalization of the private sector and the health insurance industry, and the American people don't want to live in the kind of countries that exist on the east side of the Atlantic (Mr. CONAWAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I hear a recurring theme about jobs: Where In a different life, I participate at a needs assessment in a community that I lived in that went through a process of looking at what needs were in families, in neighborhoods, and in the community. Once we distilled that list down to the top 10 needs for this particular community in Midland, Texas, if you looked at them, out of those, nine of those needs would have been positively impacted by a You cannot overstate the importance of jobs in the private sector, because when you have jobs in the private sector, individuals are better, families are better, communities are better, and this Nation, I can tell you where the jobs aren't. Here is a list of 53 new boards, commissions, and bureaucracies that are created under the health care plan that is percolating its way through this system. That plan will cost 4.7 million private sector jobs, but it will do a good job of creating additional bureaucrat jobs that don't create wealth and don't improve the overall economy of this country. ALABAMA IS SUFFERING FROM A HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (Mr. ADERHOLT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, in February, the administration assured us that if Congress would pass the stimulus bill, then we would see immediate relief and halt unemployment at 8 percent; yet it is now 9.5 percent on average, and it's rising. But the jobs have yet to appear. This problem hits home for me because Alabama is suffering from a greater unemployment rate than the national trend. Mr. Speaker, the Alabama unemployment rate topped 10 percent in June. It is the highest level since July of 1984. The June rate of 10.1 percent is up from 9.8 At this time last year, Alabama's jobless rate was half that at only 4.6 percent. The current unemployment rate is 10.1 percent. That represents over 215,000 unemployed Alabamians. The congressional district that I represent is suffering even more with an unemployment rate of about 12 percent, and that's on the average. At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet, the unemployment rate is rising, further evidence that we cannot borrow and (Mr. KING of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, 6 months after the Democratic administration came in with such promise, tens and tens of millions of Instead, during the past 6 months we've seen the systematic mismanaging and dismantling of the American economy. We've seen a stimulus bill which cost over $1 trillion in new spending with almost no tax relief for small business, with almost no needed infrastructure, but again, money on top of money. The President said jobs would come almost immediately. Instead, the situation gets worse by the week. We saw a cap-and-tax so-called energy bill which is going to result And now we see a health care bill which will ration medical care, at the same time, according to the CBO, increase medical costs, the worst Mr. Speaker, it's time for the American people to tell this administration and this Democratic-controlled Congress to work together in a bipartisan way so we can say, here come the jobs, not seeing the jobs leave our country, not seeing millions of millions of people being unemployed because of failed liberal Democrat policies. (Mr. FRANKS of Arizona asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, America is facing an unemployment and mortgage crisis unlike anything we have seen since the Great Only months ago, President Obama pledged that he would create 3\\1/2\\ millions jobs by the end of 2010 and told us that the unemployment rate would stay below 8 percent if we passed the allegedly urgent trillion- But, Mr. Speaker, since the President has assumed office, employment has dropped by over 2\\1/2\\ million jobs. We've lost 8 million jobs since the beginning of the Democrat-led 110th Congress, and half a The jobless rate stands at 9.5 percent, and the President himself This Congress and this administration must be reminded by the American people that what comprises true economic growth are jobs and economic productivity by the people. Higher taxes, increased regulation, reckless spending, bureaucratic selection of economic winners and losers and out-of-control deficit spending, these are the Democrat policies of the last five months, and they diminish productivity instead of encouraging it. They will kill jobs. And unless we change course, Mr. Speaker, this country faces an unprecedented (Mr. LAMBORN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today troubled about the Democrats' proposed government takeover of our health care system. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this legislation will not reduce costs but, rather, drive health costs up higher for American In addition to rising costs, according to the White House's chief economic adviser, Christina Romer, business tax hikes alone could Congress should consider free-market and Tax Code reforms to make our The President and his majority in Congress failed to produce jobs Why should we trust them with revising the one-sixth of our economy based on health care, when their own advisers say it will mean millions (Mr. CASSIDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Speaker, I actually applaud the goal of our Democratic colleagues in terms of the health bill they are putting out. Access, quality, and controlling costs are things that we should all And I agree with parts of the legislation. Guaranteed access, for example, is just wonderful. But, of course our concern is that CBO comment that it's not going to control cost, not achieve one of these goals, but rather, reset it to increase it. And we know as the cost of health care increases, that will be one more thing that inhibits growth So what can we do? One, we do need fundamental reform, which, as the CBO has pointed out, this bill does provide. We need to put the patient in charge of health care decisions and dollars. We need to empower patients to make value-conscious decisions, empower them with the information they need for reasonable decisions by increasing Let's empower them by incentivizing wellness programs at lower costs and improved lives. Let's empower them with things such as HSAs, which have been shown to decrease costs by 30 percent and, indeed, give insurance to those previously uninsured. Empowering patients is the (Mr. BACHUS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACHUS. I just came from a hearing with Chairman Bernanke. There were some questions he could answer, but others he couldn't answer. We asked him, Where are the jobs? He couldn't answer that question. He said unemployment would remain high through 2011. He said he's not sure that the stimulus created any jobs. It might, but he couldn't answer He did answer one important question, though; and he was very certain. He said, if we continue spending like we're spending today, we're on a rendezvous with financial disaster. He said, and he left no doubt, that we had to reduce our spending, that the deficit was going to threaten the prosperity of our Nation, not only our children and our grandchildren, but today, tomorrow. He said, we have to reduce spending. He said, spending is out of control. He said, the baby boomers in the next year or two would overwhelm the Federal budget. He (Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, while our Nation is facing record unemployment, we may well worsen the job situation if the proposed health care bill passes in its current version; 4.7 million more jobs are estimated to be lost and a trillion dollars in more We still have not addressed the hundreds of billions in health care waste, but are proposing spending hundreds of billions more. We should not be substituting the barriers, burdens and, bureaucracy of insurance companies with the barriers, burdens, and bureaucracy of Uncle Sam's I want to get people back to work. I want to make sure they're covered by health care. I want our Committee on Energy and Commerce to reconvene to get to work on this bill. It is going to take time. We need to take the time to fix this. Let's do it right. But let's not work towards artificial deadlines, and let's get America back to work (Mr. SHADEGG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I believe in health care reform. I have I came to the floor this morning to talk about this amendment. It's an amendment that was rejected by the Democrats last night. It says that no Federal employee should be able to dictate how a medical provider practices medicine. And it was rejected by the Democrats. Apparently Democrats in their health care bill want Federal employees, bureaucrats to dictate how your medical provider practices medicine. I think that's shocking. I don't want a Federal bureaucrat between me and But I got here and discovered that we are not supposed to ask, Where are the jobs? I don't get it. What's embarrassing about that question? When the Obama administration was sworn in, unemployment was 7.6 percent. When the stimulus passed, it was 8.1 percent. And today, it's 9.5 percent. And we're not supposed to ask where are the jobs? I think it's a legitimate question. I guess it's an embarrassing question. I'd (Mr. ELLSWORTH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I was sitting in my office, and I heard a I downloaded an article from the Evansville Courier Press, which happens to be in Indiana. It says: ``Stimulus has Hoosiers working.'' I'll make a few quotes out of this article: ``More than 2,400 people are now at work on Federal stimulus-funded roadway projects in Indiana, according to a state report being released today.'' ```Things were slowing down, and the stimulus filled in the gap,' said Tim Mahoney, an economics professor at the University of Southern Indiana. `It's kept the people employed that would be laid off,''' says ``What's clear is that the stimulus projects have boosted an industry ```In general, it definitely puts our people to work,' said Pete Bjorkman, the chief estimator for Evansville-based J.H. Rudolph'' ``Our crews are going to be working more hours and more days because of this . . . ,' he said. `It is creating more crews, more hours for our people that wouldn't have been there before.''' Mr. Speaker, I listened in the office to the stuff being said back and forth. To the folks in the audience and the people that are walking out there, Mr. Speaker, they're tired of this crap that's going on back and forth. We need to work together to put people back to work. (Mr. CAO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAO. Mr. Speaker, the present unemployment rate in the United States is 9.5 percent and climbing, and the American people are hurting. Our economic downturn is a challenge that will require prompt As Congress moves forward with the national debate on the economy, it is imperative that we detract from illogical partisan bickering and avoid the empty political posturing that got us into this mess in the The American people have real problems, and they want real solutions I represent a district that is over 60 percent African American, and I have seen firsthand how this economic slump has disproportionately hurt minorities more than any other group in the United States. Among African Americans, the rate of unemployment and uninsured workers is While there are a number of options for getting our economy back on track, it is important to remember that our Nation's proudest achievements have developed with a bipartisan, solutions-oriented (Mr. McKEON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, my friends are asking, Where are the jobs? It's a good question because we were told in February, when the stimulus package was passed, that four or five million jobs would be It's not bad enough that we're not doing anything to create jobs from the administration's side. But we're actually doing things to kill more I just left a markup for the Education Committee where the majority is killing a program that has been very successful since 1965, has helped millions of students go to college and provided an education for them, and now they're eliminating that program, along with it, 40,000 I have constituents at home that are really suffering. They're asking, Where are the jobs? It's about time you started doing something (Mr. FLAKE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, people are asking, Where are the jobs? And I I myself get a little leery when any administration, any says that they're going to create jobs. They do so for a while, but government jobs don't last very long, or they shouldn't last very long. What the administration should do, and this Congress, is create an environment in which private sector jobs can be created. And that's what we're not doing with this health care bill. This health care bill will kill jobs, not create them. It doesn't create an environment where Now, the administration and this Congress say we've got to get to work. But last week, last Friday we spent an entire day on a welfare- for-wild-horses bill. There's an old Garth Brooks song that says, wild horses keep dragging me away. And, apparently, wild horses keep dragging this Congress away from actually creating an environment where jobs can be created. And this health care bill goes the wrong (Mr. FARR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FARR. I hear from the other side that government takes over health care. I'm just wondering which one of you Members is going to give up your Navy doctors downstairs to take care of you. Which one of you is going to give up your Federal health care plan which insures all the members of your family? Which one of you is going to give up Medicare for all of your constituents? Which one of you is going to give up the veterans' care in the veterans' clinics that are in your districts? Which one of you who loves the military that is doing such a great job of defending our country in Iraq and in Afghanistan is going Yes, government is involved in health care. It sure is. That's what our country is surviving and living on. Let's make this work and stop (Mr. ROONEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, there has been some talk recently about the potential of a second stimulus package. Why would we need such a second stimulus? Because the first one didn't work. It's not rocket science, What the American people don't want to hear is that prior Congresses or that prior administrations used to do this, or that prior Congressmen were engaged in this, that or the other. What Americans want now is leadership and solutions moving forward, not how things I'm new here. I came here because the American people were sick and tired of the way things used to work. Unemployment will soon reach double digits, and it already has in my district, the 16th District of The first stimulus didn't work because the Federal Government is not capable of taking taxpayer money and properly redistributing it. So let's have a second stimulus package. Let's give tax breaks to small businesses and to small business owners. Let them hire and keep the people that they want to work for them. That's the American way. America works when people make it work, not when the government takes The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members--and this is not directed at the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney), who just spoke--that Members should address their remarks to the Chair and not (Mr. HUNTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, California unemployment is at 11.6 percent, and State Democrats in California destroyed the job market and the manufacturing base there through bureaucratic overregulation, unrealistic mandates and punitive fees and taxes. Congressional Democrats here in Washington are following California's lead with the national energy tax that's going to cost every American family $3,000 a year and with the job-killing health care plan projected to cost over 4 I've simply come to the easy conclusion that Democrats don't like small business. I've come to the conclusion that Democrats don't like jobs. Those of us in California have seen this movie before, and it ends like ``Thelma and Louise''--with the economy driving off a cliff in the Grand Canyon. And it's being driven by congressional Democrats. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT KNOW BEST WITH REGARD TO HEALTH CARE (Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, only in Washington, D.C., does government know best. My friends on the other side of the aisle think they know how to create jobs: stimulus I and possibly II, cap- and-trade, health care reform, higher taxes, more regulation, more government intervention. The Democrats think this is going to create Mr. Speaker, we need to be about the business of overhauling taxes, of bringing commonsense regulation reform to the people, of giving people real choice to make decisions for their health care between them and their doctors. It is about empowering people, not government. What I'm talking about, Mr. Speaker, is not socialism. It's freedom. With all that our colleagues on the other side have done, and with all that they propose to spend, I ask a simple question, Mr. Speaker: Where are THE DEMOCRAT SPAGHETTI DINNER OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, this chart is not a spaghetti dinner. It may look like it, but it's the Democrats' health care plan. If you were a person out in the hinterlands, looking at this, you would think, How in the world am I going to get health care coverage for me and for my family if I have to go through all of that? It's going to In addition to that, there are going to be jobs created, 4.7 million jobs in China and in India, and their energy bill, cap-and-trade, is going to create 2.5 million new jobs in India and in China because it's going to drive jobs offshore because the small businesspeople will not be able to afford to pay all of these bills and taxes that the The Democrats need to do something. They need to cut taxes and help the small businessman make a profit and create new jobs. If they do that, we will have jobs, but right now, we don't know where the jobs are. Unemployment was supposed to cap at 8 percent. In Indiana, it's close to 10 percent. It's going to go to 12, 14, 15 percent if they (Mr. LUETKEMEYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, if we're all real quiet and if we turn down the rhetoric and if we listen very attentively, I think we can hear the voices of our constituents back home--the people who pay the taxes of this country. What are they saying? What question are they the jobs? Where are the jobs, Mr. President? Well, we're not hearing They've seen the $800 billion stimulus package that was passed through this House, that was rammed down our throats and that had no effect. In fact, we've gone the other direction. Instead of increasing employment, we've gone the other way. We're now at 9.5 percent, headed towards double digits. What is the solution? A second stimulus is being talked about. Is that really what we need to do? In this last stimulus, there was a little bitty piece for small businesses. They're the ones that generate the jobs. They're the ones that can turn this economy around. They're the ones that can hire the people. Yet we ignore them. Oh, there are those voices again. I think I can hear them. Yes, they're louder this time. They say, Where are the jobs, Mr. President? (Mr. CAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, the chart next to me shows the Obama Misery Index, OMI, which reveals a stunning rise in debt and in unemployment. ``Oh, my,'' I think, is the right title for the index of current and Despite campaign pledges of fiscal responsibility and of job creation, since Inauguration Day, we've seen an $800 billion stimulus bill, massive energy taxes and a legislative agenda that has resulted in a rapidly growing debt alongside rising unemployment. Taken together, these figures define the effect of the President's policies to date, not only revealing their failure to deliver jobs for today's workers but an even larger government tab for our children and grandchildren to pay. Already the unemployment and debt on President Obama's watch is a stunning 40.6 percent--the current Obama Misery After the Vice President's recent claim that the government needs to spend more money to keep from going bankrupt and after the CBO, Congressional Budget Office, Director suggests that the $1 trillion Democrat health care bill will add to the country's budget problems, (Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the issue of job loss at rural hospitals if the current health proposal were to become law. The Democrats' public plan assumes reimbursement In the July letter from the Blue Dog Coalition to Speaker Pelosi, the coalition reported that Medicare reimbursement pays, on average, 20-30 percent lower than private plans. Actual costs are made up through private insurance reimbursement, which will be gone if the Democratic plan plays out. This will have a severe negative impact on rural hospitals, and it will leave us asking: Where are the jobs? Many providers suffer financial losses as a result of treating Medicare patients. The lower rates make it more difficult for rural providers, who serve higher percentages of elderly and low-income patients. A new public plan with rates similar to Medicare's will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the Nation's most efficient, high-quality providers. The result is a loss During this time of economic downturn, we need to be focused on the retention of existing jobs and on encouraging and not discouraging our (Mr. HOEKSTRA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, last week, the President visited Michigan. With an unemployment rate of 15.2 percent, we were hoping that the President would answer the question: Mr. President, where are the jobs? We had hoped that the President would have come to Michigan and would have recognized that raising taxes, that excessive spending and that more regulation wouldn't work, because that is what we've done in Michigan. We now have the highest unemployment rate in the country. Mr. President, take a look at Michigan. Recognize that we need to reduce taxes, that we need to control spending and that we need to America and Michigan will begin moving forward again when we empower its people, not when we empower the bureaucracy and the governments in Washington or in Lansing. It's about freedom. Give our constituents the freedom to spend their money to create their jobs. (Mr. WALDEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to continue this question of: The gentleman who spoke just before me is from Michigan, where their unemployment is upwards of 14 percent. Oregon's unemployment rate is now over 12.2 percent and is second only to Michigan. Our basic industries have been shut down. My part of the State, by Federal policy, prevents us from even harvesting burned dead trees in a timely manner from our Federal forest lands and accessing our resources. Now along comes legislation that says if you take woody biomass off Federal land and use it to make new, clean, efficient energy, if it comes up as certain types of stands, it doesn't count. It's not renewable. So the jobs that would go with the creation of that were really diminished or were taken away fully by the cap-and-tax legislation, which we know is going to cost 1 million or 2 million jobs I was out in John Day and Nyssa and Burns this weekend and Baker City. Everywhere I went at town meetings, the rooms were full, and people were asking, What are they doing to us in Washington? Where are CUT TAXES, CONTROL SPENDING, CREATE A COMMONSENSE ENERGY POLICY (Mr. JORDAN of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the reason our economy is not creating jobs is that small business owners are asking themselves, What's coming next out of this place? Always remember this, Mr. Speaker: The American people are smart. Small business owners are smart, but they're apprehensive; they're anxious about what's coming Is, in fact, this Congress going to pass cap-and-trade that's going to raise the cost of energy? Is, in fact, this cost of energy going to raise taxes? Is this Congress going to federally take over health care and make health care decisions for every single family and for every That's why we're not creating jobs. We need to do what we know always works: cut taxes, get spending under control and enact a commonsense (Mrs. BIGGERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address how this Congress and one concern on the minds of Americans today--jobs. Despite promises of quick action and of immediate returns, hardworking parents in my district and around the country are still staying up nights, worrying about whether they will have jobs in the next month, in the next day or In response, House and Senate leaders' only answer seems to be higher taxes and massive new government spending. Already our children and grandchildren are on the hook for the $1 trillion so-called ``stimulus bill'' that has resulted in almost 10 percent unemployment nationwide, Now the House leadership seems intent on pushing through another $1 trillion-plus health care takeover that only promises more taxes on small businesses and working families. The result: fewer jobs except for Washington bureaucrats who will be rationing out health care Mr. Speaker, we can do better. Let's work together on real solutions to cut taxes, to create the jobs and to rebuild this economy, not just (Mr. TIBERI asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, a hundred of my colleagues have come and asked, Mr. Speaker, ``Where are the jobs?'' We passed a stimulus bill months ago, and in Ohio, we had 33,000 jobs lost just last month. The jobs I see created, Mr. Speaker, are here in Washington--czars, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? We passed a bill on this floor creating a national energy tax which is going to cost Ohioans hundreds of thousands of jobs. We're debating a health care bill where small business owners are concerned that they're going to shed additional jobs at a time when we need small business owners to create more jobs. Mr. Speaker, Ohioans, as this chart points out, are shredding jobs in this administration, are shredding jobs this year. We're creating a record amount of deficits, record debt, higher taxes. All Americans (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, the question of the day is ``Where are the jobs?'' I will tell you where they're not. They're not in Michigan. Our unemployment is 15.2 percent. And sadly, in this House, we passed an awful energy bill a couple of weeks ago called cap-and-trade. That bill will add nearly a trillion dollars to the cost of businesses and homes across this country. Does that help with jobs? Absolutely not. In fact, one of my constituents in Michigan said their utility increases, their electricity costs will go up by nearly 40 percent by the year 2024. Is that going to help with jobs? Absolutely not. Did the Rules Committee allow us to add jobs with an amendment that would build perhaps as many as 100 new nuclear reactors in this country, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of jobs? No. The Rules Now, where are the jobs going? They're going to India and China. Did you happen to see on July 16 The New York Times where Secretary Chu said that if China's emissions of global warming gasses keep growing at the pace of the last 30 years, the country will emit more gasses in the (Mr. DEAL of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, my State of Georgia now has an unemployment rate in excess of 10 percent. As you've heard, other States are in worse condition. We are asking today the question of where are the jobs. We spent millions and billions, and perhaps even now trillions, of dollars throwing money at the problem, and yet the The legislative agenda that's been adopted by this administration and by this House has primarily two pieces of legislation. First is the cap-and-trade, a bill that is setting us on a path that has already been followed by some of our European countries, Spain in particular. They set out on this path of green jobs over a decade ago. The result is 17.5 percent unemployment. The green bubble burst, and for every job The second major approach of this House has been the new health care reform bill, a bill that will tax employers 8 percent of their payroll amounts if they do not provide health insurance for their employees. What does that mean? New jobs? No. It means losing jobs that we already Mr. Speaker, it's appropriate to ask, where are the jobs? THE MORE CONGRESS SPENDS, THE WORSE THINGS ALWAYS SEEM TO TURN OUT (Mr. POSEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, the stimulus bill was advertised as a way to reduce unemployment and help put this economy back on track. The blue line on this chart represents the projected path of the unemployment rate. That was below 8 percent prior to the stimulus being passed. The red line shows, in fact, what actually happened since the stimulus bill was passed. It was well-intended, but surely it was misguided. Now, the more Congress spends, the worse things always seem to turn out. So let's get out of the bailout business. Let's get out of the stimulus business. Let's get out of the national energy tax business, and let's not get into the health care business. Let's let the free enterprise system and the small businesses that made this economy great (Mr. ROYCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, accompanying the spike in the private sector job losses throughout our economy, we have seen a massive government intrusion into the private market. This Chamber recently passed cap- and-tax legislation which gives Washington 17 percent over the economy. If we move towards nationalized health care--the next priority for the administration--it could shift another 16 percent of our economy The Federal Government already runs General Motors and Chrysler. It now has a huge equity stake in dozens of our financial institutions. We've witnessed a massive $800 billion stimulus package that has failed to deliver the promise of an increase in job growth. And this flawed approach has failed to deliver because government spending does not increase the size of the economic pie. What it simply does is take money out of the private sector and shift it to the government. Real economic growth has always and will always come from the private sector. And instead of continuing this trend, shifting our economy to one centered on bureaucrats, which is exponentially increasing our deficit and killing off the private sector, we should be spurring job (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose efforts by the majority to rush through a misguided health care experiment that will greatly increase the already sky-high unemployment in my State. At a time when Floridians are facing double-digit unemployment, Congress should not be pushing through a government takeover of health care that will be paid for by a tax hike on small businesses. And a recession nearing double-digit unemployment nationally will discourage job growth and creation leading to even higher unemployment and people with employer-based health insurance being forced onto the government plan. This job-killing tax, combined with the crushing debt some in Congress have been piling on our children and grandchildren to pay for Big Government programs, will make it much more difficult for I urge my colleagues to reject this small business tax. (Mr. ISSA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say three things: Where are the jobs? Where is the transparency that was promised? And where will the savings come from in a health care proposal that, in fact, starts off by talking about savings while, in fact, increasing spending? You don't need a new tax if everything is already taxed and you are going to save. You only need a new tax if, in fact, you are going to spend more money, create more waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Speaker, the President said we would not go above 8 percent, that the stimulus would in fact drive down the tendency towards unemployment Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They were not created. Mr. Speaker, the President said that this administration would have unparalleled access and transparency, and yet the special IG for the Troubled Asset Relief Program has said just the opposite, that he's being blocked at every step, that, in fact, he's not getting the Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Where is the transparency? (Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I propose that we make August America Right to Know month. That means Americans have a right to know what this Congress is doing in proposals that change their lives, and what I'm talking about is the health care legislation. Just a couple of days ago, we marked up this legislation in the Ways and Means Committee, about a thousand pages, and it came to us 3 minutes before midnight the day prior to us marking it up. We had an amendment in the committee that said, If we're going to impose this new health care system on the American people, Members of Congress, themselves, should be put into this system. What happened to that amendment? It went down by a party-line vote. Republicans said ``yes''; Democrats, except for Mr. Davis of Alabama, said ``no.'' We also said let's recognize the fact that we're taxing people, a lot of taxes on people earning less than $250,000. That violates the pledge people believed they had in the last election. What was the vote? The Republicans said, no, let's not tax people earning less than $250,000; the Democrats said, yes, we will continue to tax those people, violating this pledge, this promise the American people thought that August ought to be the month where America gets to know what's going (Mr. MICA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, my district extends from Orlando to Daytona Beach. The State of Florida now has in excess of 10 percent unemployment. Nationally, 9.5 percent unemployment. Where are Congress passed a $787 billion so-called stimulus package. I took to the floor and spoke from the Democrats' side of the aisle and pleaded with folks that we needed jobs and we needed to invest in America's infrastructure; instead, we put less than 7 percent. So to date, out of $787 billion and $48 billion for transportation highway money, we have Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, where are the jobs? People want to work. They don't want government handouts. They don't want government welfare or food stamps. They want jobs in my district and throughout Where are the jobs, I come back to ask, that this country needs and AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, AND COMMISSIONS BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR (Mr. BRADY of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people in Texas who are worried what kinds of jobs they will have when this new government-run health care plan goes through Congress, 1,018 pages delivered to us a few minutes before midnight. We had until 9 o'clock Here's the plan: Thirty-one new Federal agencies, programs, and commissions in between you and your doctor taking away control of your At the committee, we asked, What does all this cost? They said, We don't know the price tag. We offered amendments. We said, Can you certify that Members of Congress read this bill and let the public read it? They said they thought that was a bad idea. We asked about We were worried about wait times for family physicians and second- class cancer treatment. They said that would be too inconvenient to Then finally we said, Let's strike the taxes on small businesses, and they refused to, saying small businesses have it so easy, they need to Ladies and gentlemen, we don't want the government telling us what doctors we can see, what treatments we can receive, and what medicines (Mr. KINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, last October, President Bush and Hank Paulson said to the Congress we need to bail out the financial services industry. We have to do it bold and we have to do it quick or the financial markets will tumble. Well, we passed the $700 billion TARP program, and still stock portfolios, savings of Americans all through In January, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama told us that we had to act bold and fast to pass the stimulus program because the unemployment rate was 8 percent, and now 2.5 million jobs have been lost since that And now the same Washington-knows-best mentality is telling us to rush through a government takeover of health care by August 1. This will result in a bureaucrat taking the place of your doctor telling you what procedures you will have. It will result in a $1 trillion Federal program. It will result in rationing and a huge tax increase on farmers Ladies and gentlemen, we have to slow down. Let's learn from the stimulus program. Let's learn from TARP. Let's slow down the process. Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, the pending health care legislation does one thing: It does bend the cost curve, but it bends it up. That's not according to me or my colleagues. That's according to the Congressional Budget Office that says private insurance rates will go up and the public option insurance will go up. What does that result in? 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a result of increased taxes, particularly My Blue Dog colleagues are down at the House negotiating some face- saving measure in this bill, and I'm going to include this list of their proposals, but I want to make sure that they comply with their July 9 letter which says it must be deficit neutral, it must protect rural health care, it must ensure bipartisanship, and finally, any health care reform legislation that comes to the floor must be available to all Members and the public for a sufficient amount of time This is government. This is transparency. The Blue Dogs need to (Mrs. LUMMIS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, ``where are the jobs?'' could be answered in one word, in my State of Wyoming. We were hiring people when our energy industry was robust from other States that were losing jobs, like Michigan. But the cap-and-trade bill that passed this House last week changed coal bonus payments from being paid over 5 years to now We are going to destroy jobs in Wyoming. So the people who moved from Michigan to Wyoming to find good-paying jobs are now going to have to return to Michigan or stay in Wyoming and be unemployed. It is because of the activities of this Congress. This Congress has not been happy to watch States like Michigan suffer. They have decided to make States like Wyoming, that were producing energy for this country, suffer right alongside States like Michigan. Our State, which had a healthy economy before cap-and-trade, before the Obama presidency, is now suffering just like the rest of the Nation. Our (Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it was Albert Einstein who said that ``the most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.'' That's great, Mr. Speaker, when compound interest is working for you--in building a nest egg for your children's college costs or for retirement. But when compound interest is working against you, it's It is absolutely devastating, especially for a Nation on the intermediate and long term, when that Nation recklessly spends taxpayers' money and causes huge, unsustainable deficits. As of June 30, the national debt was $11.5 trillion--over $37,000 per person. In June alone, the deficit rose by over $220 billion, a year's worth of deficits in 1 month! Now CBO says that the number, the total debt to the United States, will double in the next 10 years. It took 180 years for us to get to that $11.5 trillion. Under President Obama's massive spending it will double in just 10 years. Nothing puts our economy at greater risk of implosion and job loss than unsustainable COMMONSENSE SOLUTIONS ARE THE CURE TO OUR ECONOMIC WOES (Ms. JENKINS asked and was given permission to address the House for Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, last November, Americans sent a clear message. They wanted change in Washington. But they also asked for accountability, transparency, and for politicians to respect their tax Unfortunately, from the $787 billion so-called ``stimulus,'' trillions in bailouts, and the $3.55 trillion budget, Washington has gone on a reckless spending spree with taxpayer dollars. And now the majority in Congress is trying to pass a government takeover of health care that will add $239 billion to the debt our kids Prime time press conferences don't hide the fact that since January, our Nation's debt has skyrocketed by more than $1 trillion, that our debt to China increases each day, and that our Nation is facing double- Kansans know you can't spend money that you don't have. Congress must learn this lesson. As a CPA, a former State treasurer and a mother of two teenagers, I'm convinced that we need commonsense solutions to rein in spending, keep taxes low and get Americans back to work. JOBS WILL BE LOST AS A RESULT OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. CRENSHAW asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, it's pretty clear that we've lost a lot of jobs in this country, and I think it's pretty clear that we are going to lose a whole lot more jobs if we pass this health care plan. I thought Members might want to just hear a firsthand personal example. I've got a longtime friend that lives in Florida. He has a small business. By the way, he voted for Obama this year. He said, I'm going to vote for Barack Obama, even though I'm a Republican, because I saw him this weekend. He said, hey, have you seen that Obama health care plan? I said, yeah, as a matter of fact, I have. A lot of people have seen it. He said, man, that's not the change that I was voting for. He said, that's going to kill my business. He said, I'm going to see my taxes go up. He said, we're already laying off people, but if they put that penalty on us that I read about, then I'm going to have to lay some more people off. He said, this is killing me. And I'll tell you, that's happening all over the country, not just in Orlando, Florida, but all around the country. So we need some reform, but we need the right kind of reform, and this is not it. (Mr. SCHOCK asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Speaker, in the last 6 months, a lot has changed. We have a new President of the United States, we have a new Congress, the 111th Congress, and we have 3.1 million fewer jobs, and an increase of 28 percent in unemployment just in the last 6 months. What was the reaction? What was the response from the new administration and of this Congress? Well, we need to pass a stimulus bill, and we need to pass it now. No time for debate. No time for amendments. No time for input from the minority. We need to pass it This bill had less than 24 hours of debate on this floor before it was passed out of the floor, and yet the President took 4 days to sign it. What did it do? It spent $787 billion, the largest spending bill in And what have we gotten? The administration says we created 150,000 new jobs after spending $112 billion. Well, get out your calculators. (Mr. SMITH of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll has found that for the first time, less than half of Americans support President Obama's health care plan. Since April, approval of the President's handling of health care has dropped 8 points, while In an example of fair reporting, the Post put the poll results on its front page yesterday. Other news media have not been as candid in their When the Congressional Budget Office director revealed that the health care bill ``significantly expands the Federal responsibility for health care costs,'' the evening news programs on both CBS and NBC failed to report the CBO's key finding, nor have they reported how many jobs will be lost under the President's health care plan. Mr. Speaker, with so much at stake, Americans need the media to (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, President Obama told us that all this reckless spending he was doing was going to create jobs. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Instead of jobs, we get a so-called ``health reform'' bill. And this provision of that bill tells Americans that they will be prohibited from having their own insurance. They will be forced into a government health plan run by something like the IRS. Mr. Speaker, this health plan is socialized medicine, pure and simple. And in addition to that, it will cost more. It will increase taxes on the wealthy and a whole lot of other people. It will increase the deficit. It will lower quality. It doesn't cover everyone. And it is projected to lose another 5 million jobs of Americans. Mr. Speaker, this is not reform. This is just nuts. (Mr. BURGESS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this weekend, I received a communication from a constituent at home who brought to my attention a political cartoon that ran in the Chicago Tribune 75 years ago in 1934. It is often said that history doesn't repeat itself, but if you listen closely enough, it will rhyme. Or said another way, those who do not The constituent who sent this to me is a retired FBI agent. He wrote in his e-mail, ``change the names and the situation looks very familiar.'' Saul Alinsky, the leader of community organizers in Chicago, would be pleased with the current situation. When you look at the caption, spend, spend, spend under the guise of recovery, bust the budget, blame the capitalists for failure, junk the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, this was apropos 75 years ago. It may well be apropos (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would ask my colleagues on the other side if they would tell me, what is their health care plan? Is it just that we shouldn't do health care? What part of it would you not do? is the But I really rise, Mr. Speaker, to take cognizance of a very fine day yesterday of bipartisanship. A former colleague of ours, the now- Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, came to south Florida along with FAA Director Randy Babbitt to meet with several of us regarding radar in south Florida. On the flight from USAir here, Administrator Babbitt and I had an opportunity to hear a flight attendant do something very nice. She recognized and complimented 30 members of the Booker T. Washington High School class of 1949 in Miami who were en route here to Washington. It was a wonderful gesture, and it made for a My colleagues here who continue to rant about us not having health care, I wonder what they would say if we do nothing? Will health care (Mr. INGLIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. INGLIS. Mr. Speaker, I'm not here to ask the President to make good on his promise about those jobs, because I don't believe that government creates jobs. Government doesn't create wealth. All it does But I am here to ask the President to make good on the idea of producing the right policies that would create jobs by creating wealth in the private sector. And I would suggest to my colleagues that the way to do that is to have a low-tax situation, a lighter touch on regulation and less litigation. It's really those three things. If you have low taxes, light-touch regulation, and less litigation, we will expand the American economy, we will create wealth, and we will create That is something that we can be doing here in this Congress. It is something that we can cooperate on getting done, and we can serve the American people. We can deliver American solutions. (Mr. MORAN of Kansas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I for one believe that the health care system must be reformed. I've said that and have worked in that regard during my time in Congress. But I'm greatly concerned about the plans that I see coming forth for us to consider in this Congress. The single-payer plan raises concerns with me on behalf of senior citizens across the country, especially those I represent in Kansas. The plan that we are currently operating under, Medicare, provides wonderful services for many Americans, for senior citizens. But the reality is, that plan is bankrupt. We will spend $38 trillion more than The plan is expected to be bankrupt by 2017. So the idea that we would expand the plan when it already is in financial difficulty baffles my mind. The plan is to raise $820 billion in taxes, and we still leave the national debt increasing by $239 billion. This plan needs attention, and we need to make certain that what we do does not wreck the health care delivery plan we have in place for seniors today, especially in places like Kansas, where senior citizens are dominant. (Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I rise today to discuss the rising unemployment in my congressional district of south Florida. Last week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released data indicating that unemployment in Miami-Dade County was at nearly 11 percent. This represents a notable increase from 9.9 unemployment just Mr. Speaker, south Floridians are hurting. In Miami, workers in the food service and hotel industries have had their hours cut in half because of a reduction in tourism. These workers are working two, three In the Florida Keys, recreational fishermen are docking their boats permanently as the industry grapples with one of its slowest seasons in There is serious trouble in paradise as hardworking small businesses and middle-class families remain uncertain about their economic future. That is why it's imperative that this Congress gets serious about providing real solutions for our constituents. They cannot afford to WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS HAVING DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES ON THIS (Mr. SULLIVAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President and the Democrat majority, where in the heck are the jobs? With this stimulus bill and more than $1 trillion With the national energy tax passed by this House, it levies billions of new energy taxes on the American people, costing the average American family $3,100 more a year to heat and cool their home and put On health care, our Democrat majority's $1.2 trillion government takeover of our health care system mandates a one-size-fits-all, government-run health care plan on most Americans. Their plan is to nationalize our health care system and create new mandates, government bureaucracy and inefficiency that will only serve to drive up costs of Wasteful government spending is having devastating consequences on this country. It also could cost 4.7 million more jobs and hurt small WE NEED TO FOCUS ON SAVING THE COUNTRY'S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM (Mr. YARMUTH asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, when I was a young boy, a radio station went on the air in Louisville, Kentucky, and for the first week of its existence played one song over and over. It was called ``Purple People I am reminded of that event today as we've heard speaker after speaker from the other side repeat the same tired Republican talking points. What we haven't heard is one idea about how to fix our dysfunctional health care system which is threatening every business in this country, threatening our competitiveness and our long-term It is time that this Congress and our colleagues from the other side focus on saving this country's health care system. We heard one gentleman from the other side saying we're facing $38 trillion in additional debt in Medicare. We're trying to make sure that that I wish our colleagues on the other side would help us in that task. (Mrs. EMERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, in southern Missouri, rural families are struggling with job losses. We are a vibrant district with a time- honored work ethic, but job losses have hit us especially hard during a Constituents call my office every day, and they're asking what is Congress doing for them, how are we helping the manufacturing worker who doesn't want to go to the unemployment office because he really just wants to go back to work. And I hear a lot of justifiable anger from the same callers about Congress' policies that are going to make it tougher for them to get back to work. Cap-and-trade is the focus of Today, unemployment is still severe in southern Missouri with the potential to go much higher, much higher, if the cap-and-trade bill becomes law. More than 3,000 jobs could be lost in the Eighth District in a single year, and the few new green jobs this bill would create Mr. Speaker, this bill will leave with us a legacy of energy cost increases that will kill generations of jobs in rural America and in southern Missouri. Like my constituents, I am ready and willing to get Good energy policy is good jobs policy. I hope we can reverse course on cap-and-trade so it doesn't destroy our rural economy. THE HEALTH CARE BILL WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL TAXPAYER EXPENDITURES (Mr. WHITFIELD asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. WHITFIELD. Last night, as the Energy and Commerce Committee met to debate the new health care reform bill offered by the Democratic Party, as I looked through the analysis by CBO, I discovered that there was a reduction in Medicare benefits over the next 10 years in excess In addition to that, there was a reduction in reimbursements to The part of it that bothered me most is that in so many rural areas, programs like Medicare Advantage, home health care, skilled nursing In addition to that, this bill provides for an additional tax on employers, a tax on individuals that do not go out and buy health insurance once the mandate goes into effect; and, still, the bill is not paid for. And as the CBO director indicated, this bill will not save taxpayer money. This bill will create additional taxpayer WE DON'T NEED A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE AND WE DON'T NEED (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SOUDER. Where are the jobs? Last week, the health care bill was passed through the Education and Labor Committee, jammed through in an all-night session; and, supposedly, it offered a public-private option. Just a few minutes ago, we finished an Education and Labor markup. Where we once had a public-private option in direct lending, 80 percent chose the nonpublic option. So what did we just do? We eliminated the private option, and the Federal Government is going to be a giant bank, one of the biggest banks in the world, taking over all student lending. When we talk about the needs in health care, we need to address the problems that we're facing, the gaps in the health care system, how to make it more efficient. What we don't need is a government takeover of health care with no private options. We don't need higher taxes on the small businesses and the people in my district who are struggling with a mean of 15 percent unemployment in my eight counties. We don't need And this bill unbelievably had a clause added that will add more jobs for ACORN. When people in my district said they wanted more jobs, they (Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, it's an outrage the way health care is being approached in this country. Voters did vote for change; but, apparently, that's all they're going to have left in their pocket. I sat through a 17-hour markup on the Ways and Means Committee last week, and I didn't see one constructive process. I didn't see the voices of Democrats and Republicans heard on addressing the delivery system for Medicare to re-engineer it to reduce billions of dollars in Instead of reforming the private insurance industry that many of us want to do on both sides, Speaker Pelosi's response to that and the Democratic response to that is we'll legislate them out of business by undercutting them with a Medicare-like system which will punish rural And finally, egregiously, there's been no addressing of liability reform that punishes our doctors and health care providers with junk America demands real reform. We want real reform. Slow this thing down and give account to America for the kind of health care people need and want and that's affordable and accessible and not a GREATEST THREAT TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY FROM CAP-AND-TRADE BILL (Mr. BILBRAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, the American people were promised a climate change bill that would address the emissions problems. The problem is that their greatest threat to the environment and the economy from the so-called cap-and-trade bill was the smoke coming out of the back-room deals that were cut to create this monster that's being called cap-and- Frankly, I will just tell you the whole concept that when we had a chance to get government out of the way and build new zero emission generating facilities to be able to provide clean energy for the economy and for the environment, instead of that, this Congress decided And anyone that's worked on emissions issues will look at this bill in the future and say how could somebody with a straight face go back to their district and say that this bill is going to clean up the environment and help the economy? It is going to continue the pattern of a massive emission while we get the economy driven down. WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THE STIMULUS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME (Mr. KLINE of Minnesota asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, people are asking where are the As my friend from Indiana said moments ago, we just came out of amending a bill in the Education and Labor Committee where we wiped out the private sector in the student lending business, tens of thousands As all my colleagues know, this House, this Congress, passed a stimulus bill which was supposed to create jobs. Instead, we've been I find it interesting that the Republicans offered an alternative to that stimulus bill which would have cut taxes and created twice as many jobs, and now Christina Romer, the President's economic adviser, when she's been pressed on news interviews on two separate occasions in May and again in July about where are the jobs and why isn't the stimulus working, she said, well, the tax cuts in the stimulus bill are working. How ironic. We should have done it right the first time. WE NEED A PRESCRIPTION OF LOWER TAXES AND LOWERING SPENDING (Mr. GUTHRIE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GUTHRIE. I remember walking into my home one night when I was a senior in high school after school, 1982. My father and mother were talking with each other with a distressed look on their faces, and my dad was telling my mother that he was losing his job. The factory where he expected to work his entire life was shutting down. This was 1982, the recession, a recession like we find ourselves in today; and the prescription from Washington was to lower spending and to cut taxes. In the late 1980s, my father decided to take advantage of the economy and create a plant that he used to work at; and he decided to start a new plant, created over 500 jobs because Washington's prescription was The prescription today coming out of Washington to try to get out of this recession is to raise regulation and to raise taxes; and, Mr. Speaker, I believe that's why we're lingering in this recession, because people don't want to invest, because they're concerned about (Mr. PLATTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives addresses the very important issue of health care reform, we need to adhere to the principles of all physicians: first, do no harm. Unfortunately, the legislation that came out of the House Education and Labor Committee late last week does not adhere to this principle. CBO tells us it will drive up the costs of health care in the United States. In fact, when it's fully implemented, over $200 billion a year this plan will cost, it will not protect the right to keep the insurance coverage that you currently have. If you like it--that was one of the underlying principles of the administration--this bill will It will not adhere to that principle: do no harm. It will drive up costs. It will take away freedom of choice of the American citizens, and it is also going to have an impact on the ability for small businesses to provide insurance because of the taxes included in this bill. It's going to cost people insurance because small businesses will not be able to continue to afford the 8 percent payroll tax as well as an increase on small businesses filing a subchapter S. First, do no harm. We need to adhere to that principle. (Mr. NUNES asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, I wasn't going to come down here, Mr. Speaker, but then I heard the distinguished Democrat leader, Mr. Hoyer, come down and chastise us for using 1-minutes. Mr. Hoyer, you know why we're using these 1-minutes. It's because you've cut us out of the For the first time in this Nation's history, appropriations bills aren't under open rules. So we have no opportunity to offer amendments So you can understand why, in my district, having almost 20 percent unemployment, some of the highest unemployment in the country because this government fails to act to get water to the people to provide for the general welfare of the people of my district, this is why we come So I would suggest that we probably won't do this again because you will probably take away this advantage that we have of using these 1- minutes to make our case before the American people. I assume this will be the last day we have unlimited 1-minutes, but I can promise you that if you just go back to the open rules process on the appropriations bills, we will gladly not use these unlimited 1-minutes this way. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will kindly remind Members that remarks in debate should be directed to the Chair and not to others in NEVADA'S ECONOMY IS THE MOST DISTRESSED IN THE NATION (Mr. HELLER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, in a recent study Nevada's economy is now determined to be the most distressed in the Nation; and if you recall, 4 months ago we passed a stimulus package and we were promised by this administration, and by the majority, if we do this, if we pass this stimulus package, that we'd only have 8 percent unemployment. It would never exceed 8 percent unemployment. Yet we had to do it right now. We Well, I'm here to tell you today that Nevada's unemployment is at 12 percent, and that this administration says that the unemployment is So the question is, What did the stimulus do for Nevada? Well, in Las Vegas, Las Vegas has received to date $4,833. So the question is, Where's the money? $4,833 to Nevada and to Las Vegas. Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said, ``I bet more on a football game I ask the Speaker: Where's the money and where are the jobs? (Mr. BROUN of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I want someone to show me the jobs that we have been promised by the Democrats. Many counties in my district have unemployment rates of more Show me the jobs, Mr. Speaker. My colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle promised that their trillion-dollar stimulus would immediately create jobs and unemployment would not rise above 8 percent. Nothing could be further from the truth. In June alone, almost half a million jobs were lost, driving unemployment to its highest Now, after shoving a $646 billion energy tax down the throats of the American people, liberal leadership is now shoving a multitrillion- dollar health experiment. According to the CBO, this will cost 750,000 more jobs and push 100 million Americans off of their private health Mr. Speaker, I ask you to show me the jobs and show me why the American people should believe once again that a trillion-dollar The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings now will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 596, had I been present, I The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2729, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 330, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. PROVIDING FOR NATURAL GAS VEHICLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1622, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 393, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 507, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 428, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 658, this time has been designated for the taking of the official photo of the House The House will be in a brief recess while the Chamber is being As soon as these preparations are complete, the House will immediately resume its actual session for the taking of the photograph. About 5 minutes after that, the House will proceed with the business For the information of the Members, when the Chair says the House will be in order, we are ready to take our picture. That will be in The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess while the Chamber is being prepared. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 18 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the (Thereupon, the Members sat for the official photograph of the House The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair in 2 or 3 minutes. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 27 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Blumenauer) at 4 o'clock and 29 minutes p.m. NOTICE OF INTENTION TO OFFER RESOLUTION RAISING A QUESTION OF THE Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intention to raise a question of the privileges of Whereas, on May 25, 2007, U.S. District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger issued a ruling that directed the Bureau of Reclamation to reduce water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to protect a three-inch minnow called the Whereas, on December 15, 2008, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, based on the Wanger Ruling, issued a Biological Opinion on the Delta smelt that permanently reduced water export from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta which is traditionally delivered to cities and farms in the San Joaquin Valley and the Los Angeles and San Diego Whereas according to a University of California at Davis study, based on the water reductions outlined in the Delta smelt Biological Opinion, revenue losses in the San Joaquin Valley of California for 2009 will be $2.2 billion and job Whereas according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the San Joaquin Valley has reached Whereas region wide unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley of California is nearly 20 percent and some cities have an Whereas thousands of people who once relied on employment in the agricultural sector are now unemployed and struggling to meet their most basic needs, such as providing food for Whereas, on March, 1, 2009, the Sacramento Bee reported thousands of people have been turned away from local food banks as supplies are not ample enough to meet local needs; Whereas, on April 14, 2009, the Fresno County, California, Board of Supervisors proclaimed that the man-made drought has Whereas on June 4, 2009, despite the ongoing man-made drought in California, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a new Biological Opinion on the spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, the southern population of North American green sturgeon, and Southern Resident killer whales which further reduces water supplies to Californians; Whereas, on June 19, 2009, California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a state of emergency for Fresno County, California, and petitioned President Barack Obama to Whereas on June 28, 2009, the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar visited Fresno, California, and held a town hall meeting in which nearly 1,000 people attended to express their dissatisfaction with the lack of action by the Obama Whereas, on July 6, 2009, the Los Angeles Times reported that during Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's town hall meeting on June 28, 2009, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Mike Connor, pledged to provide financial aid to starving families and an audience member replied ``we don't Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that hundreds of San Joaquin Valley farmers protested outside the Federal Building Plaza in San Francisco which houses Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported the protestors blamed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman George Miller for the water shortage in the San Joaquin Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that protestors were holding signs that said ``ESA Puts Fish Ahead of People'', ``Congress Created Drought'', and ``New Whereas, on July 1, 2009, the Fresno Bee reported that a crowd of 4,000 marched through the streets of Fresno, California, to demand that the Federal Government end the Whereas, on June 18, 2009, the Democrat leadership held open Roll Call Vote 366 for the purpose of changing the Whereas during this vote, House Democrat leadership was seen on the House floor pressuring Members of Congress to change their Aye vote to a Nay vote in order to defeat the Nunes Amendment which would have helped to relieve the water Whereas, on July 8, 2009, during the mark-up on the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, a debate was held on the Calvert Amendment which would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Appropriations Committee, David Obey, said ``Recognize there are certain actions, that if you take, this bill won't pass, Whereas Chairman Obey violated Clause 16 of House Rule 23 by linking passage of the Calvert Amendment to loss of Whereas, on July 14, 2009, despite historical tradition of open rules during the appropriations process, the Rules Committee blocked an amendment to the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 that would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Whereas, for two years, the House of Representatives has known about the man-made drought in California without taking Whereas the lack of action by the House of Representatives has demonstrated that fish are more important than families; Constitution enumerates that the Congress shall have the power to provide for the general welfare of the United Whereas the House of Representatives has willfully and knowingly failed to provide for the general welfare of the Whereas the failure of the House of Representatives to carry out its duties has subjected the House to public ridicule and damaged the dignity and integrity of the House Resolved, That the Committee on Natural Resources is instructed to discharge H.R. 3105, the Turn on the Pumps Act of 2009, for immediate consideration by the House of The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under rule IX, a resolution offered from the floor by a Member other than the majority leader or the minority leader as a question of the privileges of the House has immediate precedence only at a time designated by the Chair within 2 legislative days after Pending that designation, the form of the resolution noticed by the gentleman from California will appear in the Record at this point. The Chair will not at this point determine whether the resolution constitutes a question of privilege. That determination will be made at the time designated for consideration of the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX. Record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PRICE DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2938) to extend the deadline for commencement of Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered 12187, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend the time period during which the licensee is required to commence the construction of the project for up to 3 consecutive 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the extension (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the period required for commencement of construction of the project described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the license effective as of the date of its expiration and the first extension authorized under subsection (a) shall take The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2938 would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the construction deadline for a hydroelectric power plant at the Melvin Price Locks and Dam in Alton, Illinois. Over the past 20 years, there has been great interest in building a hydroelectric plant at this site on the Mississippi River; however, construction of the hydroelectric plant has not happened on Last October, Brookfield Power acquired the license to proceed with the construction of the site. When Brookfield applied for an extension of the construction deadline, the company was informed that because of the administrative extensions granted to the previous licensee, congressional action is needed to grant an extension. Brookfield will lose this license at the end of this month, July 2009. For that reason, Brookfield and the City of Alton, Illinois, requested legislation to extend the deadline for 6 years. Passing this legislation is necessary to ensure that Brookfield can bring renewable energy to Illinois and create green jobs. The hydroelectric project will create 404,000 megawatt hours of electricity, the equivalent of 283 barrels of oil. Further, Brookfield will hire 125 workers over a 3-year period and invest over $400 million This bill is cosponsored by my friend and colleague from Illinois, Congressman John Shimkus. Both the majority and minority staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee have reviewed and accepted the legislation. FERC has also reviewed the legislation and does not oppose Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2938. Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2938, a bill that extends the timeline to bring this hydroelectric power plant project in Illinois on line. It gives them another up to 6 years, and ultimately, this would be the decision of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. But as they're going through the process right now of permitting and approval, this provides them an additional 6 years to make sure that the project has enough time to get approved and completed and bring I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Oregon (Mr. Mr. Speaker, I rise today also in support of this legislation. I think it's a good bill because I think hydroelectric power is a good thing for our country, and when we're concerned about getting renewable energy online, there's probably nothing better than hydropower for Unfortunately, in the cap-and-tax bill that was passed by this House over my objection and over the objection of the gentleman from Illinois, there is a provision on page 19, line 12, sub 3, that says, The hydroelectric project installed on the dam is operated so that the water surface elevation at any given location and time that would have occurred in the absence of the hydroelectric project is maintained. Now, I share this language with you because the gentleman from Illinois, my friend, talked about the 404,000 watts or megawatts, whatever it is--I didn't jot down the exact amount--would be produced as hydroelectric power and, therefore, renewable energy and create new jobs. My concern is this: that hydropower is being added after this Should the cap-and-tax bill become law, that hydropower, according to this language, would not be considered as renewable energy for purposes of Illinois meeting the new Federal standard on renewable energy. Because in consultation with two civil engineers I've spoken with who operate hydro projects--many of them and large-scale hydro projects-- when I shared this language with them about maintaining the surface elevation at any location in time, they laughed. They said you can't operate a hydro system and not affect the water behind the dam in some And so to disqualify the new hydro--like the gentleman from Illinois Now, there is another provision in this bill, the cap-and-tax bill, that said hydro that came online after 1988 is renewable but hydro before 1988 is not. Now, you have got water flowing down a river. You've got multiple dams along the way with hydro generation facilities. It's the same water. It just depends on what year the dam was built whether or not that hydropower is considered renewable or Nor do the provisions in the cap-and-tax bill that said, if woody biomass off a Federal forest comes off of a late successional stand, you can't count the burning of that to produce green energy as renewable energy, but if it came off of a severely damaged tree, it is, although there is no definition for that. And if any woody biomass comes off private, county, State lands, it's all considered renewable energy when it produces electricity when it's burned, but yet there is I share that with you because America's Federal forests are terrifically overstocked and subject to catastrophic fire. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. WALDEN. We could create more real jobs cleaning up the forest in very depressed communities. I was just out in four counties in my district. I think two, maybe three, are now at over 20 percent unemployment. They have 70, 50 and 80 percent Federal land. This is the great forests of our country that are left to burn up. The woody biomass could be put into clean energy. There are firms willing to invest if they could get supply. Again, the cap-and-trade, cap-and-tax So I share the gentleman's support of this legislation to create and move forward on the hydro project. It's unfortunate if the cap-and-tax bill that passed the House becomes law that hydro will not be considered renewal. That doesn't make sense. And I hope that the Senate Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my colleague for supporting this legislation. I share the same concern that you have with the section that you quoted in the energy bill, and we hope that our friends in the other body will address that issue so that it is not a With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SCALISE. I would like to yield 3 minutes to a cosponsor of this Mr. SHIMKUS. Melvin Price Locks and Dam is named after an historic member of this Chamber, Mel Price, who gave me my nomination to West Point. So it is with great affinity that I just mentioned that. But now that district is ably represented by my friend and colleague, Jerry Costello, and I thank him for including me on this reauthorization The Republicans have already talked about an all-of-the-above energy strategy which talks about nuclear, wind, solar and hydroelectric. And no one is really more knowledgeable on the hydroelectric issue than the colleague who preceded me, Greg Walden. There is a concern about if we want these programs, these licenses, to actually become real projects in the whole credit issue, then this has to qualify for renewable, and that will help bring some dollars to help effect this instead of just worrying about relicensing, then we can actually get it built. But if we don't do this process, then we have to go through the whole I'm very happy to be here with my friend who, again, worked hard and diligently for southern Illinois. And this is all part of that all-of- the-above energy strategy that will help us decrease our reliance on imported crude oil. Thank you for letting me join you in this Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise really in amazement today to hear our colleagues on the other side talk about hydroelectric power being a renewable energy source, because we have seen multiple venues here in the House Mr. Speaker, we have a tremendous need in this country for alternative sources of energy, renewable sources of energy. Nuclear energy is one of those renewable sources of energy, or a source of energy that is one that makes the most sense from an environmental We have many members of the opposition on the other side that want to deny us going into a nuclear age. France gets over 80 percent of its electric power from nuclear sources. The United States should do the same thing. In my home State of Georgia, the Georgia Power Company for a long period of time now has been trying to get permitting for two new nuclear reactors at their plant in Vogel just south of my district, just south of Augusta, Georgia. They already have two. They want two more. But, Mr. Speaker, they have had a great deal of difficulty because the regulatory commission and various environmental groups have They are not alone. All over this country, there are electric power companies that want to put in electric power plants that are nuclear- fueled. Mr. Speaker, they have great difficulty doing so. We need to use our renewable resources, not only for hydroelectric power, but for nuclear power. We need to look to wind and solar. We need to look to biomass. We need to stop this idiocy of a corn-based ethanol source of energy. Mr. Speaker, I'm from Georgia, and I love my cornbread and grits. It makes no sense to me to drive down the road burning up my food. But we've done that. And it has driven up the cost of corn for the chicken producers that produce most of the chicken for the world, all over the world in my district, and in my friend Nathan Deal's district from Gainesville in the Ninth and Tenth Congressional Mr. Speaker, we have an energy policy that is broken. Republicans have presented bill after bill that would solve the energy crisis. The American Energy Act is one. It is an all-of-the-above energy plan that would stimulate hydroelectric power. It would stimulate nuclear power. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. BROUN of Georgia. But our plans are not being heard on the floor of this House. Why is that? Why are the American people's It is because the leadership on the Democratic side wants to stifle debate, wants to shut off any alternative ideas. They call the Republican Party the ``Party of No,'' but the Democratic Party has been the Party of No, whereas the Republican Party is the Party of k-n-o-w Know because we know how to solve the energy crisis. We know how to solve the health care financing crisis. We know how to solve the economic crisis. But those ideas are not being heard. Mr. Speaker, it is time for the American people to wake up and demand that the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my friend from Louisiana if he Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I again rise in support of the legislation dealing with hydroelectric power. I think it is important, as we are talking about energy, that we really talk about the need to get a comprehensive national energy policy in our country. It is not just enough to promote hydroelectric power. It is not just enough to look at any one significant source of power. We need to look at all of the resources in our land. In fact, the inscription by Daniel Webster right above the Speaker's rostrum talks about the need to explore the resources of our land. Unfortunately, there are many Federal laws and barriers in place that prevent us from doing just that. This cap-and-trade national energy tax imposes even more barriers. In addition to imposing significant taxes on to the backs of American people in the form of higher utility rates and bureaucratic regulations, it will run millions of jobs out of this country. That's not the right approach. What we need is a comprehensive energy policy. I'm proud to be a cosponsor, with many other of my colleagues, of the American Energy Act, a bill that we filed earlier this year to take that comprehensive approach to a national energy policy, one that looks at all of the alternatives. We explore more technologies for wind, for solar, for hydroelectric and for nuclear power. We use our natural resources, like oil and natural gas, to get to that bridge to fund those other alternatives. We use the things that we have here today to get us to those technologies that aren't yet readily available to power our homes or to run our cars. But hopefully one day, through the use of these technologies, we will advance the utilization of the natural resources we have in our country to create jobs. Our bill would actually create jobs and generate billions of dollars to the Federal Government, not by raising taxes, but by actually creating more economic opportunities by creating jobs and getting people back to work so that they can contribute and pay into and pay down this debt as opposed to raising the debt and running off jobs. So I would hope that we would support and get to a place where we can actually get agreement in a bipartisan way to pass a bipartisan bill like the American Energy Act that actually takes a comprehensive approach to solving our national energy needs and reducing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil--rather than this tax approach, this cap-and-trade energy tax that actually would make countries in Europe, the Middle East and China more powerful and put America further at risk--so we can get our strengthened energy policy and we can get energy independence. But we need to have a bipartisan approach, not this cap-and-trade energy tax that literally would run millions of jobs Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend from Louisiana and the minority for supporting this legislation. In particular I would like to thank my colleague from Illinois, Congressman Shimkus, not only for his kind words, but for cosponsoring this legislation. I urge passage of H.R. 2938, and with that I yield back the balance The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 69) recognizing the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for diabetes, Whereas diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease caused by the inability of the pancreas to produce insulin or to use Whereas in the case of Type I diabetes or insulin-dependent diabetes, formerly called juvenile-onset diabetes because it tends to affect persons before the age of 20, the pancreas Whereas in the case of Type II diabetes or non-insulin- dependent diabetes, which comprises about 90 percent of all cases of diabetes, the pancreas produces a reduced amount of insulin or the cells do not respond to the insulin; Whereas this year 23.6 million Americans suffer from one form or another of this disease, and 5.7 million people go Whereas 2.0 million or 8.2 percent of all Latino Americans aged twenty years or older have diabetes, and Latino Americans are 1.5 times more likely to have diabetes than Whereas Mexican-Americans, the largest Latino subgroup in the United States, are more than twice as likely to have Whereas residents of Puerto Rico are 1.8 times more likely to have diagnosed diabetes than United States non-Latino Whereas diabetes affects individuals in different ways, and Whereas diabetes in the Latino community can result in a high prevalence of complications, such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in the legs, heart attacks and strokes, and Whereas individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease; learn and practice the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol Whereas targeted health communications to the public are vital in disseminating information about diabetes and the Whereas the Latino Diabetes Association, a nonprofit organization devoted to aggressive diabetes education, has worked tirelessly to raise funds for diabetes education and Whereas the month of July of 2009 would be an appropriate month to recognize Latino Diabetes Awareness Month in order to educate Latino communities across the Nation about diabetes and the need for research funding, accurate diagnosis, and effective treatments: Now, therefore, be it (1) recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for educational institutes, and other organizations that are-- (A) working to increase awareness of diabetes; and (B) conducting research for methods to help patients and families in the Latino community suffering from diabetes; Association for its great efforts to educate, support, and provide hope for individuals and their families who suffer (4) supports the designation of an appropriate month to recognize ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month''; and (5) calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with appropriate programs and activities. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I would like to thank Majority Leader Hoyer, Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Barton and Health Subcommittee Chair Pallone and, of course, my colleague from Louisiana, a good baseball player, for their support of this resolution. I also want to take the time to thank all my colleagues in the House of Representatives for their bipartisan I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 69, the Latino Diabetes Awareness Resolution. The resolution recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education and an eventual cure for diabetes and commends those organizations that are working to increase awareness of diabetes and conducting research for methods to help patients and families in Latino It also congratulates the work of the Latino Diabetes Association for its great efforts to educate, support and provide hope for individuals and families who suffer from diabetes. The resolution also supports the designation of July 2009 as ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month.'' It calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with It is critical for the long-term sustainability of any health care reform plan to make sure that steps for the prevention of diseases, like diabetes, are encouraged by Congress. This prevention of disease would do a great deal in helping keep costs down for current patients, as well as favorably changing the attitudes and behavior of diabetes patients and their families, thereby improving their quality of life. We can take a good first step in achieving these goals by passing this resolution here today. Diabetes is a chronic disease of the pancreas and adversely affects its ability to produce and use insulin Diabetes has no cure, treatment varies from patient to patient, and it is quite often very painful. Some side effects of treatment include weight gain, skin rash or itching, various stomach problems, tiredness The impact of diabetes is not focused solely on the patient; family members and immediate care takers also suffer greatly from the effects of diabetes on their loved ones. I say this from personal experience. In the Latino community, diabetes can result in high prevalence of foot problems, kidney failure, renal disease, blindness, heart attacks, What's scariest is that diabetes patients who need to take one or more insulin shots daily, and for whatever reason do not, greatly One of the reasons I believe diabetes disproportionately affects the Latino community is the lack of sound health communication that speaks to those Hispanics who are most at risk of coming down with diabetes, or who already suffer from it. This means targeting communications efforts to both English- and Spanish-speaking communities and specifically referencing these efforts towards the area of our culture Over 23.6 million Americans suffer from diabetes, and of these, 2 million are Latinos or of Latino descent; 8.6 of all Latinos over the age of 20 live with this disease. However, Latinos are almost twice as likely to have diabetes as non-Latino whites of similar age. Individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease and take the proper steps to care for themselves. This means learning and practicing the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure and cholesterol levels. They must exercise and receive regular checkups, as well as maintain a healthy, balanced diet, as well as maintaining willingness to change these dangerous eating habits. And that becomes very difficult for a lot of us because we like our frijoles, our tortillas, our tamales, our enchiladas, our menudo; but we have to put that aside. This could include eating meals prepared healthier, eating more moderate portions, or a combination of these. Two people ought to be commended for their hard work in the attempts to educate the public about diabetes and treatments for patients, and that's actors Rita Torres and Edward Olmos. A few years ago, I worked with Rita Torres and Edward to help put together a short documentary highlighting the day-to-day lives of different diabetes patients, regardless of age or ethnicity, and they ought to be recognized for their tireless efforts to raise diabetes awareness. I have been affected personally by diabetes through the loss of five members of my immediate family. My father was a proud, hardworking man, never missed a day of work for any reason until he was struck down by diabetes and ultimately needed to have a leg amputated. It originally started with a toe, half a leg, and then the leg itself. My mother also was very strong, was never sick until she, too, came My two brothers, Abelio and Tanny, and my sister Annie fought with diabetes but ultimately lost their battle largely due to lack of education and awareness of how the disease would affect their lives and Tanny recently passed away due in part to the fact that he could no longer afford all the necessary treatment to keep his diabetes at bay. He is not only a victim of diabetes but of the high cost of health care My brother-in-law, Ted Dominguez, was also a victim of diabetes. Ted was a great athlete back in his day, always in great physical shape. His lesson to us is that anyone, regardless of age, weight or physical condition, can get diabetes. He eventually went through dialysis and Also, a former staff member of mine who has been a close friend for many years, Daniel Hernandez, is a testament to us and to many other folks. He worked for me because he needed coverage for diabetes. He left my office after 2 years and became an independent consultant. He came back, however, and approached me one day and told me that the only reason he was willing to come back to work was to qualify for health care benefits that he would not be able to receive otherwise. It was their fight and their example that opened my eyes to the horrid realities and difficulties of this disease and the need for education and awareness about diabetes and ultimately to introduce this However, a great diabetes success story and a perfect example to prove that diabetes can be beat is Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor was diagnosed and has lived with type 1 diabetes since the age of 8 years of age. Due to carefully monitoring her condition, she fought the disease head-on and continues to be a great example of someone who can live with diabetes. She will soon not only be the first Latina to become a Justice on the Supreme Court, but Another example of a remarkable type 1 diabetes patient is Sara Rodriguez. Sara is a constituent of mine, a rising junior at Rancho Cucamonga High School, a straight A student, and letter winner in basketball, volleyball, and track. In order for Sara to lead as normal a teenage life as possible, she must test her blood sugar levels eight to 20 times per day, every day. She will never outgrow her disease and will require care and medication for the rest of her life. She is a very brave and courageous young woman whose fight and determination should not only be an example to diabetes patients everywhere, but to On behalf of all of the other young people like Sara Rodriguez, Congress recently reauthorized the special diabetes program. This is a wonderful example of the government's commitment to cure diabetes for people like Sara and the millions of others who live with the disease and its complications. This program funds $150 million a year in type 1 diabetes research and is aligned with the goals of this resolution to Yet another great example of a person living a healthy life with diabetes is Roque Martin, the grandfather of Matt Gomez, one of my interns, who has been instrumental in assisting with this resolution. Roque was diagnosed with diabetes over 25 years ago and continues to live a healthy life even at the age of 78. He eats rights and checks his blood sugar level three times a day and is a great example, along with Sara and Judge Sotomayor, for all diabetes patients that with proper care, diet and exercise, one can survive with diabetes. That is why it's so important to pass this resolution, which I introduced in the hopes of bringing awareness to those lucky enough to not have to face the disease firsthand, or through the fight of a loved It takes a small, but a critical, first step to help raise awareness about diabetes for not only the Latino community, but for all Americans But, also, it's a giant step for those individuals that have suffered from diabetes for many years and lack the ability to tell their stories firsthand, along with families and immediate caretakers of diabetes patients, who oftentimes suffer the impacts of the disease more so than Diabetes is a disease that can, and does, affect anyone: Democrats, Republicans, black or white, Latinos, Asians, American Indians, all nationalities. The alarming statistics regarding diabetes are on the rise. With the greater scope of the health care debate, there is no better time to raise the awareness for a preventable disease than right now. And there is no better time than right now to stress that no diabetes patient should be denied health care coverage because of their For these reasons, I ask you to stand with me and fight against Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 69. I want to congratulate the gentleman from California on his leadership on this bill, building a bipartisan coalition to bring it to the floor under suspension. I want to recognize the 23.6 million Americans that suffer from diabetes. Diabetes can lead to serious complications and premature death, but people with diabetes can take steps to control the disease and lower the risk of complications. The Centers for Disease Control has stated that progression to diabetes among those with pre-diabetes is not inevitable and that studies have shown that people with pre-diabetes who lose weight and increase their physical activity can prevent or delay diabetes and return their blood glucose levels to normal. Through regular exercise and a steady diet, Americans can get to a healthier state of living and avoid diabetes, and that's what we're trying to raise awareness about. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Houston, Texas (Mr. Gene Green), also an outstanding basketball player. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 69, which recognizes the increased rates of diabetes in the Hispanic community and calls for increased research to combat and And I want to thank my good friend Joe Baca for sponsoring this resolution and also for the compliment. I think you're the first person in history who ever said I was a good basketball player. Thank you, According to the Office of Minority Health, Mexican Americans are twice as likely as non-Hispanic whites to be diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. They have higher rates of end-stage renal disease caused by diabetes, and they are 50 percent more likely to die from diabetes Mexican American adults are two times more likely than non-Hispanic white adults to have been diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. In 2002, Hispanics were 1.5 times as likely to start treatment for end- stage renal disease related to diabetes, compared to non-Hispanic white men. In 2005, Hispanics were 1.6 times as likely as non-Hispanic whites In our district, it is predominantly Hispanic. We have a large number of individuals with type 2 diabetes, which is often referred to as late-onset diabetes. Because of this, many individuals in our district have diabetes-related complications, including illnesses such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end-stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in However, type 2 diabetes is preventable with a good diet and exercise. It is important we have targeted educational campaigns in the Hispanic community to help combat the diabetes epidemic. I would like to commend the Latino Diabetes Association and other diabetes research groups for their work in educating the Hispanic community on diabetes-related issues. Groups like these are crucial to the reduction of diabetes in the Hispanic community. I would also like to extend my support towards designating July 2009 as Latino Diabetes Awareness Month to help raise awareness of the high Through education and prevention and wellness programs we can drastically reduce the number of Hispanic individuals with diabetes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. BACA. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. This is probably the most important part, That is why this Congress needs to pass comprehensive health care reform that covers everyone so we can deal with the diabetes epidemic in our Hispanic community, our African American community and also in our low-economic community, because we can deal with this if we push the envelope back to deal with it before it gets to be where people Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I'm a medical doctor. I've treated diabetes for 3\\1/2\\ or more decades. I congratulate my good friend Joe Baca for bringing this issue to the forefront because it is extremely important for all Americans, not just only the Latino community that he's focusing on here. I've seen many patients in my overall medical career that are Latino, as well as blacks and Caucasian and people from all ethnic groups. It affects everybody no matter who their forefathers, what their skin color is, and I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this God tells us in Hosea 4:6, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. And as a medical doctor, I've tried to instill knowledge into my patients over the years, and this, of course, is what this resolution is all about, and I do congratulate the gentleman for bringing it forward because we do have a problem with people being knowledgeable about diabetes and the effect that it has upon them, Diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in the adult population. It leads to many health problems. It leads to heart attacks and As I sat here listening to Mr. Baca, I recalled an elderly black gentleman who came to see me as a patient that I diagnosed as having diabetes, and I started talking to him about diet and exercise and those types of things. Well, he didn't take care of himself, in spite of all my warnings and all of the consequences that he was headed towards. He wound up having a foot cut off, and he had that leg cut off. I kept talking to him. His blood sugar was continuing to be extremely high. Wound up having a second leg cut off, and eventually he had both arms and both legs removed, and he was sitting in a wheelchair when he finally got the message and started controlling his diet, taking his medications as prescribed, and we finally got his blood That's a sad story. I've seen many, many patients over the years that have developed renal failure, which is what diabetes leads to. It leads to the nerves in people's legs dying so that they have no feeling in their legs so they can get cuts or even the simplest little puncture or a cut on their foot may lead to gangrene that leads to amputation, maybe even lead to what we call in medicine septicemia, which is where you have bacteria in your bloodstream, and it can go to your heart and affect the valves in your heart. Septicemia itself can lead to death, Diabetes afflicts many of our population, and it's sad that people don't have the knowledge of what that disease will lead to. That's why I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this forward, and I Mr. Speaker, when I was practicing medicine in rural south Georgia, I had a small automated lab in my office down there, and Congress passed a bill called the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act. My lab was totally automated. I had quality control to make sure that the results were absolutely accurate so that when I checked a patient's blood sugar, I would know what it was to know if they had the potential for prediabetes or whether they had frank diabetes. I would do a fasting blood sugar that would help me diagnosis their condition. Well, Congress passed CLIA, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act, that closed my lab and every single doctor's lab in this country. Closed our labs. Eventually, I got my lab back up after I jumped through the hoops that were required by the legislation, by the regulatory burden placed on me and all doctors in this country. Prior to CLIA, a patient would come in and I would take a history and physical and would suspect that they may have diabetes. Some patients would get a family history of diabetes, and so I would do a screening I charged $10 for that test, Mr. Speaker. After CLIA shut me down, I had to send patients over to the hospital. The hospital was charging $35 for the same test. Once CLIA came along, it actually increased, and I got my lab opened back up, I had to charge $35, but the hospital, I The point I want to make here is this regulatory burden on the health care industry markedly raised the price for that one test. What we see across the health care industry when government gets involved in health care decisions, such as it did with CLIA, it drives up the cost for all As a physician who used to be a preferred provider for Medicare patients--I'm not now, for many reasons--but as a preferred provider, I could not see many patients, as I did previously, for free. Many, many patients, poor patients, people that had no insurance would come into my office, and I would see them for free. I have literally given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of free health care provision in my office; give free tests, free screening for diabetes, for many conditions. But under current Federal law, physicians who accept Medicare cannot do that. That makes no sense, Mr. Speaker. It is so today because of Federal regulation. Congress passed HIPPA, the Health Insurance Portability and Privacy Act. That has cost the health care industry billions of dollars and has not paid for the first aspirin to treat the headaches that it's created. And it was totally Mr. Speaker, the point I'm trying to make is the American people need to know that the more the Federal Government gets into the health care business, the more regulatory burden is placed on physicians and In the non-stimulus bill we put a chunk of money, a huge chunk of money, for something called comparative effectiveness research. What I'd like my colleagues and the American people to know, Mr. Speaker, is that this is a process put into place by the Democratic majority. This could have prevented those 78-year-old people that my friend Mr. Baca talked about from getting the care that they need because it is going to be deemed, as some Federal bureaucrat says, it's not effective comparatively to provide the dialysis for that 78-year-old that Mr. Baca was talking about. It's not going to be effective to try to prevent the blindness. It's not going to be effective to provide care to people who now are getting care. And we're going to have a I have said on this floor in Special Orders that this comprehensive health care bill that's being debated right now in committees and is going to be presented on this floor eventually--the Speaker wants to have it come up before we leave for the August recess--it's literally Now I have been chastised in the liberal media for making that claim, but it's going to kill people for this simple reason, Mr. Speaker. And the American people need to understand this. People are going to be denied services. They're going to have a marked delay in their being able to get the screening tests that they need for colon cancer or for evaluation of their chest pain or they're going to have a marked delay, as we see in Canada and Great Britain today, of being able to get their So diabetic patients who have developed coronary artery disease and have angina pectoris and maybe even had a heart attack are going to have marked delay in being able to get the stints put in or their bypass surgery that they desperately need, and people are going to die. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I have seen patients over and over again with Mr. Speaker, I've given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of my services over my career. I want people to have access to health care-- but they do today. EMTALA requires every emergency room in this country to evaluate and treat everybody who walks in. So the question of access We hear about 47 million people. The numbers keep growing by the Democratic side. The American people need to understand that a lot of those people are illegal aliens who have come here illegally. I understand why. They come here for work, for their families. And I feel American citizens are going to be denied treatment, denied x-rays, denied their coronary bypass surgery, denied their dialysis, and all these things because of this comprehensive health care plan that's being shoved down the throat of the American people. This is not the CBO just last week said it's not going to lower the cost of health care. CBO just last week said it's not going to put people in the insured category. CBO last week said it's going to cost at least The more government gets involved in the health care business, the higher the cost goes, the less efficient it is, and the Democratic plan The American people, Mr. Speaker, need to stand up and say ``no,'' and say ``yes'' to a health care plan that makes sense, that lowers the Mr. BACA. First of all, I appreciate some of the comments that my colleague, the doctor from Georgia, ended up making. And it is about knowledge, education, and awareness, and it's about preventive, because preventive is really the key to saving money. Once you do the early detection, early prevention, then we could save a lot of lives on account of treatment, because in his statement he indicated many of the people that he treated--those are people that I recognize in terms of my own personal family that lack that kind of knowledge, that kind of awareness, and did not follow the doctor's orders in terms of what they should have been doing to preserve their life. That's why it's very important that we create this kind of legislation to recognize diabetes awareness for all America, because it impacts all of us. Mr. SCALISE. It's important that we continue working to find the causes and the treatments, education, and make sure that we are researching properly to find cures for diseases like diabetes. The broader question of health care reform--I think my friend from about the challenges and the concerns that so many over on this side have of this proposal that's before us. Not here in this bill, but being debated here in this Congress in these coming weeks, this week, last week, this proposal to have a government takeover of our health I think it shows that while there are definitely ways to approach this in a bipartisan fashion, where there are many areas of health care reform that many of us agree need to be made to improve outcomes, to improve access, to focus on that narrow group of people who don't have I think the real danger is going down the road of a government takeover where government literally is interfering in the relationship between a doctor and their patient, as this bill would do, the bill that's been filed by the administration, by some of the members of this I think there's real problems, and we can only look at the neighbors that have gone down the same road. Look at Canada. Canada has a government-run health care system. Many people with the means from Canada come to America to get good care. The same thing in England. There was a tragic story in England, which has a government-run system. Just yesterday, there was a young man, a 22-year-old, who died because he was not allowed to get a liver transplant. ``He did not qualify for a donor liver under strict NHS rules.'' His own mother They have a government-run system that's very similar to the proposal that's being pushed by the President to have this government takeover We actually had an amendment in committee last night in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would have prohibited a government-run system from having a bureaucrat interfere in the relationship between a patient and their doctor. Unfortunately, our amendment was defeated. So clearly it shows that a government-run system would allow a doctor-patient relationship to be interfered with by a government bureaucrat here in Washington. That's not health care reform. That's So we need to, hopefully, go back to the table and have a true bipartisan debate because there are many proposals that are on the table, bills that have been filed--I'm cosponsor of a number of them that actually address some of the problems that exist in health care-- to allow companies to pool together so they can get the same buying power as a small business, as a large business does; to allow individuals to buy insurance across State lines so they don't have to rely on their employer if they don't like their employer's plan; and then also open up and address those areas of waste, fraud, and abuse I do think it's very important that we raise awareness and education for diseases like diabetes. And I do want again to thank the gentleman with the ``good arm'' from California for his leadership on this issue because he has, I think, taken this issue and approached it in a good bipartisan way. Hopefully, we can do the same with the broader area of Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank both sides for bipartisan support on this resolution. I look forward to the strong The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. Senate Concurrent Resolution 30, by the yeas and nays; House Concurrent Resolution 123, by the yeas and nays; The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF HUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 270, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418, So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas). The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30, on which the yeas and nays The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 421, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Representative Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.)criticizes the Democrat majority on the House Energy & Commerce Committee for blocking his amendment which would provide mental health support for workers who have lost their jobs due to President Biden's destructive climate agenda.",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee block an amendment related to New York's nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://scalise.house.gov/media/press-releases/heat-report-0",
                "scraped_text": "The HEAT Report is a weekly newsletter focusing on how members of the House Energy Action Team (HEAT) promote American energy security, and an all-of-the-above energy economy. Last week, Democrats advanced their partisan COVID-relief package without any meaningful attempts to engage Republicans. Nine of the twelve committees that received reconciliation instructions held hybrid markups where Republicans offered thoughtful amendments primarily focused on providing targeted assistance to ensure it goes to the people who need it most. Several Republicans offered amendments to push back against President Biden's anti-American energy agenda and to support struggling energy workers whose livelihoods have been destroyed by President Biden's assault on American energy production. Democrats rejected virtually every amendment on a party line vote. Meanwhile, an unprecedented winter storm has left millions without power across the South as they face the coldest temperatures in decades. In Texas alone, more than 4 million customers still had no electricity Tuesday morning. Customers are facing rolling blackouts and life-threatening conditions due to yet another rare event – a multi-day, state-wide winter freeze in Texas—that will continue to inhibit energy supply this week. Even natural gas and coal, which historically are expected to provide the vast majority of power to the state, were unable to live up to the significant demands due to cold weather and scheduled maintenance that took plants offline. This placed the spotlight on another problem – Texas's increasing reliance on windmills to generate electricity has shown that when renewables cannot reliably produce the small amount of energy that they're expected to, households across the country suffer. Unfortunately, what has happened in Texas offers a prelude to the radical energy agenda that President Biden supports, including top-down government mandates and an abandonment of a low-cost, reliable, market-driven energy economy. Instead, President Biden must work with Republicans to develop an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps Americans safe. Last week, Democrats advanced their partisan COVID-relief package without any meaningful attempts to engage Republicans. Nine of the twelve committees that received reconciliation instructions held hybrid markups where Republicans offered thoughtful amendments primarily focused on providing targeted assistance to ensure it goes to the people who need it most. Several Republicans offered amendments to push back against President Biden's anti-American energy agenda and to support struggling energy workers whose livelihoods have been destroyed by President Biden's assault on American energy production. Democrats rejected virtually every amendment on a party line vote. Meanwhile, an unprecedented winter storm has left millions without power across the South as they face the coldest temperatures in decades. In Texas alone, more than 4 million customers still had no electricity Tuesday morning. Customers are facing rolling blackouts and life-threatening conditions due to yet another rare event – a multi-day, state-wide winter freeze in Texas—that will continue to inhibit energy supply this week. Even natural gas and coal, which historically are expected to provide the vast majority of power to the state, were unable to live up to the significant demands due to cold weather and scheduled maintenance that took plants offline. This placed the spotlight on another problem – Texas's increasing reliance on windmills to generate electricity has shown that when renewables cannot reliably produce the small amount of energy that they're expected to, households across the country suffer. Unfortunately, what has happened in Texas offers a prelude to the radical energy agenda that President Biden supports, including top-down government mandates and an abandonment of a low-cost, reliable, market-driven energy economy. Instead, President Biden must work with Republicans to develop an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps Americans safe. House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) joined Fox Reports with John Roberts and Sandra Smith and highlighted his visit with Southeast Louisiana energy workers whose livelihoods depend on the American energy production that President Biden is threatening to destroy. Whip Scalise emphasized that Congress should be focused on helping these struggling workers—not the impeachment trial of a president who is already out of office. Representative Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) offered an amendment during the House Energy & Commerce Committee Budget Reconciliation markup to authorize the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Representative French Hill (R-Ark.) hosted a press conference highlighting how President Biden's executive order revoking the Keystone XL pipeline permit has slashed thousands of jobs. Representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio)visited a small, independent fracturing operation in Southeast Ohio. Representative Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) offered an amendment during the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup on budget reconciliation legislation that would prohibit the Executive branch from issuing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing to protect American jobs and businesses and keep energy prices low, especially as we seek to recover from the pandemic. Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio)blasted John Kerry for telling unemployed energy workers they would be the ones to \"make the solar panels.\" Representative Clay Higgins (R-La.)introduced three amendments during the House Oversight & Reform Committee Budget Reconciliation markup that would prevent COVID relief funds from being used to support the implementation of the Paris Climate Accords, bans on oil and gas exploration, or government entities that have cut law enforcement funding. Representative Ron Estes (R-Kansas) sent a letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Acting Administrator Jane Nishida requesting information on steps the Biden Administration will take to address the pollution caused by the production of electric vehicles. House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), Committee on Natural Resources Ranking Member Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), and over 100 House Republicans sent a letter to President Biden urging him to rescind his oil and gas leasing moratorium due to the devastating impacts this ill-conceived policy will have on a major sector of our economy while millions of Americans are unemployed due to the COVID-19 crisis. Republican Members of the Texas delegation sent a letter to Texas Governor Greg Abbott encouraging Texas' efforts to combat federal overreach that is threatening the energy industry. The letter was signed by Texas Reps. Chip Roy, Ronny Jackson, August Pfluger, Jodey Arrington, Dan Crenshaw, Randy Weber, Louie Gohmert, Michael Cloud, Michael McCaul, Lance Gooden, Brian Babin, Roger Williams, and Pat Fallon. - Displaced Keystone Pipeline and oil field workers worry Biden administration will 'ruin us' (Fox News) - House Republicans tell Texas to continue fighting Biden's federal overreach (The Blaze) - More Than 100 Republicans To Biden: Reverse ‘Devastating' Climate Executive Order (The Daily Wire) - August Pfluger back in Midland to fight for the oil and gas industry (NewsWest9) - Biden's Keystone XL pipeline cancellation is gut punch to small businesses (Fox News) - Rep. Bob Latta: Let's prioritize jobs, economics and sound policies (The Courier) - Rep. Fred Keller: Thanks to Biden's attacks, America's energy independence hangs in the balance (The Washington Times) - Rep. August Pfluger: Biden's liberal wish list threatens TX-11 jobs, national security (Brownwood Bulletin) - This Blizzard Exposes The Perils Of Attempting To ‘Electrify Everything' (Forbes) - Tucker Carlson: The great Texas climate catastrophe is heading your way (Fox News) House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) calls out President Biden's false promises. Representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) refutes claims made in a misleading think tank report. Representative Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.)criticizes the Democrat majority on the House Energy & Commerce Committee for blocking his amendment which would provide mental health support for workers who have lost their jobs due to President Biden's destructive climate agenda. Representative Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.) highlights the consequences of pursuing radical environmental policies. Representative August Pfluger (R-Texas)emphasizes the importance of American energy independence and a strong energy grid. Representative Yvette Herrell (R-N.M.)highlights the negative impacts of President Biden's energy agenda on education, teachers' salaries, and infrastructure projects in New Mexico. Representative Pete Sessions (R-Texas)outlines the consequences President Biden's policies will have on the thousands of Texas jobs that help supply the world with American energy. Representative Jim Hagedorn (R-Minn.)points out that even President Biden's top union allies oppose his order to terminate Keystone XL."
            },
            {
                "answer": "- Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee blocked an amendment for more transparency and accountability in COVID-19 nursing home deaths.",
                "question": "Did Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee oppose the amendment regarding nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://waysandmeans.house.gov/republican-leaders-renew-request-for-hearing-on-new-york-nursing-home-deaths-data-cover-up/",
                "scraped_text": "Republican Leaders Renew Request for Hearing on New York Nursing Home Deaths, Data Cover-Up WASHINGTON, DC – With new revelations that political aides to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo deliberately interfered with state public health officials in order to mask the true magnitude of COVID-19 nursing home deaths in the state, Republican Congressional leaders urged their House Democrat counterparts to hold a joint hearing regarding the undercounting of COVID-19 deaths in New York nursing homes. The letter was signed by Republican Whip and Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis Ranking Member Steve Scalise (R-LA), Ways and Means Republican Leader Kevin Brady (R-TX), Ways and Means Health Subcommittee Republican Leader Devin Nunes (R-CA), Rep. Tom Reed (R-NY), Energy and Commerce Republican Leader Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Energy and Commerce Health Subcommittee Republican Leader Brett Guthrie (R-KY), and Oversight and Reform Committee Republican Leader James Comer (R-KY). The revelations appeared in reporting by the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times late on March 4, 2020. “Given this timeline and publicly available information — which seems to confirm that a politically-driven data cover-up occurred — and the oversight authority entrusted to you as Democrat leaders of the relevant committees, it is unclear what more the majority needs to know in order to deploy all the tools at your disposal, including hearings and subpoenas, to determine if Governor Cuomo’s administration deliberately provided false data to the federal government and the public.” said the Republican leaders. A copy of the letter can be found here. The text and further background is below. - New York Governor Andrew Cuomo issued disastrous directives that knowingly sent thousands of COVID-19 positive patients back into nursing homes across the state, spreading the virus and killing thousands of New York’s parents and grandparents. - The Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis held a public briefing titled “The Devastating Impact of The Coronavirus Crisis in America’s Nursing Homes.” Republicans requested Chairman Clyburn join an investigation into Governor Cuomo’s lethal directive and he declined. - Select Subcommittee Republicans sent a letter to Governor Cuomo requesting communications and data about his lethal order that violated CDC and CMS nursing home guidance and directed COVID-19 positive patients into the nursing home. Democrats refused to join this effort. Governor Cuomo ignored the request. - Select Subcommittee Republicans sent letters to Democrat New York Attorney General Letitia James requesting an investigation of Governor Cuomo’s lethal directive. Although AG James did not directly respond to Republicans’ request, the pressure from Select Subcommittee Republicans and others resulted in her launching an investigation. - According to recent reports, Governor Cuomo’s office rewrote a critical health department report to hide the true nursing home death data from the world. - Select Subcommittee Republicans sent a letter to Governor Cuomo dismantling his sham report, which passed the blame for the COVID-19 crisis in nursing homes to the front-line health care workers. Additionally, Republicans requested communications and data about his lethal order. Governor Cuomo ignored this request. - The New York State Office of the Attorney General issued a scathing report stating that nursing home deaths had been undercounted by “approximately 50 percent” and that the Governor’s mandates “[m]ay have contributed to increased risk or nursing home resident infection, and subsequent fatalities…” The death toll has now risen to approximately 15,000 souls. - Select Subcommittee Republicans sent a letter to Governor Cuomo highlighting the bombshell report from Democrat NY AG James and again requesting communications and data about his lethal order. - Governor Cuomo’s top aide then admitted that numbers were not accurately reported out of fear that the accurate numbers would be “used against us by federal prosecutors.” - Oversight and Reform Committee Republicans called on Chairwoman Maloney to issue subpoenas for Governor Cuomo’s sworn testimony and for all documents and communications Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis Republicans have requested repeatedly from Governor Cuomo related to his order. - Ways and Means Committee Democrats refused a request for a bipartisan hearing on the issue. - Ways and Means Committee Democrats rejected a proposal offered by Rep. Reed to hold governors accountable and get answers for nursing home residents and their families by requiring governors to attest that their states have been reporting accurate nursing home data and that they would continue to report accurate data moving forward. - Democrats on the House Energy and Commerce Committee blocked an amendment for more transparency and accountability in COVID-19 nursing home deaths. Given news reports that political aides to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo deliberately interfered with the work of state public health officials in order to mask the true magnitude of COVID-19 nursing home deaths in the state, we write again to request you schedule a joint hearing before the committees on this issue in the next 15 days. Specifically, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times reported top aides to Governor Cuomo—none of whom have any health care experience—including Secretary to the Governor Melissa DeRosa, doctored a report on COVID-19 in nursing homes to intentionally conceal the true number of nursing home fatalities in New York and shield themselves, including Governor Cuomo, from any wrongdoing attributable to the March 25, 2020 “must admit” order.[1] Congressional Republican leaders have made several hearing requests without response. Yet, despite the Democrat leaders’ abdication of their oversight responsibilities, more facts have emerged from Albany via the national press. On March 4, 2021, the Wall Street Journal reported, “New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s top advisers successfully pushed state health officials to strip a public report of data showing that more nursing-home residents had died of Covid-19 than the administration had acknowledged, according to people with knowledge of the report’s production….”[2] The New York Times likewise reported “[t]he extraordinary intervention, which came just as Mr. Cuomo was starting to write a book on his pandemic achievements, was the earliest act yet known in what critics have called a monthslong effort by the governor and his aides to obscure the full scope of nursing home deaths. On June 15, 2020, the Republicans on the Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis wrote Governor Cuomo requesting all documents and communications relating to the March 25 “must admit” order and nursing home fatalities. The apparent cover-up and data manipulation began shortly thereafter with the issuance of this doctored report. Given this timeline and publicly available information — which seems to confirm that a politically-driven data cover-up occurred — and the oversight authority entrusted to you as Democrat leaders of the relevant committees, it is unclear what more the majority needs to know in order to deploy all the tools at your disposal, including hearings and subpoenas, to determine if Governor Cuomo’s administration deliberately provided false data to the federal government and the public. A hearing examining what happened in New York is a necessary first step. Concerns surrounding state actions, COVID-19, nursing homes, and data integrity are not limited to New York. The Department of Justice (DOJ) has requested data from the governors of Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Michigan, to determine “…if the state orders requiring admission of COVID-19 patients to nursing homes is responsible for the deaths of nursing home residents…. [T]he department is also investigating the Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke, Massachusetts, where COVID-19 has taken the lives of at least 76 residents.”[4] Clearly there is bipartisan interest in making sure nursing home data, particularly related to COVID-19, is accurately reported. For instance, Chairman Neal has repeatedly stated his interest in the safety of those living in nursing homes.[5]We believe there is a congressional imperative to investigate a cover-up directed from the highest office of state government and executed to prop up the image of a governor in order to sell books during a pandemic. We request transcribed interviews or depositions of, at a minimum, the following witnesses in advance of a hearing: - Eleanor Adams, the Special Advisor to the Commissioner at New York State - Howard Zucker, Commissioner of New York Department of Health - Linda Lacewell, Superintendent of the New York Department of Financial Services - Jim Malatras, Chancellor of the State University of New York and a former policy adviser to Governor Cuomo - Any McKinsey & Company staff who worked on the report, including those who developed the chart comparing New York nursing home deaths with other states Additionally, we request that you immediately issue a subpoena for the documents repeatedly requested by Select Subcommittee Ranking Member Scalise.[6] These requests are reiterated here for your ready reference: - The total number of COVID-19 related nursing home deaths, including deaths that occurred at the nursing home and deaths of a registered nursing home patient at a hospital, by day between January 1, 2020 and present. - All State issued guidance, directives, advisories, or executive orders regarding hospital discharges to nursing homes or any and all other types of assisted living facilities, including those previously superseded, in chronological order. - All underlying information, documents, and research used by the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) to draft the July 6, 2020, report entitled “Factors Associated with Nursing Home Infections and Fatalities in New York State During the COVID-19 Global Health Crisis.” - All information, documents, and communications between the Office of the Governor and the NYSDOH regarding COVID-19 mitigation in nursing homes and other long-term care facilities, including but not limited to: - All drafts of the report titled “Factors Associated with Nursing Home Infections and Fatalities in New York State during the COVID-19 Global Health Crisis;” and - Any and all communications or correspondence between New York state officials discussing any draft or any edits of the report. - All information, documents, and communications between the NYSDOH and any and all of the State’s Nursing Home Administrators relating to the implementation of any state COVID-19 guidance, particularly the March 25 “must-admit” order, the NYSDOH report, or the methodology for calculating COVID-19 deaths in nursing homes. Given the urgency of our request, the information emerging day by day through the press, and the continued desire of families to get answers, we ask you confirm the scheduling of a joint committee hearing examining the accuracy of New York’s nursing home COVID-19 deaths data reporting and the subsequent coverup by Tuesday, March 9, 2020. [1] Joe Palazzolo, et. al., Cuomo Advisors Altered Report on Covid-19 Nursing-Home Deaths, Wall St. J. (Mar. 4, 2021), https://www.wsj.com/articles/cuomo-advisers-altered-report-on-covid-19-nursing-home-deaths-11614910855; J. David Godman & Danny Hakim, Cuomo Aides Rewrote Nursing Home Report to Hide Higher Death Toll, N.Y. Times (Mar. 4, 2021), https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/04/nyregion/cuomo-nursing-home-deaths.html. [4] Press Release, Department of Justice Requesting Data From Governors of States that Issued COVID-19 Orders that May Have Resulted in Deaths of Elderly Nursing Home Residents, U.S. Dep’t of Justice (Aug. 26, 2020), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-requesting-data-governors-states-issued-covid-19-orders-may-have-resulted. [5] In an August 2020 letter to the then-Administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Seema Verma, Chairman Neal wrote “[a]ccess to timely, robust, and reliable data is critical in understanding the magnitude of the COVID-19 crisis in nursing homes and appropriately allocating resources to the hardest hit facilities as well as those at greatest risk for outbreaks.” In a July 2020 letter to Administrator Verma, Chairman Neal wrote there was a “…clear congressional imperative for nursing facility surveys and reliable data, as well as the concerns for families and patients around the country about long-term care facilities and COVID-19…” In a February 2021 letter to Acting Administrator Richter, Chairman Neal summarized concerns about data reporting in nursing homes writing, “[d]ata issues must be reconcilied to best inform public health officials responding to COVID-19 outbreaks.” [6] Letter from Steve J. Scalise, et. al., Ranking Member, Select Subcomm. on the Coronavirus Crisis, H. Comm. on Oversight & Reform, to Andre M. Cuomo, Governor, N.Y. (June 15, 2020); Letter from Steve J. Scalise, Ranking Member, Select Subcomm. on the Coronavirus Crisis, H. Comm. on Oversight & Reform, to Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor, N.Y. (July 9, 2020); Letter from Steve J. Scalise, Ranking Member, Select Subcomm. on the Coronavirus Crisis, H. Comm. on Oversight & Reform, to Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor, N.Y. (Jan. 28, 2021); Letter from Steve J. Scalise, Ranking Member, Select Subcomm. on the Coronavirus Crisis, H. Comm. on Oversight & Reform, to Andrew M. Cuomo, Governor, N.Y. (Feb. 19, 2021)."
            },
            {
                "answer": "\"We tried to take that out by the way and the Democrats blocked that amendment. That's what this is about.\"",
                "question": "Did the Democrats block Steve Scalise's amendment regarding New York's nursing home death data?",
                "url": "http://scalise.house.gov/media/press-releases/scalise-democrat-gun-control-legislation-makes-criminals-law-abiding-americans",
                "scraped_text": "Scalise: Democrat Gun Control Legislation Makes Criminals of Law-Abiding Americans WASHINGTON, D.C.—House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) joined Fox News Channel's Ingraham Angle last night to discuss Democrats' real agenda to criminalize gun owners behind their gun control legislation. Whip Scalise emphasized that while Democrats claim these laws will prevent gun violence, the reality is they will make criminals out of law-abiding citizens and would not prevent mass shootings. Click here or on the image above to watch the interview. On the true implications of Democrats' gun control legislation: \"First of all what these bills will do is they will make criminals out of law-abiding citizens. \"If you look at the bills, [the Democrats] hide behind background checks. The background check system is already in place. What this bill will say, for example: If you have a gun and you want to loan it to a friend because maybe she was beaten up by her boyfriend. She has a TRO against her boyfriend and she's afraid he's going to come back and hurt her tonight. She comes to you and she says, 'Can I borrow your gun tonight because I fear for my life?' If you give her your gun, once she goes back to her house, you are now a felon. You could go to jail for a year and have a $100,000 fine. \"We tried to take that out by the way and the Democrats blocked that amendment. That's what this is about.\" On Republican attempts to change the legislation to catch legitimate criminals: \"We tried to bring an amendment to say, if an illegal alien tries to buy a gun and goes through the background check system, which would red flag it saying this person is here illegally. We said okay, now that he's tried to illegally buy a gun in violation of federal law, notify ICE so that he can be deported. \"A law-abiding citizen will go to jail and be a felon, and an illegal person can't be turned over to ICE under the Democrat bill.\" On the failure of this legislation to prevent mass shootings: \"What's really sad about this is that they hide behind some of these tragedies, like Parkland. Take the baseball shooting. Their bill would not have done anything to stop these tragedies. Las Vegas—their bill wouldn't have done anything. \"What it would do is make criminals out of law-abiding citizens. If you go hunting with a friend and your friend wants to borrow your rifle, you better bring your attorney with you because depending on what you do with that gun you may be a felon if you loan it to him. Let's say he wants to go scope it at the range before he goes and shoots deer. That act can make you a felon subject to a year in prison and a $100,000 fine.\" \"Ultimately, they want federal registration of all guns, true registration, and then confiscation is the next step.\" \"Look at California again, their utopian state is California for all of these crazy ideas they have. They have universal background checks in California. When they did it, it didn't reduce crime. What it did is make criminals out of a lot of law abiding citizens.\""
            },
            {
                "answer": "amendment was voted down almost on a party-line vote. Every Democrat on",
                "question": "Did every Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee vote against Steve Scalise's amendment?",
                "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRECB-2009-pt14/html/CRECB-2009-pt14-issue-2009-07-21.htm",
                "scraped_text": "[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 14] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov] The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois. The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer: God of grace and glory, in the darkness of our limited knowledge, we Today, send our lawmakers forth with Your light to do the right as You give them the ability to see it. Lord, help them to keep their minds on You so that Your peace will provide the foundation for their confidence. In their dealings with each other, keep them from unkind words and unkind silences. Kindle on the altar of their hearts a devotion to freedom's cause in all the world, as You bring their thoughts and actions into conformity to Your will. Lord, lift their hearts in gratitude to You for our heritage in this land of rich The Honorable Roland W. Burris led the Pledge of Allegiance, as I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will please read a communication to the Senate from the President pro tempore (Mr. Byrd). Under the provisions of rule I, paragraph 3, of the Standing Rules of the Senate, I hereby appoint the Honorable Roland W. Burris, a Senator from the State of Illinois, to Mr. BURRIS thereupon assumed the chair as Acting President pro The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized. Mr. REID. Mr. President, following leader remarks, if any, the Senate will resume consideration of the Defense authorization bill. There will be 2 hours of debate prior to a vote on the Levin-McCain amendment regarding F-22 funding. Senators should expect the first vote to begin shortly after 12 today. The Senate will recess from 12:30 to 2:15 for our weekly caucus luncheons. After that time, the bill will be open for further amendment. I hope Members who have amendments they wish to The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010 The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the Senate will resume consideration of S. 1390, which the clerk will A bill (S. 1390) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other Thune amendment No. 1618, to amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to allow citizens who have concealed carry permits from the State in which they reside to carry concealed firearms in another State that grants concealed carry permits, if the individual complies with the laws of The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I call up amendment No. 1469. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so The Senator from Michigan [Mr. Levin], for himself and Mr. (Purpose: To strike $1,750,000,000 in Procurement, Air Force funding for F-22A aircraft procurement, and to restore operation and maintenance, military personnel, and other funding in divisions A and B that was reduced in order to authorize such appropriation) At the end of subtitle A of title I, add the following: SEC. 106. ELIMINATION OF F-22A AIRCRAFT PROCUREMENT FUNDING. (a) Elimination of Funding.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 103(1) for procurement for the Air Force for aircraft procurement is hereby decreased by $1,750,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for F-22A aircraft procurement. (1) Operation and maintenance, army.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(1) for operation and maintenance for the Army is hereby increased by $350,000,000. (2) Operation and maintenance, navy.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(2) for operation and maintenance for the Navy is hereby increased by $100,000,000. (3) Operation and maintenance, air force.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby increased by (4) Operation and maintenance, defense-wide.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(5) for operation and maintenance for Defense-wide activities is hereby (5) Military personnel.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 421(a)(1) for military personnel is (6) Division a and division b generally.--In addition to the amounts specified in paragraphs (1) through (5), the total amount authorized to be appropriated for the Department of Defense by divisions A and B is hereby increased by The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, there is Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this amendment will strike $1.75 billion in additional funding for F-22 aircraft that was in the committee-reported bill. It will also restore serious cuts that were made in readiness and military personnel accounts and across-the-board cuts. These cuts were made in order to shift funds to support F-22 production. It is appropriate that the F-22 issue receive the full consideration by the Senate that it has received. The F-22 debate is among the most important debates we will have on the DOD authorization bill this year. Stating what may be one of the worst kept secrets in Washington today, the Department of Defense budget request called for ending production of several programs, including the F-22 program. I suspect the Department of Defense will seldom shut down any major acquisition program without a fair amount of controversy, and I agree with the Senator from Georgia that Congress should never be a rubberstamp for the executive branch. But neither should we object to terminating production of a weapons system because of parochial reasons. Terminating production, such as closing a base, can involve some economic loss for communities involved. I know that very personally. But we must do so from time to time and make these difficult decisions based on what is best for the Nation and what is best for the men and As President Obama said the other day, in strong support of ending To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops with the weapons that they actually do The Senate has heard from the senior leadership of the Defense Department, both civilian and military, that we should end F-22 production. The recommendation is strong and clear, as strong and clear as I have ever heard when it comes to ending the production of a The Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force sent me and Senator McCain a letter on this matter. This letter is already part of the Record. It reads, in part, as follows: This review concluded with . . . a balanced set of recommendations for our fighter forces: 1) focus procurement on modern 5th generation aircraft rather than less capable F- 15s and F-16s; 2) given that the F-35 will constitute the majority of the future fighter force, transition as quickly as is prudent to F-35 production; 3) complete F-22 procurement at 187 aircraft, while continuing plans for future F-22 upgrades; and 4) accelerate the retirements of the old 4th generation aircraft and modify the remaining In summary, we assessed the F-22 decision from all angles, taking into account competing strategic priorities and complementary programs and alternatives, all balanced within the context of available resources. We did not and do not recommend F-22s be included in the FY10 defense budget. This comfortable. Most importantly, in this and other budget decisions, we believe it is important for Air Force leaders to make clear choices, balancing requirements across a range The Senate has also heard from the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. In their letter to me and Senator McCain on July 13, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen wrote the There is no doubt that the F-22 is an important capability for our Nation's defense. To meet future scenarios, however, the Department of Defense has determined that 187 aircraft are sufficient, especially considering the future roles of Unmanned Aerial Systems and the significant number of 5th generation stealth F-35s coming on-line in our combat air It is important to note that the F-35 is a half generation newer aircraft than the F-22, and more capable in a number of areas such as electronic warfare and combating enemy air defenses. To sustain U.S. overall air dominance, the Department's plan is to buy roughly 500 F-35s over the next five years and more than 2,400 over the life of the program. Furthermore, under this plan, the U.S. by 2020 is projected to have some 2,500 manned fighter aircraft, almost 1,000 of them will be 5th generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is expected to have only slightly more than half as many manned fighter aircraft by 2020, none of them 5th The F-22 program proposed in the President's budget reflects the judgment of two different Presidents, two different Secretaries of Defense, three chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the current secretary and chief of staff of the Air Force. If the Air Force is forced to buy additional F-22s beyond what has been requested, it will come at the expense of other Air Force and Department of Defense priorities--and require deferring capabilities in areas we believe are much more critical for our Nation's defense. For all these reasons, the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of [W]e strongly believe that the time has come to close the F-22 production line. If the Congress sends legislation to the President that requires the acquisition of additional F- 22 aircraft beyond Fiscal Year 2009, the Secretary of Defense You do not get much stronger statements than that from a Secretary of The Secretary of Defense, just last Thursday, expanded on those thoughts at the Economic Club in Chicago, when he said the following: . . . supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were The Senate has also heard, of course, from President Obama, as In December 2004, the Department of Defense determined that 183 F-22s would be sufficient to meet its military needs. This determination was not made casually. The Department conducted several analyses which support this position based on the length and type of wars that the Department thinks it might have to fight in the future, and an estimate of the future capabilities of likely adversaries. To continue to procure additional F-22s would be to waste valuable resources that should be more usefully employed to provide our troops So the President, based on his uniformed and civilian advisers' recommendations, has now said he will veto this bill if we keep the additional $1.75 billion in the bill to buy the additional seven F-22s those military leaders--uniformed and civilian--strongly say we do not I know my friend from Georgia has quoted some private sector individuals and one senior military official in particular, GEN John Corley, the Commander of the Air Force's Air Combat Command. I do not take lightly the recommendations and advice of someone with a distinguished career such as General Corley. However, General Corley's assessment of a high military risk if we end the buy of F-22s at 187 is not shared by the most senior leadership of the Department that is responsible for viewing the F-22 program, and all other Department of Defense programs, from a broader perspective. These same leaders from the previous administration--the previous Secretary of Defense, the previous Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff-- recommended termination to President Bush, and President Bush also General Cartwright said at his confirmation hearing--or reconfirmation hearing--2 weeks ago the following: . . . I was probably one of the more vocal and ardent supporters for the termination of the F-22 production. The reason's twofold. First . . . there is a study in the Joint that we just completed and partnered with the Air Force on that, number one, said that proliferating within the United States military fifth-generation fighters to all three services was going to be more significant than having them based solidly in just one service, because of the way we deploy and because of the diversity of our deployments. Point number two is, in the production of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the first aircraft variant will support the Air Force replacement of their F-16s and F-15s. It is a very It is 10 years newer in advancement in avionics and capabilities in comparison to the F-22. It is a better, more Well, that F-35 is in production now. In fact, there are 30 being paid for and bought and produced in the very budget for the Department President Eisenhower noted, from time to time, the military industrial complex will push for more and more, more than is needed. In this case, however--in this case--the senior military leadership is not Finally, to quote again from Secretary Gates's speech last week--this The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. So, Mr. President, the time has come to end F-22 production at 187 F- 22As. That is all we need to buy, that is all we can afford to buy, and Mr. President, I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of our The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Republican leader is Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I am going to proceed on my leader The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, Americans are eager for health care reforms that lower costs and increase access. This is why many of us are proposing reforms that should be easy for everyone to agree on, such as reforming our medical liability laws, strengthening wellness and prevention programs that would encourage people to make healthy choices, such as quitting smoking and losing weight and addressing the needs of small businesses without imposing new taxes that kill jobs. The administration is taking a different approach to health care reform, and the more Americans learn about it, the more concerned they become. So it is good the President plans to spend a lot of his time in the days ahead discussing the administration's plan for reform because people need to know what the administration's plan is. Specifically, Americans have concerns about losing the care they have and spending trillions of dollars for a so-called reform that could leave them with worse care than they have now, especially if it is paid One prospect Americans are extremely concerned about is that they will be forced off of their current plans as part of a government takeover of health care. Despite repeated assurances from the administration to the contrary, the independent Congressional Budget Office says that just one section of one of the Democratic proposals we have seen would force 10 million people off their current health plans. Americans do not want a government takeover, and they certainly do not want the government to spend trillions of their tax dollars to pay for it, especially if the care they end up with is worse than the care they already receive, and especially if the money that is spent on these so-called reforms only adds to the national debt. The President has repeatedly promised that his reform would not add to the debt. Yet both the House and Senate reform bills we have seen would do just that. This is why even Democrats have started to One reason Democrats are having second thoughts is because the Director of the Congressional Budget Office has sounded the alarm over the administration's claims that its reforms would cut long-term overall health care costs. On the contrary, he said the administration's reforms would actually lead to an increase in overall costs. Concerns like these about costs and debt have been building Another growing concern even among Democrats is the impact these higher costs would have on States in the form of higher Medicaid costs. At a time of tight budgets, this is something that Governors from both For example, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson has said, and I am I'm personally very concerned about the cost issue, particularly the $1 trillion figures being batted around. Expanding Medicaid might look like an easy way to expand access, but it will actually mean massive spending increases for both Federal and State taxpayers. This could be a devastating blow to States such as Kentucky and many others which are already struggling to pay the The administration's efforts to pay for its plans are not the least bit reassuring. The two main groups they are targeting are the last two that should be expected to pay for it: seniors, through Medicare cuts, To me, it is just common sense that in the middle of a recession the last thing--the last thing--we should be doing is raising taxes on small businesses. Yet both bills we have seen would do just that. Indeed, under the House bill, taxes on some small businesses would rise as high as roughly 45 percent. This means in order to pay for health care reform, Democrats would increase the tax rate on some small businesses to about 30 percent higher than the rate for big corporations. Taxes would go up so much, in fact, under the House proposal that the average combined Federal and State top tax rate for individuals would be about 52 percent--52 percent, Mr. President. Let's consider that figure for a moment. To repeat: In order to pay for a health care proposal that would not even address all the concerns Americans have about access and cost--and which might even increase overall health care costs--Democrats in the House would raise the average top tax rate in the United States to about 52 percent. The chart behind me was created by the Heritage Foundation and appeared last week in the Wall Street Journal. It shows that the House bill would raise the top U.S. rate above even France. Of the 30 countries the OECD measures, only Belgium, Sweden, and Denmark have higher rates, and five U.S. States would have tax rates even higher The United States is in the middle of a recession. We have lost more than 2.5 million jobs since this January. Families are losing homes. The last thing they need is a government takeover that kills even more jobs, adds to the ballooning national debt, increases Americans' long- term health care costs, and leaves Americans paying more for worse care than they now receive. The proposals we have seen are not just incomplete, they are indefensible, particularly at a time of spiraling Maybe this is why the administration has started to insist on an artificial deadline for getting its reform proposals through. We certainly do not need to rush and spend $1 trillion to enact this flawed proposal by the August recess. The American people and members of both parties in Congress are calling on us to slow down and take the Health care reform is too important to rush through and get it wrong. We saw what happened when some rushed and spent $1 trillion on an artificial deadline with the stimulus. The American people do not want the same mistake to be made. Instead of setting a 3-week deadline on legislation that would end up affecting one-sixth of our economy, the administration should focus on meeting existing deadlines. The Mid-Session Review of the administration's earlier predictions about unemployment, economic growth, government spending, and the outlook for the Federal deficit has traditionally been released in mid- July. Yet now we are hearing the administration may not release its midsession review until August, after Congress has adjourned and after the administration's artificial deadline for a Senate bill on health The administration is also struggling to meet its decision to close Guantanamo by January 2010. The administration's task force on detainee policy has said it will miss its deadline for making recommendations. It seems premature to announce a closing date for Guantanamo without knowing where these detainees may be sent. The most recent delay is even more reason for the administration to show flexibility and reconsider its artificial deadline for closing Guantanamo. Americans want Republicans and Democrats to enact real health care reform that reduces costs and makes health care more accessible. They don't want a government takeover of the health care system that costs trillions of dollars, is paid for by seniors and job-killing taxes on small businesses and that leaves them paying more for worse care than they currently have. Before the administration rushes to spend another trillion dollars, it needs to slow down and focus on fixing our economy and addressing the issues it is already falling behind on. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Georgia. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the Levin- McCain amendment on the F-22. I was listening with interest to the chairman speak a little bit earlier when he raised several points that I am going to address specifically as I get into the guts of the argument. I think it is kind of interesting when he gives a list of those individuals in the Pentagon and in the White House who are now in opposition to continued production of the F-22. Interestingly enough, everybody he talked about--from the President to the Secretary of Defense, to the Secretary of the Air Force, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs--every single one of those individuals is political. They are appointed. They are appointed by the I am going to talk about some individuals who are in support of the F-22 who are not appointed. No. 1, they are the men and women who fly the F-22. Secondly, it is men who have had the courage to wear the uniform of the United States of America in an unparalleled way that I have seen since I have been here, who have been willing to stand up to that political leadership and say: You guys are wrong. They have been willing to stand and say that if you cut off production of the F-22 at 187, you are going to put this country at a high risk from a national As we go through the debate, it is going to be interesting to contrast the statements and the letters that every Member has received a flurry of over the last several days. I have never seen the White House lobby such as they have lobbied on this issue. For a White House that was not supposed to be a lobbying White House or in support of lobbyists, it has been unparalleled in my now going on 15 years as a Senator Levin spoke earlier about the F-35: We are going to ramp up production. We are going to buy 30 airplanes, 30, in this budget. Well, guess what we are paying for those airplanes. We are paying $200 million a copy. Guess what we are buying an F-22 for today--an airplane that has been through the test phase; an airplane that has proved itself. We are under a multiyear contract that calls for payment by the Air Force to the contractor of $140 million a copy. There is going to be a lot of conversation on this floor about the cost of the F-22, and it is expensive: $140 million a copy is very expensive. But to come in here with a straight face and say we are going to save taxpayers' money by moving to the F-35 and then turn around and say we are going to pay $200 million a copy in this bill for F-35s, something about that Well, let me just say we are in a debate with the Pentagon with respect to budgetary issues submitted by the Pentagon to Congress. There are a lot of people who think we ought to step in line, salute the Pentagon and move ahead and do exactly what the Pentagon says with respect to the purchase of weapons systems. Well, that is not the way the Framers of the Constitution intended the Senate and the House to work. Article I, section 8 of the Constitution provides Congress with the power to levy and collect taxes, provide for the common defense of the United States, to raise and support armies and to make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces. Clearly, we in Congress have a role in overseeing the Department of Defense, reviewing budgets, and questioning budget and policy recommendations. Our interest and involvement in these issues are appropriate and not just based on parochial issues. We are charged with the responsibility of reviewing DOD policies, whether fiscal policies I think it is important to note that on several occasions in recent years, Congress has authorized policy or funding initiatives that DOD has strongly opposed and, in retrospect, Congress was right and DOD was wrong. Perhaps the most similar example to the F-22 is the battle over the F-117 that occurred many years ago when the Air Force wanted to stop buying F-117s. Thank goodness my predecessor, Senator Sam Nunn, who was then chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, forced the Air Force to buy more F-117s. Ironically, part of the Air Force's argument was that they wanted to shift funding and focus to buying more F-22s. The F-117 was critical to establishing air dominance over Iraq in Desert Storm, and we can thank Congress for recognizing the need for There are several other examples, such as the Goldwater-Nichols Reorganization Act of 1986 and the establishment of Special Operations Command in 1987, both of which were strongly opposed by the Pentagon. Other examples are continuation of the V-22 program and prohibition against retiring U-2s and B-52s, all of which are paying dividends beyond what the military expected, including in Iraq and Afghanistan I wish to address a comment Senator Levin and others have made regarding previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supporting only 183--or 187 now, with the addition of four F-22s we are buying in the supplemental. First, that number of 183 originally was established not on the basis of any study or analysis--never a study that came out and said we need 183 and we are going to be basing our decision on that--but it was based on PBD 753, which is inside Washington baseball, which was an OSD budget drill 2 days before Christmas in 2004, in which the Air Force had absolutely no input. Neither the Chief of Staff nor the Secretary was involved. A number of ``183'' or ``187'' has always been budget driven and not strategically There have been at least 10 studies done on F-22 numbers over the past 10 years. Of those, only one, the Joint Air Dominance Study done by DOD in 2005, recommended 183 F-22s. However, that study was based on only needing F-22s in a single-threat scenario and which also used a Senator Levin mentioned the comments General Cartwright made in the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing 2 weeks ago. And he relies heavily on the statement General Cartwright made. General Cartwright question to General Cartwright was: General, you say you support terminating the F-22 program at 187. Has there been any one single study, in the Air Force or outside the Air Force, any analysis done that recommends we terminate the program at 187? General Cartwright's statement to me was: Yes; there is a study going on in the Air Force right now that says we should terminate the program at 187. Well, unfortunately for General Cartwright, we now know no study was done. It is our understanding that the comment of General Cartwright is being corrected for the record and that we are receiving a corrected I wish to quote from a statement by Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell that was made last Tuesday with respect to the comments of General Cartwright. This comment is quoted in the Daily Report. It now turns out that a recent study touted by Pentagon leadership as the justification for terminating the F-22 fighter isn't a study at all but a series of briefings by DOD's program analysis and evaluation shop in the Air Force. That word comes from the Pentagon's top spokesman, Geoff Morrell, who told the Daily Report late Tuesday that the study, or whatever it is, is: Not so much a study as work products. Asked to describe the nature and timing of this study, Morrell told What I think General Cartwright was referring to . . . is Since PDB 753, only 183 F-22s have been programmed in the budget, with fiscal year 2009 being the last year of funding. To say previous Secretaries of Defense and Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs supported this is misleading since, until the fiscal year 2010 budget bill process, a decision on whether to buy more F-22s would be deferred to future decisionmakers. It is perhaps with this in mind that Secretary Gates himself decided last year to request additional F-22s in the fiscal year 2009 supplemental, and he did, in order to keep the line open and preserve the next administration's option for procurement of the F-22. I know the former President, President Bush, did not want to see the program terminated. They can say what they want to on the other side, but having had personal conversations, I know what his feeling was about this great aircraft. He could have terminated the program, but he did not terminate the program. It is this administration that is There have been five previous Secretaries of the Air Force, six previous Chiefs of Staff of the Air Force, seven previous Secretaries of Defense before this one, and eight previous commanders of Air Combat Command who have said we need more F-22s. We have supported this program from day one. We have continued to reduce the number from the original 781, now down to 187. The current Chief of Staff of the Air Force, whose letters have been quoted and inserted in the Record where he says we should cap it at 187, has testified time and time and time again in recent days and in recent weeks and who has written me letters stating that the military requirement for F-22s is not 187, it is 243, but he says we can't afford it. Therefore, he has to salute his boss. His boss is a political appointee--Secretary Gates--and the political appointee says we are going to cap it at 187; therefore, that is the direction in which we are going to go and the direction in which you I am going to close my comments at this time and turn to my colleague from Connecticut. Before I do so, I will quote somebody who is not political, somebody who is not an appointee, somebody who is a former Chief of Staff of the Air Force. That is GEN Merrill McPeak, who, last week, in an unsolicited statement, came out and said, when he talked about terminating the F-22 production rate at 187: I think it's a real mistake. . . . The airplane is a game- changer and people seem to forget that we haven't had any of our soldiers or Marines killed by enemy air since 1951. . . . It's been half a century or more since any enemy aircraft has The F-22 is at the top end. We have to procure enough of them for our ability to put a lid on, to dictate the ceiling of any conflict. We certainly need some figure well above 200. That worries me because I think it is pennywise and pound foolish to expose us in a way this much smaller number General McPeak is a supporter of this administration and, as far as we can tell, he is not a consultant for any major defense contractor. For this reason, I think his comments deserve significant attention and I will stop at this point, but I will say more later. I now turn to my colleague, Senator Dodd, who I will say has been a great champion on this issue, a great partner in support of not just the men and women of the Air Force and our other branches that depend on this weapon system to protect America and our soldiers in the field but also a great The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, how much time remains for those of us in The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. There is 44\\1/2\\ minutes remaining. Mr. DODD. I ask to be recognized for 10 minutes, and if I need a The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut is Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I commend Senator Chambliss for his eloquent and persuasive argument about why this amendment is a dangerous one, and I say that respectfully. I have great admiration for Carl Levin and John McCain, but there are serious problems with this approach, from a national security standpoint as well as a manufacturing and industrial To put this into context for our colleagues, we are being asked to authorize $1.75 billion, or two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget before us of $680 billion. We are told there are at least 25,000 direct jobs and 95,000 direct and indirect jobs at stake for that $1.75 billion--again, two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget--which Senator Chambliss has offset, by the way. It is not an expenditure that is not We are going to put those jobs at risk--not because this industry is in trouble, unlike the automobile industry, which we bailed out to the tune of $63 billion, by the way--understanding the reason many of us supported that was to maintain an industrial manufacturing base. In this case, we lead the world in aerospace. Nobody comes even close to the ability of the United States to produce the most sophisticated aircraft in the world. Yet with an industry doing relatively well-- although commercial orders are way down, which is causing serious problems but that is as a result of the economic conditions. We are unwilling to come up with $1.75 billion or two-tenths of 1 percent to put those many jobs at risk, not to mention retreating on our air One of the critical components of national security is maintaining superiority both at sea and in the air. The F-22, by any estimation, is the most superior aircraft in the world. It is not even close in terms of competitors. Yet with the numbers we have and that we are relying on, we leave ourselves way short of the earlier projected numbers. As Senator Chambliss pointed out, the testimony over the years of those who advocated this program has been significant. In fact, in the letter most recently received from General Corley, head of the Air Combat Command Office, headquartered at Langley, VA, June 9, it points out how serious this would be in terms of exposing our Nation to national security risks. The head of the Air National Guard Bureau, Lieutenant General Wyatt, makes the same claim. Chief of Staff Schwartz, before he changed his mind a week earlier, advocated the F-22 From both a manufacturing perspective and job loss, at a time when body is about to lay off anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 people--at a time when unemployment rates are going up, because we decided that $1.75 billion is too expensive at this juncture, even though we have offset it, and we have put that many jobs at risk, not because the industry is failing or because it is a bad aircraft but because the Secretary of Defense and the administration have decided this program So explain to those 90,000 people--somewhere in that range--once they lose their jobs and get laid off, and they will--why it was we decided today, because of two-tenths of 1 percent of the budget, to move in a different direction. Put aside, if you will, the $63 billion we spent I raised these concerns expressed by our military commanders--again, most notably, GEN John Corley of the Air Combat Command, LTG Harry Wyatt of the Air National Guard--I have mentioned them. In my State, there are 2,000 to 3,000 jobs at risk, and 1,000 of the jobs are down because commercial orders are down. So it is really 2,000 to 4,000 No matter how much I care about the people in my State, I could not oppose this exclusively on that basis. You ought to look nationwide. It is not just my State; it is all across the country. I raised concerns about what this amendment would do to our global competitiveness and discussed the potential harm to our economy posed by terminating the world's most advanced fighter jet. I raised concerns over the industry's ability to build the less sophisticated F-35--which has only one engine not two, and the word ``stealthy'' applied to the F-35 is a myth; it is not as stealthy, even remotely, as the F-22--that the United States and its allies are Mr. President, before I revisit these critically important arguments, let's be clear on the context in which we are having this debate. The proponents of this amendment suggest they are saving taxpayers valuable resources in terminating the F-22. They claim such cost savings are well worth the risk Generals Corley and Wyatt have warned us about. But out of a total of $680 billion in the Defense authorization bill, this amendment is valued at $1.75 billion. That is two-tenths of 1 percent of the total authorization. Since the planes are fully offset, Instead, this amendment will come at enormous cost to our security and our economy. We are in the midst of a national manufacturing crisis. Everybody has talked about it. It is why we voted for so much support for the automobile industry only a few weeks ago right here in According to the Federal Reserve's July 15, 2009, Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization Report, manufacturing production has declined 15.5 percent nationwide, between June 2008 and June 2009. I will repeat that: There has been an over 15 percent decline in our manufacturing sector. This quarter's manufacturing production is the lowest in 27 years, which was the previous low point in production since 1967, when the Fed started to keep track of the data. We in Congress tried to respond to this crisis. We passed the Emergency Economy Stabilization Act, designed to relieve credit markets We passed the $787 billion American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to stimulate the economy and boost demand in various sectors and put We have provided $63 billion to Chrysler and General Motors to keep their production lines running--companies that were brought to their knees, in part, due to dismal business planning and severe Additionally, the government has acquired unprecedented equity stakes in these companies--8 percent in Chrysler and a whopping 60 percent in I have not opposed these efforts. As chairman of the Banking Committee, I worked with my colleagues who represent those States to provide Federal assistance through the legislative process. But we took this step because we were responding to a national manufacturing crisis. We did it because we are responding to the dire and credible warnings about the potential impact of the auto industry's collapse-- particularly in Midwestern States, which greatly depend on the auto I will discuss briefly another critically important manufacturing base and its economic impact: the aerospace industry. While my home State of Connecticut ranks 29th in total population, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, it ranks sixth in total In 2008, according to the Connecticut Department of Labor, aerospace employed over 36,000 residents of my State. So any discussion of terminating the fighter jet production has an outsize effect on the I would not be arguing this case for the F-22 if it were strictly a parochial matter. We don't have a right to ask 99 other people exclusively because of something happening in our own States. The truth is, halting this production will have consequences for our industry's ability to continue to build aircraft for our military. I will lay out The expertise of these people cannot be duplicated overnight. These trained engineers, scientists, manufacturers, and machinists are highly skilled and trained. I am concerned their skill sets and experience are being taken for granted, without consideration for the peculiarities of jet engine construction. That doesn't just hurt the workers and their According to the Defense Contract Management Agency, there is a 20- to 24-month lag between payment for and production of jet engines. So the number of planes ordered in any 1 given year doesn't correspond Under Secretary of Defense Gates's plan in calendar year 2010, Pratt & Whitney is expected to make 48 F-22 engines and 19 F-35 engines, for a total of 67 fighter jet engines. The following year, the number will drop precipitously to a total of 43 engines, since the F-35 is not scheduled to begin what is called ``full-rate production'' until 2014. Thus, in calendar year 2011, Pratt & Whitney will be producing 11 F- 22 engines and 32 F-35 engines, for a total of 43 fighter engines. In 2012, since there will be no F-22 production, there will only be 41 F- The problem is even more acute when you compare overall military engines being built in 2010 versus 2011 and 2012. Under current plans, Pratt & Whitney is expected to go from building 194 military engines to 130 in 2011. That is an average drop of 33 percent in work volume. What will happen? It is the same thing occurring in manufacturing States all across the country: layoffs. Thousands and thousands of people--not just in my State but across the country. In the absence of military aircraft work orders for 3 years, companies will be forced to tell the legions of highly skilled engineers, technicians, and machinists--workers such as the Pratt & Whitney mechanics I introduced and mentioned last week--that they are not needed now. They need to retrain. They need to find another Then, 3 years later, after these workers have settled in a new job, or have retired, the Department of Defense and our allies will try to ramp up production of the F-35. But they will not be able to. They will be left scratching their heads, wondering: Why can't industry meet our production needs right now? No doubt, we will ask the same question on To assume that the thousands of workers across the Nation who work on the F-22 will stand idly by until 2014 when we begin to build the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is naive at best. This argument I make is not new at all. The Defense Department recognized this point in the 2006 Review, published by the military to identify the needs and strategy of The report stated that F-22 production should be extended ``through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in fifth generation stealth At the same time, the F-35 was scheduled to begin construction in 2010. Since then, of course, it has been pushed back 4 years to 2014. There are some rumors that this date may be pushed back even further. This means the military identified only 3 years ago--36 months ago-- the most recent published report of this type, that our Nation would suffer a loss in aerospace manufacturing capability if fighter Their response was to ensure that we keep building F-22s until the F- 35 reached full-rate production. Yet when the F-35 production schedule was pushed back 4 years, we did not extend the F-22 production to stabilize our industrial base. That is why you have the job losses I Now we find ourselves in the very situation the Department of Defense was trying to avoid 36 months ago, as we face looming job losses across our Nation, commercial orders down--losing these people on that basis and now because of the vote we may take on this issue--and thus a degradation of our ability to meet the aerospace production capability our national security requires. So I believe it is our duty and responsibility to protect these workers from losing their employment and make sure our country retains a viable and competitive capacity in Let me also point out--and I did the other day on a national security basis--that, again, superiority is critical. Right now, there are some 40 nations that have the SU-27, which is a sophisticated aircraft, and the MiG-29, which competes with the F-15 and the F-16. Forty nations have that capability. I had a larger chart earlier--I don't have it with me today--but there are little red and yellow dots all over this map that indicate advanced surface-to-air missile capability where there have been orders made or they have already been acquired. Our F- 15s and F-16s are vulnerable to those surface-to-air missiles. All over The F-22 literally could avoid the kind of detection these surface- to-air missiles provide. So we now have a capacity to be able to respond. Now we may not--and as long as we are dealing with Afghanistan and Iraq, that is one issue. But, frankly, we have to prepare for situations that could get a lot more dangerous for our Nation. The Chinese and the Russians are aggressively pursuing a fifth generation aircraft to compete with the F-22. And to say that the F-22 and the F- 35 are virtually alike I think is a mistake. That is not the case at From a national security standpoint as well, there was a reason why General Corley and General Wyatt and others have made a case on these aircraft. There is a reason why we invested some $65 billion to develop this aircraft. There is a reason why the quadrennial report 36 months ago warned about these gaps and what it would do to our industrial base I hope our colleagues, in the midst of all of this, would understand what is at stake. Again, here we are, on an economic basis, where many jobs could be lost in our country with critical technology that hangs in the balance. It would be one thing if we were arguing here this plane was no longer needed, it was not going to do the job we thought it would do, it wasn't as sophisticated as we hoped it would be. Then you might decide dropping this, giving up some jobs, may make some sense. But to give up an aircraft of this sophistication and this capability, and simultaneously, in an economic situation such as we are in, to lose as we are predicting somewhere between 25,000 and 90,000 jobs with this decision, for $1.75 billion in this budget--two-tenths of 1 percent out of a $680 billion authorization bill, I think is I hope my colleagues would listen to these arguments, would debate and understand there is an ability, to reach a compromise where we can go forward with production, reduce some of the cost that the proponents argue for in this amendment, and then move toward together. But to make the decision that we may make in the next hour and a half or so would I appreciate my colleague Senator Chambliss giving me the opportunity to respond on this issue, and I thank him for his work as well in making the case to our colleagues, Democrats and Republicans. This ought not to be an issue that divides along those lines at all. We need to understand what is at stake for our Nation, both in terms of our manufacturing base as well as the national security needs that have Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record the two letters, one from General Corley and one from General Wyatt. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your letter and the opportunity to comment on the critical issue of F-22 fleet size. At Air Combat Command we have held the need for 381 F- 22s to deliver a tailored package of air superiority to our Combatant Commanders and provide a potent, globally arrayed, asymmetric deterrent against potential adversaries. In my opinion, a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our current national military strategy at high risk in the near to mid- To my knowledge, there are no studies that demonstrate 187 F-22s are adequate to support our national military strategy. Headquarters Air Force, shows a moderate risk force can be obtained with an F-22 fleet of approximately 250 aircraft. While OSD did not solicit direct input from Air Combat Command, we worked closely with our Headquarters in ensuring our views were available. We realize the tough choices our national leadership must make in balancing current warfighting needs against the fiscal realities our Nation The F-22, a critical enabler of air dominance, plays a vital role and indispensable role in ensuring joint freedom of action for all forces and underpins our ability to dissuade and deter. Thank you for your continued support of Dear Senator Chambliss: Thank you for your inquiry and the opportunity for me to discuss what I believe to be a serious threat to the Air National Guard's ability to fulfill our Nation's highest strategic priority; defending the Homeland. The ANG has proudly performed the bulk of this mission, while simultaneously participating in overseas contingency operations, with aircraft that are rapidly nearing the end of their service life. While I believe our Nation has the capacity to recapitalize the ANG, I am not aware of any plan that commits to doing so. As such, we are in need of an immediate solution in order to ensure that America's most cost effective force can continue to perform its most While a variety of solutions abound, I believe the nature of the current and future asymmetric threats to our Nation, particularly from seaborne cruise missiles, requires a fighter platform with the requisite speed and detection to address them. The F-22's unique capability in this arena enables it to handle a full spectrum of threats that the ANG's current legacy systems are not capable of addressing. I am fond of saying that ``America's most important job should Indeed, I am keenly aware of the severe strain that our current economic situation has placed on the Department of Defense as it attempts to modernize for an ever evolving threat environment. Given this reality, finding more efficient ways to protect our Nation's interests at home and abroad is the new imperative. Many say this will mean making tough choices, but I believe we can maintain our vitality by making smart choices; leveraging the cost effective and dual use nature of the ANG is the answer. Basing F-22s (and eventually F-35s) at strategic ANG locations throughout the United States while simultaneously making them available to contingency operations is the most responsible approach to Again, thank you for your inquiry and your continued The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Hagan). The Senator from Michigan. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield myself 1 minute to give the figures relative to the F-35 production, which are the Pentagon figures. I am not sure where my good friend from Connecticut got his figures on future F-35 production. But the figures from the Pentagon are that there are 30 in this year's budget; in next year's budget, fiscal year 2011, they plan 70 F-35s; in fiscal year 2012, 109 F-35s; in fiscal year 2013, 119 F-35s. Those are far different than the numbers which my friend from Connecticut just gave. I am not sure the source of his numbers. Perhaps he can give us those At this point, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Delaware. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. DODD. I wanted to state where the numbers came from. They are from the Defense Contracting Management Agency. That is where the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Delaware is recognized. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, today, I would like to speak in strong support of the Levin-McCain amendment which strips $1.75 billion in spending for additional F-22s. These are fighter jets the military does not want and does not need. This is a Cold War system, in a post-9/11 world, that is underperforming and overpriced. To force this purchase, against the best judgment of our military leadership and Commander in Chief, weakens our ability to keep our Nation safe. The White House and Pentagon agree that continuing the F-22 production line decreases our military readiness by wasting resources that could be much more usefully employed. And it is not a partisan issue. Presidents Obama and Bush; Defense Secretaries Gates and Rumsfeld; Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, and his two predecessors; and the Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force all agree that the F-22 is not the most efficient or effective warplane to meet our current and future defense needs. The F-22 has not flown one mission over Afghanistan or Iraq, because it is not the best weapon to meet the challenges we are currently This system was designed to counter Soviet fighters at the end of the Cold War. And its continued purchase deprives the military of $1.75 billion it requested for other critical priorities, such as building the capability to protect our troops and defeat insurgencies. With ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, we cannot afford to disregard the views of our military. And in these tough economic times, we cannot afford to adopt an irresponsible approach to defense spending. These facts speak for themselves, and the stakes are simply The F-22 prepares us for the wars of the past; the wars we have already won. Today, we must look forward and make tough decisions for the future. We must heed the advice of our military leaders, such as Secretary Gates, to rebalance our defense budget and enhance our capabilities to succeed against current and future threats. This includes preparing for a wide spectrum of conflict and continuing to Madam President, this debate is not just about the future of F-22s. It is about changing the way we do business. It is about accepting this rebalancing and ending unnecessary waste. And it is about matching vital national security interests with commensurate levels of funding. The F-22 is the first test of our willingness to make the tough choices necessary to truly prioritize defense spending. The grim reality is that with regard to the budget, we have entered into a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. Madam President, I want to align myself with the remarks of Secretary Gates, and reiterate to my colleagues that this is a risk none of us Many of my colleagues have spoken of the sacrifice and cost such a decision incurs in terms of jobs. They are right, and I share their concern about jobs; especially in these tough times. I know this makes our decision today hard, and no one wants to do anything that will hinder job creation and growth. But it is with these economic constraints in mind that we must also consider the implications of spending nearly $2 billion on a defense program that our military Building more F-22s does not allow for smart or efficient growth of our workforce. Moreover, the number of jobs lost on the F-22 will likely be matched by increased production of the F-35, which is a newer and more capable warplane. American workers are needed to meet this and other defense priorities, which strengthen our national security. Jobs should follow, as opposed to dictate, our defense needs. For those concerned about cuts, I point out that the budget proposed by the President and Secretary Gates represents an increase, not a decrease, in defense spending. But this is not just an increase for the Rather, it is a budget that recognizes that over the last two decades, the nature of conflict and war has fundamentally changed. It recognizes that we must continue to build the capacity to confront a wide spectrum of challenges--conventional and unconventional; regular and irregular--and better prepare for a future in which we will Today, we must do what is in America's best interest. Today, we must focus on weapons systems that offer the maximum versatility and effectiveness, and prepare the military against the widest range of threats. And today, we must plan for our current and future counterinsurgency needs, as shaped by our experiences in Afghanistan It is in this regard that I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the Levin-McCain amendment, and adopt a better approach to Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the time during the quorum call be charged equally on both sides. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KAUFMAN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized. Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I thank the Senator for yielding time As we consider the future of the F-22 program, it is important for us to remember the most fundamental goal we have for our defense industry way we have met that goal for many decades. That goal is to give our men and women in uniform technology and equipment that is far superior to that of our enemy so they can protect themselves and defend our Nation. It has been our mission from the time of the Wright brothers to the days of Rosie the Riveter, to the era of stealthy technology. But maintaining that technology has depended on an important partnership and that is a partnership between the Pentagon, which determines the needs of our war fighters, and industry, which does the research and design and builds the next generation of military equipment that meets those needs. It is a partnership that is vital to our military strength, to our economy, and to the health of our Unfortunately, it is also a partnership that is being weakened by amendments such as the one we are considering today. Instead of treating military procurement such as the partnership that it is, this amendment envisions it as a one-way street. This amendment cancels a vital military program without adequate thought of the men and women we rely on to design and build the equipment our war fighters depend on without any consideration of the fact that if we end the F-22 program, we are cutting a link in technology that we will not be able to repair As many of you know, this is not the first time I have come to the floor to talk about the erosion of our Nation's industrial base. It likely will not be the last. That is because protecting our domestic base is not about just one company or one program or one State or one industry. This is about our Nation's economic stability, it is about our future military capability, and it is about the ability to retain skilled family-wage jobs in communities throughout the country. Just last week, the Aerospace Industries Association issued a major report that finds the Pentagon failed to consider industrial effects when choosing strategies. That report urged the Pentagon to take into account the impact decisions such as the one to stop production of the F-22 make on our manufacturing base. That report also noted that our manufacturing base was not taken into account in past Quadrennial Defense Reviews, and when Secretary Gates unveiled his program cuts in April, he specifically said defense industry jobs were not a factor in As our country faces two difficult but not unrelated challenges-- safeguarding our country in a dangerous world and rebuilding a faltering economy--ignoring the needs of our industrial base should not be an option. Whether it is the scientists who are designing the next generation of military satellites or whether it is the engineers who are improving our radar systems or the machinists assembling our war planes, these industries and their workers are one of our greatest strategic assets. What if they, all of a sudden, were not available? What if we made budgetary and policy decisions that did not take into account the need of making sure we have a strong domestic workforce in Actually, that is not impossible or even unthinkable. It is actually happening today. We need to be clear about the ramifications of amendments such as the ones we are considering today because once we give up on producing this technology, once we say that certain research and development is no longer needed, we lose that. We lose it and we Today, as we consider a critical tool for the future of our military across the globe, we have to also remember the partnership we have built with our industrial base because, unless we consider the needs of that partnership, we are not only going to continue to lose some of our best-paying American jobs, we are going to lose the backbone of our Supporting continued F-22 production will help defend against potential threats, it will protect family-wage jobs, and, most importantly, it will preserve our domestic base. That is important because we do not know what conflict will come in the future. We don't know what our challenges will be 10 or 15 or 20 or 30 years from now. If we lose our engineering or our production base and we face a challenge in the future and go back to rebuild that, it will never happen. We will be at a disadvantage in whatever future conflict we I urge our colleagues to think about the long-term interests of this decision. I oppose the amendment and I look forward to further debate. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains on our side? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The proponents have 35\\1/2\\ minutes, the Mr. LEVIN. I yield to the Senator from Arizona as much of that time The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I thank the chair. I, again, thank my friend, the distinguished chairman, for proposing this amendment. I thank the distinguished chairman for being the sponsor of this amendment. It is a privilege to work with him on this as well as many This amendment is probably the most impactful amendment I have seen in this body on almost any issue, much less the issue of defense. It boils down to whether we are going to continue the business as usual of once a weapons system gets into full production it never dies or whether we are going to take the necessary steps to reform the The F-22, in itself, is $1.75 billion. That is an impressive number anyplace outside the beltway. But more important than that, it is a signal that we are not going to continue to build weapons systems that are plagued with cost overruns, which outlive their requirements for defending this Nation and, very frankly, starts to gain control of the acquisition process which is completely out of control. The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that there were over $295 billion in cost overruns in the last several years--$295 billion in cost overruns. Recently, a close friend of mine and great leader and former Secretary of the Navy wrote an article in the Wall When John McCain was shot down over Hanoi in 1967, he was By the way, I didn't know that cost to the taxpayers I had caused. Inflation has risen by 700 percent since then. So Mr. McCain's A-4 cost $6.1 million in 2008 dollars. Applying a generous factor of three for technological improvements, the price for a 2008 Navy F-18 fighter should be $18 million. Instead, we are paying about $90 million for each new fighter. As a result, the Navy cannot buy sufficient numbers. In 1983, I was in the Pentagon meeting that launched the F- 22 Raptor. The plan was to buy 648 jets beginning in 1996 for Now they cost $350 million apiece and the Obama budget caps At least they are safe from cyberattack since no one in China knows how to program the '83 vintage IBM software that He then goes on to cite other problems, including Navy shipbuilding . . . the Army's Future Combat System that was meant to re- equip the entire Army, the 400 percent cost overrun of the It is out of control, I say to my colleagues. I will match my commitment to equipping the men and women in the military with that of anyone in this body, but it has to stop, and this vote on the F-22 will determine whether it is business as usual with the earmarking and pork- barreling of billions of dollars which has bred corruption--we have former Members of the Congress residing in Federal prison--or whether Who better to be a spokesperson, in my view, than our Secretary of Secretaries of Defense. I know of no one whom I admire more than Secretary Gates. He gave a very important speech, on July 16, at the Economic Club of Chicago--a remarkable speech. I hope all my colleagues would have the chance to read it. In part of it he says, about the First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless, I determined in a triumph of hope over I wish to emphasize my strong support and appreciation for the --and the President agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move ahead with business Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy. For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles The President's budget would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- He goes on to say how important the F-35 is, and then he says: The F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios-- specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense I ask my colleagues, would you ask yourselves why the F-22 has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. It has been in production for nearly 5 years. It has never flown over Iraq or Afghanistan. And I want to emphasize that I think it is an important fighter. We are building 187 of them. The question before this body is why we continue to build more, whether we continue to build more, or the F-35, the Joint Strike Fighter, which goes to the Marine Corps and the Navy and the Air Force. Is this the weapons system we need to balance our entire capability of I would ask my colleagues, since the F-22 was on the drawing boards and moved into production, look at the advancement in unmanned aerial vehicles. I say that as an old pilot. The unmanned aerial vehicles have been performing a magnificent job both in Iraq and Afghanistan. They have been a critical element sometimes on the battlefields. And this President's budget understands that and gives extreme priority to that. So as we go on, in light of these factors, Secretary Gates goes on to With the support of Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries The fact is, in the view of the President of the United States, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and most any objective observer of the military scene, they believe the F-22 is important, we need to have what we have, but it is now time to move on to the F-35, the Joint So this amendment really means, are we going to look at the real and compelling needs we have to have in order to win the war in Afghanistan, continue our success in Iraq, and put our funds into that kind of equipment and weapons systems or are we going to continue? Finally, I have great sympathy for the Senator from Georgia and other Senators who have come to the floor. I understand the sincerity of their views. I respect them. I would also point out, though, that to argue we should build weapons systems in the name of jobs is not what we should be about. What we should be about is procuring and building the best weapons systems to ensure our national security and how we can best equip the men and women who are in harm's way all around the world So I understand the economic impact, particularly in these hard times. My sympathy goes out to the communities that are dependent on the contracts for the F-22 aircraft. All I can say to them is we will do everything we can to help you and your families and make the adjustments, and there will be--we continue to increase spending on defense. We hope that we will be able to provide you with the necessary jobs and manufacturing that would be devoted to what we have ascertained as our national defense weapons systems procurement priorities, I say with sympathy to my colleagues who are deeply concerned about the loss of jobs in these difficult economic times. But this is not the way to provide jobs. Our obligation is to defend this So I think this amendment is overdue. I think it will be a significant, a very significant amendment, as I said before, as to whether we will get our priorities straight and listen to our esteemed Secretary of Defense, our President, our Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other military leaders in whose hands we entrust to make the tough decisions. I understand the final decision is here in Congress, but I also don't think we should dismiss the arguments that have been made by I think one of the finest men to ever serve this THE PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time to the Senator from Utah? Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to yield 7 minutes to the Senator from The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah is recognized. Mr. HATCH. Madam President, during his July 16 address, the Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, said the military needed maximum versatility to bring to bear in a wide range of armed conflicts. Last January, he argued that ``our military must be prepared for a full spectrum of operations, including the [insurgent] type of combat we are facing in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as large-scale threats that we face from I could not agree more with Secretary Gates. However, just as our Nation unwisely disregarded the hard-learned lessons of how to fight counterinsurgency operations after Vietnam, the Defense Department seems poised to make similar errors by limiting our capability to defeat the air threat of today and tomorrow: the integrated air defense This advanced system is composed of extended-range Russian surface- to-air missiles such as the S-300 and advanced fighters such as the Su- 30, which have already been sold in large numbers to China and India. Together, these systems make penetrating hostile airspace extremely difficult, if not deadly, for aircraft lacking the F-22's advanced stealth technology and capability for sustained supersonic speeds. It is these capabilities that enable the Raptor to have the unique capability to conduct stealth operations at any time of day or night. Secretary Gates argues for ceasing production of the F-22 after only are built because we will not face what the Pentagon refers to as a ``near-peer adversary'' for the foreseeable future. For the sake of our Nation, I hope he is right. However, I believe this statement misses a critical point: advanced integrated air defense systems are comparably inexpensive and readily affordable by nations such as Iran, with its insistence on developing nuclear weapons. History provides ample examples of the effective use of integrated air defense systems by nations that lack the resources to be considered a near-peer adversary of the U.S. As retired LTG Michael Dunn recently noted, North Vietnam defended its territory during the Vietnam war with what, at the time, was an advanced air defense system. This system, comprised of surface-to-air missiles and fewer than 200 fighters, was The 1973 War between Israel and Egypt is another example. The Egyptians learning from their recent defeats built an integrated air defense umbrella under which its forces were able to initially make significant territorial gains, while the Israeli Air Force faced serious losses. Only when the Egyptians advanced beyond the range of their surface-to-air missiles' umbrella was the Israeli Air Force able A more contemporary example is the loss in the 1990s of an F-117 Nighthawk to the Serbians, who were not equipped with the latest air Despite such examples, some argue additional F-22s are not necessary since stealthy jet-powered unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs, which are still under development, will play an increasingly vital role in destroying critical ground targets. This is true for threats on the ground, but I am unaware of any plans to operationally deploy a UAV that can dogfight existing or next-generation Russian and Chinese jet Our forces could be confronted with the next generation Russian and Chinese fighters soon. There have been numerous media reports the Russian Government is developing a new stealthy aircraft, presumably to counter the F-22. This aircraft called PAK-FA, is being developed jointly with the Indian Government. Additional media sources cite China's development of a similar twin engine, stealth aircraft known as Some argue that the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter can tackle those threats and defeat this new generation of advanced aircraft. While the F-35 is a very capable stealth aircraft, it was designed to complement the F-22, not replace it. The fact is the F-35 is neither as capable a fighter nor as stealthy as the F-22. For example, the F-35 does not have, nor can be upgraded to use, the supercruise engines increasingly Remember the F-22 is the NASCAR racer of this air-dominance team. Fast and unseen, the Raptor will punch a hole in an enemy's defenses, quickly dispatching any challenger in the air and striking at the most important ground targets. The Joint Strike Fighter is the rugged SUV of the team. Impressive, but not as maneuverable or capable of sustained supersonic speeds, the F-35 will exploit the hole opened by the F-22 and attack additional targets and directly support our ground forces. This is not to say the F-35 is not a highly capable stealthy aircraft. But the F-35's role is to supplement the F-22, not substitute for it. Only by utilizing the strengths of both aircraft do we ensure air Furthermore, if the F-22 is such a boondoggle, why do our allies such as Japan and Australia want to spend billions to purchase the aircraft? Why does Australia, for instance, plan to purchase up to 100 F-35s and large numbers of UAVs, and yet remains interested in the F-22? Perhaps it is because Australia understands the Russians and the Chinese are developing even more sophisticated surface-to-air missile systems and stealth fighters, threats the F-22 is uniquely designed and equipped to Others point out the F-22 has not been deployed in support of our operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. This is true. However, there were recent plans to deploy the F-22 to the Persian Gulf. But according to the July 9, 2008, edition of the widely respected Defense News, the Pentagon overruled those plans, citing concerns about ``strategic dislocation.'' This means the F-22 is hardly a dinosaur. It is a weapon that can change the balance of power in a region and deter our In conclusion, I am reminded of a point author Michael Korda made in his book about the Battle of Britain. He observed that even though the two British prime ministers before Winston Churchill pursued a policy of appeasement, they also committed their government to develop and procure the three pieces of equipment: the Spitfire fighter, Hurricane fighter and radar, which were to ensure that nation's survival during I hope the Senate will profit from these lessons of history and vote I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time. Mr. LEVIN. How much time remains for the proponents? The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 21 minutes remaining. Mr. LEVIN. I ask Senator Wyden, how much time does he need? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon is recognized. Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I rise this morning to support the Levin- McCain amendment. It seems to me that buying more F-22s at this point would meet the very definition of government waste. What you have is a situation where the Pentagon, which, suffice it to say, has not exactly been shy over the years in terms of calling for additional weapons, is on record as saying this is unnecessary. Further, I have been out talking with members of the Guard at home and trying to get their sense of what is needed in this dangerous time, and they have never once mentioned something like this. They talk, for example, about body armor. They talk about boots. They don't talk about more F-22s. Suffice it to say, when the Congress is now having a debate about trying to find additional money for health care, for example, to go out and spend close to $2 billion to buy seven more F-22 fighters the Air Force says it doesn't want defies common My home State, for example, would love to hire back police and other essential workers who have been laid off. Instead of building seven planes, we could be restoring infrastructure and developing renewable energy. Again, in my home State, we have had budget shortfalls. We have seen reductions in essential services, law enforcement being one. The debate is not about necessary steps to ensuring a strong national defense. The question is about whether the U.S. Congress wants to spend close to $2 billion to pay for more fighter jets the Air Force does not It is also important to remember that the F-22 is not being purchased for wars the United States is currently fighting. Certainly, the Taliban and Iraqi insurgents do not have an Air Force. The F-22 is being purchased to fight in possible future conflicts with other countries that may have an air force. While I strongly believe the Pentagon ought to be able to prepare for such possibilities, it is the Pentagon that is telling us we don't need these additional F-22s. It is also important to note that the Pentagon has purchased 187 F- 22s. There is not a debate about whether the United States ought to have fighters in our arsenal. The question is whether the Air Force needs 194 of them instead of 187. We have a very good Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates. The Secretary has said that 187 is sufficient to combat current and future threats. He is the one who said that more are We must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of delay to systems that are so expensive and so elaborate that only a small number can be built, and that are then usable only in a narrow range of low probability scenarios. Secretary Gates has hit the nail about as perfectly on the head as one can. He and our country want the strongest defense possible. But there are ways to make better use of that $1.75 billion than on seven I serve on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. I know there are threats to our forces every single day. I see the Senator from Georgia who serves on the Intelligence Committee. He believes strongly about this as well. We need to make sure we are protecting our troops in harm's way, but we have a variety of choices in order to secure the protection our troops have been in need of. I intend to work with Chairman Levin, Secretary Gates, the distinguished Senator from Arizona, and the President to ensure we replace the current F-15 with Last month, I visited with some of the 3,000 members of the Oregon National Guard's 41st brigade combat team, as they trained for their current deployment to Iraq. Not a one of the soldiers told me that their big concern was whether the Air Force would have 194 F-22s instead of 187. They talked to me instead about the best vehicles, the best medical care if they are injured, about the best body armor. Not I am not voting against the F-22. I am voting for the soldier, the taxpayer. They both deserve our government's greatest protection at I urge colleagues to support the Levin-McCain amendment. Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I rise today to address the F-22 program. For the past week as the debate has swirled around on this program I have not spoken on the subject. My colleagues know that I have strongly supported the F-22 program over the past two decades. Why? Because it is without question the world's most advanced fighter aircraft. It's capabilities far outstrip anything else in the world. There simply is When the Advanced Tactical Fighter Program began more than 20 years ago, no one could foresee what the world would look like in 2009. We planned to build 750 F-22s in order to match the Soviet Union's assumed far greater number of advanced fighters. The F-22 was designed with a goal of defeating 10 Soviet fighters apiece. The strategy was that using a combination of stealth and an advanced radar the F-22 would be able to attack Soviet fighters long before the adversary knew they were I am pleased to note that 20 years later as we train with the F-22 our Air Force pilots report that is exactly what it can do. Time after time as we exercise with the F-22, the results are nearly the same. The F-22 defeats all adversaries nearly with the same predictions as the What has changed, however, is that the Soviet Union no longer poses the threat that was assumed by the Defense Department in the 1980s. So then, critics say, why do we need to continue to buy more? We will soon They note that the F-22 hasn't been used in Afghanistan. While that is considered a clear argument that it isn't needed, it is laughable. As far as I know al-Qaida and the Taliban don't have an air force. The F-22 is designed to defeat conventional military forces. It is designed, for example, to counter a conventional attack by an adversary against one of its neighbors. Were the Chinese to attack Taiwan, the F- 22 would provide an incredible counter to the Chinese. The same would be true if a resurgent Russia were to try to reclaim countries in the Baltics. Unless we truly believe that we will never face another nation state in a conventional conflict then the F-22 is indeed necessary. At 187 aircraft, the F-22 provides a very credible deterrent to those nations. Is it sufficient? Perhaps. Will the Joint Strike Fighter replace it, not a chance. The Joint Strike Fighter, we expect, will be a terrific aircraft, but it is designed primarily to attack ground targets. In a battle against the F-22, it would likely lose each engagement. With better trained pilots and tactics, the Joint Strike Fighter could probably give the F-22 a run for its money, but it was never designed to replace the F-22 and should not be viewed as such. To me what is maddening about this debate is the sense that the decision is so clear cut that the F-22 program should be killed that it is only parochial politics that could keep it alive. That is pure The Nation has invested more than $65 billion to develop and buy 187 aircraft. If we choose to buy more F-22s we will do so at a very reasonable price--about $150 million. While that is not cheap by any stretch of the imagination, it is far cheaper than what we paid to initiate the program. And, if we kill the program and decide that we need to restart it in a few years, it is far cheaper than we would have This is not a boondoggle. We don't have critics saying the program is flawed and should be killed. Everyone agrees it is a great aircraft. While some of my colleagues obviously support the program because it means jobs in their States, others like myself who have no F-22 jobs in their States support the program because of its capabilities and their concern for the future. Why then has it become an issue over which to veto a bill? Why are the stakes so high with this program? I have the greatest respect for the President and the current Secretary of Defense. I have supported both in almost every initiative they have advocated. But I see in this case a pattern that I have Time after time our new leaders, both civilian and military, look at a program and see all the reasons why it isn't the right one. For example, in the early days of the Clinton administration the C-17 program was nearly terminated because the production of the aircraft wasn't performing up to expectations. I recall 2 years prior to that the Appropriations Committee recommended a pause in funding for the C- 17, not because we had lost confidence in the program. We still believed in the requirement for the aircraft, but the program wasn't performing. Up to that point, we had appropriated funds for 16 C-17s in total, but not a single one had been delivered, and there were very few coming together on the factory floor in Long Beach. We weren't recommending cancellation, but it served notice that attention was needed. However, the attention that the program received was mostly When the Clinton administration came into office many of the new officials were convinced that the C-17 should be terminated. In that instance the Pentagon mandated a study to determine whether the C-17 was still required. Luckily the conclusion was that yes the plane was still needed and those who were calling for its cancellation, including It was only a few years earlier that Secretary Cheney determined that the V-22 should be terminated. He was justifiably concerned that the price was increasing and that the program was taking longer than planned. It took the concerted effort of the Congress to stand up and say that we would not allow the program to be terminated. Certainly there were those in the Pentagon who agreed with the Secretary, but the I am told that a few years prior to that my good friend Senator Rudman weighed in with Chairman Stevens to overrule the Air Force who wanted to kill the F-117 after the production of only one squadron of aircraft. I should point out that the F-117 was not built in New Hampshire. There might have been some modest amount of work associated with the plane in his state, but the reason that Senator Rudman insisted that we keep buying the F-117 was because of its unique My colleagues all know the history of the B-2 program. It was started classified program in 1981. The Air Force was going to build 132 bombers. We expected it to cost between $20 and $25 billion in total. The contractor built a huge state of the art factory out in the high desert of California to handle the production of the aircraft. Because it was highly classified every precaution had to be taken to protect national security all of which dramatically increased the cost to Clearly the contractor and Air Force were overly optimistic on the cost and schedule of the program. Within 5 years it was clear that the program was not going to be completed within $25 billion. As development delays occurred, costs continued to escalate. The Air Force was unwilling to devote more resources to the program so in a series of moves it consistently delayed production of the aircraft and transferred dollars appropriated to build the aircraft to be used instead to cover higher development costs. By the time I became chairman, it was clear that the program would exceed its budget, but it was also clear that if it were successful it would provide an unmatched capability to this Nation. As costs mounted, the Defense Department determined that it would not be able to purchase all 132 aircraft. First production was cut to 75 and eventually it dropped to 20. In 1996 as the program was being killed, the contractor offered to produce three per year for several years at a price of about $600 million per copy. However, by that time support for the program had eroded so that neither the Pentagon nor the Congress would take up the offer. Instead, by only buying a total of 21 aircraft, we invested over $2 billion per plane making it the most costly aircraft in history. This situation isn't unique to aircraft programs. In the case of shipbuilding, I remember vividly Secretary Cheney's decision to cancel the Seawolf submarine. As a result of that decision, the three Seawolf- class submarines that were eventually built were very expensive. Because we only bought three, the average cost of each submarine was more than $4 billion. Had we built the 29 originally planned, I can only speculate about the cost, but it would certainly have been less than the price we are now paying for its replacement. What is even more galling is that during that time we were still building the capable SSN-688 Los Angeles class submarines and only paying about $800 million apiece for them. Instead of reinvigorating that program, we cancelled the Seawolf program and proceeded with the New Attack submarine, now called the Virginia class, in order to move to a cheaper submarine. Regrettably, I have to report that the cost of the Virginia class submarine is so high that we have only been able to afford to purchase one per year. When I became chairman we were buying four Los Angeles class submarines a year and paying only 1/3 the cost of the Virginia class. Is the Virginia a better submarine? Surely it is. The technological advances that the Nation has developed between the time the Los Angeles subs were designed and this decade have allowed for substantial improvements. Is it better than the Seawolf? That is The pattern I have watched during my tenure is a mix of four things. First, programs are cancelled before or as they reach maturity. Why? Sometimes because new leadership wants to go in a new direction more often, and important costs increase and schedules are delayed which erode the support for the programs. Sometimes programs are cancelled because we believe the promised replacement will be more capable or cheaper. And sometimes we argue times have changed and we don't need them. In a few cases it is clear that the program wasn't performing as For the F-22 some will argue it is too expensive. That was the argument against the V-22 program. Some say we simply don't need any more. That was the argument used to kill the B-2. Would we like to have more B-2s in the inventory today? I, for one, surely would. Others will say the threat doesn't warrant buying more F-22s. This is where I have my gravest concern. Some experts will tell you that we know that potential adversaries are working on fifth generation fighters. If in 5 years the Chinese unveil a new fifth generation fighter and begin to produce it in numbers will we regret the decision I am told that no one is likely to be able to develop and build an F- 22 equivalent aircraft for a generation. The skill and funding required to do so exceeds any foreign nation's ability. But in my view, they might not be able to design an F-22 themselves, but that doesn't mean We were told that the North Koreans were years away from a long range missile, then were surprised when they unveiled the Taepo dong. We were surprised when Pakistan conducted a nuclear test. We were shocked when the Soviet Union collapsed and most Americans were shocked when they learned about al-Qaida after 9/11. if there is one thing that shouldn't surprise us is that we cannot foretell the future. So as my colleagues deliberate on the F-22 program I come down on the side of caution. I believe it makes more sense at this time to continue to produce the program to hedge our bets against the future. To my knowledge there isn't a single worker in the State of Hawaii whose job is dependent on continuing production of the F-22, but I I believe it is unfortunate that the debate on this matter has taken on an overblown proportion. One can make the case that 187 could be sufficient. Our Secretary and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs agree that is the case. But just like the Marines argued for continuing to produce the V-22, the leaders of our Air National Guard and those in charge of flying the aircraft argue that we need more--even though the Defense When some say well, the Air Force leaders say they have enough, I will remind my colleagues that the Air Force said the same thing about When some say we should kill this and move on to the Joint Strike Fighter, I remember the Seawolf debate. We killed that submarine to build a cheaper alternative. Will we do the same thing here and be disappointed in the cost of the so-called alternative? On February 2, 1989, I was selected as the chairman of the Subcommittee on Defense of the Appropriations Committee. For the past 20 years, it has been my distinct honor to serve either as the chairman or the ranking member of this subcommittee. As my colleagues all know, the defense subcommittee has the largest budget of any of our appropriations subcommittees, and to many of us it is probably the most important of our subcommittees. It has required a great deal of my time and attention over the past 20 years. For me it has been a labor of love. I have the greatest respect for the men and women of this Nation who are willing to serve and who guarantee constitutional freedoms for the rest of us. It has been my priority to support their cause during As I consider the F-22, I do so with the past twenty years as my guide. In my opinion what I have learned has taught me to be cautious as we kill programs. Therefore today I will cast my vote to continue Mrs. BOXER. Madam President, I am going to continue to support production of the F-22 Raptor because we are still hearing strong indications from top military leaders that we need additional aircraft. Last month, General Corley, the Commander of the Air Force Air Combat Command, wrote that ending procurement of the F-22 would put our ability to execute our nation's military strategy at ``high risk'' over In addition, LTG Harry M. Wyatt III, the Director of the Air National Guard, has stated that these aircraft are particularly important for homeland defense missions, including addressing potential threats from GEN Merrill McPeak, retired, the former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, also recently added that ending F-22 procurement ``is a real mistake,'' and that ``we certainly need some figure well above 200.'' I am also not prepared to vote to end production because I have yet to see a conclusive study indicating that 187 F-22s are enough. In fact, as late as May 19 of this year, GEN Norman A. Schwartz, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, told the House Armed Services Committee that The United States has made a significant investment in the F-22 program. Before terminating it, we must see in unequivocal terms how the defense planning process has determined that requirements and The next Quadrennial Defense Review--QDR--which outlines our national security strategy--is scheduled for submission by the Department of Defense in early 2010. This important document shapes how our military will respond to threats to our national security. The timing of today's I will feel more confident making a decision on this important program after reading the QDR, as it will shape our national security strategy for years to come. As GEN James Cartwright, the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said during his confirmation hearing for his second 2-year term, ``The military requirement right now [for the F-22A] is associated with the strategy that we are laying out in the While I realize that there are compelling arguments on both sides of this issue, I do not believe we have enough information at this time to shut down the F-22 line and terminate the program at 187 aircraft. Mr. CHAMBLISS. How much time remains on both sides? The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia has 11 minutes; the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I am not sure how many other Senators want to speak or whether the opponents have speakers remaining on their Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, Senator Inhofe indicated a desire to speak. He is tied up in an EPW Committee hearing. He may be able to get Mr. LEVIN. We would like to be at the end of the line, Senator McCain Mr. CHAMBLISS. I will be happy to make some comments. Then Senator McCain and Senator Dodd and the Senator from Michigan could close it out. If Senator Inhofe comes in, we will give him a couple of minutes. Madam President, would the Chair notify me when I have used 5 Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, I want to make a couple of quick comments relative to some of what has been said. First, with regard to Senator Wyden's comments concerning the National Guard, sure, all of us want to make sure we equip our Guard, our Reserve, as well as our active-duty force with all the needs they have. I would cite him to the letter of General Wyatt, who is the head of the Air Force Guard. General Wyatt says the F-22 is uniquely qualified to fill the needs the Guard has for its national security mission. To even slightly indicate that the Guard has issues with this program is simply not correct. The Guard is on record as being a strong supporter of this program. I have a letter from retired GEN David Bockel, retired from the United States Army. He now is the acting executive director of the Reserve Officers Association. Let me quote part of this: War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22s is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede the U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of F-22s required to ensure a strong defense is 250. I ask unanimous consent that the letter of retired General Bockel be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Chambliss: The Reserve Officers Association, representing 65,000 Reserve Component members, supports additional procurement of the F-22 Raptor Aircraft. ROA urges Congress to authorize and appropriate funds for continued War plans of the United States are predicated upon technological air dominance to provide asymmetric advantage for victory. Military experts believe the current cap of 187 F-22 is an inadequate number of aircraft to ensure no future threat can impede U.S. air dominance. The minimum number of Potential adversary nations are committed to producing their own fifth-generation aircraft in the immediate future. Not providing further funding for this crucial weapons system places at risk our nation's ability to meet known and near future threats. The United States can ill afford a fighter Thank you for your efforts on this key issue, and other support to the military that you have shown in the past. Please feel free to have your staff call ROA's legislative director, Marshall Hanson, with any question or issue you Mr. CHAMBLISS. I also have quoted earlier the comments by an active- duty general, a guy I consider a great American hero, not just because he falls in that category of wearing the uniform of the United States, but he is standing up to the personnel at the Pentagon. He is saying: For an active-duty general to do that takes significant courage. This is a guy I want in the foxhole with me. That is General Corley, commander of Air Combat Command, who very clearly says in a letter that we have previously entered into the Record that a fleet of 187 F-22s puts execution of our national military strategy at high risk in the near to midterm and that the minimum number of F-22s we need, in his I want to also talk for a minute about Senator McCain's comments on the cost. This is an expensive weapons system, but it is also the most sophisticated weapons system ever designed by mankind. Most importantly, it is doing its job. It is doing its job in a very professional way. Instead of costing the $350 million Senator McCain stated in his earlier statements, because of a multiyear procurement contract we entered into between the Pentagon and the Air Force, as approved by this body--and I know Senator McCain objected to that and I understand that--but by a vote of 70 to 28, that multiyear contract was approved by this body as well as by the House. As a result, instead of paying the $350 million per copy he alluded to, we are today, under that multiyear contract, paying $140 million a copy. That is in comparison to the $200 million a copy that will be paid for every single F-35 we are buying in this budget. The figure for 200 F-35s in There are a number of people who are watching this debate out there today. Certainly those folks at the Pentagon are anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The White House is anxiously awaiting the results of the vote. The Chinese are anxiously awaiting this vote. Let me tell colleagues why. I want to quote from an article of July 19 from a gentleman named Robert D. Fisher, Jr., who is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center. He writes: Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. Government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it I ask unanimous consent that that article be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in If Japan's long-standing effort to acquire the Lockheed- Martin F-22 Raptor fifth-generation superfighter falls victim to Washington power politics, the United States may inadvertently encourage an Asian arms race over which it may It is fortunate for the United States that in what may be the last year a deal is possible, Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Daniel K. Inouye and his supporters have decided to lead an effort to reverse a 1998 law barring Through Mr. Inouye's efforts Japan now knows a slightly degraded export model of the Raptor may take five years to develop and cost about $290 million a plane for about 40, compared to the estimated $150 million the U.S. Air Force Japan's long-standing quest to obtain the F-22, however, may be shot down amid the intense political struggle over the F-22s very future. President Obama and Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates have made termination of F-22 production at 187 planes a symbolic goal of their effort to cut defense spending and reorient U.S. military strategy. This has been challenged recently by the House Armed Services Committee, which approved the production of 12 more Raptors, and a Senate committee that approved production of seven more. However, the administration immediately threatened a veto, and the F-22's opponents are working hard to ensure that After 2011, the F-22's costs will grow significantly, so Japan and its U.S. supporters have little time to nail down a deal. However, some U.S. officials have long doubted that Japan can afford to pay for the F-22, which is why the George W. Bush and Obama administrations have not seriously promoted the F-22 for Japan. Mr. Gates reportedly favors selling Tokyo the smaller, somewhat less capable and less expensive While Japan may also purchase the F-35, there are two important reasons Washington should fully support Japan's goal to acquire the F-22. First, the F-22 will be the only combat aircraft capable of countering China's expected fifth- generation fighters. Second, selling Japan the Raptor may become a critical nonnuclear means for Washington to help Japan deter a China on its way to becoming a military superpower by the 2020s. If Washington cannot provide decisive nonnuclear means to deter China, Japan may more quickly consider decisive deterrents such as missiles and Though the Chinese government says next to nothing and the U.S. government says very little, what is known about China's fifth-generation fighter program is disturbing. Both of China's fighter manufacturers, the Shenyang and Chengdu Aircraft corporations, are competing to build a heavy fifth- generation fighter, and there are serious indicators China may be working on a medium-weight fifth-generation fighter similar to the F-35. China can be expected to put a fifth- generation fighter on its future aircraft carriers, and it capabilities such as anti-ship ballistic missiles, its buildup of nuclear-missile and anti-missile capabilities and space-warfare weapons will increasingly undermine U.S. strategic guarantees for Japan. China's development of long- range anti-air and surface-to-air missiles also threatens the electronic support aircraft critical to the ``networked'' U.S. air-warfare paradigm, meaning that jet fighters could quickly lose force-multiplying radar aircraft, tankers and communication satellites. As such, Japan is correct to prefer the F-22, which reportedly can fly 300 to 400 mph faster and two miles higher than the F-35--an aircraft optimized for If Japan is serious about the F-22 and its military security, it will have to pay for both. But if Washington is serious about sustaining a strategic alliance, it should sell the Raptor to Japan and be prepared to do more as China's Mr. CHAMBLISS. There is another group watching very anxiously out there. It is a group of men and women who wear the uniform of the U.S. Air Force. They are lieutenants, captains, and majors. They are watching this anxiously because they are saying to themselves: I signed up to be a part of a U.S. Air Force that believes in putting men and women in cockpits, men and women who are going to carry the fight to the enemy. What am I hearing from Members of Congress? What am I hearing from the leadership at the Pentagon? That we are going to move away from the most advanced fighter in the world today and move to a smaller fighter? That we are going to move away from fighters maybe even altogether by going to UAVs? Is this the Air Force I signed up I can tell my colleagues why they are anxiously awaiting the outcome. They have talked to me time and time again about the fact that they are concerned about their future in the U.S. Air Force. The worst thing we can do is to discourage those brave men and women who want to make a career of the Air Force and want to be wearing the two, three, and four stars one of these days. I assure my colleagues those lieutenants and those captains and those majors are watching what this body does from a policy standpoint today. They know where their leadership at the Pentagon is coming from. They don't like what they are hearing. They are now looking to Congress to fulfill the role that John Hamre, the director of CSIS, has said time and time again, and that is to objectively review the budget the Pentagon sends to the hill. We are in the process of doing that and exercising the type of oversight we I urge my colleagues to vote against this amendment. Mr. INHOFE. Madam President, I know almost everything that can be said has been said. Having served on the Armed Services Committee for quite some time and having watched this, what is kind of worrisome to me is that when we started out the F-22 program, the fifth generation fighter program, at that time they were talking about 750. Then the numbers started coming down and approached, I guess, 243. The Air Force officials have repeatedly stated that no fewer than that would be My concern has been the same concern I have when we are talking about ground capability, when we see countries such as China and Russia passing us up in areas. I will not bring up the NLOS cannon right now. But there are many places where our prospective enemies have better equipment than we do. We do know China has their J-12s; and Russia, I believe they are calling theirs the T-50s. We do know those are fifth- generation fighters. It is very disturbing to me that we would consider stopping at this point when this is not going to be adequate to get us So I certainly support the effort to maintain those seven. Quite frankly, when Senator Chambliss offered the amendment to expand it by seven, I was thinking we should really be shooting for more, and I think he agreed with that. However, apparently with the exports out there and with the additional seven that were put in, in the committee, that would be enough to keep the line open. So I strongly support the Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? The PRESIDING OFFICER. Fourteen minutes 45 seconds. Mr. LEVIN. Well, if the Senator from Arizona would go, and then Mr. CHAMBLISS. Madam President, how much time do we have remaining? Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, we would be glad to yield a couple more Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 additional minutes to the Mr. McCAIN. Three, four. I ask the Senator, do you want to go ahead Mr. DODD. Madam President, I will wait a couple of minutes. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I will be fairly brief. This argument has been made, and we pretty well covered most of the issue. I would remind my colleagues that all the things we do are a matter of choice have unlimited amounts of funding, obviously, and if you spend money on one project, then obviously you may have to spend less on another. That is the case of the F-35, if we do not eliminate this $1.75 billion. But most importantly, I want to point out again, this amendment is more than just about a weapons system. This amendment is about whether we will stop doing business as usual; that is, continuing to fund weapons systems that are no longer needed and unnecessary. We are not saying the F-22 is not a good aircraft. We are saying it is time to end The President of the United States has threatened to veto this entire bill. That is not good for the men and women in the military to have to go through this whole process over again. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, and, very importantly, the Secretary of Defense, who has served now under two Presidents and has gained the respect and appreciation of all of us for his service--Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that Secretary of Defense Gates' speech last July 16 to the Economic Club of Chicago be There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in U.S. Department of Defense, Office of the Assistant (As Delivered by Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates, Chicago, IL, Thank you, Secretary Daley, for that kind introduction. It's an honor to be at the Economic Club of Chicago. I certainly appreciate the special arrangements you made to I thank all the distinguished citizens of this great city who came here today. I am mindful I am speaking in the adopted hometown of my boss. President Obama sends his greetings, as do Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod and the rest of the Chicago crew. They are no doubt discovering that The issue that brings me here today is central to the security of all Americans: the future of the United States military: How it should be organized, equipped--and funded-- in the years ahead, to win the wars we are in while being prepared for threats on or beyond the horizon. Earlier this enthusiastically agreed--that we needed to fundamentally reshape the priorities of America's defense establishment and reform the way the Pentagon does business--in particular, the weapons we buy, and how we buy them. Above all, to prepare to wage future wars, rather than continuing the habit of I am here on relatively short notice to speak publicly about these matters because Congress is, as we speak, debating the president's defense budget request for the next fiscal year, a budget request that implements many needed reforms and changes. Most of the proposals--especially those that increase support for the troops, their families, and the war effort--have been widely embraced. However, some of the crucial reforms that deal with major weapons programs have met with a less than enthusiastic reaction in the Congress, among defense contractors, and within some quarters of the Pentagon itself. And so I thought it appropriate to address some of these controversial issues here--in a place that is, appropriately enough not only the adopted home of our Commander-in-Chief, but also a symbol of America's industrial First, some context on how we got to this point. President Obama's budget proposal is, I believe, the nation's first truly 21st century defense budget. It explicitly recognizes that over the last two decades the nature of conflict has fundamentally changed--and that much of America's defense establishment has yet to fully adapt to the security realities of the post-Cold War era and this complex and During the 1990s, the United States celebrated the demise of the Soviet Union and the so-called ``end of history'' by making deep cuts in the funding for, and above all, the size of the U.S. military, including a 40 percent drop in the size of the Active Army. This took place even as a post-Cold War world grew less stable, less predictable, and more turbulent. The U.S. military, with some advances in areas such as precision weaponry, essentially became a smaller version of the force that held off the Soviets in Germany for decades and expelled Iraq from Kuwait in 1991. There was little appetite for, or interest in, preparing for what we call ``irregular warfare''--campaigns against insurgents, terrorists, militias, and other non-state groups. This was the bipartisan reality both in the White House and in Of course, after September 11th, some things did change. The base defense budget--not counting spending for the wars-- increased by some 70 percent over the next eight years. During this period there were important changes in the way U.S. forces were organized, based and deployed, and investments were made in new technologies such as unmanned aerial vehicles. However, when all was said and done, the way the Pentagon selected, evaluated, developed, and paid for major new weapons systems and equipment did not fundamentally Indeed, the kinds of equipment, programs, and capabilities needed to protect our troops and defeat the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan were not the highest priority of much of the Defense Department, even after several years of war. I learned about this lack of bureaucratic priority for the wars we are in the hard way--during my first few months on the job as the Iraq surge was getting underway. The challenges I faced in getting what our troops needed in the field stood in stark contrast to the support provided conventional modernization programs--weapons designed to fight other modern armies, navies, and air forces--that had been in the pipeline for many years and had acquired a loyal and enthusiastic following in the Pentagon, in the Congress, and in industry. The most pressing needs of today's warfighter--on the battlefield, in the hospital, or at home-- simply lacked place and power at the table when priorities were being set and long-term budget decisions were being So the most important shift in President Obama's first defense budget was to increase and institutionalize funding for programs that directly support those fighting America's wars and their families. Those initiatives included more helicopter support, air lift, armored vehicles, personnel protection equipment, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets for our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition, we also increased funding for programs that provide long-term support to military families and treatment for the signature wounds of this conflict--such as traumatic But, while the world of terrorists and other violent extremists--of insurgents and IEDs--is with us for the long haul, we also recognize that another world has emerged. Growing numbers of countries and groups are employing the latest and increasingly accessible technologies to put the United States at risk in disruptive and unpredictable ways. Other large nations--known in Pentagon lingo as ``near- peers''--are modernizing their militaries in ways that could, over time, pose a challenge to the United States. In some cases, their programs take the form of traditional weapons systems such as more advanced fighter aircraft, missiles, and But other nations have learned from the experience of Saddam Hussein's military in the first and second Gulf wars-- that it is ill-advised, if not suicidal, to fight a conventional war head-to-head against the United States: fighter-to-fighter, ship-to-ship, tank-to-tank. They also learned from a bankrupted Soviet Union not to try to outspend us or match our overall capabilities. Instead, they are developing asymmetric means that take advantage of new technologies--and our vulnerabilities--to disrupt our lines of communication and our freedom of movement, to deny us access, and to narrow our military options and strategic At the same time, insurgents or militias are acquiring or seeking precision weapons, sophisticated communications, cyber capabilities, and even weapons of mass destruction. The Lebanese extremist group Hezbollah currently has more rockets and high-end munitions--many quite sophisticated and In sum, the security challenges we now face, and will in the future, have changed, and our thinking must likewise change. The old paradigm of looking at potential conflict as unconventional, high end or low--is no longer relevant. And as a result, the Defense Department needs to think about and prepare for war in a profoundly different way than what we have been accustomed to throughout the better part of the What is needed is a portfolio of military capabilities with maximum versatility across the widest possible spectrum of conflict. As a result, we must change the way we think and the way we plan--and fundamentally reform--the way the Pentagon does business and buys weapons. It simply will not do to base our strategy solely on continuing to design and buy--as we have for the last 60 years--only the most technologically advanced versions of weapons to keep up with or stay ahead of another superpower adversary--especially one To get there we must break the old habit of adding layer upon layer of cost, complexity, and delay to systems that are number can be built, and that are then usable only in a We must also get control of what is called ``requirements creep''--where more features and capabilities are added to a given piece of equipment, often to the point of absurdity. The most flamboyant example of this phenomenon is the new presidential helicopter-- what President Obama referred to as defense procurement ``run amok.'' Once the analysis and requirements were done, we ended up with a helicopter that cost nearly half a billion dollars each and enabled the president to, among other things, cook dinner while in flight We also had to take a hard look at a number of weapons programs that were grotesquely over budget, were having major performance problems, were reliant on unproven technology, or were becoming increasingly detached from real world scenarios--as if September 11th and the wars that followed manufacturing sectors have at some point probably faced some combination of these challenges in your own businesses. But in the defense arena, we faced an additional, usually insurmountable obstacle to bring rationality to budget and acquisition decisions. Major weapons programs, irrespective of their problems or performance, have a habit of continuing long after they are wanted or needed, recalling Ronald Reagan's old joke that a government program represents the closest thing we'll ever see to eternal life on this earth. First, there is the Congress, which is understandably concerned, especially in these tough economic times, about protecting jobs in certain states and congressional districts. There is the defense and aerospace industry, which has an obvious financial stake in the survival and growth of And there is the institutional military itself--within the Pentagon, and as expressed through an influential network of retired generals and admirals, some of whom are paid consultants to the defense industry, and some who often are As a result, many past attempts by my predecessors to end failing or unnecessary programs went by the wayside. Nonetheless I determined in a triumph of hope over experience, and the president agreed, that given the urgency of the wars we are in, the daunting global security environment we will inhabit for decades to come, and our country's economic problems, we simply cannot afford to move To this end, the president's budget request cut, curtailed, or ended a number of conventional modernization programs-- satellites, ground vehicles, helicopters, fighters--that were either performing poorly or in excess to real-world needs. Conversely, future-oriented programs where the U.S. was relatively underinvested were accelerated or received more For example, we must sustain and continually improve our specialized strategic deterrent to ensure that our--and our allies'--security is always protected against nuclear-armed adversaries. In an initiative little noticed, the President's program includes money to begin a new generation of ballistic missile submarines and nearly $700 million in additional funds to secure and assure America's nuclear deterrent. Some of our proposed reforms are meeting real resistance. They are called risky. Or not meeting a certain military requirement. Or lacking in study and analysis. Those three words--requirements, risk, and, analysis--are commonly invoked in defense matters. If applied correctly, they help us make sound decisions. I've found, however, that more often they have become the holy trinity of the status quo or In truth, preparing for conflict in the 21st century means investing in truly new concepts and new technologies. It means taking into account all the assets and capabilities we can bring to the fight. It means measuring those capabilities against the real threats posed by real world adversaries with real limitations, not threats conjured up from enemies with unlimited time, unlimited resources, and unlimited Air superiority and missile defense--two areas where the budget has attracted the most criticism--provide case studies. Let me start with the controversy over the F-22 fighter jet. We had to consider, when preparing for a future potential conventional state-on-state conflict, what is the right mix of the most advanced fighter aircraft and other weapons to deal with the known and projected threats to U.S. air supremacy? For example, we now have unmanned aerial vehicles that can simultaneously perform intelligence, reconnaissance, and surveillance missions as well as deliver precision-guided bombs and missiles. The president's budget request would buy 48 of the most advanced UAVs--aircraft that have a greater range than some of our manned fighters, in addition to the ability to loiter for hours over a target. We also took into consideration the capabilities of the newest manned combat aircraft program, the stealth F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F- 22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F-22, and can be produced in quantity with all the advantages produced by economies of scale--some 500 will be bought over the next five years, more than 2,400 over the life of the program. And we already have eight foreign development partners. It has had development problems to be sure, as has every advanced military aircraft ever fielded. But if properly supported, the F-35 will be the backbone of America's tactical aviation fleet for decades to come if--and it is a big if--money is not drained away to spend on other aircraft that our military leadership considers of lower Having said that, the F-22 is clearly a capability we do need--a niche, silver-bullet solution for one or two potential scenarios--specifically the defeat of a highly advanced enemy fighter fleet. The F-22, to be blunt, does not make much sense anyplace else in the spectrum of conflict. Nonetheless, supporters of the F-22 lately have promoted its use for an ever expanding list of potential missions. These range from protecting the homeland from seaborne cruise missiles to, as one retired general recommended on TV, using F-22s to go after Somali pirates who in many cases are teenagers with AK-47s--a job we already know is better done at much less cost by three Navy SEALs. These are examples of how far-fetched some of the arguments have become for a program that has cost $65 billion--and counting--to produce 187 aircraft, not to mention the thousands of uniformed Air Force positions that were sacrificed to help pay for it. In light of all these factors, and with the support of the Air Force leadership, I concluded that 183--the program of record since 2005, plus four more added in the FY 09 supplemental--was a sufficient number of F-22s and The reaction from parts of Washington has been predictable for many of the reasons I described before. The most substantive criticism is that completing the F-22 program means we are risking the future of U.S. air supremacy. To assess this risk, it is worth looking at real-world potential threat and assessing the capabilities that other countries Consider that by 2020, the United States is projected to have nearly 2,500 manned combat aircraft of all kinds. Of those, nearly 1,100 will be the most advanced fifth generation F-35s and F-22s. China, by contrast, is projected to have no fifth generation aircraft by 2020. And by 2025, the gap only widens. The U.S. will have approximately 1,700 of the most advanced fifth generation fighters versus a handful of comparable aircraft for the Chinese. Nonetheless, some portray this scenario as a dire threat to America's Correspondingly, the recent tests of a possible nuclear device and ballistic missiles by North Korea brought scrutiny to the changes in this budget that relate to missile defense. The risk to national security has again been invoked, mainly because the total missile defense budget was reduced from In fact, where the threat is real or growing--from rogue states or from short-to-medium range missiles that can hit our deployed troops or our allies and friends--this budget sustains or increases funding. Most of the cuts in this area come from two programs that are designed to shoot down enemy missiles immediately after launch. This was a great idea, but the aspiration was overwhelmed by the escalating costs, operational problems, and technological challenges. Consider the example of one of those programs--the Airborne Laser. This was supposed to put high-powered lasers on a fleet of 747s. After more than a decade of research and development, we have yet to achieve a laser with enough power to knock down a missile in boost phase more than 50 miles from the launch pad--thus requiring these huge planes to loiter deep in enemy air space to have a feasible chance at a direct hit. Moreover, the 10 to 20 aircraft needed would cost about $1.5 billion each plus tens of millions of dollars each year for maintenance and operating costs. The program and operating concept were fatally flawed and it was time to face reality. So we curtailed the existing program while keeping the prototype aircraft for research and development. Many of these decisions--like the one I just described-- were more clear-cut than others. But all of them, insofar as they involved hundreds of billions of dollars and the security of the American people, were treated with the utmost seriousness by the senior civilian and military leadership of the Pentagon. An enormous amount of thought, study, recommendations including the National Defense Strategy I Some have called for yet more analysis before making any of the decisions in this budget. But when dealing with programs that were clearly out of control, performing poorly, and excess to the military's real requirements, we did not need more debate, or more delay--in effect, paralysis through analysis. What was needed were three things--common sense, political will, and tough decisions. Qualities too often in All of these decisions involved considering trade-offs, balancing risks, and setting priorities--separating nice-to- haves from have-to-haves, requirements from appetites. We cannot expect to eliminate risk and danger by simply spending more--especially if we're spending on the wrong things. But more to the point, we all--the military, the Congress, and industry--have to face some iron fiscal realities. The last defense budget submitted by President George W. Bush for Fiscal Year 2009 was $515 billion. In that budget the Bush administration proposed--at my recommendation--a Fiscal Year 2010 defense budget of $524 billion. The budget just submitted by President Obama for FY 2010 was $534 billion. Even after factoring inflation, and some of the war costs that were moved from supplemental appropriations, President Obama's defense request represents a modest but real increase over the last Bush budget. I know. I submitted them both. In total, by one estimate, our budget adds up to about what the entire rest of the world combined spends on defense. Only in the parallel universe that is Washington, D.C., would that be considered ``gutting'' defense. The fact is that if the defense budget had been even higher, my recommendations to the president with respect to troubled programs would have been the same--for all the reasons I described earlier. There is a more fundamental point: If the Department of Defense can't figure out a way to defend the United States on a budget of more than half a trillion dollars a year, then our problems are much bigger than anything that can be cured by buying a few more ships What is important is to have a budget baseline with a steady, sustainable, and predictable rate of growth that avoids extreme peaks and valleys that are enormously harmful to sound budgeting. From the very first defense budget I submitted for President Bush in January 2007, I have warned against doing what America has done multiple times over the last 90 years by slashing defense spending after a major conflict. The war in Iraq is winding down, and one day so too will the conflict in Afghanistan. When that day comes, the nation will again face pressure to cut back on defense spending, as we always have. It is simply the nature of the beast. And the higher our base budget is now, the harder it will be to sustain these necessary programs, and the more So where do we go from here? Authorization for more F-22s is in both versions of the defense bill working its way through the Congress. The president has indicated that he has real red lines in this budget, including the F-22. Some might ask: Why threaten a veto and risk a confrontation over a The grim reality is that with regard to the budget we have entered a zero-sum game. Every defense dollar diverted to fund excess or unneeded capacity--whether for more F-22s or anything else--is a dollar that will be unavailable to take care of our people, to win the wars we are in, to deter potential adversaries, and to improve capabilities in areas where America is underinvested and potentially vulnerable. That is a risk I cannot accept and I will not take. And, with regard to something like the F-22, irrespective of whether the number of aircraft at issue is 12 planes or 200, if we can't bring ourselves to make this tough but straightforward decision--reflecting the judgment of two very different presidents, two different secretaries of defense, two chairmen of the joint chiefs of staff, and the current Air Force Secretary and Chief of Staff, where do we draw the line? And if not now, when? If we can't get this right--what on earth can we get right? It is time to draw the line on doing Defense business as usual. The President has drawn that line. And that red line is a veto. And it is real. On a personal note, I joined CIA more than 40 years ago to professional career in government I have generally been known as a hawk on national security. One criticism of me when I was at CIA was that I overestimated threats to the security Well, I haven't changed. I did not molt from a hawk into a dove on January 20, 2009. I continue to believe, as I always have, that the world is, and always will be, a dangerous and hostile place for my country with many who would do America harm and who hate everything we are and stand for. But, the nature of the threats to us has changed. And so too should the way our military is organized and equipped to meet them. I believe--along with the senior military leadership of this nation--that the defense budget we proposed to President Obama and that he sent to Congress is the best we could design to protect the United States now and in the future. The best we could do to protect our men and women in uniform, to give them the tools they need to deter our enemies, and to win our wars today and tomorrow. We stand by this reform A final thought. I arrived in Washington 43 years ago this summer. Of all people, I am well aware of the realities of Washington and know that things do not change overnight. After all, the influence of politics and parochial interests in defense matters is as old as the Republic itself. Henry Knox, the first secretary of war, was charged with building the first American fleet. To get the support of Congress, Knox eventually ended up with six frigates being built in six But the stakes today are very high--with the nation at war, and a security landscape steadily growing more dangerous and unpredictable. I am deeply concerned about the long-term challenges facing our defense establishment--and just as concerned that the political state of play does not reflect the reality that major reforms are needed, or that tough We stand at a crossroads. We simply cannot risk continuing down the same path--where our spending and program priorities are increasingly divorced from the very real threats of today and the growing ones of tomorrow. These threats demand that all of our nation's leaders rise above the politics and parochialism that have too often plagued considerations of our nation's defense--from industry to interest groups, from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, from one end of Pennsylvania Avenue to the other. The time has come to draw a line and take a stand against the business-as-usual approach to national defense. We must all fulfill our obligation to the American people to ensure that our country remains safe and strong. Just as our men and women in uniform are doing their duty to this end, we in Washington must now do ours. Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I am a student of history, and there is one particular President whom I have grown, along with historians, to appreciate more and more for his two terms as President of the United States; that is, Dwight David Eisenhower. We were at peace during President Eisenhower's term, and many believe that perhaps the war in Vietnam might have been avoided if we had heeded his wise counsel. There are many things President Eisenhower did to contribute to this On several occasions, I have reread his farewell speech of January 17, 1961. In his speech, President Eisenhower said: In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex I would only add to President Eisenhower's farewell address to the Nation--which is compelling in many ways--that the words should be changed from ``military-industrial complex'' to ``military-industrial- What we are seeing here, with the advice and counsel of our President, of our Secretary of Defense, of our uniformed military, with rare exception, is a recommendation that we stop with this aircraft and build another--not that we stop building fighter aircraft for our inventory, not that we stop defending this Nation with weapons systems we need. We are even defending a weapons system's continued production that has never flown in the two wars in which we are engaged. So I urge my colleagues to understand the impact of this amendment. If we are able to succeed, it is going to send a signal that we are stopping business as usual, and we must move forward providing the men and women with the necessary means to win the struggles we are in throughout the world, especially two wars. So I urge my colleagues to understand that sacrifices will be made. Jobs will be lost. It will cause disruption in some communities. But our first obligation is the defense of this Nation and the use of scarce defense dollars in the I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. Mr. DODD. Madam President, I have 2 minutes; is that correct? Mr. DODD. Madam President, first of all, let me begin where I did a few moments ago; that is, with my great respect for Carl Levin and John Let me begin with a point my friend from Arizona has made. There is nothing more important than the national security of our Nation. It is that very argument which brings those of us on this side of the table in support of this program and in opposition to this amendment. This program is a critically important program to maintain superiority--not parity but superiority--which has always been our goal in protecting our national security interests. It was the very Pentagon itself which advocated we move forward with this program only 36 months ago. Obviously, people can change their minds. But over the months, when they were preparing for the needs of our Nation, it was the Commission on the Future of Aerospace, authorized by this Congress, which concluded the following. They said that ``the Nation immediately reverse the decline in and promote the growth of a scientifically and technologically trained U.S. aerospace workforce,'' adding that ``the breakdown of America's intellectual and industrial capacity is a threat to national security and our capability to continue as a world It was the Pentagon, only 36 months ago in their Quadrennial Review, that said the following--and they said in this report--that: The F-22 production should be extended through fiscal year 2010 with a multiyear acquisition contract to ensure the Department does not have a gap in There are reports that the F-35 could be delayed an additional 11 months--what we have already heard about. That creates a gap of 5 years that we are talking about. The danger of losing not just any jobs, anywhere from 25,000 to 90,000 aerospace workers is not insignificant. Four days ago, we were warned there has been in excess of a 15- percent decline in our industrial capacity in the aerospace industry. This will hit us even further. The ability to have a workforce capable of building these aircraft we need in the 21st century is at risk. That is why the issue not only of the technical capability of the aircraft but the workforce to produce it is at stake with this amendment. And I say that respectfully. But we have this gap in production, which we have been warned about now by the Pentagon--not by the industry itself, by the Pentagon, by the very Commission this Congress authorized to determine what our capacities were and the industrial capacity in aerospace. We are defying both reports and both recommendations by canceling this program at this number and placing at risk the future generation of superior aircraft that we need in the 21st century. So again, Madam President, I urge my colleagues, respectfully, to reject this amendment. There is a compromise, in my view, available to end up with a number far less than the originally projected numbers. But to cancel the program prematurely and create the gap in our production capabilities is a great danger for our Nation, not to mention these jobs which are critically important to our Nation and its For those reasons, I urge the rejection of the amendment. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, how much time remains? Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I commend the leaders of the committee. I also commend Senator Chambliss and Senator Dodd for their Herculean efforts here to try to stave off the closure of the line. I try to put myself in the shoes of others when I take a position on an issue. What I say comes from the heart and not because of a lack of respect for the efforts they have shown in support of their constituents. We have just come out of 8 years where we have seen our national debt double. We have incurred as much new debt for our country over the last 8 years as we did in the previous 208 years. We are looking, this year, at a 1-year deficit higher than any in the history of our country. It If you go back to 2001 and look at the cost overruns for major weapons systems, in 2001 it was about $45 billion. Last year, that number had grown to almost $300 billion. We say to our folks who are running the Pentagon, the Department of Defense: Tell us which weapons systems you need and those you do not. And Secretary Gates has said very clearly, as Gordon England did as well, his deputy, and the last President and this President: We do not need more F-22s. We have F-15s. We have F-16s. We have F-18s. Before too many more years, we will have My hope is we will be smart enough--if people are displaced, if the F-22 is not continued in production--my hope is we will be smart enough, since Lockheed has a role in building the F-35, some of the folks--hands that can build an F-22 can certainly help build F-35s. I The last thing I would ask everyone to keep in mind--as an old naval flight officer, I used to think about and I still think about how much it costs to fly an aircraft for an hour. It is anywhere from $20,000 to The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired. Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, in terms of the alleged gap, there is no gap. The QDR said we should be building fighters, F-22 production, into fiscal year 2010. As a matter of fact, what we are now doing is exceeding that production with F-35s. We have 30 F-35s in this fiscal year 2010 budget. There is no gap in fighter production. As to whether the F-35 is a capable fighter, let me just read from The F-35 is 10 to 15 years newer than the F-22, carries a much larger suite of weapons, and is superior in a number of areas--most importantly, air-to-ground missions such as destroying sophisticated enemy air defenses. It is a versatile aircraft, less than half the total cost of the F- The F-22 is costing an awful lot more than has been represented here because they are asking now, if this amendment is defeated, that we would be spending $1.75 billion for seven F-22s, which is approximately $250 million a copy for the ones the opponents of this amendment want The President of the United States, the last President of the United States, the previous one; two Secretaries of Defense, this one and the previous one; two Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Secretary of the Air Force and the Chief of Staff of the Air Force say it is time to end production of the F-22 to move into greater production of the F-35 which will serve three services, not just one. If not now, when? If not now, when? When will we end production of a weapons system, if not now, when we have both President Obama and President Bush trying to end it, Secretaries of Defense trying to end it, Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs trying to end the production of the F- 22? We must now do what is sensible, that which is requested by Secretary Gates, not because he is saluting the Commander in Chief, as has been suggested. He is not just saluting the Commander in Chief; he feels deep in his gut that we must change the way we do business. We must finally bring some of these systems to an end. That is why Secretary Gates so passionately believes we must bring production of the F-22 to an end and move into greater production of the F-35--more F-35s produced in this budget than would be produced of the F-22 if Madam President, I don't know if there is any more time. If there is, I yield back the remainder of my time, and I ask for the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 1469. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy) and the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 58, nays 40, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote. Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in Thereupon, the Senate, at 12:39 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and reassembled when called to order by the Acting President pro tempore. NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010--Continued The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I will make some brief remarks here, and at the conclusion we will determine whether there is an agreement on the other side so I can go ahead and lay down an amendment. But first I want to discuss what that amendment will be. It is amendment No. 1628, and in a moment I will seek to offer it and get it pending. It is an amendment I introduced with Senator Lieberman, Senator Bayh, and Like other Members of this body, we have watched recent events unfold in Iran with great concern. This year began with talk of warming ties and potentially reestablishing contact with Iran; that we would no longer be afraid to talk to Iran and perhaps to even reach some kinds of agreements. In recent months, however, the Iranian regime has continued its support of terrorism, its illegal nuclear weapons program in defiance of its NPT obligations, and its engagement in violent and While the administration has made clear its intention to continue to pursue high-level talks with Iran, an overture which the regime has not seen fit to even respond, the President has indicated that the window for Iran to negotiate and demonstrate progress toward complying with its international obligations is not open indefinitely. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all In May, the President indicated that Iran would have until December to show meaningful improvement. More recently, French President Nicolas Sarkozy said on behalf of the G8 nations that they will give Iran until September 2009 to agree to negotiations with respect to its nuclear If negotiations do not prove fruitful, the United States must be ready to act quickly to increase pressure on Iran to end its support for terrorist groups and its illegal nuclear program. The Kyl-Lieberman amendment expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should sanction the Iranian Central Bank if, by December, Iran has not verifiably halted its uranium enrichment activities, as well as come into full compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation By sanctioning the Central Bank of Iran--Bank Markazi--our Nation would send the message that we will use all methods at our disposal to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and oppose The case against the Iranian Central Bank is strong. It is knee-deep in the regime's illicit activities. Last year, Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Robert Kimmit revealed that between 2001 and 2006 the bank had moved $50 million from banks in London to Hezbollah front organizations in Beirut. Hezbollah, of course, is a terrorist organization. It also processes transactions for Iranian banks that already face U.S. sanctions. The Central Bank of Iran is instrumental in helping Iranian banks--the very ones this body voted overwhelmingly to sanction in 2007--to avoid sanctions. In March 2008, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of the Treasury warned financial institutions about the illicit behavior of the Central Bank of Iran. The Central Bank of Iran and Iranian commercial banks have transactions in order to make it more difficult for intermediary financial institutions to determine the true parties in the transaction. They have also continued to provide financial services to Iranian entities designated by the U.N. Security Council in its Resolutions 1737 and 1747. The U.S. Department of Treasury is particularly concerned Under U.S. law, institutions that aid entities covered by financial sanctions are liable to penalties. The Central Bank's activities clearly warrant such action, and sanctioning the bank would increase the effectiveness of existing measures. I urge my colleagues to support our amendment at such time as we are able to get a vote on it. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I thank the Chair and I thank my friend from Arizona, Senator Kyl, for his very strong statement. I rise to speak in support of this bipartisan amendment which I have cosponsored along with Senator Kyl, Senator Bayh, and Senator McCain. As you know, President Obama has made a historic offer to Iran's leaders, inviting them to engage in direct diplomacy to resolve the outstanding differences between our two countries. As the President has repeatedly said, the door is open for the Iranians to come in out of the cold, if they choose to do so. It is by suspending their illicit nuclear activities and ending their support for terrorism that the Iranians have a clear path to ending their international isolation and taking their rightful place in the community of nations. Unfortunately, as Senator Kyl said, it has now been more than 3\\1/2\\ months since the formal offer of engagement was made by President Obama, and there has been no reply from the Iranians. Meanwhile, Iran's illicit nuclear activities have continued to speed forward, in violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions. Thousands of additional centrifuges are being installed, and more and more At the same time, Iran's support for terrorist proxies in Iraq, in Lebanon, and in the Palestinian Authority areas has continued. And, of course, over the past month we and the rest of the world have watched with horror as the Iranian regime has engaged in a brutal crackdown against its own people, who have sought no more than basic human President Obama, together with our international allies, has been very clear that we will not wait indefinitely for the Iranians to respond to our offer of talks, nor will we enter into negotiations--if that is the willingness of the Iranians--that go on without end. Two weeks ago, at the annual G8 summit in Italy, the President joined with other world leaders to make clear to the Iranians that they have until the G20 summit in Pittsburgh, at the end of September, to return to the The amendment Senators Kyl, Bayh, McCain, and I have put forward would place the full weight of the U.S. Senate behind the time frame that the President and the G8 have articulated. Our amendment expresses our strong hope that Iran seizes this historic opportunity for direct We also make clear that if the Iranians have failed to engage with us diplomatically by the time of that G20 summit 2 months from now, it is our preference that multilateral sanctions be imposed through the United Nations Security Council. However, the Iranian Government--the regime that controls the people of Iran--must also understand that the United States is itself prepared to put in place what Secretary of State Clinton a while ago referred to as crippling sanctions in the event that they in Tehran continue to flaunt the will of the Specifically, our amendment asks the President to impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and other banks involved in proliferation and terrorist activities, in the event that the Iranians haven't entered into negotiations that are serious by the time of the Pittsburgh summit or if they haven't suspended enrichment and reprocessing activities The Central Bank of Iran is the financial lifeline of that regime. It is an entity that our own Treasury Department says has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the efforts of other Iranian banks that are involved in bankrolling proliferation and terrorist activities to avoid international sanctions, and that have themselves been sanctioned by the U.N. and our Treasury Department as a I will say this. The idea of imposing sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank is not new. It has already been endorsed by a bipartisan majority in this Chamber. Last year, the Senate Banking Committee, under Chairman Dodd, adopted bipartisan legislation by a vote of 19 to 2 to urge the President to immediately impose sanctions against the Central Bank. Also last year, the House of Representatives passed such More recently, the legislation that Senators Bayh, Kyl, and I introduced this spring--the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, S. 908--in addition to the other steps it takes--also expresses the sense of the Senate that the President should impose sanctions against the I am very grateful to report that S. 908, the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act, now has 67 Members of the Senate, a strong bipartisan group of 67, or two-thirds, as cosponsors of that legislation. These cosponsors range all across the ideological spectrum of Members of the Senate, and clearly make the point to Iran and to the rest of the world that whatever other differences we have, we stand together here as a strong majority and beyond the Senate in our concern about the nuclear proliferation and terror-sponsoring activities of the Iranian You might say, if you are one of the 67 cosponsors of S. 908--which does more than this amendment does but includes it--you have already This amendment, I want to point out and make clear, in no way ties the President's hand in his diplomacy with Iran. That is not our intent. The amendment is about empowering the President, giving him additional leverage in his diplomacy, by endorsing the same timetable that came out of the G8 summit a short while ago. The effect is this, and I will repeat: The Iranians must appreciate that there will be consequences if they fail to respond to the international community's diplomatic initiatives; in other words, if they continue to speed their I think this amendment will send an unmistakable message to the fanatical regime in Tehran, in support of the G8, in support of President Obama: Either you can engage with the United States and the world community and take steps to suspend your nuclear activities or you can continue on your current course, in which case you will face the crippling sanctions this sense-of-the-Senate resolution calls for. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, before my colleague Senator Lieberman leaves the floor, I wish to thank him for this amendment. We are working right now to see if we can get the amendment pending and possibly a voice vote, because it is clear it is a very important amendment and one where I think we need to express very strongly the sense of the Senate, given the situation as it exists in Iran. I wish to thank Senator Lieberman, and right now it is my understanding that your side is checking to see if it is an agreeable amendment. Hopefully, we will get that decision and move forward with it right away on a voice vote, if that is agreeable to the Senator from The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. I am encouraged by that. And in talking to the other cosponsors, we would be happy to have The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, the amendment is straightforward and expresses the sense of the Senate that there should be a date certain-- and soon--by which Iran is required to end its nuclear program or face severe sanctions. The amendment expresses that if the Iranian regime has not accepted the offer of the United States of direct diplomatic talks by the time of the G20 summit in late September or if it has not suspended all of its nuclear enrichment and reprocessing activities within 60 days after the summit, and if the U.N. Security Council does not adopt new and significant and meaningful sanctions on the regime, the President should sanction the Central Bank of Iran. The situation with respect to Iran is nearing the crisis point, if it is not there already. We have all watched the brutal crackdown in the streets of Tehran and elsewhere as the Iranian regime imposed the results of a fraudulent election. We have been astonished by the courage and resolve of those Iranian citizens who have protested for their own inalienable rights in the face of repression. And we have known that, while these dramatic events have played themselves out, the Iranian regime has continued its enrichment of uranium, growing ever closer to the day on which it has a nuclear weapons capability. The Iranian regime has gotten away with too much for too long. Its illicit nuclear activities, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles, support for Hezbollah and other terrorist groups, and its repeated threats against Israel and the United States, represent a real and growing threat to the security of the United States and the Middle East. It is in the interest of the United States, and the world's other great powers, to achieve an end to The administration has held out an ``open hand,'' making clear that it intends to open direct talks with Iran. Yet 3\\1/2\\ months since the President's formal offer, the Iranian government has made no response, nor has it suspended its enrichment activities, as required by U.N. Security Council resolutions. Time is not on the side of those pushing the Iranians to cease these dangerous actions. Administration officials and others, including the French President, have stated that they will not wait interminably while the Iranian nuclear program proceeds. At the G-8 summit 2 weeks ago, the assembled leaders agreed that the Iranians do not have forever, and that they should return to the negotiating table by the time of the G-20 summit in September. This amendment puts the Senate on record behind that timeframe, irrespective of any Senator's individual view about the likelihood of agreement Make no mistake: we must not wait interminably. According to the IAEA's latest report, Iran has increased its stockpile of low enriched uranium by some 60 percent in the previous 6 months, and has brought the number of active centrifuges above 7,000. The IAEA also reported that Iran denied inspectors access to the Arak heavy water reactor. As the threats--including to the State of Israel--continue. As the Secretary of State has recently articulated, should Iran continue to defy the international community, it must face severe sanctions. Should the regime not take up the historic offer extended to it, this resolution advocates sanctions on the Iranian Central Bank, the country's major connection to the international financial system. The U.S. Treasury Department has stated that the central bank has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated the movement of funds to those involved in proliferation and terrorist activities. This must end, and in fact 67 Senators have cosponsored legislation-- the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act--that urges the President to By adopting this resolution, we will send an unmistakable message to the government of Iran that its actions are unacceptable and will result in real and severe consequences if continued. The administration has offered to talk; the ball is in the Iranian court, and if that regime continues down its destructive path, we have no choice but to impose crippling sanctions for its continued defiance. Let me point out again, this amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment, an important sense of the Senate but certainly one that allows the administration the latitude it needs in its handling of its Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I would first ask to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to recognize that tremendously hard work both the chair of the Armed Services Committee and ranking member are doing. We are very proud of the chairman, coming from Michigan, and of all of his excellent work in standing up for the I would like to congratulate him and the Senator from Arizona for Ms. STABENOW. Mr. President, I want to speak for a moment on health care. We are hearing a lot, as we hear from colleagues, many colleagues--not every one but many colleagues on the other side of the aisle--about the need to be against health care reform, to be a ``no.'' We all know that saying no to health care reform means we are going to have the status quo. ``No'' equals the status quo. For too many families, too many businesses all across this country, that is The status quo works, it is good--for special interests making profits off the current system. But it is bad for American families, American small businesses, American manufacturers that are trying to pay the bills and trying to make sure health care is available for the We need change. We are here because the system, with all of its good parts--and there are many strengths in the American system--is also broken in too many cases for people. We want to build on what works and Right now our current health care system is bankrupting too many families. We know over 60 percent of bankruptcies are linked to medical expenses, and 75 percent of families who file bankruptcy actually have health insurance. Those with insurance, on average, are putting out medical expenses of over $18,000 when they file--even though they have There are many families--we are not only talking about those who do not have health insurance, but those who do who find themselves in very I am constantly amazed when I hear the argument about: We can't do any kind of reform because reform means putting a bureaucrat between your doctor and yourself. You and your doctor can't make decisions Do you know who stands between you and your doctor right now? An insurance company, an insurance company bureaucrat. Your doctors can't just give you whatever tests they wish. You are not able to get whatever care you need for your family. The first call they make is to Reform is about putting health care decisions back in the hands of doctors and patients and being able to create a system that actually I set up online the Health Care People's Lobby for those I represent in the State of Michigan so they could share their stories. We have a lot of folks lining the halls who represent all kinds of interests, all kinds of special interests, and they tell us what they think should be happening or not happening. But in Michigan we have set up the Health Care People's Lobby so people can share their stories about the real If the system worked today, there would be no reason for us to be here. We would be working on something else. But the fact is, we are spending twice as much on health care as any other country and have 47 million people at any one time who do not have health insurance. Those On top of that, people who are currently covered are battling every day to try to get what they thought they were paying for or to make sure their family is covered or that test or procedure or medicine can One constituent of mine in Michigan, Sandra Marczewski from Waterford, MI, wrote to me that she and her husband have been without You have no idea the fear I walk around with every day. That is too many people in Michigan, over a million people in Michigan, without insurance altogether, and millions more who are fearful every day if they lose their job, their health care goes with it, for themselves and their families. People every night are putting the kids to bed and worrying about whether someone is going to get sick, saying a prayer: Please, God, don't let the kids get sick. Don't let me get sick. I have to be able to go to work so I can make sure we There are a lot of people, as I mentioned before, who make a lot of money off of the status quo, off of the current system. It is no surprise they don't want to change it. All the ads we see, all the things going on, all the scare tactics that are going on--and there are plenty of scare tactics going on right now--all of that is about trying to scare people and raise red flags. It is easy just to be no, no, no. We certainly hear that around here all the time, people who are just saying no to any kind of progress or change or making things better for The reality is, the status quo for a lot of folks means more profit, that is underlying a lot of the motivation of what is going on right now. Our job is to make sure the American people can afford health care and have the care they need for their families. For too many families, the status quo means insecurity, expenses, and fear that come along with not knowing whether they are going to be able to afford the health care they have from month to month and whether they will, in fact, even We are here because when it comes to health care, American families and businesses are in a serious crisis, and they are asking us for action. The status quo is not good enough anymore. It is not working. It is going to bankrupt families, businesses, and the country. High health care costs are causing cuts in benefits, increases in premiums, adding to the ranks of the uninsured at alarming rates. Even those who have insurance, as I indicated before, are feeling the pain of the current system. Every day in America families are forced to choose a different doctor because their health care plan was changed, because their employer can no longer afford the old plan they had. Skyrocketing health care costs make American businesses less competitive in the global economy. It costs us jobs, and I can speak directly to that coming from the great State of Michigan. Every day in America, families see their health care plan benefits eroding because they cannot keep up with high premiums, copays, and deductibles. Every day in America, people decide to skip a doctor visit and the medication and treatment they know they need because they cannot afford the payment--in the greatest country in the world-- because the expense is too high. Year after year, as health care costs increase, American families are losing the very parts of their health care they value most: their choice of doctor, hospital, and insurance plans; their choice of treatments; the security and stability that comes from knowing they are covered if anything goes wrong. That is what we are about fixing. That is what we will fix as we do health care Recently, Families USA found that the average costs of family coverage in the workplace rose 78 percent in 7 years--78 percent. During those years, health insurance company profits ballooned 428 percent. At the same time, wages went up about 15 percent. So wages go up 15 percent, health insurance profits go up 428 percent, and premiums The fact is, we cannot wait to get started on reform. The status quo is not acceptable and ``no'' equals the status quo. So we are here working with colleagues to get it done. Doing nothing is not Recently, the nonpartisan Robert Wood Johnson Foundation released a report that projects if Federal reform efforts are not enacted within 10 years, the cost of health care for businesses could double and the number of uninsured could rise to over 65 million people with middle- class families being hit the hardest. The report shows if health care reform is not enacted, individuals and families would see health care Total individual and family spending on premiums and out-of-pocket costs could increase 68 percent in the next 10 years. I cannot imagine 68 percent out-of-pocket costs. That is if we do nothing, if we listen to those just saying no. Even under the best-case scenario, health care costs would likely increase, according to this report, at least 46 percent. And I can tell you absolutely wages are not going to go up 46 percent. Businesses could see their health care costs doubled within 10 years. The report found that employer spending on premiums would more than double, and even in the best-case economic condition, employer spending on health care will rise 72 percent. The result would likely be far fewer Americans being able to be offered insurance or accepting employer-sponsored insurance. Estimates suggest a drop of 56 percent of Americans who are now covered by their employers, dropping from 56 to So there are many numbers. There are numbers that relate to the public programs of Medicaid and children's health insurance and the increased cost there as well and what will happen if we do nothing. The amount of uncompensated care in the health care system will increase, and the worst-case scenario: the total of uncompensated care could By the way, when we say ``uncompensated care,'' that does not mean somebody is not paying for it. That is why our premiums, if you have insurance, go up so much. It means someone can't afford to see a doctor, can't take their children to the doctor, so they don't get the tests on the front end that they need or they don't see a doctor. They wait until they are really sick, and then they go to the emergency room. They are served, as they should be, and it is the most expensive venue in which to do ongoing care for people. But they are served, and then guess what happens. Everyone who has insurance sees their rates go That is what it means when we say that covering the uninsured will lower costs as we go out. I mean it will take time to do this, but over time what we are doing is working to change the way we pay for health care now because we pay for it in the most expensive way, by ignoring the problem, not focusing on health and wellness and primary care but waiting until people are in the worst possible situation: they go to the emergency room, they get care when they are sicker than they otherwise would be if they could see a doctor. And then we pay for it. That is what we want to change and will change under health care So this is about many facets. We know we have a system in America that works for many; they are blessed. We are blessed to have health insurance. For the many who have insurance, it allows them to cover their family needs. The system works well. But for many others it does not. And the reality is, we all pay for a system that does not work effectively for everyone. We all end up paying because the reality is, you can say: Well, I am not going to buy a car, I do not need car insurance; I am not going to buy a house, I do not need house insurance, but sooner or later, you are going to get sick, and just because you don't have health insurance does not mean there is not We are a great country. We can do better than what we are doing today. We have to do better. We are working hard to have a bipartisan effort that will move reform forward in this country, to make a real difference to change the system so it works for everyone and begins to lower the cost over time of what is happening, the explosion in health The option of saying no is not good enough. ``No'' equals the status quo. We just cannot have that. The public gets it. It is time for us to get it as well and move forward. I yield the floor. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Arizona is Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I call up the Lieberman-Kyl amendment and ask for its immediate consideration. It is at the desk. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report. The Senator from Arizona [Mr. McCain], for Mr. Kyl, for himself, Mr. Lieberman, Mr. Bayh, and Mr. McCain, proposes an (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate on imposing sanctions with At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON IMPOSING SANCTIONS WITH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The illicit nuclear activities of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, combined with its development of unconventional weapons and ballistic missiles and support for international terrorism, represent a grave threat to the security of the United States and United States allies in (2) The United States and other responsible countries have a vital interest in working together to prevent the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran from acquiring a (3) As President Barack Obama said, ``Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon would not only be a threat to Israel and a threat to the United States, but would be profoundly destabilizing in the international community as a whole and could set off a nuclear arms race in the Middle East that would be extraordinarily dangerous for all concerned, (4) The International Atomic Energy Agency has repeatedly called attention to the illicit nuclear activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and, as a result, the United Nations Security Council has adopted a range of sanctions designed to encourage the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran to cease those activities and comply with its obligations under the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, done at Washington, London, and Moscow July 1, 1968, and entered into force March 5, 1970 (commonly known as the (5) The Department of the Treasury has imposed sanctions on several Iranian banks, including Bank Melli, Bank Saderat, Bank Sepah, and Bank Mellat, for their involvement in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups. (6) The Central Bank of Iran, the keystone of Iran's financial system and its principal remaining lifeline to the international banking system, has engaged in deceptive financial practices and facilitated such practices among banks involved in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, including Bank Sepah and Bank Melli, in order to evade sanctions imposed by the United States and the (7) On April 8, 2009, the United States formally extended an offer to engage in direct diplomacy with the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran through negotiations with the five permanent members of the United States Security Council and Germany (commonly referred to as the ``P5-plus-1 process''), in the hope of resolving all outstanding disputes between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States. (8) The Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran has yet to make a formal reply to the April 8, 2009, offer of direct diplomacy by the United States or to engage in direct diplomacy with the United States through the P5-plus-1 (9) On July 8, 2009, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France warned that the Group of Eight major powers will give the Islamic Republic of Iran until September 2009 to accept negotiations with respect to its nuclear activities or face (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran should-- (A) seize the historic offer put forward by President Barack Obama to engage in direct diplomacy with the United (B) suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, and work on all heavy-water related projects, including the construction of a research reactor moderated by heavy water, as demanded by multiple resolutions of the United Nations Security (C) come into full compliance with the Nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty, including the additional protocol to (2) the President should impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran and any other Iranian bank engaged in proliferation activities or support for terrorist groups, as well as any other sanctions the President determines (A) the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran-- (i) has not accepted the offer by the United States to engage in direct diplomacy through the P5-plus-1 process before the Summit of the Group of 20 (G-20) in Pittsburgh, reprocessing activities and work on all heavy-water related projects within 60 days of the conclusion of that Summit; and (B) the United Nations Security Council has failed to adopt significant and meaningful additional sanctions on the Mr. McCAIN. The amendment is in the name of Senators Kyl and The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further debate? If not, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee. Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I listened carefully to the Senator from Michigan. Republicans and I believe most Democrats want health care reform this year. The President said he wants health care reform this year. Republicans want health care reform this year. We want to make sure it is done right. Let me put it this way: If we were in an operating room and a seriously ill patient came in and we knew we had only one chance to save that patient's life and to make that patient healthy, our goal would not be to see if we could do it in the next week, it would be to see if we could get it right. So far, the proposals we have seen coming out of the committees have not gotten it right. One might say: Well, that is a Republican view of Democratic proposals. Perhaps it is. But the proposals we have seen coming out of the Senate HELP Committee and out of the House of Representatives flunk the most important test, which is cost. The most important test is whether Americans can afford their health care and, after we get through fixing it, whether they can afford their government. According to virtually everyone we have heard from, the legislation we have seen simply does not meet that test. In my opinion, what we should do instead is start with the framework of the bill sponsored by Democratic Senator Wyden and Republican Senator Bennett which has 14 cosponsors--8 Democrats, 6 Republicans. This is a different sort of framework that offers virtually every American coverage, does so without any Washington takeover or government-run programs without raising the debt one penny, according to the Congressional Budget Office. Remember, I said that is a framework. I do not agree with every single part of that bill, although I am a cosponsor, but it may be a much better place to start than what That is not just my opinion. Lately, we have heard a lot about the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, MN. President Obama has talked a lot about the Mayo Clinic. The point is, at the Mayo Clinic and a few other clinics around the country, there have been significantly better outcomes. In other words, if you go there and come out, you are more likely to be well, and at a lower cost. And the question is, Why? The President has repeatedly pointed to the Mayo Clinic, Democratic Senators point to the Mayo Clinic, and Republican Senators point to the Mayo Clinic. Here is what the Mayo Clinic had to say on Friday about the legislation that is being considered in the House of Although there are some positives in the current House Tri- committee bill, including insurance for all and payment reform demonstration projects--the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the In general, the proposals under discussion are not patient focused or results oriented. Lawmakers have failed to use a fundamental lever--a change in Medicare payment policy--to help drive necessary improvements in American health care. Unless legislators create payment systems that pay for good patient results at reasonable costs, the promise of transformation in American health care will wither. The real losers will be the citizens of the United States of America. That is the Mayo Clinic talking about the bill we are beginning to I think the prudent thing to do is to try to make that bill better or start over and certainly not try to pass a 1,000-page or 2,000-page bill in 1 week or 10 days without knowing what is in it, as we did with That is not just the opinion of the Mayo Clinic. Here is a letter to House Members on July 16, a few days ago, from a number of clinics, including the Mayo Clinic. These are the Intermountain Healthcare, Gundersen Lutheran Health System, the Iowa Clinic, the Marshfield Clinic, the Rural Wisconsin Health Cooperative, ThedaCare, and I ask unanimous consent to have this letter printed in the Record The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care These are the people whose hospitals we go to, whose clinics we go to We applaud the Congress for working on this. However, we The first is about the Medicare-like public plan, as they call it, a public plan with rates based on Medicare. They say it will have a severe negative effect on their facilities, that they lose a lot of money every year, hundreds of millions of dollars. Because what happens is that Medicare, a government-run plan, pays its doctors and its clinics and its hospitals about 80 percent of what private insurance companies are paying. So roughly 177 million of us have private insurance of one kind or another. If a doctor sees you, he gets paid 100 percent. But if you go to one of these clinics and hospitals, they are paid according to the government rate, which is roughly 80 percent of the private rate. These clinics say that is not sustainable for them, and that if that continues, some of those providers, such as the Mayo Clinic, will eventually be driven out of the market. What market? The market for Medicare patients. Those are the 45 million senior Americans who absolutely depend on Medicare for their service because for most of them, that is their only option. If that is the case, what that means is they will not be able to go to the Mayo Clinic or to the MeritCare Health System or to the Iowa Clinic or to the doctor they choose because that doctor will not be a part of the Medicare system So that is the first objection these clinics make to the bill they see coming because the bill they see coming proposes to create another The second objection they have is geographic payment disparities. They say that we are a big country and there ought to be differences in Third, and maybe this is the most important of all, that the President has said and many of us in the Senate have said we need to change the way we pay for medical care, and we ought to pay more for value, for quality, for results, and less for volume--in plain English, not how many patients a doctor can see but how many of his or her We have talked about that for weeks here in our hearings. But what these respected voices in medicine are saying is that the legislation we see today--and understand, this is not even in a bill that has presented to us in the Senate yet in a way upon which we can act--does not meet the test for that. The legislation we have seen so far is David Broder, the respected columnist from the Washington Post, said that the plans which have been passed in a partisan way are ``badly flawed'' and ``overly expensive.'' I mean, the Democratic plans; we have Republican plans that we would like to be considered. I mentioned that the Wyden-Bennett plan, which is the only really bipartisan plan here, has not been given one bit of consideration so far in the Senate. And then Senator Burr and Senator Coburn have a plan, Senator Gregg has a plan, and Senator Hatch has a plan. We all have different ideas. As I said, we would like for them to be considered, today I'm talking about the Democratic plans that are now being considered. The Congressional Budget Office, of course, is the nonpartisan office in this Congress that we count on as an umpire to tell us what we are really doing. It is not supposed to have any political rhetoric. Last Thursday, the head of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf was asked at a Senate Budget Committee hearing what he thought about the bills which had begun to emerge. In other words, here we go, at a time when we are in a recession and where the President's proposals for other programs will add more to the debt in the next 10 years, three times as much as we spent in World War II, and we are talking about legislation that would add another $2 trillion. We haven't dealt with cost which is where we ought to start. Look at the 250 million who have health care and ask the question: Can you afford it? Then after we get through fixing it, can you afford your government? And what the head of the CBO is saying, as far as the Then the Lewin Group, a well-respected private agency, was asked what would happen if we had a government-run program which many of us believe will lead to another Washington takeover. We are getting accustomed to this, Washington takeovers of banks, of insurance companies, of student loans, of car companies, now maybe of health care. The Lewin Group said 88 million people will lose their private employer-sponsored insurance. How could that happen? It could happen because a small employer or a big employer would see one of these plans that is beginning to come out take place. To be specific, the Senate HELP Committee plan says you either have to provide everybody who works for you insurance or pay $750. There are a lot of employers who cannot afford to provide everybody the kind of insurance that is envisioned. So they will say: OK, we will pay the $750 fine to the government. What happens? All those employees lose their health insurance. Where do they go? Into the Government plan. That is their option. Some of them may have a choice of other plans, but if they do have a choice and one of the choices is a government-run plan, it may have the same future the Mayo Clinic and others were saying Medicare was causing to them. The government will set a low price for the doctors and a low price for the clinics. So all these employees who now have insurance that they like will lose that insurance because of the passage of this bill. The government will set the provider rates and physician rates low, and so they will be part of a government plan for which many doctors and many hospitals and many clinics will not offer services. It is similar to giving somebody a bus ticket to a bus station with no busses. Then there are the Medicare cuts. According to the Washington Post last week, Medicare cuts will pay for one-half the cost of health care for the uninsured in one of the bills being proposed. If we are to find savings in Medicare and take from the 45 million elderly people who depend on Medicare, every bit of those savings ought to be put back into Medicare and not spent on some new program. I don't think legislation that is paid for half by Medicare cuts is going to go Then there are the employer taxes. According to the National Federation of Independent Businesses, the House version has an 8- percent Federal payroll tax. I mentioned the Senate version, a $750 annual fine per employee, if the employer doesn't offer insurance. The NFIB, small businesses, estimates that will lose about 1.6 million How could that be? Well, if a small employer or even a large one has government-mandated costs added and they have less money, they will hire less employees. That is one of the options they have. Then there is the income surtax. There is a whole string of trouble for these bills. USA Today on Monday said: It is the highest tax rate in a quarter of a century that is proposed: A 45-percent top tax rate Then rationing, there are provisions in this bill which would have the government make decisions about which treatment you will have and Finally--I say ``finally'' because this is the subject I want to spend a moment on--there is the Medicaid State taxes. Sometimes this Mr. President, 177 million Americans have private insurance, but a lot of people have government insurance now. Veterans do. Military people have TRICARE insurance. About 45 million older people have Medicare. But then there is a program called Medicaid, which is the largest government-run program. About 60 million people are in it now. The Federal Government pays about 57 percent of it, and the States pay 43 percent. Every Governor I know--and I was once one--has struggled with the Medicaid Program. I once came up here in the early 1980s and asked President Reagan to take it all, let the Federal Government run it and give us Governors all of kindergarten through the 12th grade. I thought I saw a couple of Democratic Governors earlier today, and we talked about the story every Governor faces. If you have an extra dollar and you want to put it in higher education so you can improve the quality of the University of Colorado or Tennessee or keep tuition from going up, what happens to it? That dollar is stolen because it has to go in the increasing Medicaid cost. It is an inefficiently managed program. The Federal Government keeps changing the rules. The Governors have to get permission from Washington whenever they make minor changes. It is If our real goal is to help people, then why under these new plans do we say to low-income people--defined as, say, a family of four who makes less than $32,000--your only option is going to be to go in the Medicaid Program under this plan. It is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office and others that 15 or 20 million Americans will be added to the 60 million in the Medicaid Program. What will they find when they get there? They will find that 40 percent of the doctors don't see Medicaid patients. When we add another 15 or 20 million people to it, it may be a larger number. Why don't they do see Medicaid patients? For the same reason the Mayo Clinic warned about this government plan in its letter. It is because Medicaid only pays its doctors and its If you are confused by that, it works out pretty simply. Medicare pays 80 percent of what the private insurers pay, and Medicaid pays about 72 percent of what Medicare pays. If you are a doctor or a clinic or a hospital, you get paid about 60 percent, if you are helping a Medicaid patient, of what you would if you were helping one of us who has his or her own private health care. You can see that will be a pernicious trend. If we continue to dump low-income people into a government-run Medicaid Program, that is what will happen. There is another thing that happens with Medicaid. Many members of the committees working on this bill said: We can't let that happen. We can't be inhumane and just say we are out here to help people who are uninsured, and we are going to dump 20 million of them into a government-run program that doesn't have enough doctors and hospitals and clinics. We will have to raise what we pay to doctors and clinics. That sounds good, but that is very expensive, particularly for a program such as Medicaid that, according to the Government Accountability Office, $1 out of every $10 is fraudulent, is wasted. That is $32 billion a year. That is the program we are going to expand? That is the program we are going to say to low-income people: Congratulations, go into this program where you are not likely to find a doctor every time you want one, and there are a lot of hospitals and clinics that will not take you because we will not pay them for that. Because Senators and Congressmen hear that, they say: We will raise the rates. Here is the proposal: The proposal is, we are going to increase the number of people who are eligible for Medicaid by 133 to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level. That is a substantial increase. Then, if we are going to do that and put many more people into the program, we are going to have to order an increase in what we pay the doctors and the clinics to serve them, maybe up to 83 or 85 Let me talk about what that would do in one State. We called the State Medicaid director in Tennessee. Our program is called TennCare. We said: What would it cost Tennessee if we increase coverage of Medicaid up to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level? The answer came back, nearly $600 million a year. That is the State's share of the cost which is a little more than a third. The Federal Government's share is twice that. So the Federal Government is saying: That is all right. We know Tennessee doesn't have the money to do that, so we will pay it all for the first 5 years. Then, after 5 years, so the talk goes--and we were told, when we were working on this bill, this is an assumption--we will shift these costs back to Colorado, back to Tennessee. Back comes what in today's dollars is about $600 million to Remember what I said. This is a program doctors don't want to go to because they don't get paid very well. So we will have to increase the amount of money we pay doctors. So if States are required to pay doctors and providers under the Medicaid system 110 percent of what Medicare is paid, that still isn't what doctors and hospitals get, if they see somebody with private health insurance. That is about the same amount of money, about $600 million added just for the State cost, which brings the total new state cost for paying physicians and hospitals more and for all the new people in the Medicaid Program to We throw around dollars up here and figures that make any amount of money seem unimaginable. What is $1 trillion, what is $10 trillion, what is $40 billion. We former Governors can imagine it. I figured it out. If in 5 years you shifted back to the State of Tennessee just its share of those costs from the expansion of Medicaid and paying the doctors and hospitals more, the bill for the State of Tennessee to pay the increased Medicaid costs would be an amount of money that equals a The truth is, for our State--and I believe for almost every State--it is an amount of money that nobody has enough taxes to pay. You can run politicians in and out and defeat them for raising taxes all day long, and they still couldn't come up with ways to pay for it. In other words, these bills are based on a premise and assumption that will either bankrupt the States or, if the Federal Government says we will pay for it all, it will add $5, $6, $700 billion more over 10 years to We need to think that through. Is that the best way to help people who are low income? I don't think so. I think there are much better ways. The Wyden-Bennett framework is a better way. It rearranges the tax deductions we have for people who have health insurance from their employers and it says: Let's take the available money and give the money to low-income people who then buy private health insurance. It may be a very basic plan. But at least they would have health insurance, and they wouldn't be stuffed in a government program 40 percent of the doctors wouldn't see and that many of the best clinics We have been told already by the Congressional Budget Office that proposal would not add a penny to the debt. Not only does it not create a new government program, it actually makes the Medicaid Program, except for Americans with Disabilities, history. In other words, if you are poor, you are not stuffed into a program that nobody else would want to join anyway. You have a chance to buy your own insurance, and you are not consigned to the worst run government program we have So there are some real possibilities with health care, and there are some plans on the table that will lead us in the right direction. We have advice from distinguished Americans with a stake in this--which is every single one of us--but the most distinguished are those who deal with it every day. The Mayo Clinic is saying the proposed legislation misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, it will do the opposite. Shouldn't we slow down and get it right? Shouldn't we get it right? This is the only chance we have to do this. If we do it wrong, we will not be able to undo it. This is 16, 18 percent of the American economy we are talking about. People have tried to do it for 60 years, and they The only way we will do it is if we do it together. The Democrats have big majorities over on that side. They do in the House. But that is not the way things usually happen around here. The President has said--and I take him at his word--and many of the leaders have said-- and I take them at their word--that we would like to get 70, 80 votes But in order to do that, we are going to have to do it the way we usually do when we have bipartisan events around here. We get some Democrats and some Republicans and they sit down with the President and they share ideas and they agree on some things. They don't just say: OK, here it is, and we are going to vote down almost every significant I respect the fact that Senator Baucus is trying to do that in the Finance Committee, and perhaps he will succeed, working with Senator Grassley and others. But this is going to take some time. It cannot be done overnight. There are many sections to this bill. Each of them might be 500 pages long. They have enormous consequences to individuals. That is why we have all these clinics writing and saying: If you do it the way it looks like you are going to do it, you may drive us out of the business of helping Medicare patients. Do we really want to do that? Do we really want to say to 45 million Americans who depend on Medicare: We are going to pass a bill that will accelerate the process whereby respected clinics and the doctor you might choose will not see you anymore because they cannot afford to because the government will not pay them under the system we have? So I would suggest we start over, literally, conceptually; start over and listen to these clinics and doctors and focus on the delivery system and focus, first, on those 250 million Americans who already have health insurance and ask the question: Can they afford it? And, what could we do to make it possible for those Americans to afford it? And can we do it in a way that permits us to be able to honestly say when we are through that those same 250 million Americans can afford their government when we are through without adding to the debt? Then let's look at the 46 million people who are uninsured. Of course, we need for them to be insured. But the fact is, 11 million of the uninsured are already eligible for programs we already have; 10 million or so are noncitizens--half of them legally here, half of them not; a large number of them are making $75,000 a year and could afford it but just do not buy it; and another significant number are college So we are going to have to go step by step by step and see in what low-cost way we can include a large number of these 46 million Americans, who are not part of the system, in the system. But that is the wrong place to start. That is the place to end. So, Mr. President, all I am saying is, on the Republican side of the aisle we can tell you what we are for. Some of us are for the Wyden- Bennett bill with our Democratic colleagues. That is the only bipartisan bill before us today. It has not even been seriously considered by this body, but it is there, and it has significant support in the House. We have two doctors over here: Dr. Barrasso, who has been an orthopedic surgeon for 25 years, and Dr. Coburn from Oklahoma, an OB/GYN doctor. They would like to be involved in the process. So far their ideas are not really being adopted in the result we might have. We have Senator Gregg from New Hampshire, one of the most respected Senators, who has been a part of many bipartisan efforts, and he has his own bill. He would like to be more a part of it, but his ideas do not fit the way things are going. But the way things are going are too expensive for the Congressional Budget Office and take us in the wrong direction, according to the Mayo Clinic. So maybe we ought to step back and say: Well, let's listen to these other ideas. Let's go very carefully. Let's work with the President. Let's see if we can get a result. Let's keep a four-letter word out there that is a good word; and that is ``cost,'' and make sure we focus first on the 250 million Americans who have health insurance and make sure they can afford it; and, second, make sure when we finish fixing health care that those same Americans can afford their government. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor. Dear Congressman Kind: On behalf of some of the nation's leaders in health care delivery, we write to you today to comment on the House health care reform bill introduced earlier this week. We would like to thank you for the opportunity to comment on this legislation. We applaud the Congress for its commitment to passing comprehensive health care delivery system reform this year. However, we have significant concerns about the current language of the bill and we ask that these concerns, set forth below, be addressed First, we are concerned that a public plan option with rates based on Medicare rates will have a severe negative impact on our facilities. Today, many providers suffer great financial losses associated with treating Medicare patients. For example, several of the systems that have signed onto this letter lost hundreds of millions of dollars under Medicare last year. These rates are making it increasingly difficult for us to continue to treat Medicare patients. The implementation of a public plan with similar rates will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the nation's most efficient, high quality providers, eventually driving them out of the market. In addition, should a public plan with inadequate rates be enacted, we will be forced to shift additional costs to private payers, which will ultimately lead to increased costs for employers who maintain insurance for their employees. We believe all Americans must have guaranteed portable health insurance, but it is critical that we not lose sight of the need to ensure Second, our health care systems are among the most cost- efficient in the country in caring for Medicare patients. However, many of us operate in states with some of the lowest Medicare reimbursement rates in the nation. Current physician payments due to geographic disparities are actually greater under Medicare than under commercial insurance. This may be difficult to believe, given the government's rate-setting power, but flows from the fundamentally flawed payment methodology. To date, health care reform proposals simply continue the current payment methodology, despite the fact that formula changes have been identified to address this problem. We support payment changes that work to reduce geographic disparities, rather than perpetuating the flaws in the current payment system. While we believe that the Institute of Medicine study is a good first step, we encourage Congress to take this further and enact payment reforms that will address the existing disparities. Third, consistent with statements from President Obama, we believe that focusing on, defining, measuring, and paying for value is essential for controlling cost within the U.S. health care system. The system must be reformed to compensate for value instead of volume. We believe inserting a value index into various aspects of the Medicare payment system (e.g., physician fee schedule, hospital rates) is the means to accomplish this end goal of compensating for quality legislation. We urge you to address the above-stated concerns, which will demonstrate that Congress is serious about preserving the best parts of the existing health care delivery system. If we can be of assistance to you moving HealthPartners, Intermountain Healthcare, Iowa Clinic, MeritCare Health System, Park Nicollet Health System, The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, throughout this Nation's history, our freedom--and at times our very survival--has rested squarely on the shoulders of the men and women of our Armed Forces. As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I am proud to know many of these brave warfighters we have. We rely upon their training and discipline. We depend upon their service and their sacrifice. In That means keeping our commitment to every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine at every stage in their career--from the day they report for We can start to honor this commitment in the most basic way by ensuring that their facilities are safe and adequate. That is why I plan to offer an amendment that would help eliminate vegetative encroachment on training ranges. Excessive vegetation can actually render training grounds unusable. If a training range is heavily overgrown, it can lead to dangerous situations, including fires and In a recent study by the U.S. Army, 70 percent of the facilities surveyed are experiencing limitations due to uncontrolled vegetation. My amendment calls upon the Secretary of Defense to perform a comprehensive study of training ranges across every branch of the military. We must develop a plan to reclaim any overgrown land for its rightful use by our fighting men and women of America. This will help us ensure that we can train them adequately and safely so they can fully prepare for any mission they are assigned to perform. But we cannot stop there. Our commitment begins on the day someone volunteers for service in the Armed Forces. But it does not end, even after their service has drawn to a close. That is why I believe it is important to extend dislocation benefits to every servicemember, including those whose service is coming to an end. Over the course of a career in the American military, a service man or woman and their family may be ordered to relocate a number of times--moving here, moving there, this assignment, that assignment. Each move can be quite costly. From basic travel expenses to the purchase of household goods to utilities to rent, it takes a lot to Since 1955, Congress has helped members of the service defray these costs by paying a ``dislocation allowance'' to each person we reassign to a new duty station. This eases the financial burden on military families and means that personnel decisions can be made without fear of breaking the bank--at least for most servicemembers, that is. Unfortunately, those who retire are not covered under the current system, despite the fact that their final orders may require a permanent change of station. So after years of supporting service men and women when we ask them to relocate, we abandon them at the time of their final move. We leave them to fend for themselves, even though the expenses they incur will be as high as ever, and even though their income has been reduced to half of what they had been paid during So we simply cannot stand for this. We cannot allow those who have served us honorably to be left out in the cold at the end of their careers. We must offer these benefits to all Members of our Armed Forces, even those who have been asked to move for the last time. That is why I am calling for a study to examine the feasibility of extending the dislocation allowance to retiring servicemembers. We should find a way to make this work. The cost of moving demands it. Our servicemembers support it. And, most importantly, it is the right thing Colleagues, Members of this great body, let's come together to stand for those who sacrifice on our behalf and protect this great country of ours that allows us to do what we do in America, with freedom and opportunity. Let's provide our men and women in uniform with the support they need at every stage of their careers--from the first day Cutting down on vegetation encroachment will keep our trainees safe and help prepare them for years of honorable service. When that service ends, dislocation benefits will help them retire with some measure of So I urge my colleagues to join with me in supporting these initiatives I put forth. We owe our troops nothing less. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from South Carolina. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DeMINT. Mr. President, I wish to speak for a few minutes about health care and the need for health care reform in the country today. I think most Americans would agree we need to do everything we can to make affordable health insurance available to every American and, hopefully, that is what this health reform debate will be about. Unfortunately, we are seeing a pattern develop here that has been going on all year--since the President took office--that has many Americans alarmed at the rapid pace we are spending and borrowing, imposing new taxes, and taking over various aspects of the American economy. I know a lot of Americans are alarmed and some are outraged. More than any other comment, I am hearing Americans say: Why don't you slow down and read the bills before you continue the expansion of Now we are talking about health care, and we see that same pattern of crisis and rush and it ``has to be done today, hair's on fire'' type of mentality here in Washington so that we almost have to call this a ``son of stimulus'' health care bill. Because certainly the last time the President tried to ram a massive bill through Congress before we had a chance to read it, we ended up with this colossal stimulus failure that has actually resulted in the loss of jobs in America and a burden of debt on our children that is almost unimaginable. It makes no sense for us to follow that same pattern with health care--nearly 20 percent of our economy--to have a government takeover with a bill we haven't even completely seen yet, that is supposed to be passed in the next 2 weeks, even though the bill wouldn't take effect until 2013. What is the rush? The whole purpose of the Senate is to be the place where the legislation comes to cool down, where we deliberate, we look at the details. The President himself has admitted he is not aware of the details of the bill he is out selling every day. We do have serious problems in health care that we need to fix. The unfortunate thing is I have no confidence that the President actually wants to make health insurance affordable and available to all Americans because when he was in the Senate, Republicans proposed a number of alternatives that would have done that. Yet in every case-- every opportunity he had to make health insurance more available and affordable to Americans--he voted no. Let's review some of them, because I think we have to recognize that the point of this health care debate is not to make sure every American is insured, but to make sure the government is running our health care system. The most personal and private part of our lives they are talking about turning over to bureaucrats at the Federal level. This makes no sense. What we could do is be fair to those who don't get their health work. If people get their health insurance at work, as we do here in Congress, your employer can deduct the cost of it and the employee is exempt from paying taxes on those benefits. That is equivalent to about a $5,000 a year benefit to families who get their health care or health insurance at work. Why can't we offer that same fairness to Americans who don't get their health insurance at work? It is something I actually proposed here in the Senate while President Obama was a Senator, that we would give fair tax treatment; at least let them deduct it from their taxes. He voted no, as did I believe every Democrat, and they killed the bill in the House. This was basic fairness to make health insurance a little more affordable to people who didn't get it at work. The President voted no. We hear a lot of talk about how we need a government plan to make the private plans more competitive. Why not make all the insurance companies compete with insurance companies all over the country instead of what we do now? A lot of Americans don't know that the reason we don't have a competitive private health insurance market is that the Federal Government makes it impossible. You have to buy your health insurance in the State where you live, so a few insurance companies basically have monopolies in every State of the country. What if someone such as myself who lived in South Carolina could look all across the country, find a policy I wanted at a better price, and buy it? Why can't we do that? Well, I proposed we do that. We introduced it on the Senate floor. It would have created a competitive health insurance market and allowed people to buy all over the country. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, to kill the bill. Now they are talking about: Well, we need a government option to create some competition, to have a real competitive market. He voted against it. What about allowing Americans who put money in a health savings account, or their employer puts it in there for them--their own money-- why not let them use that money to pay for a health insurance premium if they don't get it at work? It sounded like a good idea to me, to make it a little bit easier, a little more affordable to have your own health insurance, so I proposed that bill here in the Senate. Barack Obama voted no, as did all of the Democrats, and they killed the bill. What about the idea of allowing a lot of small employers--I was a small businessman for years. It was hard to buy health insurance as a small employer, but I did. It cost me a lot of money, a lot more than the big employers. But what about allowing a lot of small employers to come together and form associations and buy health insurance so they could offer it to their employees less expensively? Well, it is a good idea that was offered right here on the floor of the Senate by Republicans. Barack Obama voted no, as did most of the Democrats, and There is a long list here I could go through, but every single bill, every single health reform idea that has been proposed here, the President, when he was in the Senate, voted against. Everything that would have made health insurance available and affordable to the average American who doesn't get their insurance at work was voted no Now he is saying, We need the government to take it over because it is not working. The reason it is not working is we won't let it work. The part of health insurance, the health care system that works the best today is when you have your own health insurance and you pick your own doctor and you and your doctor decide what kind of health care you are going to get. It is not a perfect system, and insurance companies have a lot of work to do to make things work better because I have to argue with them a lot myself. But the part of the health care system that doesn't work is the part that the government runs, Medicaid and Medicare, the SCHIP and TRICARE. Some of the people who get those benefits such as our seniors say Medicare works fine, but, unfortunately, doctors don't want to see them coming because Medicare and Medicaid don't cover the cost of even seeing a patient. So many physicians are closing their practices to our seniors because they have government health insurance. Government health care does not pay enough for the physician and the hospital to see the patient, so they shift The worst part of all of these government plans is they are trillions of dollars in debt--debt that our children are going to have to pay back. These programs are broke. Yet they want to expand these programs. They want to take the part of health care that is not working and essentially force it on every American. They want every American to have a Medicaid plan where doctors don't want to see us coming because As I look at this whole health care reform debate--and I am glad to see the President out taking shots at me for saying we have to stop him on this, because we have been on a rampage since he took office, passing one government program after another, expanding spending and debt at levels we have never imagined in this country. It is time to slow down and take stock of where we are. Other countries that have to lend us money to keep us going are beginning to wonder, Can we pay our debts? We have doubled our money supply by the Federal Reserve, and that means big inflation, higher interest rates. Yet we are moving ahead with this health care plan that is going to expand our debt as a nation, raise taxes on small businesses that create the jobs. It looks as if we are going to penalize Americans who don't decide to buy health insurance, and we are moving again toward a government program that we know won't work. There is not one Federal program that has worked as advertised, that has worked to the budget we said it would be to. This week we have had announcements of what we have already passed as far as stimulus over the last year is going to mean trillions of dollars-- trillions of dollars--we are going to have to borrow and that our I appeal to my colleagues: We don't need to rush through a bill in the next 2 weeks before we go on our August break that affects one- fifth--20 percent--of our total economy, that gets the government to effectively take over the most personal and private service that we ask for as Americans. We don't need to pass a bill such as that, that we won't even have time to read. What the President and I think a lot of the proponents of this bill are afraid of is if we are able to go home on the August break and we take this bill and we put it on the Internet where people can read it, and radio talk shows and bloggers all around the country are able to tell the American people what this bill is and what it will do, and get past this utopian rhetoric that we are hearing from the President and look at the nuts and bolts, because everything he is saying this bill is going to do the Congressional Budget Office and other experts are saying, No, it isn't going to work that way. It isn't going to save us money, it is going to raise our taxes, it is going to cost jobs in America, and it isn't going to fix health care. We need to go back to the basics, including some of what I have mentioned already, that would reform health care and make private health insurance work better, make it more affordable, and get it into the hands of more Americans. Why should we give up on freedom and move to a government plan when we haven't even given freedom a chance to I know the government can't run health care and I don't want them running my plan. One of the best ideas I have heard in this debate is whatever we pass, Congressmen and Senators ought to have to take that health plan. I am going to have an amendment to that effect if they try But I appeal to my colleagues: Let's listen to the American people. Let's stop this rampage toward bigger and bigger government. Let's take our time and look at this bill and, for once, do something right. Our The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida is recognized. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be laid aside in order that I might call up The Senator from Florida [Mr. Nelson] proposes an amendment Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To repeal the requirement for reduction of survivor annuities under the Survivor Benefit Plan by veterans' dependency and indemnity At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. ___. REPEAL OF REQUIREMENT OF REDUCTION OF SBP SURVIVOR (1) In general.--Subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, (ii) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (2) Conforming amendments.--Such subchapter is further (B) In section 1451(g)(1), by striking subparagraph (C). (i) in subsection (f)(2), by striking ``does not apply--'' and all that follows and inserting ``does not apply in the case of a deduction made through administrative error.''; and (D) In section 1455(c), by striking ``, 1450(k)(2),''. (b) Prohibition on Retroactive Benefits.--No benefits may be paid to any person for any period before the effective date provided under subsection (f) by reason of the (c) Prohibition on Recoupment of Certain Amounts Previously Refunded to SBP Recipients.--A surviving spouse who is or has been in receipt of an annuity under the Survivor Benefit Plan under subchapter II of chapter 73 of title 10, United States Code, that is in effect before the effective date provided under subsection (f) and that is adjusted by reason of the amendments made by subsection (a) and who has received a refund of retired pay under section 1450(e) of title 10, United States Code, shall not be required to repay such (d) Repeal of Authority for Optional Annuity for Dependent Children.--Section 1448(d) of such title is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``Except as provided in paragraph (2)(B), the Secretary concerned'' and inserting (A) by striking ``Dependent children.--'' and all that follows through ``In the case of a member described in paragraph (1),'' and inserting ``Dependent children annuity when no eligible surviving spouse.--In the case of a member (e) Restoration of Eligibility for Previously Eligible Spouses.--The Secretary of the military department concerned shall restore annuity eligibility to any eligible surviving spouse who, in consultation with the Secretary, previously elected to transfer payment of such annuity to a surviving 1448(d)(2)(B) of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the effective date provided under subsection (f). Such eligibility shall be restored whether or not payment to such child or children subsequently was terminated due to loss of dependent status or death. For the purposes of this subsection, an eligible spouse includes a spouse who was previously eligible for payment of such annuity and is not remarried, or remarried after having attained age 55, or whose second or subsequent marriage has (f) Effective Date.--The sections and the amendments made by this section shall take effect on the later of-- (1) the first day of the first month that begins after the (2) the first day of the fiscal year that begins in the Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, this is the widows and orphans amendment. This is the dastardly subject we have been dealing with for years, where there is an offset from an insurance payout, that servicemembers pay insurance premiums and/or retirees pay premiums, which is offset by Veterans Department disability compensation, which otherwise the veteran's surviving spouse and children would be able to, under existing law, be eligible for both, but there is an offset. This particular amendment is going to eliminate that offset. Every year, we come to the floor on the Defense authorization bill and we offer the amendment and we have an overwhelming vote in the Senate. Every year, it goes to conference and, for years and years, in the conference committee with the House, they would say you cannot pass an amendment that would even reduce the offset for widows and orphans. Only in the last couple years have we had some modest reduction of the offset. Then, on an earlier piece of legislation this year, we had a little bit more reduction of the offset. What this amendment will do is I wish to point out at the outset, I have a letter from the Military Coalition, and I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record. There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Nelson: The Military Coalition (TMC), a consortium of nationally prominent military and veterans organizations, representing more 5.5 million members plus their families and survivors would like to thank you for your sponsoring of Amendment No. 1515 of FY2010 NDAA (S. 1390). This Amendment, like your bill, S. 535, would repeal the law requiring a dollar-for-dollar deduction of VA benefits for service connected deaths from the survivors' SBP annuities. The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is a top We strongly believe that if military service caused a member's death, the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) the VA pays the survivor should be added to the SBP benefits the disabled retiree paid for, not substituted for them. In the case of members who died on active duty, a surviving spouse with children can avoid the dollar-for- dollar offset only by assigning SBP to the children. That forces the spouse to give up any SBP claim after the children attain their majority--leaving the spouse with only a $1,154 monthly annuity from the VA. Those who give their lives for their country deserve fairer compensation for their surviving spouses. Your amendment would also end this inequity. The Military Coalition again thanks you for sponsoring this Amendment to restore equity to this very important survivor program and encourages your colleagues vote for its passage. Air Force Association, Air Force Sergeants Association, Air Force Women Officers Associated, American Logistics Association, AMVETS, Army Aviation Assn. of America, Assn. of Military Surgeons of the United States, Assn. of the US Army, Association of the United States Navy, Commissioned Officers Assn. of the US Public Health Service, Inc. CWO & WO Assn. US Coast Guard, Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the US, Fleet Reserve Assn., Gold Star Wives of America, Inc., Iraq & Afghanistan Veterans of America, Jewish War Veterans of the USA, Marine Corps League, Marine Corps Reserve Association, Military Officers Assn. of America, Military Order of the Purple Heart, National Association for Uniformed Services, National Guard Assn. of the US, National Military Family Assn., National Order of Battlefield Commissions, Naval Enlisted Reserve Assn., Non Commissioned Officers Assn. of the United States of America, Reserve Enlisted Assn. of the US, Reserve Officers Assn., Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces, The Military Chaplains Assn. of the USA, The Retired Enlisted Assn., USCG Chief Petty Officers Assn., US Army Warrant Officers Assn., Mr. NELSON of Florida. This letter supports this legislation. It is from the Military Coalition. The Military Coalition is a group of 34 organizations, and their signatures are on the letter--alphabetically, from the Air Force Association all the way to the last one on the list of 34, the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States. All those organizations that you would expect are in between; there are 34 I wish to tell you about this particular amendment. I filed this bill--and this is nonpartisan--years ago with Senator Sessions and eight other original cosponsors. It will repeal the law that takes almost $1,200 per month from families who have lost a loved one because of military service. This survivors benefit plan, otherwise known by its initials as SBP, is an annuity paid by the Defense Department. Survivors receive the benefit when either a military retiree pays a premium as income insurance for their survivors or when a servicemember The other law is dependency and indemnity compensation, referred to by its initials DIC. It is a survivor benefit paid by the Veterans' Administration. Survivors receive this benefit when the military What this amendment will do is fix this longstanding problem in the military survivor benefits system. The problem is, it requires a dollar-for-dollar reduction of the survivor benefits from the SBP, paid by the Department of Defense, offsetting against the dependents and indemnity compensation, DIC, paid by the Veterans' Administration. You know the great quote, following one of America's bloodiest wars, by President Lincoln in his second inaugural address--and the war was still raging at that point. He said that one of the greatest obligations in war is to ``finish the work we are in; to bind up the Nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle''--in other words, the veterans--``and for his widow and his orphan.'' Following Lincoln's advice to honor truly our servicemembers, they need to know their widows and orphans, their survivors, will be taken care of. We certainly agree that the U.S. Government must take care of our veterans, their widows, and their orphans. In keeping with that principle, we need to repeal this offset that denies the widows and orphans the annuity their deceased loved ones have earned on Active Duty or have purchased for them. A retired military member can purchase this SBP, and it is an insurance policy so their survivors will have Over in the Veterans' Administration, we have a law that says, if you are disabled a certain percentage, we are going to take care of you. One should not offset the other--particularly, when somebody has paid Well, that dollar-for-dollar offset is what has me so agitated for a decade now. I have already explained that, for the survivors benefit plan, there are two ways to qualify: The military retiree goes out and voluntarily pays into an insurance program with their retirement income. Later, the statute was added that the survivors benefit plan is available to an Active-Duty servicemember if they are killed as a result of military service. For retirees, the SBP is an insurance program that protects the income of survivors; and for Active-Duty military members, SBP is compensation for the servicemembers' On the other hand, the dependents indemnity compensation is a benefit payment to the survivors of a servicemember who dies from a service- connected condition. For almost a decade, I have fought to repeal the law that requires the dollar-for-dollar offset of these two very different benefits. Back in 2005, the Senate took the step in the right direction and passed, by a vote of 92 to 6, my amendment to repeal that offset. When it got down to the conference committee, you know what happened. In the 2008 Defense authorization bill, we cracked the door to eliminating the offset. In the conference committee negotiations with the House, we made some progress when we got a special payment of $50 per month, which would now increase to $310 per month by 2017 because of money savings found in the tobacco legislation passed Our efforts have been important steps in the right direction, but they are not enough. We must meet our obligation to the widows and orphans with the same sense of honor as was the service their loved ones had performed. We need to completely offset this SBP and DIC. We must continue to work to do right by all those who have given this Nation their all and especially for the loved ones they may leave to In that letter that I have had entered into the Record, it says: The elimination of this survivor benefit inequity is the top legislative goal for [the Military Coalition] in 2009. I will not take the time to read the names of the 34 organizations that signed the letter, but they are all fairly well known to every one On February 24 of this year, during a joint session of the Congress, To keep our sacred trust with those who serve, we will raise their pay, and give our veterans the expanded health I say amen to that. I ask that President Obama help us end this injustice to widows and orphans of our Nation's heroes. Mr. President, may I inquire if there is someone else who wants to speak now, because if there would not be, I would like to speak as in Mr. McCAIN. I object. Let's dispose of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona objects. Mr. McCAIN. I object to the Senator from Florida going into morning business until we dispose of the amendment. Then he can do it right Mr. NELSON of Florida. I merely inquired if another Senator wants to speak. Certainly, I would withhold asking for a unanimous consent. Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I intend to speak on the Thune amendment and was scheduled to speak in the next few minutes. If it is OK with the floor leaders, if my colleague will speak for a brief amount of time, I am happy to go after him. It is up to the floor managers. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I say to the Senator from Florida, we will find out if there are others who want to speak on his amendment. If not, we are in favor of disposing of his amendment. Part of the agreement we made, in order for us to proceed, was that if anyone came to the floor to speak on the pending amendment, that Senator would have priority. If it is agreeable to the Senator from Florida, the Senator from New York would go ahead and then we could go back to him speaking Mr. NELSON of Florida. Of course. It is my understanding the Senator from South Carolina had just spoken as in morning business. That is why I was inquiring. I am very grateful to the ranking member of the committee for us to go ahead and dispose of this amendment. Mr. McCAIN. Why don't we wait until after the Senator from New York finishes, to make sure there is no one else who wants to speak on the Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, if my colleague needs 5 minutes, I am happy to yield to him, if I would come after that. I ask unanimous Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kaufman). Without objection, it is so (The remarks of Mr. NELSON of Florida pertaining to the introduction of S. 1484, S. 1485, S. 1486, and S. 1487 are located in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions.'') Mr. REED. Mr. President, if the Senator from Florida is prepared, I have conferred with the ranking member, the Senator from Arizona, and The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote, Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I know we are not now on the Thune amendment. I know we have gone aside to other amendments and that we will be debating Thune tomorrow morning, but there are so many of my colleagues who want to speak, and I have a lot to say. So I will speak for 5 minutes tomorrow morning, but I will give the bulk of my speech Mr. President, I rise in staunch opposition to the Thune amendment. I believe it is a dangerous amendment that would go far beyond authorizing gun possession for self-defense and not only create a serious threat to public safety but also severely undercut American Amendment No. 1618, authored by Senator Thune, would force States and localities from across the Nation to permit individuals from other States to carry hidden and loaded handguns in public, even where the elected representatives of those States have chosen to bar these persons from possessing firearms. The legislation would require every State with concealed carry legislation to honor concealed carry licenses issued by any other State so long as they abide by the State's This amendment is a bridge too far and could endanger the safety of millions of Americans. Each State has carefully crafted its concealed carry laws in the way that makes the most sense to protect its citizens. It is obvious what is good for the safety of people in New York City or Philadelphia or Chicago or Miami or Los Angeles is not the same thing that is needed in rural Idaho or rural Tennessee. Yet this amendment, in one fell swoop, says the protections some States feel they need to protect law enforcement, to protect its citizenry, would The amendment will incite the dangerous race to the bottom in our Nation's gun laws. Let's examine the lineup of people who could carry concealed weapons in 48 States under this amendment. And I don't disparage each State for doing what it wants within its own borders, but why impose that on States outside their borders? Arizona law allows a concealed carry permit to be issued to an applicant who is a known alcoholic. So alcoholics would be in the lineup. They could carry a concealed weapon in States outside of Arizona simply because Arizona allowed them to do so. Texas, which is one of the top 10 sources of guns recovered in crimes in New York City, a city in which I reside, is obliged to issue a permit to a person who has been convicted repeatedly of illegally carrying a handgun. Therefore, we can place arms traffickers in this Mississippi law leaves access to concealed carry permits for members Alaska and Vermont allow adult residents of their States to carry a concealed weapon without a license or background check as long as they are allowed to possess a gun, even if they have committed violent misdemeanors, have committed misdemeanor sex offenses against minors or are dangerously mentally ill and have been voluntarily committed to a Again, each State has its own views. The State of Vermont is a beautiful State. It is different from New York State in many ways, and the laws that fit for Vermont don't necessarily fit for New York. A 17-year-old Crip or Blood from New York--a member of a gang; dangerous, maybe violent--could head to Vermont, obtain a Vermont driver's license, buy a gun, and return to New York or he could buy a whole bunch of guns and return to New York. When law enforcement stops him, a loaded gun tucked in his pants or a whole bunch of guns in his backpack, all he would have to do is claim he is a Vermonter visiting New York, show his Vermont ID, and the New York Police Department would be unable to stop him. This runs shivers down the spines of New York police officers, of New York sheriffs, of New York law enforcement. And it doesn't just apply to New York. This could apply to any large State. Imagine law enforcement stopping one of these characters with a backpack full of guns--a known member of a major gang--and having to let them go. Imagine how empowered gun smugglers and traffickers would feel. Their business would boom. These are people who make money by selling guns illegally to people who are convicted felons. They could go to the State with the weakest laws, get a concealed carry permit--if that State allowed it, and in all likelihood it might--and then start bringing concealed guns into neighboring States and States across the country. Their business would boom, but our safety would be impaired. Imagine routine traffic stops turned into potential shootouts. Police officers in New York have the safety and the peace of mind in knowing that the only people who might legally have a gun are those who have been approved by the police department. That is how we do it in a city such as New York. We have had our problems with crime. Thank God it is much lower now, due to the great work of the New York City police. But now they would be totally unprepared, walking on tiptoe. And if the criminal simply said: I am from this State--wow. I shudder Beyond the very real threat this poses to law enforcement and the safety of our police officers and the safety of our citizens, it would create a logistical nightmare. A police officer making a stop of a car would have to have in front of him or her the laws of all 45 States that now allow or whose residents would now be allowed or even whose people had gotten carry permits who would now be allowed to carry What about States rights? I have not been on the side--it is obvious--of the gun lobby for as many years as I have been here in the House and Senate. I have always believed, though, there is a right to bear arms and that it is unfair to say the second amendment should be seen through a pinhole and the first, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth amendments should be seen broadly. I don't think But every amendment has limitations. Through the years when I have been involved in this issue, the NRA and other gun groups have argued, frankly, that the States ought to make their own decisions. All of a sudden we see a 180-degree hairpin turn. Now they are saying that the States cannot make their own decisions. Why is it that every other issue should be resolved by the States except this one? The amendment flies in the very face of States rights arguments and takes away I say to my colleagues who have laws and citizenry who probably want the laws not drawn as tightly as my State, if you open up this door, one day you will regret it. Because if you say that the Federal Government should decide what law governs, you are taking away States' In the 1990s, after the passage of the Brady Act, the National Rifle Association funded multiple legal challenges to it, citing the 10th amendment, that the right to bear arms therefore resided in the States. Indeed, Mary Sue Falkner, who was then a spokesman for the NRA, said at This is not a case about firearms per se, but about whether the Federal Government can force States and local governments Similarly, in reference to Brady, the NRA's chief lobbyist said that the Federal Government was getting too much involved in State affairs. The gun lobby's rallying cry has always been, ``Let each State decide.'' But with this amendment, again, a 180-degree flip. Clearly, large urban areas merit a different standard than rural areas. To gut the ability of local police and sheriffs to determine who should be able to carry a concealed weapon makes no sense. It is wrong to take away any State's rights to make decisions about what can make a resident safer. A one-size-fits-all approach to community safety leads Make no mistake, this is a serious amendment. It is, even though not the intention of the author, a dangerous amendment. There will be needless suffering, injuries, and deaths if this amendment is agreed I talked to my colleague Senator Thune. We are friends. We saw each other in the gym this morning. He said to me: What about truckdrivers who have the gun in the cab of their truck and ride across State lines? I am sympathetic to that. I supported laws that allow police officers in New York to carry their gun when they cross over into New Jersey to shop or whatever. But you do not need this law to deal with that problem, because it creates so many other issues. There are ways we can deal with the problem that the Senator from South Dakota brought up to me in the gym this morning, without decimating State laws that protect Make no mistake about it, this amendment would affect every State in the country, but I do not see the Governors on board. It would affect every city in the country. I don't see the mayors on board. It would affect every county in the country, but I don't see the sheriffs on board. It would affect every town in the country, but I don't see Before we rush to judgment, shouldn't we ask our Governors, our mayors, our sheriffs, our police chiefs if this will make our communities safer or less safe? If this will put the men and women, the brave men and women who defend us and protect us on police forces, in I urge my colleagues to give thoughtful and careful consideration to the consequences of the Thune amendment. I believe if they do, they The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, as we meet here today we are discussing the Defense authorization bill. We debate it each year. It is basically an authorization for the expenditure of funds in defense of America. It is a significant bill with a lot of different parts. I commend the Senators who have brought this to the floor, Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, and his Republican I know this bill is important and I know we will be returning to substantive amendments on this bill very shortly. But while we have this break in the action, I want to address another issue which is being debated in almost every corridor on Capitol Hill, and that is the issue of health care reform. It is an interesting issue and an amazing challenge to this Congress, to try to grapple with the health care Despite our prosperity, we know there is something fundamentally flawed with our health care system. We spend more than twice as much per person in America on health care as any other country, and the results do not show that money is being well spent. Many other countries, spending a fraction of what the United States spends, end up with very different and much better results in terms of survival from certain diseases and illness, and mortality rates. There is something to be learned here about how we can be more effective in providing health care for our citizens and not break the bank. Most Americans know what I am talking about when I talk about cost, because they are facing cost issues every day. They know health insurance premiums in America in the last several years have gone up three times faster than the incomes and wages of Americans. We have learned it is not unusual for one-fourth of Americans to spend 1 out of every $10 in income for health insurance. Some, a smaller group but a significant group, spend up to $1 out of every $4 in income on health insurance. The number keeps going through the roof with no end in sight. It worries us, not just as individuals and members of families, but businesses that are trying to do the right thing for their It worries units of government because, whether it is your State government providing assistance for Medicaid or whether it is the Federal Government concerned about Medicare and Medicaid, the costs of health care are growing so quickly that they could easily put us into a perpetual debt situation, something we do not want to see, something we Now we are debating in the House and in the Senate, in a variety of different committees, how to change this health care system. Needless to say, it is a contentious debate. There are a lot of different points of view. There are some people and companies in America that want no change in our health care system. Most people do. Some don't. Many of those who are resisting change, who are unwilling to support the President's efforts to move us in this direction, are the very same companies and people who are profiting from the current system. Make no mistake, when you spend billions of dollars on a system, much more than any other country, you are going to end up in a situation where many people are profiting handsomely from the current system. When you talk about reform--reducing the cost, reducing the payments, being more cost effective--these people see money going out the window, That is what the battle is all about. We have been through it before, and now we have returned to it. But in addition to cost, there is also the issue of the availability of health insurance. This morning's Chicago Tribune, on the front page, told the story of a man who sadly is one of the victims of this situation. He lives in a suburb of Chicago, and he works as a doorman at one of the buildings. He had a bad back. He finally was told--he tried a lot of conservative treatment; it just did not work--you are going to have to have back So he did what he was supposed to do. He went to his insurance company and said: The doctor is recommending a surgery, and I want to know if it will be covered by my health insurance. Well, the health insurance company sent back to him written confirmation that the costs of the surgery would be covered by his health insurance. So he went through with the surgery and ended up incurring $148,000 in medical I think you know how this story ends. They turned in the bills to the insurance company, and they denied them. They said: We did not really approve this surgery. You should have taken a more conservative Well, he thought he had done everything he was supposed to. What followed was a battle with this insurance company, day after day, month after month, while people were saying: Send us the $148,000. This man of limited means was fighting to finally get this health insurance company to pay what they promised to pay. It took him months. When it was all over, Mr. Napientek, Michael Napientek, ended up with coverage. Had he failed to get the coverage for that surgery, it would have wiped out his entire life's savings. That is the reality of health care. That is the situation too many people find themselves in, so vulnerable in a situation where one medical bill denied by an insurance company bureaucrat can literally wipe out their life's savings. We can do better. We have to do better. That is what this debate is all about. First, we have to reduce the cost of health care for families and businesses and governments across America. There are ways to do that. We can lower costs to make sure every American has access to insurance. We can make it clear that no one can be turned down for insurance coverage because of a preexisting condition. We can make certain there is no discrimination in the premiums that are charged individual Americans because one is a male and another female; one is a certain age and another not. We can make certain there is more fairness in the way people are treated by these health insurance companies. This idea of denying coverage for preexisting conditions, imagine how frustrating that must be to realize that if you turned in a claim this year on your health insurance because you had a bad back, and you went to the doctor next year, when it came time for surgery they would not This happened to a friend of mine, a fellow I grew up with in East St. Louis, IL, in the trucking business. He not only owned the business, he drove the trucks. When he reached 60 years of age, his back was killing him. Well, at that point his company had lost its health insurance. Why? Because the wife of one of the employees had a sick baby. Her sick baby incurred a lot of medical bills, and the cost of health insurance went through the roof. They had to cancel the company's health insurance, give the employees some money, and say: He was in the same boat. He went out to get private health insurance, complained about a bad back. The following year when the doctor said he needed back surgery, he turned in a claim to his health insurance company, and they said: No, it is a preexisting condition. We will not Do you know what he had to do? He ended up filing a worker's compensation claim claiming that his back injuries had to do with bouncing around in a truck for 30 or 40 years, not an unreasonable conclusion. Do you know who he sued? He sued himself. He sued as an employee of the company. He sued himself as owner of the company. Is that crazy to reach that point? And he won, incidentally. They said it is subject to worker's compensation. We will pay for the He had done everything right, providing health insurance for his employees until he could not afford it, trying to get private insurance for himself at the age of 60, then turning in a claim and being turned down. He could have been wiped out by that surgery, just as the man on We are all in this vulnerable situation because the health insurance companies have so much power over our lives. I listen to those on the other side of the aisle who come--not all of them but many--every single day and say we do not need to change this system. Who are they talking to? Who are they listening to? They are not listening to people like these who find out every day that they do not have coverage, that the cost of insurance is too high, that their doctor is in a debate with a clerk at an insurance company over whether they are going to get the necessary and proper treatment for a medical condition. That is the There are many ways to address this, and we should. We have to address it by making sure everyone has access to health insurance regardless of preexisting conditions, health status for a medical condition. We have to get rid of the so-called lifetime caps. Imagine that a diagnosis tomorrow that you or someone you love in your family has a chronic condition that is going to call for medical treatment for a long period of time, and then you realize there will come a moment when that health insurance company would say: We are out of here. You just broke the bank. You hit the cap on your policy. We have to put an end to that. We also have to limit the out-of- pocket expenses individuals have to pay. There comes a point where people cannot afford this expense. We have to require equal treatment for men and women--Black, White, and brown, young and old, whether they We have to make sure if a health insurance policy in America is offered, it is a good policy that covers the basic needs. There are policies that do not. They sell health insurance you can afford, and guess what. It is worthless. That is not good for America and it is not There are ways to lower costs. We ought to be pushing for prevention. We ought to be trying to find ways to keep people well, incentives for the right conduct and healthy outcomes. Right now there is not much of a reward or an incentive for wellness. We also have to give support to small businesses. When we look at the insured in America, most of them are small business employees and their children. The poorest people in America are covered by Medicaid, the government health insurance, as Folks are fortunate, like myself, under the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and most others who have health insurance policies, to have coverage. But the folks in the middle who get up and go to work every day for the small businesses of America--and their kids--are the One of the proposals before us in Congress is to make sure small businesses can start getting into pools where they can use that pooling power to reach out and have health insurance coverage that is Senator Reed is on the Senate floor today. He and I were fortunate enough to be at lunch today when our colleague from Connecticut, Chris Dodd, got up and spoke about what had happened in the HELP Committee, the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, in preparing a bill on health care reform. There were 800 amendments filed. They met for 61 days. Some 400 amendments were considered and voted on. Over 100 of those were from the Republican side of the aisle. They were trying their best to create a bipartisan compromise to get through the bill. But Senator Dodd came up and talked about this, not in terms of a specific bill and its provisions; he talked about the historic opportunity we have. He said for many of us, for most of us now serving in the Senate, this may be the only time in our political careers when we can change the health care system for the better; when we can make sure that people in America have a better chance to be able to afford He certainly inspired us when he pulled out this magazine and showed us a picture of our colleague, Senator Teddy Kennedy, on the cover of Newsweek, and the quote from Ted Kennedy that says: ``We're almost There is a long essay in here about Ted Kennedy's terrific public career and how much of it has been spent on this issue of health care; what it meant to him personally when his son was diagnosed with bone cancer and had to have his leg amputated; what he went through in a plane crash; when he has seen others and what they have gone through. Teddy Kennedy reminds us that these opportunities do not come around very often. There is lots we can debate and argue about, but at the end of the day the American people want to see the debate end. They want to see us acting together responsibly for health care that is centered on patients; to make sure they have a health insurance policy they like, that they can keep; to make certain they have a good strong confidential relationship with their doctors for themselves and their families; to make sure, as well, they are not excluded from coverage for preexisting conditions; to make sure that health insurance is going to be affordable; and to make sure it covers all Americans. We can do it. We are a great and prosperous nation. We have a President who is committed to it. And working with him on a bipartisan basis we can get this done. We can work with the health care professionals--the doctors, the nurses, those leading hospitals--who This is our chance. For those who are saying no, that they want the status quo, they do not want to change it, only a small percentage of Americans agree with them. Most Americans agree what I have talked about today needs to be done. We have to overcome those voices of negativity and doubt who continue to come to the Senate floor, those Let me tell you, this is a great, strong country that tackles big problems. We have never been assigned a bigger assignment than this one, health care for America. It touches all 300 million of us. We have to make sure it is done fairly, done effectively, and done quickly. If we let this drag out for months beyond this year, it is going to be I encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to work toward that goal, make certain that President Obama's leadership is rewarded with health care reform that does make a difference. Mr. BOND. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss an amendment that I am cosponsoring with my friend and fellow cochair of the Senate National Guard Caucus, Senator Leahy. We will be introducing a bipartisan amendment to strengthen one of our Nation's most important military and civilian resources, the National Guard. The National Guard, as I think everybody in this body knows, has a long and proud history of contributing to America's military operations abroad while providing vital support and security to civil authorities Since September 11, 2001, our citizen soldiers and airmen have taken on greater responsibilities and risk, from fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan to providing critical disaster assistance in the United Now we see the tremendous value of the National Guard forces every time we look as they confront terrorists, provide critical support in unique areas such as Afghanistan where the agribusiness development teams are working to help provide agricultural know-how and better income to the farmers of Afghanistan, to areas where they provide water, food, and health supplies to victims of natural disasters. Furthermore, the Guard is a tremendous value for the capability it provides our Nation. It provides 40 percent of the total military force for around 4.5 percent of the budget. In other words, the Guard There is no doubt today we are asking more from the men and women of the National Guard than ever before, often at great cost to their I think this means we have a heavy responsibility to support our citizen soldiers and airmen in their unique dual mission of developing military support abroad and providing homeland defense stateside. While serving abroad, National Guard troops serve under Air Force and Army Commands in what is known as title 10 status, which refers to the section in the U.S. Code dealing with the military. But when the Guard operates at home, they serve under the command and control of the I had the honor of serving as commander in chief of the Missouri National Guard for 8 years. I can tell you that Missouri has a wide range of natural and sometimes human disasters ranging from tornadoes and floods to blizzards and ice storms. I called out the Guard for every single one of those and several more I probably cannot even remember: threatened prison insurrections, other civil disobedience, to tracking down escapees from prison. Right after Katrina--I think it was about a year after Katrina--I visited Jefferson Barracks, MO, where one of our National Guard engineer units is stationed. They told me proudly that when Katrina hit, they immediately sent one of their National Guard battalions to Katrina. They had all the equipment, the high-wheeled vehicles, the communications equipment. They did such a wonderful job, the adjutant general of Louisiana called and said: You have two more battalions; send us another one. They said: That is where the problem comes in. We only have equipment for one out of three battalions. The Guard was one-third resourced. We could have sent them down there in tennis shoes and a taxicab, but they needed the equipment that an engineer battalion has to deal with the problems of the aftermath of the floods and the hurricane. I think there is a lot more we can do to make this unique arrangement work more smoothly. The Guard will continue to play a critical role in response to another natural disaster or, heaven forbid, terrorist attack. To the men and women of the National Guard, we say: Thank you for that support. But more needs to be done. The amendment we are introducing today to strengthen the Guard consists of two planks which are designed, first, to increase the Guard's voice inside the Pentagon and, second, to clarify how the Federal military support to civil authorities will We would give the Chief of the National Guard more muscle in the Pentagon, providing a seat for him on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. With 40 percent of the force, one would think that big a portion of our total military capability would deserve to sit with the outstanding leaders of the Army, the Air Force, the Marines, and others who are there. One would think this large a segment of our force would be represented. When we have big decisions on the future of our resource allocation for the military--title X and, in this case, also title Last year--I thank my colleagues--we successfully authorized the promotion of the Chief of the National Guard to the rank of four-star general in last year's empowerment legislation. Additionally, this year's empowerment amendment will make certain that the Chief of the National Guard Bureau has a Vice Chief in the grade of lieutenant general. When you are dealing with that many problems, there is a major operation that needs to be handled by a deputy to the four-star Chief of the National Guard. It is critical to the day-to-day operations of the National Guard Bureau and to ensure the Guard is adequately This amendment will also fill the gaps between civilian and military emergency response capabilities. We would give the National Guard Bureau, in consultation with the States' adjutant generals, budgetary power to identify, validate, and procure equipment essential to their unique domestic missions so they will be better prepared to respond to emergencies here at home. The next time they call for a second engineer battalion, I hope we have the equipment to send one to whatever State The amendment also supports the designation of National Guard general officers as commanders of Army North and Air Force North commands. This will ensure unity of effort and of command between the National Guard in the 54 States and territories and the very important U.S. North command which protects the United States in the continental United Finally, our amendment gives State Governors tactical control of Federal troops responding to emergencies inside their State or territory. Time and time again, we have seen Reserve units stationed within close proximity to a natural or manmade disaster forced to stand by and watch when they could have been assisting injured victims in preventing loss of property. This amendment ensures that all available military forces be utilized as early as possible in an emergency situation. This way, our State leaders can act more quickly and decisively to mitigate disasters at home. Our citizen soldiers stand ready to defend the Nation, secure our homeland from natural disasters and terrorist attacks, and are now fighting overseas in the war on nor the Federal military support missions of the Guard are likely to diminish in importance at any time in the foreseeable future. In fact, the need for the National Guard is greater now than ever before. Now more than ever, as budgets are constrained and entitlements continue to grow at alarming rates, we should not be looking to reduce the Guard We have a responsibility to give the Guard the equipment, resources, and bureaucratic muscle they need to meet their critical dual mission. In order to do so, it is imperative we strengthen the decisionmaking capability of Guard leaders within the Department of Defense and make As one former leader of the Guard said: If you want us in on the big plays, at least let us in the huddle when you are planning to call I thank my colleagues for their past support of the Guard. I join with Senator Leahy in asking for continued support of the National Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to set aside the pending Thune amendment and call up my amendment No. 1597. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The Senator from Kansas [Mr. Brownback], for himself, Mr. Bayh, Mr. Kyl, and Mr. Inhofe, proposes an amendment numbered Mr. BROWNBACK. I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To express the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism) At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON REDESIGNATION OF NORTH (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) On October 11, 2008, the Department of State removed North Korea from its list of state sponsors of terrorism, on (2) North Korea was removed from that list despite its refusal to account fully for its abduction of foreign citizens, proliferation of nuclear and other dangerous technologies and weapon systems to terrorist groups and other state sponsors of terrorism, or its commission of other past (3) On March 17, 2009, American journalists Euna Lee and Laura Ling were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border subsequently sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in a prison (4) On April 5, 2009, the Government of North Korea tested a long-range ballistic missile in violation of United Nations (5) On April 15, 2009, the Government of North Korea announced it was expelling international inspectors from, and recommissioning, its Yongbyon nuclear facility and ending its (6) Those actions were in violation of the June 26, 2008, announcement by the President of the United States that the removal of North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism was dependent on the Government of North Korea agreeing to a system to verify its declarations with respect (7) On May 25, 2009, the Government of North Korea conducted a second illegal nuclear test, in addition to conducting tests of its ballistic missile systems launched in (8) North Korea has failed to acknowledge or account for its role in building and supplying the secret nuclear facility at Al Kibar, Syria, has failed to account for all remaining citizens of Japan abducted by North Korea, and, according to recent reports, continues to engage in close cooperation with the terrorist Iranian Revolutionary Guard (9) There have been recent credible reports that North Korea has provided support to the terrorist group Hezbollah, including by providing ballistic missile components and personnel to train members of Hezbollah with respect to the development of extensive underground military facilities in (10) The 2005 and 2006 Country Reports on Terrorism of the Department of State state, with respect to Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, ``Most worrisome is that some of these countries also have the capability to manufacture WMD and other destabilizing technologies that can get into the hands of terrorists. The United States will continue to insist that these countries end the support they give to terrorist (11) President Barack Obama stated that actions of the Government of North Korea ``are a matter of grave concern to all nations. North Korea's attempts to develop nuclear weapons, as well as its ballistic missile program, constitute a threat to international peace and security. By acting in blatant defiance of the United Nations Security Council, North Korea is directly and recklessly challenging the international community. North Korea's behavior increases tensions and undermines stability in Northeast Asia. Such provocations will only serve to deepen North Korea's isolation. It will not find international acceptance unless it abandons its pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should designate North Korea as a country that has repeatedly provided support for acts of (1) section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979 (50 U.S.C. App. 2405(j)) (as continued in effect pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. (2) section 40 of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. (3) section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, this is a bipartisan amendment put forward by Senator Bayh and myself. I ask unanimous consent that The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. This is a bipartisan resolution and sense of the Senate that the administration should relist North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. As my colleagues know, the Bush administration, through a great deal of hoopla, listed North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. They took them off the list in spite of such terrible and erratic behavior as nuclear weapons, missile technology, and now taking U.S. citizens hostage and holding them. Nonetheless, the Bush administration, as part of the six-party talks, did an agreement, a deal to delist them as a state sponsor of terrorism. All that got us was more nuclear weapons, more missiles being sent off, more provocative action by the North Koreans, and a dismal situation. What we are asking with the amendment is that it is a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of In that regard, I wish to enter a few items in the Record to be printed at the end of my presentation that are currently in the news. This is yesterday's front page of the Washington Post where it talks about ``[North] Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back I ask unanimous consent that this full article be printed in the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. That is an old story. Unfortunately, we know very well about the gulags that exist in North Korea and the 200,000 people we believe are in those. Here is today's Washington Post. This was new information I found shocking: North Korea building mysterious military ties with the military junta in Burma now taking place and the possibility of them giving military equipment and supplies, I suppose possibly even nuclear arms and missile technology, to the military I ask unanimous consent that this be printed in the Record at the end The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. If that is not enough to relist them as a state sponsor of terrorism, I don't know what is. But there is a full record we can go forward with on relisting North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. At the outset, I think we ought to look at this and say this is an extremely tough situation for the United States. It is one on action to confront them on what they are doing to militarize some of the worst places and worst actors around the world and what North Korea is doing to threaten interests of the United States. All this is taking place while Kim Jong Il is ill. To what degree, we don't know for sure. A succession is being discussed. Of what nature, we are not sure. But clearly North Korea is doing the most provocative things they have probably done in the history of that provocative nation. It is taking place right now. We should notice it and recognize these are terrorist actions. We should clearly call for them to be I have, many times, spoken before regarding the long and outrageous list of crimes of the Kim regime. I will not go through those again at great length. But I will say the crimes committed by the North Korean regime include not only those external and diplomatic of nature-- violating agreements, treaties, conventions, and proliferating dangerous technologies to the world's worst actors--but the regime has also committed massive and unspeakable crimes against the North Korean people themselves who for decades have been beaten, tortured, raped, trafficked, starved, used as medical experiments, subjected to collective familial punishment, and executed in the most brutal and painful ways. If you want further details on that, read yesterday's Hundreds of thousands languish in the gulag and concentration camps spread out over the entire country. All the while, the world watches and wrings its collective hands. As we pledged never again, we watch as yet again another criminal regime commits a genocide. Never again I have introduced legislation to address these issues. I hope the Foreign Relations Committee can find time to take it up. The amendment before us today deals with another aspect of the North Korean criminal state, its longstanding and robust sponsorship of international terrorism. The amendment would place the Senate on record as standing for the proposition that North Korea's hostile and provocative actions will not be ignored. Indeed, they will have meaningful consequences under the law. This amendment, of which Senator Bayh is the lead cosponsor, expresses the sense of the Senate that the Secretary of State should redesignate North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism based on its nuclear and missile proliferation, abductions, On October 11, 2008, the State Department removed North Korea from the list of state sponsors of terrorism on which it had been placed since 1988. At the time, this is what President Bush said to the North Korean regime upon announcing that North Korea would be removed. He We will trust you only to the extent that you fulfill your promises. If North Korea makes the wrong choices, the United They have made the wrong choices. We should act accordingly. Sanctions are a critical part of our leverage to pressure North Korea to act. They should only be lifted based on North Korean performance. If the North Koreans do not meet their obligations, we should move quickly to reimpose sanctions that have been waived and consider new restrictions going They have not lived up to their obligations. They have continued Let's examine how well the North Korean regime has lived up to its commitment since being removed from the list. Since removal last October, the North Korean regime has done the following: launched a multistage ballistic missile over Japan in violation of U.N. Security Council sanctions; kidnapped and imprisoned two American journalists and sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in a North Korean prison camp; pulled out of the six-party talks vowing never to return; kicked out international nuclear inspectors and American monitors; restarted its nuclear facilities; renounced the 50-year armistice with South Korea; detonated a second illegal nuclear weapon; launched additional short-range missiles; is preparing to launch long-range missiles capable of reaching the United States; and today news accounts are reporting about North Korean proliferation to the Burmese junta, Add to this a long history of other ongoing illicit operations that finance the North Korean regime's budget, including the following: extensive drug smuggling; massive and complex operations to counterfeit U.S. currency, many of which are believed to be in wide circulation; money laundering; terrorist threats by the regime against the United States, Japanese, and South Korean civilians. That is what this regime and group has done and is doing. That is some of what they have done What have we done in response? The U.N. Security Council has passed another sanctions resolution similar to the same resolution North Korea has brazenly violated to get us to this point. In 2006, the State Department, in its terrorism report, said this about keeping North Korea on the list: North Korea ``continued to maintain their ties to Most worrisome is that some of these countries [including North Korea] also have the capability to manufacture [weapons of mass destruction] and other destabilizing technologies If that was the justification for the terror list in 2006, certainly North Korea's actions today fit that standard--perhaps even more so We cannot have it both ways. If we removed North Korea from the terrorism list last year as a reward for its dubious cooperation on nuclear weapons, we would only be reversing that step by adding it back after the regime betrayed its commitments and followed up with hostile I would also like to address this issue: It often has been raised with me--and the Secretary of State herself has raised this indirectly with me--that the multiple statutes that control the list of state sponsors of terrorism do not provide the legal ability for the Secretary of State to redesignate. I think this argument is flawed, and I would like to summarize that by reading the relevant portions of each of these acts, because here is the key point on it, that they are saying: Well, we have to find factual basis that is different from the first round for us to do that. We are going through a legal review of doing this. But here the state sponsor of terrorism list is controlled under two different acts: the Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign As to countries covered by the prohibition, it says this. This is The prohibitions contained in this section apply with respect to a country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided That is what it says in the Arms Export Control Act. The list I have just read goes through what has taken place, and they are clearly and repeatedly providing support for acts of international terrorism. It does not say anything about they cannot be relisted or we have to go through some elaborate finding process, that it cannot be based on actions they have done. These are the actions they have done in the last 6 months that are of public record. And it says the Secretary of State makes this determination and has fairly wide discretion to be Under section 628 of the Foreign Assistance Act, it says: The United States shall not provide any assistance to any country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. Again, the statute is very broad in its statement. It does not say anything about they cannot relist them. It says they can do this on the I do not know why we need to wait any longer, with the actions this government has taken and even with these most recent ones reported today of working with Burma or of the publicly done ones we know about of nuclear weapons detonation or the ones of missile technology being I recognize this is a sense of the Senate, so it is just a sense of this body. But this body has had a strong impact in prior actions when we took a sense-of-the-Senate resolution to list the Revolutionary Guard in Iran, that we believed they should be listed as a state sponsor of terrorism. The administration acted not long after that to I believe if this body took strong action here now and said we believe North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism, it would send a very strong and proper signal to the administration-- not that we are doing your job, but we believe this is the case and this is something that is meritorious toward North Korea and its That is why I urge my colleagues to support the bipartisan Bayh- Brownback amendment and vote for this amendment to the Defense N. Korea's Hard-Labor Camps: On the Diplomatic Back Burner Seoul.--Images and accounts of the North Korean gulag become sharper, more harrowing and more accessible with each A distillation of testimony from survivors and former guards, newly published by the Korean Bar Association, details the daily lives of 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps: Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, as they age, they hunch over at the waist. Most work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition- related illnesses, usually around the age of 50. Allowed just one set of clothes, they live and die in rags, without soap, The camps have never been visited by outsiders, so these accounts cannot be independently verified. But high- resolution satellite photographs, now accessible to anyone with an Internet connection, reveal vast labor camps in the mountains of North Korea. The photographs corroborate survivors' stories, showing entrances to mines where former prisoners said they worked as slaves, in-camp detention centers where former guards said uncooperative prisoners were tortured to death and parade grounds where former prisoners said they were forced to watch executions. Guard towers and electrified fences surround the camps, photographs show. ``We have this system of slavery right under our nose,'' said An Myeong Chul, a camp guard who defected to South Korea. ``Human rights groups can't stop it. South Korea can't stop it. The United States will have to take up this issue at But the camps have not been discussed in meetings between U.S. diplomats and North Korean officials. By exploding nuclear bombs, launching missiles and cultivating a reputation for hair-trigger belligerence, the government of Kim Jong Il has created a permanent security flash point on the Korean Peninsula--and effectively shoved the issue of ``Talking to them about the camps is something that has not been possible,'' said David Straub, a senior official in the State Department's office of Korean affairs during the Bush and Clinton years. There have been no such meetings since ``They go nuts when you talk about it,'' said Straub, who is now associate director of Korean studies at Stanford Nor have the camps become much of an issue for the American public, even though annotated images of them can be quickly called up on Google Earth and even though they have existed concentration camps and twice as long as the Soviet Gulag. Although precise numbers are impossible to obtain, Western governments and human groups estimate that hundreds of thousands of people have died in the North Korean camps. North Korea officially says the camps do not exist. It restricts movements of the few foreigners it allows into the country and severely punishes those who sneak in. U.S. reporters Laura Ling and Euna Lee were sentenced last month to 12 years of hard labor, after being convicted in a closed trial on charges of entering the country illegally. North Korea's gulag also lacks the bright light of celebrity attention. No high-profile, internationally recognized figure has emerged to coax Americans into understanding or investing emotionally in the issue, said Suzanne Scholte, a Washington-based activist who brings camp survivors to the United States for speeches and marches. ``Tibetans have the Dalai Lama and Richard Gere, Burmese have Aung San Suu Kyi, Darfurians have Mia Farrow and George Clooney,'' she said. ``North Koreans have no one like that.'' Before guards shoot prisoners who have tried to escape, they turn each execution into a teachable moment, according to interviews with five North Koreans who said they have Prisoners older than 16 are required to attend, and they are forced to stand as close as 15 feet to the condemned, according to the interviews. A prison official usually gives a lecture, explaining how the Dear Leader, as Kim Jong Il is known, had offered a ``chance at redemption'' through hard The condemned are hooded, and their mouths are stuffed with pebbles. Three guards fire three times each, as onlookers see blood spray and bodies crumple, those interviewed said. ``We almost experience the executions ourselves,'' said Jung Gwang Il, 47, adding that he witnessed two executions as an inmate at Camp 15. After three years there, Jung said, he was allowed to leave in 2003. He fled to China and now lives Like several former prisoners, Jung said the most arduous part of his imprisonment was his pre-camp interrogation at the hands of the Bowibu, the National Security Agency. After eight years in a government office that handled trade with China, a fellow worker accused him of being a South Korean ``They wanted me to admit to being a spy,'' Jung said. ``They knocked out my front teeth with a baseball bat. They fractured my skull a couple of times. I was not a spy, but I admitted to being a spy after nine months of torture.'' When he was arrested, Jung said, he weighed 167 pounds. When his interrogation was finished, he said, he weighed 80 pounds. ``When I finally got to the camp, I actually gained weight,'' said Jung, who worked summers in cornfields and ``Most people die of malnutrition, accidents at work, and during interrogation,'' said Jung, who has become a human rights advocate in Seoul. ``It is people with perseverance who survive. The ones who think about food all the time go crazy. I worked hard, so guards selected me to be a leader in my barracks. Then I didn't have to expend so much energy, and Human rights groups, lawyers committees and South Korean- funded think tanks have detailed what goes on in the camps based on in-depth interviews with survivors and former guards who trickle out of North Korea into China and find their way The motives and credibility of North Korean defectors in the South are not without question. They are desperate to make a living. Many refuse to talk unless they are paid. South Korean psychologists who debrief defectors describe them as angry, distrustful and confused. But in hundreds of separate interviews conducted over two decades, defectors have told similar stories that paint a consistent portrait of The number of camps has been consolidated from 14 to about five large sites, according to former officials who worked in the camps. Camp 22, near the Chinese border, is 31 miles long and 25 miles wide, an area larger than the city of Los Angeles. As many as 50,000 prisoners are held there, a former There is a broad consensus among researchers about how the camps are run: Most North Koreans are sent there without any judicial process. Many inmates die in the camps unaware of the charges against them. Guilt by association is legal under North Korean law, and up to three generations of a wrongdoer's family are sometimes imprisoned, following a rule from North Korea's founding dictator, Kim Il Sung: ``Enemies of class, whoever they are, their seed must be eliminated Crimes that warrant punishment in political prison camps include real or suspected opposition to the government. ``The camp system in its entirety can be perceived as a massive and elaborate system of persecution on political grounds,'' writes human rights investigator David Hawk, who has studied the camps extensively. Common criminals serve time elsewhere. Prisoners are denied any contact with the outside world, according to the Korean Bar Association's 2008 white paper on human rights in North Korea. The report also found that suicide is punished with longer prison terms for surviving relatives; guards can beat, rape and kill prisoners with impunity; when female prisoners become pregnant without Most of the political camps are ``complete control districts,'' which means that inmates work there until death. There is, however, a ``revolutionizing district'' at Camp 15, where prisoners can receive remedial indoctrination in socialism. After several years, if they memorize the writings of Kim Jong Il, they are released but remain monitored by Since it offers a safe haven to defectors, South Korea is home to scores of camp survivors. All of them have been debriefed by the South Korean intelligence service, which presumably knows more about the camps than any agency outside But for nearly a decade, despite revelations in scholarly reports, TV documentaries and memoirs, South Korea avoided public criticism of the North's gulag. It abstained from voting on U.N. resolutions that criticized North Korea's record on human rights and did not mention the camps during leadership summits in 2000 or 2007. Meanwhile, under a ``sunshine policy'' of peaceful engagement, South Korea made major economic investments in the North and gave huge, unconditional annual gifts of food and fertilizer. The public, too, has been largely silent. ``South Koreans, who publicly cherish the virtue of brotherly love, have been inexplicably stuck in a deep quagmire of indifference,'' according to the Korean Bar Association, which says it publishes reports on human rights in North Korea to ``break Government policy changed last year under President Lee Myung-bak, who has halted unconditional aid, backed U.N. resolutions that criticize the North and tried to put human rights on the table in dealing with Pyongyang. In response, North Korea has called Lee a ``traitor,'' squeezed inter- An Myeong Chul was allowed to work as a guard and driver in political prison camps because, he said, he came from a intelligence agent, as were the parents of many of his fellow In his training to work in the camps, An said, he was ordered, under penalty of becoming a prisoner himself, never to show pity. It was permissible, he said, for bored guards ``We were taught to look at inmates as pigs,'' said An, 41, adding that he worked in the camps for seven years before escaping to China in 1994. He now works in a bank in Seoul. The rules he enforced were simple. ``If you do not meet your work quota, you do not eat much,'' he said. ``You are not allowed to sleep until you finish your work. If you still do not finish your work, you are sent to a little prison inside the camp. After three months, you leave that prison An said the camps play a crucial role in the maintenance of totalitarian rule. ``All high-ranking officials underneath Kim Jong Il know that one misstep means you go to the camps, Partly to assuage his guilt, An has become an activist and has been talking about the camps for more than a decade. He was among the first to help investigators identify camp buildings using satellite images. Still, he said, nothing will change in camp operations without sustained diplomatic In the Clinton years, high-level diplomatic contacts between Washington and Pyongyang focused almost exclusively on preventing the North from developing nuclear weapons and President George W. Bush's administration took a radically different approach. It famously labeled North Korea as part of an ``axis of evil,'' along with Iran and Iraq. Bush met with camp survivors. For five years, U.S. diplomats refused After North Korea detonated a nuclear device in 2006, the Bush administration decided to talk. The negotiations, however, focused exclusively on dismantling Pyongyang's In recent months, North Korea has reneged on its promise to abandon nuclear weapons, kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors, exploded a second nuclear device and created a major security administration's dealings with North Korea. The camps, for the time being, are a non-issue. ``Unfortunately, until we get a handle on the security threat, we can't afford to deal with human rights,'' said Peter Beck, a former executive director of the U.S. Committee for Human Rights in North Kim Young Soon, once a dancer in Pyongyang, said she spent eight years in Camp 15 during the 1970s. Under the guilt-by- association rule, she said, her four children and her parents At the camp, she said, her parents starved to death and her eldest son drowned. Around the time of her arrest, her husband was shot for trying to flee the country, as was her It was not until 1989, more than a decade after her release, that she found out why she had been imprisoned. A security official told her then that she was punished because she had been a friend of Kim Jong Il's first wife and that she would ``never be forgiven again'' if the state suspected She escaped to China in 2000 and now lives in Seoul. At 73, she said she is furious that the outside world doesn't take more interest in the camps. ``I had a friend who loved Kim Jong Il, and for that the government killed my family,'' she Clinton: U.S. Wary of Growing Burmese, North Korean Military Bangkok, July 21.--The Obama administration is increasingly concerned that nuclear-armed North Korea is building mysterious military ties with Burma, another opaque country with a history of oppression, Secretary of State Hillary ``We know that there are also growing concerns about military cooperation between North Korea and Burma, which we take seriously'' Clinton told reporters after talks in the Thai capital. ``It would be destabilizing for the region. It would pose a direct threat to Burma's neighbors.'' U.S. officials traveling with Clinton, who is in Thailand to attend a regional security forum, said the concerns about Burma and North Korea extend to possible nuclear cooperation. North Korea has a long history of illicit missile sales and proliferation, including secretly helping to build a Syrian nuclear reactor that was destroyed in 2007 by Israeli jets. ``This is one of the areas we'd like to know about,'' said one official. ``We have concerns, but our information is Burma, also known as Myanmar, is regarded as one of the world's most oppressive nations, run by generals who have enriched themselves while much of the country remains desperately poor. North Korea is an equally grim country, with vast prison camps and an ailing dictator, Kim Jong Il. The evidence of growing Burmese-North Korean cooperation since formal ties were restored in 2007 is extensive, but the full extent of the military relationship is unclear. The nuclear connection is even murkier, but intelligence agencies have tracked suspicious procurement of high- precision equipment from Europe, as well as the arrival in Burma of North Korean officials associated with the company connected to the Syria reactor, according to David Albright, director of the Institute for Science and International ``Something may be going on, but no one has any proof. It is a mix of suspicions and concerns,'' Albright said, adding that close examination of satellite imagery of suspected nuclear sites has turned up no evidence. But he said that the purchases of high-precision equipment were especially troubling because the equipment did not make sense for use in missiles and it was shipped to educational entities that had Japanese officials last month also arrested three people for attempting to illegally export dual-use equipment to Burma, via Malaysia, under the direction of a company involved in the illicit procurement for North Korean military Moreover, Albright said, European and U.S. intelligence agencies have identified people associated with Namchongang Trading Corp., a North Korean company also known as NCG, as working in Burma. NCG reportedly provided the critical link between Pyongyang and Damascus, acquiring key materials from vendors in China and probably from Europe and secretly transferring them to a desert construction site near the The State Department last month cited NCG for being ``involved in the purchase of aluminum tubes and other equipment specifically suitable for a uranium enrichment U.S. officials have observed other troubling connections. The U.S. Navy last month closely tracked Kang Nam 1, a rusty North Korean freighter, after the government in Pyongyang tested a nuclear weapon. Although U.S. officials were never completely certain the ship was headed to Burma, the ship returned to North Korea after the United States, China and other countries put pressure on Burma to respect a United Nations resolution barring most North Korean weapons exports. Photographs that have emerged in recent weeks also show an extensive series of 600 to 800 tunnel complexes and other underground facilities built in Burma with North Korean technical assistance near its new capital, Naypyidaw. North Korean officials can be spotted in the photos, which were taken between 2003 and 2006 and posted on the Web site of YaleGlobal Online by journalist Bertil Lintner, an expert on Burma has uranium deposits, but as a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, it is required to allow any nuclear facilities. Russia in 2007 agreed to help build a 10-megawatt light-water reactor in Burma, but little appears At the news conference, Clinton also strongly criticized the Burmese government for its well-documented use of gang rape as a military tactic, organized by Burmese officers, against ethnic minorities. A new offensive against the Karen ethnic group has sent more than 4,000 refugees fleeing across ``We are deeply concerned by reports of continuing human rights abuses within Burma, particularly by actions that are mistreatment and abuse of young girls,'' Clinton said. The Obama administration is conducting a review of its Burma policy, which Clinton said has been placed on hold while Washington awaits the outcome of the trial of Nobel ``We have made clear we expect fair treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi, and we have condemned the way that she has been treated by the regime in Burma, which we consider to be baseless and totally unacceptable,'' Clinton said. The National League for Democracy, Suu Kyi's party, won a landslide electoral victory in 1990, but the military leadership refused to accept it. Since then, she has been under house arrest for most of the time, as have hundreds of In May, just days before Suu Kyi's six-year term under house arrest was due to expire, the government put her on trial for an incident involving a U.S. citizen who swam across Rangoon's Lake Inya to reach Suu Kyi's lakefront bungalow and allegedly stayed there one or two nights. Suu Kyi was taken to Rangoon's notorious Insein Prison on charges of violating the terms of her detention by hosting a foreigner, which could bring a three- to five-year prison term, according to Burmese opposition officials. Suu Kyi, 63, is said to be in poor health and has recently been treated ``Our position is that we are willing to have a more productive partnership with Burma if they take steps that are self-evident,'' Clinton said. She called on Burmese authorities to ``end the violence against their own people,'' including ethnic minorities, ``end the mistreatment of Aung The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island. Mr. REED. Mr. President, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Kerry, is prepared to comment and speak. I ask unanimous consent that at the conclusion of his remarks, the Senator from Delaware be recognized as in morning business. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, obviously North Korea's actions in recent weeks--months, really; testing a nuclear device on May 25 and launching ballistic missiles on July 4--received the appropriate objection in many different ways of China, Japan, South Korea, the United States, and many other countries. Clearly, those actions threaten to undermine the peace and security of northeast Asia, and the U.S. response to those actions ought to be and, I believe, is already resolute. China responded very clearly. The sanctions have been toughened--individual sanctions for the first time. A number of steps were taken by both the United Nations and China. China, incidentally, has been unprecedented in the personalization of some of the sanctions that it has put into I know the Senator from Kansas cares, obviously, enormously about the underlying issue here. But I have to say this amendment, while well intended, simply does not do what it is supposed to do. It has no impact other than the sense of the Senate: sending a message which at this particular moment, frankly, works counterproductively to other Right now, the Secretary of State is meeting at ASEAN. Right now, the various countries involved in this delicate process are working to determine how to proceed forward with respect to getting back to talks and defusing these tensions. For the Senate just to pop on an amendment like this at this moment in time not only sends a signal that complicates that process, but I think it also, frankly, will make it more difficult to secure the return of two American journalists, Laura It simply is an inappropriate interference without a foundation, I might add--without a foundation--in the law. Let me be very specific. When President Bush lifted the designation of terrorism--in fact, nothing that the Senator from Kansas has laid out here actually is supported either by the intelligence or by the facts. I could go through his amendment with specificity. Let me give an example. This is On March 17, 2009, American journalists . . . were seized near the Chinese-North Korean border by agents. . . . He is citing that as a rationale for putting them back on the list. Well, the fact is, the families themselves, as well as the two journalists--but the families--have acknowledged that they, in fact, were arrested for illegally crossing the border. So that is inappropriate. But not only is it inappropriate to cite a fact that is not a fact, but it is not a cause for putting somebody on the terrorism Nowhere do any of the actions cited here fit into the statutes that apply to whether somebody is designated as appropriately being on the terrorism list. Let me be more specific about that. When President Bush took them off the list, here is what they said. This is the President's The current intelligence assessment satisfies the second statutory requirement for rescission. Following a review of all available information, we see no credible evidence at this time of ongoing support by the DPRK for international terrorism, and we assess that the current intelligence assessment, including the most recent assessment published May 21, 2008, provides a sufficient basis for certification by the President to Congress that North Korea has not provided any support for international terrorism during the There is no intelligence showing to the contrary, as we come to the floor here today, and it is inappropriate for the Senate simply to step Our review of intelligence community assessments indicates there is no credible or sustained reporting at this time that supports allegations (including as cited in recent reports by the Congressional Research Service) that the DPRK has provided direct or witting support for Hezbollah, Tamil Tigers, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. Should we obtain credible evidence of current DPRK support for international terrorism at any time in the future, the Secretary could again designate DPRK a state sponsor of terrorism. Well, we have not. It simply does not fit under the requirements. We need to use the right tools. This amendment is flawed and I am convinced could actually undermine what I know is going on right now in terms of efforts by a number of different parties to try to move this process forward. This is not the way a responsible Senate ought to go about trying to deal with an issue with this kind of diplomatic The relisting, incidentally, has no practical effect in terms of anything it would do with respect to our current policy other than raise the issue with respect to the Senate at this moment but, as I say, inappropriately with respect to the statutes it concerns. President Bush actually preserved all the existing financial sanctions on North Korea at the time he lifted the terror designation, and he kept them all in place by using other provisions of law. The fact is, this administration has, in fact, responded in order to put real costs on North Korea for its actions. We led the international effort at the United Nations Security Council, and we did enact sweeping new sanctions on North Korea, and by all accounts they are The U.N. Security Council resolution 1874, passed unanimously, imposed the first ever comprehensive international arms embargo on North Korea. Those sanctions are now beginning to take effect. A North Korean ship suspected of carrying arms to Burma turned around after it was denied bunkering services in Singapore, and the Government of Burma itself warned that the ship would be inspected on arrival to ensure that it complied with the U.N. arms embargo. So that is real. That is happening. Significantly, China has agreed to impose sanctions both on North Korean companies and individuals involved in nuclear and So the sanctions that were recently imposed by the Obama administration, in concert with the international community, are having a real impact. So I think we ought to give them time to work. I do not think we ought to come in here and change the dynamics that, as I say, I know are currently being worked on by the Secretary of State. As we are here in the Senate today, those meetings are taking place. It is better for the United States and the international community to focus our efforts on concrete steps rather than resort to a toothless and symbolic gesture. This will have no impact ultimately because we are still going to go down our course, but it can ripple the process which I might also point out, the President and Secretary of State have been closely communicating with allies and with partners in the region. They are currently involved in discussions with China, Russia, South Korea, and Japan on this issue. Even as we debate the issue here, the effort at the ASEAN Forum is specifically geared to try to coordinate our approach with our treaty allies and with others. We ought to give Third, obviously all of us reject the recent actions taken by North Korea. There is no doubt about that. But it was not so long ago that we were actually making some progress on the denuclearization effort. And observers of the region--those who are expert and who follow it closely--are all in agreement as to the rationale which has driven North Korea to take some of the actions it has taken. I was in China about a month and a half ago. I spent some time with Chinese leaders on this issue because one of the tests took place while I was there and I saw the Chinese reaction up close and personal. I saw the degree to which they were truly upset by it, disturbed by it, and took actions to deal with it. The fact is that they explained it, as have others, as a reaction by North Korea to perhaps three things: No. 1, the succession issues in North Korea itself; No. 2, the policies of the South Korean Government over the course of the last year or so; and No. 3, the fact that while they had nuclear weapons and had been engaged in a denuclearization discussion with the United States, most of the focus appeared to have shifted to Iran, and there was some sense that the focus should have remained where those nuclear weapons So I believe we need to preserve diplomatic flexibility in the weeks and months ahead. There is an appropriate time for the administration to come to us. There is an appropriate way for us to deal with this issue, to sit down with the administration, to make it clear to them that we think we ought to do this, to talk with them about it, to engage in what the rationale might be under the law. But as I say, none of the reasons that are legitimate under the law for, in fact, a designated country as going on the terrorist list is appropriate or fit here. I think that is the most critical reason of all. Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, thank you very much. I thank the floor manager on the majority side for this unanimous consent which allows me I wish to say a word or two about the Defense authorization bill which is before us, and then I want to pivot. I will talk about the health of our Nation's defense, but also about the health care of our Let me start off by extending my thanks to the leaders of the Armed Services Committee, Senator Levin and Senator McCain, and their staffs for the good work they have done. I wish to thank Senator Reed of Rhode Island for his contributions as well. Standing here on the floor, I am looking at Senator Reed, a graduate of the Military Academy at West Point, and right across the aisle, at Senator McCain, a graduate of the Naval Academy. It is great to have that kind of experience here in the Senate. They are sitting on opposite sides of the aisle, coming from schools that are sometimes thought to be rivals, but they are able to I wish to express my thanks to the President and to the Secretary of Defense Bob Gates. We have learned that in the last 7 years, cost overruns from major weapons systems in this country grew from about $45 million in 2001 to last year almost $300 billion, a growth over 7 years in cost overruns for major weapons systems in 2001 of $45 million and last year almost $300 billion. What we need is for the administration as well as the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs to say to the folks on the Armed Services Committee, but also to say to us in the Senate and in the House: These are the weapons systems we need, these are the threats we believe we face as a nation, and to give us some sense of priorities of the weapons systems we should support and fund, the troop levels we need and, frankly, the weapons systems we don't I was privileged to follow on the heels of the Presiding Officer, Senator Kaufman, about a month and a half ago to Afghanistan and Pakistan. He and Senator Reed, I think, led that CODEL and shared with us our needs in that part of the world. We need a military strategy and we also need a civilian strategy in Afghanistan, and I think this administration has given us a good two-pronged approach. We have good new leadership there on the military side. Basically, though, they said our job here is counterinsurgency. We need more troops, more trainers to train the Afghans and to train the military side, and then the civilian side. We also need mobility in terms of a lot of additional helicopters, about 150 new helicopters or additional ones coming in to provide the mobility to move our men and women all over the southern part of Afghanistan, and to meet the Taliban threat. The kind of weapon we don't use there or don't need there, I will be very blunt, is the F-22 which we discussed and debated here for the last several days, a fighter aircraft that has been around for a dozen or so years. We are still building more of them, but they have never flown a flight mission in Iraq and never flown a flight mission in Afghanistan either. The F-22 is limited in what it can do. It basically is a fighter, air-to-air combat. The Afghans, the Taliban, don't have fighter aircraft. In Iraq, the folks we are fighting there don't have aircraft. Meanwhile, we have F-15s, F-16s, F-18s. We are going to build 2,500 F-35s, for less than half the price of the F-22, which not only do dog fights but can also do ground-to-air support and a variety of different functions that the F-22 cannot for a lot less money. The administration, I think wisely, said as hard as it is sometimes to stop the production line on aircraft, in this case the F-22, in terms of what is cost effective, we need to refocus on the F-35 and on counterinsurgency, preparing for those kinds of challenges we face. We voted to do that, a 58-to-40 vote. I was very pleased with the vote and I commend everyone who voted as they did, and, frankly, the people who took the opposite view. There were some tough issues to deal with, I know particularly from folks in whose States the aircraft are being produced and systems for those aircraft are being produced. I know it is difficult to accept. But I am encouraged by that vote. My hope is we will pay heed to some of the priorities sent to us by the Secretary of Defense, which are designed to make sure we spend money on weapons systems that we are likely to need in the 21st century--certainly in the next decade or two or three--and I think with Sort of pivoting, if I can, after having said a word about the health of our Nation's defense, let me talk about the health of the people in our country. Some of my colleagues are probably getting tired of hearing me say this, but when talking about health care, I mention four things: No. 1, we spend more money for health care than any other nation on Earth. No. 2, we don't get better results. No. 3, we have people in this country today losing their health care. No. 4, some 47 million Americans today don't have health insurance, don't have health care. We have to do better than this. We have to do better than this. I There has been a big focus, as there should be, on extending health care coverage to 47 million folks who don't have it, and we need to address that, obviously. Having said that, the other concern we need to address is reining in the growth of health care costs. We are getting clobbered as a nation in terms of being able to compete with the rest of the world where we pay so much more money for health care than any other nation, and employers pay, and we are getting clobbered as a Federal Government with the cost of Medicare and Medicaid, and State governments trying to bear their share of the cost of Medicaid. They Over lunch today, I said to my colleagues in our caucus meeting that wouldn't it be great if somehow we could have our cake and eat it too. I said that with a piece of chocolate cake staring me right in the face. But as it turned out, there are delivery systems, if you will, of health care in this country where they are not necessarily having their cake and eating it too, but where they are able to provide better health care, better outcomes, at a lower price. Think about that: better health care, better outcomes, better quality of health care at a The names are beginning to become familiar to us. Some are already familiar: Mayo in Minnesota, and now they have an operation down in Florida too to see if that model will work in Florida, and it has; Kaiser Permanente in northern California, an outfit called Intermountain Health--all of these are nonprofits--Cleveland Clinic in Cleveland, OH, an outfit called Geisinger in Hershey, PA; there is what is called a health care cooperative in the State of Washington, I believe it is around Puget Sound, called Puget Sound Cooperative where they have been able to emulate this interesting result of better quality outcomes, better health care, lower prices. What we need to do is to attempt not only to extend health care coverage to folks who don't have it--47 million--but to rein in the growth of health care costs. The idea that health care costs grow at 2 or 3 or 4 percent over the consumer price index, to continue to do that is going to cripple us economically and competitively as a nation. It is going to cripple our ability to rein in our large and growing In the last 8 years in this Nation we ran up as much new debt as we did in the first 208 years of our Nation's history. Think about that: In the last 8 years, we ran up as much new debt in this country as we did in our first 208 years as a nation. This year we are on track to have the biggest single-year deficit we have ever had. We are also in the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression, and we are trying to stimulate the economy and get it moving. I am encouraged that it is starting to move, but that is a huge deficit, coming on the heels of, frankly, 8 years where we spent like drunken sailors, and I know how drunken sailors spend. It is not a pretty sight, and this is, We need to go to school on the Mayos, the Geisingers, the Cleveland Clinics, the Kaiser Permanentes, the Puget Sounds, the Intermountain Healths, and see what we can learn from them. What is their secret? How are they able to do this, better outcomes, less price? As it turns out, there are a number of things they do in common. I wish to mention a few of them today. Among the things they do, they have literally brought on to their staff the doctors at Cleveland Clinic, for example, who provide health care. They are on staff at the Cleveland Clinic. The same is true at Mayo and these other nonprofits. I saw an interesting special on CNN a couple of weekends ago. They were interviewing a number of people who worked at the Cleveland Clinic. They interviewed a fellow who is a doctor, a cardiologist, as I recall. He used to be in private practice. He said, in the old days when I was on my own in private practice or group practice, I got paid, compensated, for the number of hearts I operated on. If somebody came to me and they had a heart problem and it could be addressed by diet or exercise or medicine, he said, usually I didn't prescribe those things. I didn't get paid for doing that. If they needed to have a heart operation and we could address their problem with an operation, he said, I got paid for that. As a result, I was more inclined to operate on people's hearts than to use some approaches that were arguably more cost effective. He went on to say, now I work for the Cleveland Clinic. I am a staff doc here. I don't have to operate on people's hearts to be compensated. I can provide good advice, help people with their diet problems, their exercise problems, their weight problems. I can help people better understand what their opportunities are with medicine. I So a light went off for me. Some of us are hearing quite a bit the need to get away from these fee-for-service deals where we basically incentivize doctors, hospitals, and nurses to ask for and order more visits, more procedures, more MRIs, more lab tests, for imaging, more x-rays, because they get paid for it, because they know that by doing more of everything, they reduce the likelihood that they are going to be sued. That sort of gets us in this conundrum where we overuse health care. If we are going to have real success in drawing down the costs of health care, part of it will be addressing the issue of fee for service, get away from that practice, and get away from the Let me mention some of the things they are doing at these five or six entities I mentioned, these nonprofits. Among the things they do is coordinate care. I use my mom as an example. My mom is now deceased. She lived in Florida for roughly the last 30 or so years of her life. She had dementia; she had congestive heart failure; she had arthritis. She had five doctors. The last years of her life that she was down there, my sister and I would go down to visit my mom about every other month or so. We would take turns, and we would go with our mom to visit her doctors. These five doctors my mom had never talked to each other. In fact, I don't think they knew that the other doctors existed. They were all in the aggregate prescribing something like 15 different kinds of prescription medicines. We kept them at her home in what looked like my dad's old fishing tackle box. It was compartmentalized with medicines to take before breakfast, during breakfast, after breakfast; before lunch, during lunch, and throughout the day. Some of those medicines my mom was prescribed, she didn't need to take. Somebody needed to know what she was taking and say, You shouldn't be taking these two medicines in combination; they are hurting you. We didn't One of the things these nonprofits do is coordinate the care that is provided to my mom or anybody's mom or dad. Another thing that would have been very helpful for my mom or other people in that situation is to have electronic health records. If my mom had an electronic health record such as we have in the VA and like we are developing in Delaware and some other States, when my mom went from doctor's office to doctor's office they would know in each office who else she was seeing and the medicines she was being prescribed, the lab tests and everything. They would have it right there for her when she came for We have a great ability to harness information technology or electronic health care records, which are a big part of that. Our nonprofits I have talked about--the half dozen or so--have that in common. On wellness and prevention, we know it is not just from nonprofits but out in California is Safeway, and these people have supermarkets all over America and several hundred thousand employees. Their health care costs from 2004 to 2008 have been level and flat. They have incentivized employees to do the right thing for themselves, in terms of holding down their weight, helping them get off tobacco, to lethargy, to get off the sofa, and to eat what is right; and there are antismoking campaigns and all kinds of stuff. So we have a good model It is not just the nonprofits but a lot of employers are starting to There are another one or two points I will mention on the nonprofits. On chronic disease management, such as heart disease and diabetes, I am told that about 80 percent of the cost of these chronic diseases can be controlled by four factors: diet, exercise, overweight/obesity, and smoking. Those four factors control about 80 percent of the cost of our expenditures on chronic care. If we work with those four items, we will help reduce the costs and provide better outcomes for people. We will also hold down our costs. There are a couple lessons from the nonprofits and others. Part of it is pharmacy--making sure people who need pharmaceutical medicines, small and large molecules, are taking those, and somebody is checking to make sure they are taking what they Focusing on primary care, many of those people coming out of medical schools want to be specialists. They are not interested in being primary care doctors. We need more primary care doctors. We need to change the incentives to get more primary care doctors, which is what we need. Another idea is for us to pool insurance costs. As my colleagues know, we have the Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan. We have an insurance pool where we pool all the Federal employees and their dependents and the retirees and their dependents into one large pool to purchase health insurance. They get it at a not cheap price but a pretty good price. One of the reasons why is, when you have a lot of people in the purchasing pool, you get a good variety and much better costs. If you think about the administrative costs for health insurance, as a percentage of premiums, I am told, in the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program, it is about 10 percent. When it comes to people buying individual policies and small businesses, their administrative costs as a percentage of premiums are about 30 percent. So the idea of creating large purchasing pools makes a whole lot of I will close here. The idea that we would pass health care legislation and stop extending coverage for people who don't have it-- if that is all we do, we have failed the American people. We have to do at least two things. One is extend coverage but also make sure the coverage we extend provides better coverage, better quality outcomes and better health care and that we do so at a price that is diminished and does not continue to expand by several times the rate of inflation. We can do that going forward. That is what we need to do. My friends have been generous in allowing me to proceed. I see several Senators are anxious to get back into the debate. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arizona is recognized. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the amendment offered by the Senator from Kansas concerning North Korea. I must say I was entertained by the outlook--as far as North Korea's behavior is concerned--by the distinguished chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee. I can't remember when I have disagreed more. The State Department's 2008 Country Reports on Terrorism stated that ``as part of the six-party talks process, the U.S. reaffirmed its intent to fulfill its commitment regarding the removal of the designation of the DPRK as a state sponsor of terrorism in parallel with the DPRK's actions on denuclearization and in accordance with They certainly haven't taken any action on denuclearization, and it certainly hasn't been in accordance with the criteria set forth by law. There was a problem with this trade, however. We delisted North Korea, and we got something worse than nothing. Facts are stubborn things. In response to our action, Pyongyang has embarked on a pattern of astonishing belligerence and has reversed even the previous steps it had taken toward the denuclearization prior to its removal from the A few facts. In December 2008--just 2 months after the United States removed Pyongyang from the list--North Korea balked at inspections of its nuclear facilities and ceased disablement activities at the Yongbyon reactor. In March, the regime seized two American journalists near the China-North Korean border and subsequently sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor in the North Korean gulag. These are two American citizens who may have strayed over a border. Does that mean they are sentenced to 12 years of hard labor in the most harsh prison camps in the world? What are we going to do about it? It is remarkable. Two weeks later, it tested a long-range ballistic missile, in violation of U.N. Security Council resolutions, and then announced it was expelling international inspectors from Yongbyon, reestablishing the facility, and ending North Korean participation in disarmament talks. In May, Pyongyang conducted its second nuclear test; in June, a North Korean ship suspected of carrying illicit cargo departed North Korea in likely defiance of U.N. Security Council obligations; and earlier this month, Pyongyang again launched short- and medium-range missiles into the Sea of Japan, including on the Fourth of July. All these are indications that the North Koreans somehow should not be listed as terrorists? I think we ought to, frankly--I respect and appreciate my friend from Kansas. Maybe we ought to have a binding resolution, rather than a sense of the Senate. It is remarkable that these events have taken place against a backdrop of belligerence and intransigence by North Korea. Pyongyang has never accounted for or even acknowledged its role in assisting the construction of a nuclear reactor in Syria, which the Israelis had to bomb. Similarly, it has refused to provide a complete and correct declaration of its nuclear program. Of course, something we all know, which is one of the great tragedies in the history of the world, is this is a gulag of some 200,000 people, where people are regularly beaten, starved, and executed. According to the Washington Post, most of them work 12- to 15-hour days until they die of malnutrition-related illnesses, usually at around the age of 50. They are allowed just one set of clothes. They live and die in rags, without soap, socks, underclothes or sanitary It is not an accident that the average South Korean is several inches taller than the average North Korean. This regime may be the most repressive and oppressive and Orwellian in all the world today. So the Chinese have been serious--according to Mr. Kerry, the Senator from Massachusetts, the Chinese have been resolute on the issue of the ship inspections. The U.N. Security Council resolution calls for monitoring and following of the ship, and if the decision is made that they need to board a North Korean ship, if the North Koreans refuse, then the following ship cannot board but can follow them into a port, where the port authorities are expected to board and inspect the vessel. And then that violation is reported to the U.N. Security Council. That ought to rouse some pretty quick action. I don't share the confidence of the Senator from Massachusetts that if a North Korean ship goes into a port at Myanmar, you will see likely action, except maybe the offloading of Look, the North Koreans have clearly been engaged in selling anything they can to anybody who will buy it because they need the money-- whether it be drugs, counterfeit currency, nuclear technology or missiles. Every time we have held onto the football, like Lucy, they I think this is a very modest proposal of the Senator from Kansas. I point out that years and years of six-party talks, different party talks, negotiations, conversations, individuals who have been assigned as chief negotiators who then end up somehow negotiating, with the end If the North Koreans continue to test weapons, test missiles, sooner or later, they will match a missile with a weapon that will threaten the United States of America. Right now, those missiles they are testing go over Japanese territory. I think it is pretty obvious we are dealing with a regime of incredible and unbelievable cruelty and oppression of their own people. The newly published Korean bar association details the daily lives of the 200,000 political prisoners estimated to be in the camps. Eating a diet of mostly corn and salt, they lose their teeth, their gums turn black, their bones weaken and, This is a regime that, in any interpretation of the word, is an outrageous insult to the world and everything America stands for and believes in. I believe they will pose a direct threat, over time, to the security of not only Asia but the world. They were able to export technology all the way to Syria, obviously. Why should they not be able I urge my colleagues to vote in support of the amendment by the Senator from Kansas, and I hope we can vote on that sooner rather than The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas is recognized. Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to add Senator Bennett from Utah as a cosponsor of the amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWNBACK. I thank my colleague from Arizona. I think he understands more than anybody in this body the situation and what happens in a gulag-type situation. That has drawn me to the topic of North Korea for a couple years--the human rights abuses. Hundreds and thousands of North Koreans are fleeing to be able to simply get food, and a couple hundred thousand of them are in the gulag system. It is unbelievable that this can happen in 2009. We have Google Earth that can even show this. But we just say: OK, that is the sort of thing that happens there. It is mind-boggling to me that we wouldn't act I appreciate the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, the Senator from Massachusetts, who is a distinguished Senator and is very bright and experienced in foreign policy. I could not disagree with him more about North Korea. We have had an ongoing dialog and discussion about this. He makes the point that we should not pop this on the bill. I have been trying for months for us to relist them as terrorists. They should not have been delisted in the first place. It was a terrible process move on the Bush administration to try to move the talks forward, saying we are going to delist you and you are going to do something for us. Pyongyang and Kim Jong Il said thank you very much, and now we are going to stick it in your face, which is what they have continued to do. I have listed the things, as the Senator from The thought that we are acting resolutely, to me, is an insult to the people in North Korea who have lived under this oppressive regime. We are not acting resolutely toward North Korea. We are not putting any sanctions on them. We have asked for international sanctions, but why aren't we willing to put sanctions on ourselves? If we think this is such a proper course to follow, and we are willing to push it on an international body, why wouldn't we be willing to do it ourselves? Why wouldn't we be willing to list them as a terror nation, as a state sponsor of terror? I don't understand that; why, if it is good in the Plus, we need to have teeth into this. This is a modest--a modest-- proposal. It is a resolution, a sense of the Senate that North Korea should be relisted as a state sponsor of terrorism. We are not relisting them. That is an administration call. We are saying we, as a body, given the provocative actions that have taken place since they have been delisted clearly merits the relisting of North Korea as a state sponsor of terrorism. That is our opinion, and that is what we Without a foundation in the law, it is clearly--as I read previously--allowed for the Secretary of State to determine that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism. That is the actual wording of the law in the Arms Export Control Act. Clearly, they have acted to sponsor international terrorism with their relation with Burma, with the missiles, with the nuclear weapons, and with the proliferation they He says, and is suggesting, that delisting has no practical effect. I believe it does have a practical effect, and it certainly does on the administration's stance toward North Korea and their international posture toward North Korea. Plus, it has a practical effect on what we can provide for as far as aid from the United States to North Korea. We shouldn't be providing aid to the North Koreans. We should provide food aid, if we can monitor it. We shouldn't be giving oil to the North Koreans. That should be limited so the administration cannot do that. They would not be able to if they are listed as a state sponsor of Mr. President, it will hurt the people of North Korea and those who are in the North Korean gulags if we don't relist them. It recovers any vestige of hope they might have that at some point in time somebody of enough stature, such as the United States Government, is going to take enough notice that they are going to put pressure on the North Korean regime. I have talked with some people who were refuseniks in the Soviet Union, in a Soviet gulag during an era where we had far less communication capacity than we do today, and yet they were able to get messages at that point in time into the Soviet gulag that the Americans were putting pressure on the Soviet Union and the lack of human rights in the Soviet Union, and it gave them hope. It gave them hope in the If we can pass this, it can give people in the gulags in North Korea hope that somebody is at least paying enough attention to put pressure on this, and maybe they may be able to live longer, or actually live at all. It can give them hope, instead of ``abandon hope all ye who enter here,'' as it says at the entrance to Inferno and as it is in the gulag So it is a modest resolution, and I would hope my colleagues would vote overwhelmingly for this resolution to relist North Korea as a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the pending amendment be set aside and that amendment No. 1528 be called The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk The Senator from Connecticut [Mr. Lieberman], for himself, Mr. Graham, Mr. Begich, Mr. Cornyn, Mrs. Hutchison, and Mr. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. (Purpose: To provide authority to increase Army active-duty end strengths for fiscal year 2010 as well as fiscal year 2011 and 2012) SEC. 402. ADDITIONAL AUTHORITY FOR INCREASES OF ARMY ACTIVE- (a) Authority to Increase army Active-Duty End Strength.-- (1) Authority.--For each of fiscal years 2010, 2011, and 2012, the Secretary of Defense may, as the Secretary determines necessary for the purposes specified in paragraph (2), establish the active-duty end strength for the Army at a number greater than the number otherwise authorized by law up to the number equal to the fiscal-year 2010 baseline plus (2) Purpose of increases.--The purposes for which an increase may be made in the active duty end strength for the (A) To increase dwell time for members of the Army on (C) To achieve reorganizational objectives, including increased unit manning, force stabilization and shaping, and (b) Relationship to Presidential Waiver Authority.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the President under section 123a of title 10, United States Code, to waive any statutory end strength in a time of war or (c) Relationship to Other Variance Authority.--The authority in subsection (a) is in addition to the authority to vary authorized end strengths that is provided in subsections (e) and (f) of section 115 of title 10, United (1) In general.--If the Secretary of Defense increases active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2010 under subsection (a), the Secretary may fund such an increase through Department of Defense reserve funds or through an (2) Fiscal years 2011 and 2012.--(2) If the Secretary of Defense plans to increase the active-duty end strength for the Army for fiscal year 2011 or 2012, the budget for the Department of Defense for such fiscal year as submitted to Congress shall include the amounts necessary for funding the active-duty end strength for the Army in excess of the (1) Fiscal-year 2010 baseline.--The term ``fiscal-year 2010 baseline'', with respect to the Army, means the active-duty end strength authorized for the Army in section 401(1). (2) Active-duty end strength.--The term ``active-duty end strength'', with respect to the Army for a fiscal year, means the strength for active duty personnel of Army as of the last Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, I am pleased and proud to introduce this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors. To state it briefly, it extends the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army by 30,000 over the next 3 years, effective with the commencement of fiscal year 2010. It doesn't mandate this increase, but it expands the authority of the Secretary of Defense, obviously, with the support and authorization of the President of the United States, the Commander in Chief, to extend the end strength of the U.S. Army. End strength means how many soldiers can the U.S. Army have. Of course, it does this to reduce the tremendous stress on the U.S. Army, which is carrying the burden of combat in two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan today, and over the next year or 18 months will be in this unique position. Progress has been made, thank God, in Iraq, and the Iraq Security Forces are progressively taking over responsibility for keeping the security in their country. The drawdown of American soldiers is happening in a methodical and responsible way, and I again express my appreciation to President Obama that it is happening in that way. At the same time, we are increasing our troop presence in Afghanistan. Bottom line: The demand for members of the U.S. Army on the battlefield over the next year, 18 months, at the outside 2 years, is going up. If the supply remains constant, that means the stress on every soldier in the U.S. Army and his or her family will not be reduced. As a matter of fact, it will go up. The term for this--which I will get to in a This is an amendment that began with members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and a comparable amendment in the House Armed Services Committee, recognizing, as we all do, the tremendous stress that our Army is under, the extraordinary job they are doing in Iraq This is really the next great generation of the American military. But we see in it some tough statistics: the increase in mental health problems, the increase in divorces of members of the service, and, There are many things we have supported in this Senate and the Congress--and the administration has--to respond to each one of those problems. But in a way, the most direct thing we can do is to increase the size of the U.S. Army so there is less pressure on every soldier in the Army, in this sense. Every time we add another soldier to the U.S. Army--and we are talking about authorization to add 30,000 more--it means that much more time every other member of the U.S. Army can spend back at base retraining, preparing and, most important of all, spending As I know the Presiding Officer knows--and I know the President of the United States knows it too--the good news is that the Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, who has done and is doing an extraordinary job for our country with, of course, the support and authorization of President Obama, yesterday announced that he would be temporarily increasing the Active-Duty end strength of the U.S. Army by 22,000 soldiers over the I cannot sufficiently express my words of appreciation for Secretary Gates's decision. He acted by employing the emergency authority he has in an authorization of the use of force and a built-in statutory waiver he has up to 3 percent of existing end strength to expand the size of the Army. This amendment, which had been planned, and was in the committee before this great action by Secretary Gates yesterday, is now before us, and I am honored to offer this amendment with a bipartisan group of cosponsors who are listed on this amendment as a way to do two things: The first is that it literally increases from 547,000 to 577,000-plus the authorized end strength of the U.S. Army, and to leave that authority there in case there is a need that Secretary Gates and the President see in the coming 3 years to raise the number. Mr. McCAIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? Mr. McCAIN. It is my understanding that the amendment authorizes the additional forces Secretary Gates said yesterday in his speech that we need--or the day before yesterday. Why do we need to put this into the Mr. LIEBERMAN. Two reasons. The first is that it is a bit beyond what Secretary Gates did. He authorized using the extraordinary powers he possesses as Secretary in this time of conflict up to 22,000 for the next 3 years. The amendment authorizes--doesn't mandate, doesn't appropriate--30,000 for the next 3 years. So it gives some latitude, depending on how conditions go in Iraq and Afghanistan, to go a bit further--8,000 more, if necessary, over the next 3 years. Second, I say to my friend from Arizona, when this amendment started, we didn't know Secretary Gates was going to do this. I am grateful he did, but this amendment now--frankly, as Secretary Gates himself said to me yesterday, and I appreciate it and I don't think he would mind if I repeated it on the Senate floor--gives the Senate and Congress the opportunity to essentially vindicate and support the step that the Secretary has made and, as he put it, send a message from the Senate to the members of the U.S. Army that help is on the way. Mr. McCAIN. And there is no doubt that the Army very badly needs the Mr. LIEBERMAN. My friend from Arizona is absolutely right. There is no doubt, based on the demand, certainly temporarily, over the next 18 months, perhaps 2 years, as we are drawing down in Iraq, but not as rapidly as we are adding forces in Afghanistan, that there is at least a temporary need for more than the authorized 547,000 members of the Mr. McCAIN. And if I could question the Senator further, perhaps this would illuminate any requirement for stop loss or for involuntary Mr. LIEBERMAN. Absolutely. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons The decision to eliminate the routine use of ``stop loss'' authority in the Army requires a larger personnel flow for each deploying unit to compensate for those whose contract So, yes, this makes it possible to end the use of stop loss, which is essentially, in layman's terms, a way to require people to stay actively deployed longer than they originally were going to be Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank my friend from Arizona. We have illuminated most of the reasons in our exchange why this amendment is important. I will simply add a few more things Secretary Gates said yesterday, which The army has reached a point of diminishing returns in their multiyear program to reduce the size of its training That is the training and support which supports the Active-Duty Army. The cumulative effect of these factors is that the Army faces a period where its ability to continue to deploy combat units at acceptable fill rates is at serious risk. Here is the point I just made in response to Senator McCain's Based on current deployment estimates, this is a temporary A temporary point of stress. We hope and pray that is true. It which will peak in the coming year and abate over the course Mr. President, in addition to the Secretary of Defense, we heard from the Army's Chief of Staff, GEN George Casey, and Secretary of the Army Pete Geren, who have been advocates within the Pentagon for this increase in end strength, and I thank them for that. Admiral Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, told our Armed Services Committee earlier this year that the light at the end of the tunnel, as he put it, is still more than 2 years away, and that is only if everything goes according to plan, which in combat, obviously, often does not. Again, I say this is an authorization; it is not a mandate. I will add that Secretary Gates announced yesterday that he will find a way to fund the additional troops in this year and fiscal year 2010--the one that begins October 1--by reprogramming other funds appropriated to the Pentagon for fiscal year 2011, which is the budget that will be presented to us next year, if it is probable that the Department of Defense will require funding as part of its normal operations, and more likely as part of the OCO fund--the overseas contingency operation fund--which supports our presence in Iraq and Afghanistan. I cannot say enough, I know all of us in the Senate believe we cannot say enough, in gratitude to the members of the U.S. Army who are leading the battle for us against the Islamic extremists and terrorists who attacked us on 9/11/01. We owe them a debt we can never fully One thing we can do, that Secretary Gates did yesterday and the Senate can do in this amendment, is to send a message to our troops in the field that help is on the way in the most consequential way, which I ask that when the vote be taken, it be taken by the yeas and nays. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second? Mr. LIEBERMAN. Again I say to my colleagues I am doing that, although I expect there will be very strong support for this, because I believe it is the most visible way for this Senate to send the message to the U.S. Army of appreciation and gratitude, to them and their families, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Michigan is recognized. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, let me commend Senator Lieberman and others who support this amendment. We in the Armed Services Committee are very supportive of previous increases; indeed, we led the way on some of them. Because of the stress on the Army and the number of commitments which had been made in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must give the kind of support to our troops they deserve and the American people want us to One of the ways we can reduce some of the stress is by increasing the end strength so the dwell time is more sufficient and there are other positive spinoffs as well from this kind of increase in the authorized The Secretary made a very powerful speech the other day when he called for an increase of 22,000, I believe, in the end strength. That end strength is temporary, it is almost as large as this--not quite; this is 30,000, but this is surely in the ballpark. It is appropriate. It is authority, it is not mandatory, and I think it is a very positive signal to send to our men and women in uniform and to their families. I The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized. Mr. LIEBERMAN. Mr. President, briefly I thank Senator Levin, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, not just for his strong statement of support now but for the support he has given during our committee's deliberations to the goal of achieving an increase in Army Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent the order for the The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Begich). Without objection, it is so Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I am going to talk about an amendment we have not yet cleared unanimous consent for it to be brought up. I am hopeful that will come. But in order to advance the issue, I intend to talk about my amendment, No. 1475, without offering it at this time. I think it is an appropriate amendment to talk about at this point following Senator Lieberman's amendment because his amendment deals One of the reasons it is important to do that is the stress that the restricted numbers provide on our military personnel. Senator Lieberman mentioned, and I will repeat, the number of suicides and attempted suicides by our young men and women serving in the military has increased and one of the reasons, frankly, is that the repeated deployments and the length of the deployments have added to the stress Health experts agree that there is most likely a combination of factors leading to this increase in suicides. Many of these factors are simply the results of the prolonged conflict that our Nation finds itself in, including multiple deployments, extended separations from family and loved ones, and the overwhelming stress of combat experiences; each placing a unique and tremendous strain on the men and But while Congress has recognized these strains, and acted to help provide relief by increasing the size of our forces and thereby reducing the number and frequency of deployments, we cannot as easily remedy the stress or mental trauma created by combat experience. For those who have had to witness the ugliness and devastation of war first-hand, they have encountered something very unnatural for the human mind to comprehend or accept. For these service members, recovering from these experiences involves a long and arduous journey in learning to identify, control and cope with a wide array of emotions. And this learning process is often only accomplished with the guidance and management of highly trained mental or behavioral health In this light, we in Congress have acted to increase funding for more mental health providers and improved access for our troops and their families, and we have sharpened the focus of the military on addressing these care needs. That is very positive and has had a very positive What we must now focus on, and direct the military's attention to, is the potentially harmful practice of administering antidepressants to a population that frequently moves throughout a theater of war and is therefore susceptible to gaps in mental health management. We are not certain they are getting the follow-up care they need. A 2007 report by the Army's fifth Mental Health Advisory Team survey of U.S. troops, about 12 percent of combat troops in Iraq, and 17 percent of combat troops in Afghanistan, are taking prescription antidepressants or sleeping pills to help them cope with this stress. This equates to roughly 20,000 troops on such medications in theatre What I find particularly troubling, when reviewing these figures, is that the Pentagon has yet to establish an official clearinghouse that accurately tracks this kind of data. In fact, the Army's best reported estimate can only tell us that the authorized or prescribed drug use by troops in Iraq and Afghanistan is believed to be evenly split between antidepressants--mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs--and prescription sleeping pills. My amendment would provide us with the information so we know what is happening with the use of these Providing that this best estimate contains some degree of accuracy, it is important for us to also recognize that many of these same antidepressants, after strong urging by the FDA, recently expanded their warning labels to state that young adults--ages 18-24 years old-- may be at an elevated risk of suicidal thoughts and behavior while using the medication. This same age group--18-24 years old--represents 41 percent of our military forces serving on the front lines in Iraq While keeping this warning label in mind, it is imperative that my colleagues understand that nearly 40 percent of Army suicide victims in 2006 and 2007 are believed to have taken some type of antidepressant drugs--and overwhelmingly these SSRIs. And as I mentioned at the beginning of this statement, the number of Army suicides reported each This class of antidepressants--these SSRIs--are unlike most earlier classes of psychiatric medications in that they were, from their inception, specifically designed for use as an antidepressant --that is, they were engineered to target a particular process in the brain that plays a significant role in depression and other anxiety disorders. More significantly, however, these SSRIs are unlike most other antidepressant medications because they are still allowed by Department of Defense policy to be prescribed to service members while they are deployed and directly engaged in overseas operations. Now, to be fair, there is widespread consensus in the community of professional mental health providers, and empirical evidence to support, that SSRIs do offer significant benefit for the treatment of posttraumatic stress and some forms of depression. And although there are some side effects, they are reportedly much milder and shorter in duration than other antidepressants. Additionally, SSRIs are also believed to potentially prevent, or at least some believe, lesson the more harmful long-term effects of posttraumatic stress disorder. My concern, however, and hopefully that of my Senate colleagues, is not the long-term efficacy of these SSRIs, but more pointedly the volume and manner in which these drugs are being administered to our You see, unlike medications that work on an as-needed basis, SSRIs only begin to work after having been taken every day--at a specific dosage--for a significant period of time. This frequently translates to a 3 to 6 week latency period before the therapeutic effect materializes and patients begin to feel improvement. In light of the population I have been discussing, there are two very readily apparent problems with this shortcoming--first, is that service members serving in forward operating areas, such as Afghanistan and Iraq, are quite frequently subject to moving between bases or into other areas--some so remote that there may be no trained mental health provider available to administer the treatment and to make sure it is effective. Second, and more importantly, is that this initial period is when patients, particularly younger patients, often suffer an escalation in In essence, DOD may be prescribing SSRIs to its service members, without the assurance that they will remain in a capacity to be observed by a highly trained mental health provider. Worse yet, these same patients may very likely find themselves ordered off to conduct combat operations during this same latency period. Let's return our focus back to the alarming increase in the number of military and veteran suicides reported in 2008 and 2009. At what point do we step forward to direct that action be taken by DOD to capture, track and report this data? And at what point do we ensure that DOD is properly prescribing, dispensing and administering these drugs to our troops without having in place the necessary As a first step in this direction, the amendment I intend to introduce will accomplish a better understanding as to the potential magnitude of this issue. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to capture, at a macro level--at a macro level, not individual information, without divulging or violating any protected patient health information--the volume and types of antidepressants, psychotropics or antianxiety drugs being prescribed to our men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. It will also require DOD, beginning in June of 2010 and then annually thereafter through 2015, to report to Congress an accurate percentage of those troops currently and previously deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan since 2005 who have been I wish to reiterate that this measure specifically directs the disclosure of this information by DOD to be done in such a way as to not violate the individual patient privacy rights of our service men or This legislation further directs DOD to contact the National Institute of Mental Health and provide any and all data as determined necessary by the Institute to conduct a scientific peer reviewable study to determine whether these types of prescriptions, and/or the method in which they are being prescribed and administered by DOD, are in any way contributing to the rising number of suicides by I want to specifically address one issue I have heard from some who express concern about this amendment by saying it would stigmatize, in the eyes of our troops, those seeking mental health care. Nothing could be further from what this amendment does. This amendment would collect information in an anonymous manner, and it will be invisible to the The men and women serving in our military, and equally so their families, deserve our utmost assurance that we are doing everything in our power to see that our Nation's warfighters are provided the best medical care available. An integral part of our commitment must also be to ensure that these service men and women volunteering to serve our Nation are not being exposed to what may potentially endanger them when This amendment is very simple. It asks us to gather information so we can make a judgment in a macro sense, without violating the individual privacy of our service men and women. It allows us to gather the information, to have the best information. This Congress has a proud record of providing the necessary resources for the health care of our This amendment will complement that by making sure that we have the analytical tools to make sure we are providing the right type of mental health services to our service men and women who are in theater. It gets us the information in order to judge what is being done today. I would hope my colleagues would agree that we would want to have this information, and I hope at a later time I will have the Mr. LEVIN. First of all, let me commend the Senator from Maryland on his amendment. I support it. I hope it can be cleared or placed in order so that we can adopt it on a rollcall if it cannot be cleared. I ask unanimous consent that we now proceed to a vote on the Lieberman amendment, a rollcall vote on the Lieberman amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll. Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Byrd), the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Specter), and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb) are necessarily absent. Mr. KYL. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber The result was announced--yeas 93, nays 1, as follows: Mr. LEVIN. I move to reconsider the vote, and I move to lay that Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Leahy be added as a cosponsor on the amendment which we just adopted, the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as ranking member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise in support of this vital amendment in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's, SBA, small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the programs, this amendment will create a more equitable and flexible method for Federal agencies to fairly allocate Federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the Nation. Earlier this year, I offered an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. Unfortunately, that amendment was not accepted. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, is the true order of preference when determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone--HUBZone--program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted amendment provides equity for the The amendment provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This amendment makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, service- disabled veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service-disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. And of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this amendment brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the amendment authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled veteran and women-owned firms. The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to support the section 1072 of S. 1390, National Defense Authorization Act of 2010. This section authorizes the Comptroller General of the United States to assess As everyone knows, I strongly believe whistleblowers play an important role in the accountability of all government. This should also be true for the men and women who wear uniforms and serve in the In 1988, Congress passed legislation that gave members of the armed services unique whistleblower protections. Despite this military whistleblower law, I have concerns that military whistleblowers could be underserved by the regulations and processes created by the Department of Defense, DOD, and the DOD, Office of Inspector General, During the course of my own investigation of several military whistleblower cases, I learned some matters which may question how effectively military whistleblower reprisal cases are handled by the DOD and DOD OIG. The Government Accountability Office, GAO, has noted in its past work that the effectiveness of the Federal protection for military whistleblowers rests principally on a two-stage process of investigation and administrative review. The first stage involves a DOD, service, or guard inspector general's investigation of the specific facts and interpretation of issues associated with a whistleblower reprisal allegation. In the second stage of the investigation/administrative review process, the DOD OIG reviews and approves the findings of the service or guard inspectors general. This review is designed to provide assurance that the findings and recommendations in a report were made in compliance with applicable investigatory guidelines and meet legal sufficiency. The second stage of this procedure is crucial for the military whistleblower process to In addition to the tasking included in S. 1390, the military whistleblower reprisal appeal process should be examined by the GAO as whistleblower law, 10 USC Sec. 1034, gives the Boards for the Correction of Military Records--BCMR--of each armed service the appeal authority in these often unique and complex matters. I believe the report requested by the underlying bill is important and I support its inclusion. However, it is important for the GAO to also study the effectiveness of the BCMR appeal process to ensure military whistleblowers are afforded a fair administrative process to combat Last year, I first introduced the idea of a GAO military whistleblower study when I requested this work of the Acting Comptroller General Gene L. Dodaro in a letter dated July 18, 2008. I followed up on my letter to the GAO with a legislative proposal through a filed amendment to the Defense Department appropriations bill for 2009 which instructed the GAO to conduct a comprehensive analysis of this issue. Unfortunately, that amendment did not make it through the legislative process. I thank Chairman Levin and Ranking Member McCain for including this sensible military whistleblower study in the current Accordingly, I offer this latest amendment to include a review and analysis of the military whistleblower reprisal appeals heard by the Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 authorizes almost $680 billion for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. The bill provides pay and health care to servicemembers and their families; funds troops with the equipment and resources they need to fight and provide security; strengthens our ability to train foreign militaries and protect against IEDs and rogue nuclear threats; and It also includes legislation to complete the James A. Lovell Federal It gives the VA and the Navy the authority they need to finalize a model partnership between the North Chicago VA Medical Center and the This is a model that the Departments hope can be replicated around Combining separate Federal hospitals will provide better care for our servicemembers and veterans while saving valuable taxpayer dollars. Given the conflicts we face abroad, this bill provides the right amount to spend in support of our troops. Today, the United States is the world's leader in defense spending. Last year, U.S. military spending accounted for almost half of the world's total military spending. We spend more than the next 46 countries combined. U.S. military spending, combined with that of our close allies, makes up 72 percent of all military spending in the world. Our defense budget is six times larger than China's and 100 times larger than Iran's. These funds make good on a promise to our men and women in our military. Our troops continue to do everything we ask of them in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. These conflicts have taken an extraordinary toll on servicemembers and their families that we cannot The Armed Forces, particularly the Army and the Marine Corps, will continue to be heavily stressed, even as we start to redeploy our forces from Iraq. Servicemembers still do not have enough dwell time between deployments and the Army has seen a troubling rise in the number of suicides. These are indications of the strain that multiple and continued deployments are taking on the force. The President requested increasing the size of the Army to 547,400 soldiers and increasing the Marine Corps to 202,100 Marines, while preventing cuts in Navy and Air Force personnel. This bill supports the President's request. It also authorizes an additional 30,000 soldiers in 2011 and 2012, should the Secretary of Defense believe such troops are necessary. Additional soldiers and marines will help ease the burdens More personnel will give each service more breathing room to care for its wounded warriors. Others can continue the fight while injured and ill servicemembers can recover in wounded transition units. This legislation creates a task force to assess the policies and programs that support the care and transition of recovering wounded and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. The task force will consider whether servicemembers have sufficient access to care for posttraumatic stress disorder and traumatic brain injury, the signature injury of the wars. It will look at how well we help injured warriors transition from the Department of Defense to the Department of Veterans Affairs. The task force will also review the support available to family caregivers as they care for recovering injured and seriously ill members of the Armed Forces. For every servicemember successfully recovering from a serious injury or illness, there is often a family member who has put the brakes on his or her life to care for that Last week, my office received a call from the family of Jordan Hoyt, a soldier from Barry, IL. He was seriously injured in Afghanistan and is receiving care at Walter Reed Army Medical Center here in Washington. His wife Haley has moved to Washington to be near Jordan while he goes through months of surgery and rehabilitation. She has brought with her their infant child, who was born while Jordan was away serving his country. Haley is from Quincy. She has left her family behind to help Jordan recover from his injury. She has also delayed her educational plans to study criminal justice. Haley is 19 years old. After Jordan leaves Walter Reed, the couple will return to Quincy to live with her mother, who has already provided them with incredible support. While taking care of wounded servicemembers is our basic responsibility, we also need to support the families whose lives have been up-ended by the wars. I commend the committee for including this task force to look at the needs of family caregivers. This President inherited many challenges at home and abroad, including two wars and a challenging situation in Pakistan. This bill supports President Obama's new direction in addressing these priorities. In June, our military redeployed from Iraq's cities under the Status of Forces Agreement concluded by the government of Iraq and the previous administration. The Iraqis must continue to take I commend the President's increased focus on defense and development in Afghanistan; preventing the reemergence of the Taliban and al-Qaida; and strengthening economic, agricultural, educational, and democratic development. These goals are important to development in Afghanistan, but they are essential to our military's strategy. I support the National Defense Authorization Act and commend Chairman Levin and Almost 3,000 soldiers from the Illinois Army National Guard are currently deployed to Afghanistan. Members of the Illinois Guard's 33rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team are helping train the Afghan National Police and providing force protection at military bases. It has been a difficult deployment, with many casualties. Gen William Enyart, the Adjutant General of Illinois, has had to attend the funerals of too many of his soldiers. He sent me an article he had written this spring. Why do the young soldiers serve, he asked? This is what he wrote. They They are our kids, they are our protectors. They are what stand between us and chaos. They don't have to be asked to serve. They don't have to be asked to go into danger. They do it, not out of hate, not out of vengeance, but out of love. Love of family, love of community, love of fellow soldier. I think he is right. Members of the Armed Forces and their families make these sacrifices to keep our country safe. We owe them much in return. This bill takes one step by providing them the resources they need. I ask my colleagues to support this legislation and to send it to Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to a period of morning business, with Senator Hatch to be recognized for 15 minutes, then Senator Murray for 8 minutes, then Senator Burris for 6 minutes, and Senator Brown for 10 minutes. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, there will be, then, no more amendments we will be able to take up tonight on the Defense authorization bill. We Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I rise to express my concerns about the administration's failure to make the deadline of issuing a report on the Guantanamo detainee policy. Today's deadline, similar to the January 2010 closure deadline, was self-imposed. It concerns me that the administration maintains that closure will occur even though the execution of this process has been less than stellar. In January, on his very first full day in office, President Obama signed the order to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility in 12 months. The President created separate task forces to examine closure and detainee issues. These task forces were developed and staffed by the Obama administration to achieve successful closure in 1 year. The product of this review is to include a report on a broader detainee Today marks the first deadline in this process. It was set to be the date of release and publication of the task force report on a broader detainee policy going forward. The administration's failure to meet the deadline appears to me to be the ``canary in the coal mine'' that a January closure of Guantanamo without a detailed plan is an exercise in Yet the White House downplays the missed deadline and publicly states that the January closure is still on track. Is it? Despite not having a plan and missing a deadline for a key integral part of the closure process, the administration claims it can still meet the overall deadline of closure by January 1. I find that notion suspect at best In May, a Gallup Poll indicated that 65 percent--65 percent--of Americans oppose the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention facility. Even so, the administration intends to follow its timeline and close Guantanamo by January 2010. The task force examining the cases of the remaining 229 detainees has only reviewed half the necessary caseload The Justice Department hopes to complete its review by an October reporting deadline, but that benchmark is quickly slipping away too. This review process has taken twice the amount of time the administration thought it would take. Yet keeping Guantanamo open beyond January is inexplicably still not an option in the Recently, media reports are circulating that the administration's Guantanamo closure plan has been fraught with political miscalculation and internal dissension. Moreover, the complex nature of this issue will undoubtedly force the transfer of detainees inside the United States. Since the announcement of the President's intention to close Guantanamo, I have joined other Senators in pointing out the lack of planning and clear miscalculation of this decision. That pool has grown and a groundswell of bipartisan support is signaling the White House to In May, the Senate voted 90 to 6 to strip out funding in the fiscal year 2010 war spending request that would authorize $80 million for the transfer of detainees to the interior of the United States of America. Now that the failure to meet this deadline has been reported by outlets such as the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and New York Times, the administration still does not get it. Senior administration officials are letting hubris get in the way. This is neither the proper There should have been more study of this issue prior to setting us on a course for closure. It is easy to say that Guantanamo can be closed when you are a candidate for President. It is even easier to sign an order on your very first full day in office as President that says in 12 months Guantanamo will close. What is hard is taking a deliberative, methodical approach and then formulating the proper plan to balance the safety of this country with the needs of lawful detention. Had the administration conducted a careful and thorough review of this issue, the conclusion would have been that Guantanamo fulfills both requirements. Instead, the administration has painted Clearly, the administration miscalculated and underestimated the depth and breadth of this issue. From the onset, the administration has tried to reverse-engineer the process for closing Guantanamo--starting from the end and working backward. If changes are not made immediately, administration officials will force this issue on American cities and towns in just 185 days. They will limp across the finish line. We have 185 days until Guantanamo is closed. The days until the plan is released ARE a big question mark. They are going to limp across the finish line on January 22, 2010, and herald their accomplishments a victory despite its ill-conceived planning and Three Stooges-like Guantanamo is still an asset to this country. It complies with international treaties and exceeds the standards of domestic corrections facilities. I don't see how anyone who is honest about this matter can characterize it in any other way, especially when there is not a sufficient replacement located domestically to meet the Justice Department's needs. It is my fervent hope that the President and Attorney General will reconsider their ill-considered plan to close Guantanamo and recognize the obvious, that a $200 million facility that is already operational and in compliance with international treaties This is an important issue. I don't think the American people are going to stand to have these very dangerous people brought on shore to our country when we have a $200 million facility that meets international treaty obligations sitting there doing the job. I think the administration needs to get this work done and needs to get it done The PRESIDING OFFICER. (Mr. Udall of Colorado). The Senator from Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, 3 weeks ago I sent a letter to families across my home State of Washington asking for their help as we reform our broken health care system. I told them I wanted to pass a plan that protects existing coverage when it is good, improves it when it is not, and guarantees care for the millions who have none. I asked them to share their stories with me and ideas about how to make this vision a reality. I told them that I know health care is a very personal issue, but also that personal stories have the power to change minds and transform debates. The response to my request has been simply I wish to share some of the stories that have been pouring into my office--over 5,000 so far--because they underscore not only the desperate need to fix our broken health care system but also the dire For too many families today, health care reform can't wait. I wish to share a story from a letter I received from Rita from Seattle who sent me a story about her sister Janet. Janet was unemployed and had lost her health insurance when her throat began to hurt one day back in 2004. She paid out of her own pocket to visit a health clinic and was sent home with antibiotics. Well, weeks later, she was still in a lot of pain and finally managed to get an appointment with a specialist, to come in to get help. Only after begging them for an appointment was she seen by the specialist 3 days later and was told that the pain she had been living with was in the late stages of an aggressive form of throat cancer. Janet died not long after that. It was a death that would have been prevented had she been able to see a specialist Janet is not alone. A woman by the name of Kathleen from Puyallup, WA, sent in a story about her friend Kelly. Kelly had just been laid off from work when she came down with what she thought was the flu. She didn't have any health insurance because she had been laid off from her job and she couldn't afford to go to the doctor, so she waited. Two weeks later she felt even worse, so she finally made an appointment to go in for a checkup. Kelly never made it to the doctor. Her 7-year-old son found her dead on the couch on the morning she was supposed to go in. She died from an untreated ovarian cyst. Because Kelly didn't have health insurance, that little boy no longer has a mother. I think the fact that these stories are possible in the greatest and richest country in the world is simply shameful. No son should lose a mother simply because she can't afford care. No family should have to watch a loved one suffer because insurance companies instead of doctors are making the decisions. That is why we so badly need to reform our Our country has been working on this issue for over 60 years and we have spent months and months this session alone working to put together a reform package that works for all Americans. We have had over 6 months of hearings. We went through over 50 hours of public markups. We debated over 200 amendments. So when I hear some of my colleagues from across the aisle saying we should slow down, saying we should take more time, or that we are trying to reform health care too fast, and when I see some of them shrugging off every attempt we have made at engaging them and bringing them into the process, I think of Kelly and I think of Janet and I think of all of the families out there right now with sick husbands or sick wives or sick kids. I think of all the small business owners I have talked to who can't cover their employees. I think of the people who have coverage, but are worried about losing it today in this uncertain economy. I think about all the working Americans who are paying a hidden tax today in the form of rising premiums in order to cover those Americans who don't have access to care. As a mother and as a Senator, I say enough is enough. Yesterday we heard some pretty ugly and blatant rhetoric. One Member of the Senate who wants to protect the status quo, who doesn't want to make any changes, said: ``If we're able to stop Obama on this, it will That is playing games with real lives in order to score cheap political points. Bucking health care reform isn't going to break the President of the United States. It will break American families. It will break American businesses. It is going to break the bank. Americans deserve better. The families of Janet and Kelly and the thousands of others who have written me deserve better. We can't play politics with what is most important to our Nation's families--the They say justice delayed is justice denied. Well, health care delayed is often health care denied. It was denied to Kelly, it was denied to Janet, and it gets denied to more Americans every single day we wait. I call on all of our colleagues here in the Senate to work with us to rise above partisanship. We have a good plan right now. We are working to listen and bring everybody in and make it better. It will rein in the costs with the goal of lowering them across the long term. It will make sure all Americans have high quality, affordable coverage. This issue is not going to go away if we don't do anything. It is not going to get better or easier if we wait. In fact, today, costs are rising at an unsustainable rate for those who do have insurance and more and more Americans are losing their insurance every day. We have been talking about reforming the health care system for a very long time. I go home to my home State of Washington every weekend, and I am asked often now if it is the right time to tackle health care reform. In these difficult and challenging economic times when people are worried about paying their bills, worried about losing their jobs, worried about what is coming around the corner, they ask me if we are biting off more than we can chew. I tell them: This is exactly the time we need to act. Premiums are rising three times faster than wages today. Every day, 14,000 more Americans lose their health insurance. In these already difficult times, I don't want to add losing health insurance to the list of concerns our families have to deal with every We know the current system is unsustainable. Even those people with good coverage today are faced with massive costs and rising premiums. That is why tackling this problem now has to be part of our long-term Without health care reform, family budgets are going to continue to be strapped, more Americans are going to lose their care, and we are going to hear more stories like Janet and Kelly. I hope we can put aside the partisan rhetoric, I hope we can put aside the talk of: Slow this down; it is too fast. This issue is imperative, and I urge my Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity. This legislation ignores the explosion of gun crime plaguing America's cities and putting an unnecessary burden on local In my home State of Illinois, an entire generation of young people, many of whom live in urban areas, is being decimated with gun violence. On May 10 of 2007, a 16-year-old honor student named Blair Holt was shot to death while riding a Chicago city bus. When the shooter opened fire, Blair was shot while protecting a young girl with whom he was riding. The shooter was also a 16-year-old boy and an admitted member of the Gangster Disciples national street gang. Just the other day, justice was presented to him when he was given 100 years in prison by Similar tragic stories have only grown more frequent. In the first 6 months of 2009, Chicago alone logged 202 homicides, 84 percent of whom were shot to death. In comparison, in the same period of time, we lost The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Hundreds of Chicago public school students have been shot so far this year. By the end of the school year in June, at least 36 had died. Over the Fourth of July weekend, while most of us celebrated our Nation's independence, Chicago suffered through an almost unparalleled torrent of gun violence: 63 shootings were tallied, and 11 of them were The carnage on Independence Day weekend led the Chicago Tribune to demand on July 10: ``Where is our courage? Where is the indignation This is far too high a price to pay for inaction. I will say it again: The people of Chicago deserve better than life in a war zone. Students deserve better than being gunned down in the streets after school and parents deserve better than having to raise families in the midst of a bloodbath. We must work vigorously to combat the rampant gun As a registered gun owner myself, I respect the second amendment and responsible gun ownership. However, I am deeply concerned about the devastating consequences of guns falling into the wrong hands. To this end, I strongly believe we should keep firearms out of the hands of children, terrorists, and criminals, and in solving this problem we need to provide local law enforcement officials with Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and States and not the Federal Government. It is our job as Federal legislators to enact measures that strengthen States' law enforcement efforts instead of arbitrarily increasing their burden. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggles with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug dealers in big I am not alone in my opposition to the Thune amendment. I join the International Association of Chiefs of Police and State lawmakers around the country in recognizing that this legislation would severely hamper efforts to combat gun crime in our Nation's urban areas. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have 2 letters from the the mayor of the city of Chicago, Mayor Daley, and the Major Cities Chiefs There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in Dear Senator Burris: I am writing to express the City of Chicago's strong opposition to Senator Thune's amendment regarding concealed carry reciprocity, and to urge you to vote against this amendment as part of the National Defense Although the State of Illinois would not be affected directly by its passage, this amendment runs the possible risk of reinforcing current movements in the Illinois legislature to pass concealed-carry laws, which would greatly set back Chicago's efforts to curtail gun violence. Concealed carry regulation is an issue best left to cities and states, and not the Federal government. A national standard of reciprocity would ignore the challenges local law enforcement struggle with on a daily basis when combating gangs and drug Pasasge of this amendment would limit the ability of states and local governments to protect their citizens with common- sense and community-specific laws and regulations regarding the carrying of hidden handguns. It would promote gun trafficking by making it easier to transport firearms between states without the fear of being apprehended by law enforcement. The bill would also endanger the safety of our police officers by making it more difficult to distinguish between legal and illegal gun possession--ambiguity that The City of Chicago continues to do all it can to protect our communities from the gun violence of gangs and drug dealers. It is a tireless effort that requires the involvement of the community members, the hard work of local law enforcement and sensible policy decisions made at all levels of government. The Thune amendment would serve as an obstacle to these efforts, and that is why I strongly urge you to oppose this potentially debilitating legislation. Majority Leader, Hart Office Bldg., U.S. Senate, Washington, Speaker, Cannon Office Bldg., House of Representatives, Dear Majority Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi: On behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs, I am writing to express our strong opposition to S. 845 and H.R. 1620, the Respecting States Rights and Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009. Because we are responsible for public safety in the largest jurisdictions in the United States, we recognize that this This misguided legislation would undermine efforts by law enforcement agencies across the Nation and thwart measures already enacted by the states. Please know that we stand with the more than 400 Mayors who have objected to this ill- An oversimplification of carefully reasoned standards and licensing provisions, the proposed measure would arbitrarily overturn laws which have been tailored to the needs of regions and local communities. Passage of this legislation would be an affront to Federalism as it would force a state to accept permits from other jurisdictions--whether or not We are confident that members of Congress will respect the authority of states, counties and cities to adopt their own regulations regarding weapons and will not act with disregard for the many reasonable and prudent laws already in place Chiefs of Police and Sheriffs call upon you to vote against Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, as I said earlier, cities in every State face unique challenges that require tailored solutions. This is never truer than with the issue of gun control. It is imperative that States set their own standards for concealed carry permits and are not obligated to honor permits awarded elsewhere with different, potentially less rigorous requirements. We must not tie the hands of State governments regarding their ability to protect and serve their I think that this legislation moves our national gun policy in the wrong direction. In their assessment of the recent gun violence, the Tribune opined that ``The tragic loss of brave soldiers killed overseas grabs media headlines and fuels the raging fires of political debate. Meanwhile, in another war right here in our own backyard, the killings We cannot ignore this horrific situation any longer. We must not be conned into believing that easier access to firearms will reduce firearm deaths. Rather than making it easier for people to bring concealed weapons into other States, I hope my colleagues will get serious about addressing the urgent problem of gun crime in our cities I urge my fellow Senators to not only vote against this amendment but to join me in working towards a real solution for this senseless cycle The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to congratulate the community and business leaders of Youngstown, OH, for showing the rest of the Nation what so many of us in Ohio already know: Youngstown is one of the I have held some 140 community roundtables across Ohio's 88 counties at least once since I have been in the Senate, where I have met with educators, students, community and business leaders, and entrepreneurs I have held a half dozen roundtables in the Mahoning Valley, including two in Youngstown, and have traveled across towns along the From the autoworker in Lordstown to the electrician in Warren, to the technology entrepreneur in Youngstown, to the small business owner in Salem, I am impressed by their unwavering commitment to rebuilding this Youngstown remains a great city in the face of many challenges, and its dedicated and talented workforce is driving today's innovation and Each time I visit Youngstown, I learn something new--from Mayor Williams, the fine, aggressive, very bright, young mayor of Youngstown, to Chamber of Commerce leader Tom Humphries, to dozens of teachers, It is easy to see why Entrepreneur Magazine lists Youngstown as one of the top 10 U.S. cities to start a business. On the cover it says: In their August issue, Entrepreneur Magazine describes Youngstown as a ``dreamer,'' where technology innovation is driving job growth and Bold plans and visionary leadership have set the stage for sustained economic growth. Youngstown's healthy dose of all-American grit and hard work will turn economic potential into economic reality, driving regional economic expansion that can strengthen Ohio's middle class. It takes what Entrepreneur Magazine called a ``concept revolutionary enough to help ignite a renaissance in this small city.'' It takes a community that understands a transformation must take place from within--from the educators to innovators, from community activists to the industry leaders. Faced with a choice, it takes the foresight to invest in the future and not dwell on the sometimes Today, we are seeing the results of a decade-long process of renewal and rebirth for Youngstown, in Warren, and the entire Mahoning Valley. More than a year ago, I made my first trip to the Youngstown Business Incubator, which is an example of community and business leaders nurturing startup companies that can strengthen the regional economy. Nurtured in the Youngstown Business Incubator in 2002, Turning Technologies, for example, has become one of the fastest growing technology companies in the Nation, according to Entrepreneur Magazine. This is no accident. Mike Broderick, from Turning Technologies, and other emerging businesses, say they have relied on the affordable startup costs, accessible resources, the transportation network that criss-crosses western Pennsylvania and Ohio, and the community An important part of Youngstown's favorable business climate is access to talented workers and students. Kent State's Trumbull campus is a model for workforce training among Ohio's colleges and universities. Their educators are training a legion of highly skilled But more must be done to close the gap between high unemployment in that part of Ohio. My whole State is still afflicted by high unemployment and this terrible recession. More must be done to close the gap between the high unemployment and the shortage of skilled Congressman Tim Ryan, with whom the Presiding Officer and I both served in the House of Representatives, and who represents Youngstown in the House, and I recently introduced the Strengthening Employment Clusters to Organize Regional Success, or SECTORS Act. SECTORS would help allow businesses, workforce development boards, labor unions, and community colleges to connect skilled workers with workforce and community needs. We will see that with Youngstown State University in Youngstown, and with the Trumbull County branch of Kent SECTORS is not only a jobs skill bill, but an economic development bill. It is only one part of the citywide strategy to harness the Youngstown State University is training engineers and contributing to workforce needs of an emerging advanced materials sector, involving advanced chemical and composite engineering and nanotechnology. I have seen some of this technology in the Mahoning Valley, and it is ready to YSU's science, technology, engineering, and math program, or STEM, teaches students the critical skills in the fields of advanced sciences, information technology, and engineering. If our students succeed in the 21st century global economy, we must invest in our young people, who will create the businesses and We must also ensure that our communities are part of economic revival I met with the Mahoning Valley Organizing Collaborative at one of my roundtables. We sat for an hour and a half in the basement of a church, with 15 community activists, who have a focus you wouldn't believe. This is a collective effort of neighborhood groups, churches, and labor unions. It is another example of citizens taking ownership of their community. It is revitalizing neighborhoods, surveying land to determine future economic use, and cleaning up crime-ridden neighborhoods. Ordinary citizens are organizing to make a difference, Yet another example of strategic economic development is the Youngstown 2010 Citywide Plan, which aims to revitalize the city of Youngstown with carefully planned economic development and urban As Ohio cities experience population loss, Youngstown's efforts to modernize infrastructure to serve current population needs is a All of these efforts are part of a collective strategy by workers, entrepreneurs, educators, and elected officials to tap into the region's rich resources and innovative spirit. That is why Entrepreneur Magazine wrote about Youngstown, calling it the ``dreamer.'' Out of these 10 cities, the other 9 are significantly larger than Youngstown, but none could equal Youngstown in hope, focus, and energy. In the last decade, something special happened in this northeast Ohio city. A new generation is envisioning things we wouldn't have talked about 10 years ago. ``Let's clean the slate and start over again'' is the radical transformation I believe in most places we wouldn't have been able to expand with the speed we did. The affordability here really helped fuel our growth. I found Youngstown to be a brilliant It has been my pleasure to work with Congressman Ryan, Mayor Williams, the Youngstown Business Incubator, Turning Technologies, and all of the community activists who are working hard to create new opportunities for a better and stronger Youngstown. Ohio's dedicated workforce and hard-working community leaders are leading examples of how we can turn around our economy, create new jobs, and how we can, across my State, and across the Mahoning Valley in Ohio, and across this country, rebuild our middle class. Mr. President, before yielding the floor, I add that all of us who do this work and are, frankly, blessed enough to get to serve in the Senate spend much of our time away from home or our families are back, in my case, in Ohio, or in Washington. Either way, we are away from families more than we would like. I would like to, because today is my wife's birthday, wish her a happy birthday, if she is home watching this. If she is not, I will tell her later. I could not be with her today in Ohio. I look forward to coming home this weekend. Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I rise today with sadness to honor the life of Mr. Mason Rudd, a good friend who died on July 5, 2009, at the age of 90. He was loved by many in my hometown of Louisville, KY, and Mason will be remembered as an entrepreneur, philanthropist, and family man who did so much to make his adopted hometown a better place. His American dream began at the University of Minnesota, where he funded his college education with help from a tennis scholarship, participation in ROTC, and by selling doughnuts. In 1939, he graduated with a degree in geology and petroleum engineering. After college, his service in World War II led him to believe that he survived the war for one reason--to help others achieve and live better lives. And this he Mr. Rudd spent a few years working as an engineer for Shell Oil and then selling fire engines in Iowa until 1952 when he moved to Louisville. There he established Rudd Equipment Company, which distributed heavy construction equipment. The company he built brought him a large fortune which would serve him well when he undertook his Mason grew to love the city and especially the local university--the University of Louisville. He contributed $1.4 million to the creation of a neurology professorship at the University of Louisville after his first wife Mary suffered a fatal stroke. His help facilitated the $3.6 million Bass-Rudd Tennis Center at the University of Louisville as well as the endowment for the Rudd Program for Young Artists at the Kentucky However, more important than the money, Mr. Rudd contributed invaluable time and effort to the causes of health care and education. Thirty years ago, this passion was clear to me when I served as Jefferson County's judge-executive and it was my responsibility to appoint someone to the county's board of health. I reappointed him to the board, just as those serving before me had and those after me did. While serving on this board as well as in leadership positions at Louisville General Hospitals and Louisville's Jewish Hospital, his efforts provided everyone in the city with a healthier, safer life. His fellow members credit him with creating lead poisoning education programs, a hazardous-materials task force in the health department, a mandate on sewage treatment, and primary care clinics for the His efforts also extended to helping the Louisville Free Library Foundation during his 16 years on the board there. Because of him the library's book endowment is stronger and the children's reading program continues to grow. Most notably, in the year 2000 library fundraising efforts under his leadership made it possible to purchase computers for Mr. Rudd leaves behind his wife Peggy: his daughter Betsy; and his son Michael. The life he led in his 90 years stands out as an example of service to his community and country which all Americans should Command Master Chief Petty Officer Jeffrey James Garber Mr. NELSON of Nebraska. Mr. President, I rise today to honor Navy Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber who passed away aboard the Originally from Hemingford, NE, Master Chief Garber enlisted in the Navy in December 1983. His career was an impressive one. At sea his assignments included time aboard the USS Worden, USS Nimitz, USS Portland, and Strike Fighter Squadron 34; and he had been assigned to the USS Eisenhower since June 2008. The Eisenhower is currently operating in the Arabian Sea in support of Operation Enduring Freedom Master Chief Garber's military awards include the Meritorious Service Medal: Navy/Marine Corps Commendation Medal; Navy/Marine Corps Achievement Medal, six; Meritorious Unit Commendation; Good Conduct Medal, five; Navy Expeditionary Medal; National Defense Service Medal, two; Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal, two; Sea Service Deployment Ribbon, six; And Navy Recruiting Service On June 20, Command Master Chief Jeffrey James Garber was found unresponsive in a berthing space aboard the carrier, USS Dwight D. Eisenhower. When he was found unresponsive in his stateroom at approximately 8:15 a.m. local time, a medical emergency was declared; and medical personnel were on the scene within minutes. Sadly, all efforts to revive him were unsuccessful, and Master Chief Garber was pronounced dead of natural causes at 8:23 a.m. He was 43 years old. Command Master Chief Garber has been posthumously awarded the Legion of Merit medal, recognizing his accomplishments as Command Master Chief Command Master Chief Garber leaves behind his wife Amy, (Vogt) Garber, and his three children, Tayler, Paige and Josh, all of Virginia Beach; his parents Larry and JoAnn Kuester of York, NE; and his brothers Joel and Jon. Throughout his career, those who knew him, admired Master Chief Garber's professionalism, but also, genuinely liked him. He will forever be remembered by his family and friends as not only the epitome of what a command master chief should be, but primarily a loving husband, father, and son. I join all Nebraskans today in mourning the loss of Command Master Chief Garber and offering Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, I am pleased today to recognize a community in North Dakota that is celebrating its 125th anniversary. On July 23-26, the residents of Northwood will gather to celebrate their Founded in 1884, Northwood is located in Northeastern ND, and was named after Northwood, IA, a common starting point for pioneers settling in the Dakota Territory. In its early years, the town grew rapidly, and continued to expand over the next century. It was honored in 1993 by the North Dakota League of Cities as City of the Year. In 2007, Northwood was devastated by an EF4 tornado. Not a single building was left untouched by this monstrous storm that wreaked havoc on everything in its path. Homes and businesses were destroyed, yet amidst all of the destruction, this community banded together, and with the assistance of the federal government, it has successfully rebuilt. Today, Northwood is a friendly and welcoming community that includes a nine-hole golf course, a swimming pool, a strong business community, and a high quality education system. Additionally, the town remains true to its agricultural roots through its farming population. The central point of Northwood's 125th anniversary celebration will be the dedication of the new Northwood Public School and the Veteran's Memorial. Other activities, to name a few, include a community picnic, a tractor pull, a teen dance, karaoke, a 5K walk and run, a craft show, a kiddie parade, and a 3-on-3 basketball tournament. I ask the Senate to join me in congratulating Northwood, ND, and its residents on their first 125 years and in wishing them well in the future. By honoring Northwood and all other historic small towns of North Dakota, we keep the great pioneering frontier spirit alive for future generations. It is places such as Northwood that have helped shape this country into what it is today, which is why this fine Mr. JOHANNS. Mr. President, today I pay tribute to a leader in In February of 2007, Abigail Kimbell became the 16th Chief of the U.S. Forest Service. She was the first female in this role, a job she held until July 5, 2009. During those 2\\1/2\\ years, she served with distinction and accomplished much for the forests, grasslands, and Gail is credited with renewing the emphasis behind the Forest Service's mission of ``Caring for the Land and Serving People'' and reconnecting programs and functions to that mission. She improved firefighter safety and fire suppression cost containment. Gail showed great vision and leadership, pressing the agency to continually strive to meet a standard of excellence in its operations, both internally and Gail emphasized the importance of quality water to the environment and our communities. She directed the agency's investment in the education of children and youth, particularly those in underrepresented communities, to enhance their connection to the natural world. Gail's numerous and significant contributions span more than three decades of public service. As a Forest Supervisor, she focused on community collaboration to build understanding and support for an economically and environmentally viable long-term timber sale program in Alaska. She also made bold land management decisions to ensure forests remained healthy by reducing hazardous fuels. As associate deputy chief for the national forest system, Gail was central to the development of the Healthy Forests Initiative, including the Healthy Forests Restoration Act. She also worked to improve As regional forester in the northern region, she oversaw the development and implementation of community wildfire protection plans in Idaho, Montana, and North Dakota. She also played a leading role in the development of plans to delist the grizzly bear in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. Gail pioneered the implementation of improved forest planning with unprecedented public collaboration and ownership. On July 31, 2009, Gail Kimbell will be retiring from the Forest Service with 35-plus years of service to that agency and our country. Her dedication to the Forest Service mission ``to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the Nation's forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations'' will be forever At 2:56 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has passed the following bill, in which it requests the concurrence of the conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American At 4:35 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered by Ms. Niland, one of its reading clerks, announced that the House has agreed to the following concurrent resolution, in which it requests the H. Con. Res. 164. Concurrent resolution recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the The following communications were laid before the Senate, together with accompanying papers, reports, and documents, and were referred as EC-2352. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (6) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2353. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (10) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of brigadier general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2354. A communication from the Deputy Secretary of Defense, transmitting the report of (7) officers authorized to wear the insignia of the grade of major general in accordance with title 10, United States Code, section 777; to EC-2355. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Federal Acquistion Regulation Supplement; Restriction on Acquisition of Specialty Metals'' ((RIN0750- AF95) (DFARS Case 2008-D003)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 16, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2356. A communication from the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy, Department of Defense, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Defense Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Requirements Applicable to Undefinitized Contract Actions'' ((RIN0750- AG29) (DFARS Case 2008-D029)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 17, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2357. A communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, a six-month periodic report on the national emergency that was declared in Executive Order 13441 with respect to Lebanon; to the EC-2358. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Qualified Plug-in Electric Vehicle Credit Under Section 30'' (Notice 2009-58) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to the EC-2359. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 2 on Casualty Loss IRC 165'' (LMSB-4-0309-010) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 14, 2009; to EC-2360. A communication from the Chief of the Publications and Regulations Branch, Internal Revenue Service, Department of the Treasury, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Industry Director's Directive No. 4 on Mixed Service Costs Phase 1'' (LMSB-4-0509-022) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 20, 2009; EC-2361. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a Clarification Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2362. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-124, ``National Law Enforcement Museum Sales and Use Tax Credit Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2363. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-125, ``Records Access Amendment Act of EC-2364. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-126, ``Raze Permit Community Notification Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2365. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-127, ``Citizen-Service Programs Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2366. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-128, ``Child Development Center Directors Relocation Fairness Clarification Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2367. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-133, ``Transportation Infrastructure Improvements GARVEE Bond Financing Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. EC-2368. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-134, ``Anacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act of 2009''; to the Committee on Homeland EC-2369. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-135, ``Clean and Affordable Energy Fund Balance Temporary Amendment Act of 2009''; to the Committee EC-2370. A communication from the Chairman of the Council of the District of Columbia, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on D.C. Act 18-136, ``Neighborhood Development Tax Deferral Temporary Act of 2009''; to the Committee on EC-2371. A communication from the Director, Office of Personnel Management, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Office's report on Federal agencies' use of the physicians comparability allowance (PCA) program; to the Committee on EC-2372. A communication from the Senior Official, Office of Inspector General, Federal Housing Finance Agency, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee on Homeland Security and EC-2373. A communication from the Inspector General, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the Semi-Annual Report of the Inspector General for the period from October 1, 2008 through March 31, 2009; to the Committee EC-2374. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Summer 2009 Fireworks, Coastal Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA08, 1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0422)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2375. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Fireworks Displays in Boothbay Harbor, South Gardiner, and Woolwich, Maine'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0526)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2376. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; San Clemente Island Northwest Harbor August and September Training; Northwest Harbor, San Clemente Island, California'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0522)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2377. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Southside Summer Fireworks, St. Clair River, Port Huron, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0478)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2378. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Sigma Gamma Fireworks, Lake St. Clair, Grosse Pointe Farms, Michigan'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0477)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2379. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; Thunder on Niagara, Niagara River, North Tonawanda, New York'' ((RIN1625-AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0110)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2380. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Safety Zone; F/V PATRIOT, Massachusetts Bay, Massachusetts'' ((RIN1625- AA00)(Docket No. USG-2009-0512)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2381. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Regulated Navigation Area; Herbert C. Bonner Bridge, Oregon Inlet, North Carolina'' ((RIN1625-AA11)(Docket No. USG-2009-0489)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2382. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Drawbridge Operation Regulations; Potomac River, Between Maryland and Virginia'' ((RIN1625-AA09)(Docket No. USG-2008-1216)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2383. A communication from the Attorney Advisor, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Homeland Security, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Anchorage Regulations; Port of New York'' ((RIN1625-AA01)(Docket No. USG-2009-0045)) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2384. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Multispecies Fishery; Closure of the Eastern United States/Canada Area'' (RIN0648-XQ01) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, EC-2385. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic Sea Scallop Fishery; Closure of the Closed Area II Scallop Access Area to Scallop Vessels'' (RIN0648-XQ05) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2386. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Reef Fish Fishery of the Gulf of Mexico; Closure of the 2009 Deepwater Grouper Commercial Fishery'' (RIN0648-XP56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2387. A communication from the Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Biennial Specifications and Management Measures; Inseason Adjustments'' (RIN0648-AX96) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2388. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Spiny Dogfish; Framework Adjustment 2'' (RIN0648-AX56) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on EC-2389. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Recreational Management Measures for the Summer Flounder, Scup, and Black Sea Bass Fisheries; Fishing Year 2009'' (RIN0648-AX69) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2390. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Greenland Turbot, Arrowtooth Flounder, and Sablefish by Vessels Participating in the Amendment 80 Limited Access Fishery in Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Management Area'' (RIN0648-XP97) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EC-2391. A communication from the Acting Director of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast States; Pacific Coast Groundfish Fishery; Closure of the Pacific Whiting Primary Fishery for the Mothership Sector'' (RIN0648- XP82) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and EC-2392. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper- Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Amendment 16'' (RIN0648-AW64) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, EC-2393. A communication from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Operations, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, the report of a rule entitled ``Fisheries Off West Coast Specifications Modification'' (RIN0648-XO74) received in the Office of the President of the Senate on July 15, 2009; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF COMMITTEES--THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2009 The following material was omitted from the Congressional Record of Financial Campaign Contributions Report for Daniel M. (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Daniel Milton Rooney: 5/24/2008, Gridiron-PAC, $5,000; 10/ 21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Patricia Regan Rooney: 6/15/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 6/27/ 2008, DCCC, $5,000; 8/03/2005, Patrick Murphy, $2,000; 9/29/ 2005, Patrick Murphy, $1,109; 4/21/2008, Barack Obama, $500; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/14/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,500; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/28/2006, DCCC, $1,500; 12/28/2007, DCCC, $2,000; 9/23/2008, Patrick Murphy, $250; 10/21/2008, Committee for Change (Joint FR Committee), $30,000. Arthur Joseph Rooney II: 9/07/2006, Melissa Hart, $500; 4/ 13/2007, Arlen Specter, $1,000; 6/20/2008, DCCC, $2,000; 8/ 06/2005, Patrick Murphy, $500; 10/27/2006, Mike Doyle, $500; 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 8/25/2008, John Murtha, $2,000; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,700; 5/02/2008, Tom Rooney, ($1,700); 5/02/2008, Tom Patricia Rooney Gerrero: 4/11/2008, Hillary Clinton, $500. Rita Rooney Conway: 8/14/2008, 07/31/2008, John Murtha, Obama Victory Fund (Joint FR Committee), $2,000; $5,000; 6/ 30/2008, Obama for America, $250; 02/12/2008, Hillary Clinton for President, $1,000; 10/14/2005, DSCC, $500; 05/30/2006, DSCC, $250; 10/23/2008, Committee for Change, $10,000; 06/30/ 2006, DCCC, $2,000; 08/31/2007, Obama for America, $250. Daniel Michael Rooney: 05/12/2005, North Side Good Government Committee, $3000; 3/26/2007, Tom Rooney, $400; 3/ 26/2007, Tom Rooney, $2,300; 7/22/2008, Tom Rooney, $1,900; 9/15/2008, Florida 16 Victory Trust (Joint FR Committee), John Thomas Rooney: 11/15/2005, George W. Bush, $1,000; 8/ James Emmett Rooney: 12/20/2005, Mike Doyle, $500; 01/24/ 2008, Arlen Specter, $500; 03/12/2007, Majority PAC, $1,000; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 3/23/2006, Robert Casey, $2,100; 11/29/2007, Robert Casey, $1,000; 3/04/2008, William Shuster, $500; 4/25/2008, Jason Altmire, $500; 10/29/2008, Jason Altmire, $2,300; 5/18/2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 9/20/ 2005, John Murtha, $1,000; 7/07/2006, John Murtha, $2,000; 6/ 28/2006, DCCC, $1,000; 11/19/2007, John Murtha, $2,000; 10/ 11/2005, Prosperity Helps Inspire Liberty PAC, $1,000; 6/08/ The following executive reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. ROCKEFELLER for the Committee on Commerce, Science, *Polly Trottenberg, of Maryland, to be an Assistant *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term of two years. *Deborah A. P. Hersman, of Virginia, to be a Member of the National Transportation Safety Board for a term expiring *Richard A. Lidinsky, Jr., of Maryland, to be a Federal Maritime Commissioner for the term expiring June 30, 2012. *Meredith Attwell Baker, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for the remainder of the *Mignon L. Clyburn, of South Carolina, to be a Member of the Federal Communications Commission for a term of five By Mr. KERRY for the Committee on Foreign Relations. *Anne Elizabeth Derse, of Maryland, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 7. Sisters and Spouses: Jane Quasarano (sister), None. Paul Quasarano (brother-in-law): (A good faith effort was made to obtain contribution information from Mr. Quasarano. The following is what is available:) National Beer Wholesalers Association (NBWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, and 2009; Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers Association (MBWWA) PAC: Contributions in 2005, 2006, 2007 and $3,000 in 2008 and $3,000 in 2009; Michigan Senator Martha Scott: $1,500 in 2008 and $1,500 in 2009; Michigan Lt. Governor John Cherry: $5,000 in 2008 and $5,000 in 2009; Magistrate O'Brien; Michigan State Representative Ed Gaffney; Michigan Senator Mary Waters; Michigan Senator Steve *Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, September 2008, Barack Obama; $250, August of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this *Donald Sternoff Beyer, Jr., of Virginia, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to Switzerland, and to serve concurrently and without additional compensation as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Post: Chief of Mission to the Swiss Confederation and the (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them in the past four years. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this report is complete and 1. Self: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Judy Feder for Congress, $2,000, 2006; Judy Feder for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Al Weed for Congress, $2,000, 2006; John Tester for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2006; Tom Harkin for U.S. Senate, $2,280, 2007; Leonard Boswell for Congress, $2,100, 2006; Tom Perriello for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Paul Hodes for Congress, $2,000, 2007; Dan Seals for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Jared Polis for Congress, $500, 2008; Eighth District Democratic Committee, Virginia Democratic Party, $250, 2006; Allan Lichtman for Senate, $250, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $5,000, 2007; Fairfax County Democratic Committee, $1,000, 2008; Philip Forgit for Congress, $1,000, 2007; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,250, 2005; Peter Welch for Congress, $1,000, 2006; Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $500, 2006; Alexandria Democratic Committee, $250, 2005; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $2,300, 2007; John Kerry for U.S. Senate, $1,000, 2007; Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Democratic Party of Virginia, $2,500, 2007; Born Fighting PAC, $2,500, 2008; Leslie Byrne for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Mark Udall for Senate, $2,300, 2008; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Jim Webb for U.S. Senate, $2,100, 2006; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $2,000, 2005; Bob Casey for U.S. Senate, $900, 2006; Ethan Berkowitz for Congress, $1,000, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Gerry Connelly for Congress, $2,300, 2008; Gerry Connelly for Congress, $1,000, 2009; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Democratic National Committee, $26,700, 2005; Moving Virginia Forward, $20,000, 2007; Kaine for Governor, $19,600, 2005; Deeds for Attorney General, $10,000, 2005; Byrne for Lieutenant Governor, $8,600, 2005; Commonwealth Coalition, $5,000, 2006; Virginia 2. Spouse: Megan C. Beyer: Obama for America, $4,600, 2007; Mark Warner for Senate, $4,600, 2007; Democratic National Committee, $28,500, 2008 (Obama Victory Fund); Harris Miller for Senate, $2,100, 2006, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, $10,000, 2006; Forward Together PAC, $5,000, 2005; Ronnie Musgrove for U.S. Senate $1,000, 2008; Leslie Byrne for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Gerry Connelly for U.S. Congress, $1,000, 2008; Mary Landrieu for Senate, $1,000, 2008; Win Virginia 2008, $3,256, 2008; Virginia Senate 2006, $10,000, 2006; Democratic National Committee, $5,000, 2005; Democratic National Committee, $500, 2006; Democratic Stephanie A. S. Beyer: $2,300, 3/2007, Obama for America. 4. Parents: Donald S. Beyer, Sr.: No contributions. 5. Grandparents: Otto S. Beyer Jr.: (deceased 1948). 6. Brothers Spouses: Michael S. Beyer: $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $250, 5/14/07, Whipple for Va Senate. June C. Beyer, spouse: $250, 8/6/08, Obama for America; 7. Sisters and Spouses: Katherine S. Beyer (single): No Marylee B. Hill: $250, 9/27/06, Feder for Congress; $250, 6/14/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 8/17/07, Obama for America; $500, 10/3/07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $250, 3/4/ 07, Hudgins for Fairfax Board; $600, 12/29/05, Kaine Inaugural Committee; $350, 5/30/07, Vanderhye for Va Delegate; $250, 7/2/08, Petersen for Va Senate; $150, 9/24/ *John R. Nay, of Michigan, a Career Member of the Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To be best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $0--I have never made a political donation. 2. Spouse: $0--She has never made a political donation. 3. Children and Spouses: Janelle V.A. (Nay) Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jamison R. Bennett: $0-- has never made a political donation; Jaclyn E.A. Nay: $0--has never made a political donation; Jordan R. Nay: $0--has never 4. Parents: Jack R. Nay: $50, Spring 2006, Joe Schwartz (R- Michigan); Geraldine G. Nay: $0, (made only one political donation in her lifetime--$30 to the Democratic Nat'l 7. Sisters and Spouses: Karen Y. Sefchick: $0--has never *Vinai K. Thummalapally, of Colorado, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $2,200, 6/07, Obama for America; $9,000, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Madia for U.S. Congress; 2. Spouse: Barbara: $2,300, 6/07, Obama for America; $100, 10/08, Josh Segall for Congress (AL); $500, 9/08, Obama Victory Fund; $500, 9/08, Obama for America; $500, 8/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $300, 9/08, Udall for Colorado, US Senate; $1,000, 1/09, Ritter for Governor, Colorado; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for U.S. Senate; $25, 3/09, 3. Children: Vishal: $2,500, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,800, 6/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 3/09, Bennet for 6. Brother and Spouse: Ajay K. Thummalapally: None. 7b. Rasika G. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $2,300, 7/17/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, 7/31/08, Obama for America; $2,300 10/01/08, Madia for U.S. Congress. Girish V. Reddy: $2,300, 6/30/07, Obama for America; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $1,000, 7/31/08, Obama Victory Fund; $28,500, 10/02/08, Obama Victory Fund; $2,300, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $1,000, 11/02/06, Music Row Democrats Federal PAC Inc.; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 03/31/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 04/26/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; $2,300, 05/24/07, Obama For America; -$2,300, 10/31/07, Obama For America; $500, 06/14/07, John Edwards For President; $500, 07/31/08, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 10/21/08, Committee For Change (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 10/27/08, Nebraskans For Kleeb. 4. Parents: Clarence Avant (father): 2005/2006, $1,000, 10/ 16/06, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee; $1,000, 03/ 22/06, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $2,100, 09/30/06, Tennessee Senate 2006 (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $500, 06/30/05, LA PAC; $1,000, 10/24/05, Berman For Congress; $1,200, 07/14/ 06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $900, 02/27/06, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $2,000, 08/20/05, Harold Ford Jr. For Tennessee; $1,000, 12/15/05, Cantwell 2012; $1,000, 01/12/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,000, 06/05/06, Mfume For US Senate; $1,100, 08/16/06, Mfume For US Senate; $500, 04/01/06, Schiff For Congress; $1,000, 11/01/05, Schiff For Congress; $5,000, 05/20/05, Hopefund, Inc.; $500, 11/01/06, Mejias For Congress; $500, 09/30/06, Mejias For Congress; $1,000, 09/26/ 05, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 04/18/06, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 05/01/05, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 06/26/06, Mary Bono Committee; $500, 02/12/ 06, Hackett For Senate; $1,000, 03/14/06, Carter For Senate Committee; $500, 05/30/06, Friends Of Tammy Duckworth; $2,000, 08/25/05, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 03/23/06, Feinstein For Senate; $250, 03/24/06, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $250, 11/07/05, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 06/22/06, Klobuchar For Minnesota; $500, 04/25/05, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $500, 03/31/06, Bill Nelson For US Senate; $400, 10/20/05, Friends Of Hillary; $1,000, 06/14/05, Friends Of Hillary; $4,200, 04/04/ 06, Friends of Hillary; $1,000, 07/11/05, Friends Of Hillary; -$3,500, 05/02/06, Friends Of Hillary; $2,500, 10/19/06, Hill PAC; $500, 07/25/06, Lawless For Congress; $500, 03/19/06, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $500, 12/03/05, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $1,900, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $2,100, 12/15/05, Kennedy For Senate 2012; $1,000, 11/04/05, Steele For Maryland Inc.; $1,000, 02/21/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; $1,000, 11/02/06, DNC Services Corporation/Democratic National Committee; 2007/ 2008, $1,000, 08/31/07, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $2,000, 01/23/08, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee; $1,000, 10/10/07, Friends Of Rahm Emanuel; $500, 07/14/08, Loebsack For Congress; $500, 09/30/ 07, John Hall For Congress; $1,000, 05/11/07, Richardson For President Inc.; $1,000, 11/23/07, Friends Of Mark Warner; $2,300, 08/28/08, Friends Of Hillary; $5,000, 07/29/08, Hill PAC; $2,300, 07/18/08, Vernon Jones For Georgia; $500, 07/10/ 07, Richardson For Congress; $250, 06/25/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 08/08/07, Richardson For Congress; $500, 05/ 19/08, Alaskans For Begich; $750, 06/18/08, Citizens For Waters; $1,000, 07/21/07, Citizens For Waters; $500, 10/15/ 08, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $500, 11/09/07, Committee To Re-Elect Loretta Sanchez; $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $1,000, 09/28/07, Friends Of Senator Carl Levin; $1,000, 03/01/07, Friends Of Patrick J. Kennedy Inc.; $500, 09/06/07, Barbara Lee For Congress; $1,000, 03/30/08, Barbara Lee For Congress; $250, 09/30/07, Mary Bono Mack Committee; $500, 09/17/08, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $500, 11/14/07, Diane E. Watson For Congress; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 05/ 09/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $1,000, 06/20/08, Powers For Congress; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $2,300, 10/31/07, Friends Of Barbara Boxer; $500, 03/ 20/08, Jesse Jackson Jr. For Congress; $2,500, 07/16/08, Rangel Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 10/27/08, David Scott For Congress; $500, 08/27/08, Joe Garcia For Congress; $1,000, 03/13/07, John Edwards For President; $1,000, 03/20/08, Al Franken For Senate; $500, 07/ 07/08, Congressman Waxman Campaign Committee; $1,000, 08/16/ 07, LA PAC; $1,000, 11/20/07, Berman For Congress; $300, 06/ 28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; $2,000, 06/28/08, Committee To Re-Elect Ed Towns; -$400, 04/29/08, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $300, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $700, 09/24/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,000, 06/14/07, Friends Of Jim Clyburn; $2,300, 05/02/07, Rangel For Congress; $1,000, 08/20/07, Conyers for Congress; $2,500, 08/02/08, Conyers For Congress; $-1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $1,200, 08/02/08,-Conyers For Congress; $5,000, 09/ 19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $28,500, 6/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraising Contribution); $2,300, 03/08/07, Obama For America. Jacqueline Avant (mother): 2005/2006, $2,100, 04/19/06, Friends Of Hillary; 2007/2008, $250, 02/14/07, Emily's List; $2,300, 03/28/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $4,600, 08/ 31/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $1,000, 09/16/08, Democrats Win Seats (DWS PAC); $2,000, 12/ 5. Grandparents: Zella Gray (maternal grandmother)-- deceased; Leon Gray (maternal grandfather)--deceased; Gertrude Woods (paternal grandmother)--deceased; Phoenix 6. Brothers and Spouses: Alexander Avant (brother): $500, 6/07/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $500, 09/11/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $250, 12/13/07, Hillary Clinton For President; $2,300, 06/30/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $2,500, 09/19/08, Obama Victory Fund (Joint Fundraiser Contribution); $250, 10/10/08, Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this 1. Self: $4600, 3/29/07, Obama for America; $1000, 6/30/06, Boswell for Congress; $1000, 9/21/06, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 2/23/08, Ben Cardin for Senate; $1000, 6/30/2006, Friends of Joe Lieberman; $1000, 9/25/2008, Patrick Murphy for Congress; $250, 2/27/06, David Yassky for Congress; $1000, 12/10/08, Mikulski for Senate Committee; $500, 3/01/ 06, Whitehouse for Senate; $2300, 11/24/08, Hillary Clinton for President; $5000, 7/06/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/2006, Forward Together PAC; $2300, 9/24/2007, Friends of Mark Warner; $2300, 1/16/2008, Friends of Mark Warner; $1000, 4/18/07, Friends of Mary Landrieu; $2100, 3/8/06, Miller 2006 (Harris Miller); $2100, 10/31/05, Rales for Senate; $2500, 9/ 2.-Spouse: Michelle Loewinger or Michelle Gutman: $5000, 7/ 6/05, Forward Together PAC; $5000, 1/10/06, Forward Together PAC; 3/29/07, $2300, Obama for America; 5/25/07, $2300, Obama for America; 10/31/05, $2100, Rales for Senate; 9/24/07, $2300, Friends of Mark Warner; 1/16/08, $2300, Friends of 3. Children and Spouses: Collin Gutman--single--none; Chase 4. Parents: Max Gutman--deceased 1973; Roslyn Gutman--none. 5. Grandparents: All grandparents are deceased for decades. 7. Sisters and Spouses: Deborah Studen (Harvey Studen)-- *Vilma S. Martinez, of California, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge the information contained in this 1. Self: $931.00, 1/29/2008, Obama for America; $1,000.00, 10/30/2008, -Obama for America; $250.00, 3/25/2006, Friends of Juan Vargas; $200.00, 10/02/2006, Madrid for Congress. Carlos A. Singer: $1,000.00, 10/11/2004, Democratic Jessica Uzcategui, (Carlos' spouse): $500.00, 1/26/2008, 6. Brothers and Spouses: Salvador Martinez, Jr.: unable to 7. Sisters and Spouses: Rose Linda Hernandez: none. (*David H. Thorne, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of America to the Italian Republic, and to serve concurrently Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United States of (The following is a list of all members of my immediate family and their spouses. I have asked each of these persons to inform me of the pertinent contributions made by them. To the best of my knowledge, the information contained in this Self: Democratic National Committee, $100, 2006, David Thorne; Democratic National Committee, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; New Hampshire Democratic Party, $1000, 2006, David Thorne; Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, David Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $2300, 2007, David Thorne; Biden for President, $1000, 2007, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama for America, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $250, 2008, David Thorne; Obama Victory Fund, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Footlik for Congress, $1000, 2008, David Thorne; Young Democrats of America, $500, 2008, David Thorne. Spouse: Friends of John Kerry, $2100, 2006, Rose Thorne; John Powers for Congress, $1300, 2007, Rose Thorne; John Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, for the Committee on Foreign Relations I report favorably the following nomination list which was printed in the Record on the date indicated, and ask unanimous consent, to save the expense of reprinting on the Executive Calendar that this nomination lie at the Secretary's desk for the information of Senators. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. *Foreign Service nominations beginning with Christopher L. Andino and ending with Holly Hope Zardus, which nominations were received by the Senate and appeared in the Congressional *Nomination was reported with recommendation that it be confirmed subject to the nominee's commitment to respond to requests to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of the Senate. The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the first and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated: S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. By Mrs. GILLIBRAND (for herself, Mr. Alexander, and Mr. S. 1478. A bill to strengthen communities through English literacy and civics education for new Americans, and for S. 1479. A bill to provide for the treatment of certain By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bingaman, and Mr. Tester): S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, S. 1481. A bill to amend section 811 of the Cranston- Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act to improve the program under such section for supportive housing for persons with disabilities; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and By Mr. KERRY (for himself, Ms. Snowe, Mr. Rockefeller, Nanotechnology Research and Development Act, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and S. 1483. A bill to designate the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Alexandria, Minnesota, as the ``Max J. Beilke Department of Veterans Affairs Outpatient S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on S. 1485. A bill to improve hurricane preparedness by establishing the National Hurricane Research Initiative and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, S. 1486. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the creation of disaster protection funds by property and casualty insurance companies for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from future catastrophic S. 1487. A bill to establish a bipartisan commission on insurance reform; to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and The following concurrent resolutions and Senate resolutions were appointments for the 111th Congress; considered and agreed S. Res. 219. A resolution honoring the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey; to the Committee on S. Con. Res. 33. A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp should be issued to honor the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought and served during World War II; to the Committee on At the request of Mr. Kerry, the name of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 144, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to remove cell phones from listed At the request of Mrs. Murray, the name of the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Conrad) was added as a cosponsor of S. 211, a bill to facilitate nationwide availability of 2-1-1 telephone service for information and referral on human services and volunteer services, and At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 237, a bill to establish a collaborative program to protect the Great Lakes, and for other At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Bayh) was added as a cosponsor of S. 254, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for the coverage of home At the request of Mr. Dorgan, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 428, a bill to allow travel At the request of Mr. Webb, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) was added as a cosponsor of S. 572, a bill to provide for the issuance of a ``forever stamp'' to honor the sacrifices of the brave men and women of the armed forces who have been awarded the At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown) was added as a cosponsor of S. 616, a bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to authorize medical simulation enhancement At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Thune) was added as a cosponsor of S. 781, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for collegiate housing and At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Barrasso) was added as a cosponsor of S. 812, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the special rule for contributions of qualified conservation contributions. At the request of Mr. Durbin, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. 846, a bill to award a congressional gold medal to Dr. Muhammad Yunus, in recognition of his contributions to the fight against global poverty. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) was added as a cosponsor of S. 913, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand workplace health incentives by equalizing the tax consequences of employee athletic facility use. At the request of Mr. Crapo, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 941, a bill to reform the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, modernize firearm laws and regulations, protect the community from criminals, and for At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1026, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to improve procedures for the collection and delivery of marked absentee ballots of absent overseas uniformed service voters, and for other purposes. At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Menendez) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1055, a bill to grant the congressional gold medal, collectively, to the 100th Infantry Battalion and the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, United States Army, in recognition of their dedicated service during World War II. At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1066, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to preserve access to ambulance At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1121, a bill to amend part D of title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to provide grants for the repair, renovation, and construction of elementary and secondary schools, including early learning facilities At the request of Mr. Roberts, the name of the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Johnson) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1128, a bill to authorize the award of a military service medal to members of the Armed Forces who were exposed to ionizing radiation as a result of participation in the testing of nuclear weapons or under other At the request of Mr. Schumer, the name of the Senator from Michigan (Mr. Levin) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1153, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the exclusion from gross income for employer-provided health coverage for employees' spouses and dependent children to coverage provided to other eligible designated At the request of Mr. Harkin, the name of the Senator from Maine (Ms. Snowe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1156, a bill to amend the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users to reauthorize and improve the safe routes to school program. At the request of Mr. Cornyn, the name of the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1265, a bill to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to provide members of the Armed Forces and their family members equal access to voter registration At the request of Mr. Nelson of Nebraska, the name of the Senator a cosponsor of S. 1279, a bill to amend the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 to extend the Rural At the request of Mr. Grassley, the names of the Senator from Montana (Mr. Baucus) and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey) were added as cosponsors of S. 1304, a bill to restore the economic rights of At the request of Mr. Isakson, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Kaufman) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1312, a bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage, as supplies associated with the injection of insulin, of containment, removal, decontamination and disposal of home-generated needles, syringes, and other sharps through a sharps container, decontamination/ destruction device, or sharps-by-mail program or similar program under At the request of Mr. DeMint, the name of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1324, a bill to ensure that every American has a health insurance plan that they can afford, own, At the request of Mr. Vitter, the names of the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Bunning), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of S. 1344, a bill to temporarily protect the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. At the request of Mr. Reed, the name of the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Akaka) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1362, a bill to provide grants to States to ensure that all students in the middle grades are taught an academically rigorous curriculum with effective supports so that students complete the middle grades prepared for success in high school and postsecondary endeavors, to improve State and district policies and programs relating to the academic achievement of students in the middle grades, to develop and implement effective middle grades models for At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1408, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage alternative energy At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of S. 1415, a bill to amend the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act to ensure that absent uniformed services voters and overseas voters are aware of their voting rights and have a genuine opportunity to register to vote and have their absentee ballots cast and counted, At the request of Mrs. Murray, the names of the Senator from Washington (Ms. Cantwell), the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) and the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr. Feingold) were added as cosponsors of S. 1422, a bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to clarify the eligibility requirements with respect to airline flight At the request of Mr. Wyden, the name of the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Roberts) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1439, a bill to provide for duty-free treatment of certain recreational performance outerwear, and At the request of Mrs. Boxer, the name of the Senator from California (Mrs. Feinstein) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1469, a bill to provide for the administration of Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Baucus, the name of the Senator from New York (Mr. Schumer) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1474, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the provision prohibiting the crediting of interest to the Highway Trust Fund, and for other At the request of Mr. Menendez, the name of the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Carper) was added as a cosponsor of S. Con. Res. 25, a concurrent resolution recognizing the value and benefits that community health centers provide as health care homes for over 18,000,000 individuals, and the importance of enabling health centers and other safety net providers to continue to offer accessible, affordable, and continuous care to their current patients and to every American who lacks access At the request of Mrs. Lincoln, the name of the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 210, a resolution designating the week beginning on November 9, 2009, as At the request of Mr. Johanns, the name of the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander) was added as a cosponsor of S. Res. 212, a resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that any savings under the Medicare program should be invested back into the Medicare program, rather than At the request of Mr. Leahy, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Bond, the name of the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1501 intended to be At the request of Mr. Sanders, the name of the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Wyden) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1514 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the names of the Senator from Florida (Mr. Martinez), the Senator from North Carolina (Mr. Burr), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Casey), the Senator from Iowa (Mr. Harkin), the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) and the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1515 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bunning, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1517 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Lieberman, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1528 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Levin, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1528 proposed to At the request of Mr. Risch, the name of the Senator from Arkansas (Mrs. Lincoln) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1543 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Nelson of Florida, the name of the Senator from New Jersey (Mr. Lautenberg) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1558 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Brownback, the names of the Senator from Arizona (Mr. Kyl), the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe) and the Senator from Utah (Mr. Bennett) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1597 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Begich, the name of the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1599 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for At the request of Mr. Thune, the names of the Senator from Oklahoma (Mr. Inhofe), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Risch), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Cochran) and the Senator from Mississippi (Mr. Wicker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1618 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the names of the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Bond) and the Senator from Missouri (Mrs. McCaskill) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1621 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Ms. Collins, her name was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1628 proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes. At the request of Mr. Bennett, his name was added as a cosponsor of At the request of Mr. Schumer, the names of the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Webb), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), the Senator from Oregon (Mr. Merkley) and the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker) were added as cosponsors of amendment No. 1635 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for At the request of Mr. Pryor, the name of the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 1637 intended to be proposed to S. 1390, an original bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS S. 1476. A bill to require all new and upgraded fuel pumps to be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, today I am here to talk about a simple Each year U.S. consumers spend $2.57 billion more than they should for gasoline and diesel fuel. This is because they are buying hot fuel. The physics behind hot fuel are fairly simple. Retailers currently measure our gasoline as it if is stored at 60 degrees Fahrenheit. However, if the temperature increases, as it often does during the summer or in warm climates, the gasoline expands so that consumers are getting less energy per gallon of fuel. Yet, when consumers buy hot fuel, they are paying the same amount even though they are getting less This problem can be easily solved by installing temperature compensating equipment that will regulate the distribution of fuel based on its temperature at the time of purchase. A similar policy was implemented in Canada 15 years ago because retailers were losing money due to the cold temperature of the fuel they were selling; and earlier this year, the U.S. retailer Costco Warehouse, LLC agreed to install this temperature compensating equipment as a result of a legal Today, I am introducing legislation that would require all retailers of gasoline to install temperature compensating equipment on their retail fuel pumps. The Future Accountability in Retail Fuel Act of 2009, or the FAIR Fuel Act, is not intended to be onerous. It would simply require that within 6 years after enactment of this legislation all retail gasoline pumps would include automatic temperature compensating equipment. Prior to that 6 year timeline, if a retailer replaces their pumps, they must replace it with a pump that will be able to compensate for temperature fluctuations. Rural retail gasoline owners are exempt from this replacement requirement and the bill provides grant assistance for small retail owners to retrofit or purchase pumps with temperature compensating equipment. American families deserve to be treated fairly. They deserve to get what they pay for. With the current economic crisis and the high prices of gasoline, every penny we can save the consumer will go along way to them survive these tough times. This legislation will help to achieve this goal. It will finally give consumers the fairness they deserve. I am pleased that this bill has been endorsed by the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, OOIDA, USPIRG and Consumer Watchdog. I look forward to working with the members of the Commerce Committee and the full Senate in getting this legislation passed. I think we owe it Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Future Accountability in (1) Automatic temperature compensation equipment.--The term ``automatic temperature compensation equipment'' has the meaning given the term in the National Institute of Standards (2) Equivalent standard.--The term ``equivalent standard'' means any standard that prohibits the retail sale of gasoline with energy content per gallon that is different than the energy content of 1 gallon of gasoline stored at 60 degrees (3) Rural area.--The term ``rural area'' means any area (A) a city, town, or unincorporated area that has a (B) the urbanized area that is contiguous and adjacent to (4) Small-volume station.--The term ``small-volume station'' means any retail fuel establishment that dispenses fewer than 360,000 gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel per SEC. 3. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT. (1) New motor fuel dispensers.--Beginning 180 days after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers that are newly installed or upgraded at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with automatic temperature compensation equipment to ensure that any volume of gasoline or diesel fuel measured by such dispenser for retail sale is equal to the volume that such quantity of fuel would equal at the time of such sale if the temperature of the fuel was 60 degrees Fahrenheit. (A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B), not later than 5 years after the issuance of final regulations under subsection (c), all motor fuel dispensers at any retail fuel establishment in the United States shall be equipped with the automatic temperature compensation (B) Small-volume stations.--Small-volume stations located in rural areas shall not be subject to the requirement under (1) Annual inspection.--Beginning on the date described in subsection (a), State inspectors conducting an initial or annual inspection of motor fuel dispensers are authorized to determine if such dispensers are equipped with the automatic temperature compensation equipment required under subsection (2) Notification.--If the State inspector determines that a motor fuel dispenser does not comply with the requirement under subsection (a), the State inspector is authorized to notify the Federal Trade Commission, through an electronic notification system developed by the Commission, of such (3) Follow-up inspection.--Not earlier than 180 days after a motor fuel dispenser is found to be out of compliance with the requirement under subsection (a), the Federal Trade Commission shall coordinate a follow-up inspection of such (A) In general.--The owner or operator of any retail fuel establishment with a motor fuel dispenser subject to the requirement under subsection (a) that is determined to be out of compliance with such requirement shall be subject to a fine equal to $5,000 for each noncompliant motor fuel (B) Additional fine.--If a motor fuel dispenser is determined to be out of compliance during a follow-up inspection, the owner or operator of the retail fuel establishment at which such motor fuel dispenser is located shall be subject to an additional fine equal to $5,000. (5) Use of fines.--Any amounts collected under paragraph (4) shall be deposited into the trust fund established under (1) Commencement.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, shall commence a rulemaking procedure to (2) Final regulations.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall issue final regulations to implement the requirement under subsection (a), including specifying which volume correction factor tables shall be used for the range of gasoline and diesel fuel products that are sold to retail SEC. 4. AUTOMATIC TEMPERATURE COMPENSATION EQUIPMENT GRANT (1) In general.--There is established in the Treasury of the United States a trust fund to be known as the ``Automatic Temperature Compensation Equipment Trust Fund'' (referred to (2) Transfers.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall transfer to the Trust Fund out of the general fund of the Treasury an amount equal to the amount collected as fines (3) Investment.--The Secretary of the Treasury shall invest such portion of the Trust Fund as is not required to meet current withdrawals. Such investments may be made only in interest-bearing obligations of the United States. (1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund for grants to owners and operators of retail fuel establishments to offset the costs associated with the installation of automatic temperature (2) Maximum amount.--The Secretary may not award a grant (3) Eligible recipients.--An owner or operator of not more than 5 retail fuel establishments is eligible to receive a (4) Use of grant funds.--Grant funds received under this subsection may be used to offset the costs incurred by owners and operators of retail establishments to acquire and install automatic temperature compensation equipment in accordance (5) Authorization of appropriations.--There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out (c) Reimbursement of State Inspection Costs.--The Secretary of Commerce is authorized to use amounts in the Trust Fund to reimburse States for the costs incurred by the States to-- (1) inspect motor fuel dispensers for compliance with the (2) notify the Secretary of Commerce of any noncompliance Nothing in this Act may be construed to preempt a State from enacting a law that imposes an equivalent standard or a more stringent standard concerning the retail sale of S. 1477. A bill to establish a user fee for follow-up reinspections under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act; to the Committee on Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill that would charge a reinspection fee for goods that fail FDA inspection for good manufacturing practices. Currently, businesses do not have to pay for the second inspection if they fail. Essentially, then, the FDA is absorbing this extra cost. This Nation faces difficult enough choices without subsidizing private companies that fail basic inspections. I am pleased to credit the Bush administration for originally proposing this fee, which is again proposed in President Obama's fiscal year 2010 budget. This fee carries proposed savings of an estimated $24 million per year, and could save as much as $115 million over 5 years. We must ensure that U.S. taxpayer money is being used efficiently and effectively, and this measure would help in our ongoing efforts to streamline government programs and reduce the Federal budget deficit. FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach testified about these fees before the House Agriculture, Rural Development, and FDA Appropriations Subcommittee in 2006. He believes, and I agree, that the reinspection fee will motivate businesses to comply with long-established health and that do not meet Federal standards should bear the burden of the reinspection, rather than getting a free pass at the taxpayer's One of the main reasons I first ran for the U.S. Senate was to restore fiscal responsibility to the Federal budget. I have worked throughout my Senate career to eliminate wasteful spending and to reduce the budget deficit. Unless we return to fiscally responsible budgeting, Congress will saddle our nation's younger generations with an enormous financial burden for years to come. This bill is one small By Mr. KOHL (for himself, Mr. Feingold, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Durbin, S. 1480. A bill to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to establish a program to improve the health and education of children through grants to expand school breakfast programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Mr. FEINGOLD. Mr. President, today I join with Senator Kohl to introduce the Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act as part of my continued efforts to improve student achievement in our Nation's schools. One part of student performance that is often overlooked is nutrition, which can have a significant impact on student achievement. I know many of my colleagues share my support for school programs that help alleviate hunger for the most in-need students, such as the Free and Reduced Price Lunch Program, as well as those programs that provide more nutritious food, such as the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Snack I am sure that I am not the only member of this body who grew up hearing that breakfast is the most important meal of the day. I was lucky never to have to worry about going hungry, and my parents did not have to choose between giving their children lunch or breakfast. The fact is, that is a choice many parents do have to make today, even if they get the help of reduced price meals. The current economic difficulties and rising unemployment have only increased the burdens facing low income families in Wisconsin and around the country as they struggle to provide nutritious meals for their children. The Student Breakfast and Education Improvement Act would provide grants for schools wishing to begin or expand universal school breakfast programs. Studies show that kids who eat breakfast perform better in school and on tests, and they tend to be less disruptive to the class. I have heard many stories from teachers, school nurses, and other school officials over the years to confirm this. In fact, in my home State of Wisconsin, the Milwaukee Public Schools have been working with the Hunger Task Force for the past few years to implement universal school breakfast programs, which they have in place now in more than 80 schools. This program, which has expanded in its second year, has proven popular with students, teachers, and parents. This bill would target the most in-need schools--those with 65 percent or more of students eligible for the free and reduced price lunch program--with the funds necessary to implement a universal free breakfast program. The grants, which could be used in a number of ways, aim to help schools overcome the numerous barriers faced in trying to Our Nation faces a series of pressing education challenges in its schools, including most significantly a large achievement gap and graduation rate gap among minority and low income students. After decades of civil rights struggles, public education should provide all our students with access to equal opportunities, but the quality of public education provided to students of color and low-income students in urban and rural Wisconsin and around the country still does not come close to affording many of these students an equal chance for success. Too often these students learn in crumbling and outdated buildings, they do not have the same access to high quality technology in their classrooms, they are taught by the least experienced teachers, and they often do not have adequate access to important resources like school These and a number of other factors contribute to the achievement gap in our Nation's schools and the Federal Government can help to address this gap by promoting smarter and more flexible accountability structures and increased supports for schools during the upcoming reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Congress should also help to address some of the many other issues facing our nation's students living in poverty issues that may not seem directly related to education, but impact the academic growth of students including hunger, affordable housing, and crime. This bill takes an important step to address hunger and also seeks to improve nutrition education by providing funds to expand school breakfast programs, boost collaboration between local farmers and schools, expand service- learning opportunities in our classrooms, and improve nutrition In this economy, more and more parents are forced to make these kinds of decisions, and the school meal programs can provide a tremendous relief. As we look forward to reauthorizing the Child Nutrition Act, it is vital that we take stock of the successes and limitations of existing programs. School breakfast faces a number of hurdles that, quite simply, other school feeding programs do not. Chief of those is time. For some students, getting to school early is impossible; for some, the lure of breakfast is not a strong enough draw to get up earlier. These are problems that schools across the country are facing and solving with creativity and dedication. This legislation will help support the innovative work going on in some of our nation's schools and will help to scale up successful nutrition programs in other schools so that hopefully one day, none of America's students will By Mr. NELSON, of Florida (for himself and Mr. Martinez): S. 1484. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to create Catastrophe Savings Accounts; to the Committee on Finance. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, last year we were all transfixed by the non-stop news coverage of Hurricanes Gustav and Ike as they grew into monster storms, crossing the Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico and leaving a trail of misery in their wake. Ike, the third most destructive storm in the history of the U.S., made landfall in Galveston, Texas, and then tracked through Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, killing 112 people and causing more Since 2003, hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have caused more than 2,000 deaths in the U.S. Forty percent of all hurricanes that make Insured losses from hurricanes average more than $5.2 billion per year. A recent study of hurricane-related damages over the last century suggests that economic losses will double every 10 years. With more than 50 percent of the U.S. population living within 50 miles of the coast, and with 180 million people visiting the coast annually, the Hurricanes, however, do not just impact the coasts. These extreme events also have national consequences, such as increased fuel prices, displaced populations, and severe inland flooding. The American public is increasingly aware of the potential for high recovery costs and financing of natural disaster losses. I cannot overstate the importance of prior preparation and insurance coverage for large catastrophic risks--including natural disasters such as hurricanes and earthquakes--as well as efforts to promote a stable, This is why today Senator Martinez and I are introducing four bills: the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, Act of 2009, S. 1486, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009, S. 1484, and the National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009, 1485. These bills take a pro-active approach in addressing these natural The National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009 will expand the scope of fundamental research on hurricanes. The bill is aimed at improving hurricane forecasting and tracking and helping us find better ways to mitigate their impact. The Act will establish a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant program for hurricane and tropical cyclone research and bring together a task force, jointly chaired by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, NIST, and NSF. The second bill, the Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance Act of 2009, establishes the bipartisan Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance. This commission will assess the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, as well as the four major hurricanes that struck the U.S. in 2004. It will also evaluate the country's ongoing exposure to earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods. Finally, the commission will recommend and report legislative and regulatory changes that will improve the domestic and international financial health and competitiveness of property and casualty insurance markets, assuring the availability of adequate insurance when an insured event occurs, as well as the best possible range of insurance products at competitive The Policyholder Disaster Protection Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to allow property and casualty insurance companies to create tax-exempt disaster protection funds and to make tax deductible contributions to those funds for the payment of policyholders' claims arising from certain catastrophic events, such as windstorms, Finally, the Catastrophe Savings Accounts Act of 2009 amends the Internal Revenue Code to create tax-exempt catastrophe savings accounts. Individuals could take tax-free distributions from these accounts to pay expenses resulting from a presidentially declared major disaster. The bill limits catastrophe savings account balances to $2,000 for individuals with homeowner insurance deductibles of not more than $1,000, and the lesser of $15,000 or twice the homeowner's insurance deductible for individuals with deductibles of more than As I mentioned at the beginning of my remarks, the entire country experiences financial losses when hurricanes hit. It is time for us to take the bull by the horns and pass legislation that plans in advance As we are in the hurricane season, it will become painfully apparent just how precarious a lot of the construction is, how precarious building codes are not being fairly and judiciously administered, and it will become evident what an economic disaster even a mild hurricane can cause when it hits the coast. And Lord knows, if the big one hits an urbanized part of the coast--and the big one is a category 4 or a category 5 hurricane--it is going to create economic chaos. It is going to cause the insurance industry to be on the brink of total collapse. And it will ultimately, just like Katrina, end up having the U.S. Government pay a major part of the economic bailout consequences of a natural disaster, such as a hurricane or an earthquake hitting the United States. We ought to get ahead of it and we ought to plan for it, and that is what this package of four bills Senator Martinez and I are Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bills be There being no objection, the text of the bills was ordered to be Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Catastrophe Savings Accounts (a) In General.--Subchapter F of Chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exempt organizations) is amended by adding at the end the following new part: ``(a) General Rule.--A Catastrophe Savings Account shall be exempt from taxation under this subtitle. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, such account shall be subject to the taxes imposed by section 511 (relating to imposition of tax on unrelated business income of charitable organizations). ``(b) Catastrophe Savings Account.--For purposes of this section, the term `Catastrophe Savings Account' means a trust created or organized in the United States for the exclusive benefit of an individual or his beneficiaries and which is designated (in such manner as the Secretary shall prescribe) at the time of the establishment of the trust as a Catastrophe Savings Account, but only if the written governing instrument creating the trust meets the following ``(A) no contribution will be accepted unless it is in ``(B) contributions will not be accepted in excess of the account balance limit specified in subsection (c). ``(2) The trustee is a bank (as defined in section 408(n)) or another person who demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the manner in which that person will administer the trust will be consistent with the requirements ``(3) The interest of an individual in the balance of his ``(4) The assets of the trust shall not be commingled with other property except in a common trust fund or common ``(c) Account Balance Limit.--The aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual (including qualified rollover ``(1) in the case of an individual whose qualified ``(2) in the case of an individual whose qualified deductible is more than $1,000, the amount equal to the ``(B) twice the amount of the individual's qualified ``(d) Definitions.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Qualified catastrophe expenses.--The term `qualified catastrophe expenses' means expenses paid or incurred by reason of a major disaster that has been declared by the President under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford ``(2) Qualified deductible.--With respect to an individual, the term `qualified deductible' means the annual deductible for the individual's homeowners' insurance policy. ``(3) Qualified rollover contribution.--The term `qualified rollover contribution' means a contribution to a Catastrophe ``(A) from another such account of the same beneficiary, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account, and ``(B) from a Catastrophe Savings Account of a spouse of the beneficiary of the account to which the contribution is made, but only if such amount is contributed not later than the 60th day after the distribution from such other account. ``(1) In general.--Any distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account shall be includible in the gross income of the distributee in the manner as provided in section 72. ``(2) Distributions for qualified catastrophe expenses.-- ``(A) In general.--No amount shall be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) if the qualified catastrophe expenses of the distributee during the taxable year are not less than the aggregate distributions during the taxable ``(B) Distributions in excess of expenses.--If such aggregate distributions exceed such expenses during the taxable year, the amount otherwise includible in gross income under paragraph (1) shall be reduced by the amount which bears the same ratio to the amount which would be includible in gross income under paragraph (1) (without regard to this subparagraph) as the qualified catastrophe expenses bear to ``(3) Additional tax for distributions not used for qualified catastrophe expenses.--The tax imposed by this chapter for any taxable year on any taxpayer who receives a payment or distribution from a Catastrophe Savings Account which is includible in gross income shall be increased by 10 ``(4) Retirement distributions.--No amount shall be under paragraph (1) (or subject to an additional tax under paragraph (3)) if the payment or distribution is made on or after the date on which the distributee attains age 62. ``(f) Tax Treatment of Accounts.--Rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (2) and (4) of section 408(e) shall apply (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 4973 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to tax on excess contributions to certain tax-favored accounts and annuities) is amended by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (4), by inserting ``or'' at the end of paragraph (5), and by inserting after paragraph (5) the following new paragraph: ``(6) a Catastrophe Savings Account (as defined in section (2) Excess contribution.--Section 4973 of such Code is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: Accounts.--For purposes of this section, in the case of Catastrophe Savings Accounts (within the meaning of section 530A), the term `excess contributions' means the amount by which the aggregate account balance for all Catastrophe Savings Accounts maintained for the benefit of an individual exceeds the account balance limit defined in section subchapter F of chapter 1 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the following new item: (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``National (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act (1) Hurricanes and other tropical cyclones have directly caused more than 2,000 deaths in the United States since 2003 and account for approximately 66 percent of insured losses (2) While the ability to understand and predict hurricanes and other tropical cyclones has improved since 1999, particularly with respect to storm tracking, much remains (A) storm dynamics, rapid intensity change, and impact on (B) the interactions of storms with natural and built (C) the impacts to and response of society to destructive (3) Several expert assessments of the state of hurricane science and research needs have been published, including-- (A) the January 2007 report by the National Science Board titled, ``Hurricane Warning: The Critical Need for a National (B) the February 2007 report by the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research entitled, ``Interagency Strategic Research Plan for (C) reports from the Hurricane Intensity Working Group of the National Science Advisory Board of the National Oceanic (4) In the June 2005 publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council prioritized Federal science and technology investments needed to reduce future loss of life and property caused, both directly and indirectly, by hurricanes and other (5) A National Hurricane Research Initiative complements the objectives of the National Windstorm Impact Reduction It is the sense of Congress that, consistent with the findings of the expert assessments and strategies described in paragraphs (3) and (4) of section 2, a National Hurricane Research Initiative should be established to address the urgent and compelling need to undertake long-term, coordinated, multi-entity hurricane research focused on-- (1) conducting high priority scientific, engineering, and (2) effectively applying the research results of such studies to mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on society. (1) Task force.--The term ``Task Force'' means the National Hurricane Research Task Force established under section 6(a). (2) Eligible entities.--The term ``eligible entities'' means State, regional, and local government agencies and departments, tribal governments, universities, research (3) Indian tribe.--The term ``Indian tribe'' has the meaning given the term in section 102 of the Federally Recognized Indian Tribe List Act of 1994 (25 U.S.C. 479a). (4) Initiative.--The term ``Initiative'' means the National Hurricane Research Initiative established under section (5) National windstorm impact reduction program.--The term ``National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program'' means the program established by section 204 of the National Windstorm (6) State.--The term ``State'' means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, (7) Tribal government.--The term ``tribal government'' (8) Under secretary.--The term ``Under Secretary'' means (1) In general.--The Under Secretary, in collaboration with the Director of the National Science Foundation, shall establish an initiative to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Initiative'' for the purposes described in (A) the activities of the Under Secretary under this (B) the activities of the Task Force under section 6; and (2) Purposes.--The purposes described in this paragraph are (A) To improve understanding and prediction of hurricanes (ii) forecasting of storm formation, intensity, and wind and rain patterns, both within the tropics and as the storms (iii) storm surge modeling, inland flood modeling, and (iv) the interaction with and impacts of storms with the (v) the impacts to and response of society to destructive storms, including the socio-economic impacts requiring (B) To develop infrastructure that is resilient to the forces associated with hurricanes and other tropical storms. (C) To mitigate the impacts of hurricanes on coastal populations, the coastal built environment, and natural (iv) other natural systems that can reduce hurricane wind (D) To provide training for the next generation of (1) In general.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall develop a detailed, 5-year implementation plan for the Initiative (A) incorporates the priorities for Federal science and publication, ``Grand Challenges for Disaster Reduction'', and in related 2008 implementation plans for hurricane and coastal inundation hazards of the Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council; establishes benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track progress of the research carried out under the Initiative and the application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related public benefits, as recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(2); and (C) identifies opportunities to leverage the results of the research carried out under section 7 with other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss- (i) the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program established by section 204(a) of the National Windstorm (ii) the National Flood Insurance Program established under chapter 1 of the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (42 (iii) the initiatives of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); (iv) wind hazard mitigation initiatives carried out by a (v) the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Project fo the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; and (vi) the Working Group for Tropical Cyclone Research of the Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services (2) Review.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall ensure that the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) is reviewed (A) the Director of the National Science Foundation; (C) the Director of the National Institute for Standards (D) the Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (F) the Associate Administrator for Science Mission (3) Revisions.--The Under Secretary shall revise the implementation plan required by paragraph (1) not less frequently than once every 5 years to address and respond to the findings and recommendations of the Task Force. (1) Establishment of research objectives.--The Under Secretary shall, in consultation with the Director fo the National Science Foundation, establish objectives for research carried out pursuant to section 7 that are based on the findings of the expert assessments and strategies (2) Coordination.--In carrying out the provisions of this subsection, the Under Secretary shall coordinate with the (d) National Workshops and Conferences.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Director of the National Science Foundation and the Task Force, shall carry out a series of national workshops and conferences that assemble a (1) to address hurricane-related research questions; and (2) to encourage researchers to work collaboratively to carry out the purposes described in subsection (a)(2). (e) Public Internet Website.--The Under Secretary, in coordination with the Task Force, shall facilitate the establishment of a public Internet website for the (1) to foster collaboration and interactive dialogues among the Under Secretary, the Director of the National Science (2) to enhance public access to Initiative documents and (A) information about the members of the Task Force, including their affiliation and contact information; (D) the most recent 5-year implementation plan developed (E) the most recent annual report submitted to Congress (1) Requirement for annual crosscut budget and report.--The Under Secretary, in conjunction with members of the Task Force who represent Federal agencies, the Office of Science and Technology Policy, and the Office of Management and Budget, shall submit to Congress each year, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the fiscal year beginning in such year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a coordinated annual report for the Initiative for the fiscal year in which the report is submitted and the last (2) Contents.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall-- (A) document the funds transferred by the Under Secretary to the heads of other Federal agencies under section 8(b); (B) document the grants and contracts awarded to eligible (C) for each agency that receives funds under section 8(b) and eligible entity that receives a grant or contract under section 7, identify what major activities were undertaken (D) for each research activity or group of activities described in section 7(c), as appropriate, identify any accomplishments, which may include full or partial achievement of benchmarks, milestones, goals, performance measure targets established for the implementation plan under (a) Establishment.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall establish a task force to be known as the ``National Hurricane Research Task Force'' to facilitate and coordinate the efforts of Federal agencies and eligible entities in (b) Membership.--The Task Force shall be composed of the (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee. (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and (4) The Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Secretary's (5) The Commanding General of the U.S. Army Corps of (6) The Director of the United States Geological Survey, or (7) The Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space (8) One member shall be appointed by the Secretary of Defense, who shall be a representative of the Office of Naval (9) The Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and (10) The Director of the Office of Science and Technology (11) The Director of the Office of Management and Budget, (12) The Chair of the Executive Committee of the Federal Geographic Data Committee, or the Chair's designee. (13) Such other members from Federal agencies as the chairpersons of the Task Force jointly consider appropriate. Government, selected jointly by the chairpersons of the Task Force in consultation with the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering, as follows: (A) At least 3 members who are prominent in the fields of hurricane science, engineering, social science, or related (B) At least 1 member who represents a State government agency responsible for emergency management and response. (C) At least 3 members who represent the views of local governments, tribal governments, and nongovernmental (D) At least 2 members who represent private sector interests engaged in hurricane research, preparedness, (E) At least 1 member who represents a State floodplain or (c) Chairpersons.--The concurrent chairpersons of the Task (1) The Under Secretary, or the Under Secretary's designee (2) The Director of the National Science Foundation, or the (3) The Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, or the Director's designee under subsection (d) Initial Meeting.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Task Force shall hold (e) Meetings.--The Task Force shall meet at the call of the chairpersons of the Task Force, but not less frequently than (f) Duties.--The duties of the Task Force are as follows: (1) To provide assistance to the Under Secretary with the development of the 5-year implementation plan required by (2) Not later than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and in consideration of the expert findings (A) to develop and furnish to the Under Secretary findings and recommendations, as appropriate, for monitoring research progress and for a set of benchmarks, milestones, goals, and performance measures to track the transition and application of research results for reducing hurricane losses and related (B) to identify interim and long-term goals of the research (C) to prioritize the activities of the Initiative over a (3) To improve communication and coordination among Federal agencies with respect to hurricane-related research, developments in hurricane forecasting and operations, and best practices for applying results of Initiative research to reduce loss of life and property damage resulting from (4) To identify opportunities to leverage the activities and products of the Initiative with the National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program and other Federal and non-Federal hurricane research, coordination, and loss reduction (5) To recommend a model described in section 7(c)(1)(A) and monitor progress on development of such model. (6) To make recommendations to the Under Secretary and the Director of the National Science Foundation on research priorities and content and structure of the program (7) To make recommendations on national hurricane research (8) To assess opportunities to leverage the capabilities of (9) To evaluate the extent to which the stakeholders described in paragraph (8) have been engaged as partners and (10) To assist the Under Secretary in facilitating the development of the annual report required by section 5(f). (11) To review such report and provide comments to the (12) To submit to the National Science and Technology Council and to Congress, together with documents submitted to Congress in support of the budget of the President for the 2012 fiscal year (as submitted pursuant to section 1105 of title 31, United States Code), a report containing a comprehensive review of the progress of the Initiative in meeting the needs of the United States to understand hurricanes, their impacts on natural and built environment, (1) Authority to establish.--The Task Force may establish such advisory bodies as the Task Force considers necessary to assist the Task Force in its duties under subsection (f). (2) Criteria.--An advisory body established under paragraph (1) shall represent a broad variety of private and public (h) Advisors to the Task Force.--The Task Force may seek advice and input from any interested, knowledgeable, or affected party as the Task Force considers necessary to carry (1) In general.--All members of the Task Force who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services as officers or employees of the United States. (2) Travel expenses.--The members of the Task Force shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Task Force. (j) Procurement of Temporary and Intermittent Services.-- The Chairpersons may procure temporary and intermittent services under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for level V of the Executive Schedule under section 5316 of such (k) Volunteer Services.--Notwithstanding section 1342 of title 31, United States Code, the Commission may accept and use voluntary and uncompensated services as the Commission (l) Exemption From FACA Notice Requirement for Task Force Advisory Bodies.--An advisory body established by the Task Force under subsection (g) shall not be subject to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App. (m) Termination of Task Force.--The Task Force shall (a) National Science Foundation Competitive Grant Research (1) In general.--The Director of the National Science Foundation, in coordination with the Under Secretary, shall establish a program to award grants to eligible entities to (B) other research that is consistent with the research (2) Selection.--The National Science Foundation shall select grant recipients under this section through its merit (b) National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall carry out a program of research described in subsection (c) or other research that is consistent with the research objectives (2) Research activities.--Research carried out under (B) awarding grants to eligible entities to carry out (C) contracting with eligible entities to carry out (D) entering into cooperative agreements to carry out (c) Research.--The research described in this subsection is research that is consistent with the purposes described in section 5(a)(2) and is described by one or more of the (1) Fundamental hurricane research.--Fundamental hurricane (A) Community research models.--Research to support continued development and maintenance of community weather research and forecast models recommended by the Task Force under section 6(f)(5), including advanced methods of observing storm structure and assimilating observations into the models, in which the agency or institution hosting the models ensures broad access and use of the model by members of the Task Force and the civilian research community. (B) Predicting hurricane intensity and structure.--Research (i) storm formation and tracking with extended time scale (ii) rapid changes in storm size, motion, structure, and (iv) the transition to extratropical characteristics as conditions, including the atmosphere, ocean, and land (C) Understanding air and sea interactions.--Research regarding observations, theory, and modeling to improve understanding of air and sea interaction in hurricanes and (D) Predicting storm surge, waves, rainfall, inland flooding, and strong winds produced by hurricanes.--Research to understand, model, and predict rainfall, coastal and riverline flooding, high winds, and the potential occurrence of tornadoes, including probabilistic modeling, mapping, and understanding of the complex relationships between hurricanes and climate on seasonal to decadal time scales, such as research to determine the most effective methods to use observational information and numerical-model simulations to examine short-term and long-term impacts of climate on changes in storm intensity, geographic distribution, and (F) Relationships between hurricanes and ecosystems.-- Research to improve the understanding of how hurricanes affect ecosystems, landscapes, and natural resources and to develop assessments for hurricane vulnerability and risk, (i) how ecosystems have been influenced by past hurricanes and the ability and capacity of ecosystems to recover from (ii) how ecosystem management practices can minimize disruptions to ecosystem functions and dependent economic (iii) the role of natural features, such as barrier (I) acting as natural buffers to wind and flood forces; and (2) Technology assessment and development.--Technology assessment and development, which may consist of the (A) Improved observation of hurricanes and tropical storms.--Research to improve hurricane and tropical storm observations and to improve the understanding of the complex nature of storms and their interaction with the natural and built environment through development and application of new (vi) other geospatial technologies and geospatial data, (B) Computational capability.--Research and development of robust computational capabilities and facilities required to conduct numerical and other types of modeling that support the scientific studies and research carried out under the Initiative as well as data acquisition and modeling during hurricane events, including research to improve understanding of the efficient utility of multiple models that-- (i) require sharing and interoperability of databases, computing environments, networks, visualization tools, and analytic systems that improve on such technologies that are available on the date of the enactment of this Act; and (ii) are used for transitioning hurricane research assets (C) Technologies for disaster response and recovery.-- Research to improve damage assessments after a hurricane and emergency communications during hurricane response and (i) communications networks for government agencies and (iii) cyber-security during hurricane or storm related (iv) use of models, remote sensing, and statistically based ground sampling to support effective and rapid damage assessment to scale disaster response and recovery needs. (3) Research integration, transition, and application.-- Research on integration, transition, and application of research results, which may consist of the following: (A) Transition of research to operations.--Research to develop mechanisms to accelerate the application of improved models, observations, communication, and risk assessment systems, and related research products to forecasting and other operational settings, including use of 1 or more (B) Assessing vulnerable infrastructure.--Developing a national engineering assessment and clearinghouse of coastal infrastructure by leveraging and building upon existing Federal activities, resources, and research, including infrastructure related to levees, sea walls, and similar coastal flood-protection structures, drainage systems, communications, to determine the level of vulnerability of (C) Interaction of hurricanes with engineered structures.-- Research to improve understanding of the impacts of hurricanes and tropical storms on buildings, structures, and housing combined with modeling that is essential for guiding the creation of improved building designs and construction codes in locations particularly vulnerable to hurricanes. (D) Evacuation planning.--Research to improve the manner in which hurricane-related information is provided to, and utilized by, the public and government officials, including research to assist officials of State, tribal, regional, or (i) determining the circumstances in which evacuations are (i) assess the social, behavioral, and economic factors that influence decision making by the public, government officials, nongovernmental entities, the private sector, and other impacted populations before, during, and in the (ii) improve the translation of natural science and engineering research carried out under the Initiative into informed decision making that enables communities, economies, and the man-made and natural environments to become resilient to hurricane impacts, including development of effective risk and vulnerability assessment and risk communication tools; (iii) develop methods of assessing disaster recovery costs, both government and nongovernment, and of comparing the relative benefits of disaster mitigation methods with (a) In General.--There are authorized to be appropriated for fiscal years 2010 through 2015 amounts as follows: (1) To the Under Secretary, $18,750,000 to carry out sections 5, 6, and 7(b), of which not less than $13,750,000 (2) To the Director of the National Science Foundation, atmosphere.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(1), the Under Secretary may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Under Secretary considers foundation.--Of amounts appropriated pursuant to the authorization of appropriations under subsection (a)(2), the Director of the National Science Foundation may transfer to the heads of other Federal agencies such amounts as the Director considers appropriate to carry out sections 5 and (1) In general.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council of the National Academies for the National Research Council to (2) Timing.--The Under Secretary shall seek to enter into the agreement described in paragraph (1) not later than 180 (b) Independent Review of National Hurricane Research Initiative.--Under an agreement between the Under Secretary and the National Research Council under this section, the National Research Council shall carry out an independent review of the Initiative. In carrying out the review, the National Research Council shall review the following: (1) Whether the Initiative has well-defined, prioritized, (2) Whether the Initiative is properly coordinated among (3) Whether the Initiative has allocated appropriate (4) Whether suitable mechanisms exist for transitioning the research results from the Initiative into operational technologies and procedures and activities in a timely (c) Report.--Not later than 4 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Under Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate and the Committee on Science and Technology of the House of Representatives a report on the results of the (d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be appropriated to the Under Secretary, $750,000 to carry Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Policyholder Disaster (1) Rising costs resulting from natural disasters are placing an increasing strain on the ability of property and casualty insurance companies to assure payment of homeowners' claims and other insurance claims arising from major natural (2) Present tax laws do not provide adequate incentives to assure that natural disaster insurance is provided or, where such insurance is provided, that funds are available for payment of insurance claims in the event of future catastrophic losses from major natural disasters, as present law requires an insurer wishing to accumulate surplus assets for this purpose to do so entirely from its after-tax (3) Revising the tax laws applicable to the property and casualty insurance industry to permit carefully controlled accumulation of pretax dollars in separate reserve funds devoted solely to the payment of claims arising from future major natural disasters will provide incentives for property and casualty insurers to make natural disaster insurance available, will give greater protection to the Nation's homeowners, small businesses, and other insurance consumers, and will help assure the future financial health of the (4) Implementing these changes will reduce the possibility that a significant portion of the private insurance system would fail in the wake of a major natural disaster and that governmental entities would be required to step in to provide SEC. 3. CREATION OF POLICYHOLDER DISASTER PROTECTION FUNDS; (a) Contributions to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Subsection (c) of section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to the taxable income of insurance companies other than life insurance companies) is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (12), by striking the period at the end of paragraph (13) and inserting ``; and'', and by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``(14) the qualified contributions to a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year.''. (b) Distributions From Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Paragraph (1) of section 832(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (D), by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (E) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at ``(F) the amount of any distributions from a policyholder disaster protection fund during the taxable year, except that a distribution made to return to the qualified insurance contribution (as defined in subsection (h)) for a taxable year shall not be included in gross income if such distribution is made prior to the filing of the tax return (c) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--Section 832 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to insurance company taxable income) is amended by adding at the end the following new ``(h) Definitions and Other Rules Relating to Policyholder Disaster Protection Funds.--For purposes of this section-- ``(1) Policyholder disaster protection fund.--The term `policyholder disaster protection fund' (hereafter in this subsection referred to as the `fund') means any custodial account, trust, or any other arrangement or account-- ``(A) which is established to hold assets that are set aside solely for the payment of qualified losses, and ``(i) the assets in the fund are required to be invested in a manner consistent with the investment requirements applicable to the qualified insurance company under the laws ``(ii) the net income for the taxable year derived from the assets in the fund is required to be distributed no less ``(iii) an excess balance drawdown amount is required to be distributed to the qualified insurance company no later than the close of the taxable year following the taxable year for ``(iv) a catastrophe drawdown amount may be distributed to the qualified insurance company if distributed prior to the close of the taxable year following the year for which such ``(v) a State required drawdown amount may be distributed, ``(vi) no distributions from the fund are required or permitted other than the distributions described in clauses contributions that are not qualified contributions. ``(2) Qualified insurance company.--The term `qualified insurance company' means any insurance company subject to tax ``(3) Qualified contribution.--The term `qualified contribution' means a contribution to a fund for a taxable year to the extent that the amount of such contribution, when added to the previous contributions to the fund for such ``(B) the fund balance determined as of the close of the ``(4) Excess balance drawdown amounts.--The term `excess balance drawdown amount' means the excess (if any) of-- ``(A) the fund balance as of the close of the taxable year, ``(B) the fund cap for the following taxable year. ``(A) In general.--The term `catastrophe drawdown amount' means an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount ``(B) Net losses from qualifying events.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the qualified losses for the taxable year determined without ``(C) Gross losses in excess of threshold.--The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be equal to the ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over ``(I) the fund cap for the taxable year (determined without ``(II) 30 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable catastrophe loss year.--If for any taxable year included in the reference period the qualified losses exceed the amount determined under subparagraph (C)(ii), the `catastrophe drawdown amount' shall be an amount that does not exceed the lesser of the amount determined under subparagraph (B) or the amount determined under this subparagraph. The amount determined under this subparagraph shall be an amount equal ``(i) the qualified losses for the taxable year, over (determined without regard to paragraph (9)(E)), or ``(II) 10 percent of the qualified insurance company's surplus as regards policyholders as shown on the company's annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable ``(E) Reference period.--For purposes of subparagraph (D), the reference period shall be determined under the following ``For a taxable year beginning in-- The reference period shall be-- 2012 and later...................... The 3 preceding taxable years. 2011................................ The 2 preceding taxable years. 2010................................ The preceding taxable year. 2008 or before...................... No reference period applies. ``(6) State required drawdown amount.--The term `State required drawdown amount' means any amount that the department of insurance for the qualified insurance company's jurisdiction of domicile requires to be distributed from the fund, to the extent such amount is not otherwise described in ``(7) Fund balance.--The term `fund balance' means-- ``(A) the sum of all qualified contributions to the fund, ``(B) less any net investment loss of the fund for any ``(C) less the sum of all distributions under clauses (iii) ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified losses' means, with ``(i) the amount of losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred in the qualified lines of business specified in paragraph (9), net of reinsurance, as reported in the qualified insurance company's annual statement for the taxable year, that are attributable to one or more qualifying events (regardless of when such qualifying events occurred), ``(ii) the amount by which such losses and loss adjustment expenses attributable to such qualifying events have been reduced for reinsurance received and recoverable, plus ``(iii) any nonrecoverable assessments, surcharges, or other liabilities that are borne by the qualified insurance company and are attributable to such qualifying events. ``(B) Qualifying event.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the term `qualifying event' means any event that satisfies ``(i) Event.--An event satisfies this clause if the event ``(III) Winter catastrophe (snow, ice, or freezing). ``(ii) Catastrophe designation.--An event satisfies this ``(I) is designated a catastrophe by Property Claim ``(II) is declared by the President to be an emergency or ``(III) is declared to be an emergency or disaster in a similar declaration by the chief executive official of a State, possession, or territory of the United States, or the ``(A) In general.--The term `fund cap' for a taxable year is the sum of the separate lines of business caps for each of the qualified lines of business specified in the table ``(B) Separate lines of business cap.--For purposes of subparagraph (A), the separate lines of business cap, with respect to a qualified line of business specified in the table contained in subparagraph (C), is the product of-- ``(i) net written premiums reported in the annual statement for the calendar year preceding the taxable year in such line ``(ii) the fund cap multiplier applicable to such qualified ``(C) Qualified lines of business and their respective fund cap multipliers.--For purposes of this paragraph, the qualified lines of business and fund cap multipliers specified in this subparagraph are those specified in the Fire..............................................................0.25 Allied............................................................1.25 Farmowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.25 Homeowners Multiple Peril.........................................0.75 Commercial Multi Peril (non-liability portion)....................0.50 Earthquake.......................................................13.00 Inland Marine.....................................................0.25. ``(D) Subsequent modifications of the annual statement blank.--If, with respect to any taxable year beginning after the effective date of this subsection, the annual statement blank required to be filed is amended to replace, combine, or otherwise modify any of the qualified lines of business specified in subparagraph (C), then for such taxable year subparagraph (C) shall be applied in a manner such that the fund cap shall be the same amount as if such reporting ``(E) 20-year phase-in.--Notwithstanding subparagraph (C), the fund cap for a taxable year shall be the amount determined under subparagraph (C), as adjusted pursuant to subparagraph (D) (if applicable), multiplied by the phase-in ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 2009........................................... 5 percent 2010........................................... 10 percent 2011........................................... 15 percent 2012........................................... 20 percent 2013........................................... 25 percent 2014........................................... 30 percent 2015........................................... 35 percent 2016........................................... 40 percent 2017........................................... 45 percent 2018........................................... 50 percent 2019........................................... 55 percent 2020........................................... 60 percent 2021........................................... 65 percent 2022........................................... 70 percent 2023........................................... 75 percent 2024........................................... 80 percent 2025........................................... 85 percent 2026........................................... 90 percent 2027........................................... 95 percent 2028 and later................................. 100 percent. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ``(10) Treatment of investment income and gain or loss.-- ``(A) Contributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money to a fund shall be treated as a sale or exchange of such property for an amount equal to its fair market value as of the date of transfer, and appropriate adjustment shall be made to the basis of such property. Section 267 shall ``(B) Distributions in kind.--A transfer of property other than money by a fund to the qualified insurance company shall not be treated as a sale or exchange or other disposition of such property. The basis of such property immediately after such transfer shall be the greater of the basis of such property immediately before such transfer or the fair market value of such property on the date of such transfer. ``(C) Income with respect to fund assets.--Items of income of the type described in paragraphs (1)(B), (1)(C), and (2) of subsection (b) that are derived from the assets held in a fund, as well as losses from the sale or other disposition of such assets, shall be considered items of income, gain, or loss of the qualified insurance company. Notwithstanding paragraph (1)(F) of subsection (b), distributions of net income to the qualified insurance company pursuant to paragraph (1)(B)(ii) of this subsection shall not cause such ``(11) Net income; net investment loss.--For purposes of paragraph (1)(B)(ii), the net income derived from the assets in the fund for the taxable year shall be the items of income and gain for the taxable year, less the items of loss for the taxable year, derived from such assets, as described in paragraph (10)(C). For purposes of paragraph (7), there is a net investment loss for the taxable year to the extent that the items of loss described in the preceding sentence exceed the items of income and gain described in the preceding ``(12) Annual statement.--For purposes of this subsection, the term `annual statement' shall have the meaning set forth ``(13) Exclusion of premiums and losses on certain puerto rican risks.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, premiums and losses with respect to risks covered by a catastrophe reserve established under the laws or regulations of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico shall not be taken into account under this subsection in determining the amount of the fund cap or the amount of qualified losses. ``(14) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out the purposes of this subsection, including regulations-- ``(A) which govern the application of this subsection to a qualified insurance company having a taxable year other than the calendar year or a taxable year less than 12 months, ``(B) which govern a fund maintained by a qualified insurance company that ceases to be subject to this part, and ``(C) which govern the application of paragraph (9)(D).''. (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, This Act may be cited as the ``Commission on Catastrophic (1) Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, which struck the United States in 2005, caused over $200 billion in total economic losses, including insured and uninsured losses. (2) Although private sector insurance is currently available to spread some catastrophe-related losses throughout the Nation and internationally, most experts believe there will be significant insurance and reinsurance shortages, resulting in dramatic rate increases for consumers and businesses, and the unavailability of catastrophe (3) The Federal Government has provided and will continue to provide billions of dollars and resources to pay for losses from catastrophes, including hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, tornados, and other disasters, at huge (4) The Federal Government has a critical interest in ensuring appropriate and fiscally responsible risk management of catastrophes. Mortgages require reliable property insurance, and the unavailability of reliable property insurance would make most real estate transactions impossible. In addition, the public health, safety, and welfare demand that structures damaged or destroyed in a catastrophe be reconstructed as soon as possible. Therefore, the inability of the private sector insurance and reinsurance markets to maintain sufficient capacity to enable Americans to obtain property insurance coverage in the private sector endangers the national economy and the public health, safety, (5) Multiple proposals have been introduced in the United States Congress over the past decade to address catastrophic risk insurance, including the creation of a national catastrophic reinsurance fund and the revision of the Federal tax code to allow insurers to use tax-deferred catastrophe funds, yet Congress has failed to act on any of these (6) To the extent the United States faces high risks from catastrophe exposure, essential technical information on financial structures and innovations in the catastrophe (7) The most efficient and effective approach to assessing the catastrophe insurance problem in the public policy context is to establish a bipartisan commission of experts to study the management of catastrophic disaster risk, and to require such commission to timely report its recommendations to Congress so that Congress can quickly craft a solution to Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance (in this Act (a) Members.--The Commission shall be composed of the (1) The Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management (3) 12 additional members or their designees of whom one (B) a representative of a primary insurance company; (D) an independent insurance agent with experience in (H) a faculty member of an accredited university with (I) a member of nationally recognized think tank with (L) a nationally recognized expert in antitrust law. (1) In general.--Any member of the Commission described under subsection (a)(3) shall be appointed only upon (C) the Speaker of the House of Representatives; and (D) the minority leader of the House of Representatives. (2) Consultation.--In making any appointment under paragraph (1), each individual described in paragraph (1) (c) Eligibility Limitation.--Except as provided in subsection (a), no member or officer of the Congress, or other member or officer of the Executive Branch of the United States Government or any State government may be appointed to (1) In general.--Each member of the Commission shall be (2) Vacancies.--A vacancy on the Commission shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as (1) Majority.--A majority of the members of the Commission shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number may hold (2) Approval actions.--All recommendations and reports of the Commission required by this Act shall be approved only by (f) Chairperson.--The majority leader of the Senate, the minority leader of the Senate, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and the minority leader of the House of Representatives shall jointly select 1 member appointed pursuant to subsection (a) to serve as the Chairperson of the (g) Meetings.--The Council shall meet at the call of its Chairperson or a majority of its members at any time. (A) the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina, Rita, and Wilma in 2005, and the 4 major hurricanes earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunamis, and floods; and (2) recommend and report, as required under section 6, any necessary legislative and regulatory changes that will-- (A) improve the domestic and international financial health (i) availability of adequate insurance coverage when an appointment of Commission members under section 4, the Commission shall submit to the President and the Congress a final report containing a detailed statement of its findings, together with any recommendations for legislation or administrative action that the Commission considers appropriate, in accordance with the requirements of section (b) Considerations.--In developing any recommendations under subsection (a), the Commission shall consider-- (1) the catastrophic insurance and reinsurance market structures and the relevant commercial practices in such insurance industries in providing insurance protection to (2) the constraints and opportunities in implementing a catastrophic insurance system that can resolve key obstacles currently impeding broader implementation of catastrophe risk (3) methods to improve risk underwriting practices, (A) analysis of modalities of risk transfer for potential (B) assessment of private securitization of insurances (C) private-public partnerships to increase insurance (D) the financial feasibility and sustainability of a national catastrophe pool or regional catastrophe pools designed to provide adequate insurance coverage and increased (4) approaches for implementing a public insurance scheme for low-income communities, in order to promote risk (5) methods to strengthen insurance regulatory requirements and supervision of such requirements, including solvency for (6) methods to promote public insurance policies linked to programs for loss reduction in the uninsured sectors of the enforcement of structural mitigation and vulnerability reduction measures, such as zoning and building code (8) the appropriate role for the Federal Government in stabilizing the property and casualty insurance and (ii) the modernization of Federal taxation policies; and (iii) an ``insurance of last resort'' mechanism; and (9) the merits of 3 principle legislative proposals (A) The creation of a Federal catastrophe fund to act as a (B) Tax-deferred catastrophe accounts for insurers (S. (C) Tax-free catastrophe accounts for policyholders (S. (a) Hearings.--The Commission or, at the direction of the Commission, any subcommittee or member of the Commission, (1) hold such public hearings in such cities and countries, sit and act at such times and places, take such testimony, receive such evidence, and administer such oaths or affirmations as the Commission or such subcommittee or member (2) require, by subpoena or otherwise, the attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of such books, records, correspondence, memoranda, papers, documents, tapes, and materials as the Commission or such subcommittee or (1) Issuance.--Subpoenas issued under subsection (a) shall bear the signature of the Chairperson of the Commission and shall be served by any person or class of persons designated (2) Enforcement.--In the case of contumacy or failure to obey a subpoena issued under subsection (a), the United States district court for the judicial district in which the subpoenaed person resides, is served, or may be found may issue an order requiring such person to appear at any designated place to testify or to produce documentary or other evidence. Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by the court as a contempt of that court. (A) In general.--Information obtained under a subpoena issued under subsection (a) which is deemed confidential, or with reference to which a request for confidential treatment is made by the person furnishing such information-- (i) shall be exempt from disclosure under section 552 of (ii) shall not be published or disclosed unless the Commission determines that the withholding of such information is contrary to the interest of the United States. (B) Exception.--The requirements of subparagraph (A) shall not apply to the publication or disclosure of any data aggregated in a manner that ensures protection of the (c) Authority of Members or Agents of the Commission.--Any member or agent of the Commission may, if authorized by the Commission, take any action which the Commission is (1) Authority.--Notwithstanding any provision of section 552a of title 5, United States Code, the Commission may secure directly from any department or agency of the United States any information necessary to enable the Commission to (2) Procedure.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, the head of that department or agency shall furnish the information requested to the Commission. (e) Postal Services.--The Commission may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other departments and agencies of the Federal Government. (f) Administrative Support Services.--Upon the request of the Commission, the Administrator of General Services shall provide to the Commission, on a reimbursable basis, any administrative support services necessary for the Commission (1) In general.--The Commission may accept, use, and dispose of gifts or donations of services or property. (2) Regulations.--The Commission shall adopt internal regulations governing the receipt of gifts or donations of services or property similar to those described in part 2601 (a) Compensation of Members.--Each member of the Commission who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall be compensated at a rate equal to the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General Schedule under section 5332 of title 5, United States Code, for each day (including travel time) during which such member is engaged in the performance of the duties of the Commission. All members of the Commission who are officers or employees of the United States shall serve without compensation in addition to that received for their services (b) Travel Expenses.--The members of the Commission shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Commission. subcommittees and appoint persons to such subcommittees as (d) Staff.--Subject to such policies as the Commission may prescribe, the Chairperson of the Commission may appoint and fix the pay of such additional personnel as the Chairperson considers appropriate to carry out the duties of the (e) Applicability of Certain Civil Service Laws.-- Subcommittee members and staff of the Commission may be-- (1) appointed without regard to the provisions of title 5, United States Code, governing appointments in the competitive (2) paid without regard to the provisions of chapter 51 and subchapter III of chapter 53 of that title relating to classification and General Schedule pay rates, except that an individual so appointed may not receive pay in excess of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General objectives, the Commission may procure temporary and intermittent services of consultants and experts under section 3109(b) of title 5, United States Code, at rates for individuals which do not exceed the daily equivalent of the annual rate of basic pay prescribed for GS-18 of the General (g) Detail of Government Employees.--Upon request of the Chairperson of the Commission, any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Commission to assist in (2) such detail shall be without interruption or loss of The Commission shall terminate 60 days after the date on which the Commission submits its report under section 6. There are authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 to carry S. 1488. A bill to extend temporarily the 18-month period of continuation coverage under group health plans required under COBRA continuation coverage provisions so as to provide for a total period of continuation coverage of up to 24 months; to the Committee on Health, Mr. BURRIS. Mr. President, today I rise to address a growing problem resulting from America's high levels of unemployment and economic downturn. Congress is working to design health reform that will provide access to quality, affordable insurance coverage for every American, but as unemployment numbers continue to rise, help may not come in time to avoid coverage denials on the individual insurance market and unbearable economic strain for those job seekers whose COBRA coverage The Comprehensive Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 codified 18 months of additional group rate coverage under employer sponsored plans following a triggering event such as job loss. This law has been instrumental in providing continuity of health coverage for families. The measure requires companies with over 20 employees to provide access to 18 months of continued coverage at the employee's expense, except in cases of firing for gross employee misconduct. Beneficiaries cover the additional administrative expense, and may be charged up to 103 percent The American Reinvestment and Recovery Act provided help with health insurance for families who lost their jobs after September 1, 2008 and through December of 2009. For those in this category, the federal government provides nine months of subsidized premiums, with beneficiaries covering 35 percent of premium costs. However, the For those that lost their job before September, and are still looking for work, the situation is dire. Many are quickly facing the end of their 18 month eligibility period for COBRA. They hear about health reform but have no idea when it may come. Insurance exchanges to guaranteeing eligibility and reasonable premiums on the individual market could take years to set up. In the mean time, those who could have afforded coverage under COBRA may instead have to resort to The Emergency COBRA Expansion Act of 2009 will give job seekers the opportunity to continue their COBRA coverage for up to an additional 6 months. The bill applies to all of those utilizing COBRA benefits as of the date of bill passage, and would not extend anyone's coverage beyond 12 months from the date of bill enactment. A year from now, our country will be on the road to economic recovery, but in the meantime we need to help struggling families to stay insured and healthy. S. 1489. A bill to amend the Small Business Act to create parity among small business contracting programs, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, as Ranking Member of the Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, I rise to introduce this bill in order to correct disparities among the Small Business Administration's small business contracting programs. Building on my efforts to bring true parity to the program, this bill will create a more equitable and flexible method for federal agencies to fairly allocate federal procurement dollars to small business contractors across the nation. Earlier this year, I filed an amendment, cosponsored by my colleague from Maine, Senator Collins, to create parity as part of S. 454, the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. For years it has been unclear to the acquisition community what, if any, the true order of preference is for determining which small business contracting program is at the top of the agency's priority list. The SBA's regulations state that there is parity among the programs, and this had been the general practice in effect until two Government Accountability Office decisions were released on September The decisions stated that the Historically Underutilized Business Zone, HUBZone, program had preference over all other small business contracting programs. While the interpretation benefits HUBZone businesses, it comes at the expense of other vital small business contracting programs. This targeted bill provides equity for the SBA's The bill provides Federal agencies with the necessary flexibility to satisfy their government-wide statutory small business contracting goals. This bill makes clear to purchasing agencies that contracting officers may award contracts to HUBZone, Service Disabled Veterans, 8(a), or women-owned firms with equal deference to each program. It would provide these agencies with the ability to achieve their goaling requirements equally through an award to a HUBZone firm, a service- disabled veteran-owned small business, and a small business participating in the 8(a) business development program. Of course this list will also include women-owned small businesses once the women's procurement program is fully implemented by the SBA. In addition, this bill brings the SBA's contracting programs closer to true parity by giving HUBZones a subcontracting goal. HUBZones are the only small business contracting program without a subcontracting goal. In addition, the bill authorizes mentor protege programs modeled after those used in the 8(a) program for HUBZones, service-disabled The essence of true parity is where each program has an equal chance of competing and being selected for an award. During these difficult economic times, it is imperative that small business contractors possess an equal opportunity to compete for Federal contracts on the I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this bill. SENATE RESOLUTION 218--MAKING MINORITY PARTY APPOINTMENTS FOR THE 111TH Mr. McCONNELL submitted the following resolution; which was Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th Congress, or until their successors are appointed: COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, SENATE RESOLUTION 219--HONORING THE HOCKEY TEAM OF EAST SIDE HIGH Mr. MENENDEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred Whereas adolescents who lack a structured, after-school environment are at high risk of delinquency, poor academic Whereas the lack of a structured after-school environment is especially prevalent in inner-city communities such as Whereas athletic organizations provide a safe after-school environment in which adolescents learn about commitment, Whereas East Side High School in Newark, New Jersey, formed Whereas members of the East Side High School hockey team Whereas the New Jersey Devils offered assistance to the East Side High School hockey team, including access to the Whereas the nonprofit organization, Hockey in Newark, has joined with the New Jersey Devils and the National Hockey League to collect and distribute donated hockey equipment and uniforms valued at $85,000 to low-income children in Newark, (1) commends the dedication of the players and coaches of the hockey team of East Side High School in Newark, New (2) wishes the East Side High School hockey team many (3) commends the New Jersey Devils for engaging the local community and providing low-income, at-risk children the SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 33--EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT A COMMEMORATIVE POSTAGE STAMP SHOULD BE ISSUED TO HONOR THE CREW OF THE USS MASON DE-529 WHO FOUGHT AND SERVED DURING WORLD WAR II Mr. BURRIS submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 was the only United States Navy destroyer with a predominantly black enlisted crew Whereas the integration of the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 was the role model for racial integration on Navy vessels and Whereas the integration of the crew signified the first time that black citizens of the United States were trained to Whereas the USS Mason DE-529 served as a convoy escort in the Atlantic and Mediterranean Theatres during World War II; Whereas, in September 1944, the crew of the USS Mason DE- 529 helped save Convoy NY119, ushering the convoy to safety Whereas, in 1998, the Secretary of the Navy John H. Dalton made an official decision to name an Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer the USS Mason DDG-87 in order to honor the USS Whereas, in 1994, President Clinton awarded the USS Mason DE-529 a long-overdue commendation, presenting the award to Whereas commemorative postage stamps have been issued to honor important vessels, aircrafts, and battles in the history of the United States: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that-- (1) the United States Postal Service should issue a postage stamp honoring the crew of the USS Mason DE-529 who fought (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued. SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson, of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered to lie on the table. SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, supra; which was ordered SA 1647. Mr. LAUTENBERG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 213, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 706. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON HEALTH CARE BENEFITS AND (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) Career members of the Armed Forces and their families extraordinary sacrifices, over the course of 20-year to 30- year careers in protecting freedom for all Americans. (2) The nature and extent of these demands and sacrifices are never so evident as in wartime, not only during the current combat operations, but also during the wars of the last 60 years when current retired members of the Armed Forces were on continuous call to go in harm's way when and (3) A primary benefit of enduring the extraordinary sacrifices inherent in a military career is a range of retirement benefits, including lifetime health benefits, that a grateful Nation provides for those who choose to subordinate their personal life to the national interest for (4) Currently serving and retired members of the uniformed services and their families and survivors deserve benefits equal to their commitment and service to our Nation. (5) Many employers are curtailing health benefits and shifting costs to their employees, which may result in retired members of the Armed Forces returning to the Department of Defense, and its TRICARE program, for health care benefits during retirement, and contribute to health (6) Defense health costs also expand as a result of service-unique military readiness requirements, wartime requirements, and other necessary requirements that represent the ``cost of business'' for the Department of Defense. (7) While the Department of Defense has made some efforts to contain increases in the cost of the TRICARE program, too many of those efforts have been devoted to shifting a larger share of the costs of benefits under that program to retired members of the Armed Forces who have earned health care benefits in return for a career of military service. (8) In some cases health care providers refuse to accept TRICARE patients because that program pays less than other public and private payors and imposes unique administrative (9) The Department of Defense records deposits to the Department of Defense Military Retiree Health Care Fund as discretionary costs to the Department in spite of legislation enacted in 2006 that requires such deposits to be made (10) As a result, annual payments for the future costs of servicemember health care continue to compete with other (b) Sense of Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that-- (1) the Department of Defense and the Nation have an obligation to provide health care benefits to retired members of the Armed Forces that equals the quality of their selfless (2) past proposals by the Department of Defense to impose substantial fee increases on military beneficiaries have failed to acknowledge properly the findings addressed in (3) the Department of Defense has many additional options to constrain the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage retired members of the Armed Forces who participate or seek to participate in the TRICARE program, and should pursue any and all such options rather than seeking large increases for enrollment fees, deductibles, and copayments for such retirees, and their families or SA 1648. Mrs. BOXER (for herself and Mrs. Feinstein) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which SEC. __. PORT CHICAGO NAVAL MAGAZINE NATIONAL MEMORIAL. (a) In General.--Section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as subsection (f); (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following: ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of the Interior shall administer the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial as a unit of the National Park System in accordance with-- ``(B) the laws generally applicable to units of the ``(i) the National Park Service Organic Act (16 U.S.C. 1 et ``(ii) the Act of August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 461 et seq.). ``(2) Administered land.--The land described in subsection (d)(2) shall be administered in accordance with this ``(1) In general.--The Secretary of Defense shall enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary of the Interior providing for the transfer, without reimbursement, of administrative jurisdiction to the Secretary of the Interior of the land described in paragraph (2), if the Secretary of Defense determines that the land is in excess of ``(2) Description of land.--The land referred to in paragraph (1) is the parcel of approximately 5 acres of land, as depicted on the map entitled `Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial, Proposed Boundary', numbered 018/80,001, ``(e) Agreement With City of Concord and East Bay Regional Park District.--The Secretary of the Interior may enter into an agreement with the City of Concord, California, and the East Bay Regional Park District to establish and operate a facility for visitor orientation and parking, administrative offices, and curatorial storage for the Port Chicago Naval (3) in subsection (f), (as redesignated by paragraph (1)), by striking ``Secretary of the Navy to provide public access to the Memorial'' and inserting ``Secretary of Defense to provide the maximum practicable public access to the Memorial (b) Sense of Congress on Remediation and Repair of Port (1) Remediation.--It is the sense of Congress that, to facilitate the transfer of administrative jurisdiction described in subsection (d) of section 203 of the Port Chicago National Memorial Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 431 note; Public Law 102-562; 106 Stat. 4235)(as added by subsection (a)), the Secretary of Defense should promptly remediate any remaining environmental contamination relating to the land. (2) Repair.--It is the sense of Congress that, in order to preserve the Port Chicago Naval Magazine National Memorial for future generations, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Interior should work together to-- (A) repair storm damage to the Port Chicago Naval Magazine (B) develop a process by which future repairs and necessary modifications to the Memorial can be achieved in as timely (c) Effect.--Nothing in this section or the amendments made by this section affects or limits the application of, or obligation to comply with, any environmental law, including section 120(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (42 U.S.C. 9620(h)). SA 1649. Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Mr. Coburn) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which Section 2473 of title 10, United States Code, is amended-- (1) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following ``(c) Small arms Production Industrial Base.--In this section, the term `small arms production industrial base' means the persons and organizations that are engaged in the production or maintenance of small arms within the United (2) in subsection (d), by adding at the end the following SA 1650. Mr. LIEBERMAN (for himself and Mr. Graham) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 394, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1032. TRIAL BY MILITARY COMMISSION OF ALIEN UNPRIVILEGED (a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged belligerents for violations of the law of war ``(a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that the preferred forum for the trial of alien unprivileged enemy belligerents subject to this chapter for violations of the law of war and other offenses made punishable by this chapter is trial by military commission under this chapter. ``(b) Reporting Requirement.--For any alien unprivileged enemy belligerent subject to this chapter whom the United States Government decides to try in Federal district court rather than by military commission under this chapter, the Secretary of Defense and the Attorney General shall report to Congress, not later than 30 days after such decision is made, ``(1) the criteria used to decide to try such individual in Federal district court rather than by military commission; ``(2) an estimate of the total costs to the United States Government, including costs borne by the judicial branch, attributable to trying such individual in Federal district ``(3) any other information that the Secretary of Defense (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections of the beginning of such subchapter, as amended by section 1031(a), is further amended by adding after the item relating to ``948e. Trial by military commission of alien unprivileged SA 1651. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, and Mr. Burris) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall give a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is being evaluated by a physical evaluation board for separation or retirement for disability, incurred in the performance of military duties under this chapter or for placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter the option to remain on active duty during the physical evaluation board process ``(A) is cleared by the board for continuation of active ``(B) is separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2) A member may change the election under paragraph (1) at any point during the physical evaluation board process and ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. ``(e) A member contemplating the exercise of an option under subsection (d) may exercise such option only after being afforded an opportunity to consult with a member of the SEC. 653. ENCOURAGEMENT OF USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Assignment to Community Based Warrior Transition Units for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(ii) consistent with the needs of the armed forces. ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1652. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 429, between lines 8 and 9, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON INTERNATIONAL MILITARY EDUCATION AND (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) Building foreign partner capacity is a fundamental cornerstone of the security strategy of the United States. (2) Significant progress has been made in this area over the past several years, but the United States Government must continue to increase its efforts, including improving reliability of funding and late notifications of school availability for the International Military Education and (1) In general.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report on the effectiveness and efficiency (2) Content.--The report required under paragraph (1) shall include the following information broken out by year over the (A) Number of courses in the IMET program available, accomplished, and cancelled and an explanation therefor. (B) Number of students authorized and actual attendance for each course and an explanation for the difference. (C) The total budget and actual budget executed for each course in the IMET program and an explanation for the (D) The process for selecting students for the IMET (E) The process for distributing funding for each school, (F) Lessons learned to ensure student attendance and course SA 1653. Mr. CORNYN (for himself and Mr. Inhofe) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle B of title XII, add the following: (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) According to the Department of Defense's (DoD) 2009 Annual Report on Military Power of the People's Republic of China, the military balance in the Taiwan Strait has been shifting in China's favor since 2000, marked by the sustained deployment of advanced military equipment to the Chinese (2) Although the DoD's 2002 Report concluded that Taiwan ``has enjoyed dominance of the airspace over the Taiwan Strait for many years,'' the DoD's 2009 Report states this (3) China has based 490 combat aircraft (330 fighters and 160 bombers) within unrefueled operational range of Taiwan, and has the airfield capacity to expand that number by hundreds. In contrast, Taiwan has 390 combat aircraft (all of (4) Also according to the DoD's 2009 Report, China has continued its build-up of conventional ballistic missiles since 2000, ``building a nascent capacity for conventional short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) strikes against Taiwan into what has become one of China's primary instruments of coercion.'' At this time, China has expanded its SRBM force opposite Taiwan to seven brigades with a total of 1,050 through 1,150 missiles, and is augmenting these forces with conventional medium-range ballistic missiles systems and at least 2 land attack cruise missile variants capable of ground or air launch. Advanced fighters and bombers, combined with enhanced training for nighttime and overwater flights, provide China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) with additional capabilities for regional strike or maritime (5) Furthermore, the Report maintains, ``the security situation in the Taiwan Strait is largely a function of dynamic interactions among Mainland China, Taiwan, and the United States. The PLA has developed and deployed military capability to coerce Taiwan or attempt an invasion if necessary. PLA improvements pose new challenges to Taiwan's security, which has historically been based upon the PLA's inability to project power across the 100 nautical-mile Taiwan Strait, natural geographic advantages of island defense, Taiwan's armed forces' technological superiority, (6) The Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 requires that, in furtherance of the principle of maintaining peace and stability in the Western Pacific region, the United States shall make available to Taiwan such defense articles and defense services in such quantity ``as may be necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a sufficient self-defense capability,'' allowing that ``the President and the Congress shall determine the nature and quantity of such defense articles and services based solely upon their judgment of the (b) Report to Congress on Taiwan's Current Air Force and Future Self-Defense Requirements.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report, in both classified and (1) A thorough and complete assessment of the current state (2) An assessment of the effectiveness of the aircraft in the face of a full-scale concerted missile and air campaign by China, in which China uses its most modern surface-to-air (3) An analysis of the specific weapons systems and platforms that Taiwan would need to provide for it's self- defense and maintain control of its own air space. (4) Options for the United States to assist Taiwan in (5) A 5-year plan for fulfilling the obligations of the United States under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide for Taiwan's self-defense and aid Taiwan in maintaining control SA 1654. Mr. CORNYN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. POSTHUMOUS BENEFITS FOR SURVIVING SPOUSE. (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Military Widow and Surviving Spouse Protection Act''. (b) Amendment.--Section 1703(a)(1) of title XVII of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 ( Public Law 108-136) is amended by inserting ``or the citizen died while serving honorably in an active duty status in the military, air, or naval forces of the United States and such death occurred through no fault of the citizen,'' after SA 1655. Mr. CORNYN (for himself, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Kyl) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle C of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING COMMITMENT TO GLOBAL (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The surge strategy executed in Iraq by General David H. Petraeus and General Raymond T. Odierno in 2007 and 2008 was highly successful in reducing levels of violence and enabling the Iraqi government and security forces to gain credibility (2) President Obama articulated his general strategy for Iraq during a speech at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, on February 27, 2009, stating that a central goal is to ensure that Iraq ``is sovereign, stable, and self-reliant''. During the speech, the President outlined the President's objective to ``transition to full Iraqi responsibility'' through the ``responsible removal of our combat brigades from Iraq''. (3) As part of the President's Iraq strategy, the President also indicated the President's commitment to ensuring that ``we preserve the gains we've made and protect our troops''. Consequently, the United States and our allies have a continued interest in maintaining these hard-fought security gains, especially during the upcoming Iraqi provincial elections, while simultaneously protecting the United States (4) A key component of the President's plan for Iraq is to retain a transitional force there to carry out several distinct functions, including training, equipping, and advising the Iraqi Security Forces, conducting targeted counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilian and military forces within Iraq. In accordance with this policy, United States forces have largely withdrawn from Iraqi cities, but the President expects that the transitional force, to number between 35,000 and 50,000 United States military servicemembers, will remain in Iraq for the (5) President Obama articulated his emerging plan for Afghanistan in a speech on March 27, 2009, stating that the United States goal there is to ``disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future''. To this end, the current surge strategy in Afghanistan, spearheaded by General Petraeus and General Stanley A. McChrystal, the new commander of the NATO International Security Assistance Force, is critical to providing security for the Afghan populace, bolstering the Afghan security forces, and waging a successful campaign against Islamic extremists of al Qaeda, (6) President Obama's laudable goals of disrupting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and Pakistan and developing increasingly self-reliant Afghan security forces necessitated the surge of 17,000 additional United States troops to increase the overall size of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force. These more robust forces, focusing in the south and east portions of the country, will have an enhanced ability to protect the Afghan population against a resurgence of al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their allies, as well as to provide greater ability for the Afghan government (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate (1) the global war on terror represents a critical effort to protect the American people and ensure that future generations may continue to enjoy the precious freedoms we (2) the United States must remain committed to succeeding in the global war on terror and fighting the forces of Islamic extremism in Iraq and Afghanistan, including al Qaeda, the Taliban, and other groups, that are intent on the murder of innocent Americans, the destruction of the American way of life, and the global proliferation of radical and (3) our military servicemembers and civilian United States personnel serving in harm's way in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other fronts in the global war on terror must be given any and all resources they need to accomplish the missions that have been asked of them, including the deployment of additional forces, should United States commanders on the (4) in Iraq, the hard-earned security gains won by our servicemembers must be preserved, and the long-term United States strategy there must continue to reflect that essential (5) the President's plan for Iraq is fundamentally sound and represents a responsible and carefully considered strategy that will help Iraq maintain sovereignty, stability, and self-reliance, achievements that were made possible largely through the extraordinary efforts and tremendous sacrifices of United States servicemembers and civilian (6) the President's plan for Afghanistan is clearly intended to improve the overall security situation there and enable the eventual drawdown and withdrawal of United States forces, and the President's near-term strategy to surge forces and provide improved security to the Afghan people by locating United States military personnel among the population, in conjunction with the growing Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, which the United States supports and trains, will increase the security of the Afghan (7) although gains in the global war on terror will not come without a cost, the American people and the Iraqi and Afghan people share a common enemy and a common goal to do whatever is necessary to defeat terrorists and those who SA 1656. Mr. CONRAD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. REPORT ON RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION OF MEMBERS OF (a) Report Required.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Air Force shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the efforts of the Air Force to attract and retain qualified individuals for service as members of the Air Force involved in the operation, maintenance, handling, and (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) A description of current reenlistment rates, set forth by Air Force Specialty Code, of members of the Air Force serving in positions involving the operation, maintenance, (2) A description of the current personnel fill rate for Air Force units involved in the operation, maintenance, (3) An description of the steps the Air Force has taken, including the use of retention bonuses or assignment incentive pay, to improve recruiting and retention of officers and enlisted personnel by the Air Force for the (4) An assessment of the feasibility, advisability, utility, and cost effectiveness of establishing additional bonuses or incentive pay as a way to enhance the recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the (5) An assessment of whether assignment incentive pay should be provided for members of the Air Force covered by (6) An assessment of the long-term community management plan for recruitment and retention by the Air Force of skilled personnel in the positions described in paragraph SA 1657. Mr. SESSIONS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. NO MIRANDA WARNINGS FOR AL QAEDA TERRORISTS. (1) the term ``foreign national'' means an individual who is not a citizen or national of the United States; and (A) has the same meaning that term has under the law of (B) includes a privileged belligerent and an unprivileged enemy belligerent, as those terms are defined in section 948a of title 10, United States Code, as amended by section 1031 (b) No Miranda Warnings.--Absent an unappealable court order requiring the reading of such statements, no agency or department of the United States shall read to a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States the statement required by Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), or otherwise inform such a prisoner of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have under the Constitution of the United States or under any Federal statute, regulation, or treaty. No Federal statute, regulation, or treaty shall be construed to require that a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States be informed of any rights that the prisoner may or may not have. No statement that is made by a foreign national who is captured or detained as a prisoner of war by the United States may be excluded from any proceeding on the basis that the prisoner was not informed of a right SA 1658. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REPORT ON CHILD CARE ASSISTANCE (a) In General.--Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and the House of Representative a report on financial assistance for child care provided by the Department of Defense, including through the Operation: Military Child Care and Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood programs, to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) The types of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in (2) The extent to which such members have taken advantage of such assistance since such assistance was first made (3) The formulas used for calculating the amount of such (5) The remaining costs of child care to families of such members that are not covered by the Department of Defense. (6) Any barriers to access to such assistance faced by such (7) The different criteria used by different States with respect to the regulation of child care services and the potential impact differences in such criteria may have on the (8) The different standards and criteria used by different programs of the Department of Defense for providing such assistance with respect to child care providers and the potential impact differences in such standards and criteria may have on the access of such members to such assistance. (9) Any other matters the Comptroller General determines relevant to the improvement of financial assistance for child care made available by the Department of Defense to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection with a contingency operation. SA 1659. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle F of title V, add the following: SEC. 557. INCREASE IN FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR CHILD CARE FOR (a) In General.--Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall prescribe regulations to increase financial assistance provided under Operation: Military Child Care to cover not less than 75 percent of the costs of child care provided (b) Operation: Military Child Care Defined.--In this section, the term ``Operation: Military Child Care'' refers to the program of the Department of Defense to provide financial assistance for child care to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who are deployed in connection SA 1660. Mr. CARDIN (for himself, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Webb, and Mr. Warner) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. ___. CONSENT OF CONGRESS TO COMPACT AMENDMENTS. amendments of the State of Maryland, the amendments of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the amendments of the District of Columbia to sections 5, 9 and 18 of title III of the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Regulation Compact. (b) Amendments.--The amendments referred to in subsection ``(a) The Authority shall be governed by a Board of eight Directors consisting of two Directors for each Signatory and two for the federal government (one of whom shall be a regular passenger and customer of the bus or rail service of the Authority). For Virginia, the Directors shall be appointed by the Northern Virginia Transportation Commission; for the District of Columbia, by the Council of the District of Columbia; for Maryland, by the Washington Suburban Transit Commission; and for the Federal Government, by the Administrator of General Services. For Virginia and Maryland, the Directors shall be appointed from among the members of the appointing body, except as otherwise provided herein, and shall serve for a term coincident with their term on the appointing body. A Director for a Signatory may be removed or suspended from office only as provided by the law of the Signatory from which he was appointed. The nonfederal appointing authorities shall also appoint an alternate for each Director. In addition, the Administrator of General Services shall also appoint two nonvoting members who shall serve as the alternates for the federal Directors. An alternate Director may act only in the absence of the Director for whom he has been appointed an alternate, except that, in the case of the District of Columbia where only one Director and his alternate are present, such alternate may act on behalf of the absent Director. Each alternate, including the federal nonvoting Directors, shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. In the event of a vacancy in the Office of Director or alternate, it shall be filled in the same manner as an original appointment. ``(b) Before entering upon the duties of his office each Director and alternate Director shall take and subscribe to the following oath (or affirmation) of office or any such other oath or affirmation, if any, as the constitution or laws of the Government he represents shall provide: `I, , hereby solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the state or political jurisdiction from which I was appointed as a director (alternate director) of the Board of Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority and will faithfully discharge the duties of the (2) Subsection (a) of section 9 is amended to read as ``(a) The officers of the Authority, none of whom shall be members of the Board, shall consist of a general manager, a secretary, a treasurer, a comptroller, an inspector general, and a general counsel and such other officers as the Board may provide. Except for the office of general manager, inspector general, and comptroller, the Board may consolidate any of such other offices in one person. All such officers shall be appointed and may be removed by the Board, shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and shall perform such duties and functions as the Board shall specify. The Board shall fix and determine the compensation to be paid to all officers and, except for the general manager who shall be a full-time employee, all other officers may be hired on a full-time or part-time basis and may be compensated on a salary or fee basis, as the Board may determine. All employees and such officers as the Board may designate shall be appointed and removed by the general manager under such subsection (d) to read as follows (and by renumbering all ``(d) The inspector general shall report to the Board and head the Office of the Inspector General, an independent and objective unit of the Authority that conducts and supervises audits, program evaluations, and investigations relating to Authority activities; promotes economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in Authority activities; detects and prevents fraud and abuse in Authority activities; and keeps the Board fully and currently informed about deficiencies in Authority activities as well as the necessity for and progress of (4) Section 18 is amended by adding a new section 18(d) to governments for the Authority for the purpose of matching federal funds appropriated in any given year as authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 regarding funding of capital and preventative maintenance projects of 1 the Authority shall be made from amounts derived from ``(2) For the purposes of this paragraph (d), a `dedicated funding source' means any source of funding that is earmarked or required under State or local law to be used to match Federal appropriations authorized under title VI, section 601, Public Law 110-432 for payments to the Authority.''. (c) Right to Alter, Amend, or Repeal.--The right to alter, amend, or repeal this section is expressly reserved. The consent granted by this section shall not be construed as jurisdiction of the United States in and over the region that (d) Construction and Severability.--It is intended that the provisions of this compact shall be reasonably and liberally construed to effectuate the purposes thereof. If any part or application of this compact, or legislation enabling the compact, is held invalid, the remainder of the compact or its application to other situations or persons shall not be (e) Inconsistency of Language.--The validity of this compact shall not be affected by any insubstantial differences in its form or language as adopted by the State of Maryland, Commonwealth of Virginia and District of (f) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect on the SA 1661. Mr. KERRY (for himself and Mr. Chambliss) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. INCLUSION OF SERVICE AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, IN Section 12731(f)(2)(A) of title 10, United States Code, is (1) by striking ``the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008'' and (2) by striking ``in any fiscal year after such date'' and inserting ``in any fiscal year after fiscal year 2001''. SA 1662. Mr. DURBIN (for himself and Mr. Nelson of Nebraska) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. 617. SPECIAL COMPENSATION FOR MEMBERS OF THE UNIFORMED (a) In General.--Chapter 7 of title 37, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ``Sec. 439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring ``(a) Monthly Compensation.--The Secretary concerned may pay to any member of the uniformed services described in subsection (b) monthly special compensation in an amount ``(b) Covered Members.--A member eligible for monthly special compensation authorized by subsection (a) is a member ``(1) has been certified by a licensed physician to be in need of assistance from another person to perform the ``(2) has a serious injury, disorder, or disease of either ``(A) is incurred or aggravated in the line of duty; and ``(B) compromises the member's ability to carry out one or more activities of daily living or requires the member to be constantly supervised to avoid physical harm to the member or ``(3) meets such other criteria, if any, as the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) prescribes for purposes of this compensation payable to a member under subsection (a) shall be determined under criteria prescribed by the Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard), but may not exceed the amount of aid and attendance allowance authorized by section 1114(r)(2) of title 38 for veterans in need of aid and attendance. ``(2) In determining the amount of monthly special compensation, the Secretary concerned shall consider the ``(A) The extent to which home health care and related ``(B) The extent to which aid and attendance services are being provided by family and friends who may be compensated with funds provided through the monthly special compensation. ``(d) Payment Until Medical Retirement.--Monthly special compensation is payable under this section to a member described in subsection (b) for any month that begins before the date on which the member is medically retired. ``(e) Construction With Other Pay and Allowances.--Monthly special compensation payable to a member under this section is in addition to any other pay and allowances payable to the ``(f) Benefit Information.--The Secretary of Defense, in collaboration with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, shall ensure that members of the uniformed services who may be eligible for compensation under this section are made aware of the availability of such compensation by including information about such compensation in written and online ``(g) Regulations.--The Secretary of Defense (or the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall prescribe regulations to carry out this (1) In general.--Not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense (and the Secretary of Homeland Security, with respect to the Coast Guard) shall submit to Congress a report on the provision of compensation under section 439 of title 37, United States (2) Elements.--The report required by paragraph (1) shall (A) An estimate of the number of members of the uniformed services eligible for compensation under such section 439. (B) The number of members of the uniformed services (C) The average amount of compensation provided to members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation. (D) The average amount of time required for a member of the uniformed services to receive such compensation after the (E) A summary of the types of injuries, disorders, and diseases of members of the uniformed services receiving such compensation that made such members eligible for such (c) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 7 of such title is amended by adding at ``439. Special compensation: members of the uniformed services with serious injuries or illnesses requiring assistance in SA 1663. Mr. DODD submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as At the end of subtitle B of title VI, add the following: SEC. 619. MONTHLY SPECIAL PAY FOR MEMBERS RETAINED IN THE (a) Monthly Special Pay Required.--The Secretary concerned shall pay to each member of the Armed Forces described in subsection (b) monthly special pay in the amount specified in subsection (c) for each month or portion of a month of pre- deployment and re-integration duty performed by such member on or after September 11, 2001, while described by subsection (b), regardless of whether or not such duty was performed by (b) Covered Members.--A member of the Armed Forces described in this subsection is any member of the Armed Forces whose enlistment or period of obligated service is extended, or whose eligibility for retirement is suspended, pursuant to section 123 or 12305 of title 10, United States Code, or any other provision of law authorizing the President to extend an enlistment or period of obligated service, or suspend an eligibility for retirement, of a member of the uniformed services in time of war or of national emergency declared by Congress or the President (commonly referred to (c) Amount.--The amount of monthly special pay payable under subsection (a) for a month or portion of a month is (d) Construction With Other Monthly Special Pay.--Monthly special pay may not be paid under both this section and 8116 of the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2009 (division C of Public Law 110-329; 122 Stat. 3646) for any SA 1664. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, between lines 20 and 21, insert the following: (3) Assessments of members discharged or released upon return from deployment.--In the case of a member of the Armed Forces who is discharged or released from the Armed Forces upon the member's return from deployment, the Secretary of Defense shall make available the opportunity for such member to participate in the mental health assessments required under subparagraph (C) of paragraph (1) together with the unit with which the member was previously deployed, without SA 1665. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. __. FUNDING FOR MENTAL HEALTH CARE FOR MEMBERS OF THE (a) Availability of Defense Health Program Funds.--Subject to the provisions of appropriations Acts, amounts available for Defense Health Program shall be available for programs described in subsection (b) for members of the National Guard not on active duty in the Armed Forces who incurred a psychological or mental illness or injury on active duty in the Armed Forces as demonstrated by existing medical records or, in the absence of such records, by the opinion of a licensed medical provider in the State where the member (b) Covered Programs.--The programs described in this (1) Programs to assist members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) in case management in the receipt of non-clinical care for an illness or injury described in (2) Programs to advise members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) on the receipt of care and treatment for an illness or injury described in that (3) Programs of psychological health treatment for members of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an (4) Programs supporting the efforts of the military departments to update and maintain military health electronic (5) Such other treatment programs as may assist a member of the National Guard described in subsection (a) for an illness or injury described in that subsection, as determined by the State Surgeon General of the National Guard of the State in which the member reside, the Director of Psychological Health of the State in which the member resides, the mental health or equivalent agency of the State in which the member resides, or the Director of the Psychological Health Program (c) Budgeting.--The Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs shall coordinate with the National Guard Bureau and other personnel and logistical elements of the National Guard in determining the budget requirements of the National Guard for the programs described in subsection (b). SA 1666. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as (h) Post-Deployment Health Assessments of Guard and Reserve (1) In general.--The Secretary concerned shall administer a Post-Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA) to each member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning to the member's home station or county of residence from deployment in connection with a contingency operation within the (A) In the case of a member of the Individual Ready Reserve, the assessment shall be administered by not later than the member's release from active duty following such deployment or 10 days after the member's return to such (B) In the case of any other member of a reserve component of the armed forces returning from deployment, by not later than the member's release from active duty following such (A) In general.--The Post-Deployment Health Assessment required under this subsection shall be performed by a practitioner trained and certified as qualified to participate in the performance of Post-Deployment Health Assessments or Post-Deployment Health Reassessments. (B) Report on availability of trained personnel.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the congressional defense committees a report on the availability of personnel described under subparagraph (A) to perform assessments pursuant to this subsection at the home stations or counties of residence of members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces. If such personnel are not available at such locations, the Secretary shall indicate the additional resources necessary to ensure such availability within one SA 1667. Mr. CASEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 214, line 12, insert ``18 months,'' after ``12 SA 1668. Mr. GREGG submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. AUTHORITY TO TRANSFER DEFENSE ARTICLES AND Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the congressional defense committees, may transfer defense articles and equipment used by the United States Armed Forces in Iraq as of the date of the enactment of this Act to the armed forces of the Governments of Lebanon and Jordan in a manner that is SA 1669. Mrs. BOXER (for herself, Mr. Bond, Ms. Landrieu, Ms. Murkowski, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Wyden, Mr. Burris, and Mr. Schumer) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 713. REDUCTION OF MINIMUM DISTANCE OF TRAVEL FOR (a) Reduction.--Section 1074i(a) of title 10, United States Code, is amended by striking ``100 miles'' and inserting ``50 (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, and shall apply with respect to referrals for specialty health care made on or after such (c) Offset.--The amount authorized to be appropriated by section 301(a)(4) for operation and maintenance for the Air Force is hereby decreased by $25,000,000, with the amount of the decrease to be derived from amounts available for line item # 320 in the table in section 4301 for advertising. SA 1670. Mr. MENENDEZ submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as On page 435, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. PAYMENT BY SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS OF PLOT (a) Plot Allowance.--Section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following ``(c)(1) In the case of an individual described in paragraph (2) who is buried in a cemetery that is owned by a State or by an agency or political subdivision of a State, the Secretary shall pay to such State, agency, or political subdivision the sum of $300 as a plot or interment allowance ``(2) An individual described in this paragraph is a spouse, surviving spouse (which for purposes of this chapter includes a surviving spouse who had a subsequent remarriage), minor child (which for purposes of this chapter includes a child under 21 years of age, or under 23 years of age if pursuing a course of instruction at an approved educational institution), or, in the discretion of the Secretary, unmarried adult child of any of person described in paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), or (7) of section 2402 of this title.''. (b) Effective Date.--Subsection (c) of section 2303 of title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (a), shall apply with respect to an individual who dies on or SA 1671. Mr. KYL (for himself, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Vitter) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for the defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as SEC. 1232. SENSE OF THE SENATE ON NON-STRATEGIC NUCLEAR (a) Findings.--The Senate makes the following findings: (1) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States, chaired by former Secretaries of Defense William Perry and James Schlesinger, recently concluded that there is significant asymmetry between the tactical nuclear weapons arsenals of the Russian Federation (2) The Commission also determined that ``[a]s part of its strategy to assure its allies, the United States should not abandon strategic equivalency with Russia. Overall equivalence is important to many U.S. allies in Europe. The United States should not cede to Russia a posture of superiority in the name of deemphasizing nuclear weapons in U.S. military strategy. There seems no near-term prospect of such a result in the balance of operationally deployed (3) The Commission continued, ``But that balance does not exist in non-strategic nuclear forces, where Russia enjoys a sizeable numerical advantage. As noted above, it stores thousands of these weapons in apparent support of possible military operations west of the Urals. The United States deploys a small fraction of that number in support of nuclear sharing agreements in NATO. Precise numbers for the U.S. deployments are classified but their total is only about five percent of the total at the height of the Cold War. Strict U.S.-Russian equivalence in NSNF numbers is unnecessary. But the current imbalance is stark and worrisome to some U.S. allies in Central Europe. If and as reductions continue in the number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons, this imbalance will become more apparent and allies (4) The Commission stated, ``Some U.S. allies located closer to Russia, however, are fearful of Russia and its tactical nuclear forces. The imbalance in non-strategic nuclear weapons, which greatly favors Russia, is of rising concern and an illustration of the new challenges of strategic stability as reductions in strategic weapons (5) The Commission also stated, ``The combination of new warhead designs, the estimated production capability for new nuclear warheads, and precision delivery systems such as the Iskander short-range tactical ballistic missile (known as the SS-26 in the West), open up new possibilities for Russian efforts to threaten to use nuclear weapons to influence (b) Sense of the Senate.--The Senate strongly urges the (1) to make it a priority in all United States arms control negotiations with Russia to gain a verifiable accounting of the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia, including the types, current deployments, and security from theft of the same; (2) to ensure that reductions in the tactical nuclear weapons of Russia are a top priority in any arms control (3) to assure United States allies that they are protected from any use or threatened use of tactical nuclear weapons SA 1672. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 68, between lines 12 and 13, insert the following: (6) A description of current and past sales, or contracts for the sale, by the Russian Federation of technology, materials, components, or services related to nuclear weapons or nuclear energy, ballistic missile or space launch capabilities, or advanced conventional weapons systems. SA 1673. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 424, between lines 7 and 8, insert the following: SEC. 1059. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT REGARDING THE (a) In General.--The Secretary of Defense may not carry out any program for the refurbishment, reuse, or replacement of the United States nuclear weapons stockpile unless the Director of the Sandia National Laboratory, the Director of the Los Alamos National Laboratory, the Director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and JASON certify to the congressional defense committees that the program-- (1) may be carried out without the need for any testing; (2) will preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and (3) will provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (1) The term ``refurbishment'' means a strategy of, or similar to, the lifetime extension program, whereby individual warhead components are replaced before they degrade with components of nearly identical design or that (2) The term ``reuse'' means a strategy of using surplus pits or secondaries from other warhead types or, in certain cases, a strategy involving the new manufacture of these (3) The term ``replacement'' means a strategy that permits SA 1674. Mr. KYL submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, insert the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON STATUS OF UNITED STATES NUCLEAR WEAPONS (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found that ``the physical infrastructure'' of the United States nuclear weapons complex ``is in serious need of (2) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States also found that ``the intellectual infrastructure is also in serious trouble. A major cause is the recent (and (3) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States stated, ``Once core capabilities are established, the should require that annual NNSA budget submissions include an assessment of whether the budget as proposed will maintain these capabilities. To monitor progress, the NNSA and the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) should establish a formal mechanism for tracking funding sources for the weapons laboratories, without additional administrative (4) The Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States recommended, ``The NNSA should conduct a study of the core competencies needed in the weapons complex, and the Congress and Office of Management and Budget should use these (b) Annual Report.--The Secretary of Defense shall, in consultation with the directors of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons production facilities and as part of the budget justification materials submitted to Congress in support of the Department of Defense budget for each fiscal year (as submitted with the budget of the President under section 1105(a) of title 31, United States Code), submit a report on the condition and status of the nuclear weapons complex of the United States. The report (1) An assessment of whether the budget is sufficient to preserve the core intellectual and technical competencies of the United States in nuclear weapons, including weapons design, system integration, manufacturing, security, use control, reliability assessment, and certification. (2) A description of the demographics and experience of the nuclear weapons workforce, including the number of individuals who have ever participated in an underground (3) A plan for enabling the design laboratories to grow the required expertise and sustain it over the long term. (4) An assessment of the condition and status of the national nuclear weapons laboratories and nuclear weapons (5) A plan to provide for the long-term safety, security, reliability, and credibility of the United States nuclear (6) An assessment of the condition and status of the nuclear weapons production complex and the ability of the complex to sustain and modernize the nuclear deterrent. (1) The term ``national nuclear weapons laboratories'' includes Sandia National Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. (2) The term ``nuclear weapons production facilities'' means the Y-12 complex at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, the Savannah River Site, the Pantex Plant, the Nevada Test Site, SA 1675. Mr. FEINGOLD (for himself and Ms. Murkowski) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle D of title VI, add the following: SEC. 652. CONTINUATION ON ACTIVE DUTY OF RESERVE COMPONENT Section 1218 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d)(1) The Secretary of a military department shall ensure that each member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is determined, after a mobilization and deployment to an area in which imminent danger pay is authorized under section 310 of title 37, to require evaluation for a physical or mental disability which could result in separation or retirement for disability under this chapter or placement on the temporary disability retired list or inactive status list under this chapter is retained on active duty during the disability evaluation process until ``(A) cleared by appropriate authorities for continuation ``(B) separated, retired, or placed on the temporary ``(2)(A) A member described in paragraph (1) may request termination of active duty under such paragraph at any time during the demobilization or disability evaluation process of ``(B) Upon a request under subparagraph (A), a member described in paragraph (1) shall only be released from active duty after the member receives counseling about the ``(C) Each release from active duty under subparagraph (B) ``(3) The requirements in paragraph (1) shall expire on the date that is five years after the date of the enactment of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year SEC. 653. USE OF LOCAL RESIDENCES FOR COMMUNITY-BASED CARE Section 1222 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by ``(d) Use of Local Residences for Certain Reserve Component Members.--(1)(A) A member of a reserve component described by subparagraph (B) may be assigned to the community-based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent place of residence if residing at that location ``(i) medically feasible, as determined by a licensed ``(II) the optimal course of medical treatment of the ``(B) A member of a reserve component described by this subparagraph is any member remaining on active duty under section 1218(d) of this title during the period the member is ``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed as terminating, altering, or otherwise affecting the authority of the commander of a member described in paragraph (1)(B) to order the member to perform duties consistent with the ``(3) The Secretary concerned shall pay any reasonable expenses of transportation, lodging, and meals incurred by a member residing at the member's permanent place of residence under this subsection in connection with travel from the member's permanent place of residence to a medical facility during the period in which the member is covered by this (a) In General.--Chapter 61 of title 10, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 1218 the ``Sec. 1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: ``The Secretary of a military department shall provide to a member of a reserve component under the jurisdiction of the Secretary who is injured while on active duty in the armed forces the following before such member is demobilized or administrative processing through community based warrior transition unit located nearest to the member's permanent ``(3) An opportunity to consult with a member of the applicable judge advocate general's corps, or other qualified legal assistance attorney, regarding the member's eligibility for compensation, disability, or other transitional (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the beginning of chapter 61 of such title is amended by inserting after the item relating to section 1218 the following new ``1218a. Discharge or release from active duty: transition SA 1676. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 66, between lines 19 and 20, insert the following: (e) Comptroller General Review.--The Comptroller General of (1) review the assessment required by subsection (b) and (2) not later than 120 days after receiving the assessment and the plan, provide to the congressional defense committees SA 1677. Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Mr. Sessions, and Mr. Lieberman) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title II, add the following: SEC. 245. CONTINUED PRODUCTION OF GROUND-BASED INTERCEPTOR (a) Limitation on Break in Production.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that the Missile Defense Agency does not allow a break in production of the Ground-based Interceptor (1) completed the Ballistic Missile Defense Review; and (2) made a determination with respect to the number of Ground-based Interceptor missiles that will be necessary to support the service life of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System. (b) Limitation on Certain Actions With Respect to Missile Field 1 and Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska.-- (1) Limitation on decommissioning of missile field 1.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that Missile Field 1 at Fort Greely, Alaska, does not complete decommissioning until seven silos have been emplaced at Missile Field 2 at Fort (2) Limitation with respect to disposition of silos at missile field 2.--The Secretary of Defense shall ensure that no irreversible decision is made with respect to the disposition of operational silos at Missile Field 2 at Fort Greely, Alaska, until that date that is 60 days after the date on which the reports required by subsections (b)(3) and (c)(3) of section 243 are submitted to the congressional SA 1678. Mr. LEAHY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 321, strike line 18 and all that follows through (1) In general.--Chapter 47A of title 10, United States (2) Technical and conforming amendment.--The table of chapters for title 10, United States Code, is amended by (1) Definition.--In this subsection, the term ``covered (A) brought before a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act; and (B) in which final judgment has not been entered, or the matter has not otherwise become final, on the date of (2) Dismissal.--Any covered matter shall be dismissed (3) Statute of limitations.--For any offense charged in a covered matter dismissed under paragraph (2), the running of the statute of limitations for that offense shall be tolled during the period beginning on the date on which charges relating to the offense were filed with a military commission convened under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code, as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act, and ending on the date of enactment of this Act. SA 1679. Mr. GRASSLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: On page 435, between line 14 and 15, insert the following: SEC. 1083. INVESTIGATIONS, AUDITS, INSPECTIONS, EVALUATIONS, Section 3518(c) of title 44, United States Code, is (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``paragraph (2)'' and (2) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and (3) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following: ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), this subchapter shall not apply to the collection of information during the conduct of any investigation, audit, inspection, evaluation, or other ``(A) any Federal office of Inspector General, including-- ``(i) any office of Inspector General of any establishment, Federal entity, or designated Federal entity as those terms are defined under sections 12(2), 8G(a)(1), and 8G(a)(2) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.), ``(ii) any office of Special Inspector General established ``(B) the Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency established under section 11 of the Inspector ``(C) the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board established under section 1521 of division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Public Law 111-5; 123 SA 1680. Mr. VOINOVICH (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Bond, Mr. Begich, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Byrd, Mr. Casey, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Dorgan, Mrs. Lincoln, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Risch, Mr. Rockefeller, and Mrs. Shaheen) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle A of title XII, add the following: SEC. 1211. AVAILABILITY OF APPROPRIATED FUNDS FOR THE STATE (a) Availability of Appropriated Funds.--The Secretary of Defense may, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary, use funds appropriated to the Department of Defense for fiscal year 2010 to pay the costs incurred by the National Guard (including the costs of pay and allowances of members of the National Guard) in conducting activities under the (1) to support the objectives of the commander of the combatant command for the theater of operations in which such (2) to build international civil-military partnerships and capacity on matters relating to defense and security. (1) Approval by commander of combatant command and chief of mission.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless such activities are jointly approved by the commander of the combatant command concerned (2) Participation by members.--Funds shall not be available under subsection (a) for the participation of a member of the National Guard in activities conducted under the State Partnership Program in a foreign country unless the member is on active duty in the Armed Forces at the time of such (c) Reimbursement.--In the event of the participation of personnel of a department or agency of the United States Government (other than the Department of Defense) in activities for which payment is made under subsection (a), the head of such department or agency shall reimburse the Secretary of Defense for the costs associated with the participation of such personnel in such activities. Amounts reimbursed the Department of Defense under this subsection shall be deposited in the appropriation or account from which amounts for the payment concerned were derived. Any amounts appropriation or account, and shall be available for the same purposes, and subject to the same conditions and limitations, SA 1681. Mrs. LINCOLN (for herself, Ms. Landrieu, Mr. Tester, and Mr. Wyden) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle C of title VI insert the following: SEC. 635. TRAVEL AND TRANSPORTATION ALLOWANCES FOR MEMBERS OF Section 408a(c) of title 37, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the first sentence the following: ``The regulations may not, for purposes of subsection (a), define normal commuting distance as any distance greater then 100 SA 1682. Mr. CONRAD (for himself, Mr. Enzi, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Tester, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Barrasso, and Mr. Dorgan) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: SEC. 1083. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE OF (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings: (1) President Barack Obama stated in his speech on April 4, 2009, in Prague, Czech Republic, on working toward a world without nuclear weapons, ``as long as these weapons exist, we will maintain a safe, secure and effective arsenal to deter any adversary, and guarantee that defense to our allies''. (2) The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States found, in the Commission's final report, that preserving the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is essential to ensuring the reliability and credibility of the nuclear force, and that the nuclear triad becomes even more important as the size of the nuclear force (3) The stabilizing, reliable, and cost-effective Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile is a critically important component of the nuclear triad, essential for the United States to deter its enemies, assure its allies, and (4) The current 450-missile force, with its inherent broad dispersion, low warhead loading, and high readiness and reliability, makes a successful disarming attack nearly impossible and eliminates pressure to maintain a launch-on- (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that-- (1) as the United States and Russia negotiate further reductions in strategic offensive arsenals, the United States must be certain that the long-term vitality of the triad of strategic nuclear delivery systems is not threatened; (2) the land-based nuclear force is the most stabilizing portion of the nuclear arsenal of the United States and it becomes even more so as the total number of weapons in the (3) a robust intercontinental ballistic missile force is an essential component of the nuclear triad and must be retained to advance the Nation's nuclear strategy of deterrence, SA 1683. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1684. Mr. THUNE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Establishment.--There is established a bipartisan, independent panel to be known as the National Defense Panel (b) Membership.--The Panel shall be composed of twelve members who are recognized experts in matters relating to the national security of the United States. The members shall be (1) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (2) Three by the chairman of the Committee on Armed (3) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (4) Three by the ranking member of the Committee on Armed (c) Co-Chairs of the Panel.--The chairman of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives and the chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the Senate shall each designate one of their appointees under subsection (d) Period of Appointment; Vacancies.--Members shall be appointed for the life of the Panel. Any vacancy in the Panel shall be filled in the same manner as the original (1) review the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, the Secretary of Defense's terms of reference, and any other materials providing the basis for, or substantial inputs to, the work of the Department of Defense on the 2009 quadrennial defense review under section 118 of title 10, United States Code (in this subsection referred to as the ``2009 QDR''), as well as the 2009 QDR (2) conduct an assessment of the assumptions, strategy, findings, costs, and risks in the report of the 2009 QDR under subsection (d) of such section, with particular attention paid to the risks described in that report; (3) submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary an independent assessment of a variety of possible force structures of the Armed Forces, including the force structure identified in the report of the 2009 QDR, suitable to meet the requirements identified in the review required in (4) to the extent practicable, estimate the funding required by fiscal year, in constant fiscal year 2010 dollars, to organize, equip, and support the forces contemplated under the force structures included in the (5) provide to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and the Secretary of Defense, through the reports under subsection (g), any recommendations it considers appropriate for their (f) First Meeting.--The Panel shall hold its first meeting not later than 30 days after the date on which all appointments to the Panel under paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (1) Interim report of panel.--Not later than February 15, 2010, the Panel shall submit an interim report on its findings to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense. (2) Final report of panel.--Not later than January 15, 2011, the Panel shall submit its final report, together with any recommendations, to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary (3) Report of secretary of defense.--Not later than February 15, 2011, the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives the Secretary's comments (h) Information From Federal Agencies.--The Panel may secure directly from the Department of Defense and any of components of the Department such information as the Panel considers necessary to carry out its duties under this section. The Secretary of Defense and the head of the component concerned shall ensure that information requested by the Panel under this subsection is promptly provided. (i) FFRDC Support.--Upon the request of the co-chairs of the Panel, the Secretary of Defense shall make available to the Panel the services of any federally funded research and development center that is covered by a sponsoring agreement authorities provided in section 3161 of title 5, United States Code, and shall be subject to the conditions set forth (k) Payment of Panel Expenses.--Funds for activities of the Panel shall be provided from unobligated amounts available to (l) Termination.--The Panel shall terminate 45 days after the date on which the Panel submits its final report under SEC. 1092. REPORTS ON STATUTORY COMPLIANCE OF THE REPORT ON (a) Comptroller General Report.--Not later than 90 days after the Secretary of Defense submits the report required by subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by subsection (a) of that section, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives and to the Secretary of Defense a report on the degree to which the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review complies with (b) Secretary of Defense Report.--If the Comptroller General determines that the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review deviates significantly from the requirements of subsection (d) of section 118 of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report addressing the areas of deviation not later than 30 days after the submittal of the report by the Comptroller SEC. 1093. REPORT ON THE FORCE STRUCTURE FINDINGS OF THE 2009 (a) In General.--Concurrent with the delivery of the report on the 2009 quadrennial defense review required by section 118(d) of title 10, United States Code, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committees on Armed Services of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with a (1) the analyses used to determine and support the findings (2) a description of any changes from the 2006 quadrennial defense review to the minimum military requirements for major (b) Major Military Capabilities Defined.--In this section, the term ``major military capabilities'' includes any capability the Secretary determines to be a major military capability, any capability discussed in the report of the 2006 quadrennial defense review, and any capability described in paragraph (9) or (10) of section 118(d) of title 10, SA 1685. Mr. ENSIGN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: (a) Findings.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, any finding by Congress in division ___ of this Act relating to actual or perceived gender identity shall have no (b) Support for Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions.-- Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the Attorney General may not provide assistance to a State, local, or tribal law enforcement agency under section __04 of this Act (c) Federal Offense.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, section 924 of title 18, United States Code, as (A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``gender (B) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``gender identity''; (A) in paragraph (2), by adding ``and'' at the end; (B) in paragraph (3), by striking ``; and'' and inserting a (d) Statistics.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, subsection (b)(1) of the first section of the Hate Crime Statistics Act (28 U.S.C. 534 note), as amended by section __08 of this Act, is amended by striking ``and gender (e) Rule of Construction.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, division __ of this Act (relating to hate crimes), and the amendments made by that division, shall SA 1686. Mr. SANDERS submitted an amendment intended to be proposed him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: SEC. __. AUDIT REFORM AND TRANSPARENCY FOR THE BOARD OF (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking all after ``shall (b) Audit.--Section 714 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following new subsection: ``(e) Audit and Report of the Federal Reserve System.-- ``(1) In general.--The audit of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal reserve banks under subsection (b) shall be completed before the end of ``(A) Required.--A report on the audit referred to in paragraph (1) shall be submitted by the Comptroller General to the Congress before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date on which such audit is completed and made available to the Speaker of the House, the majority and minority leaders of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the committee and each subcommittee of jurisdiction in the House of Representatives and the Senate, ``(B) Contents.--The report under subparagraph (A) shall include a detailed description of the findings and conclusion of the Comptroller General with respect to the audit that is the subject of the report, together with such recommendations for legislative or administrative action as the Comptroller SA 1687. Mr. MENENDEZ (for himself and Mr. Corker) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which On page 475, between lines 2 and 3, insert the following: SEC. 1211. CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT FOR COALITION SUPPORT Section 1232(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 (Public Law 110-181; 122 Stat. 392), as amended by section 1217 of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Public Law 110-417; (1) in paragraph (1)(A), by striking ``the Secretary of Defense shall submit'' and inserting ``the Secretary of Defense, after consultation with the Secretary of State, (A) by redesignating subparagraphs (A), (B), and (C) as clauses (i), (ii), and (iii), respectively, and indenting each clause, as so redesignated, 6 ems from the left margin; (B) by striking ``shall include an itemized description'' and inserting the following: ``shall include the following: (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph: ``(i) is consistent with the national security interests of ``(ii) will not adversely impact the balance of power in SA 1688. Ms. SNOWE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle H of title X, add the following: (1) the terms ``Administration'' and ``Administrator'' mean the Small Business Administration and the Administrator (2) the terms ``HUBZone small business concern'', ``small business concern'', ``small business concern owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans'', and ``small business concern owned and controlled by women'' have the same meanings as in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 (b) Contracting Opportunities.--Section 31(b)(2)(B) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 657a(b)(2)(B)) is amended by (c) Contracting Goals.--Section 15(g)(1) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 644(g)(1)) is amended in the fourth sentence by inserting ``and subcontract'' after ``not less than 3 percent of the total value of all prime contract''. (d) Mentor-Protege Programs.--The Administrator may establish mentor-protege programs for small business concerns owned and controlled by service-disabled veterans, small business concerns owned and controlled by women, and HUBZone small business concerns modeled on the mentor-protege program participating in programs under section 8(a) of the Small SA 1689. Mrs. MURRAY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by her to the bill S. 1390, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2010 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows: At the end of subtitle G of title X, add the following: SEC. 1073. REPORT ON DOCUMENTATION OF SUPPORT PROVIDED BY (a) In General.--Not later than March 31, 2010, the Secretary of Defense shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives a report on the documentation of the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is (b) Elements.--The report required by subsection (a) shall (1) An assessment of the mechanisms used by the Secretary, if any, to document the support provided by members of the Armed Forces while deployed in support of contingency operations that is provided as a result of operational requirements and outside of the requirements of their participation in operational missions that involve combat (2) Recommendations for the improvement or creation of (3) An assessment of the feasibility and advisability of creating and implementing an experience, service, or skill identifier to identify the support described in paragraph (4) An assessment of whether such identifier could be used effectively and efficiently for the provision of training and (5) An assessment of whether the current chain of command construct allows members described in paragraph (1) who provide support described in such paragraph sufficient opportunity to obtain recognition for their service. (6) An identification of the differences between service in the reserve components of the Armed Forces and service in the regular components of the Armed Forces and how those differences affect the matters described in paragraphs (1) (7) An assessment of how a mechanism described in paragraph (1) could be used to improve determinations of whether a member of the Armed Forces has, for purposes of establishing service-connection for a disease or injury under section 1154(b) of title 38, United States Code, engaged in combat with the enemy in active service with a military, naval, or air organization of the United States during a period of war, Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the Public that a hearing has been scheduled before the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The hearing will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room The purpose of the hearing is to consider the nominations of James J. Markowsky, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil Energy), Warren F. Miller, Jr., to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Nuclear Energy) and Director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste, Anthony M. Babauta, to be an Assistant Secretary of the Interior (Insular Areas), and Jonathan B. Jarvis, to be the Director of the Because of the limited time available for the hearing, witnesses may testify by invitation only. However, those wishing to submit written testimony for the hearing record may do so by sending it to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510-6150, or by e-mail to Amandaxkelly@ For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I would like to announce for the information of the Senate and the public that a business meeting has been scheduled before Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. The business meeting will be held on Tuesday, July 28, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, immediately The purpose of the business meeting is to consider pending For further information, please contact Sam Fowler at (202) 224-7571 committee on commerce, science, and transportation Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, in Russell 253, at The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate to conduct a hearing on Tuesday, July 21, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. committee on environment and public works and subcommittee on green Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Environment and Public Works and the Subcommittee on Green Jobs and the New Economy be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in room SD-406 of the Dirksen The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, 2009, to hold a hearing entitled ``The National Security Implications of Climate Change.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 10 a.m., in SH-216 of the Hart Senate The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, July 21, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled, ``Excessive Speculation in the Wheat Market.'' The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and Border Security, be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on July 21, 2009, at 2:15 pm, in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Ensuring a Legal Workforce: What Changes Should be Made to Our Current Employment Verification The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. CHAMBLISS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Army fellow in my office, David Evans, be granted the privileges of the The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Lea Shanley, a congressional science fellow in my office, be granted the privilege of the floor for the duration of my statement. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate convenes as a Court of Impeachment with regard to the case of Samuel B. Kent, the following list of staff from the House of Representatives be provided floor privileges during those proceedings. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Phil Tahtakran, Branden Ritchie, Ryan Clough, Michael Lenn, Danielle Brown, Alan Baron, Allison Halataei, Jessica Klein, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair, on behalf of the majority leader, pursuant to Public Law 111-25, announces the appointment of the following individuals to serve as members of the Ronald Reagan Centennial Commission: Sig Rogich of Nevada and Frank Fahrenkoph of Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 218, which was submitted The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the resolution by title. There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the resolution be agreed to and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The resolution (S. Res. 218) was agreed to, as follows: Resolved, That the following be the minority membership on the following committees for the remainder of the 111th COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE NUTRITION AND FORESTRY: Mr. Chambliss, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Cochran, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Roberts, Mr. Johanns, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Thune, and Mr. COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS: Mr. Lugar, Mr. Corker, Mr. Isakson, Mr. Risch, Mr. DeMint, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Wicker, and COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS: Ms. Collins, Mr. Coburn, Mr. McCain, Mr. Voinovich, Mr. COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP: Ms. Snowe, Mr. Bond, Mr. Vitter, Mr. Thune, Mr. Enzi, Mr. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING: Mr. Martinez, Mr. Shelby, Ms. Collins, Mr. Corker, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Brownback, Mr. Graham, 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H. Con. Res. 164, at the desk The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the concurrent A concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) recognizing the 40th anniversary of the Food and Nutrition Service of the There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the concurrent resolution be agreed to, the preamble be agreed to, the motions to reconsider be laid upon the table, and that any statements relating to the concurrent resolution be printed in the Record, without intervening The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 164) was agreed to. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, for the information of the Senate, the managers of the Department of Defense authorization measure have asked for a filing deadline of first-degree amendments to the bill. While no consent will be granted tonight, it is expected that tomorrow morning unanimous consent will be requested for a filing deadline of 11 a.m., Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 2245, which was received The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title. conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I would note that of the four names the clerk read--those four national heroes--two of them are from Ohio, Neil Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read three times, passed, the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, with no intervening action or debate, and any statements related The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The bill (H.R. 2245) was ordered to a third reading, was read the Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, Wednesday, July 22; that following the prayer and pledge, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time for the two leaders be reserved for their use later in the day, and the Senate resume consideration of Calendar No. 89, S. 1390, the Department of Defense authorization bill, as provided for The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, under the previous order, the time until 12 o'clock will be equally divided and controlled between Senators Thune and Durbin or their designees. At 12 o'clock, the Senate will proceed to a rollcall vote in relation to the Thune amendment. Additional As a reminder, at 2 p.m. tomorrow, there will be a live quorum with respect to the Court of Impeachment of Samuel B. Kent. Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come before the Senate, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate stand There being no objection, the Senate, at 7:40 p.m., adjourned until The House met at 10:30 a.m. and was called to order by the Speaker The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following I hereby appoint the Honorable John T. Salazar to act as The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2009, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning-hour debate. The Chair will alternate recognition between the parties, with each party limited to 30 minutes and each Member, other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip, limited to 5 minutes. CALIFORNIA'S THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT'S PERSPECTIVE ON HEALTH CARE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, last night I had a telephone town hall with constituents in my district. As I made the call, I informed them that we were going to discuss any subject they wanted, but I wanted to concentrate on health care. As a result, I had one of the largest responses I ever had. Thousands of people got on the line. Most times, there were no less than 1,400 people on the line. I didn't choose them by party. I didn't choose them by income. I didn't choose them by occupation. It was random, calling people in my The response was overwhelming, overwhelmingly negative with respect to the plans they hear about that are coming from the White House, the Senate and the House. Why were they negative? They were negative because the people in my district were concerned about whether or not the government was going to dominate health care in this country, and those who were satisfied with their plans--even though they had some imperfections, even though they had some desire to have them improved, but by and large had made choices with respect to their plans--wondered whether their freedom of choice would be taken away by the government plan presented by the President and by the leadership in both the Senate and the House. It was interesting, they also were very concerned about the cost. When they hear the word $1 trillion, they begin to think that this particular plan has real problems. As we discussed the various aspects of it, they referred me to the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office's report that disappointed the White House and the Democratic leadership in the House and the Senate because the report suggested that this program cannot pay for itself, that we're talking about at least $1 trillion to be imposed on the American people. The dialogue that I had with my constituents was very lively. They were also concerned about the fact that we have Medicare and Medicaid-- as we call it in California, Medi-Cal--that is on an unsustainable path to bankruptcy. This has been pointed out by the director of CBO as well as many others outside the halls of Congress and outside the Federal Government. So the American people are trying to tell us that they are concerned that we have an unsustainable program already that we have not faced up to; and on top of that, we're going to impose this new national health plan. It was interesting because the President and the Democratic leadership have said that, look, the public option is just that. It's not going to destroy the private sector. Yet constituents in my district were very, very clear as to their understanding of the necessary impact of this program. They also were concerned about the promises made in this plan. I guess you could sum it up in these words: First entitlement and then rationing. When government takes over a program like medical care, and when it promises everything, and when you see the track record with respect to Medicare and Medicaid, you understand that at some point in time, we're going to hit the fiscal wall, and government's only ability to control cost at that point in time--if you look historically at other government-centered health You can look at it in Canada. You can look at it in Great Britain. You can look at it in every country around the world. And frankly, I do not want--and my constituents told me last night they do not want the imposition of a government bureaucrat between them, as patients, and Interestingly, last night in one of our committees marking up that case, that question was posed: Could we say in the plan that there would not be the intervention of a government bureaucrat to dictate to your doctor as to what your health care should be? That specific amendment was voted down almost on a party-line vote. Every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against that prohibition; and every Republican voted for it. In other words, it was crystal clear. The amendment presented last night before that committee was: In this plan, can we at least promise the American people there will not be intervention by a Federal bureaucrat to dictate the care you will receive or not receive from your doctor? That specific public policy If you believe that health care delivered by the Federal Government is superior to what you get now, go to your local DMV and see if you'd like them making the decision with respect to your medical care. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, ladies and gentlemen of the House, this week the House will debate legislation and give the principle of pay-as-you- go, or PAYGO, the force of law. Quite simply, supporting PAYGO means that we agree to pay for what we buy; and it can be one of the most important actions we take for fiscal discipline in this Congress. PAYGO is essential because America faces unprecedented debt and a fiscal year 2009 deficit of $1.7 trillion. A New York Times analysis found that 90 percent of that deficit is attributable to the economic downturn, Bush administration policies, and the extension of those policies. However we got into this hole, it's imperative that we find a way out of it. PAYGO is not a cure-all, not a solution entirely to our deficits. But it is an important and valuable start, and it is a proven first step to In the 1990s, the Clinton administration turned record deficits, administrations, into record surplus; and the PAYGO rule, supported on a bipartisan basis by Republicans and Democrats, was a key part in that fiscal transformation. As President Obama has recognized, and I quote, ``It is no coincidence that this rule was in place when we moved to record surpluses in the 1990s and that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record deficits that doubled the national debt.'' Today we can once again use PAYGO to begin rolling back the dangerous fiscal situation that confronts us. Under statutory PAYGO, Congress will be required to find savings to balance the dollars we spend. On the one hand, it will constrain unnecessary spending and subsidies. On the other, it will force those in favor of tax cuts to explain exactly what they want to go without in return. In other words, pay for them. Of course none of those choices are easy, but it is exactly the avoidance of hard choices that saddles our children and grandchildren with the debt that confronts us. In addition, deficit reduction will mean fewer interest payments on our debt which, in turn, will help us make sustainable entitlements in the priorities that matter most to the American people, including education, clean energy and health care. The PAYGO law would apply to new policies that reduce revenue or expand entitlement spending. It will exempt extensions of current policy on the alternative minimum tax, the estate tax and middle-income tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and Medicare payments to doctors. Some would criticize these exemptions, but I see them as an important way of keeping PAYGO credible and enforceable. It is clear that there is bipartisan support in Congress for extending those policies without offsets. Now, very frankly, I would vote for offsets; but we have seen that that does not happen in the United States Senate; and there is an inclination not to do it here. A PAYGO bill that does not exempt them would have to be waived again and again, turning the cause of fiscal I find it much more sensible to make a fiscal discipline promise we can keep. I would also note that the exemptions in the House legislation are narrower than those sent to us in the President's original proposal. Most notably, they only apply to the middle-class tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 and not to tax cuts generally. Mr. Speaker, pay as you go cannot remove us from our deficit hole in a single stroke, nor will it. That will take much hard work. PAYGO is not enough in and of itself, but it is absolutely necessary because it keeps us from digging the hole any deeper. It is tested and proven. We adopted this policy in a bipartisan way in 1990. We reaffirmed that policy in a bipartisan vote in 1997, with Speaker Gingrich and President Clinton reaching agreement on that proposition. Yes, it's tested and proven, as I said. I hope that all of my colleagues, Democrats and Republicans alike, will support it when it comes to the The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I'm sorry I don't have the time to respond to the majority leader's comments about PAYGO. But I would just simply say that the Democrats passed a PAYGO policy when they first took over, and we're getting deeper and deeper into debt. If that's what PAYGO does, The President, the Speaker and the majority leader are all in a rush to pass legislation here. So much in a rush, they will not even give Members a chance to read the bills. Why is that? It's perhaps because they don't want people to know what's in the bills. But the American people want to get health reform right, not just fast. Artificial deadlines for passing legislation serve a political purpose, not a legitimate purpose. I have promised that I will not vote for any health care legislation that is not publicly available in its final form for at least 72 hours in advance of a vote. Every Member of Congress should have time to read the health care bill they are asked to vote on, and the American people should be given this same common courtesy. Let's give them significant time to fully understand the details of a health care proposal rather than steamrolling partisan legislation through Congress. We should make August a national health care awareness month so that Americans can let their Member of Congress know where they stand before voting because we already know of many problems in the proposals that are being put forward. Number one, the bill contains zero savings from eliminating or even reducing waste, fraud and abuse. In an attempt to correct this egregious lack of oversight, Ways and Means Republicans offered six amendments during the committee's markup to reduce wasteful spending. All of them were rejected by the We know that the House Democrats' health care plan will increase Federal spending significantly, that coming directly from the CBO, appointed by the Democrats. We know that it's going to raise taxes on small businesses through surtax increases. Of taxpayers who file in the top brackets, more than half of them are small businesses. The Democrat plan, according to a study by the Tax Foundation, would raise the top Significantly, it includes fines of up to $500,000 on employers who make an honest mistake thinking they had provided what the government deemed ``sufficient'' coverage. It will impose an 8 percent payroll tax on employers who can't afford to offer health insurance to their employees, and on employers who do the right thing and offer health coverage to their employees but it is deemed insufficient by the government, and employers who are not paying at least 72.5 percent of an employee's premium or 65 percent for family coverage. What they plan to do is take over more aspects of our life. Every piece of legislation that is passing out of this House this session is aimed at putting the government more in control of our lives and giving us less freedom. The health care bill is the worst of those. Cap-and- We must not rush into passing health care legislation. We must slow down and get things right. The American people are hurting. We know they are hurting. Unemployment is going up dramatically under this Congress and under this President, and we need to be dealing with what we can do to create jobs and help individual families, not make things worse by killing more jobs and raising taxes. That's what PAYGO does. It is hard to make cuts in spending, easy to raise taxes, and that's what they plan to do. We shouldn't let them fool the American people again. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. We have got to stop letting the Democrats do these things, rushing bills through, hiding things in obscure language, and taxing us into high The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Ms. HERSETH SANDLIN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as the co-chairman of the Blue Dog Coalition which has long advocated for restoring statutory PAYGO as an important budgetary tool necessary to impose discipline in both chambers of Congress as it regards the collection and use of taxpayer money. I would like to thank the majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), for his strong, steadfast, and unquestioned support for statutory PAYGO and for his words earlier this As I stated and as the majority leader has, this is an important to impose discipline. It is a tested and proven tool from the 1990s that again, as has been mentioned, President Clinton and former Speaker Newt Gingrich agreed to back in the 1990s. I think it is imperative that opponents of this legislation explain more clearly why they lived with PAYGO with little or no complaint in the last decade, and the surpluses aided by such disciplines, and why they abandoned such discipline which led to a doubling of the national debt over the last 8 We need to make priorities and tough decisions so as to ensure fairness to future generations. It is essential to adopt statutory PAYGO as one step, among many others, to ensure both economic and national security. It is not fair to future generations for the United States to in any way be beholden to foreign creditors. The interest on the national debt alone is more than we spend on education and veterans Statutory PAYGO is necessary to impose discipline in both Chambers. One of the earlier speakers mentioned that since adopting PAYGO in the House rules, that the deficits have worsened. Unfortunately, much of the legislation passed out of this Chamber that abides by House rules for PAYGO come back to this Chamber after action in the Senate that strips how we pay for our priorities. That's why again reinstating PAYGO as a budgetary tool in statute is necessary for both the House and the Senate, and fortunately is supported by the current So, Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to ask the hard questions about what worked in the 1990s to produce budget surpluses, about what didn't work over the past 8 years to result in a national debt, a record national debt, and what tools are necessary to get us back on the path of fiscal discipline and surpluses once again. Statutory PAYGO is one key, one tool, among others, that will lead to the kind of tough decisions and priorities necessary to restore the fiscal health of the country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today at a time of a great moment in the life of this country. The American people are hurting. We are facing in this country the worst recession in a quarter century. We have lost 2 million jobs since this Congress and this administration enacted a stimulus bill. The unemployment rate at the time we passed the stimulus bill was 7.5 percent. We were told that we had to spend that nearly $800 billion, borrowed from future generations of Americans, so the unemployment rate wouldn't go over 8 percent. It We saw this Democratic majority pass a budget that will double the national debt in 5 years and triple it in 10, and that's if the economy starts to grow again, which sadly, few economists believe it will in Now this summer we saw this majority, in the name of global warming, pass a national energy tax that will essentially raise the cost of energy for businesses and individuals by thousands of dollars per year. And now comes health care reform, a government takeover of health care in this country financed with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Yet my colleagues, many of whom I deeply respect, come to the floor this week to talk about something called PAYGO, fiscal discipline. Well, the truth is that in this majority and this administration, PAYGO means you pay and they go on spending. The truth is we have got to come to terms with these difficult times. We have got to begin to demonstrate the priorities that businesses and family farms and working families are demonstrating at this time of national challenge and economic recession. Families and businesses are sitting down and prioritizing what should come first. We ought to have national energy legislation to set us on a pathway toward energy independence. We ought to have health care reform that brings real competition into our economy and lowers the cost for consumers. But the first thing we ought to be doing is coming together We know how to create jobs. John F. Kennedy knew it, Ronald Reagan knew it, George W. Bush knew it when the towers fell: fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C., and tax relief for working families, small The last thing we need right now is one more massive tax increase, one more government takeover of one more American industry. What we need is focus, and we need to prioritize what this Congress is working on. We ought to be asking what the American people are asking today with a heavy heart as they look at Washington, D.C.: Where are the Health care, energy independence, other priorities, other talking points on Capitol Hill are not going to get the American people back to work. Congress should come together, men and women of goodwill and strong principle, and work in such a way that can restore this economy, and then work in a bipartisan way on the other major issues facing our The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, the House will be taking up H.R. 2920 this week, the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2009, otherwise known as This bill, sponsored by our majority leader, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Hoyer), will renew our commitment to fiscal responsibility and protect core democratic values. As the President said less than 2 months ago, the pay-as-you-go rule is very simple: Congress can only spend a dollar in one place if it saves a dollar in another. Just as families cut back on eating out at restaurants to pay for a new amenity, so too must Congress make In fact, this rule was put in place when the country saw record deficits turn into record surpluses during the 1990s. It is no surprise to learn that when this rule was abandoned, we returned to record PAYGO legislation will reestablish this requirement that turned deficits into surpluses under the Clinton administration. It is also critically important to pass PAYGO to ensure our fiscal health and stability as Congress considers health care reform legislation, a necessary item. We must be able to pay for this reform without unduly burdening our American taxpayers. To understand this critically important PAYGO legislation and the record deficits this country is facing, we must understand how we got here. We must move toward a more balanced budget which will initiate an era of fiscal responsibility and a stronger long term fiscal position. PAYGO is an important and critical piece of legislation in that process. First, a number of factors have brought us to this cash-strapped position. Under the previous administration, the PAYGO principle was abandoned, reckless tax cuts were passed for the wealthy and two wars were funded outside of the budget process. On top of that, our economy has seen one of the most severe recessions since the Great Depression. Congressional efforts to get the economy moving again have proven to be fairly effective thus far, but they have come at a price. Understanding these problems and the long term fiscal restraints, what does the PAYGO legislation do? It will require that all new policies reducing revenues or expanding entitlement spending enacted during a session of Congress be offset over 5 and 10 years. As Congress did in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, PAYGO will include an exemption for legislation designated as an emergency. PAYGO will require any future extension of upper income tax cuts to be offset, as well as force a serious examination of wasteful subsidies in the budget and tax loopholes that can be eliminated to benefit more will force advocates of tax cuts to acknowledge the costs and show how they will be paid for, as well as ensuring that we can afford to fund America's most important priorities consistently for future Certain exemptions on discretionary programs funded in the appropriations process will be granted under PAYGO. These programs are the low income home energy assistance program, our Head Start program, Pell grants, the special supplemental nutrition program for women, PAYGO will also establish an enforcement mechanism in nonexempt mandatory programs at the end of year if Congress has not already paid for the cost of all legislation enacted during that given year. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a priority for the President. He understands, as we do, that we must balance short-term deficit spending for economic recovery with a commitment to restoring fiscal discipline in the long term. The large deficits that we inherited as a result of the reckless borrow-and-spend policies of the previous administration have put pressure on funding for important priorities such as health care, education and clean energy jobs. We must ensure that regardless of who is in power, PAYGO will be a powerful impediment to reckless tax Mr. Speaker, the people of our country elect us to come to Washington to represent them in the best way that we can. After years of unrestrained spending, budget gimmicks and rampant waste, as well as fraud and abuse in Federal spending, it is clear we cannot continue along that same fiscal path. We are in a deep fiscal hole. However, with the right tools, including a statutory PAYGO budgeting process, we can reverse this dangerous trend and begin to put the country back on a Mr. Speaker, that is why I support H.R. 2920 and encourage our FINANCIAL REGULATORY REFORM UNDER THE GROWING FED: A RECIPE FOR TOTAL The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise this morning to address the critical issue of regulatory reform in our financial markets. In 1912, a year before he became President, Woodrow Wilson ominously stated ``waiting to be solved lurks the great question of banking reform.'' So here we are almost 100 years later, and we are facing the same lurking The Treasury Department recently issued an 85-page white paper containing five main objectives for reforming or financial markets. Although a few of these objectives may sound good on paper, the devil is always in the details. A closer look at this new plan reveals a fundamental change to our financial system and economy that will stifle the innovation and competition fostered by the traditional American free enterprise system, giving way to a future of Big Government propping up all companies that are ``too big to fail.'' Specifically, the Obama financial regulatory reform plan calls for ceding the Federal Reserve a vast amount of additional authority with the power to create new requirements for capital and liquidity and for any firm ``whose combination of size, leverage, and interconnectedness could pose a threat to financial stability if it fails.'' The Fed, which has failed in the past as a regulator, will be allowed to oversee almost all aspects of any financial company in the United States and its foreign affiliates. Specifically, the Fed will be able to regulate, lend to and close down companies not normally under their control if My colleagues, this is total government control. Additionally, the Treasury will be given more powers as well, such as the ability to appoint a conservator or receiver to ``stabilize'' any large financial firm that is failing, any large financial firm. This will be done in lieu of bankruptcy proceedings, and the result will almost certainly lead to those ``too big to fail'' institutions, backed by the United States Government, having the upper hand in the market, particularly when it comes to raising funds, and smaller competitors will be forced out down the line. Thus, we are destined for an economy dominated by what essentially are government-backed entities, like the Fannie Maes Big government backed by an all-powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to our financial problems. We cannot erode the components of our free market economy because we are afraid to let the market work. It will devastate the innovation and competition that has traditionally Another issue worth mentioning when discussing regulatory reform of financial markets is the issue of transparency and possible conflicts of interest. Bill Gross of Pimco, a private financial institution that manages the world's largest mutual fund, is heavily involved in the mortgage securities market and is an open proponent of the Treasury's public-private investment program. Interestingly, in the spring of 2008, Pimco actually presented a plan in Washington, D.C. for a public- private partnership, very similar to the plan that Geithner came out with this year. Pimco is now hoping to be one of the companies that the Treasury picks to help buy up some of the $1.25 trillion in mortgage bonds that have sank big institutions like Bank of America and In addition, the Federal Reserve has also looked to Pimco to specifically ask for advice on which banks needed more taxpayer TARP funds to stay afloat. Pimco's close relationship with the Treasury and the Fed should not allow it to be the beneficiary of billions of dollars gained through Federal contracts and preferential investment opportunities, particularly with Geithner's public-private investment Mr. Speaker, a free market is an economic system in which individuals, rather than the government, make the majority decisions regarding economic activities. In a free-market economy, the government's function is limited, and it should act in a way as an umpire and issue regulatory procedures. The Obama financial regulatory reform plan will move us away from our free-market system and towards a future where the free market is negated by government over-involvement in the private financial sector. We are moving toward a system of permanent interdependence of big companies' reliance on big government. This is fundamentally un-American, and the long-term consequences of Let's not make Washington, D.C. the bailout capital of the world for every private company in America. Let those companies suffer the consequences for their risky actions. Instead, let's be good stewards of taxpayer dollars, keeping in mind that more regulation doesn't mean better regulation and a powerful Federal Reserve isn't the answer to The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOYD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the pay-as-you-go legislation that the House will be considering later this week. This is a bill that the Blue Dogs and I have endorsed for the last several Congresses. It is a priority of this President and of the House leadership and of more than 165 cosponsors of this legislation. I'm always intrigued by those who would oppose PAYGO, like my friend, Mr. Pence from Indiana, who spoke earlier that basically criticized the deficit spending that has occurred, I assume that he would be critical of that in the last previous administration and this administration, but yet he seems to oppose the one tool that we have that has proven to The principle is simple, Mr. Speaker. If you have new spending then you have to pay for them. It is very simple. PAYGO was one of the tools that led this country in the 1990s to record surpluses. However, that tool, PAYGO, and others that were in place, were allowed to expire under President Bush and the Republican leadership of this body in Those who claim that PAYGO didn't work need simply to look at the numbers. When it was on the books, we had balanced budgets and even record surpluses. But after it was allowed to expire, we saw the explosion of new spending programs and spiraling deficits to go along with it. By putting PAYGO back into law, we will get back on the path toward fiscal responsibility and long-term sustainability. It is no secret by anybody that works in this place and now even out in the country, that we have an unsustainable budget picture looking forward. When you have a budget hole, Mr. Speaker, the first rule of thumb, the first rule you need to follow is stop digging. PAYGO does that by ensuring that new programs that are enacted must be paid for. We owe it to our children and to their children to stop digging this I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this PAYGO legislation in order to return to fiscal discipline. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, I'm here, too, to join in advocacy for the PAYGO legislation that is going to come before the House floor this week. PAYGO is what it sounds like. If we have a new program, we have to find a way to pay for it, either through cuts or revenues. If we have a proposed tax cut, we have to find a way to pay for it, either in a reduction in programs elsewhere or a shifting of priorities and It is a very simple, elemental approach. If you're going to buy something, you have to pay for it. Families know it, in their family budgets, they have to do it all of the time. And government really is no different. It is no different because in the end, if we borrow money, at some point we are going to have to pay it back. We have gotten into a habit in this Congress of not paying for things, in some cases, expenditure programs, and in other cases tax cuts. We have had some back and forth this morning with our friends on the other side of the aisle, and without getting into the blame game, which doesn't get us anywhere, there is an irrefutable fact, and that is that in the past 8 years with the tax cuts, with Medicare part D that was not funded, with a war in Iraq and a war in Afghanistan on the credit card, we have gone from the largest surplus in the history of this country to the largest deficit in the history of this country. What it means is that our kids and our grandkids are the ones who are going to have to pick up the tab. Aside from the fact that that is obviously unfair and none of us wants to pass the burden of debt for our spending on to others, it really is going to restrict what it is that generation can do to meet its own challenges to educate its kids, to provide health care to its kids and themselves and to provide for We have the capacity to impose on ourselves the same rule that families have to impose on themselves every month when they sit around the kitchen table and go over their checkbook and try to figure out how, at the end of the month, they are going to make the checkbook balance. And that is to accept the burden of the discipline of paying for our tax cut proposal or our spending proposal when we make the Voters know that. They want fiscal responsibility. In fact, their concern about the deficit rightly is at the top of their agenda. We have had extraordinary circumstances here that have required extraordinary actions with the economy going off the cliff, with the stimulus spending and with the legacy of a war in Iraq and Afghanistan We have restored truth in budgeting so that those two things, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, are now on the budget. So it is painful because we are seeing in black and white what the cost of those enterprises are, and we know that we are going to have to pay for them. We are not trying to hide it. We are being direct. The American people are entitled to that candor, and they are entitled to have us respond by making certain that we, going forward, adopt pay-as-you-go principles. It is not just good in theory, and it is not just good for conservatives or liberals. It is good for I'm a big supporter, I think most of us are, that in this country we achieve the goal of having all of our citizens covered by health care. Every citizen should be covered and have access to health insurance. Every citizen should help pay for it. And if you lose your job, you shouldn't lose your health care. The President has acknowledged that as worthy as that goal is, we must pay for it. And the health care bill that we are now considering has to be paid for. What a difference from what happened with the prescription drug program that was largely put on the credit card and it is not able to sustain itself or pay for One of the reasons it is so important to have PAYGO is that it imposes the discipline on us to kick the tires of a program. Health care is a great example. We need it. We have good health care in this country. But the cost is going up at two or three times the rate of inflation, two or three times the rate of profit growth, two or three times the rate of wage growth. So people are falling behind. The middle class is getting squeezed. They are facing higher co-pays and deductibles. By adopting PAYGO, it is forcing us to look at our delivery system and ask yourselves how can we reform the delivery of health care to make it more efficient and provide more value for less In fact, there are examples after examples of how we have, in many cases, excess utilization. So this bill is going to be helpful to all of us. And it is very important that we pass this legislation. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, right now Americans all across the country are dealing with this tough economy, many by tightening their belts and by managing their family budgets. Unfortunately, they are looking to Washington, and they are seeing this Congress that is being run by people that don't get what the American people are dealing with across Spending is out of control here in Washington by this administration and by this Congress. Look at the proposals that we are debating today. Health care in America needs reforms. But with all of the problems that exist, we still have some of the best medical care in the world. In fact, people that live in countries that have a government-run plan and who have the means, come to America to get care because in those countries, government takeover of health care has led directly to rationing of care. And so what are we facing today? We are facing a plan by the President, Speaker Pelosi and others here to have a government takeover of America's health care system. When you read this bill, and you hear all of this great rhetoric, you hear the President saying that if you like the plan you have, you can keep it. The problem is, the bill doesn't allow you to keep your health care plan. There is actually a section in their government takeover that allows a health care czar, some bureaucrat in Washington that was never elected to anything, to be able to take away your health care if they don't think that it complies with these new Federal requirements. So if you like what you have, this health care czar can take it away In fact, if you're uninsured--and all we hear about is the uninsured that we need to address the problem of the uninsured, and I agree. The thing is when you really break down the numbers and when you look at who is really uninsured, you get to a number of about 7 million people. Once you strip away the illegal aliens and you take away the people who choose not to get health care who are currently eligible, you end up with 7 million Americans. That is a number we can address without blowing up all of the things that work for over 300 million Americans. But in their plan, they actually tax some of those very people that The Congressional Budget Office just gave testimony last week. Unfortunately the chairman of the committee threw the public out of the meeting. It was a secretive meeting that they wouldn't even allow the public to come into. I guess after they heard the testimony, you can see why, because the testimony said, number one, that the costs in this bill are out of control. All of the savings that we heard, that were promised, don't even exist. That's the Congressional Budget Office's But then they talked about the taxes, over $580 billion in new taxes on businesses in their health care bill. There's over $240 billion of penalties that would be applied to American families that maybe don't go along with this new government takeover of health care. There's $29 billion of taxes on uninsured people in their bill. The Congressional Budget Office gave the specific testimony that this bill, this government takeover of health care, adds $29 billion in new taxes on the backs of uninsured Americans. And this is as they're running around saying that they want to help uninsured Americans. I know a lot of uninsured Americans out there that don't think $29 billion of new taxes on their backs is the kind of help that they want. When you look at this bill, you start to realize that what they're doing, what they're proposing, is the very government takeover where rationing of care would exist, where a government bureaucrat can get in between the relationship of you and your doctor. It's the same thing that's happened in Canada, it's the same thing that's happened in England, where unfortunately just yesterday we saw the story of a 22-year-old who was denied lifesaving care, denied a transplant by this government bureaucracy that exists in England that rations care. I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee where this bill is currently being debated. We were in committee till 12:30 in the morning last night. We had an amendment that would have prohibited a Federal bureaucrat in Washington from interfering between the relationship of an American citizen and their doctor. That's the most sacrosanct relationship that should exist. Nobody should come between the relationship between you and your doctor. Yet they voted down that amendment. So clearly this is about rationing. Their proposal is not about reforming health care, because there's bipartisan agreement on the reforms that need to be made to address the real problems that exist in health care. What their bill is about is a government takeover. It's growing government more. It's adding more to the Federal deficit. Hundreds of billions of dollars by CBO testimony would be added to the Federal deficit, at a time when Americans are saying, Congress, Washington, control spending. Get a grip. People saw that the This bill is a horrible idea. Government should not be taking over our health care system and interfering in the relationship between us The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from If we do not begin paying our bills today, we will continue to short- change future generations who face higher taxes and cuts to Federal investments in priorities such as education, health care and national security. In order to ensure our long-term fiscal sustainability, we must all work together and return to the proven, effective pay-as-you- go rules that brought our Federal budget to balance in the 1990s. We now have a President who is committed to changing the fiscal course of this country. Together, we are committed to putting an end to the reckless fiscal policies and out-of-control spending of the past that has given us the record deficits we see today. To that end, the President has charged Congress with passing statutory PAYGO, and we have an obligation to see that this critical piece of legislation Our Federal Government simply cannot continue to live beyond its means, mortgaging our future on the backs of our children and our grandchildren. Reinstituting statutory PAYGO will send a message to the American people that their government is serious about putting the country back on stable economic footing. The time to act is now. The President has put his words into action and I look forward to working with the Blue Dogs and my colleagues in the House and the Senate to make statutory PAYGO a reality again in this country. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Speaker, American families and small business owners are struggling with high health care costs. They're also struggling with access to a doctor; getting to see a doctor and establishing a relationship with that doctor so that you can really lead a healthier life-style, building the kind of trust that's necessary so that the doctor knows the patient and knows what it's going to take to lead them along a healthier pathway and having the patient trust the doctor so that the advice that they're being given is something that they will adhere to. American families are struggling, small business owners are struggling, and we have to do something about Republicans believe we should reform health care, but we need to do it responsibly and in a very, very thoughtful way so as to not disrupt the system that we currently have. If you have health insurance that you like that leads to a relationship with a doctor, you can keep it. But we don't want to see a system completely devastated or disrupted. I am a member of the House Ways and Means Committee, and we worked on the bill in the House which outlines the President's plan; and that bill doesn't do near enough to provide good, accessible health care. Furthermore, it's a very expensive bill. The Congressional Budget Office has just started looking at this and it's seeing a very expensive bill that's going to add significantly to the deficit. As a physician who has practiced medicine for over 20 years, I look at this and I say, whoa, wait a minute, let's get this right. It's more important to get it right than to rush into something and do it very hastily and cause disruption in the health care system where we have some things that are working. One of the speakers earlier mentioned the fact that we've got in fact in effect the finest health care in the world. We've got the most highly trained doctors and nurses. We have people from all over the world coming here to train. We have those who live in other countries who come here to get their health care. But we have a cost problem, we have an insurance problem, and we need to fix that, and we need to make sure that insurance coverage is meaningful and really leads to access to a doctor for every American. Republicans have ideas on how to do this. It incorporates three basic principles: Information for you to make decisions for your family or for your small business, to make cost comparisons, to create transparency, information among physicians so that we don't duplicate tests and run up the costs. These are all important things. Information is very important throughout the system and we believe that we can incorporate this in a very cost-effective way. Secondly, choice. Americans want choices. They like to shop. Let's give Americans a wide range of choices to meet their family needs or their small business needs in health care. If we do that, that will create competition and that will start to drive the costs down of health insurance premiums which we're all struggling with. It will make it more affordable and we'll get more people on it. We can address the uninsured by targeting our response as one of the previous speakers Finally, we need to put families back in control of their health care destiny. There should be nothing between the doctor and the patient in this. That's the essence of good, high quality health care, and that's the only way we're going to control the cost ultimately, by fostering and strengthening that doctor-patient relationship and making it something that every American has. That's how we'll fix health care. Republicans have those ideas and many more and we'll be glad to share them as this debate goes further with the American public. INTRODUCING THE ADULT EDUCATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH ACT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you as a member of the Education and Labor Committee. It is a pleasure to stand before you today to speak about the Adult Education and Economic Growth Act of 2009, known as H.R. 3238, legislation that my friend and colleague Representative Patrick Kennedy of Rhode Island and I introduced on As we all know, our Nation is facing one of the most difficult economic times in history. Technology and globalization, coupled with the economic recession, are causing low-wage and low-skilled workers to become particularly vulnerable. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, unemployment among individuals with less than a high school diploma has risen from 7\\1/2\\ percent in December of 2007 to almost 15 percent in April 2009. The unemployment rate for high school graduates with no college degree has increased from 4.6 percent to 9.3 percent. Currently, the U.S. ranks 11th among OECD countries in the percent of young adults with a high school diploma. We should be especially concerned that we are the only country in which younger adults are less educated than the previous generation. More than 40 million adults across our country have basic skills needs or limited proficiency in English that keep them from participating fully in work, in family and In 2007, more than 25 million adults ages 18 to 64 had no high school credential. In 2006, 18,400,000 adults spoke English less than ``very well'' according to the U.S. Census Bureau. In my congressional district alone, there are 154,000 adults without a high school diploma. In addition, another 444,000 adults speak a language other than English or do not speak English ``very well.'' In Texas, we have 3.8 million adults who do not have a high school diploma. This is unacceptable. We must do much more to educate our adult learners and assist them in acquiring the 21st century skills they need to succeed in the In my conversations with business leaders in my congressional district and across the country, they have shared their desire for a highly educated and trained workforce. Employers need highly skilled workers to compete globally, particularly in high-growth industries and Despite these alarming statistics and realities, we have not made adequate investments in our adult education delivery system. Our adult education and workforce training delivery systems are in great need of reform. In many States, thousands of adult learners are experiencing long waiting lists for adult literacy services to increase their basic literacy skills or improve their English skills. More than 77 percent of community-based literacy programs currently report waiting lists. Current funding reaches only 2.8 million of these adults each year and thousands more are on those waiting lists that I mentioned for adult A report issued this month by the President's Council on Economic Advisers, Preparing the Workers of Today for the Jobs of Tomorrow, underscores that our modern economy requires workers with higher skills and the need to employ workers with education and training beyond the In closing, I want to say that the report identifies key limitations to our education and training system, including low completion rates, limited accountability, poor coordination among different programs and excessive bureaucratic restrictions on the use of training funds. If we are to remain competitive in the global economy, we must invest in high quality adult education and workforce training programs that lead to family-sustaining jobs in careers with the promise of Mr. Speaker, I invite Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle The ``Adult Education and Economic Growth Act,'' H.R. 3238, strengthens our adult education and workforce training systems, increases economic growth in local communities and supports President Obama's call to once again lead the world college degrees by 2020. This legislation provides adult learners with greater access to obtain basic literacy or workplace skills, including English as a Second Language. This bill assists adults in gaining admission to job This legislation provides adequate resources for innovative educational and workforce programs, so that states can bridge the gap between adult education and occupational skills training. Our adult learners will be better served by having access to integrated This legislation expands access by ensuring that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills needs of individual states, including the number of adults who This legislation increases access to adult education, literacy, and This legislation increases access to correctional educational programs and provides added accountability in the system. This legislation invests in lower skilled workers by providing We must reform our adult education and workforce delivery systems if we are to provide adults with the educational opportunities and 21st century skills needed to acquire family-sustaining wages and remain The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from I rise today to express the deepest concern for the fact that unemployment rates have risen to 13.7 percent in the Inland Empire. There are those who believe that the solution to almost every problem facing America involves more government spending here in Washington. I am committed to the fact that just the opposite is the case. We must do everything that we possibly can to create a taxing system that The sooner we get back to the point of creating job opportunities in the private sector and recognizing that growth of government for the sake of government is not the answer, the sooner we will solve this problem. The jobs for San Bernardino and Riverside County lie in the private sector. So let's create an environment of opportunity and hope for those who are looking for jobs for the future. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my good friend and colleague, Chairman Ruben Hinojosa, for his work on this issue of adult Just like Ruben Hinojosa and his district in Texas, in my State of Rhode Island where unemployment rates continue to rise, 23 percent of the adult population in my district alone lacks a high school diploma. Last June when the National Commission on Adult Literacy released its report, it served as a wake-up call for all those concerned with the quality of our adult workforce. The commission found that 80 to 90 million adults in this country have deficiencies in basic education and that our investments in adult education and training were reaching less than 3 percent of those who need it. That's why we need to ensure that our adult education and workforce training programs have the tools and resources they need to prepare our workers for the next generation of jobs in energy, in health care and in technology. We need to improve the way we deliver adult education and workforce training programs and the way we provide career paths to higher growth fields through greater involvement with business leaders, State agencies and adult education community and workforce leaders. We need to better leverage employers to provide educational programs to their employees. We need to enhance the use of technology to improve quality learning access and delivery of adult education, literacy and workplace skills services. The Adult Education and Economic Growth Act which Ruben Hinojosa and I are introducing will do all of these things in order to provide those employed and unemployed with the ability to attain the skills they need I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation. The Adult Education and Economic Growth (AEEG) Act of 2009 1. Will refocus the adult education and workforce skills system to make postsecondary and job training readiness a 85 percent of GED graduates have to take at least one remedial course before they can enroll in postsecondary education. We need to do a better job preparing them for success in school and in work, rather than getting them to an arbitrary finish line that actually leaves them short of 2. Will give incumbent workers greater access to the workforce skills training and adult education systems. It is too hard for people already on the job to receive workforce skills training and adult education. It's not enough to get someone into a job, we need to get them into a career. That means continued training, even after a worker is Only 3 to 4 percent of the workers with the most limited literacy proficiencies receive basic skills training from their employers. Our bill will create greater incentives for employer involvement in the education of their employees. 3. Will ensure that federal funding formulas accurately take into account the adult education and workforce skills Federal funding formulas are outdated, and especially penalize states with a high proportion of non-native English speakers. Our legislation will ensure a fairer distribution 4. Will increase the use of technology in workforce skills Technology has greatly increased our ability to reach workers at times and places convenient to them. By 2006, 73 percent of American adults were online, including those at the lowest literacy levels. We cannot reach all of those needing services without deploying technology to provide 5. Will increase access to correction education programs and provide for added accountability in the system. Offenders with education and training are statistically less likely to commit crimes after release. There is a direct correlation between education level and recidivism: the higher the education level, the lower the recidivism rate. A decrease in recidivism reduces costs to taxpayers and keeps The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess until noon today. Accordingly (at 11 o'clock and 33 minutes a.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the The Chaplain, the Reverend Daniel P. Coughlin, offered the following God of mercy and goodness, may this midday moment of prayer and dedication be received as a welcome gift by all, refreshing Your people and clarifying our purpose in serving this Nation. Bless the work that Congress has begun this day. Rectify any defects and strengthen its integrity. Let us finish the tasks You set before us in a way that pleases You and gives glory to this Nation and Your Holy The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof. Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Will the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen) come forward and lead the House in the Pledge of Allegiance. Mr. PAULSEN led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. A message from the Senate by Ms. Curtis, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate has passed a bill and a concurrent resolution of the following titles in which the concurrence of the House is requested: S. 951. An act to authorize the President, in conjunction with the 40th anniversary of the historic and first lunar landing by humans in 1969, to award gold medals on behalf of the United States Congress to Neil A. Armstrong, the first human to walk on the moon; Edwin E. ``Buzz'' Aldrin, Jr., the pilot of the lunar module and second person to walk on the moon; Michael Collins, the pilot of their Apollo 11 mission's command module; and, the first American to orbit the Earth, S. Con. Res. 11. Concurrent resolution condemning all forms of anti-Semitism and reaffirming the support of Congress for the mandate of the special Envoy to Monitor and Combat Anti- (Mr. WILSON of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. WILSON of Ohio. I rise today in strong support of statutory pay- as-you-go legislation, which will be taken up this week by the House. This bill demonstrates our commitment to fiscal responsibility and will restore the policy that led us from deficit spending to debt to We have to reduce our deficit spending. If we don't, we will not be able to invest in vitally important priorities like health care, PAYGO is very simple: All the policies that cut taxes or reduce revenues must be paid for or offset over 5 and 10 years. All policies that expand entitlement spending must be paid for over 5 and 10 years. Discretionary spending is not subject to PAYGO, and exceptions could be This makes common sense and families live by it every day. If you spend more in one area of the family budget, you have got to cut back in other areas. It's about time that our government start living by the (Mr. BOEHNER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, before I came to Congress, I ran a small business. And in that small business I offered a health insurance benefit to my employees. I offered a pension benefit to my employees. Both of these plans were as a result of a 1974 Federal law called ERISA, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, that allows employers to offer health plans to their employees and pension plans to Over the years, employers now provide health insurance to their employees, to the total of about 132 million Americans that today get But in the Democrat health care plan, I noticed this morning in an article from The Wall Street Journal there's a provision in there that, in their bill, after 5 years all employer plans will have to be approved by the Department of Labor and the new Health Choices Commissioner, who will set Federal standards for what is an acceptable Now, these employers are providing these plans to their employees. They're trying to provide a benefit their employees want and need. And now the Federal Government is going to decide what your health plan is I would suggest that a lot of employers in America are going to look at this and decide, You know, this really isn't worth it. Under their plan, if you're an employer and you don't provide health insurance, you have to pay an 8 percent payroll tax to the Federal Government. Eight Now, most employers probably pay more than this for their health care. And so, as a result, I would think a lot of employers are just going to pay the 8 percent tax and allow their employees to be shoved According to the Congressional Budget Office, some 23 million Americans would lose their benefits from their employers and be forced into government health care. According to the Lewin Group, 114 million Americans would be forced into the government plan. This is not what the American people want. And if you put an 8 percent tax on payroll, guess what? Employers are going to hire less people. And most of my constituents are asking, Where are the jobs? And if you tax employment through this health care plan or you tax employment under this crazy national energy tax, you're going to create At a time when we need jobs and we need our economy going again, we don't need to be taxing employers and taxing employment, because we're (Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona asked and was given permission to Mrs. KIRKPATRICK of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act. This commonsense measure will help bring fiscal responsibility back to Washington. With the national debt at almost $11.6 trillion, Congress needs to start showing some discipline. I launched my ``Do More With Less'' campaign to cut inefficient spending and reduce the debt. I have been proud to support billions of cuts in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations bills. And I have called on the Treasury Secretary to use returned bailout funds to pay back what I am also pleased to be an original cosponsor of the PAYGO bill. By requiring that Congress offset spending dollar-for-dollar, this legislation will ensure that Washington makes the tough choices it PAYGO helped produce the budget surpluses of the late 1990s, and it I urge my colleagues to stand with me and support passage of this (Mr. CANTOR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CANTOR. Mr. Speaker, at a time when millions of Americans are losing their jobs and families are desperately seeking employment, this Congress and this administration have made job creation a secondary concern. As a result, they have squandered a golden opportunity to put Frankly, the American people have just had enough. They have had enough of a stimulus bill that has wasted hundreds of billions of dollars and not staved off job loss. They have had enough of the national energy tax that will impose extraordinary job-killing taxes on the people of this country. And now, Mr. Speaker, they have had enough of talk of a health care bill that not only will fail to deliver the access and quality that we need, but it will cripple small businesses Mr. Speaker, the question is: Where are the jobs? Congress and this administration have been asleep for too long--and we can do better. (Mr. BACA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACA. America's health system is not working. We cannot stay with the failing system that we now have. What good is an insurance card if there's no real access to services? What good is the current system if I have a senior under Medicare, like in my district, scared that their We also need a health care reform that gets past the politics and past the rhetoric that every single person is covered. I stand here to advocate for those without a voice, for those who cannot afford to travel to Washington, D.C. I stand here to advocate for a viable public option to compete with the private sector. I stand here to advocate for American families. And I stand for the American families who are busting at the seams, trying to make ends I urge my colleagues to advocate for all American families and pass health care reform that is needed for all American people in this (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PENCE. In the midst of the worst recession in 25 years, after months of runaway Federal spending, bailout, record deficits, and a national energy tax, now comes a government takeover of health care paid for with nearly a trillion dollars in tax increases. Before we move on to the next big government scheme of this administration, the American people are asking, Mr. President, where Make no mistake about it, the President's health care bill would do nothing to lower the cost of health care and would be a disaster for the American economy. If ObamaCare passes--according to the experts--if ObamaCare passes, you will probably lose your health insurance and you The American people know we can do better. We must do better. For the sake of our economy and reform, I implore my Democratic colleagues, say ``no'' to a government takeover of health care and higher taxes and say ``yes'' to a bipartisan majority in this Congress that is committed to fiscal discipline, reform, and putting Americans back to work. (Mr. CHILDERS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHILDERS. It's a privilege to come to this House floor today to you-go legislation that is scheduled to be introduced this week. As a member of the fiscally conservative Blue Dog Coalition, I believe reinstituting PAYGO is vital to restoring confidence with the American people that Washington and this Congress are indeed serious about reducing the Federal deficit and not continuing the reckless spending policies so often associated with Washington over the past decade. The people of north Mississippi and the American people all understand that at some point the bills have to be paid. Going from a $5 trillion debt at the end of the Clinton administration to a now over $11 trillion debt, it is not hard to imagine the daily frustrations I see every weekend at home on the faces of individuals and families It is time for Congress to start operating just as the families in my district do and adopt statutory PAYGO as the law of the land. I urge all of my colleagues to join me in supporting this landmark HEALTH CARE WITHOUT RAISING TAXES AND COSTING JOBS (Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. We can have health care reform without raising taxes and costing jobs. The health care version currently being debated in Congress is recognized and called by many as a prescription for disaster--disaster as it relates to ensuring quality and affordable health care and disaster as to the impact it would have on our economy. Governors across the country, Republicans and Democrats, are fearful it would only add additional costs to an already unsustainable system. The Mayo Clinic says this bill misses the opportunity to help create higher quality, more affordable health care for patients. In fact, they CBO last week stated that it would worsen our economic outlook by increasing deficits and driving our Nation more deeply into debt. There are many reasons to be skeptical of this plan: the job loss, the additional debt, the government intrusion between you and your Some continue to say, It's better than nothing. When you are sick or your son or daughter is sick, you don't want the doctor just to do (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Speaker, 15 years ago Frank Luntz wrote the speeches for Newt Gingrich to come out here and scare the American people about the Clinton health reform. They succeeded 15 years ago. What have the people gotten since then? Nothing. The number of people have gone up and up and up and up who do not have health insurance. So here they are all arrayed out here again today one at a time. Folks, they are here to scare you again. Mr. Speaker, the people are smarter In the election of 2008, they elected a President who said he would bring health care reform to this country, and they gave the Democrats an overwhelming majority because they are tired of the fear machine. Now I know you all have your talking points. Frank Luntz pulled them out of the drawer, shined them up for 2008 and said, Hey, boys, here's the speech that worked in 1994. Use it again. It won't work, Mr. Speaker. The people want health care reform, and we're going to give it (Mr. CARTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CARTER. Mr. Speaker, the lady on television said, ``Where's the beef?'' The American people are now saying, ``Where's the jobs?'' One of the things that the President promised was jobs for this country. The Speaker said, It's about jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs, but the national unemployment is 9.5 percent, and in the Midwest it's in double digits. Yes, the Democrats have given us some jobs. They've given us this cap-and-tax bill which is going to stick a tax collector in everybody's pocket, destroy small businesses, and destroy jobs in the country. They've given us 33 czars at $170,000 a year to reward their cronies who helped them get elected up here by creating new jobs in Washington Last night the Energy and Commerce Committee voted to put a bureaucrat between a doctor and his patient to tell him how he's going to treat that sick person. That's a new job they want to create. They've got this idea that if they throw enough money to ACORN, they're going to create jobs for ACORN--if they can keep the indictments away (Mr. PERLMUTTER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. PERLMUTTER. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate my friends wanting to talk about jobs. They have the arguments that they want to pursue, but they don't want to let the facts get in the way of their argument. Let's start with the report we received today from the Federal Reserve. We know that jobs fell off a cliff last fall and earlier this year as part of the Bush administration's efforts for jobs. Private nonfarm employment fell by 670,000 jobs on average per the month from January to April, but declines slowed to 312,000 in May and 415,000 in June. The May and June declines in construction jobs were the smallest since Job declines and temporary employment applications slowed noticeably, and employment in nonbusiness services turned up in May and increased further in June. That's why we have the stock market going up. That's why consumer confidence is going up is because this is working, even if (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, this ain't a talking point. Last night I talked to one of my constituents. This man is an unemployed truck driver. His statement to me was a very clear one: Where are the jobs? He said, You guys back there in Washington have put together a so- called stimulus bill that cost me--he's still a taxpayer--$1 trillion, and now you plan to take over the entire health care system in this country? He said, It would be devastating. I am looking for a job as a truck driver again, and with what you've done on cap-and-trade, it's The message is loud and clear. It's not coming from anyone putting together talking points, Mr. Speaker. It's coming from the American people to Democrats and Republicans alike in this Congress. Where are (Mr. MINNICK asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. MINNICK. Mr. Speaker, today Congress will consider a law requiring us to do what every other American taxpayer must do with its family finances, something very simple and very basic, pay for what we Ten years ago, thinking somehow it didn't need outside fiscal discipline, Congress abandoned this commonsense approach, wasted our budget surpluses, and went on a spending frenzy, doubling our national the largest budget deficit in our Nation's history. Our government cannot continue to borrow and spend, create ever- higher levels of debt, and pass along the costs of paying for it to our children and grandchildren. We are now relying on trillions of dollars of money borrowed from China and Middle Eastern oil states to pay our It's time we grow up, act like responsible adults and return to fiscal sanity. With this measure, any new spending we pass must be deficit-neutral. This is the long overdue essential first step towards a return to fiscal responsibility that will assure our creditors and demonstrate to the American public that we deserve to govern. I salute my Blue Dog colleagues for their persistence on bringing this critical issue to a vote. I urge my colleagues to support this (Mr. McCARTHY of California asked and was given permission to address Mr. McCARTHY of California. Mr. Speaker, this morning I opened up my hometown paper, The Bakersfield Californian. On the front page of the local section there is an article, Kern County's unemployment rate for the month of June increased to 14.7 percent. If that's a talking point, it's coming directly from the paper. One year ago the unemployment rate The American people know that if Americans are not working, America is not working. My constituents ask me, Is this Obama economy going to improve? They continue to ask me, If you take more from what people earn, for the energy tax every time you turn on a light, when you go to health care, taxing, are you taking away the choice? But I tell them there is a chance for a better way. There is a better way to work together to focus on small business. Small business creates 70 percent of every job in America. We can do better by working CONGRATULATING THE FRIENDSHIP MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH IN ROSWELL, NEW (Mr. TEAGUE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TEAGUE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in Roswell, New Mexico. This year the church will be celebrating 47 years of service to the Roswell community. The Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been dedicated to the faith and well-being of the people of Roswell for nearly a half a century. I would like to especially honor the current serving pastor, Rev. Michael K. Shelton, and the church's former pastor, the Rev. O.C. King, and his wife for 28 years of faithful leadership to the church and the Churches like Friendship Baptist achieve such great distinction because of the hard work, dedication, and compassion of their congregation. The leaders of the church and their staff are also to be Friendship Missionary Baptist Church has been and will remain a place for fellowship and a source of hope for the people of southern New Mexico. I am honored to have churches like Friendship Missionary Baptist Church in my district, and I commend them on their years of FEDERAL ELECTED OFFICIALS SHOULD ENROLL IN THE PUBLIC HEALTH CARE (Mr. BLUNT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BLUNT. Mr. Speaker, would a government takeover of health care create jobs? The answer is clearly no. We should be focused on job one right now, which is find the jobs. But, Mr. Speaker, if the Energy and Commerce Committee had continued to work today, I would have introduced an amendment to require all Federal elected officials, including the President and Vice President, to set aside our health care benefits and enroll in their new idea of a government-run health care system. If the majority is really so confident that their plan will provide the very best health care to the people we represent, we ought to demonstrate that confidence by enrolling ourselves. I, for one, don't believe the government-run health care plan will be the best for the people we represent, but a government competitor will soon be the only A government competitor, Mr. Speaker, would be like an elephant in a room full of mice. The fast mice can get out of the room as quick as they can. The slow mice get crushed, and only the elephant is left. It is time we put our health care where we want the American health care to be, Mr. Speaker, but it's also time we find the jobs. THE BENEFITS OF HEALTH CARE REFORM FOR ALL AMERICANS (Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because we really are on the verge of finalizing groundbreaking health care reform legislation that will benefit healthier generations to come and the 250 million of us who have health care but who are tired of skyrocketing Did your salary go up 114 percent this last decade? It sure didn't, but that's what happened with premiums and deductibles. This is about real reform, not for insurance companies and their bean counters, but I want to emphasize today the importance of including a robust public plan option, relying on the Medicare provider network in the final reform bill. Providing Americans with a real choice in doctors and insurance plans puts Americans back in charge of their health care, not insurance companies, but real people and patients. I would say that for those who believe in the free market, why are you afraid of a public plan? Why are you afraid of something that Mr. Speaker, I think it's time for us to do health care reform to lower costs, to make it affordable, and to benefit those of us who have health care to lower our deductibles and our premiums. (Mr. POE of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, the unemployment rate is in double digits around this country. Some States have the highest unemployment rate in history. The economy is bleeding jobs because the trillion- Jobs, jobs, jobs, that's all we heard from the taxacrats as they jammed that bill through Congress. They didn't give anybody a chance to read it. They sure didn't want Members of Congress to read it. The American people didn't get to read it, and they have to suffer the But the stimulus bill did help one city, however. Washington, D.C., has the lowest unemployment rate in the country. Now, how can that be? Well, the stimulus bill stimulated government programs funded at taxpayer expense. These aren't real jobs. Government doesn't create anything. All they do is suck money out of a private economy that could The bureaucrats created more jobs for red tape regulating bureaucrats and forced citizens to subsidize it. All the trillion-dollar stimulus bill did was spend taxpayer money to create more government regulations, more government control, and more government bureaucrats. (Mr. HALL of New York asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HALL of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to dispel the myth that health care reform will suddenly move the burden of paying for the uninsured onto the rest of us. All Americans are already paying the high costs of a broken health care system with 47 million Americans The cost of caring for the uninsured gets passed on to all of us. The average American family is currently paying more than $1,000 every year to support the uninsured. This $1,000 fee is buried deep in every premium and pays for the broken health care system. Health care costs are soaring out of control. Premiums have doubled in 9 years, growing three times faster than wages. These staggering prices are too high for American families. Members of Congress must come together to address the problem for the health of middle class Americans and the health of their wallets. The cost of inaction is just (Mr. WILSON of South Carolina asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, Democrats have painted a target on the backs of America's small businesses. As unemployment rises, 2.6 million jobs have been lost since January. Democrats First there was cap-and-tax, which will skyrocket electric bills, gas prices and food prices, and make American businesses less competitive. Now they have a government-run health care full of tax hikes and mandates on small businesses, which the NFIB estimates will cost 1.6 Small businesses create the majority of jobs in this country. They are doing the best they can in this tough economy, but all they hear from Democrats is pay higher taxes. Democrats should stop feeding Big Government and start providing relief to small businesses. Where are the jobs? We need health care reforms that help more Americans regardless of their preexisting conditions, help small businesses provide insurance for their employees, and keep in place an In conclusion, God bless our troops and we will never forget September the 11th in the global war on terrorism. (Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. MOORE of Wisconsin. You've heard the commercial: Don't support So the question that you need to ask yourself then is, Do I feel lucky? Do I feel lucky that I won't be one of the 14,000 people a day who lose their jobs and can't afford health insurance, that I won't have such a high deductible that I avoid preventive care and end up with end-stage cancer because I didn't go to the doctor. Well, am I Do I feel lucky that Junior won't break a bone and I end up in the emergency room with a $5,000 bill? Do I feel lucky that I won't go bankrupt from my health care problems? Do I feel lucky that I won't have some preexisting condition that prevents me from getting a new job? Do I feel lucky that my health care premium won't grow three times The American economy is in the intensive care unit. The disease is the high cost of health care, and the medicine is health care reform. (Mr. PAULSEN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. PAULSEN. Mr. Speaker, last week my home State of Minnesota saw the unemployment rate rise once again, while seeing its exports drop by The number one priority of this Congress and this administration should be job creation. But it's clear that the economic stimulus policies being pursued in Washington are failing. Congress has missed important opportunities to pursue real policies that will put Instead, we've seen reckless spending and reckless borrowing at unprecedented rates, so much so that the fact now is that every man, woman and child in our country owes over $37,000 as their share of the Mr. Speaker, we should be reforming health care without throwing even more new taxes on the backs of families and small businesses, and we should be giving priority to helping small businesses, our number one job creators, to put Minnesotans and Americans back to work. APOLLO MOON LANDING IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF ST. LOUIS PRIDE (Mr. CARNAHAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, as a member of the Science and Technology Committee, I rise today to remember the 40th anniversary of the Apollo Moon landing and the deep sense of pride it gave our Nation. I, like all Americans, watched with amazement as Neil Armstrong declared: ``That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind.'' That moment demonstrates the magnitude of American know-how, ingenuity, innovation and our ability to rise to a great challenge. My home city of St. Louis, Missouri, was instrumental in the success of that Moon mission, serving as home to then-McDonnell Douglas, which manufactured components for the third-stage booster rocket for Saturn V. That third-stage booster rocket launched those brave astronauts into lunar orbit, making the historic journey possible. Now it's time to lead the world once again in innovation and science technology, especially as we transition to a new clean energy economy. Americans are ready to be called to action for a great challenge again. (Mrs. MILLER of Michigan asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. MILLER of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, when the economic stimulus plan was passed earlier this year, the American people were told that we had to act immediately because of our economic crisis. We were also told that that plan would create or save 3 million jobs and that the unemployment rate would not rise above 8 percent, and that we had to act so fast that actually not one Member of this House or the American Well, the economy hasn't gained 3 million jobs. It's actually lost 3 Unemployment is almost 10 percent. In my home State of Michigan, it is 15.2 percent today, and $787 billion has been added to our national debt and we have an annual deficit approaching $2 trillion. Mr. Speaker, now we're being told that we need to pass health care reform immediately because we're in a crisis. We're told that it will be deficit neutral because it includes massive new taxes on individuals and small businesses. But CBO says that it will actually increase the deficit, Mr. Speaker, while others say that it will force millions of We do need to reform our health care system, but doing it in such a (Mr. REICHERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Speaker, our economy is struggling, and unemployment is near 10 percent. Yet the health care proposal being considered in Congress asks our job creators, the small businesses of America across this country, to pay a new 8 percent tax. Last week, in the Ways and Means Committee, I proposed to exempt small businesses from this penalty tax if it would result in businesses having to lay off workers, cut wages, or reduce jobs. America's businesses are hurting, and we're asking them to pay more taxes? Yet, my amendment was rejected. Requiring small businesses to pay a penalty tax is no way to help them stay in business and create jobs. American workers will be harmed. Workers will bear the new cost I urge my colleagues to reject this bill. Americans need the confidence that their jobs are not in jeopardy, that we are working to protect and strengthen their health care, while supporting the small And these aren't speaking points. That's just some straight shooting (Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. COFFMAN of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, President Barack Obama's chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, reflected on the administration's lack of focus on the economy earlier this year when he said that our Nation's financial crisis presented an opportunity to accomplish agendas A good example of that was the so-called stimulus bill that had nothing to do with helping to save or create jobs in the private sector, but everything to do with expanding government programs and The Obama administration and the Congress should be focused on one issue and only one issue, and that is stabilizing our Nation's economy so that Americans can keep the jobs they have and get back the jobs they lost. Only when the economy is stabilized should we be debating other issues such as energy policy and health care reform. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting, and it's time that our President and the Democrats in Congress stop ignoring their pain and (Mr. LEE of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. LEE of New York. It amazes me how out of touch we are in Washington. For months now, my constituents in western New York have Well, according to this chart of job postings, we found out where they are: right here in Washington, D.C., as we continue to hire thousands of Federal bureaucrats. It's one of the only cities that's It's appalling that we're continuing to grow the Federal Government When I ran a business, you always had a budget, and you lived within When you look around D.C., you see construction cranes all around the skyline. It's because we can't construct enough buildings to house all these Federal bureaucrats that we're now hiring when we have this We have to stop this excessive spending and work together to create (Ms. SPEIER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, the enemies of health reform have scoured all of Canada to find a story that fits with their message of ``no But I only have to look to my district, to Sharon Almeida from San Bruno, who sent me this letter titled, ``What's Wrong With This Each month Sharon and her husband, Frank, net $3,811 from Social Security and pensions. But they pay out nearly $2,800 for Sharon's cancer treatments. That leaves them just $1,000 for food, utilities, gas, insurance, never mind a little something for the grandchildren. Thank God they own their own home and no longer have a mortgage. Mr. Speaker, Sharon and Frank worked hard. They played by the rules and raised a beautiful and supportive family. They do not deserve this. So, to the critics of reform, I say, let the Canadians worry about the Canadians. It's time we come together to provide real health care reform for Sharon and other hardworking Americans. (Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California. Mr. Speaker, trouble, oh, we got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and it rhymes with B and that stands for Broke. Right here in Capital City, right here, we've gotta figure out a way to help the Americans we're about to You've got trouble right here in Capital City. With a capital T, and that rhymes with D and that stands for debt. Right here in Capital City we've got trouble. Remember the millions, the billions, the trillions. And don't you forget, we've got trouble. We're in terrible, terrible trouble. The game of some 256 Members is a devil's bet. Oh, yes, we've got trouble, trouble. Trouble with a T. It rhymes with D, and it stands (Mr. BROWN of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BROWN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, it's time for commonsense health care reform that will strengthen free enterprise, lower cost and Unfortunately, at a cost of $1.28 trillion, Democrats wish to create a new government program that will unwillingly force more than 100 million people out of their current coverage, increase taxes by $818 According to CBO, this legislation would also increase the Federal deficit by $239 billion over 10 years and, as a result, would ration care, force doctors out of the profession and hospitals out of business, and ultimately provide fewer options and longer waits for Locally, new health mandates in South Carolina, a State already in financial crisis, would create more unbudgeted costs and reduce funding Spending so much and accomplishing so little, a government takeover of health care is the wrong direction for all Americans. Republicans have a better plan that expands access to affordable health care and allows families to choose the plan that best fits their needs. (Mr. CULBERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, Continental Airlines, one of the largest employers in Houston, has just laid off 1,700 people. And my friend, Mr. Chris Lee of New York, has put together an inspired chart that shows clearly what this liberal leadership of this House and this Congress are doing with our hard-earned tax dollars. They're redistributing the wealth to Washington, D.C., they're creating jobs in the government and Washington and out in Nancy Pelosi land, out in San Francisco and in State capitals across the Nation. But we fiscal conservatives understand, it's common sense: to create jobs, you cut taxes; you get lawyers and bureaucrats and regulators off the backs and out of the pockets of small business people. We need to cut taxes to create jobs. Do so immediately. We need to cut spending at the Federal level to reduce the level of debt that our children and The Inspector General for the Treasury has just reported that these irresponsible bailouts that this liberal majority has passed could cost taxpayers up to $23.7 trillion on top of the $60 trillion in unfunded liability that we have already passed on to our kids. It's time to cut taxes and create jobs and get the government off our PRESIDENT OBAMA'S SUPPORT FOR HEALTH CARE REFORM IS WANING (Mr. FLEMING asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Speaker, the more details Americans learn about the government takeover of health care proposed by the President and the liberal leadership of Congress, the less support there is for this A Washington Post-ABC poll shows more than half of this country is opposed to this plan. Yes, support for this crazy deep dive into The nonpartisan CBO says this plan won't reduce the cost as the President suggested; it will accelerate it. And we know that will kill This liberal Congress rammed the stimulus and cap-and-trade, which nobody could read before voting, down the throats of the American people. But they are now fed up and on to their strategy. We don't want DMV, Department of Motor Vehicles, style medicine with long waiting lines, delayed care and skyrocketing cancer death rates as in Canada and the UK. We don't want a system that will bankrupt this country and ignore the elderly, and we sure don't want our tax money Simply put, we want commonsense health care reform, not nonsense (Mr. BUCHANAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Speaker, at the start of this year, the focus has I was chairman of the Florida Chamber 4 years ago. We represented 137,000 businesses, and 99 percent of those businesses were small business. They create 75 percent of the jobs. Yet, today, we are going to tax health care. It's not a tax on profit. It's a tax on payroll. If you've got a $1 million payroll making no money, and if you're paying another $80,000 a year you don't have, you're going to put people out The other thing they want to put together is a surtax of 5.4 percent on businesses. They want to get to the millionaires. Do you know who those folks are? They're small business people. You wouldn't know that if you've never been in business. That's the majority of them. So you're going to tax the 8 percent. You're going to add another 5.4 percent. You're going to kill millions of businesses, and you're going to kill millions and millions of more jobs. We need to get focused back on the economy and on jobs in America today, right now. (Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker and Members, I serve on the Energy and Commerce Committee and on the Health Subcommittee. We were in session last night until 12:30, working on this bill. It was beginning to be a bipartisan bill. We accepted Republican amendments; we accepted Democratic amendments, but we have a long way to go. Let me Forty-three to fifty million people in our country are without health care. They get their health care through the emergency rooms. Do you know who pays for that? Those of us who have insurance, who are fortunate enough to have employer-based insurance, whether you're a Federal employee, a State employee, a city employee or whether you work for some of the large industries. We have insurance, but 43 to 50 million people don't. Our country's employers and employees spend more per capita than anywhere in the world for some of the worst results for We are going to debate a bill in a few minutes by my colleague from California, Joe Baca, on the increase in diabetes in the Hispanic community. Diabetes can be dealt with early on. Our health care system decides to deal with people after they're so ill that it's more expensive. We need health care reform in our country for cost containment but also to make sure that every American doesn't have to get their health care through the emergency rooms. (Mr. MILLER of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MILLER of Florida. Mr. Speaker, Americans all over this country are asking: Where are the jobs? We've been promised jobs over and over by the Obama administration and by the majority in this Congress, but When the President took office, 11.5 million people were unemployed. Six months later, that number now stands at 14.5 million Americans who are unemployed and who are looking for work. Where are the jobs? In February, when the majority rammed through a $1 trillion stimulus bill with zero input from my Republican colleagues, Americans were promised that unemployment would remain at 8 percent. Five months later, unemployment is at 9.6 percent and is climbing. In my home State of Florida, that number is 10.6 percent, the highest it has been in The stimulus bill is not working, and despite what Vice President Biden says, we can't borrow and spend our way out of this recession. Instead of spending trillions of dollars on failed programs and on misled policies, we need to focus on lowering taxes on small businesses (Mr. WAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WAMP. Mr. Speaker, the world is looking to us for innovation. That's the goose that lays the golden egg in our country--our free enterprise system, entrepreneurship. They are looking and are saying, American innovation can pull this economy back in a good direction, not regulation. Other governments are moving away from regulation and high taxation. We're moving towards it. It's innovation, not regulation. Look at the new cap-and-trade legislation for energy and the environment. It's a regulatory scheme. It's a taxation scheme, not an innovation scheme. Where is nuclear power? Where are the new energy can lead to a robust, manufacturing-driven, job-creating U.S. economy? Look at the new health care scheme. It's a regulatory scheme, a taxation scheme and, frankly, a litigation scheme. It's protecting the status quo in litigation. The greatest medical centers in America are saying this government insurance scheme is the wrong approach. We need less litigation. We need to unleash the entrepreneurship and the innovation of the United States again so that we can lead. Where are the jobs? They're in innovation and in entrepreneurship. They're in our free enterprise system. The government chokes it with (Mr. REHBERG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. REHBERG. Mr. Speaker, 5 months after this House passed the so- called ``stimulus'' that shattered spending records, the economy struggles, and unemployment is approaching 10 percent. It's important to remember that Republicans had a different plan for economic recovery. While we didn't have enough votes to pass it, our solution relied on American ingenuity and small business, not on stimulating bigger government by creating government jobs. Our plan would have produced immediate results by putting tax dollars right back in the pockets of American taxpayers and of job creators. Recently, it was reported that someone in the White House sees the need for another stimulus. Instead of doing the same thing over again and expecting a different result, perhaps it's time to give Republican alternatives a serious look. It's not too late to pass a real stimulus (Mr. CHAFFETZ asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CHAFFETZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise with deep concern about the families of the United States of America. The economics of this credit card Congress are not working. Where are the jobs? We cannot tax and spend our way out of our challenges. I firmly believe that President Obama, Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats in Congress are taxing, spending and borrowing too much money. This credit card Congress has now put us nearly $12 trillion in debt. We are spending nearly $600 million per day just in interest on that debt. Bailouts and stimulus money by the billions of dollars are not helping the average person at home, and now we have a proposal to slam through a government-run, Chinese-financed health care system that puts a Washington, D.C., politician between our doctor and my wife. The tax-and-spend, credit-card-driven, Chinese-financed economics driven by the Democrats doesn't work. We need fiscal discipline, limited government, accountability, and a strong national defense. We need to restore liberty for the American people and for small businessmen and -women. That's where you'll find the jobs. Stand up, America. Let your voice be heard. Put a stop to this credit (Mr. GINGREY of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, one of the American people's biggest fears about the Democratic health care reform plan is the prospect of having some government bureaucrat stand between them and the doctors they trust. I've heard this message time and time again in townhall meetings, in letters and in phone calls from patients The House Democratic leadership has promised the American people that their fears about the bureaucrat-rationed care they will receive are unfounded, even while drafting a 1,000-page bill that creates this Comparative Effectiveness Council to decide which treatments will be Late yesterday evening, I gave my colleagues a chance on the Energy and Commerce Committee to put their money where their mouths were by offering an amendment in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would simply bar Federal political appointees and bureaucrats from An easy vote, Mr. Speaker. Who do you want making your health care decisions--your doctor or a government bureaucrat? However, every Democrat on the committee, save one, voted against this amendment. It's time for Congress to focus on strengthening the doctor-patient relationship and not the bureaucratic-patient relationship. (Mr. BONNER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BONNER. Mr. Speaker, the people in South Alabama and, really, all across our country want to know: Where are the jobs? Where are the jobs that were promised by the administration and by the Democratic Without a single Republican vote, a $787 billion stimulus bill was forced on the backs of the taxpayers of our country with one simple promise: that it would keep unemployment below 8 percent and that it would create some 3.5 million jobs over the next 2 years. Where are those jobs? Instead of creating new jobs, almost 2.5 million jobs have been lost just since the stimulus bill has been passed. Nationally, the unemployment rate is 9.5 percent, inching up closer and closer to double digits. In five of the six counties that I represent in South Alabama, that unemployment rate is already at Mr. Speaker, there is a serious lack of credibility in our Nation's capital. Don't take my word for it. Just listen to the American people. SUMMERS RELYING ON GOOGLE SEARCHES TO GAUGE RECESSION (Mr. WESTMORELAND asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. WESTMORELAND. Mr. Speaker, when this administration took over on January 20, the unemployment was at about 7.2 percent, and they made a promise that this new stimulus of $787 billion would create or would save 600,000 jobs. Since that point, we've lost 2 million jobs. Where The President's top economic adviser pictured here, Mr. Larry Summers, has made us all feel better in this country by telling us: Of all the statistics pouring into the White House every day, top economic adviser Larry Summers highlighted one Friday to make his case that the economic free-fall has ended. The number of people searching for the term ``economic depression'' on Google is down to normal levels, Summers said. Searches for the term were up fourfold when the recession deepened in the earlier part of the year, and the recent shift goes to show consumer confidence is higher, Summers told Peterson Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I'm telling you that somebody in (Mr. AUSTRIA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. AUSTRIA. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting. Millions of Americans are out of work, and hundreds of thousands continue to lose their jobs each month. In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate reached 11.1 percent in June, the highest it has been in decades. According to the Columbus Dispatch, this adds up to an additional 33,000 jobs in Ohio that have been lost during the month of June, which is up from 8.8 percent in January 2009. The Dispatch article goes on to state that, over the course of the past year, 279,000 Ohioans have lost their jobs, including small businesses, At the end of the day, I trust the American people and our small businesses, the taxpayers, to spend and to invest their own money as they see fit. That is what will get America back to work. Unfortunately, the other side of the aisle's economic policies have this backwards. The government continues to take Americans' tax dollars and to spend those dollars as they see fit. Not only is that inefficient and wasteful; it's just flat out wrong. Where are the jobs? It's time to get Ohio and Americans back to work now. (Mrs. SCHMIDT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. SCHMIDT. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask a simple question: Where are the jobs? My constituents, along with those across Ohio and In my home State of Ohio, the unemployment rate has risen to 11.1 percent. We have the seventh-highest rate in the Nation. Every single county in my district is equal to or is higher than the national average, and Pike and Scioto Counties are actually above 15 percent, but that number is rather deceiving. Another large percentage of our population has either given up looking for work right now or has taken People in Ohio and in my district are hurting. We need jobs and we need them now. Only $6 million of the Department of Transportation Recovery Act dollars have been spent so far in Ohio. The Recovery and Reinvestment Act was supposed to provide immediate stimulus to create new jobs. Where are those jobs? People are hurting. Five months later, (Mr. ROE of Tennessee asked and was given permission to address the Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, with the national unemployment rate nearing 10 percent and Tennessee's own unemployment rate at over 11 percent, people are outraged that not more is happening in Washington to help them find work. So far, this Congress has provided those who find themselves out of work extended benefits, but it insisted on taxing those benefits. Worse, the majority has not done enough to stimulate the economy and to produce jobs, the best benefit Despite all of the promises of a green job revolution and the millions of jobs that would be saved or created because of the economic stimulus package, the number of jobs since President Obama took office Republicans have called for an immediate end to the tax on unemployment benefits, which would surely help those who have been hurt by this recession. We have also called for tax relief for small businesses who can use that money to create jobs. These measures can American small businesses are the most innovative in the world and will pull us out of this recession if we allow them, but Democrats seem determined to prevent any recovery from occurring. In the past month, they moved to bludgeon our economy with a national energy tax and tax on small business to finance massive new health care entitlements. (Mr. SESSIONS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, over 6 months ago, my Democrat colleagues and the Obama administration told the American people that if we passed the $1.2 trillion stimulus package, it would create jobs, halt the growing unemployment rate, and turn our economy around; yet here we are today with a 9.5 percent unemployment rate--the highest in 26 years-- and a record $1.1 trillion deficit that is growing and expected to be And yet this administration and Democrats want to push through another $1.2 trillion health care package, a health care package that, according to the President's own economic adviser, will result in 4.7 Just a few weeks ago when talking about the stimulus package, Vice President Biden said for the Obama administration, Well, we just Mr. Speaker, I don't think that the American people can really afford for this Congress or this administration to guess wrong again. We need to make sure that we find the jobs in this country, not tax and spend. (Mr. ROSKAM asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROSKAM. Mr. Speaker, listen. Listen with me and see if we can hear the sounds of jobs. Shhh, shhh, shhh, shhh. You gotta listen real The administration told us in this House months ago that if the American people stood in favor of the stimulus package that unemployment would peak at 8 percent, and yet here in Illinois, the State that I represent, we've now eclipsed 10 percent. We were told that the cost curve would be broken if only we would follow the administration's health care plan and it would be the salvation of small business, and yet the Congressional Budget Office came into the Ways and Means Committee last week, Mr. Speaker, and said The question that has to be asked and has to be answered is one that we've heard no answer today from the other side: Where are the jobs? There are no jobs. This is an administration that has pumped sunshine for months and has failed to follow through, and we ought not follow We know what we need to do, and that is stand for small business and (Mr. HERGER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HERGER. Mr. Speaker, rising health care costs are a serious problem, but the Democrat bill being advanced in the House proposes $1.2 trillion in additional spending on health care coupled with massive tax increases that would hurt small business and middle class The Democrat new 8 percent payroll tax will force employers to cut millions more jobs in the middle of the worst recession in decades while their surtax would push my State of California's top income tax rate to over 56 percent, higher than even that of France's. And those tax hikes won't even cover the full costs of this bill. Mr. Speaker, we need real reform that brings down health care costs instead of pouring more money into a broken system. HEALTH CARE PLAN SHOULD BE GOOD ENOUGH FOR EVERYBODY (Mr. TIAHRT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIAHRT. Mr. Speaker, on Friday I offered an amendment in the Appropriations Committee that failed because every Democrat voted against it. The amendment simply stated that Members of Congress and the administration should live by the laws they impose on the American Specifically, if you vote for a government-run health insurance plan, you should get a government-run health insurance plan. If it's good enough to impose health care rationing on the American people, it's certainly good enough for you. Because it's hypocritical to vote for a government-run rationed health care plan that will be forced on everyone else while retaining a private insurance plan for yourself. If Members don't believe they should have to live under the rationed health care plan that they're pushing, they should explain why. Kansans are upset by the possibility that they're forced on a rationed public health care plan by this Congress. They believe if it's not good enough for the people who vote for it, it's not good enough for them. Mr. Speaker, it's time for us to reform health care by addressing defensive medicine costs, by offering market-based principles for health care, and by keeping patients and doctors in control, not (Mr. COLE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. COLE. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Well, they certainly aren't in the Democrats' job-killing health care plan. At a time when America is suffering the worst recession in a generation, it's utterly irresponsible to propose a government takeover of our health care system and destroy millions of private sector jobs in the process. Since the Democrats passed their stimulus package, more than 2 million American jobs have been lost, and the chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, Dr. Christina Romer, has suggested that the tax hikes on businesses that will be required to pay for the Democratic health care plan will result in the loss of an additional In addition, Mr. Speaker, the Democratic proposal will force drastic cuts in Medicare Advantage, causing millions of seniors to lose their coverage for prescription medicine, the cost of private health care will skyrocket, and the Lewin Group has estimated that nearly 114 million Americans will be forced out of their current private health care coverage and into government-run health care plans. Mr. Speaker, the Democrats' job-killing health care proposal is the wrong prescription. It will cost millions of jobs. Americans need a AMERICANS WANT TO SEE WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR THEM, NOT AGAINST THEM (Mr. LATTA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, the people of the Fifth Congressional District of the State of Ohio of the United States all want a job. Last year at this time, the Fifth Congressional District, according to the National Manufacturers Association, had the ninth largest number of manufacturing jobs in the country. When the new numbers just came out, When you look at this map of the State of Ohio, looking at Williams, Fulton, Defiance, Paulding, Crawford, and Huron--those are some of my counties--when I've got counties over 15 percent, folks back home want What this Congress passed before we went on the Fourth of July recess was the national energy tax, the largest tax that we're going to see that puts businesses out, that puts people out of work, and that's what People want to know what we're going to do for them, not what we're doing to them. And I'm telling you that folks back home, when I go home every weekend, want to know what are we doing. When you look at the State of Indiana right here, right next to us, they're in as big When the Heritage Foundation came out with their report, of the top 20 congressional districts in the country that had problems under cap- and-tax, Ohio and Indiana ranked right in the top, 16 out of 20. We've got to do something. We've got to act right now. (Mr. McCOTTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McCOTTER. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They are not in Michigan, my home State, where we have a 15.2 percent unemployment rate. And what could we expect, especially when this was one of the driving forces behind the trillion dollar stimulus package. One could We then saw a national cap-and-tax energy tax did not create jobs, did not help, and now we're on the verge of a radical socialization of America's health care network. And what do we hear from the other side? And do you know why? Because while our health care system needs reform, it is not broken. The one thing that's broken is this Congress. And if this Congress keeps spending people's money and engaging in radical change to our cherished way of life, every single family budget (Mr. LANCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LANCE. Mr. Speaker, there is a great debate here in Congress about how we go about reforming health care in the United States. I've tried to work in a bipartisan capacity with the majority, but the Democratic leadership's health care reform plan is a governmental takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and, ultimately, less health care coverage for New Jerseyans. Most disappointing to me is the fact that the Democratic health plan would increase, not reduce, our Nation's burgeoning long-term health costs, a step in the wrong direction. And according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, instead of saving the Federal Government from fiscal catastrophe, the Democratic health care proposal would already worsen the situation that is out of control, an $11 trillion Democrats should put aside their $1.5 trillion health care plan and take a hard look at the affordable and effective Medical Rights and Reform Act put forth by the Republican Tuesday Group. Together, we can find real solutions to make health care affordable. (Mr. ALEXANDER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. Speaker, several of my colleagues have come to this mike today and said, Where are the jobs? Well, if we pass this government-run health plan with compulsory insurance, it's going to create some jobs. It's going to take a government police force that you won't believe. We're going to have Barney Fifes running all over this Nation forcing people to do things they don't want to do. And how do we pay for it? Well, that's simple. We just go to the small businesses that can't afford to buy insurance for their employees as it is and we increase by 8 percent their payroll taxes. We are going to break the backs of small businesses that are the backbone of this (Mrs. BACHMANN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) As a Senator, President Obama supported the $700 billion bailout Nation strategy that today we're learning will cost the American people President Obama pushed the trillion dollar stimulus that cost our President Obama took over GM and Chrysler, and he gave pink slips to 3,400 car dealerships that cost 150,000 jobs. No jobs. President Obama's national energy tax will double our electricity bills in Minnesota and will cost 2.5 million job losses every year. Now President Obama's economic adviser tells us that the government takeover of our private health care insurance will cost us 5 million This may be called the China-India stimulus plan, but the President Mr. Speaker, let's have real change so the American people can have (Mr. AKIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. AKIN. Americans love records. How fast can you go? How high can you go? How deep can you go? We love to set records. Why, the Democrats just set a fantastic record of the biggest tax increase in the history of our country. And was it clever? It was really clever. All you have to do is flip a light switch to pay a tax. And spending. Oh, we've done a great job of spending it. As a result of taxing and spending, more records. Why, in the last 6 months, we have lost more jobs than any 6- month period since World War II. There's a record for you. Here's another record. We have, in the last 6 months, used up more jobs and lost jobs than we created over the Bush years over the previous 9 years. That's the only time that's happened since the Great And here's another record, too: That is, the jobs that we've lost have been longer than any time since we've been measuring unemployment I wish we didn't set quite so many records. We don't need the (Mr. HASTINGS of Washington asked and was given permission to address Mr. HASTINGS of Washington. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Americans have lost millions of jobs in the last 6 months. The unemployment rate today is approaching 10 percent nationwide. And amid all of this, Democrats are proposing a government takeover of health care that would increase taxes, eliminate choices, cut Medicare, force Americans out of their current plans and place billion-dollar job- killing fines and mandates on small businesses, the job creators. Studies estimate that nearly 5 million jobs will be lost as a result of taxes on small business under this Democrat plan. There is a better solution, Mr. Speaker. Rather than penalizing struggling small businesses, Congress must make it easier for them to afford health benefits. We must increase choices, make health costs deductible, expand health savings accounts, end waste, fraud and abuse and control unnecessary lawsuits that drive up costs for everyone. I support reform, Mr. Speaker, that lets Americans keep their doctors, lowers costs and keeps medical decisions between the patient (Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, at the beginning of this year, the administration and Speaker Pelosi had this House pass a 1,500-page stimulus bill which no one in either body was able to read before they passed it that spent $800 billion which we did not have, all because they promised that it would create new jobs. In fact, they said it would actually either create or save 2 to 3 million new jobs. Their economic policy adviser at the White House said it would mean an immediate start of creating new jobs and eliminating losing jobs. Even Majority Leader Steny Hoyer was on the floor saying this would be an immediate jolt to the economy, the immediate creation of jobs. Well, it is 5 or 6 months later, and where are we? I just heard from Chairman Bernanke. He says he can't assess where we are right now. But if you look at the numbers, if you look at the chart that I have here, the Democrat projection with stimulus had we done something was here. What actually happened, we have seen as far as jobs, more job losses, more job losses, more job losses, February, March, April, May and June, more job losses. We have lost several million jobs since the stimulus The administration misread the American economy. The administration misread the American public. The American public knows that we need to We spend too much, we borrow too much and we tax too much. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. WITTMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, just a few minutes ago, I finished a lunch with a gentleman who is a business owner in Virginia. And we had a discussion about what are the things that we need to be doing to help As I travel across the First District, the thing I hear time and time again is where are the jobs? What are we doing to help this economy? What are we doing to help small businesses? Folks, that is where this economy is going to be picked up, from the efforts to make sure we help our small businesses. That is what this Congress needs to be focusing on each and every day. When we come here, our focus ought to be what are we doing to help small business? What we doing to create jobs? Obviously, what is happening right now isn't working. People out there are anxious. They are concerned. They are frustrated. They are telling me, as well as the rest of the Congress, get to work, start creating jobs and start turning this economy around. (Mr. SCALISE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, Americans all across the country are asking, where are the jobs? When President Obama brought the stimulus plan before the American people, he said it needed to be rammed down their throats quickly. He didn't allow people even the opportunity to read it. Not one Member who voted for the bill even had the opportunity to read it. But he said, don't worry. Just trust me. It will create Well, now 6 months later, 2 million more Americans have lost their jobs since President Obama took the oath of office. And what's their answer? They're talking about another stimulus bill. In fact, just last week, Vice President Joe Biden said, We have to go spend money to keep The American people are starting to understand what's going on here with this Congress, the liberals that are running this place. They realize all they're doing is taxing and spending, and they're not creating jobs. They're running jobs off. The cap-and-trade energy tax would lose 3 million jobs to countries like China. And then they come back with this plan to have a government takeover of our health care system, a plan that would add another $800 billion of new taxes on the backs of American people and run off even more jobs. The American people know what's going on here. They want jobs, not (Mrs. CAPITO asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, for West Virginia's families, it's jobs, health care and the economy that matters the most to them. They've seen trillions of dollars spent, and they see Washington proposing to spend trillions more. They want to know where are the jobs with the stimulus? They want to know why the only apparent answer here in Washington is My constituents want their voices heard. Recently, I sent a survey out and received 3,500 responses on what do people want on health care. They want to keep the coverage that they have. More than two-thirds are troubled by the idea of a government-run health care. Three-fourths are shocked by the thought of yet another trillion-dollar program. And the vast majority think that this is not the time to be raising taxes. Unfortunately, the plan moving through the House right now fails to address all of these. It fails to control costs. It taxes small businesses. It threatens to force families into government-run health care. Simply put, this is not the health care reform my constituents and I are looking for. What they're looking for are jobs. (Mr. SMITH of Nebraska asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, we were told a $1 trillion stimulus package would create jobs immediately. But since then, nearly 2 million Americans have lost their jobs, and unemployment is at 9.5 percent, the highest in 26 years. Then the House passed cap-and-trade legislation which will cost our country 2.5 million jobs each year. Now we're rushing to take up the Democrats' health care bill, which As House Republicans offer plans and ideas to get our economy moving again, all we get in return is more of the same, spending and taxing, and it keeps yielding the very same results: Longer unemployment lines Mr. Speaker, we need new ideas and new approaches to deliver GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE IS NOT GOOD FOR AMERICA (Mr. TERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TERRY. The House health care bill is a government takeover of your health care and destructive to the economy. It provides perverse incentives to employers to dump their health care plan, forcing their employees into the government health exchange where they will choose the government-subsidized government plan. Oops, there goes the promise This costs you $1 trillion placed on the back of small businesses. After 10 years, the cost of this plan explodes, needing multi- trillions of dollars to continue to fund. More taxes, more debt. Oops, (Mr. CALVERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CALVERT. Mr. Speaker, around the country, more and more Americans are out of work, struggling to pay their bills. Yesterday, the Web site recovery.gov revealed that your government spent $1.2 million to purchase pork at twice what struggling families would pay at a local grocery store. It would be funny if it weren't so painful. The $787 billion stimulus was sold to the American people as a bill that would put people back to work. But now we see it for what it really is, a massive expansion of social welfare which is doing nothing Where are the jobs? Almost 6 months have passed since the stimulus was signed into law, and unemployment continues to tick upward. It is over 13 percent in my congressional district. The so-called ``stimulus'' was a missed opportunity to provide true tax relief to the American people and for shovel-ready infrastructure projects that would have provided jobs. As more information on this stimulus package is revealed, I'm sure more terrifying news will be before us. (Mr. BISHOP of Utah asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BISHOP of Utah. Mr. Speaker, I want to introduce you to Mr. Pitchford. He is a young and exciting teacher who gets 12-, 13- and 14- year-olds to enjoy geography and history. But this September, he is not going to be back in the classroom because his district relies upon resource jobs and royalties and development to fund schools. And this administration, through the arbitrary and unilateral decisions of the Secretary of the Interior, has cut this funding. This is the administration that stopped new uranium development for 2 years, has postponed offshore drilling decisions, and has postponed oil shale development projects. And for Mr. Pitchford, has taken 77 oil and gas leases and suspended them because they don't think 7 years of study was If we do not develop the resources on our public lands, jobs are lost. If we don't have cheap forms of affordable energy, jobs are lost. And those jobs aren't simply a number. They are a face of a real person like Mr. Pitchford, who is no longer a teacher not because of his choice, but because of government decisions. And the collateral damage of these government decisions are the 13- and 14-year-olds in his classroom. Where are the jobs? They're not in Mr. Pitchford's (Mr. GOODLATTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Speaker, let me ask a question. I don't know if it has been asked yet today. The American people want to know, where are the jobs? We have a Congress that has gone off the tracks. A trillion- dollar stimulus package, that's thousand-dollar bills stacked 63 miles high. Did we get any jobs? No. We have a budget with a $1.2 trillion deficit built into it. Are we going to get jobs? No. We are going to We have a cap-and-tax bill that is going to kill American jobs by raising the cost of our traditional sources of energy, coal, nuclear and oil. We have a health care bill on the agenda before the Congress today that is going to kill jobs and raise the cost of health care to the American people rather than contain the cost and create more choice This Congress is out of control, and the American people want to (Mr. KENNEDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in favor of the health care bill this Congress is considering. It would cap out-of-pocket expenses. It would eliminate preexisting condition discrimination. It would give patients a choice between our own physician and a government plan. It would eliminate lifetime caps for health care. It would eliminate the ability for people to no longer have the choice of having to choose a job and not be able to leave that job because of health care discrimination, no more denial because of a preexisting condition, and mental health parity for all insurance plans, irrespective of mental Mr. Speaker, we need to have mental health screening annually covered, and that is what this bill does so that we treat it as a preventive item. For the 130 million Americans with mental health conditions, this will act as a preventive measure, saving us millions and millions of lives and dollars from suicide and the like. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I offered a bipartisan commission amendment to the stimulus bill when it came before the Appropriations Committee and it failed. Had that amendment passed, we could have helped create jobs, Now 6 months later, we have unemployment rates at a 26-year high, and some say it will go to 11 percent, and some even say 12 and 13 percent. We have piled another $787 billion on top of our children and our grandchildren. Social Security is in trouble. Medicare is in trouble. Medicaid is in trouble. Let's pass this bipartisan amendment so we can get control of the debt, get control of the deficit, create a (Mrs. BLACKBURN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the health care proposals that are before us have been tried before. Public option was tried in my home State of Tennessee under a plan called TennCare. For more than 10 years, the legislature and three Governors tried to make it work. It has been less than successful. But what has happened is that a program that was supposed to have saved millions, tens of millions of dollars, has never saved one nickel. It also has restricted access. It has driven up the cost of private health insurance, and it has nearly Tennesseeans know that rushing to reform health care and doing that wrong is a very expensive process. We all know that costs and access of health care needs to be addressed. No one seriously believes that any of these plans before this House right now is going to do that. Tennesseeans know the cost of rushing and getting it wrong, and the American people are figuring it out because they have seen the majority rush a stimulus, an omnibus, a housingus and a porkulus that has left the American people saying, where are the jobs? And they do not want The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair must enlist the cooperation of Members in heeding the gavel at the expiration of their time. (Mr. PRICE of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, in the midst of the worst recession in a generation, so what did President Obama and Speaker Pelosi do? Well, they propose a government takeover of health care that will lead to fewer jobs, higher taxes, and less health coverage. As a physician, I know that government-run health care will end quality care. In addition, since the recession began, 6 million jobs have been lost; yet the Democrats' health care plan includes hundreds of billions of dollars in new taxes on small businesses, the job engine creation in this Nation, $800 billion in new taxes. According to the economic modeling by the President's own Chief Economic Advisers, the business tax hikes alone would destroy up to 4.7 million jobs, and amazingly, an independent analysis by the nonpartisan Lewin Group found that 114 million Americans would lose their personal, Mr. Speaker, the American people want real solutions to get our economy back on track, not another excuse to raise taxes on small businesses and working families. House Republicans have a plan for reform that expands access to affordable health care and saves jobs. (Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, the facts show that Fact: the administration promised that it would create 3.5 million jobs. Instead, we have lost an additional 2 millions jobs. But not only is the administration and this Congress not succeeding in creating jobs; they're actually rushing to pass legislation that would even Look, the Pelosi cap-and-trade bill would cost Americans anywhere between 2 million and 3 million jobs a year in additional job losses. The health care proposal would cost Americans 4.7 million jobs lost and lead to $1.3 trillion in new spending and huge tax increases. Mr. Speaker, it's time to give relief to the job creators like the small businesses; and very respectfully I say, Mr. President, it's time to stop talking. Stop wasting taxpayers' money. Stop irresponsibly borrowing. Stop raising taxes. It's time to focus, focus on creating THE ADMINISTRATION IS HIDING OMINOUS NUMBERS FROM THE AMERICAN PUBLIC (Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. In case you missed it, there was an ominous report in yesterday's Washington Post that said the administration is delaying for several weeks the congressionally mandated report on economic growth, job creation, and budget deficits, a report that's due The administration said yesterday, We're not going to tell you what's in that report for several more weeks. Why? I will tell you why. They don't want to downplay the politically damaging deficit numbers, the unemployment numbers, and the economic growth, or lack of growth, Why? Because it's an attempt to hide this record-breaking deficit as the Democrat leaders break arms to rush through this government takeover, the experiment in health care. That's why the administration is hiding ominous numbers from the American public. (Mr. RADANOVICH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. RADANOVICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to talk about the devastating job losses in my district in California. This Congress, with the help of the Obama administration, has taken away 40,000 jobs and almost $1 billion of income from the great San Joaquin Valley in California in a foolish attempt to protect a 3-inch fish. The valley's unemployment now is at 20 percent, with some towns as 40 percent. Yet, the mere flick of a switch on the pumps in the delta will restore 40,000 jobs at no cost to the government. In addition to this careless disregard for the farmers in my district, the Democrat leadership is now ramming through a $1.2 trillion health care reform measure that will eliminate 4.7 million jobs, small business jobs, and subject farmers to $500 billion in new taxes. And let's not forget the $846 billion national energy tax that will result in a 2.3 million job loss and cause the price of everything Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The Democrats are giving them to the little fishies in the San Francisco Bay delta. Go figure. (Mr. OLSON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. OLSON. Mr. Speaker, when Congress passed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the administration argued that an $800 billion taxpayer-funded spending spree was necessary to create jobs. It was rushed through with no time to review the policies that would implement The administration sold this spending spree as a jobs creation measure. Yet, it turns out that jobs weren't a priority at all. A $3.9 billion stimulus funding announcement was made for smart grid investment grants by Vice President Biden in which he stated, ``This is Well, the Department of Energy didn't seem to get the memo. Application forms for grants asked: ``Will DOE use the number of jobs estimated to be created and/or retained as a criterion for rating a proposal for funding?'' The grant guidance says: ``No.'' Where are the jobs? Job creation was supposed to be the primary requisite for receiving recovery funds, and yet it was simply a WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW A RUSHED GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE (Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, as the House leadership prepares to rush to judgment on legislation that will lead to a government takeover of health care, 17 percent of our Nation's economy, it's instructive to look back a few weeks to the cap-and-trade energy debate. Just before the Fourth of July break, leadership set another deadline to pass what will amount to the largest tax hike in U.S. history. With unemployment soaring, policies that impose a national energy tax will only make things worse by increasing energy costs for all Americans, crippling small businesses, and putting more people out of Frankly, the legislation we passed is a gift that keeps on giving to our economic rivals like China and India whose economies are already sucking away U.S. manufacturing jobs at an alarming rate. Needless to say, as we saw from Secretary Clinton's recent visit to India, these nations do not plan to impose restrictions on their emissions. Mr. Speaker, American families are struggling; there's no doubt about it. They're working to make ends meet and they are worrying about their jobs. We should not burden them with a new national energy tax, and we certainly should not allow a rushed government takeover of health care. (Ms. FOXX asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, our economy is in the midst of a historic recession, and millions of Americans have lost their jobs over the past several months despite promises from Speaker Pelosi and President Obama that their extravagant spending would create jobs. But Americans are a hardworking and resilient people. So I was excited when I heard from a laid off entrepreneurial constituent of mine from Allegheny County, North Carolina, who's working on starting his own business. He plans to hire around 20 people over the next 2 However, he recently wrote to tell me that if the Democrats' health care bill becomes law, the new taxes and burdensome rules will take a devastating bite out of his ability to grow jobs. In fact, he said he would hire only half the workers if this legislation becomes law. Mr. Speaker, this is a travesty. This Congress should be implementing policies that create jobs, instead of burdening entrepreneurs with job- killing taxes and new government mandates and red tape. THE POLICIES OF THIS ADMINISTRATION ARE LENGTHENING AND DEEPENING THIS (Mr. McCLINTOCK asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. McCLINTOCK. Mr. Speaker, I was struck by the chilling similarity between the broad-based taxes under the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade tax we passed several weeks ago and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 that economists blame as one of the major factors in producing the Another of Hoover's blunders was the Emergency Relief and Construction Act of 1932. Its centerpiece was a radical increase in income tax rates from 25 percent to well over 50 percent. If that sounds familiar, it should. That's one of the financing proposals in the health care bill that would push State and Federal income tax rates to more than 50 percent in most States. Mr. Speaker, when I see the same policies from this administration that turned the recession of 1929 into the Depression of the 1930s, I'm reminded of Ben Franklin's observation that ``experience keeps a dear Mr. Speaker, these policies are lengthening and deepening this recession because this administration did not even learn from WHERE ARE THE JOBS THE DEMOCRATS SPENT $1 TRILLION TO CREATE? (Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Speaker, you know, I think pushing government-controlled health care is a way for the Democrats to divert The White House said we had to pass a stimulus because it didn't want unemployment over 8 percent. Unemployment is at 9.5 percent and slated The White House said it didn't want to own General Motors. The The White House said it didn't want any pork in the stimulus. Now, we're paying money to clear away obstacles for fish and to monitor The White House said it didn't want to increase the deficit. The U.S. deficit broke past $1 trillion in June, a grim testament to the I have one question, Where are the jobs the Democrats spent $1 HEALTH CARE REFORM MUST TARGET ACCESS TO QUALITY AFFORDABLE CARE (Mr. BOOZMAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BOOZMAN. Mr. Speaker, we must reform health care. Too many Americans do not have access to quality, affordable health care. resolving these problems, however, the President prescribes an overhaul that will deny Americans treatments they need and make them wait to get treatments that a new health care commissioner allows. This is not the way to reform our health care system, and my constituents agree. I've received many calls and letters from Arkansans, like Michael who recently told me he owes his life to the fact that we don't have a system like the British-run government health In 2007, Michael was diagnosed with renal cell carcinoma, something he's sure his doctor would not have caught had he had his hands tied in red tape health procedures. He owes his life to the care we were able We cannot rush through legislation that will have serious implications on care Americans like Michael receive. We need to take a reasonable amount of time to listen to the concerns of Americans like Michael and craft a commonsense bill that addresses the real problems. WE SHOULD NOT BE DECIMATING THE CARE OF OUR SENIOR POPULATION (Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. GINNY BROWN-WAITE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, last week the Democrats released a health care bill which essentially said to America's seniors ``drop dead.'' Despite their promise to care for our seniors, Democrats have decided that it's too expensive to care for my senior constituents and everyone else's constituents. This bill would cut an additional $156 billion from the Medicare Advantage program in order to pay for the government expansion of health care for the young, the healthy, and the wealthy. This, by the way, is the second attack on our seniors this year. The first came in March when the administration announced that Social Security recipients would not receive a cost-of-living increase. Listen up, America. Seniors have special needs. This bill ignores the needs of Florida's health care system. We should be fixing what is broke, not decimating the care of our senior population. This is change (Mr. SHUSTER asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHUSTER. Mr. Speaker, the American people are hurting and they're asking, Where are the jobs? The Obama administration and congressional Democrats promised that the stimulus--the trillion-dollar stimulus-- would create jobs immediately. Last month alone, we lost almost half a million jobs and unemployment now stands at 9.5 percent. It's clear the Democrats' trillion-dollar stimulus package isn't working, and their response is to increase spending in the appropriations process by 12 percent, pass a national energy tax that's going to result in increased energy costs, less competitiveness for American jobs, and drive jobs from American shores. Now they're trying to ram down a health care plan that's going to raise taxes on American business, cost jobs, and force people into a We need to focus on creating jobs--and you do that by holding the line on taxes, controlling spending, and reforming health care. Let's focus on creating jobs and answering the American people's cry for, (Mr. BLUMENAUER asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. BLUMENAUER. It's been fascinating watching some of my friends parade to the floor making some pretty outrageous claims. The most recent one was, my good friend from Florida suggesting that by having the administration follow the law, that if the cost-of-living has not increased sufficiently, so that there isn't a cost-of-living increase for Social Security, somehow this is an administration assault on senior citizens. This is a rather bizarre notion when we think about their record when they were in charge, seeking to undercut formulas like the one in question to move them back in the other direction. When it comes to health care, when our friends on the other side of the aisle, strong-armed their prescription Medicare drug coverage program into law; did not seek concessions from the pharmaceutical industry; created the ``doughnut hole'' that has created a massive gap What we're doing at this point is trying to move forward in a constructive fashion to give the American people choices, follow the (Ms. FALLIN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Ms. FALLIN. Mr. Speaker, the American people are concerned about keeping their jobs and the huge deficit that we have incurred here and in the Senate, and passing that debt on down to future generations of With over a thousand pages, the Democrat health care bill costs too much, spends too much, and will destroy jobs in America. Health care reform should be about lowering costs, providing quality, affordable care for all Americans. And this health care debate must consider that every individual has different health care needs and that Americans are The Democrat leadership has failed to address these needs by supporting the same old, tired proposals of massive Federal new spending and increased Federal regulation, which will cost the United This time, cutting a bigger Federal check won't do it. Their plan amounts to $818 billion in new taxes on individuals, on businesses, and a Federal takeover of our health care system. These taxes will crush our small business owners and destroy thousands of jobs. This plan will put bureaucrats in charge of our health care--and the (Mr. ENGEL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ENGEL. The majority Democrats in this Congress are trying very hard to pass a health care bill that will be a good bill for the American people. Our friends on the other side of the aisle don't seem It's a national disgrace that there are 47 million Americans that have no health care coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that our emergency rooms are being used to help people that have no coverage whatsoever. It's a national disgrace that so many of our health care We are trying to craft a plan that will put America back on the road so that every American will have health care; so that health care as we know it will be improved; so that people that like their health care can keep their health care, but people that don't have health care, can We know that the system is broken. I don't want to hear people on the other side of the aisle talk about deficits because when they were in the majority for 12 years, they gave us the biggest deficits in American history and left us with red ink as far as the eye can see. So I would urge my friends on both sides of the aisle, let's put our (Mr. McHENRY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. McHENRY. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Unemployment in my district has hit 14 percent--14 percent. Failed stimulus aside, Washington is doing nothing but making matters worse. Put yourself in the shoes of the only people that can lift us out of this economic recession--small business owners. Let's see what they're They're facing higher energy costs because of this Democrat cap-and- trade tax on energy. They're facing higher health care costs because of a government takeover of health care. They're looking at higher energy taxes, higher health care costs, and the kicker is, higher personal income taxes. The liberals are already proposing it. The folks that are running Washington are out of touch with small business owners and are doing the wrong thing on our economy. And I urge the leadership of this Congress to do the right thing. Don't kill the goose that laid the golden egg. Don't kill small business owners. (Mr. DENT asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. DENT. The issue is: Jobs, jobs, jobs. A friend of mine who employs many people in my district said this to me the other day, The policy proposals coming out of Washington are impeding job creation and scaring people. He's right. And there are five reasons that are driving One, a stimulus that spends too much, borrows too much, and delivers too few jobs. Two, a budget that doubles the national debt in 5 years and triples it in 10 years. Three, a card check bill that is undemocratic and imposes binding arbitration. Four, a national energy tax, cap-and-trade, that will cost 66,000 jobs in Pennsylvania and jack up electric bills for consumers. And, five, a House health care bill with enormous tax increases and mandates on small businesses and Enough is enough. Time for Washington to get out of the way and let job creators do what they know how to do--create jobs. (Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, we have heard some interesting rhetoric today about the impacts on small businesses and health care reform. Here's a statistic. If we do nothing, the cost of health care on our small businesses in the United States over the next 10 years will increase to $2.4 trillion. That's going to have a crushing burden on the ability of small businesses to do what they do best, which is to Only 48 percent of our small businesses currently provide health care. If we allowed those cost increases to occur by doing nothing in terms of health care reform, we're guaranteeing fewer Americans will have health care, we're guaranteeing fewer successes among small businesses that are the job generator in this economy. Doing nothing has a profound cost. That's why we need health care reform. We need it now. We've waited 6 years. The time has arrived. (Mr. LINDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, does anybody see what's happening? Does anybody even care? The $700 billion TARP program was to buy troubled assets. Did we do that? No. We bought car companies and banks. And we own them. And then we took the money away from the bond holders of the The $787 billion stimulus package only stimulated more welfare. It hasn't created jobs. Not one. And now we have put upon us a government takeover of health care that's going to lose, according to Christina This has never been about jobs for the Democrats. It's never even Who's going to make the decisions over your life, the personal decisions? The Democrats think they can. We think you should. Does anybody see what's happening? Does anyone even care? (Mr. GOHMERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, $700 million for wild horses last Friday; $50 million for rare cranes and rare dogs and cats that don't even live in this country. We've got habitat problems in this country. The $800 billion stimulus hasn't stimulated anything except unemployment. I just left a crime hearing and we found out that out of 207,000 people in Federal prison, 53,000 of them are not citizens. They're non- U.S. citizens. They're here--most of them, they said, were probably illegal. So there's 53,000 jobs Americans didn't want, committing But this is too serious. I know as a former judge, if somebody had come in and said, Here's a mom who has all these kids and grandchildren and she's gone to a bank and said, Give me money, loan me money, I can't control my spending, you would take those beautiful children away and give them to somebody that would be responsible. (Mr. HENSARLING asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HENSARLING. Mr. Speaker, it's time to admit the failure of Obamanomics. Where are the jobs? Since we enacted the President's economic program, 2 million more are unemployed in this land--9.6 percent unemployment, the highest in a quarter of a century. So what do we have to show for Obamanomics? $143 billion more dollars of taxpayer bailout money. The first trillion-dollar deficit in our Nation's history. We had the national debt to be increased, tripled-- We have found the historic debt, we have found the historic deficits, we have found the historic bailouts, Mr. Speaker. But where are the You cannot bail out, borrow, and spend your way into prosperity. It does not work. It is time to put America back to work with tax relief for small businesses and American families. That's the Republican plan. (Mr. LaTOURETTE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LaTOURETTE. A number of my colleagues today have asked, Where are the jobs? Well, I don't know exactly where the jobs are because they haven't appeared. But I can tell you where the jobs went, at least in When the Democrats opened this Congress, 4,000 people at Chrysler out of work. We honored a United States Senator. That's a nice piece of But then things began to get serious. Almost 10,000 people out of work. The most important thing they could put on the floor is Supporting the Goals and Ideals of National Teen Dating. Eleven thousand people out of work, we had to pass the Monkey Safety Everybody likes safe monkeys. Thirteen thousand people out of work; Great Cats and Rare Canids Act. Sixteen thousand people out of work; Honoring Arnold Palmer. And 18,000 Chrysler workers out of work, the most important thing the majority could put on the floor is National But now they're getting serious because later today we are going to vote on Supporting the Goals of National Dairy Month. (Mr. FORTENBERRY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Speaker, as Congress takes on the essential task of strengthening America's health care system, we have a choice here to either rush legislation costing more than $1 trillion or to have a serious analysis on the fundamental question as to how we actually improve health care outcomes, reduce costs, and protect vulnerable One major consideration should be how any health care proposal will affect small businesses. Small businesses generate 60 to 80 percent of all new jobs each year in this country. In my hometown of Lincoln, Nebraska, 80 percent of those in the private sector are employed in This current plan would place an 8 percent payroll tax on certain small businesses who do not or cannot provide government-mandated Mr. Speaker, one study suggests that as many as 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a direct result of this overall health care proposal. There are more creative solutions to get people the care they need, help families manage ever-increasing costs, and help small business entrepreneurs provide the benefits for their employees. (Mr. HOYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HOYER. I have been listening to this litany of ``Where are the jobs?'' I have been here long enough. Mr. Pence, you opposed the program in 1993. You said it would destroy this economy. You said it would blow deficits sky high. It created 216,000 jobs per month on You then supported an economic program in 2001. You said it would be a haven for jobs and small business and all that. You created not 216,000 jobs per month but 4,240. Those are the figures. I'm sure that you will all want to come here and say, ``No, Hoyer was wrong on those Under the economic program we propose, 216,000 new jobs every month on average. Under your program for the last 8 years under the Bush administration, 4,240 per month. That is a very substantial difference between 20.8 million new jobs under the economic program that you did not support in 1993 that we proposed, passed, and President Clinton So when you talk about jobs, you ought to talk about the experience that you've had under our program and your program. You failed. We succeeded. As a matter of fact, in the last year of the Bush administration, we lost 3 million-plus jobs. During the last year of the Clinton administration, we gained 1.9 million jobs. That's a 5 So keep talking. America knew the difference. America made a decision. They said what you had been doing was not what they wanted so they changed. In 2006, they changed the Congress, and in 2008 they And let me tell you something. We have lost 200,000 less jobs per month than Bush lost in his last 3 months in office, over the last 3 months. Now, is that where we want to be? It is not. But it is 200,000 better than the last 3 months in your administration. Those are the (Mr. McCAUL asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McCAUL. Mr. Leader and Mr. Speaker, where are those jobs? We have the highest unemployment rate since the 1930s. They say a picture Mr. HOYER. I thought it was since 1982 when Ronald Reagan was Mr. McCAUL. Reclaiming my time, they say a picture speaks a thousand words. Well, look at this picture right here because it says it all. This is a picture of Larry Summers, the President's top economic adviser. Look at him. He's not creating jobs. He is asleep. Mr. Speaker, I would submit to you, this administration is asleep at the The Vice President recently said that we can spend our way out of bankruptcy. What? Really? Spend our way out of bankruptcy? What happened to Economics 101? I think the American people are smarter than Instead of cutting taxes and spending, which has historically worked, instead, we are enacting policies that will devastate our economy; a national energy tax that will kill 2.5 million jobs and, according to the President, skyrocket energy prices. A health care bill that, according to the CBO, will spend over $1 trillion and kill 4.7 million It is time, Mr. Speaker, for the American people to wake up. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pastor of Arizona). The gentleman from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I would respectfully ask, as both I and my record were directly challenged by the distinguished majority leader on the floor, and given the fact that I've already utilized my 1 minute extended during the debate at the opening of this session, when a Member's record is challenged on the floor of the Congress, does a Member, under the Rules of the House, have the opportunity to obtain time when the distinguished majority leader refuses to yield time? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Only if someone yields to the gentleman. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his inquiry. Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, is it proper for a Member to direct an entire address to another Member of the body as opposed to the Chair or the The SPEAKER pro tempore. Members must direct their remarks to the Mr. PENCE. Further parliamentary inquiry, if I may. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will be heard. Mr. PENCE. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, would it have been in order for the distinguished majority leader to raise questions about my record and the positions that I've taken here in the Congress during the course of my career in the context of floor debate under these rules? The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair cannot issue an advisory opinion Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to address the statement that was The SPEAKER pro tempore. Has the gentleman from Indiana previously Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state it. Mr. KING of Iowa. Is there a rule that prohibits this body from to a unanimous consent request to allow a Member to be recognized? The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is the gentleman seeking recognition to Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I am recognized for a parliamentary inquiry, as I understand it. My parliamentary inquiry is: Does there exist a rule that prohibits a Member from being recognized to speak The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a matter of recognition. As the Chair stated before, if the gentleman has already had a 1-minute, he is Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, further parliamentary inquiry. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair could recognize for a unanimous consent request that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Indiana be allowed to speak out of order. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair would entertain that request from Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to speak out of order The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. PENCE. Mr. Speaker, the distinguished majority leader came to the floor moments ago, and he asked the question that Republicans have been asking since midday today. It's a question that millions of Americans Now the leader--I know it was unintentional--misstated my record, saying that when I was here in 1993 that I opposed health care reform. In fact, I was elected to Congress in the year 2000. But it was an honest mistake and a misstatement of fact, and I acknowledge it. But can I just suggest, Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the millions of Americans that may be looking in, let's stop looking to the errors of the past by Democrats or Republicans and let's come together today to Republicans are here to say that a government takeover of health care, financed by $1 trillion in tax increases is a disaster for this economy. It is unconscionable for this majority and this administration to insist on the adoption of a government takeover of health care financed by $1 trillion of tax increases during the worst recession in As the distinguished majority leader just said, Republicans say with (Mr. NEUGEBAUER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. NEUGEBAUER. Well, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? That's what the American people want to know. What they know is the plan that the Democrats have isn't working, spending money we do not have. Not just a little bit of money but trillions of dollars that we don't have. Chairman Bernanke spoke to the House Financial Services Committee today, and he said: Maintaining the confidence of the public and the financial markets requires that policy measures begin planning now for restoration of fiscal balance. Unless we demonstrate a strong commitment to fiscal sustainability, we will have neither fiscal I'll interpret that for you. If we keep spending money we do not have, we are not going to create jobs. We are going to lose more jobs. Last week, the Federal deficit in this country reached $1 trillion. If you started counting to $1 trillion, it would take you 17,000 years. We're talking about real money. We cannot continue on this spending spree that Congress is in, spending money that we do not have. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The American people want their jobs THE FAILED POLICIES OF THE PAST 6 MONTHS SHOULD NOT BE REPEATED (Mr. ROGERS of Alabama asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. ROGERS of Alabama. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? The President and Speaker Pelosi came to this House early this year and said, if you'll borrow and spend $1.1 trillion, which is the largest spending bill in American history, it's going to save existing jobs and create another 3 million jobs. Well, where are those jobs? They say, Well, you know, we had to spend that money because we couldn't go to the failed policies of the past and repeat those. Well, they would like to rewrite history. But the fact is, in 2003, this Congress passed one of the largest tax cuts on small businesses in America in our history, and it was followed by over 50 months of consecutive job growth, the largest consecutive period of time of I would suggest to you, the only failed policies of the past that we shouldn't repeat are the failed policies of the past 6 months. (Mr. KING of Iowa asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KING of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I would say to the leader, where are the jobs? I listened attentively. I pricked my ears up. I thought I was going to find out where the jobs are. I didn't hear that answer. I looked back at what happened for the 108th and 109th Congress. Members of the Democrats came down on the floor and they said, Just put us in charge and we'll solve the problem. They won the majority, and we saw a hockey stick graph going downward of industrial investment. That's what happened to our economy; it reacted to the Democrat You elected President Obama. Now you don't have any excuses, and you are angry because we are asking, ``Where are the jobs?'' There are 14.5 to 14.7 million unemployed, another 6.8 million that are simply looking for a job that don't fit into that category, 21.3 million people looking for jobs in the United States, all of this under We had historically low unemployment and a growing economy because we lowered taxes, and we kept the pressure off of regulation. You are turning this into the nationalization of the private sector and the health insurance industry, and the American people don't want to live in the kind of countries that exist on the east side of the Atlantic (Mr. CONAWAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CONAWAY. Mr. Speaker, I hear a recurring theme about jobs: Where In a different life, I participate at a needs assessment in a community that I lived in that went through a process of looking at what needs were in families, in neighborhoods, and in the community. Once we distilled that list down to the top 10 needs for this particular community in Midland, Texas, if you looked at them, out of those, nine of those needs would have been positively impacted by a You cannot overstate the importance of jobs in the private sector, because when you have jobs in the private sector, individuals are better, families are better, communities are better, and this Nation, I can tell you where the jobs aren't. Here is a list of 53 new boards, commissions, and bureaucracies that are created under the health care plan that is percolating its way through this system. That plan will cost 4.7 million private sector jobs, but it will do a good job of creating additional bureaucrat jobs that don't create wealth and don't improve the overall economy of this country. ALABAMA IS SUFFERING FROM A HIGH UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (Mr. ADERHOLT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, in February, the administration assured us that if Congress would pass the stimulus bill, then we would see immediate relief and halt unemployment at 8 percent; yet it is now 9.5 percent on average, and it's rising. But the jobs have yet to appear. This problem hits home for me because Alabama is suffering from a greater unemployment rate than the national trend. Mr. Speaker, the Alabama unemployment rate topped 10 percent in June. It is the highest level since July of 1984. The June rate of 10.1 percent is up from 9.8 At this time last year, Alabama's jobless rate was half that at only 4.6 percent. The current unemployment rate is 10.1 percent. That represents over 215,000 unemployed Alabamians. The congressional district that I represent is suffering even more with an unemployment rate of about 12 percent, and that's on the average. At a time when families are struggling to make ends meet, the unemployment rate is rising, further evidence that we cannot borrow and (Mr. KING of New York asked and was given permission to address the Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, 6 months after the Democratic administration came in with such promise, tens and tens of millions of Instead, during the past 6 months we've seen the systematic mismanaging and dismantling of the American economy. We've seen a stimulus bill which cost over $1 trillion in new spending with almost no tax relief for small business, with almost no needed infrastructure, but again, money on top of money. The President said jobs would come almost immediately. Instead, the situation gets worse by the week. We saw a cap-and-tax so-called energy bill which is going to result And now we see a health care bill which will ration medical care, at the same time, according to the CBO, increase medical costs, the worst Mr. Speaker, it's time for the American people to tell this administration and this Democratic-controlled Congress to work together in a bipartisan way so we can say, here come the jobs, not seeing the jobs leave our country, not seeing millions of millions of people being unemployed because of failed liberal Democrat policies. (Mr. FRANKS of Arizona asked and was given permission to address the Mr. FRANKS of Arizona. Mr. Speaker, America is facing an unemployment and mortgage crisis unlike anything we have seen since the Great Only months ago, President Obama pledged that he would create 3\\1/2\\ millions jobs by the end of 2010 and told us that the unemployment rate would stay below 8 percent if we passed the allegedly urgent trillion- But, Mr. Speaker, since the President has assumed office, employment has dropped by over 2\\1/2\\ million jobs. We've lost 8 million jobs since the beginning of the Democrat-led 110th Congress, and half a The jobless rate stands at 9.5 percent, and the President himself This Congress and this administration must be reminded by the American people that what comprises true economic growth are jobs and economic productivity by the people. Higher taxes, increased regulation, reckless spending, bureaucratic selection of economic winners and losers and out-of-control deficit spending, these are the Democrat policies of the last five months, and they diminish productivity instead of encouraging it. They will kill jobs. And unless we change course, Mr. Speaker, this country faces an unprecedented (Mr. LAMBORN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. LAMBORN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today troubled about the Democrats' proposed government takeover of our health care system. The Congressional Budget Office has confirmed that this legislation will not reduce costs but, rather, drive health costs up higher for American In addition to rising costs, according to the White House's chief economic adviser, Christina Romer, business tax hikes alone could Congress should consider free-market and Tax Code reforms to make our The President and his majority in Congress failed to produce jobs Why should we trust them with revising the one-sixth of our economy based on health care, when their own advisers say it will mean millions (Mr. CASSIDY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Speaker, I actually applaud the goal of our Democratic colleagues in terms of the health bill they are putting out. Access, quality, and controlling costs are things that we should all And I agree with parts of the legislation. Guaranteed access, for example, is just wonderful. But, of course our concern is that CBO comment that it's not going to control cost, not achieve one of these goals, but rather, reset it to increase it. And we know as the cost of health care increases, that will be one more thing that inhibits growth So what can we do? One, we do need fundamental reform, which, as the CBO has pointed out, this bill does provide. We need to put the patient in charge of health care decisions and dollars. We need to empower patients to make value-conscious decisions, empower them with the information they need for reasonable decisions by increasing Let's empower them by incentivizing wellness programs at lower costs and improved lives. Let's empower them with things such as HSAs, which have been shown to decrease costs by 30 percent and, indeed, give insurance to those previously uninsured. Empowering patients is the (Mr. BACHUS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. BACHUS. I just came from a hearing with Chairman Bernanke. There were some questions he could answer, but others he couldn't answer. We asked him, Where are the jobs? He couldn't answer that question. He said unemployment would remain high through 2011. He said he's not sure that the stimulus created any jobs. It might, but he couldn't answer He did answer one important question, though; and he was very certain. He said, if we continue spending like we're spending today, we're on a rendezvous with financial disaster. He said, and he left no doubt, that we had to reduce our spending, that the deficit was going to threaten the prosperity of our Nation, not only our children and our grandchildren, but today, tomorrow. He said, we have to reduce spending. He said, spending is out of control. He said, the baby boomers in the next year or two would overwhelm the Federal budget. He (Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, while our Nation is facing record unemployment, we may well worsen the job situation if the proposed health care bill passes in its current version; 4.7 million more jobs are estimated to be lost and a trillion dollars in more We still have not addressed the hundreds of billions in health care waste, but are proposing spending hundreds of billions more. We should not be substituting the barriers, burdens and, bureaucracy of insurance companies with the barriers, burdens, and bureaucracy of Uncle Sam's I want to get people back to work. I want to make sure they're covered by health care. I want our Committee on Energy and Commerce to reconvene to get to work on this bill. It is going to take time. We need to take the time to fix this. Let's do it right. But let's not work towards artificial deadlines, and let's get America back to work (Mr. SHADEGG asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SHADEGG. Mr. Speaker, I believe in health care reform. I have I came to the floor this morning to talk about this amendment. It's an amendment that was rejected by the Democrats last night. It says that no Federal employee should be able to dictate how a medical provider practices medicine. And it was rejected by the Democrats. Apparently Democrats in their health care bill want Federal employees, bureaucrats to dictate how your medical provider practices medicine. I think that's shocking. I don't want a Federal bureaucrat between me and But I got here and discovered that we are not supposed to ask, Where are the jobs? I don't get it. What's embarrassing about that question? When the Obama administration was sworn in, unemployment was 7.6 percent. When the stimulus passed, it was 8.1 percent. And today, it's 9.5 percent. And we're not supposed to ask where are the jobs? I think it's a legitimate question. I guess it's an embarrassing question. I'd (Mr. ELLSWORTH asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I was sitting in my office, and I heard a I downloaded an article from the Evansville Courier Press, which happens to be in Indiana. It says: ``Stimulus has Hoosiers working.'' I'll make a few quotes out of this article: ``More than 2,400 people are now at work on Federal stimulus-funded roadway projects in Indiana, according to a state report being released today.'' ```Things were slowing down, and the stimulus filled in the gap,' said Tim Mahoney, an economics professor at the University of Southern Indiana. `It's kept the people employed that would be laid off,''' says ``What's clear is that the stimulus projects have boosted an industry ```In general, it definitely puts our people to work,' said Pete Bjorkman, the chief estimator for Evansville-based J.H. Rudolph'' ``Our crews are going to be working more hours and more days because of this . . . ,' he said. `It is creating more crews, more hours for our people that wouldn't have been there before.''' Mr. Speaker, I listened in the office to the stuff being said back and forth. To the folks in the audience and the people that are walking out there, Mr. Speaker, they're tired of this crap that's going on back and forth. We need to work together to put people back to work. (Mr. CAO asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAO. Mr. Speaker, the present unemployment rate in the United States is 9.5 percent and climbing, and the American people are hurting. Our economic downturn is a challenge that will require prompt As Congress moves forward with the national debate on the economy, it is imperative that we detract from illogical partisan bickering and avoid the empty political posturing that got us into this mess in the The American people have real problems, and they want real solutions I represent a district that is over 60 percent African American, and I have seen firsthand how this economic slump has disproportionately hurt minorities more than any other group in the United States. Among African Americans, the rate of unemployment and uninsured workers is While there are a number of options for getting our economy back on track, it is important to remember that our Nation's proudest achievements have developed with a bipartisan, solutions-oriented (Mr. McKEON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, my friends are asking, Where are the jobs? It's a good question because we were told in February, when the stimulus package was passed, that four or five million jobs would be It's not bad enough that we're not doing anything to create jobs from the administration's side. But we're actually doing things to kill more I just left a markup for the Education Committee where the majority is killing a program that has been very successful since 1965, has helped millions of students go to college and provided an education for them, and now they're eliminating that program, along with it, 40,000 I have constituents at home that are really suffering. They're asking, Where are the jobs? It's about time you started doing something (Mr. FLAKE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, people are asking, Where are the jobs? And I I myself get a little leery when any administration, any says that they're going to create jobs. They do so for a while, but government jobs don't last very long, or they shouldn't last very long. What the administration should do, and this Congress, is create an environment in which private sector jobs can be created. And that's what we're not doing with this health care bill. This health care bill will kill jobs, not create them. It doesn't create an environment where Now, the administration and this Congress say we've got to get to work. But last week, last Friday we spent an entire day on a welfare- for-wild-horses bill. There's an old Garth Brooks song that says, wild horses keep dragging me away. And, apparently, wild horses keep dragging this Congress away from actually creating an environment where jobs can be created. And this health care bill goes the wrong (Mr. FARR asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. FARR. I hear from the other side that government takes over health care. I'm just wondering which one of you Members is going to give up your Navy doctors downstairs to take care of you. Which one of you is going to give up your Federal health care plan which insures all the members of your family? Which one of you is going to give up Medicare for all of your constituents? Which one of you is going to give up the veterans' care in the veterans' clinics that are in your districts? Which one of you who loves the military that is doing such a great job of defending our country in Iraq and in Afghanistan is going Yes, government is involved in health care. It sure is. That's what our country is surviving and living on. Let's make this work and stop (Mr. ROONEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, there has been some talk recently about the potential of a second stimulus package. Why would we need such a second stimulus? Because the first one didn't work. It's not rocket science, What the American people don't want to hear is that prior Congresses or that prior administrations used to do this, or that prior Congressmen were engaged in this, that or the other. What Americans want now is leadership and solutions moving forward, not how things I'm new here. I came here because the American people were sick and tired of the way things used to work. Unemployment will soon reach double digits, and it already has in my district, the 16th District of The first stimulus didn't work because the Federal Government is not capable of taking taxpayer money and properly redistributing it. So let's have a second stimulus package. Let's give tax breaks to small businesses and to small business owners. Let them hire and keep the people that they want to work for them. That's the American way. America works when people make it work, not when the government takes The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will remind Members--and this is not directed at the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney), who just spoke--that Members should address their remarks to the Chair and not (Mr. HUNTER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HUNTER. Mr. Speaker, California unemployment is at 11.6 percent, and State Democrats in California destroyed the job market and the manufacturing base there through bureaucratic overregulation, unrealistic mandates and punitive fees and taxes. Congressional Democrats here in Washington are following California's lead with the national energy tax that's going to cost every American family $3,000 a year and with the job-killing health care plan projected to cost over 4 I've simply come to the easy conclusion that Democrats don't like small business. I've come to the conclusion that Democrats don't like jobs. Those of us in California have seen this movie before, and it ends like ``Thelma and Louise''--with the economy driving off a cliff in the Grand Canyon. And it's being driven by congressional Democrats. GOVERNMENT DOES NOT KNOW BEST WITH REGARD TO HEALTH CARE (Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina asked and was given permission to Mr. BARRETT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, only in Washington, D.C., does government know best. My friends on the other side of the aisle think they know how to create jobs: stimulus I and possibly II, cap- and-trade, health care reform, higher taxes, more regulation, more government intervention. The Democrats think this is going to create Mr. Speaker, we need to be about the business of overhauling taxes, of bringing commonsense regulation reform to the people, of giving people real choice to make decisions for their health care between them and their doctors. It is about empowering people, not government. What I'm talking about, Mr. Speaker, is not socialism. It's freedom. With all that our colleagues on the other side have done, and with all that they propose to spend, I ask a simple question, Mr. Speaker: Where are THE DEMOCRAT SPAGHETTI DINNER OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, this chart is not a spaghetti dinner. It may look like it, but it's the Democrats' health care plan. If you were a person out in the hinterlands, looking at this, you would think, How in the world am I going to get health care coverage for me and for my family if I have to go through all of that? It's going to In addition to that, there are going to be jobs created, 4.7 million jobs in China and in India, and their energy bill, cap-and-trade, is going to create 2.5 million new jobs in India and in China because it's going to drive jobs offshore because the small businesspeople will not be able to afford to pay all of these bills and taxes that the The Democrats need to do something. They need to cut taxes and help the small businessman make a profit and create new jobs. If they do that, we will have jobs, but right now, we don't know where the jobs are. Unemployment was supposed to cap at 8 percent. In Indiana, it's close to 10 percent. It's going to go to 12, 14, 15 percent if they (Mr. LUETKEMEYER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Mr. Speaker, if we're all real quiet and if we turn down the rhetoric and if we listen very attentively, I think we can hear the voices of our constituents back home--the people who pay the taxes of this country. What are they saying? What question are they the jobs? Where are the jobs, Mr. President? Well, we're not hearing They've seen the $800 billion stimulus package that was passed through this House, that was rammed down our throats and that had no effect. In fact, we've gone the other direction. Instead of increasing employment, we've gone the other way. We're now at 9.5 percent, headed towards double digits. What is the solution? A second stimulus is being talked about. Is that really what we need to do? In this last stimulus, there was a little bitty piece for small businesses. They're the ones that generate the jobs. They're the ones that can turn this economy around. They're the ones that can hire the people. Yet we ignore them. Oh, there are those voices again. I think I can hear them. Yes, they're louder this time. They say, Where are the jobs, Mr. President? (Mr. CAMP asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, the chart next to me shows the Obama Misery Index, OMI, which reveals a stunning rise in debt and in unemployment. ``Oh, my,'' I think, is the right title for the index of current and Despite campaign pledges of fiscal responsibility and of job creation, since Inauguration Day, we've seen an $800 billion stimulus bill, massive energy taxes and a legislative agenda that has resulted in a rapidly growing debt alongside rising unemployment. Taken together, these figures define the effect of the President's policies to date, not only revealing their failure to deliver jobs for today's workers but an even larger government tab for our children and grandchildren to pay. Already the unemployment and debt on President Obama's watch is a stunning 40.6 percent--the current Obama Misery After the Vice President's recent claim that the government needs to spend more money to keep from going bankrupt and after the CBO, Congressional Budget Office, Director suggests that the $1 trillion Democrat health care bill will add to the country's budget problems, (Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to address the issue of job loss at rural hospitals if the current health proposal were to become law. The Democrats' public plan assumes reimbursement In the July letter from the Blue Dog Coalition to Speaker Pelosi, the coalition reported that Medicare reimbursement pays, on average, 20-30 percent lower than private plans. Actual costs are made up through private insurance reimbursement, which will be gone if the Democratic plan plays out. This will have a severe negative impact on rural hospitals, and it will leave us asking: Where are the jobs? Many providers suffer financial losses as a result of treating Medicare patients. The lower rates make it more difficult for rural providers, who serve higher percentages of elderly and low-income patients. A new public plan with rates similar to Medicare's will create a financial result that will be unsustainable for even the Nation's most efficient, high-quality providers. The result is a loss During this time of economic downturn, we need to be focused on the retention of existing jobs and on encouraging and not discouraging our (Mr. HOEKSTRA asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, last week, the President visited Michigan. With an unemployment rate of 15.2 percent, we were hoping that the President would answer the question: Mr. President, where are the jobs? We had hoped that the President would have come to Michigan and would have recognized that raising taxes, that excessive spending and that more regulation wouldn't work, because that is what we've done in Michigan. We now have the highest unemployment rate in the country. Mr. President, take a look at Michigan. Recognize that we need to reduce taxes, that we need to control spending and that we need to America and Michigan will begin moving forward again when we empower its people, not when we empower the bureaucracy and the governments in Washington or in Lansing. It's about freedom. Give our constituents the freedom to spend their money to create their jobs. (Mr. WALDEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to continue this question of: The gentleman who spoke just before me is from Michigan, where their unemployment is upwards of 14 percent. Oregon's unemployment rate is now over 12.2 percent and is second only to Michigan. Our basic industries have been shut down. My part of the State, by Federal policy, prevents us from even harvesting burned dead trees in a timely manner from our Federal forest lands and accessing our resources. Now along comes legislation that says if you take woody biomass off Federal land and use it to make new, clean, efficient energy, if it comes up as certain types of stands, it doesn't count. It's not renewable. So the jobs that would go with the creation of that were really diminished or were taken away fully by the cap-and-tax legislation, which we know is going to cost 1 million or 2 million jobs I was out in John Day and Nyssa and Burns this weekend and Baker City. Everywhere I went at town meetings, the rooms were full, and people were asking, What are they doing to us in Washington? Where are CUT TAXES, CONTROL SPENDING, CREATE A COMMONSENSE ENERGY POLICY (Mr. JORDAN of Ohio asked and was given permission to address the Mr. JORDAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, the reason our economy is not creating jobs is that small business owners are asking themselves, What's coming next out of this place? Always remember this, Mr. Speaker: The American people are smart. Small business owners are smart, but they're apprehensive; they're anxious about what's coming Is, in fact, this Congress going to pass cap-and-trade that's going to raise the cost of energy? Is, in fact, this cost of energy going to raise taxes? Is this Congress going to federally take over health care and make health care decisions for every single family and for every That's why we're not creating jobs. We need to do what we know always works: cut taxes, get spending under control and enact a commonsense (Mrs. BIGGERT asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise to address how this Congress and one concern on the minds of Americans today--jobs. Despite promises of quick action and of immediate returns, hardworking parents in my district and around the country are still staying up nights, worrying about whether they will have jobs in the next month, in the next day or In response, House and Senate leaders' only answer seems to be higher taxes and massive new government spending. Already our children and grandchildren are on the hook for the $1 trillion so-called ``stimulus bill'' that has resulted in almost 10 percent unemployment nationwide, Now the House leadership seems intent on pushing through another $1 trillion-plus health care takeover that only promises more taxes on small businesses and working families. The result: fewer jobs except for Washington bureaucrats who will be rationing out health care Mr. Speaker, we can do better. Let's work together on real solutions to cut taxes, to create the jobs and to rebuild this economy, not just (Mr. TIBERI asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. TIBERI. Mr. Speaker, a hundred of my colleagues have come and asked, Mr. Speaker, ``Where are the jobs?'' We passed a stimulus bill months ago, and in Ohio, we had 33,000 jobs lost just last month. The jobs I see created, Mr. Speaker, are here in Washington--czars, Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? We passed a bill on this floor creating a national energy tax which is going to cost Ohioans hundreds of thousands of jobs. We're debating a health care bill where small business owners are concerned that they're going to shed additional jobs at a time when we need small business owners to create more jobs. Mr. Speaker, Ohioans, as this chart points out, are shredding jobs in this administration, are shredding jobs this year. We're creating a record amount of deficits, record debt, higher taxes. All Americans (Mr. UPTON asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, the question of the day is ``Where are the jobs?'' I will tell you where they're not. They're not in Michigan. Our unemployment is 15.2 percent. And sadly, in this House, we passed an awful energy bill a couple of weeks ago called cap-and-trade. That bill will add nearly a trillion dollars to the cost of businesses and homes across this country. Does that help with jobs? Absolutely not. In fact, one of my constituents in Michigan said their utility increases, their electricity costs will go up by nearly 40 percent by the year 2024. Is that going to help with jobs? Absolutely not. Did the Rules Committee allow us to add jobs with an amendment that would build perhaps as many as 100 new nuclear reactors in this country, tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of jobs? No. The Rules Now, where are the jobs going? They're going to India and China. Did you happen to see on July 16 The New York Times where Secretary Chu said that if China's emissions of global warming gasses keep growing at the pace of the last 30 years, the country will emit more gasses in the (Mr. DEAL of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the Mr. DEAL of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, my State of Georgia now has an unemployment rate in excess of 10 percent. As you've heard, other States are in worse condition. We are asking today the question of where are the jobs. We spent millions and billions, and perhaps even now trillions, of dollars throwing money at the problem, and yet the The legislative agenda that's been adopted by this administration and by this House has primarily two pieces of legislation. First is the cap-and-trade, a bill that is setting us on a path that has already been followed by some of our European countries, Spain in particular. They set out on this path of green jobs over a decade ago. The result is 17.5 percent unemployment. The green bubble burst, and for every job The second major approach of this House has been the new health care reform bill, a bill that will tax employers 8 percent of their payroll amounts if they do not provide health insurance for their employees. What does that mean? New jobs? No. It means losing jobs that we already Mr. Speaker, it's appropriate to ask, where are the jobs? THE MORE CONGRESS SPENDS, THE WORSE THINGS ALWAYS SEEM TO TURN OUT (Mr. POSEY asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. POSEY. Mr. Speaker, the stimulus bill was advertised as a way to reduce unemployment and help put this economy back on track. The blue line on this chart represents the projected path of the unemployment rate. That was below 8 percent prior to the stimulus being passed. The red line shows, in fact, what actually happened since the stimulus bill was passed. It was well-intended, but surely it was misguided. Now, the more Congress spends, the worse things always seem to turn out. So let's get out of the bailout business. Let's get out of the stimulus business. Let's get out of the national energy tax business, and let's not get into the health care business. Let's let the free enterprise system and the small businesses that made this economy great (Mr. ROYCE asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, accompanying the spike in the private sector job losses throughout our economy, we have seen a massive government intrusion into the private market. This Chamber recently passed cap- and-tax legislation which gives Washington 17 percent over the economy. If we move towards nationalized health care--the next priority for the administration--it could shift another 16 percent of our economy The Federal Government already runs General Motors and Chrysler. It now has a huge equity stake in dozens of our financial institutions. We've witnessed a massive $800 billion stimulus package that has failed to deliver the promise of an increase in job growth. And this flawed approach has failed to deliver because government spending does not increase the size of the economic pie. What it simply does is take money out of the private sector and shift it to the government. Real economic growth has always and will always come from the private sector. And instead of continuing this trend, shifting our economy to one centered on bureaucrats, which is exponentially increasing our deficit and killing off the private sector, we should be spurring job (Mr. BILIRAKIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to strongly oppose efforts by the majority to rush through a misguided health care experiment that will greatly increase the already sky-high unemployment in my State. At a time when Floridians are facing double-digit unemployment, Congress should not be pushing through a government takeover of health care that will be paid for by a tax hike on small businesses. And a recession nearing double-digit unemployment nationally will discourage job growth and creation leading to even higher unemployment and people with employer-based health insurance being forced onto the government plan. This job-killing tax, combined with the crushing debt some in Congress have been piling on our children and grandchildren to pay for Big Government programs, will make it much more difficult for I urge my colleagues to reject this small business tax. (Mr. ISSA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to say three things: Where are the jobs? Where is the transparency that was promised? And where will the savings come from in a health care proposal that, in fact, starts off by talking about savings while, in fact, increasing spending? You don't need a new tax if everything is already taxed and you are going to save. You only need a new tax if, in fact, you are going to spend more money, create more waste, fraud, and abuse. Mr. Speaker, the President said we would not go above 8 percent, that the stimulus would in fact drive down the tendency towards unemployment Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? They were not created. Mr. Speaker, the President said that this administration would have unparalleled access and transparency, and yet the special IG for the Troubled Asset Relief Program has said just the opposite, that he's being blocked at every step, that, in fact, he's not getting the Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Where is the transparency? (Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin asked and was given permission to address the Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I propose that we make August America Right to Know month. That means Americans have a right to know what this Congress is doing in proposals that change their lives, and what I'm talking about is the health care legislation. Just a couple of days ago, we marked up this legislation in the Ways and Means Committee, about a thousand pages, and it came to us 3 minutes before midnight the day prior to us marking it up. We had an amendment in the committee that said, If we're going to impose this new health care system on the American people, Members of Congress, themselves, should be put into this system. What happened to that amendment? It went down by a party-line vote. Republicans said ``yes''; Democrats, except for Mr. Davis of Alabama, said ``no.'' We also said let's recognize the fact that we're taxing people, a lot of taxes on people earning less than $250,000. That violates the pledge people believed they had in the last election. What was the vote? The Republicans said, no, let's not tax people earning less than $250,000; the Democrats said, yes, we will continue to tax those people, violating this pledge, this promise the American people thought that August ought to be the month where America gets to know what's going (Mr. MICA asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, my district extends from Orlando to Daytona Beach. The State of Florida now has in excess of 10 percent unemployment. Nationally, 9.5 percent unemployment. Where are Congress passed a $787 billion so-called stimulus package. I took to the floor and spoke from the Democrats' side of the aisle and pleaded with folks that we needed jobs and we needed to invest in America's infrastructure; instead, we put less than 7 percent. So to date, out of $787 billion and $48 billion for transportation highway money, we have Mr. Speaker and my colleagues, where are the jobs? People want to work. They don't want government handouts. They don't want government welfare or food stamps. They want jobs in my district and throughout Where are the jobs, I come back to ask, that this country needs and AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, AND COMMISSIONS BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR DOCTOR (Mr. BRADY of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. BRADY of Texas. Mr. Speaker, there are a lot of people in Texas who are worried what kinds of jobs they will have when this new government-run health care plan goes through Congress, 1,018 pages delivered to us a few minutes before midnight. We had until 9 o'clock Here's the plan: Thirty-one new Federal agencies, programs, and commissions in between you and your doctor taking away control of your At the committee, we asked, What does all this cost? They said, We don't know the price tag. We offered amendments. We said, Can you certify that Members of Congress read this bill and let the public read it? They said they thought that was a bad idea. We asked about We were worried about wait times for family physicians and second- class cancer treatment. They said that would be too inconvenient to Then finally we said, Let's strike the taxes on small businesses, and they refused to, saying small businesses have it so easy, they need to Ladies and gentlemen, we don't want the government telling us what doctors we can see, what treatments we can receive, and what medicines (Mr. KINGSTON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. KINGSTON. Mr. Speaker, last October, President Bush and Hank Paulson said to the Congress we need to bail out the financial services industry. We have to do it bold and we have to do it quick or the financial markets will tumble. Well, we passed the $700 billion TARP program, and still stock portfolios, savings of Americans all through In January, Nancy Pelosi and President Obama told us that we had to act bold and fast to pass the stimulus program because the unemployment rate was 8 percent, and now 2.5 million jobs have been lost since that And now the same Washington-knows-best mentality is telling us to rush through a government takeover of health care by August 1. This will result in a bureaucrat taking the place of your doctor telling you what procedures you will have. It will result in a $1 trillion Federal program. It will result in rationing and a huge tax increase on farmers Ladies and gentlemen, we have to slow down. Let's learn from the stimulus program. Let's learn from TARP. Let's slow down the process. Mr. SHIMKUS. Mr. Speaker, the pending health care legislation does one thing: It does bend the cost curve, but it bends it up. That's not according to me or my colleagues. That's according to the Congressional Budget Office that says private insurance rates will go up and the public option insurance will go up. What does that result in? 4.7 million jobs could be lost as a result of increased taxes, particularly My Blue Dog colleagues are down at the House negotiating some face- saving measure in this bill, and I'm going to include this list of their proposals, but I want to make sure that they comply with their July 9 letter which says it must be deficit neutral, it must protect rural health care, it must ensure bipartisanship, and finally, any health care reform legislation that comes to the floor must be available to all Members and the public for a sufficient amount of time This is government. This is transparency. The Blue Dogs need to (Mrs. LUMMIS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. LUMMIS. Mr. Speaker, ``where are the jobs?'' could be answered in one word, in my State of Wyoming. We were hiring people when our energy industry was robust from other States that were losing jobs, like Michigan. But the cap-and-trade bill that passed this House last week changed coal bonus payments from being paid over 5 years to now We are going to destroy jobs in Wyoming. So the people who moved from Michigan to Wyoming to find good-paying jobs are now going to have to return to Michigan or stay in Wyoming and be unemployed. It is because of the activities of this Congress. This Congress has not been happy to watch States like Michigan suffer. They have decided to make States like Wyoming, that were producing energy for this country, suffer right alongside States like Michigan. Our State, which had a healthy economy before cap-and-trade, before the Obama presidency, is now suffering just like the rest of the Nation. Our (Mr. SMITH of New Jersey asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, it was Albert Einstein who said that ``the most powerful force in the universe is compound interest.'' That's great, Mr. Speaker, when compound interest is working for you--in building a nest egg for your children's college costs or for retirement. But when compound interest is working against you, it's It is absolutely devastating, especially for a Nation on the intermediate and long term, when that Nation recklessly spends taxpayers' money and causes huge, unsustainable deficits. As of June 30, the national debt was $11.5 trillion--over $37,000 per person. In June alone, the deficit rose by over $220 billion, a year's worth of deficits in 1 month! Now CBO says that the number, the total debt to the United States, will double in the next 10 years. It took 180 years for us to get to that $11.5 trillion. Under President Obama's massive spending it will double in just 10 years. Nothing puts our economy at greater risk of implosion and job loss than unsustainable COMMONSENSE SOLUTIONS ARE THE CURE TO OUR ECONOMIC WOES (Ms. JENKINS asked and was given permission to address the House for Ms. JENKINS. Mr. Speaker, last November, Americans sent a clear message. They wanted change in Washington. But they also asked for accountability, transparency, and for politicians to respect their tax Unfortunately, from the $787 billion so-called ``stimulus,'' trillions in bailouts, and the $3.55 trillion budget, Washington has gone on a reckless spending spree with taxpayer dollars. And now the majority in Congress is trying to pass a government takeover of health care that will add $239 billion to the debt our kids Prime time press conferences don't hide the fact that since January, our Nation's debt has skyrocketed by more than $1 trillion, that our debt to China increases each day, and that our Nation is facing double- Kansans know you can't spend money that you don't have. Congress must learn this lesson. As a CPA, a former State treasurer and a mother of two teenagers, I'm convinced that we need commonsense solutions to rein in spending, keep taxes low and get Americans back to work. JOBS WILL BE LOST AS A RESULT OF HEALTH CARE REFORM (Mr. CRENSHAW asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CRENSHAW. Mr. Speaker, it's pretty clear that we've lost a lot of jobs in this country, and I think it's pretty clear that we are going to lose a whole lot more jobs if we pass this health care plan. I thought Members might want to just hear a firsthand personal example. I've got a longtime friend that lives in Florida. He has a small business. By the way, he voted for Obama this year. He said, I'm going to vote for Barack Obama, even though I'm a Republican, because I saw him this weekend. He said, hey, have you seen that Obama health care plan? I said, yeah, as a matter of fact, I have. A lot of people have seen it. He said, man, that's not the change that I was voting for. He said, that's going to kill my business. He said, I'm going to see my taxes go up. He said, we're already laying off people, but if they put that penalty on us that I read about, then I'm going to have to lay some more people off. He said, this is killing me. And I'll tell you, that's happening all over the country, not just in Orlando, Florida, but all around the country. So we need some reform, but we need the right kind of reform, and this is not it. (Mr. SCHOCK asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SCHOCK. Mr. Speaker, in the last 6 months, a lot has changed. We have a new President of the United States, we have a new Congress, the 111th Congress, and we have 3.1 million fewer jobs, and an increase of 28 percent in unemployment just in the last 6 months. What was the reaction? What was the response from the new administration and of this Congress? Well, we need to pass a stimulus bill, and we need to pass it now. No time for debate. No time for amendments. No time for input from the minority. We need to pass it This bill had less than 24 hours of debate on this floor before it was passed out of the floor, and yet the President took 4 days to sign it. What did it do? It spent $787 billion, the largest spending bill in And what have we gotten? The administration says we created 150,000 new jobs after spending $112 billion. Well, get out your calculators. (Mr. SMITH of Texas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, a new ABC News/Washington Post poll has found that for the first time, less than half of Americans support President Obama's health care plan. Since April, approval of the President's handling of health care has dropped 8 points, while In an example of fair reporting, the Post put the poll results on its front page yesterday. Other news media have not been as candid in their When the Congressional Budget Office director revealed that the health care bill ``significantly expands the Federal responsibility for health care costs,'' the evening news programs on both CBS and NBC failed to report the CBO's key finding, nor have they reported how many jobs will be lost under the President's health care plan. Mr. Speaker, with so much at stake, Americans need the media to (Mr. CAMPBELL asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, earlier this year, President Obama told us that all this reckless spending he was doing was going to create jobs. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? Instead of jobs, we get a so-called ``health reform'' bill. And this provision of that bill tells Americans that they will be prohibited from having their own insurance. They will be forced into a government health plan run by something like the IRS. Mr. Speaker, this health plan is socialized medicine, pure and simple. And in addition to that, it will cost more. It will increase taxes on the wealthy and a whole lot of other people. It will increase the deficit. It will lower quality. It doesn't cover everyone. And it is projected to lose another 5 million jobs of Americans. Mr. Speaker, this is not reform. This is just nuts. (Mr. BURGESS asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BURGESS. Mr. Speaker, this weekend, I received a communication from a constituent at home who brought to my attention a political cartoon that ran in the Chicago Tribune 75 years ago in 1934. It is often said that history doesn't repeat itself, but if you listen closely enough, it will rhyme. Or said another way, those who do not The constituent who sent this to me is a retired FBI agent. He wrote in his e-mail, ``change the names and the situation looks very familiar.'' Saul Alinsky, the leader of community organizers in Chicago, would be pleased with the current situation. When you look at the caption, spend, spend, spend under the guise of recovery, bust the budget, blame the capitalists for failure, junk the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, this was apropos 75 years ago. It may well be apropos (Mr. HASTINGS of Florida asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. HASTINGS of Florida. I would ask my colleagues on the other side if they would tell me, what is their health care plan? Is it just that we shouldn't do health care? What part of it would you not do? is the But I really rise, Mr. Speaker, to take cognizance of a very fine day yesterday of bipartisanship. A former colleague of ours, the now- Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, came to south Florida along with FAA Director Randy Babbitt to meet with several of us regarding radar in south Florida. On the flight from USAir here, Administrator Babbitt and I had an opportunity to hear a flight attendant do something very nice. She recognized and complimented 30 members of the Booker T. Washington High School class of 1949 in Miami who were en route here to Washington. It was a wonderful gesture, and it made for a My colleagues here who continue to rant about us not having health care, I wonder what they would say if we do nothing? Will health care (Mr. INGLIS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. INGLIS. Mr. Speaker, I'm not here to ask the President to make good on his promise about those jobs, because I don't believe that government creates jobs. Government doesn't create wealth. All it does But I am here to ask the President to make good on the idea of producing the right policies that would create jobs by creating wealth in the private sector. And I would suggest to my colleagues that the way to do that is to have a low-tax situation, a lighter touch on regulation and less litigation. It's really those three things. If you have low taxes, light-touch regulation, and less litigation, we will expand the American economy, we will create wealth, and we will create That is something that we can be doing here in this Congress. It is something that we can cooperate on getting done, and we can serve the American people. We can deliver American solutions. (Mr. MORAN of Kansas asked and was given permission to address the Mr. MORAN of Kansas. Mr. Speaker, I for one believe that the health care system must be reformed. I've said that and have worked in that regard during my time in Congress. But I'm greatly concerned about the plans that I see coming forth for us to consider in this Congress. The single-payer plan raises concerns with me on behalf of senior citizens across the country, especially those I represent in Kansas. The plan that we are currently operating under, Medicare, provides wonderful services for many Americans, for senior citizens. But the reality is, that plan is bankrupt. We will spend $38 trillion more than The plan is expected to be bankrupt by 2017. So the idea that we would expand the plan when it already is in financial difficulty baffles my mind. The plan is to raise $820 billion in taxes, and we still leave the national debt increasing by $239 billion. This plan needs attention, and we need to make certain that what we do does not wreck the health care delivery plan we have in place for seniors today, especially in places like Kansas, where senior citizens are dominant. (Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend her remarks.) Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Mr. Speaker, where are the jobs? I rise today to discuss the rising unemployment in my congressional district of south Florida. Last week, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released data indicating that unemployment in Miami-Dade County was at nearly 11 percent. This represents a notable increase from 9.9 unemployment just Mr. Speaker, south Floridians are hurting. In Miami, workers in the food service and hotel industries have had their hours cut in half because of a reduction in tourism. These workers are working two, three In the Florida Keys, recreational fishermen are docking their boats permanently as the industry grapples with one of its slowest seasons in There is serious trouble in paradise as hardworking small businesses and middle-class families remain uncertain about their economic future. That is why it's imperative that this Congress gets serious about providing real solutions for our constituents. They cannot afford to WASTEFUL GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS HAVING DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES ON THIS (Mr. SULLIVAN asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. President and the Democrat majority, where in the heck are the jobs? With this stimulus bill and more than $1 trillion With the national energy tax passed by this House, it levies billions of new energy taxes on the American people, costing the average American family $3,100 more a year to heat and cool their home and put On health care, our Democrat majority's $1.2 trillion government takeover of our health care system mandates a one-size-fits-all, government-run health care plan on most Americans. Their plan is to nationalize our health care system and create new mandates, government bureaucracy and inefficiency that will only serve to drive up costs of Wasteful government spending is having devastating consequences on this country. It also could cost 4.7 million more jobs and hurt small WE NEED TO FOCUS ON SAVING THE COUNTRY'S HEALTH CARE SYSTEM (Mr. YARMUTH asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. YARMUTH. Mr. Speaker, when I was a young boy, a radio station went on the air in Louisville, Kentucky, and for the first week of its existence played one song over and over. It was called ``Purple People I am reminded of that event today as we've heard speaker after speaker from the other side repeat the same tired Republican talking points. What we haven't heard is one idea about how to fix our dysfunctional health care system which is threatening every business in this country, threatening our competitiveness and our long-term It is time that this Congress and our colleagues from the other side focus on saving this country's health care system. We heard one gentleman from the other side saying we're facing $38 trillion in additional debt in Medicare. We're trying to make sure that that I wish our colleagues on the other side would help us in that task. (Mrs. EMERSON asked and was given permission to address the House for Mrs. EMERSON. Mr. Speaker, in southern Missouri, rural families are struggling with job losses. We are a vibrant district with a time- honored work ethic, but job losses have hit us especially hard during a Constituents call my office every day, and they're asking what is Congress doing for them, how are we helping the manufacturing worker who doesn't want to go to the unemployment office because he really just wants to go back to work. And I hear a lot of justifiable anger from the same callers about Congress' policies that are going to make it tougher for them to get back to work. Cap-and-trade is the focus of Today, unemployment is still severe in southern Missouri with the potential to go much higher, much higher, if the cap-and-trade bill becomes law. More than 3,000 jobs could be lost in the Eighth District in a single year, and the few new green jobs this bill would create Mr. Speaker, this bill will leave with us a legacy of energy cost increases that will kill generations of jobs in rural America and in southern Missouri. Like my constituents, I am ready and willing to get Good energy policy is good jobs policy. I hope we can reverse course on cap-and-trade so it doesn't destroy our rural economy. THE HEALTH CARE BILL WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL TAXPAYER EXPENDITURES (Mr. WHITFIELD asked and was given permission to address the House Mr. WHITFIELD. Last night, as the Energy and Commerce Committee met to debate the new health care reform bill offered by the Democratic Party, as I looked through the analysis by CBO, I discovered that there was a reduction in Medicare benefits over the next 10 years in excess In addition to that, there was a reduction in reimbursements to The part of it that bothered me most is that in so many rural areas, programs like Medicare Advantage, home health care, skilled nursing In addition to that, this bill provides for an additional tax on employers, a tax on individuals that do not go out and buy health insurance once the mandate goes into effect; and, still, the bill is not paid for. And as the CBO director indicated, this bill will not save taxpayer money. This bill will create additional taxpayer WE DON'T NEED A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTH CARE AND WE DON'T NEED (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. SOUDER. Where are the jobs? Last week, the health care bill was passed through the Education and Labor Committee, jammed through in an all-night session; and, supposedly, it offered a public-private option. Just a few minutes ago, we finished an Education and Labor markup. Where we once had a public-private option in direct lending, 80 percent chose the nonpublic option. So what did we just do? We eliminated the private option, and the Federal Government is going to be a giant bank, one of the biggest banks in the world, taking over all student lending. When we talk about the needs in health care, we need to address the problems that we're facing, the gaps in the health care system, how to make it more efficient. What we don't need is a government takeover of health care with no private options. We don't need higher taxes on the small businesses and the people in my district who are struggling with a mean of 15 percent unemployment in my eight counties. We don't need And this bill unbelievably had a clause added that will add more jobs for ACORN. When people in my district said they wanted more jobs, they (Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, it's an outrage the way health care is being approached in this country. Voters did vote for change; but, apparently, that's all they're going to have left in their pocket. I sat through a 17-hour markup on the Ways and Means Committee last week, and I didn't see one constructive process. I didn't see the voices of Democrats and Republicans heard on addressing the delivery system for Medicare to re-engineer it to reduce billions of dollars in Instead of reforming the private insurance industry that many of us want to do on both sides, Speaker Pelosi's response to that and the Democratic response to that is we'll legislate them out of business by undercutting them with a Medicare-like system which will punish rural And finally, egregiously, there's been no addressing of liability reform that punishes our doctors and health care providers with junk America demands real reform. We want real reform. Slow this thing down and give account to America for the kind of health care people need and want and that's affordable and accessible and not a GREATEST THREAT TO THE ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY FROM CAP-AND-TRADE BILL (Mr. BILBRAY asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. BILBRAY. Mr. Speaker, the American people were promised a climate change bill that would address the emissions problems. The problem is that their greatest threat to the environment and the economy from the so-called cap-and-trade bill was the smoke coming out of the back-room deals that were cut to create this monster that's being called cap-and- Frankly, I will just tell you the whole concept that when we had a chance to get government out of the way and build new zero emission generating facilities to be able to provide clean energy for the economy and for the environment, instead of that, this Congress decided And anyone that's worked on emissions issues will look at this bill in the future and say how could somebody with a straight face go back to their district and say that this bill is going to clean up the environment and help the economy? It is going to continue the pattern of a massive emission while we get the economy driven down. WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THE STIMULUS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME (Mr. KLINE of Minnesota asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. KLINE of Minnesota. Mr. Speaker, people are asking where are the As my friend from Indiana said moments ago, we just came out of amending a bill in the Education and Labor Committee where we wiped out the private sector in the student lending business, tens of thousands As all my colleagues know, this House, this Congress, passed a stimulus bill which was supposed to create jobs. Instead, we've been I find it interesting that the Republicans offered an alternative to that stimulus bill which would have cut taxes and created twice as many jobs, and now Christina Romer, the President's economic adviser, when she's been pressed on news interviews on two separate occasions in May and again in July about where are the jobs and why isn't the stimulus working, she said, well, the tax cuts in the stimulus bill are working. How ironic. We should have done it right the first time. WE NEED A PRESCRIPTION OF LOWER TAXES AND LOWERING SPENDING (Mr. GUTHRIE asked and was given permission to address the House for Mr. GUTHRIE. I remember walking into my home one night when I was a senior in high school after school, 1982. My father and mother were talking with each other with a distressed look on their faces, and my dad was telling my mother that he was losing his job. The factory where he expected to work his entire life was shutting down. This was 1982, the recession, a recession like we find ourselves in today; and the prescription from Washington was to lower spending and to cut taxes. In the late 1980s, my father decided to take advantage of the economy and create a plant that he used to work at; and he decided to start a new plant, created over 500 jobs because Washington's prescription was The prescription today coming out of Washington to try to get out of this recession is to raise regulation and to raise taxes; and, Mr. Speaker, I believe that's why we're lingering in this recession, because people don't want to invest, because they're concerned about (Mr. PLATTS asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. PLATTS. Mr. Speaker, as the House of Representatives addresses the very important issue of health care reform, we need to adhere to the principles of all physicians: first, do no harm. Unfortunately, the legislation that came out of the House Education and Labor Committee late last week does not adhere to this principle. CBO tells us it will drive up the costs of health care in the United States. In fact, when it's fully implemented, over $200 billion a year this plan will cost, it will not protect the right to keep the insurance coverage that you currently have. If you like it--that was one of the underlying principles of the administration--this bill will It will not adhere to that principle: do no harm. It will drive up costs. It will take away freedom of choice of the American citizens, and it is also going to have an impact on the ability for small businesses to provide insurance because of the taxes included in this bill. It's going to cost people insurance because small businesses will not be able to continue to afford the 8 percent payroll tax as well as an increase on small businesses filing a subchapter S. First, do no harm. We need to adhere to that principle. (Mr. NUNES asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, I wasn't going to come down here, Mr. Speaker, but then I heard the distinguished Democrat leader, Mr. Hoyer, come down and chastise us for using 1-minutes. Mr. Hoyer, you know why we're using these 1-minutes. It's because you've cut us out of the For the first time in this Nation's history, appropriations bills aren't under open rules. So we have no opportunity to offer amendments So you can understand why, in my district, having almost 20 percent unemployment, some of the highest unemployment in the country because this government fails to act to get water to the people to provide for the general welfare of the people of my district, this is why we come So I would suggest that we probably won't do this again because you will probably take away this advantage that we have of using these 1- minutes to make our case before the American people. I assume this will be the last day we have unlimited 1-minutes, but I can promise you that if you just go back to the open rules process on the appropriations bills, we will gladly not use these unlimited 1-minutes this way. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will kindly remind Members that remarks in debate should be directed to the Chair and not to others in NEVADA'S ECONOMY IS THE MOST DISTRESSED IN THE NATION (Mr. HELLER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, in a recent study Nevada's economy is now determined to be the most distressed in the Nation; and if you recall, 4 months ago we passed a stimulus package and we were promised by this administration, and by the majority, if we do this, if we pass this stimulus package, that we'd only have 8 percent unemployment. It would never exceed 8 percent unemployment. Yet we had to do it right now. We Well, I'm here to tell you today that Nevada's unemployment is at 12 percent, and that this administration says that the unemployment is So the question is, What did the stimulus do for Nevada? Well, in Las Vegas, Las Vegas has received to date $4,833. So the question is, Where's the money? $4,833 to Nevada and to Las Vegas. Las Vegas Mayor Oscar Goodman said, ``I bet more on a football game I ask the Speaker: Where's the money and where are the jobs? (Mr. BROUN of Georgia asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.) Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today because I want someone to show me the jobs that we have been promised by the Democrats. Many counties in my district have unemployment rates of more Show me the jobs, Mr. Speaker. My colleagues on the Democratic side of the aisle promised that their trillion-dollar stimulus would immediately create jobs and unemployment would not rise above 8 percent. Nothing could be further from the truth. In June alone, almost half a million jobs were lost, driving unemployment to its highest Now, after shoving a $646 billion energy tax down the throats of the American people, liberal leadership is now shoving a multitrillion- dollar health experiment. According to the CBO, this will cost 750,000 more jobs and push 100 million Americans off of their private health Mr. Speaker, I ask you to show me the jobs and show me why the American people should believe once again that a trillion-dollar The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings now will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 164. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 422, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.'' So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. Mr. McMAHON. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 596, had I been present, I The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2729, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 330, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. PROVIDING FOR NATURAL GAS VEHICLE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 1622, as amended, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from New Mexico (Mr. Lujan) that the House suspend the rules The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 393, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). There are 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 507, as amended, on which the yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 428, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members are advised 2 So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 658, this time has been designated for the taking of the official photo of the House The House will be in a brief recess while the Chamber is being As soon as these preparations are complete, the House will immediately resume its actual session for the taking of the photograph. About 5 minutes after that, the House will proceed with the business For the information of the Members, when the Chair says the House will be in order, we are ready to take our picture. That will be in The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess while the Chamber is being prepared. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 18 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the (Thereupon, the Members sat for the official photograph of the House The SPEAKER. Pursuant to clause 12(a) of rule I, the Chair declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair in 2 or 3 minutes. Accordingly (at 4 o'clock and 27 minutes p.m.), the House stood in The recess having expired, the House was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. Blumenauer) at 4 o'clock and 29 minutes p.m. NOTICE OF INTENTION TO OFFER RESOLUTION RAISING A QUESTION OF THE Mr. NUNES. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2(a)(1) of rule IX, I rise to give notice of my intention to raise a question of the privileges of Whereas, on May 25, 2007, U.S. District Court Judge Oliver W. Wanger issued a ruling that directed the Bureau of Reclamation to reduce water exports from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta to protect a three-inch minnow called the Whereas, on December 15, 2008, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, based on the Wanger Ruling, issued a Biological Opinion on the Delta smelt that permanently reduced water export from the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta which is traditionally delivered to cities and farms in the San Joaquin Valley and the Los Angeles and San Diego Whereas according to a University of California at Davis study, based on the water reductions outlined in the Delta smelt Biological Opinion, revenue losses in the San Joaquin Valley of California for 2009 will be $2.2 billion and job Whereas according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in the San Joaquin Valley has reached Whereas region wide unemployment in the San Joaquin Valley of California is nearly 20 percent and some cities have an Whereas thousands of people who once relied on employment in the agricultural sector are now unemployed and struggling to meet their most basic needs, such as providing food for Whereas, on March, 1, 2009, the Sacramento Bee reported thousands of people have been turned away from local food banks as supplies are not ample enough to meet local needs; Whereas, on April 14, 2009, the Fresno County, California, Board of Supervisors proclaimed that the man-made drought has Whereas on June 4, 2009, despite the ongoing man-made drought in California, the National Marine Fisheries Service issued a new Biological Opinion on the spring-run Chinook salmon, Central Valley steelhead, the southern population of North American green sturgeon, and Southern Resident killer whales which further reduces water supplies to Californians; Whereas, on June 19, 2009, California's Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a state of emergency for Fresno County, California, and petitioned President Barack Obama to Whereas on June 28, 2009, the Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar visited Fresno, California, and held a town hall meeting in which nearly 1,000 people attended to express their dissatisfaction with the lack of action by the Obama Whereas, on July 6, 2009, the Los Angeles Times reported that during Interior Secretary Ken Salazar's town hall meeting on June 28, 2009, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Reclamation, Mike Connor, pledged to provide financial aid to starving families and an audience member replied ``we don't Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that hundreds of San Joaquin Valley farmers protested outside the Federal Building Plaza in San Francisco which houses Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported the protestors blamed Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman George Miller for the water shortage in the San Joaquin Whereas, on June 29, 2009, CBS 5 Eyewitness News reported that protestors were holding signs that said ``ESA Puts Fish Ahead of People'', ``Congress Created Drought'', and ``New Whereas, on July 1, 2009, the Fresno Bee reported that a crowd of 4,000 marched through the streets of Fresno, California, to demand that the Federal Government end the Whereas, on June 18, 2009, the Democrat leadership held open Roll Call Vote 366 for the purpose of changing the Whereas during this vote, House Democrat leadership was seen on the House floor pressuring Members of Congress to change their Aye vote to a Nay vote in order to defeat the Nunes Amendment which would have helped to relieve the water Whereas, on July 8, 2009, during the mark-up on the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010, a debate was held on the Calvert Amendment which would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Appropriations Committee, David Obey, said ``Recognize there are certain actions, that if you take, this bill won't pass, Whereas Chairman Obey violated Clause 16 of House Rule 23 by linking passage of the Calvert Amendment to loss of Whereas, on July 14, 2009, despite historical tradition of open rules during the appropriations process, the Rules Committee blocked an amendment to the Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 that would have restored water deliveries to Californians; Whereas, for two years, the House of Representatives has known about the man-made drought in California without taking Whereas the lack of action by the House of Representatives has demonstrated that fish are more important than families; Constitution enumerates that the Congress shall have the power to provide for the general welfare of the United Whereas the House of Representatives has willfully and knowingly failed to provide for the general welfare of the Whereas the failure of the House of Representatives to carry out its duties has subjected the House to public ridicule and damaged the dignity and integrity of the House Resolved, That the Committee on Natural Resources is instructed to discharge H.R. 3105, the Turn on the Pumps Act of 2009, for immediate consideration by the House of The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under rule IX, a resolution offered from the floor by a Member other than the majority leader or the minority leader as a question of the privileges of the House has immediate precedence only at a time designated by the Chair within 2 legislative days after Pending that designation, the form of the resolution noticed by the gentleman from California will appear in the Record at this point. The Chair will not at this point determine whether the resolution constitutes a question of privilege. That determination will be made at the time designated for consideration of the resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, the Chair will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered, or on which the vote is objected to under clause 6 of rule XX. Record votes on postponed questions will be taken later. EXTENDING DEADLINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PRICE DAM HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2938) to extend the deadline for commencement of Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would otherwise apply to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project numbered 12187, the Commission may, at the request of the licensee for the project, and after reasonable notice, in accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures under that section, extend the time period during which the licensee is required to commence the construction of the project for up to 3 consecutive 2-year periods from the date of the expiration of the extension (b) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the period required for commencement of construction of the project described in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of the enactment of this Act, the Commission may reinstate the license effective as of the date of its expiration and the first extension authorized under subsection (a) shall take The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2938 would allow the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to extend the construction deadline for a hydroelectric power plant at the Melvin Price Locks and Dam in Alton, Illinois. Over the past 20 years, there has been great interest in building a hydroelectric plant at this site on the Mississippi River; however, construction of the hydroelectric plant has not happened on Last October, Brookfield Power acquired the license to proceed with the construction of the site. When Brookfield applied for an extension of the construction deadline, the company was informed that because of the administrative extensions granted to the previous licensee, congressional action is needed to grant an extension. Brookfield will lose this license at the end of this month, July 2009. For that reason, Brookfield and the City of Alton, Illinois, requested legislation to extend the deadline for 6 years. Passing this legislation is necessary to ensure that Brookfield can bring renewable energy to Illinois and create green jobs. The hydroelectric project will create 404,000 megawatt hours of electricity, the equivalent of 283 barrels of oil. Further, Brookfield will hire 125 workers over a 3-year period and invest over $400 million This bill is cosponsored by my friend and colleague from Illinois, Congressman John Shimkus. Both the majority and minority staff of the Energy and Commerce Committee have reviewed and accepted the legislation. FERC has also reviewed the legislation and does not oppose Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2938. Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 2938, a bill that extends the timeline to bring this hydroelectric power plant project in Illinois on line. It gives them another up to 6 years, and ultimately, this would be the decision of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. But as they're going through the process right now of permitting and approval, this provides them an additional 6 years to make sure that the project has enough time to get approved and completed and bring I would like to yield 3 minutes to my friend from Oregon (Mr. Mr. Speaker, I rise today also in support of this legislation. I think it's a good bill because I think hydroelectric power is a good thing for our country, and when we're concerned about getting renewable energy online, there's probably nothing better than hydropower for Unfortunately, in the cap-and-tax bill that was passed by this House over my objection and over the objection of the gentleman from Illinois, there is a provision on page 19, line 12, sub 3, that says, The hydroelectric project installed on the dam is operated so that the water surface elevation at any given location and time that would have occurred in the absence of the hydroelectric project is maintained. Now, I share this language with you because the gentleman from Illinois, my friend, talked about the 404,000 watts or megawatts, whatever it is--I didn't jot down the exact amount--would be produced as hydroelectric power and, therefore, renewable energy and create new jobs. My concern is this: that hydropower is being added after this Should the cap-and-tax bill become law, that hydropower, according to this language, would not be considered as renewable energy for purposes of Illinois meeting the new Federal standard on renewable energy. Because in consultation with two civil engineers I've spoken with who operate hydro projects--many of them and large-scale hydro projects-- when I shared this language with them about maintaining the surface elevation at any location in time, they laughed. They said you can't operate a hydro system and not affect the water behind the dam in some And so to disqualify the new hydro--like the gentleman from Illinois Now, there is another provision in this bill, the cap-and-tax bill, that said hydro that came online after 1988 is renewable but hydro before 1988 is not. Now, you have got water flowing down a river. You've got multiple dams along the way with hydro generation facilities. It's the same water. It just depends on what year the dam was built whether or not that hydropower is considered renewable or Nor do the provisions in the cap-and-tax bill that said, if woody biomass off a Federal forest comes off of a late successional stand, you can't count the burning of that to produce green energy as renewable energy, but if it came off of a severely damaged tree, it is, although there is no definition for that. And if any woody biomass comes off private, county, State lands, it's all considered renewable energy when it produces electricity when it's burned, but yet there is I share that with you because America's Federal forests are terrifically overstocked and subject to catastrophic fire. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. WALDEN. We could create more real jobs cleaning up the forest in very depressed communities. I was just out in four counties in my district. I think two, maybe three, are now at over 20 percent unemployment. They have 70, 50 and 80 percent Federal land. This is the great forests of our country that are left to burn up. The woody biomass could be put into clean energy. There are firms willing to invest if they could get supply. Again, the cap-and-trade, cap-and-tax So I share the gentleman's support of this legislation to create and move forward on the hydro project. It's unfortunate if the cap-and-tax bill that passed the House becomes law that hydro will not be considered renewal. That doesn't make sense. And I hope that the Senate Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my colleague for supporting this legislation. I share the same concern that you have with the section that you quoted in the energy bill, and we hope that our friends in the other body will address that issue so that it is not a With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. Mr. SCALISE. I would like to yield 3 minutes to a cosponsor of this Mr. SHIMKUS. Melvin Price Locks and Dam is named after an historic member of this Chamber, Mel Price, who gave me my nomination to West Point. So it is with great affinity that I just mentioned that. But now that district is ably represented by my friend and colleague, Jerry Costello, and I thank him for including me on this reauthorization The Republicans have already talked about an all-of-the-above energy strategy which talks about nuclear, wind, solar and hydroelectric. And no one is really more knowledgeable on the hydroelectric issue than the colleague who preceded me, Greg Walden. There is a concern about if we want these programs, these licenses, to actually become real projects in the whole credit issue, then this has to qualify for renewable, and that will help bring some dollars to help effect this instead of just worrying about relicensing, then we can actually get it built. But if we don't do this process, then we have to go through the whole I'm very happy to be here with my friend who, again, worked hard and diligently for southern Illinois. And this is all part of that all-of- the-above energy strategy that will help us decrease our reliance on imported crude oil. Thank you for letting me join you in this Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I would yield 3 minutes to the gentleman Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I rise really in amazement today to hear our colleagues on the other side talk about hydroelectric power being a renewable energy source, because we have seen multiple venues here in the House Mr. Speaker, we have a tremendous need in this country for alternative sources of energy, renewable sources of energy. Nuclear energy is one of those renewable sources of energy, or a source of energy that is one that makes the most sense from an environmental We have many members of the opposition on the other side that want to deny us going into a nuclear age. France gets over 80 percent of its electric power from nuclear sources. The United States should do the same thing. In my home State of Georgia, the Georgia Power Company for a long period of time now has been trying to get permitting for two new nuclear reactors at their plant in Vogel just south of my district, just south of Augusta, Georgia. They already have two. They want two more. But, Mr. Speaker, they have had a great deal of difficulty because the regulatory commission and various environmental groups have They are not alone. All over this country, there are electric power companies that want to put in electric power plants that are nuclear- fueled. Mr. Speaker, they have great difficulty doing so. We need to use our renewable resources, not only for hydroelectric power, but for nuclear power. We need to look to wind and solar. We need to look to biomass. We need to stop this idiocy of a corn-based ethanol source of energy. Mr. Speaker, I'm from Georgia, and I love my cornbread and grits. It makes no sense to me to drive down the road burning up my food. But we've done that. And it has driven up the cost of corn for the chicken producers that produce most of the chicken for the world, all over the world in my district, and in my friend Nathan Deal's district from Gainesville in the Ninth and Tenth Congressional Mr. Speaker, we have an energy policy that is broken. Republicans have presented bill after bill that would solve the energy crisis. The American Energy Act is one. It is an all-of-the-above energy plan that would stimulate hydroelectric power. It would stimulate nuclear power. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute. Mr. BROUN of Georgia. But our plans are not being heard on the floor of this House. Why is that? Why are the American people's It is because the leadership on the Democratic side wants to stifle debate, wants to shut off any alternative ideas. They call the Republican Party the ``Party of No,'' but the Democratic Party has been the Party of No, whereas the Republican Party is the Party of k-n-o-w Know because we know how to solve the energy crisis. We know how to solve the health care financing crisis. We know how to solve the economic crisis. But those ideas are not being heard. Mr. Speaker, it is time for the American people to wake up and demand that the Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, I would ask my friend from Louisiana if he Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I again rise in support of the legislation dealing with hydroelectric power. I think it is important, as we are talking about energy, that we really talk about the need to get a comprehensive national energy policy in our country. It is not just enough to promote hydroelectric power. It is not just enough to look at any one significant source of power. We need to look at all of the resources in our land. In fact, the inscription by Daniel Webster right above the Speaker's rostrum talks about the need to explore the resources of our land. Unfortunately, there are many Federal laws and barriers in place that prevent us from doing just that. This cap-and-trade national energy tax imposes even more barriers. In addition to imposing significant taxes on to the backs of American people in the form of higher utility rates and bureaucratic regulations, it will run millions of jobs out of this country. That's not the right approach. What we need is a comprehensive energy policy. I'm proud to be a cosponsor, with many other of my colleagues, of the American Energy Act, a bill that we filed earlier this year to take that comprehensive approach to a national energy policy, one that looks at all of the alternatives. We explore more technologies for wind, for solar, for hydroelectric and for nuclear power. We use our natural resources, like oil and natural gas, to get to that bridge to fund those other alternatives. We use the things that we have here today to get us to those technologies that aren't yet readily available to power our homes or to run our cars. But hopefully one day, through the use of these technologies, we will advance the utilization of the natural resources we have in our country to create jobs. Our bill would actually create jobs and generate billions of dollars to the Federal Government, not by raising taxes, but by actually creating more economic opportunities by creating jobs and getting people back to work so that they can contribute and pay into and pay down this debt as opposed to raising the debt and running off jobs. So I would hope that we would support and get to a place where we can actually get agreement in a bipartisan way to pass a bipartisan bill like the American Energy Act that actually takes a comprehensive approach to solving our national energy needs and reducing our dependence on Middle Eastern oil--rather than this tax approach, this cap-and-trade energy tax that actually would make countries in Europe, the Middle East and China more powerful and put America further at risk--so we can get our strengthened energy policy and we can get energy independence. But we need to have a bipartisan approach, not this cap-and-trade energy tax that literally would run millions of jobs Mr. COSTELLO. Mr. Speaker, let me thank my friend from Louisiana and the minority for supporting this legislation. In particular I would like to thank my colleague from Illinois, Congressman Shimkus, not only for his kind words, but for cosponsoring this legislation. I urge passage of H.R. 2938, and with that I yield back the balance The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Costello) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 69) recognizing the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for diabetes, Whereas diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease caused by the inability of the pancreas to produce insulin or to use Whereas in the case of Type I diabetes or insulin-dependent diabetes, formerly called juvenile-onset diabetes because it tends to affect persons before the age of 20, the pancreas Whereas in the case of Type II diabetes or non-insulin- dependent diabetes, which comprises about 90 percent of all cases of diabetes, the pancreas produces a reduced amount of insulin or the cells do not respond to the insulin; Whereas this year 23.6 million Americans suffer from one form or another of this disease, and 5.7 million people go Whereas 2.0 million or 8.2 percent of all Latino Americans aged twenty years or older have diabetes, and Latino Americans are 1.5 times more likely to have diabetes than Whereas Mexican-Americans, the largest Latino subgroup in the United States, are more than twice as likely to have Whereas residents of Puerto Rico are 1.8 times more likely to have diagnosed diabetes than United States non-Latino Whereas diabetes affects individuals in different ways, and Whereas diabetes in the Latino community can result in a high prevalence of complications, such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in the legs, heart attacks and strokes, and Whereas individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease; learn and practice the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol Whereas targeted health communications to the public are vital in disseminating information about diabetes and the Whereas the Latino Diabetes Association, a nonprofit organization devoted to aggressive diabetes education, has worked tirelessly to raise funds for diabetes education and Whereas the month of July of 2009 would be an appropriate month to recognize Latino Diabetes Awareness Month in order to educate Latino communities across the Nation about diabetes and the need for research funding, accurate diagnosis, and effective treatments: Now, therefore, be it (1) recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education, and an eventual cure for educational institutes, and other organizations that are-- (A) working to increase awareness of diabetes; and (B) conducting research for methods to help patients and families in the Latino community suffering from diabetes; Association for its great efforts to educate, support, and provide hope for individuals and their families who suffer (4) supports the designation of an appropriate month to recognize ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month''; and (5) calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with appropriate programs and activities. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) and the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise) The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on this legislation and to insert extraneous material thereon. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. First, I would like to thank Majority Leader Hoyer, Chairman Waxman, Ranking Member Barton and Health Subcommittee Chair Pallone and, of course, my colleague from Louisiana, a good baseball player, for their support of this resolution. I also want to take the time to thank all my colleagues in the House of Representatives for their bipartisan I rise today in strong support of House Resolution 69, the Latino Diabetes Awareness Resolution. The resolution recognizes the need to continue research into the causes, treatment, education and an eventual cure for diabetes and commends those organizations that are working to increase awareness of diabetes and conducting research for methods to help patients and families in Latino It also congratulates the work of the Latino Diabetes Association for its great efforts to educate, support and provide hope for individuals and families who suffer from diabetes. The resolution also supports the designation of July 2009 as ``Latino Diabetes Awareness Month.'' It calls upon the people of the United States to observe the month with It is critical for the long-term sustainability of any health care reform plan to make sure that steps for the prevention of diseases, like diabetes, are encouraged by Congress. This prevention of disease would do a great deal in helping keep costs down for current patients, as well as favorably changing the attitudes and behavior of diabetes patients and their families, thereby improving their quality of life. We can take a good first step in achieving these goals by passing this resolution here today. Diabetes is a chronic disease of the pancreas and adversely affects its ability to produce and use insulin Diabetes has no cure, treatment varies from patient to patient, and it is quite often very painful. Some side effects of treatment include weight gain, skin rash or itching, various stomach problems, tiredness The impact of diabetes is not focused solely on the patient; family members and immediate care takers also suffer greatly from the effects of diabetes on their loved ones. I say this from personal experience. In the Latino community, diabetes can result in high prevalence of foot problems, kidney failure, renal disease, blindness, heart attacks, What's scariest is that diabetes patients who need to take one or more insulin shots daily, and for whatever reason do not, greatly One of the reasons I believe diabetes disproportionately affects the Latino community is the lack of sound health communication that speaks to those Hispanics who are most at risk of coming down with diabetes, or who already suffer from it. This means targeting communications efforts to both English- and Spanish-speaking communities and specifically referencing these efforts towards the area of our culture Over 23.6 million Americans suffer from diabetes, and of these, 2 million are Latinos or of Latino descent; 8.6 of all Latinos over the age of 20 live with this disease. However, Latinos are almost twice as likely to have diabetes as non-Latino whites of similar age. Individuals suffering from diabetes can reduce their risk for complications if they are educated about their disease and take the proper steps to care for themselves. This means learning and practicing the skills necessary to better control their blood glucose, blood pressure and cholesterol levels. They must exercise and receive regular checkups, as well as maintain a healthy, balanced diet, as well as maintaining willingness to change these dangerous eating habits. And that becomes very difficult for a lot of us because we like our frijoles, our tortillas, our tamales, our enchiladas, our menudo; but we have to put that aside. This could include eating meals prepared healthier, eating more moderate portions, or a combination of these. Two people ought to be commended for their hard work in the attempts to educate the public about diabetes and treatments for patients, and that's actors Rita Torres and Edward Olmos. A few years ago, I worked with Rita Torres and Edward to help put together a short documentary highlighting the day-to-day lives of different diabetes patients, regardless of age or ethnicity, and they ought to be recognized for their tireless efforts to raise diabetes awareness. I have been affected personally by diabetes through the loss of five members of my immediate family. My father was a proud, hardworking man, never missed a day of work for any reason until he was struck down by diabetes and ultimately needed to have a leg amputated. It originally started with a toe, half a leg, and then the leg itself. My mother also was very strong, was never sick until she, too, came My two brothers, Abelio and Tanny, and my sister Annie fought with diabetes but ultimately lost their battle largely due to lack of education and awareness of how the disease would affect their lives and Tanny recently passed away due in part to the fact that he could no longer afford all the necessary treatment to keep his diabetes at bay. He is not only a victim of diabetes but of the high cost of health care My brother-in-law, Ted Dominguez, was also a victim of diabetes. Ted was a great athlete back in his day, always in great physical shape. His lesson to us is that anyone, regardless of age, weight or physical condition, can get diabetes. He eventually went through dialysis and Also, a former staff member of mine who has been a close friend for many years, Daniel Hernandez, is a testament to us and to many other folks. He worked for me because he needed coverage for diabetes. He left my office after 2 years and became an independent consultant. He came back, however, and approached me one day and told me that the only reason he was willing to come back to work was to qualify for health care benefits that he would not be able to receive otherwise. It was their fight and their example that opened my eyes to the horrid realities and difficulties of this disease and the need for education and awareness about diabetes and ultimately to introduce this However, a great diabetes success story and a perfect example to prove that diabetes can be beat is Supreme Court nominee, Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor was diagnosed and has lived with type 1 diabetes since the age of 8 years of age. Due to carefully monitoring her condition, she fought the disease head-on and continues to be a great example of someone who can live with diabetes. She will soon not only be the first Latina to become a Justice on the Supreme Court, but Another example of a remarkable type 1 diabetes patient is Sara Rodriguez. Sara is a constituent of mine, a rising junior at Rancho Cucamonga High School, a straight A student, and letter winner in basketball, volleyball, and track. In order for Sara to lead as normal a teenage life as possible, she must test her blood sugar levels eight to 20 times per day, every day. She will never outgrow her disease and will require care and medication for the rest of her life. She is a very brave and courageous young woman whose fight and determination should not only be an example to diabetes patients everywhere, but to On behalf of all of the other young people like Sara Rodriguez, Congress recently reauthorized the special diabetes program. This is a wonderful example of the government's commitment to cure diabetes for people like Sara and the millions of others who live with the disease and its complications. This program funds $150 million a year in type 1 diabetes research and is aligned with the goals of this resolution to Yet another great example of a person living a healthy life with diabetes is Roque Martin, the grandfather of Matt Gomez, one of my interns, who has been instrumental in assisting with this resolution. Roque was diagnosed with diabetes over 25 years ago and continues to live a healthy life even at the age of 78. He eats rights and checks his blood sugar level three times a day and is a great example, along with Sara and Judge Sotomayor, for all diabetes patients that with proper care, diet and exercise, one can survive with diabetes. That is why it's so important to pass this resolution, which I introduced in the hopes of bringing awareness to those lucky enough to not have to face the disease firsthand, or through the fight of a loved It takes a small, but a critical, first step to help raise awareness about diabetes for not only the Latino community, but for all Americans But, also, it's a giant step for those individuals that have suffered from diabetes for many years and lack the ability to tell their stories firsthand, along with families and immediate caretakers of diabetes patients, who oftentimes suffer the impacts of the disease more so than Diabetes is a disease that can, and does, affect anyone: Democrats, Republicans, black or white, Latinos, Asians, American Indians, all nationalities. The alarming statistics regarding diabetes are on the rise. With the greater scope of the health care debate, there is no better time to raise the awareness for a preventable disease than right now. And there is no better time than right now to stress that no diabetes patient should be denied health care coverage because of their For these reasons, I ask you to stand with me and fight against Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res. 69. I want to congratulate the gentleman from California on his leadership on this bill, building a bipartisan coalition to bring it to the floor under suspension. I want to recognize the 23.6 million Americans that suffer from diabetes. Diabetes can lead to serious complications and premature death, but people with diabetes can take steps to control the disease and lower the risk of complications. The Centers for Disease Control has stated that progression to diabetes among those with pre-diabetes is not inevitable and that studies have shown that people with pre-diabetes who lose weight and increase their physical activity can prevent or delay diabetes and return their blood glucose levels to normal. Through regular exercise and a steady diet, Americans can get to a healthier state of living and avoid diabetes, and that's what we're trying to raise awareness about. Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my good friend from Houston, Texas (Mr. Gene Green), also an outstanding basketball player. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Res. 69, which recognizes the increased rates of diabetes in the Hispanic community and calls for increased research to combat and And I want to thank my good friend Joe Baca for sponsoring this resolution and also for the compliment. I think you're the first person in history who ever said I was a good basketball player. Thank you, According to the Office of Minority Health, Mexican Americans are twice as likely as non-Hispanic whites to be diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. They have higher rates of end-stage renal disease caused by diabetes, and they are 50 percent more likely to die from diabetes Mexican American adults are two times more likely than non-Hispanic white adults to have been diagnosed with diabetes by a physician. In 2002, Hispanics were 1.5 times as likely to start treatment for end- stage renal disease related to diabetes, compared to non-Hispanic white men. In 2005, Hispanics were 1.6 times as likely as non-Hispanic whites In our district, it is predominantly Hispanic. We have a large number of individuals with type 2 diabetes, which is often referred to as late-onset diabetes. Because of this, many individuals in our district have diabetes-related complications, including illnesses such as foot problems and amputations, kidney failure that may lead to chronic or end-stage renal disease, blindness, numbness and loss of sensation in However, type 2 diabetes is preventable with a good diet and exercise. It is important we have targeted educational campaigns in the Hispanic community to help combat the diabetes epidemic. I would like to commend the Latino Diabetes Association and other diabetes research groups for their work in educating the Hispanic community on diabetes-related issues. Groups like these are crucial to the reduction of diabetes in the Hispanic community. I would also like to extend my support towards designating July 2009 as Latino Diabetes Awareness Month to help raise awareness of the high Through education and prevention and wellness programs we can drastically reduce the number of Hispanic individuals with diabetes. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. BACA. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds. Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. This is probably the most important part, That is why this Congress needs to pass comprehensive health care reform that covers everyone so we can deal with the diabetes epidemic in our Hispanic community, our African American community and also in our low-economic community, because we can deal with this if we push the envelope back to deal with it before it gets to be where people Mr. SCALISE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I'm a medical doctor. I've treated diabetes for 3\\1/2\\ or more decades. I congratulate my good friend Joe Baca for bringing this issue to the forefront because it is extremely important for all Americans, not just only the Latino community that he's focusing on here. I've seen many patients in my overall medical career that are Latino, as well as blacks and Caucasian and people from all ethnic groups. It affects everybody no matter who their forefathers, what their skin color is, and I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this God tells us in Hosea 4:6, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. And as a medical doctor, I've tried to instill knowledge into my patients over the years, and this, of course, is what this resolution is all about, and I do congratulate the gentleman for bringing it forward because we do have a problem with people being knowledgeable about diabetes and the effect that it has upon them, Diabetes is the leading cause of blindness in the adult population. It leads to many health problems. It leads to heart attacks and As I sat here listening to Mr. Baca, I recalled an elderly black gentleman who came to see me as a patient that I diagnosed as having diabetes, and I started talking to him about diet and exercise and those types of things. Well, he didn't take care of himself, in spite of all my warnings and all of the consequences that he was headed towards. He wound up having a foot cut off, and he had that leg cut off. I kept talking to him. His blood sugar was continuing to be extremely high. Wound up having a second leg cut off, and eventually he had both arms and both legs removed, and he was sitting in a wheelchair when he finally got the message and started controlling his diet, taking his medications as prescribed, and we finally got his blood That's a sad story. I've seen many, many patients over the years that have developed renal failure, which is what diabetes leads to. It leads to the nerves in people's legs dying so that they have no feeling in their legs so they can get cuts or even the simplest little puncture or a cut on their foot may lead to gangrene that leads to amputation, maybe even lead to what we call in medicine septicemia, which is where you have bacteria in your bloodstream, and it can go to your heart and affect the valves in your heart. Septicemia itself can lead to death, Diabetes afflicts many of our population, and it's sad that people don't have the knowledge of what that disease will lead to. That's why I congratulate Mr. Baca for bringing this forward, and I Mr. Speaker, when I was practicing medicine in rural south Georgia, I had a small automated lab in my office down there, and Congress passed a bill called the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act. My lab was totally automated. I had quality control to make sure that the results were absolutely accurate so that when I checked a patient's blood sugar, I would know what it was to know if they had the potential for prediabetes or whether they had frank diabetes. I would do a fasting blood sugar that would help me diagnosis their condition. Well, Congress passed CLIA, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act, that closed my lab and every single doctor's lab in this country. Closed our labs. Eventually, I got my lab back up after I jumped through the hoops that were required by the legislation, by the regulatory burden placed on me and all doctors in this country. Prior to CLIA, a patient would come in and I would take a history and physical and would suspect that they may have diabetes. Some patients would get a family history of diabetes, and so I would do a screening I charged $10 for that test, Mr. Speaker. After CLIA shut me down, I had to send patients over to the hospital. The hospital was charging $35 for the same test. Once CLIA came along, it actually increased, and I got my lab opened back up, I had to charge $35, but the hospital, I The point I want to make here is this regulatory burden on the health care industry markedly raised the price for that one test. What we see across the health care industry when government gets involved in health care decisions, such as it did with CLIA, it drives up the cost for all As a physician who used to be a preferred provider for Medicare patients--I'm not now, for many reasons--but as a preferred provider, I could not see many patients, as I did previously, for free. Many, many patients, poor patients, people that had no insurance would come into my office, and I would see them for free. I have literally given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of free health care provision in my office; give free tests, free screening for diabetes, for many conditions. But under current Federal law, physicians who accept Medicare cannot do that. That makes no sense, Mr. Speaker. It is so today because of Federal regulation. Congress passed HIPPA, the Health Insurance Portability and Privacy Act. That has cost the health care industry billions of dollars and has not paid for the first aspirin to treat the headaches that it's created. And it was totally Mr. Speaker, the point I'm trying to make is the American people need to know that the more the Federal Government gets into the health care business, the more regulatory burden is placed on physicians and In the non-stimulus bill we put a chunk of money, a huge chunk of money, for something called comparative effectiveness research. What I'd like my colleagues and the American people to know, Mr. Speaker, is that this is a process put into place by the Democratic majority. This could have prevented those 78-year-old people that my friend Mr. Baca talked about from getting the care that they need because it is going to be deemed, as some Federal bureaucrat says, it's not effective comparatively to provide the dialysis for that 78-year-old that Mr. Baca was talking about. It's not going to be effective to try to prevent the blindness. It's not going to be effective to provide care to people who now are getting care. And we're going to have a I have said on this floor in Special Orders that this comprehensive health care bill that's being debated right now in committees and is going to be presented on this floor eventually--the Speaker wants to have it come up before we leave for the August recess--it's literally Now I have been chastised in the liberal media for making that claim, but it's going to kill people for this simple reason, Mr. Speaker. And the American people need to understand this. People are going to be denied services. They're going to have a marked delay in their being able to get the screening tests that they need for colon cancer or for evaluation of their chest pain or they're going to have a marked delay, as we see in Canada and Great Britain today, of being able to get their So diabetic patients who have developed coronary artery disease and have angina pectoris and maybe even had a heart attack are going to have marked delay in being able to get the stints put in or their bypass surgery that they desperately need, and people are going to die. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired. Mr. SCALISE. I yield 2 additional minutes to the gentleman from Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I have seen patients over and over again with Mr. Speaker, I've given away hundreds of thousands of dollars of my services over my career. I want people to have access to health care-- but they do today. EMTALA requires every emergency room in this country to evaluate and treat everybody who walks in. So the question of access We hear about 47 million people. The numbers keep growing by the Democratic side. The American people need to understand that a lot of those people are illegal aliens who have come here illegally. I understand why. They come here for work, for their families. And I feel American citizens are going to be denied treatment, denied x-rays, denied their coronary bypass surgery, denied their dialysis, and all these things because of this comprehensive health care plan that's being shoved down the throat of the American people. This is not the CBO just last week said it's not going to lower the cost of health care. CBO just last week said it's not going to put people in the insured category. CBO last week said it's going to cost at least The more government gets involved in the health care business, the higher the cost goes, the less efficient it is, and the Democratic plan The American people, Mr. Speaker, need to stand up and say ``no,'' and say ``yes'' to a health care plan that makes sense, that lowers the Mr. BACA. First of all, I appreciate some of the comments that my colleague, the doctor from Georgia, ended up making. And it is about knowledge, education, and awareness, and it's about preventive, because preventive is really the key to saving money. Once you do the early detection, early prevention, then we could save a lot of lives on account of treatment, because in his statement he indicated many of the people that he treated--those are people that I recognize in terms of my own personal family that lack that kind of knowledge, that kind of awareness, and did not follow the doctor's orders in terms of what they should have been doing to preserve their life. That's why it's very important that we create this kind of legislation to recognize diabetes awareness for all America, because it impacts all of us. Mr. SCALISE. It's important that we continue working to find the causes and the treatments, education, and make sure that we are researching properly to find cures for diseases like diabetes. The broader question of health care reform--I think my friend from about the challenges and the concerns that so many over on this side have of this proposal that's before us. Not here in this bill, but being debated here in this Congress in these coming weeks, this week, last week, this proposal to have a government takeover of our health I think it shows that while there are definitely ways to approach this in a bipartisan fashion, where there are many areas of health care reform that many of us agree need to be made to improve outcomes, to improve access, to focus on that narrow group of people who don't have I think the real danger is going down the road of a government takeover where government literally is interfering in the relationship between a doctor and their patient, as this bill would do, the bill that's been filed by the administration, by some of the members of this I think there's real problems, and we can only look at the neighbors that have gone down the same road. Look at Canada. Canada has a government-run health care system. Many people with the means from Canada come to America to get good care. The same thing in England. There was a tragic story in England, which has a government-run system. Just yesterday, there was a young man, a 22-year-old, who died because he was not allowed to get a liver transplant. ``He did not qualify for a donor liver under strict NHS rules.'' His own mother They have a government-run system that's very similar to the proposal that's being pushed by the President to have this government takeover We actually had an amendment in committee last night in the Energy and Commerce Committee that would have prohibited a government-run system from having a bureaucrat interfere in the relationship between a patient and their doctor. Unfortunately, our amendment was defeated. So clearly it shows that a government-run system would allow a doctor-patient relationship to be interfered with by a government bureaucrat here in Washington. That's not health care reform. That's So we need to, hopefully, go back to the table and have a true bipartisan debate because there are many proposals that are on the table, bills that have been filed--I'm cosponsor of a number of them that actually address some of the problems that exist in health care-- to allow companies to pool together so they can get the same buying power as a small business, as a large business does; to allow individuals to buy insurance across State lines so they don't have to rely on their employer if they don't like their employer's plan; and then also open up and address those areas of waste, fraud, and abuse I do think it's very important that we raise awareness and education for diseases like diabetes. And I do want again to thank the gentleman with the ``good arm'' from California for his leadership on this issue because he has, I think, taken this issue and approached it in a good bipartisan way. Hopefully, we can do the same with the broader area of Mr. BACA. Mr. Speaker, again, I want to thank both sides for bipartisan support on this resolution. I look forward to the strong The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Baca) that the House suspend the rules The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds Mr. BROUN of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. Senate Concurrent Resolution 30, by the yeas and nays; House Concurrent Resolution 123, by the yeas and nays; The first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. Remaining electronic votes will be conducted as 5-minute votes. RECOGNIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF HUNTERS FOR THE HUNGRY The SPEAKER pro tempore. The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution, H. Res. 270, The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Scott) that the House suspend the rules and The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 418, So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded. The SPEAKER pro tempore (Ms. Jackson-Lee of Texas). The unfinished business is the vote on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30, on which the yeas and nays The Clerk read the title of the concurrent resolution. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) that the House suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution, S. Con. Res. 30. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 421, The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Members have 2 minutes So (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the rules were suspended and The result of the vote was announced as above recorded."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Democrats rejected virtually every amendment on a party line vote.",
                "question": "Did Democrats vote against Steve Scalise's amendment regarding New York's nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://scalise.house.gov/media/press-releases/heat-report-0",
                "scraped_text": "The HEAT Report is a weekly newsletter focusing on how members of the House Energy Action Team (HEAT) promote American energy security, and an all-of-the-above energy economy. Last week, Democrats advanced their partisan COVID-relief package without any meaningful attempts to engage Republicans. Nine of the twelve committees that received reconciliation instructions held hybrid markups where Republicans offered thoughtful amendments primarily focused on providing targeted assistance to ensure it goes to the people who need it most. Several Republicans offered amendments to push back against President Biden's anti-American energy agenda and to support struggling energy workers whose livelihoods have been destroyed by President Biden's assault on American energy production. Democrats rejected virtually every amendment on a party line vote. Meanwhile, an unprecedented winter storm has left millions without power across the South as they face the coldest temperatures in decades. In Texas alone, more than 4 million customers still had no electricity Tuesday morning. Customers are facing rolling blackouts and life-threatening conditions due to yet another rare event – a multi-day, state-wide winter freeze in Texas—that will continue to inhibit energy supply this week. Even natural gas and coal, which historically are expected to provide the vast majority of power to the state, were unable to live up to the significant demands due to cold weather and scheduled maintenance that took plants offline. This placed the spotlight on another problem – Texas's increasing reliance on windmills to generate electricity has shown that when renewables cannot reliably produce the small amount of energy that they're expected to, households across the country suffer. Unfortunately, what has happened in Texas offers a prelude to the radical energy agenda that President Biden supports, including top-down government mandates and an abandonment of a low-cost, reliable, market-driven energy economy. Instead, President Biden must work with Republicans to develop an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps Americans safe. Last week, Democrats advanced their partisan COVID-relief package without any meaningful attempts to engage Republicans. Nine of the twelve committees that received reconciliation instructions held hybrid markups where Republicans offered thoughtful amendments primarily focused on providing targeted assistance to ensure it goes to the people who need it most. Several Republicans offered amendments to push back against President Biden's anti-American energy agenda and to support struggling energy workers whose livelihoods have been destroyed by President Biden's assault on American energy production. Democrats rejected virtually every amendment on a party line vote. Meanwhile, an unprecedented winter storm has left millions without power across the South as they face the coldest temperatures in decades. In Texas alone, more than 4 million customers still had no electricity Tuesday morning. Customers are facing rolling blackouts and life-threatening conditions due to yet another rare event – a multi-day, state-wide winter freeze in Texas—that will continue to inhibit energy supply this week. Even natural gas and coal, which historically are expected to provide the vast majority of power to the state, were unable to live up to the significant demands due to cold weather and scheduled maintenance that took plants offline. This placed the spotlight on another problem – Texas's increasing reliance on windmills to generate electricity has shown that when renewables cannot reliably produce the small amount of energy that they're expected to, households across the country suffer. Unfortunately, what has happened in Texas offers a prelude to the radical energy agenda that President Biden supports, including top-down government mandates and an abandonment of a low-cost, reliable, market-driven energy economy. Instead, President Biden must work with Republicans to develop an all-of-the-above energy strategy that keeps Americans safe. House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) joined Fox Reports with John Roberts and Sandra Smith and highlighted his visit with Southeast Louisiana energy workers whose livelihoods depend on the American energy production that President Biden is threatening to destroy. Whip Scalise emphasized that Congress should be focused on helping these struggling workers—not the impeachment trial of a president who is already out of office. Representative Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.) offered an amendment during the House Energy & Commerce Committee Budget Reconciliation markup to authorize the construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline. Representative French Hill (R-Ark.) hosted a press conference highlighting how President Biden's executive order revoking the Keystone XL pipeline permit has slashed thousands of jobs. Representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio)visited a small, independent fracturing operation in Southeast Ohio. Representative Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) offered an amendment during the House Energy and Commerce Committee markup on budget reconciliation legislation that would prohibit the Executive branch from issuing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing to protect American jobs and businesses and keep energy prices low, especially as we seek to recover from the pandemic. Representative Bill Johnson (R-Ohio)blasted John Kerry for telling unemployed energy workers they would be the ones to \"make the solar panels.\" Representative Clay Higgins (R-La.)introduced three amendments during the House Oversight & Reform Committee Budget Reconciliation markup that would prevent COVID relief funds from being used to support the implementation of the Paris Climate Accords, bans on oil and gas exploration, or government entities that have cut law enforcement funding. Representative Ron Estes (R-Kansas) sent a letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Acting Administrator Jane Nishida requesting information on steps the Biden Administration will take to address the pollution caused by the production of electric vehicles. House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.), Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Republican Conference Chair Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.), Committee on Natural Resources Ranking Member Bruce Westerman (R-Ark.), and over 100 House Republicans sent a letter to President Biden urging him to rescind his oil and gas leasing moratorium due to the devastating impacts this ill-conceived policy will have on a major sector of our economy while millions of Americans are unemployed due to the COVID-19 crisis. Republican Members of the Texas delegation sent a letter to Texas Governor Greg Abbott encouraging Texas' efforts to combat federal overreach that is threatening the energy industry. The letter was signed by Texas Reps. Chip Roy, Ronny Jackson, August Pfluger, Jodey Arrington, Dan Crenshaw, Randy Weber, Louie Gohmert, Michael Cloud, Michael McCaul, Lance Gooden, Brian Babin, Roger Williams, and Pat Fallon. - Displaced Keystone Pipeline and oil field workers worry Biden administration will 'ruin us' (Fox News) - House Republicans tell Texas to continue fighting Biden's federal overreach (The Blaze) - More Than 100 Republicans To Biden: Reverse ‘Devastating' Climate Executive Order (The Daily Wire) - August Pfluger back in Midland to fight for the oil and gas industry (NewsWest9) - Biden's Keystone XL pipeline cancellation is gut punch to small businesses (Fox News) - Rep. Bob Latta: Let's prioritize jobs, economics and sound policies (The Courier) - Rep. Fred Keller: Thanks to Biden's attacks, America's energy independence hangs in the balance (The Washington Times) - Rep. August Pfluger: Biden's liberal wish list threatens TX-11 jobs, national security (Brownwood Bulletin) - This Blizzard Exposes The Perils Of Attempting To ‘Electrify Everything' (Forbes) - Tucker Carlson: The great Texas climate catastrophe is heading your way (Fox News) House Republican Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) calls out President Biden's false promises. Representative Troy Balderson (R-Ohio) refutes claims made in a misleading think tank report. Representative Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.)criticizes the Democrat majority on the House Energy & Commerce Committee for blocking his amendment which would provide mental health support for workers who have lost their jobs due to President Biden's destructive climate agenda. Representative Guy Reschenthaler (R-Pa.) highlights the consequences of pursuing radical environmental policies. Representative August Pfluger (R-Texas)emphasizes the importance of American energy independence and a strong energy grid. Representative Yvette Herrell (R-N.M.)highlights the negative impacts of President Biden's energy agenda on education, teachers' salaries, and infrastructure projects in New Mexico. Representative Pete Sessions (R-Texas)outlines the consequences President Biden's policies will have on the thousands of Texas jobs that help supply the world with American energy. Representative Jim Hagedorn (R-Minn.)points out that even President Biden's top union allies oppose his order to terminate Keystone XL."
            },
            {
                "answer": "In case you missed it, just one week ago all 50 Senate Democrats voted against Senator Tim Scott’s amendment to hold states accountable that misreport COVID-related nursing home deaths.",
                "question": "Did all Democrats on the Energy and Commerce Committee vote against Steve Scalise's amendment regarding nursing home death data?",
                "url": "https://www.scott.senate.gov/media-center/press-releases/sen-scott-renews-call-for-accountability-amid-ny-nursing-home-scandal/",
                "scraped_text": "Sen. Scott Renews Call for Accountability Amid NY Nursing Home Scandal In case you missed it, just one week ago all 50 Senate Democrats voted against Senator Tim Scott’s amendment to hold states accountable that misreport COVID-related nursing home deaths. Now, new reports show that Governor Cuomo’s administration knowingly withheld the state’s nursing home death toll. Last night, Senator Scott issued the following statement: “Last week, every Senate Democrat voted against my amendment to hold states like New York accountable for misreporting data on COVID-related nursing home deaths. Now we find out the truth. This is unacceptable, & those involved must be held accountable.“ WATCH Senator Scott’s remarks from last week demanding accountability for nursing home deaths: SEN. TIM SCOTT: Colleagues, as of last month, two out of every five COVID-related deaths in this country are either residents of nursing homes or the staff of nursing homes. Inaccurate information affects life-and-death decisions for communities. Requiring states to provide accurate data is common sense for anyone who believes, as I do, that we should have a science-based, fact-driven response to this pandemic. We should not offer more funding to states that have mismanaged and then covered up their pandemic response until they fix it. It simply makes no sense. That is why my colleagues should join me in supporting this amendment."
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Refuted"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 1,
        "claim": "Meat packing workers have suffered more COVID-19 cases than health care workers.",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "Douglas, L. 2020. “As more meatpacking workers fall ill from COVID-19, meat companies decline to ",
                "question": "Which group of workers has had a higher reported incidence of COVID-19 cases, meat packing workers or health care workers?",
                "url": "https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/102206/ap-092.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  This paper has been published through USDA Economic Research Service’s (ERS) COVID-19 Working  Paper series. ERS’ temporary Working Paper series is designed to publicly release preliminary analyses relevant to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on agriculture, food, the environment, and rural  America in a timely manner. ERS’ COVID-19 Working Papers have not undergone the review and  editorial process generally accorded official ERS publications, but they have been reviewed by ERS  economists and social scientists through an expedited review process.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  This preliminary analysis explores how working conditions in meatpacking plants might have contributed to the spread of the Coronavirus (COVID-19). Data from the Occupational Information Network  (O*NET) was used to construct a set of industry-level working condition variables and compare  meatpacking to the sample of other manufacturing industries in our comparison group. This novel  approach showed that proximity to others in the meatpacking industry is likely the main factor that  influenced the spread of COVID-19, nearly three standard deviations higher in meatpacking than our  comparison sample of other manufacturing industries. Overall exposure to disease was also found to be 2.5 standard deviations higher in the meatpacking industry compared to other manufacturing industries. Subsequently, we performed a county-level analysis on COVID-19 spread, comparing rural counties that have a large number of meatpacking plants to other nonmetropolitan counties that were dependent on a single manufacturing industry, using the time frame of mid-March to mid-September of 2020. Data  analysis begins in mid-March since confirmed cases became national in scope at this point. In mid-April 2020, COVID-19 cases in meatpacking-dependent rural counties rose to nearly 10 times the number in  comparison to rural counties dependent on other single manufacturing industries. This difference  disappears completely by mid-July, driven by a reduction in COVID-19 cases in the meatpacking industry rather than an increase in other industries, and holds steady through mid-September. The paper concludes by collating evidence from other studies to infer that the meatpacking industry's increased precautions to protect workers help explain why no difference was observed between meatpacking-dependent counties  and our comparison group for the final 2 months of the study period. However, this inference should be viewed as suggestive since it cannot formally test using the data referenced in the working paper.   Keywords: COVID-19, epidemic, meatpacking industry, rural communities, working conditions.  Thomas P. Krumel, Jr., an assistant professor of agribusiness and applied economics at North Dakota  State University, completed this report while working as a research agricultural economist with USDA, Economic Research Service. Corey Goodrich is a research analyst, University of Connecticut,  Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Use of commercial and trade names does not imply approval or constitute endorsement by USDA.  To ensure the quality of its research reports and satisfy governmentwide standards, ERS requires that all research reports with substantively new material be reviewed by qualified technical research peers. This technical peer review process, coordinated by ERS' Peer Review Coordinating Council, allows experts who possess the technical background, perspective, and expertise to provide an objective and meaningful assessment of the output’s substantive content and clarity of communication during the In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and institutions participating in or administering USDA programs are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age, marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by program or incident.  Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information may be made available in languages other than English.  To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the letter all of the information requested in the form. To request a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email: USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Summary .................................................................................................................................... Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19 ................................................ Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 7 Background ................................................................................................................................. 8 Data ........................................................................................................................................... 11 County-Industry Dependence .................................................................................................... Occupational Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 14 COVID-19 Cases ........................................................................................................................ Results ....................................................................................................................................... Occupational Characteristics ..................................................................................................... 18 COVID-19 Cases in Rural Meatpacking Counties ..................................................................... Possible Effects of Industrial Changes ....................................................................................... Discussion .................................................................................................................................. References ................................................................................................................................. 28 Appendix A: List of 25 highest rates of COVID-19 per 100,000 people  for all rural counties in the United States at the end of May 2020 .............................................. Appendix B: New COVID-19 cases since March 1, 2020: Comparing  U.S. counties with 20 percent or more of employment in meatpacking  to counties with 20 percent or more of employment in another single  non-meatpacking manufacturing industry ................................................................................... COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  This working paper aims to empirically identify the likely mechanism that led to widespread outbreaks of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) virus within the meatpacking industry—the physical proximity of workers.  While the media and other researchers have principally used case studies to theorize about this  mechanism, this working paper validates this exposition by using an industry-level comparison, meaning our results are generalizable beyond a single meatpacking plant or community to the entire industry. Additionally, since a viable comparison group was generated, the analysis was able to track COVID-19 spread across the pandemic and observe trends against a plausible counterfactual. Our naive event study found evidence of large differences between meatpacking communities and our comparison group during  the initial industry outbreak, which disappeared after implementing workplace safety precautions. Our empirical approach mirrors a recent Journal of Public Economics article exploring the change in labor demand resulting from the pandemic (Forsythe et al., 2020). While the working paper cannot fully verify that these newly implemented safety precautions were singlehandedly responsible for the change, this study provides suggestive evidence indicating improved working conditions led to reducing COVID-19  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  There are 49 U.S. nonmetro counties in which 20 percent or more of county employment is in  meatpacking (defined in this working paper as meatpacking-dependent counties). This represents  41 percent of all nonmetro counties with employment in a single manufacturing industry greater  Physical proximity of workers is nearly three standard deviations higher in the meatpacking  Meatpacking-dependent counties observed nearly 10 times more COVID-19 cases in early May,  compared to other manufacturing-dependent counties. By the beginning of July, this difference completely disappeared, driven by a reduction of cases  This identical pattern was maintained for the remainder of the study period. This analysis uses the O*NET (Occupational Information Network) to construct a complete set of  working condition variables at the industry level. The analysis converts every working condition variable, from occupation to the industry in which the occupational employment statistics were gathered by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), to generate a crosswalk. The study compares the z-scores (a method used to compare meatpacking and other manufacturing industries) of the meatpacking industry to a set of other manufacturing industries most like meatpacking in terms of their employment dependence across  these working condition variables. Employment dependence was defined by using imputed County  Business Patterns data to determine the share of employment in single four-digit NAICS (North American Industry Classification System) industries for each nonmetro county in the United States. Using an  employment threshold of at least 20 percent employment in a single manufacturing industry utilizes  observed differences to generate a testable hypothesis on why the meatpacking industry experienced  widespread outbreaks early in the pandemic. The analysis concludes by using the count of nationwide  cases, the John Hopkins COVID-19 case data, to develop a time series to observe the different patterns in COVID-19 spread between these comparison groups of the pandemic.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  On February 26, 2020, the first non-travel related case of COVID-19 was confirmed in the United States, with limited undetected community spread since as early as late January (Jordan et al., 2020).1 By April 1, 2020, the United States surpassed 200,000 confirmed cases (Coronavirus Research Center), and most states had begun restricting in-person work to only essential industries. Animal slaughtering and  processing was one of the many industries deemed essential.2 By early April 2020, meatpacking  processing plants across the country began to experience major outbreaks of COVID-19. These  processing plants soon became epicenters of the pandemic throughout the rural United States in the early months of the disease, with several plants limiting or shutting down production as a result.3 Concerns over supply chain disruptions led to the signing of a U.S. Presidential Executive Order under the Defense Production Act on April 28, 2020 to ensure these plants remained open. Cases, however, continued to  increase rapidly. By the end of May, 2020, our analysis estimates that counties with at least 20 percent of their workforce employed in the meatpacking industry comprised 13 of the 25 rural counties with the  highest rates of COVID-19 per 100,000 people and 8 of the top 10.4   Meatpacking plants are highly concentrated in the rural United States and became prominent in the media due to the number of individuals affected. Nobles County, Minnesota, exemplified the concentration of cases within the industry. By May 1, 2020 the county reached 866 confirmed COVID-19 cases, of which  40 percent could be traced to the meatpacking plant in the county (Cummings, 2020). As a result, the plant shut down on April 21, 2020 and then partially reopened in early May 2020. At that time, the plant 1 The individual became ill on February 13, 2020 but the case was not confirmed until February 26, 2020. 2 The terms animal slaughtering, processing, and meatpacking are used interchangeably for the remainder of the paper. 3 We will use the same classification of rural areas as Cromartie et al. (2020), defined as nonmetropolitan (nonmetro) counties. and “nonmetro” are used interchangeably, as are the terms “urban” and “metro.”  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  began implementing policies to reduce the spread of COVID-19 through measures such as screening  workers, mandating facemasks, and installing plexiglass dividers between workers (CBS Minnesota).  Nobles County, Minnesota was not an outlier. A couple of weeks earlier, a meatpacking plant in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, closed after 230 workers tested positive for COVID-19 (Corkery, 2020). This trend was so widespread in meatpacking counties that by May 6, 2020, counties within 15 miles of at least one meatpacking plant saw nearly double the number of cases per 100,000 compared to counties outside of  that radius (Graddy, 2020). In many states (particularly in the Midwest, which houses many of the largest meat processing plants), much of the early COVID-19 cases initiated in these factories. Further, the reported number of cases tied to these meatpacking plants might have been underreported, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel newspaper. Specifically, Brown County in Wisconsin saw significant  outbreaks of COVID-19 traced to meatpacking plants, along with other high-risk establishments such as nursing homes and jails, but only a few establishments reported outbreaks (Perez, 2020; Douglas, 2020).5 Further illustrating the widespread nature of the meatpacking industry enabling the spread of COVID-19, a similar pattern was observed in several countries in Europe during the initial outbreak of the pandemic The regularity of these outbreaks (regardless of county, State, or country) indicates there were likely occupational characteristics that made meatpacking workers uniquely vulnerable to COVID-19. This  paper aims to identify the mechanism that likely contributed to these outbreaks—namely, the physical proximity of workers—and evaluate the suggestive evidence that policy changes within the industry  The meatpacking industry has a long history of difficult working conditions, most famously chronicled in The Jungle by Upton Sinclair in 1906. The book ultimately spawned many food and safety standards  since it was not uncommon at the time for workers to suffer severe injuries and sometimes die on the job. While safety has improved significantly in the meatpacking industry, it includes some of the highest risks among factory jobs in the United States. Workers experience cuts, carpal tunnel syndrome, skin diseases, 5 The outbreaks were not self-reported by the establishments. When the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel obtained access to data from Brown County, Wisconsin, the newspaper was able to trace back the cases to more facilities than were previously known. COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  amputations, and even death (Orrenius and Zovodny, 2009). Krumel (2017) most recently documented  the industry's working conditions before COVID-19—detailing the correlation between industry wages,  the contemporary deteriorating working conditions, and the shift in employment demographics from  1970-2000. During this timeframe, real meatpacking wages declined by 11 percent, while disability cases per worker increased fourfold. This result contradicted the theoretical expectation of the compensated wage differential in that as the risk increased, the wage went down. This incongruity with theory can partly be explained by the influx of Hispanic immigrants into the industry at this time, a trend that has continued into the 21st century.6 Hispanic workers comprised 30 percent of the total workforce by 2000 and nearly 40 percent in 2020, representing many of the frontline workers at these plants (Kandel and Parrado, 2005; Champlin and Hake, 2006; Artz et al., 2010; Fremstad et al., 2020; Krumel, 2020a).  Another critical factor in this change is that the industry shifted from largely specialized work to more mechanized labor. Over the last 40 years, there has also been a significant concentration of labor within the meatpacking industry, with many companies taking advantage of economies of scale to build larger processing plants (MacDonald and McBride, 2009). The increasing number of employees at these plants, as well as the declining working conditions have been offered as possible explanations for the COVID-19 A recent Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) study provided further insight into the effects that multiple aspects of the meatpacking industry had on COVID- 19 spread (Taylor et al., 2020). Notably, the authors found that transmission of the disease was highest among the counties with meatpacking plants that processed more than 10 million pounds of meat per  month. These counties saw 35 percent more cases relative to the average for all counties with  meatpacking plants. Most important to note for this paper is that suggestive evidence was found to show that plants receiving waivers to increase production-line processing speeds (likely requiring workers to be in closer physical proximity to each other) saw a twofold increase in transmission rates relative to 6 Krumel (2017) demonstrates that immigrant workers might “have different compensating wage differentials from natives in the meatpacking industry,” i.e., they are more willing to take these dangerous jobs at lower salaries than a comparable U.S. worker. COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  nonwaiver processing plants.7 Additional context is also provided for occupational characteristics, such as physical proximity, that facilitate the spread of disease within the meatpacking industry.  There is related literature on the effect of occupational characteristics on the spread of the flu and, more recently, COVID-19. This research illustrates the impact of occupational traits on the spread of  contagious diseases. Markowitz et al. (2019) documented the flu's spread and explored the spread’s  relationship to occupational attributes such as labor conditions, employment rates, and the prevalence of the flu. For occupational characteristics, they created an O*NET-based index containing interpersonal contact traits, such as contact with others.8 They found that the industries with the highest interpersonal contact—i.e., health care and retail—saw the highest instances of flu transmission. In contrast,  manufacturing and construction, the two industries with the lowest interpersonal contact, saw no  significant flu transmission. This result differs from what is being observed with COVID-19 and its rapid spread in the manufacturing sector, driven mostly by the meatpacking industry. The conflicting results are likely due to both industrial aggregation bias (Hamermesh, 1996) and different societal reactions to Regarding the potential issue with industry aggregation bias, the index created by Markowitz and  colleagues focuses exclusively on interpersonal relationships and fails to quantify any measure for  physical proximity between workers or the exposure to diseases or infections. This leads to difficulties in extrapolation, especially for the meatpacking industry. Interpersonal contact is lower in meatpacking than in other manufacturing industries, but it has significantly higher physical proximity. Aggregating the industries to the sector level, rather than analyzing each individual industry, causes a downward bias in the effect of meatpacking on the spread of the virus.9 Consequently, a more disaggregated approach is necessary to understand the role of meatpacking on the coronavirus disease spread.   7 These waivers have been issued in part by technology enhancements in the meatpacking industry, as well as policy changes. occurred first in 2012 and later expanded in 2018.  8 Contact with others is defined as: How much does this job require the worker to be in contact with others (face-to-face, by telephone, or 9 It is important to note that the authors used two-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes in their analysis (likely because of data availability for monthly employment numbers). For context, meatpacking is a four-digit industry classification (3116) and would have been aggregated up to manufacturing sector (31-33) in their analysis.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Regarding behavioral differences, occupations requiring high interpersonal contact (e.g., many white- collar jobs) might more easily switch to telework than those with low interpersonal contacts, such as mining, construction, and manufacturing. As a result, the contrasting response to the COVID-19  pandemic versus seasonal flu (namely, the switch to remote work if feasible) leads to valid concerns of an overestimation of risk for occupations when using just interpersonal contact.   Further research on occupational characteristics of COVID-19 spread has also shown the significance of occupational factors taking a more disaggregated approach (Lewandowski, 2020). This paper suggests the importance of occupational characteristics, such as exposure to disease and infection and physical  proximity, in the early transmission of COVID-19 in the European Union. The paper’s findings suggested cross-country variances in cases of COVID-19 were in large part determined by differing levels of  occupational exposure (20-25 percent), while differences in containment policies played a smaller role (3.5 percent). However, as time progressed past the first 7 days after the 100th case was identified in country, the contribution that differences in occupational exposure had on the spread of the disease decreased, and the contribution that containment policies had on slowing the spread increased. Like the Markowitz study, this paper also creates an index that is partly correlated with the ability to work from home, as Lewandowski used four European Working Condition Survey variables in the index, which  measured interpersonal relationships and the place of work.   Lewandowski (2020) provides evidence suggesting that, as time progresses, both countries and businesses could reduce occupational risk. This result is partly corroborated by the findings in the PNAS article showing meatpacking plants that closed their businesses had transmission rates lower than counties  without meatpacking plants 3 weeks after the closure. This delay is likely due to an incubation period of up to 14 days (Taylor et al., 2020). Combined, these results, therefore, provide evidence suggesting COVID-19 prevention policies implemented by firms helped reduce the spread of the disease.     Our dataset was developed to identify the occupational characteristics that could have driven COVID-19 cases within the meatpacking industry, motivated by the previous work on occupational characteristics and their relationship to the spread of the flu and COVID-19. Three different data sources were combined to conduct the analysis: employment by industry at the county level, occupational characteristics, and confirmed COVID-19 cases at the county level. Using this collected information, a naive event study was evaluated that centered around COVID-19 cases within rural counties with a high employment share in  the meatpacking industry, compared to other rural counties similarly dependent on other single-industry COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  To develop our comparison groups, two indicator variables were created based on the industry’s  employment share within a county using the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)  and imputed County Business Patterns data (Eckert et al., 2020). A county is defined as dependent on a single industry if said industry employs 20 percent or more of the county's total employed workers. To construct a plausible counterfactual, this analysis is restricted to all manufacturing industries with a similar employment dependence to maintain comparability to develop our meatpacking indicator.10 The  aim was to isolate the impact from a single large facility, not a combined effect from multiple plants and aggregated industries.11,12 All counties not containing at least 20 percent employment in a single  manufacturing industry were dropped from our analysis.  10 For a comparison group, we wanted employment that would have the most similar working conditions to meatpacking and considered essential (meaning that most jobs were not moved to remote). Manufacturing as a sector fits this description.  11 We are assuming that it will be possible to pick up the effect from a plant outbreak using such a high level of employment dependence. assumption appears to be corroborated in the case of Nobles County, Minnesota—where it is estimated that the meatpacking plant accounted for 12 We should note that USDA, Economic Research Service has an alternative definition of manufacturing dependence, which uses total manufacturing employment across multiple industries. All our results are robust to the relaxing the definition of manufacturing dependence to a single industry and using this more general classification.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Number of counties with more than 20 percent of employment in a single 4-digit North American Industry Classification System, Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., and Yang, N. J. 2020. Imputing Missing Values in the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Patterns, No. w26632. National Bureau of Economic Research. Household and institutional furniture and kitchen cabinet manufacturing Agriculture, construction, and mining machinery manufacturing Ventilation, heating, air-conditioning, and commercial refrigeration equipment Fruit and vegetable preserving and specialty food manufacturing Total of 19 other manufacturing industries with a single occurrence COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  In total, 147 counties were identified as being dependent upon a single manufacturing industry. Of these, 120 counties (82 percent) are nonmetro. As figure 1 demonstrates, the meatpacking industry comprises a significant share of these nonmetropolitan counties. Since nearly 90 percent of meatpacking-dependent counties are nonmetro, the sample is restricted to the rural subsample for comparability.13 As such, these 120 counties functioned as our sample of analysis for the remainder of the paper. Further illustrating this concentration is that these meatpacking-dependent counties represent just 2.5 percent of all rural counties but 19.0 percent of all meatpacking employment in the United States (Cromartie et al., 2020). This  representation stems from a significant consolidation within the meatpacking industry over the past 40 years. Other major industries represented in manufacturing-dependent counties categorization include motor vehicle manufacturing, lumber mills, and seafood product preparation. However, these industries employ 20 percent or more of the total workforce in at most only 11 rural counties. Since the sample size of all non-meatpacking, single-industry manufacturing-dependent counties are much smaller than  meatpacking, all of these counties were pooled into a single comparison group.   Our sample was limited to strictly rural counties. In addition to the reasons discussed above, this  restriction enhanced our ability to identify mechanisms of the disease spread. Cromartie et al. (2020) showed that rural counties demonstrated flat and uniform patterns of COVID-19 case spread through June 2020. In other words, this pattern held regardless of population size. By contrast, metro counties showed a large initial spike in April 2020 and a substantial caseload decrease through June 2020. Due to this lack of homogeneity between rural and metro counties in the timing of the pandemic, it becomes unfeasible to determine if differences in COVID-19 spread are attributable to industry dependence or other  confounders correlated with metro status. This finding should not reduce our external validity—as only 7 of the 56 meatpacking counties observed in this study, or 12.5 percent, are metro counties.  This working paper used data collected on more than 1,000 occupations from O*NET (O*NET OnLine)  to construct our data on occupational characteristics among manufacturing industries. Three different work context topics were used for our analysis: interpersonal relationships, physical work conditions, and structural job characteristics. These categories represent 57 different variables, which provide a wealth of information on the characteristics of these occupations. O*NET collects this data by randomly sampling 13 Meatpacking-dependent counties include 49 nonmetro and 7 metro counties.  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  employees from each of these occupations, as well as employers. The three variables most likely to enable the spread of viruses are contact with others, physical proximity, and exposure to disease or infection. other words, how much the job requires workers to be in contact with others (face-to-face, by telephone, or otherwise),14,15 the extent to which the job requires workers to be in close physical proximity to others, 16 and how often the job requires exposure to disease or infection, 17 respectively. Unlike the previous literature, however, we did not create a combined index, but instead, all 57 variables were evaluated independently to assess significant occupational outliers in the meatpacking industry that could enable the spread of the disease and avoid issues with creating an aggregated index.   Since the data collected from O*NET is gathered at the occupational level, and our analysis was at the industry level, the occupational data were first converted to the industry level.18 Occupational  employment statistics gathered by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) were used to facilitate our conversion process. BLS collects the occupational data from employers in all industry sectors and  geographic areas throughout the United States. These industries comprise occupations designated by their 6-digit occupation code. Using this 6-digit occupation code, a crosswalk was constructed between the data from BLS and O*NET to match the occupations with their respective work context score. By doing so, most occupations were matched within each industry on a first pass, although some industries initially 14 Since the formal definition for the work context involves contact with others (i.e., face-to-face, by telephone, or otherwise) this variable will be difficult to interpret in light of COVID-19. It is not feasible to separate occupations with high in-person contact and occupations easily able to 15 The first quintile is no contact with others, second quintile is occasional contact with others, third quintile is contact with others about half the time, fourth quintile is contact with others most of the time, and the final quintile is constant contact with others. 16 First quintile workers do not work near other people (beyond 100 feet), second quintile workers work with others but not closely (e.g., private office), third quintile workers work slightly close to others (e.g., shared office), fourth quintile workers work moderately close others (at arm's length), and the final quintile workers work very close to others (near touching).  17 First quintile workers almost never come into contact with diseases or viruses, second quintile workers are exposed at least once a year or more (but not every month), third quintile workers are exposed once a month or more (but not every week), fourth quintile workers are exposed once a week or more (but not every day), and the final quintile workers are exposed every day.  18 To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to utilize this approach to evaluate the role of working conditions in industry-related outcomes. Such data has broader applications, beyond COVID-19, that future research should explore.  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  The lower match rates for some industries can largely be attributed to the O*NET database lacking  information on some occupations that comprise occupations within industries and suppressing data on  occupations with insufficient total employment numbers. To combat this issue, weighted averages were created based on similar occupations that had O*NET scores. Determining similarity in occupations was done by matching the digit on the occupational code. For instance, occupations with the same first five digits are grouped together. Once an occupation was matched to other similar ones, a weighted average was computed based on the number of individuals employed with O*NET data. If no matches were found  at the 5-digit level, the same process would be repeated with four digits, and so forth. Using this method, nearly 99 percent of occupations were matched with all industries for all work context variables. These occupational characteristics were then aggregated to the industry level by calculating the weighted  Our paper uses county-level confirmed COVID-19 case data collected from Johns Hopkins University  (Dong et al., 2020) as a primary outcome measure. Johns Hopkins collects its data from aggregated data sources, such as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as well as from State and county health departments. The reported data are cumulative totals, from which the daily growth for each county is calculated. A 2-week moving average was next calculated to both smooth the data and minimize issues  with corrections in the Johns Hopkins data. Specifically, the data has dates for counties that were  corrected to account for either under- or over-reporting of COVID-19 cases in previous days.  Furthermore, to allow for comparability among counties, county population was used to weight cases  using the U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census’s 2019 county population estimates. Our  measure was then defined as the 2-week moving average of daily COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people.  The ratio of this 2-week-moving average number of new daily cases was taken for the point estimate for This variable was constructed over the timeframe spanning from mid-March to mid-September 2020. The  analysis begins in mid-March since it was not until this point that confirmed cases became national in scope. Cases reported past mid-September were excluded in our primary analysis since a massive surge in rural areas occurred at this time, and it cannot be determined whether it was caused by individual  manufacturing plants or an overall nationwide surge in those geographies. This temporal restriction was made for the sake of identification. As the sample sizes were relatively small, our results will be severely COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  impacted by noise correlated with this surge.19 Cromartie et al. (2020) extended their analysis through November 2020 on a larger comparison group. They suggested that this surge does not appear to be  driven by the meatpacking industry, since the pattern within that industry appeared nearly identical to all In early March 2020, before these widespread outbreaks, meatpacking-dependent counties started with  fewer COVID-19 cases compared with counties dependent on other manufacturing industries. However,  the number of cases in meatpacking-dependent counties proceeded to increase significantly, relative to the comparison group over the rest of the month, through the end of May 2020. Beginning in early June 2020, there was a sharp decline relative to the comparison group, converging toward no difference in the  number of cases. The timing of this decline corresponds with adjustments in working conditions made by the industry. By mid-July 2020, there was no difference in spread rate between meatpacking-dependent counties and other manufacturing-dependent counties in COVID-19 case numbers. This pattern remained  consistent through the remainder of our examined timeframe.   19 As we will demonstrate in our results section, from July 17 through September 17, 2020, COVID-19 cases in meatpacking-dependent counties were an average of less than 1 percent higher than manufacturing-dependent counties. For comparison, from mid-September through the end of 2020, cases in meatpacking-dependent counties were 11 percent higher. This difference offers a significant challenge in identification because there was not a monotonic pattern. In October, cases in meatpacking-dependent counties were 31 percent higher. November, and meatpacking-dependent counties were actually 12 percent lower than the comparison group in December. there were systematic differences related again to industry working conditions, or it could be random noise, driven by our relatively small sample size and idiosyncratic rural spread, which was not picked up by the industry. Because of the rising case prevalence across rural communities, we do not feel comfortable performing this inference, but subsequent research should better aim at decomposing the spatial and temporal spread in rural areas of the United States. To supplement this analysis, appendix B provides the 2-week moving average of new daily COVID-19 cases, per 100,000 population, for our 2 categories through the end of 2020.    20 It is important to note the critical distinction between the analyses presented in Cromartie et al. (2020) and this paper. same definition of meatpacking dependence, but Cromartie et al. (2020) compare meatpacking-dependent counties to all other rural counties. That is a critical descriptive exercise that provides vital context to the pandemic scope and is the proper comparison for Rural America at a Glance (et al., 2020). In addition, this study controls for working conditions in order to better understand the factors that may have caused greater 21 An earlier version of this analysis utilized a lagged dependent variable model; however, since the Arellano-Bond estimator cannot be employed (because the variables we are most interested in interpreting are time-invariant), there are legitimate endogeneity concerns with such a framework. This led us to simplify the analysis for our preliminary findings.    COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Our analysis started by analyzing occupational characteristics to generate our testable hypothesis: i.e., that meatpacking-dependent counties had higher COVID-19 spread than other manufacturing-dependent  counties and likely attributable to the working conditions in meatpacking plants. We identify the  mechanism that likely caused a higher impact of COVID-19 throughout the meatpacking industry,  compared with other industries and the counties where they are located. We use O*NET data, as  discussed above to conduct this analysis, specifically comparing occupational characteristics between the meatpacking industry and other manufacturing-dependent industries. This comparison was conducted by  analyzing z-scores of the meatpacking industry, calculated against the sample of all similarly dependent COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Meatpacking working condition scores and number of standard deviations from the comparison  Spend time using your hands to handle, control, or fell  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Note: Values above 1.645 represent a confidence level of 90 percent or above, values above 1.96 represent confidence levels of 95 percent or above, and values of 2.576 represent a confidence level of 99 percent or above.  Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from O*NET OnLine (n.d.), National Center for O*NET Development. Of the 57 working-condition variables analyzed, evidence of significant differences was found in 13 of them . As table 1 illustrates, the meatpacking industry is a significant outlier on all factors the previous literature indicated as enabling the spread of a virus. The most significant of these is physical proximity, being nearly three standard deviations away from the sample's mean. This calculation and the size of the score suggest that workers within these meatpacking plants frequently work significantly closer together than other manufacturing workers. Beyond being nearly 3 standard deviations higher than the sample  mean, the estimated value of 66.64 indicates that the average worker in meatpacking is an arm’s length Because the mean score over the entire industry is used to facilitate the additional analysis, certain occupations (executives) will reduce this average, and this fact is observed prominently in meatpacking. To contextualize the score above, the three production occupations that make up more than a third of the total employment—meat, poultry, fish cutters and trimmers; butchers and meat cutters; and slaughterers and meat packers—have scores of 85, 77, and 73, respectively. So, while the average worker is an arm’s length away from their coworkers, the modal worker is significantly closer. These frontline workers are the main reason meatpacking is nearly three standard deviations above our sample’s mean.   Another key difference between meatpacking and other manufacturing jobs is the high score on exposure to disease and infection, which is nearly 2.5 standard deviations above the mean. This score can likely be attributed to workers at meatpacking plants coming into contact with foodborne illnesses, such as  Sounds, noise levels are distracting or uncomfortable  Spend time kneeling, crouching, stooping or crawling  Impact of decisions on co-workers or company results  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Salmonella.22 While foodborne illnesses spread through different channels than a coronavirus, this still represents a significant difference between meatpacking and other manufacturing industries.  Contact with others is another variable that was found to enable the spread of the flu, and other literature used it to forecast and evaluate COVID-19 spread. Meatpacking was 2.70 standard deviations below the mean in this category. Providing additional context for this score, meatpacking was also 2.61 standard deviations below the mean for face-to-face conversations, compared to the sample of other manufacturing industries. The deskilling that meatpacking underwent starting in the 1970s, as the industry became  increasingly mechanical through the utilization of repetitive tasks, appears to have minimized interaction among workers. This is not to say that there are not points in the day when contact with others will occur at a high rate, such as breaks and shift changes. However, when performing individual work  responsibilities, contact with others was significantly lower than that found in the comparison group of Bolstering confidence in our developed measure of classifying working conditions, scores of more than 1.645 standard deviations above the mean were observed for meatpacking, compared with other  manufacturing-dependent industries for the following variables as well: 1) Time spent making repetitive motions, 2) Time spent standing, 3) Time spent using your hands to handle, control or fell, objects, tools, or controls, and 4) Pace determined by speed of equipment. Scores of more than 1.645 standard  deviations were observed below the mean for meatpacking, compared with other manufacturing- dependent industries on: 1) Freedom to make decisions, 2) Structured versus unstructured work, 3) Time spent sitting, and 4) Impact of decisions on coworkers or company results.  The differences in working conditions between the meatpacking industry and other manufacturing plants indicate aggregation bias (i.e., combining multiple industries) that can mask important differences across 22 It is also worth mentioning that, while this value differs significantly from that seen in our comparison sample of other manufacturing, it is still a relatively low value. This indicates that meatpacking workers are exposed fairly infrequently.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Scatter plot of physical proximity of workers, exposure to diseases and infections, and total  Note: We would like to point out that there is a tight clustering of the other industries on physical proximity between 55 and 60. There are only 3 industries above 60, with meatpacking and seafood processing being the only 2 industries above 65. Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from O*NET OnLine (n.d.), National Center for O*NET Development. Figure 2 shows two of the three characteristics previously used in the literature to forecast and explain that viral spread in the workplace was significantly more prevalent in the meatpacking industry relative to the other manufacturing industries. Focusing on these two occupational characteristics, figure 2 displays the distribution of manufacturing industries that have a rural employment dependence with respect to their values for physical proximity and exposure to diseases, as well as industry size. As shown, there is significant clustering of manufacturing industries around the scores of 58 (Slightly close—e.g., shared office) and 7 (almost never exposed) for physical proximity and exposure to diseases and infections, respectively. Of industries that also have a rural manufacturing-dependent county, only animal  slaughtering and processing and seafood product preparation and packaging were significant outliers, with meatpacking having significantly higher total employment.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Table 1 and figure 2 provide strong evidence that the outbreaks within the meatpacking industry can  likely be attributed to workers' uniquely high physical proximity. They also raise the possibility that meatpacking might be more susceptible to disease and virus outbreaks generally. However, further work should aim at distinguishing the possible contributions from foodborne and airborne illnesses. While other characteristics, such as low temperatures or a loud work environment could lead to higher rates of COVID-19 spread, neither factor was found to significantly vary between meatpacking and other  manufacturing industries. In the case of a loud work environment, which may increase the spread of the disease due to increased particle admission when having to shout, meatpacking was below the sample  Supplementing these results are the findings from Taylor et al. (2020) that meatpacking companies that had received a waiver to increase production speeds saw increased rates of COVID-19 compared with  plants that received no such waiver. Plants with higher line speeds (i.e., faster equipment) likely also necessarily increased physical proximity between their workers. Günther et al. (2020) documented the spread of COVID-19 at a single large meatpacking plant, highlighting the importance of physical  proximity in the spread of the disease. They found evidence that cases that spread within the plant had a significant spatial pattern. Specifically, there was significant transmission of COVID-19 to co-workers working within close physical proximity. Using information collected on living conditions and  transportation of individuals at this meatpacking plant, their data also strongly suggested that while there may have been secondary infections outside of work, transmission most likely occurred at the processing plant. Extrapolating their findings to our results, inference that many of the cases observed in our meatpacking-dependent counties occurred via close physical proximity to workers with COVID-19 and  likely not through secondary infections from outside the processing plant.   Further complementing our results is an additional report from the CDC, which evaluated a single  meatpacking plant in South Dakota (Steinberg et al., 2020). This report found frontline workers, who often work in close proximity to one another, had higher case rates of COVID-19 compared with other  workers. Furthermore, salaried workers who had individual workstations (thus enabling them to increase physical distance and implement physical barriers) experienced lower rates relative to hourly workers with less access to such amenities. While the CDC focused on a single meatpacking plant, it provides anecdotal context supporting our findings. Since industry-specific data was analyzed, our results are likely valid for the entire industry at large in that the physical proximity of workers was a primary driver of the COVID-19 outbreaks experienced across meatpacking.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Ratio of new COVID-19 cases since March 17, 2020: Comparing rural counties with employment  rates of 20 percent or more in meatpacking to rural counties with employment rates of 20 percent  or more in other single manufacturing industries, 2-week-moving average of new daily COVID-19  Sources: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center. for Systems Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., and Yang, N. J. 2020. Imputing Missing Values in the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Patterns, No. w26632. Figure 3 illustrates the ratio of cases between meatpacking- and other manufacturing-dependent counties as defined above.23,24 As shown in this figure, the caseloads between the two groups were similar until mid-April 2020, with meatpacking-dependent counties starting a slight decline in new COVID numbers.  23 Since we are presenting our results as a ratio (meatpacking divided by manufacturing), it is worth mentioning that meatpacking and other manufacturing are equal at a value of 1. Greater than 1 means that meatpacking is higher than manufacturing, while a value of less than 1 signifies that meatpacking is lower than manufacturing.  24 Appendix B tracks the data as separate categories rather than presenting the ratio.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  At this time, cases began to climb substantially within rural meatpacking-dependent counties relative to all other rural manufacturing-dependent counties. The peak of this disparity occurred in early May 2020, with meatpacking-dependent counties having nearly 10 times as many cases per day, compared with the  other counties in our study.25 During the next 2 months, there was a significant drop until early July 2020, at which point both groups of counties experienced almost identical caseloads for the remainder of our data frame. It should be noted that there was an increase in COVID-19 cases in other manufacturing- dependent counties during May and June 2020; however, the growth was substantially smaller than the  decrease in daily cases in meatpacking-dependent counties during the end of May through June 2020.26 Therefore, figure 3 provides suggestive evidence that there was some change within these meatpacking- dependent counties driving this drop, rather than being driven by an increase in cases from the other Extrapolating from our analysis of the occupational characteristics of meatpacking and naive event study of cases, inference of the effect of industry-wide changes within these counties on COVID-19  transmissions can be made. Specifically, using cases from the naive event study, a crucial shift in the reaction to COVID-19 can be evaluated. As shown in figure 3, after the initial peak in cases in late April through early May 2020, the disparity between meatpacking and other manufacturing-dependent counties 25 Our results are somewhat dampened compared to Cromartie et al. (2020), suggesting that our manufacturing-dependent counties had at least marginally higher caseloads when compared to non-manufacturing rural counties.   26 On June 3, 2020, the start of the convergence, meatpacking-dependent counties had a 2-week-moving average of daily cases of 38, compared to 6 for our comparison group. On July 21, 2020, our data appear to stabilize at around 2-week moving average of daily cases of 19 for both groups. For the next 2 months, the 2-week moving average of daily cases is bounded between a low of 15 and a high of 22. appears to be achieved, suggesting the convergence was not driven by our comparison group increasing. 27 These results are robust. Several alternative constructions of the time series are not included in the preliminary version of this manuscript: 1) They are robust to aligning counties by point in the epidemiological disease progression, eliminating concerns about statewide spread driving the measured results. 2) They are robust to using the neighboring rural counties to address some of the unobserved factors likely to be shared across neighboring counties. 3) It is further demonstrated that meatpacking plants are likely the vector of observed county-level spread by relaxing the employment threshold, indicating a monotonically decreasing pattern, as meatpacking employment becomes less prominent in a county. results are robust to the utilization of deaths as the variable of interest, indicating that testing is not driving the analysis. externally valid to utilizing a distinct dataset with COVID-19 cases by meatpacking workers and workers in other food processing, exhibiting an 28 The results are also robust to county characteristics, as demonstrated by a multivariable-conditional correlation on the initial outbreak. COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  started to decrease sharply, moving identically for the final 2 months of the study. This similarity provides suggestive evidence that policy changes within these plants, such as installing physical barriers between workers and requiring workers to wear face masks, helped reduce the transmission of COVID-19 cases within these meatpacking plants. This inference is shared by Cromartie et al. (2020): “[P]artial plant closures and increased social distancing protocols were implemented at meatpacking plants across the country starting in late May 2020. These measures appear to have slowed infection rates, as June saw a sharp reduction in cases in meatpacking-dependent counties.”   Data collected on 111 different meatpacking plants in 14 states by the CDC during April and May 2020 provide in-depth information on the type of policies that processing plants implemented during these months to control the spread of COVID-19 (Waltenburg et al., 2020). Specifically, the CDC found 80  percent of facilities in their sample screened workers on entry; 77 percent required face masks; and 62 percent installed physical barriers. Some of these plants' procedures would have directly affected the spread of cases caused by workers' close physical proximity (i.e., physical barriers and face masks). However, policies such as removing financial incentives and decreased crowding of transportation were often not implemented, 30 percent and 15 percent, respectively. The financial incentives are an industry policy that could receive additional attention from researchers in the future. On the one hand, the industry compensated their workers for the additional risk of contracting the virus by providing hazard pay. On the other hand, workers within the meatpacking industry are often financially constrained and thus uniquely dependent upon working (Krumel, 2020b). This hazard pay could have created the incentive for  individuals who are feeling sick to still show up for work.   While this type of prevention effort was not universal, the information provides evidence that many  meatpacking plants began to implement prevention policies during the pandemic's early months. Given  the sharp decline of cases seen within the data while implementing these policies, the data provide  suggestive but meaningful evidence that the implementation of policies (such as universal face masks and physical barriers) reduced COVID-19 spread within meatpacking plants.   COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  To our knowledge, this paper represents the first effort to empirically identify the mechanism that likely caused the COVID-19 outbreaks within the meatpacking industry at an industry-level analysis. There is strong evidence the meatpacking industry was a major catalyst for COVID-19 outbreaks in rural America during the pandemic's early months. This evidence indicates these outbreaks were likely attributable to workers' physical proximity within these plants. Suggestive evidence is also found that shows policies introduced within these plants in the wake of the outbreaks helped reduce the future spread of the disease. Meatpacking plants were already incredibly vulnerable to the spread of COVID-19 due to consolidation within the industry, which led to large meatpacking processing plants with hundreds of workers. This was further exacerbated by the close physical proximity of workers within these plants, which helped to  facilitate the disease’s spread—especially among frontline workers. Despite past warnings to prepare for a scenario such as COVID-19 within the food industry (Grabell and Yeung, 2020), COVID-19 represents a  largely exogenous shock, which resulted in delayed responses throughout many occupations and  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Artz, G., Jackson, R., and Orazem, P. F. 2010. “Is It a Jungle Out There? Meat Packing, Immigrants, and Rural Communities,” Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 35(2), 299-315.  Asadi, S., Wexler, A.S., Cappa, C.D., Barreda, S., Bouvier, N., and Ristenpart, W. 2019. “Aerosol  emission and superemission during human speech increase with voice loudness,” Sci Rep 9, 2348.  Boehm, R. 2020, May 20. “With Trump Executive Order, Are Meat and Poultry Plants a COVID-19  Ticking Time Bomb?,” Union of Concerned Scientists.  CBS Minnesota. “Coronavirus in MN: Worthington’s JBS Pork Plant Partially Reopens, Operations  Expected to ‘Normalize Over Time.’” CBS Network, Minnesota.  Champlin, D., and Hake, E. 2006. “Immigration as industrial strategy in American meatpacking,” Review Corkery, M. 2020, April 13. “U.S. Food Supply Chain is Strained as Virus Spread,” The New York Times. Cromartie J, Dobis E, Krumel Jr, T. P., McGranahan D, and Pender J. 2020. Rural America at a Glance  2020 Edition, EIB-221. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. December  Cummings C. 2020. “Coronavirus in Minnesota: Nobles County Reaches 866 Known Cases of COVID- 19, Most Traced to JBS Pork Plant.” CBS Network, Minnesota.  Dong E, Du H, and Gardner L. (n.d.) “An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real  time,” Lancet Infectious Diseases, 20(5):533-534.  Douglas, L. 2020. “As more meatpacking workers fall ill from COVID-19, meat companies decline to  Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., and Yang, N. J. 2020. Imputing Missing Values in the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Patterns, No. w26632. National Bureau of Economic Research.  Fremstad, S., Rho, H., and Brown, H. 2020. Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better  Protections. Center for Economic and Policy Research, Washington D.C.  Forsythe, E., Kahn, L. B., Lange, F., and Wiczer, D. 2020. “Labor demand in the time of COVID-19:  Evidence from vacancy postings and UI claims,” Journal of Public Economics, 189, 104238.  Grabell, M. and Yeung, B. 2020 “Meatpacking Companies Dismissed Years of Warnings but Now Say  Nobody Could Have Prepared for COVID-19.” ProPublica, New York, New York.  Graddy, S. 2020. Investigation: Counties with Meatpacking Plants Report Twice the National Average  Rate of COVID-19 Infections. The Environmental Working Group, Washington D.C.  Günther, T., Czech-Sioli, M., Indenbirken, D., Robitaile, A., Tenhaken, P., Exner, M., Ottinger, M., Fischer, N., Grundhoff, A., Mrinkmann, M. 2020. “SARS-CoV-2 outbreak investigation in a  German meat processing plant,” EMBO Molecular Medicine.  Hamermesh, D. S. 1996. Labor Demand. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University press.  Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center. (n.d.) Center for Systems Science and  Engineering, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.  Jorden, M. A., Rudman, S. L., Villarino, E., Hoferka, S., Patel, M. T., ... and Mytty, E. 2020. “Evidence for Limited Early Spread of COVID-19 Within the United States, January–February  2020,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(22), 680.  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Kandel, W., and Parrado, E. A. 2005. “Restructuring of the US meat processing industry and new  Hispanic migrant destinations,” Population and Development Review, 31(3), 447-471.  Krumel Jr, T. P. 2017. “Anti-Immigration Reform and Reductions in Welfare: Evidence from the  Krumel Jr, T. P. 2020. Three Essays on Welfare and Experimental Economics. Ph.D. dissertation.     Krumel Jr, T. P. 2020. The Meatpacking Industry in Rural America During the COVID-19 Pandemic,              U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Washington D.C. Lewandowski, P. 2020. Occupational Exposure to Contagion and the Spread of COVID-19 in Europe.  Macdonald, J. and McBride, W. 2009. The Transformation of U.S. Livestock Agriculture: Scale,  Efficiency, and Risks, EIB-43. U. S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service,  Markowitz, S., Nesson, E., and Robinson, J. J. 2019. “The effects of employment on influenza rates,” Middleton, J., Reintjes, R., and Lopes, H. 2020. “Meat plants – a new front line in the COVID-19  O*NET OnLine (n.d.), National Center for O*NET Development.  Orrenius, P. M., and Zavodny, M. 2009. “Do immigrants work in riskier jobs?,” Demography, 46(3), 535- Perez, M. 2020. “Meatpacking plants tied to more COVID-19 cases than known before, new business  outbreak data shows,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  Sinclair, U. 1906. The Jungle. New York: Grosset & Dunlap.  Steinberg, J., Kennedy, E., Basler, C., et. al. 2020. “COVID-19 Outbreak Among Employees at a Meat  Processing Facility – South Dakota, March-April 2020,” Centers for Disease Control and  Taylor, C. A., Boulos, C., and Almond, D. 2020. “Livestock plants and COVID-19 transmission.”  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(50), 31706-31715.  Waltenburg, M, Victroff, T, Rose, C, et al. 2020. “Update: COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and  Processing Facilities – United States, April-May 2020,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,  COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Appendix A: List of 25 highest rates of COVID-19 per 100,000 people  for all rural counties in the United States at the end of May 2020  Note: Hancock, Georgia, is the only county that has a manufacturing dependence other than meatpacking in this list, as more than 20 percent of county employment is in NAICS 3272 Glass and Glass Product Manufacturing.  Sources: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center. for Systems Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland; Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., and Yang, N. J. 2020. Imputing Missing Values in the U.S. Census Bureau's County Business Patterns, No. w26632. COVID-19 Working Paper: Meatpacking Working Conditions and the Spread of COVID-19, AP-092  Appendix B: New COVID-19 cases since March 1, 2020: Comparing  U.S. counties with 20 percent or more of employment in meatpacking  to counties with 20 percent or more of employment in another single  Source: USDA, Economic Research Service using data from Johns Hopkins University Coronavirus Resource Center. for Systems Science and Engineering, Johns Hopkins University and Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.  Greater than 20 percent employment in meatpacking, nonmetro Greater than 20 percent employment in nonmeatpacking manufacturing, nonmetro"
            },
            {
                "answer": "3. L. Douglas, “As more meatpacking workers fall ill from Covid-19, meat compa-",
                "question": "How do COVID-19 case rates among meat packing workers compare to those among health care workers?",
                "url": "https://www.eeoc.gov/sites/default/files/2021-04/4-28-21%20Meeting%20-%2005%20Ramirez%20-%20Supporting%20Materials.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "By Hye Jin Rho, Hayley Brown, and Shawn Fremstad*  * Hye Jin Rho is an Economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). Hayley Brown is a Research Assistant at CEPR. Shawn Fremstad is a Senior Policy Fellow at CEPR.  A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  Before the COVID-19 pandemic, more than 30 million US workers were employed in six broad  industries that are now on the frontlines of the response. They include grocery store clerks,  nurses, cleaners, warehouse workers, and bus drivers, among others. They were essential  before the pandemic hit, yet also overworked, underpaid, under protected, and  underappreciated. The tables attached provide a basic demographic profile of workers in  Table 1 shows the number of workers in six groups of frontline industries and the  characteristics of the workforce in each of these industry groups. An accompanying  spreadsheet provides state-level versions of Table 1. Additionally, New York state data are  used in this report by the Fiscal Policy Institute.   Table 2 lists the specific industries within each of the six industry groups and shows the  percentage of women workers, workers of color, and low-income workers in each of these  Table 3 lists the top 10 occupations in each of the frontline industries and shows the  percentage of women workers, workers of color, and low-income workers in each of these  Workers in frontline industries are disproportionately women. About one-half of all workers are  women, but nearly two-thirds (64.4 percent) of frontline workers are women. Women are  particularly overrepresented in the frontline industries in Health Care (76.8 percent of  workers) and Child Care and Social Services (85.2 percent). Women are also overrepresented  in the following occupations within frontline industries: cashiers (71.8 percent); retail  salespersons (63.5 percent); customer service representatives (63.7 percent); pharmacy  technicians (81.6 percent); fast food and counter workers (67 percent); all of the top 10  occupations in the Health Care industry group (71.3 to 96.5 percent), except physicians; and,  all of the top 10 occupations in the Child Care and Social Services industry group (73.1 to 97.7  People of color are overrepresented in many occupations within frontline industries. Just over  four-in-ten (41.2 percent) frontline workers are Black, Hispanic, Asian-American/Pacific  Islander, or some category other than white. Hispanics are especially overrepresented in  A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  Building Cleaning Services (40.2 percent of workers). Blacks are most overrepresented in  Child Care and Social Services (19.3 percent of workers). Workers of color are particularly  overrepresented in the following occupations: bus drivers, transit and intercity (56.7 percent);  most of the top 10 occupations in Trucking, Warehouse, and Postal Service; most of the top  10 occupations in Building Cleaning Services; all of the top 10 occupations in Health Care,  except registered nurses, physicians, managers, and secretaries and administrative; four of  the top 10 occupations in Child Care and Social Services (childcare workers, personal care  Immigrants are overrepresented in Building Cleaning Services and in many frontline occupations in  other frontline industries. About one-in-six frontline workers (17.3 percent) are immigrants. In  Building Cleaning Services, 38.2 percent of workers are immigrants. Immigrant workers are  also overrepresented in Grocery and Related Product Merchant Wholesalers (23.9 percent);  Warehousing and Storage (22.5 percent), and Home Health Care Services (23.9 percent).  Immigrants are particularly overrepresented in the following occupations: janitors and  building cleaners (40.7 percent); maids and housekeeping cleaners (58.8 percent); cleaners of  vehicles and equipment (34.5 percent); packers and packagers (39.1 percent); physicians  (28.4 percent); and, home health aides (26.9 percent). A large share of personal care aids and  nursing assistants in both the Health Care industry group and the Child Care and Social  Services industry group are also immigrant workers (22.6 to 37.9 percent).  Many workers in frontline industries are over age 50, and a substantial number live in a household  with one or more older people. Just over one-in-three (33.9 percent) frontline workers are over  age 50. Among all frontline workers, about one-in-six (16 percent) live with someone who is  Many workers in frontline industries have family care obligations. More than one-third of  frontline workers (35.9 percent) have a minor child at home.   More than one-third of workers in many frontline industries live in low-income families. Roughly  a third or more of low-income workers are found in six of the top 10 occupations in the  Grocery, Convenience, and Drug Stores industry group; three of the top 10 occupations in the  Trucking, Warehouse, and Postal Service industry group; four of the top 10 occupations in  Building Cleaning Services industry group; three of the top ten occupations in the Health Care  industry group; and, five of the top 10 occupations in the Child Care and Social Services  industry group. Overall, almost one-quarter of frontline workers (23 percent) live in low- income families (income below 200 percent of poverty).  The Building Cleaning Services industry has a particularly high incidence of uninsured workers.  About one-in-ten frontline workers in this industry do not have health insurance. Among  workers in Building Cleaning Services, nearly three-in-ten are uninsured.   A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  While the COVID-19 legislation passed by Congress to date includes some important  protections for frontline workers, these workers remain under protected and under  compensated. Congress must act quickly on a variety of fronts to ensure that all frontline  workers have: 1) comprehensive health insurance that includes free coverage of COVID-19  testing and treatment; 2) paid sick leave and paid family leave; 3) free child care; 4) student  loan relief; and, 5) consumer and labor protections, including hazard pay or other additional  compensation for essential workers. Frontline workers who are immigrants should be  protected regardless of their current immigrant status. Finally, the US Occupational Safety  and Health Administration should immediately issue an Emergency Temporary Standard  requiring all employers to provide specific and necessary protections for frontline workers.   This profile uses the most recent five-year estimates of data from the American Community  Survey (2014–2018). The demographics of the frontline workforce is unlikely to have  changed in any substantial way over the last two years, and using five-year estimates of ACS  data helps ensure that sample sizes are sufficient to produce reasonably precise estimates by  To define “frontline industries,” we use the same six industry groupings as the New York City  Comptroller did in their recent profile of frontline workers in New York City. The frontline  industry groups, each of which includes one or more specific industries (as classified using the  Grocery, Convenience, and Drug Stores: Grocery and related product merchant wholesalers  (4470), Supermarkets and other grocery stores (4971), Convenience Stores (4972),  Pharmacies and drug stores (5070), and General merchandise stores, including warehouse  Public Transit: Rail transportation (6080) and Bus service and urban transit (6180).  Trucking, Warehouse, and Postal Service: Truck transportation (6170), Warehousing and  Building Cleaning Services: Cleaning Services to Buildings and Dwellings (7690).  A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  Health Care: Offices of physicians (7970), Outpatient care centers (8090), Home health care  services (8170), Other health care services (8180), General medical and surgical hospitals, and  specialty hospitals (8191), Psychiatric and substance abuse hospitals (8192), Nursing care  facilities (skilled nursing facilities) (8270), and Residential care facilities, except skilled  Child Care and Social Services: Individual and family services (8370), Community food and  housing, and emergency services (8380), and Child day care services (8470).  Our initial analysis includes all US workers in these six frontline industry categories, but no  workers in frontline occupations that are outside of these six categories. As a result, our  estimates exclude some workers in occupations (but not industries) that are clearly on the  frontlines, while also including some workers who are not in frontline occupations, even  though they are in frontline industries. For example, a police officer is a frontline occupation  in a non-frontline industry, while a school bus driver is a non-frontline occupation (at least  in areas where schools are closed) in a frontline industry (public transit). Still, the vast  majority of workers in the six frontline industries are frontline workers.   Characteristics of Workers in Frontline Industries  Source: CEPR's Analysis of American Community Survey, 2014-2018 5-Year Estimates  Source: CEPR's Analysis of American Community Survey, 2014-2018 5-Year Estimates  A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries  Source: CEPR's Analysis of American Community Survey, 2014-2018 5-Year Estimates  Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic Southern Valley Executive OÞcer John Schwalls says 100 percent of the workforce at Henderson Farm - nearly 200 employees total - has contracted RHEA COUNTY, Tenn. — We're now learning new details about the farm that's behind a massive Henderson Farm in Evensville has been the center of a COVID-19 outbreak, causing the county's cases to jump from 13 to almost 200, but the executive oÞcer of Southern Valley - a partner of the farm - tells us the infection has been contained. Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic John Schwalls has worked with Southern Valley in various roles since 1994. Today, he told us that 100 percent of the workforce at Henderson Farm has contracted COVID-19.   Schwalls says that only three employees - less than 1% of the workforce - have shown symptoms, in the nearly 200 employees that have the virus. John Schwalls says that employees stay in an air conditioned “college dorm like room with bunk beds.” And that since the first case confirmed on May 11th, nobody has left the farm and gone into He tells me that right now everybody is asymptomatic and still working, but the farm has offered to pay employees even if they canʼt work. Schwalls says anybody is free to come and go saying, “weʼre not running a concentration camp.” Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic This began on March 28th when workers from Mexico came to Henderson Farm to work and live there in what Schwalls describes as “college dorm room, bunk bed like” area. Since the Õrst case of COVID-19 was conÕrmed in the farm on May 11th, Schwalls says every employee was tested by the Rhea County Health Department when they came to the farm. Even though ultimately only three people were symptomatic with a cold-like illness, every single employee Since this happened, Schwalls says no employee has left the Henderson Farm area, and that supplies have been brought to those that reside there. The company’s executive oÞcer says that there’s been a big misconception from Rhea County residents that Hispanic people in the community are contagious, when in fact none of those workers have been in local stores or When we asked Schwalls if those people could freely leave the farm he says, “this isn’t a concentration camp, people can come and go.” But he says that although they have the ability to leave, nobody has because of their own concerns and worry. Schwalls tells us that all the employees are still working, even with the virus. \"I can't make Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic He says that those three people who did show symptoms were not allowed to work, however, We reached out to the Tennessee Department of Health, and oÞcials there tell us they are monitoring the situation, and have someone with the department speciÕcally designated to monitor symptoms and cases as they develop at the farm. As of May 26, the state health department reports 197 cases of coronavirus in Rhea County.   On Monday, Henderson Farms released the following statement to us: \"After a worker tested positive for COVID-19 and out of an abundance of caution, we requested that the Rhea County Health Department test all employees at Henderson Farms in Evensville, TN. When the results came back, we learned our workers at this location tested positive for COVID-19. At this stage, we feel blessed that our workers are asymptomatic and the situation remains contained. Yet as a precautionary measure and in line with the latest public health guidelines, these workers continue to remain in isolation at the farm where they live and work. Nothing is more important to us than the health of our workers and community at large. We take this very seriously and are monitoring the situation closely in partnership with Rhea County Health Department, taking all precautionary measures to continue to protect our workers and our community.\" Utah woman, 39, dies 4 days after 2nd dose of COVID-19 vaccine; autopsy ordered Garth Brooks says wife Trisha Yearwood tested positive for COVID-19 Chattanooga pastor dies of COVID-19 complications, one day after wife's passing Rhea Co. farm leader says all of their nearly 200 employees have virus, only 3 symptomatic | WTVC https://newschannel9.com/news/local/rhea-co-farm-leader-says-all-of-their-nearly-200-employees-have-virus-only-3-symptomatic Fact-forward journalism on demand. Subscribe now for instant access. The 32-acre hydroponic farm Green Empire Farms was the center of 171 confirmed coronavirus cases in Madison County. Oneida, N.Y. — Every day, more than 300 workers walked in and out of the sprawling Green Empire Farm Even when the whole world mostly shut down, the 32-acre farm under glass kept going. There were millions of strawberries to pick after growing ripe under miles of glass. And there were half a million tomato plants The company, Mastronardi Produce of Canada, took measures to protect those workers from the coronavirus, officials from Madison County and the company said. But it didn’t matter. At the end of each workday, 186 workers left the giant farm in vans and on buses, to return to hotels where they lived four to a room and slept two to a bed. The workers’ living conditions, chosen for them by the labor company that hired them and brought them to Oneida, were perfect for the coronavirus to dig in and take hold. The indoor farming complex is now the site of the biggest coronavirus cluster in Upstate New York, according to Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s office. The only cluster outside of New York City that was bigger was in By Thursday, 169 of the 340 workers had tested positive. “They were living in close quarters, together, so it was ripe for spread,” said Eric Faisst, Madison County public health director. “The conditions were perfect.” The farmworkers living in the hotels are migrant workers who speak little English, county officials said. Faisst said many of the workers are scared. They came here to the U.S. to work and send money to their families. Some are from Mexico and other Spanish-speaking countries, others are from Haiti. Now they are The county had to get 12 interpreters to help with tracing the sick and exposed workers’ travels through the The outbreak was so shocking that it caught Cuomo’s attention. He mentioned it in his nationally viewed news briefing Wednesday. He compared the cluster to outbreaks in meatpacking plants across the nation. “It’s when you run a facility with a large number of workers in a dense environment,” the governor said. But county officials say it’s not the workplace, but where the workers live that have been making them Until last April 29, it seemed like everything was under control. That’s when Faisst got the first bad news: The night before, Oneida Health, the hospital nearest the greenhouse, saw two workers. Both were sick with COVID-19. Both lived in those hotels, four to a room. Workers live in the Super 8 and the Days Inn in Madison County and the La Quinta Hotel in Verona in Oneida County. When Faisst heard of about the two positive tests among the workers, he knew he was facing a potential cluster that showed the virus’ ability to jump from person to person at an exponential rate. All the The county called in the state for help. Two days later, an army of state and county workers set up rows The farmworkers filed in, speaking to each other in Spanish and French. One by one, nurses swabbed their noses and took down their contact information, aided by interpreters. Then the workers boarded the buses By Monday, the results came back. All but 47 of the contract workers had the virus. The county and state tested the second wave of workers, mostly local help, on Tuesday in the same way. All of the workers at the farm do the same jobs and make roughly the same pay on paper, employees said. But they live in two different worlds and work for two different employers. The workforce drawn from Central New York makes a little less than $13 an hour. They pick, plant, sort and pack. They work for Green Empire Farm, which is owned by Mastronardi Produce, a 70-year-old company in Kingsville, Ontario, that was started by an Italian immigrant who decided to grow hothouse tomatoes. The company has at least six hothouse farms in North America. Most of the produce is sold under the Sunset brand. The new amphitheater in the company’s hometown The company prides itself on how it treats its workers, a company spokeswoman said, and is devastated But more than half the workers in Oneida, those in the buses and the hotels, are migrant farmworkers employed by an Indiana company called MAC Contracting. A Mastronardi spokeswoman said MAC supplies Faisst said the contract workers did not bring the virus into the community. The county’s first coronavirus case was at the greenhouse, but it was a local worker. A worker who has been at the greenhouse since it opened said the migrant workers were hired to take local jobs that went unfilled. Both sets of workers are supposed to make the same amount: a little less than $13 an hour. The contract workers are paid by MAC, who takes money out of their checks for the hotel rooms. Since the outbreak, the county has been pushing MAC to put fewer workers in the rooms and to pay them when they’re not working, said John Becker, chairman of the Madison County Board of Supervisors. “You’re going to comply, or we’ll take further measures,” Becker said the county told MAC. He said he was “aghast” when he found out how many workers were living in a room, together, while public health officials were trying to space people six feet apart. Becker said he was concerned the workers would not be paid when they were quarantined, which made him worry they would keep working while they were sick. The county, he said, pushed Mastronardi to pay them while sick. Becker said the county is delivering food to all of the workers in the hotels in Madison County while they are quarantined to keep them inside. It is Becker said the outbreak is peeling back the curtain on how factory farms work. “We can’t fill the jobs with American labor, so these folks come up. They send money home. These conditions are throughout the country,” said Becker, who ran his family’s dairy farm for decades. Becker said it’s unclear whether the workers have the documents to work in the U.S. “That’s one of those questions I don’t want to ask,” he said. “That’s MAC’s deal.” Farm labor contractors, like MAC, traditionally handle the certifying that the workers’ papers are legal for the companies that hire them. They also handle transportation and housing. The Oneida greenhouse had always planned to bring in some labor. There is a bunkhouse on the grounds, The greenhouse just opened in August. It took five years of work to get the farm to come to Madison County, Becker said. The county was jockeying with others to get the huge operation. In the end, Madison County had the most land and the sweetest deal: a 20-year tax break worth millions. Company documents show that the project will be built in four phases on 600 acres of land. Each phase is a 32-acre greenhouse. The total cost is more than $100 million. It’s unclear how much of the project has been Cris Schultz, a MAC employee in Indiana, disputed the county’s account in an interview Thursday with syracuse.com. She said the workers never stayed more than three to a room. She said the workers pay for some of the housing out of their paychecks, but she would not say how much. She disputed that the workers’ living arrangements made them ill. “Everyone is entitled to their own opinion,” Schultz said. “We followed social distancing.” She declined to say how MAC helped the workers follow social distancing when they were on the buses or at the hotels. County officials said that, after prodding, MAC spaced the workers out on the buses and vans and began wiping down the vehicles several times a day. Schultz would not say how many workers were sick with symptoms from the virus. At one point in she said “enough” were sick; then she said none were ill. County officials said two of the workers had been hospitalized. They have since been released and are recovering back at the hotels they were living in. “I am worried about them, their health,” Schultz said. Then she hung up. Oneida feels more like a village than a city. The population is 11,000. People mostly know each other, and now they know the workers who have been picking and planting under the glass at the edge of the city. The outbreak has put a spotlight on the laborers in a way that makes county and city officials worry. “They came here to work and send money back to their country,” said Oneida Mayor Helen Acker. “They Now they are being watched, not just by public health officials, but by people who are angry they are here. Madison County publicly identified nine local businesses, including a laundromat and the Walmart, as Faisst said he feels the virus is under control. The workers have been tested and quarantined. He is not “They’re scared as hell and then on top of that, you’re starting to see this mob mentality. They’re victims of this virus … they acquired this here,” Faisst said. “My concern is for their safety.” None of the county officials thought the greenhouse would be closed. All of migrant workers have been isolated in their hotels since the mass testing last Saturday. The infected workers will be released in roughly two weeks. Workers who have recovered and workers who tested negative will be back at work sooner. Next week they will be picking the millions of tomatoes under acres of glass at the edge of the city. Do you work for Green Empire Farm in Oneida or know about the handling of its workforce? Reporter Marnie Eisenstadt would like to talk to you. Contact her anytime: email | twitter| Facebook | 315-470- Coronavirus in NY: Cases, maps, charts and resources Is going to school in person obsolete? Cuomo wonders why ʻold model’ persists A struggle for PPP funds in Central NY: 6 small business owners, 1 bank and a lot of heartache Almost half of Onondaga County’s coronavirus deaths are from nursing homes Note to readers: if you purchase something through one of our affiliate links we may earn a commission. Registration on or use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement, Privacy Policy and Cookie Statement, and Your California Privacy Rights (each updated 1/1/21). © 2021 Advance Local Media LLC. All rights reserved (About Us).  The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of Advance Local. Community Rules apply to all content you upload or otherwise submit to this site. Of the 5 States with the Most Farmworkers, Only 3 Are Prioritizing Vaccines — and Not All Means of Prioritizing Are Equal, per the CDC Above, a scene from the July 2020 documentary “COVID’s Hidden Toll.” Months later, FRONTLINE found that only some states are prioritizing farmwork- On a recent Saturday morning, Karla, a farmworker from Mexico, didn’t wake up early to weed fields around Morrow County, Oregon. Instead, she went to a regional tourism center to get her first dose of the COVID-19 “It took a weight off my shoulders,” she said. Karla came to the U.S. in February to find work and to save money for her son, who just started college. “I went there because they didn’t ask for documents,” Karla said of the tourism center. She was afraid a local clinic might ask for information that immigration authorities could use to Karla is one of 2.4 million farmworkers in the U.S. — at least half of whom are undocumented, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and all of whom should be prioritized for COVID-19 vaccines, according to the Paula Moura (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/person/paula-moura/) What’s more, the CDC recommends (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm695152e2.htm) that vaccina- tions for farmworkers be offered near their worksites or in their communities. “Minimizing barriers to access vac- cination for frontline essential workers, such as vaccine clinics at or close to the place of work, are optimal,” the CDC statement (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/hcp/acip-recs/vacc-specific/covid-19/evidence-table-phase-1b- 1c.html) said. The agency included all agricultural workers in phase 2 of its vaccine-priority recommendations, along with police officers, to “preserve functioning of society.” Despite the CDC’s guidance, only three of the five states with the most farmworkers, according to the U.S. Cen- sus Bureau — California, Washington and Oregon — prioritized farmworkers for vaccinations ahead of the gener- al population. And only two — California and Oregon — have established policies that provide vaccination clinics for farmworkers on worksites or in their communities. Texas and Florida did not prioritize vaccinations for farmworkers ahead of the general population. And although officials from Washington and Texas said they were targeting or planning to target farmworkers, neither has is- sued a state policy prioritizing vaccine events on farms or in farmworker communities.  In states lacking aggressive vaccination campaigns, farmworkers — deemed “essential” to the nation’s food sup- ply by the Trump administration (https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/CISA-Guidance-on-Essen- tial-Critical-Infrastructure-Workers-1-20-508c.pdf) and reaffirmed by President Joe Biden (https://www.white- house.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/03/18/statement-by-president-biden-on-the-farm-work- force-modernization-act-of-2021/) — are again at risk of COVID-19 outbreaks. “Without true access to vaccination, I fear that we will see a dramatic increase in COVID-19 mortality … as the harvest season ramps up, similar to 2020 ,” sociologist Alicia Riley told FRONTLINE. Riley coauthored a University of California San Francisco study (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266v1.full) published in January that found the mortality rate among farmworkers increased 55% from March through September 2020, compared to the same period in previous years. In total, some 9,100 farmworkers have died of COVID-19 in the U.S. since the beginning of the pandemic, out of 554,000 infections, according to Jayson Lusk, a professor of agricultural economics at Purdue University. That grim death toll has repercussions beyond the workers themselves. “It’s not just the workforce. It’s their fam- ilies, because we know that they live in overcrowded living conditions,” said Dr. Max Cuevas. Featured prominent- ly in the July 2020 FRONTLINE documentary COVID’s Hidden Toll, Cuevas is the CEO of Clinica de Salud del Valle de Salinas, which has been at the center of vaccine distribution in California’s Monterey County. Oregon — which the U.S. Census Bureau estimates has around 86,000 farmworkers — began prioritizing vaccines for farmworkers on March 29, ahead of all adults becoming eligible May 1. At the first state-held event targeting farm- and food-processing workers in late March, some 1,000 people in Morrow County were vaccinated. “They were suggesting that folks schedule an appointment ahead of time, but they were also welcoming walk- ins. That’s a really beneficial option,” said Zaira Sanchez, emergency relief coordinator for the farmworker-fo- cused nonprofit UFW Foundation, which helped organize the event. “Some folks just don’t have access or skills to The next step is coordinating with the state to bring mobile vaccination clinics to farms, Sanchez said. hoping that, doing mobile clinics on worksites, we are getting to the folks who don’t have time or don’t have the ability to travel to their appointment or to the event.” Beyond improving access and eliminating the need to take time off work or to register online, on-site events give clinicians the chance to thoroughly explain the importance and safety of vaccinations. “Delivery of these services by trusted entities is important, given the mistrust, as well as misunderstanding, around COVID and vaccines in general,” said Brenda Eskenazi, the director of the Center for Environmental Re- search and Children’s Health at University of California Berkeley, who tracked COVID-19 infections among farm- Even so, many are wary. At an April 3 event organized by LUPE, a farmworker union, targeting agricultural work- ers in Texas’ Rio Grande Valley, clinicians successfully delivered about 700 vaccinations, but “Half of the people we were asking said, ‘No, thanks,’” said Daniel Diaz, LUPE’s director of organizing. Texas — which has 143,763 farmworkers, according to the U.S. Census Bureau — now has the second highest COVID-19 infection rate in the country, after California. Maria, a 39-year-old farmworker in the Rio Grande Valley, said she is hesitant to get vaccinated because she has lingering side effects from a previous bout with COVID-19: “I want to see what happens to others.” To date, vaccine rollout for the general U.S. population has bested the Biden administration’s initial timeline, but that has not been true for people of color, including undocumented workers. Advocates worry that, as states open up vaccines to all adults, farmworkers will be locked out. And vaccinating now is critical, many told FRONT- LINE, because the peak agricultural season starts soon. And yet, many farmworkers have avoided offsite vaccinations due to fear of providing information that could be used to deport them. While a social security number or a state-issued ID is not required to receive a shot, none of the five states with the largest numbers of farmworkers issued guidelines to vaccinators, instructing them not to In a statement (https://www.dhs.gov/news/2021/02/01/dhs-statement-equal-access-covid-19-vaccines-and-vac- cine-distribution-sites) , the Department of Homeland Security said it won’t perform raids on vaccination sites and “encourages all individuals, regardless of immigration status, to receive the COVID-19 vaccine.” The CDC (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/keythingstoknow.html? s_cid=10499:about%20covid%2019%20vaccine:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY21) said vaccines are “free of to all people living in the United States, regardless of their immigration or health insurance status.” And yet, 14 people in Texas were denied vaccines at a University of Texas Rio Grande Valley (UTRGV) clinic, near the border with Mexico. A LUPE report (https://lupenet.org/2021/04/12/report-inequitable-vaccine-access-for-un- tl_inbound=1&tl_groups%5b0%5d=10212&tl_form_type=1&tl_period_type=3&emci=a4d45130-659c-eb11-85aa- 0050f237abef&emdi=53429f0c-689c-eb11-85aa-0050f237abef&ceid=837127) released April 12 found that, out of 20 private providers in the state’s Cameron, Hidalgo and Starr counties, four asked for social security numbers or a Texas ID to register for vaccinations. UTRGV ultimately issued an apology, and the 14 were vaccinated. By contrast, Colorado (https://www.denverpost.com/2021/01/17/colorado-covid-vaccine-undocumented-nonciti- zens/), which has around 36,733 farmworkers, issued a letter advising providers not to request IDs and threaten- In Florida — which has 96,247 farmworkers, according to the Census Bureau — many people don’t want the vac- cine, because they don’t think it’s safe, said Maria Martinez, a coordinator with the nonprofit Farmworker Associ- Most of the state’s farmworkers weren’t eligible for vaccines until April 5, along with the general population. the meantime, Martinez said, farmworkers were “harvesting potatoes and planting chili, tomatoes. They are working. Despite bringing their mask, they are still close to each other at work.” The Florida Department of Health didn’t respond to questions from FRONTLINE. Even with worksite events, it’s hard to reach everyone — or to avoid line jumpers. “In the initial rollout, clearly there were some disparities: a lot of confusion, a lack of transparency about who was receiving the vaccine and why,” said California State Assembly member Robert Rivas (D-30), who emphasized the need for workplace safe- Together with nonprofits and mobile clinics, California has delivered more than 15,000 vaccine doses to farm- workers and has allocated 40,000 doses for food and farmworkers. But that covers a fraction of the state’s 1 mil- lion farmworkers, as estimated by the state’s Department of Public Health. At the rate Monterey County is presently receiving vaccines from the state, it would take six more weeks to fully vaccinate farmworkers — “and that’s only one of the groups that currently are eligible for the vaccine All of this is before California’s peak harvest begins in late April. As the high season moves across the U.S., it brings an influx of new migrants, who travel through Arizona, California, Michigan and beyond. Leticia, a 35-year-old fruit picker who lives on the outskirts of Prosser, Oregon, is concerned about more unvacci- nated workers arriving. Getting sick would affect her ability to feed her kids. “They say we are essential workers, but they don’t give us the same rights. If we are not protected, we will keep working, with the virus or not,” she said. “We can’t stop and we can’t stay home.” Watch COVID’s Hidden Toll (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/covids-hidden-toll/) in its entirety below. This story has been updated to include the name of Morrow County.  Paula Moura (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/person/paula-moura/), Tow Journalism Fellow, FRONTLINE/Newmark Journalism School Fellowship, FRONTLINE paula_moura@wgbh.org (mailto: paula_moura@wgbh.org) @PaulaMoura_san (https://twitter.com/PaulaMoura_san)  Journalistic Standards (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/editorial-standards-and-ethics) As the U.S. Crosses 500,000 Deaths from COVID-19, These 9 Documentaries Offer Context (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/us-crosses-500000-deaths-covid-19-9-documentaries-offer- Taking Office in a Time of Crisis: 16 Documentaries on Key Issues Biden Inherits (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/16-documentaries-key-issues-president-biden-inherits/) Awaiting Election Results, the U.S. Set a New Daily COVID Record. These 8 Films Offer Context. (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/awaiting-election-results-the-u-s-set-a-new-daily-covid-record- Agriculture, (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/agriculture/) Business and Economy, (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/business-and-economy/) COVID-19, (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/covid-19/) Immigration, (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/immigration/) Social Issues (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/social-issues/) Chauvin Trial Lawyers Bring Everything Together in Closing (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/chauvin-trial- lawyers-bring-everything-together-in-closing-arguments- After 45 witnesses and 14 days of testimony in the Hennepin County District Court trial, two lawyers will make their closing arguments, the final words the jurors hear from them before The War in Afghanistan: As Biden Sets U.S. Withdrawal Date, 13 Documentaries Explore the Conflict and Its Impact (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/war- Explore nearly two decades of reporting from FRONTLINE on After Jan. 6, Investigating the Contours of a “Broad Fascist (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/after-jan-6- investigating-the-contours-of-a-broad-fascist-movement- In a scene from the new documentary “American Insurrection,” correspondent A.C. Thompson talks with sociologist Pete Simi “I Felt Hate More Than Anything”: How an Active Duty (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/steven- carrillo-boogaloo-bois-active-duty-airman-incite-civil- Steven Carrillo’s path to the Boogaloo Bois shows the hate group is far more organized and dangerous than previously (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/chauvin-trial- lawyers-bring-everything-together-in-closing-arguments-on- (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/war-in- (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/after-jan-6- investigating-the-contours-of-a-broad-fascist-movement-in- (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/steven-carrillo- boogaloo-bois-active-duty-airman-incite-civil-war/) SHOW MORE (HTTPS://WWW.PBS.ORG/WGBH/FRONTLINE/ARTICLES/) Funding for FRONTLINE is provided through the support of PBS viewers and by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. provided by the Ford Foundation. Additional funding is provided by the Abrams Foundation; the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation; Park Foundation; and the FRONTLINE Journalism Fund with major support from Jon and Jo Ann Hagler on behalf of the Jon L. Hagler Foundation, and Podcasts (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/podcasts/dispatch/) Investigations (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/investigations/) Schedule (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/schedule/) Contact Us (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/contact-us/) Our Funders (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/our- Privacy Policy (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/privacy- PBS Privacy Policy (https://www.pbs.org/about/pbs-privacy-policy/) PBS Terms of Use (https://www.pbs.org/about/terms-use/) Corporate Sponsorship (https://www.sgptv.org/programs/PBS-frontline/) About Us (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/) History (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/history/) Awards (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/awards/) (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/editorial-standards-and- Journalistic Guidelines (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about- Senior Editorial Team (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about- Our Staff (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/our-staff/) Jobs/Internships (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/about-us/jobs/) Pressroom (https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/topic/announcements/) PBS LearningMedia (https://www.pbslearningmedia.org/collection/fl/) FRONTLINE is a registered trademark of WGBH Educational Foundation. Web Site Copyright ©1995-2021 WGBH Educational Foundation. Excess mortality associated with the COVID-19 pandemic among Californians 18–65 years of age, by occupational sector and occupation: March through October 2020 Yea-Hung Chen1, Maria Glymour2, Alicia Riley2, John Balmes3, Kate Duchowny2, Robert Harrison3, 1Institute for Global Health Sciences, University of California, San Francisco 2Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco 3Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. The copyright holder for this preprint NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. Though SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks have been documented in occupational settings and though there is speculation that essential workers face heightened risks for COVID-19, occupational differences in excess mortality have, to date, not been examined. Such information could point to opportunities for intervention, such as workplace modifications and prioritization of vaccine distribution. Using death records from the California Department of Public Health, we estimated excess mortality among Californians 18–65 years of age by occupational sector and occupation, with additional stratification of the sector analysis by race/ethnicity. During the COVID-19 pandemic, working age adults experienced a 22% increase in mortality compared to historical periods. Relative excess mortality was highest in food/agriculture workers (39% increase), transportation/logistics workers (28% increase), facilities (27%) and manufacturing workers (23% increase). Latino Californians experienced a 36% increase in mortality, with a 59% increase among Latino food/agriculture workers. Black Californians experienced a 28% increase in mortality, with a 36% increase for Black retail workers. Asian Californians experienced an 18% increase, with a 40% increase among Asian healthcare workers. Excess mortality among White working-age Californians increased by 6%, with a 16% increase among White food/agriculture workers. Certain occupational sectors have been associated with high excess mortality during the pandemic, particularly among racial and ethnic groups also disproportionately affected by COVID-19. In-person essential work is a likely venue of transmission of coronavirus infection and must be addressed through strict enforcement of health orders in workplace settings and protection of in-person workers. Vaccine distribution prioritizing in-person essential workers will be important for reducing excess COVID mortality. More deaths are occurring during the COVID-19 pandemic than predicted by historical trends [1-4]. In California, per-capita excess mortality is relatively high among Blacks, Latinos, and individuals with low educational attainment [4]. An explanation for these findings is that these populations face unique occupational risks because they may disproportionately make up the state’s essential workforce and because All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. essential workers often cannot work from home [4-6]. Additionally, due to historical structural inequities, low-wage essential workers may be more likely to live in crowded housing [5-7], resulting in household Despite the inherent risks that essential workers face, no study to date has examined differences in excess mortality across occupation. Such information could point to opportunities for intervention, such as workplace modifications and prioritization of vaccine distribution. Using time-series models to forecast deaths from March through October 2020, we compare excess deaths among California residents 18–65 years of age across occupational sectors and occupations, with additional stratification of the sector analysis We obtained data from the California Department of Public Health on all deaths occurring on or after To focus on individuals whose deaths were most plausibly linked to work, we restricted our analysis to decedents 18–65 years of age. Death certificates include an open text field for “Decedent’s usual occupation,” described as “type of work done during most of working life.” Retirement is not separately recorded. We processed the occupation information listed on the death certificates using an automated system developed by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, which converts free-text occupational data to 2010 US Census codes. A team of 3 researchers manually categorized the resulting 529 unique codes into occupational sectors, with a focus on the 13 sectors identified by Cailfornia officials as comprising the state’s essential workforce[8] and retail workers; we anticipated that these sectors would be most at risk. To ease presentation, we combined or eliminated some sectors, placing the defense, communications/IT, and financial sectors in the not-essential category (under the logic that it was particularly difficult to ascertain which workers in these sectors fully met the state’s definitions for essential work) and placing chemical, energy, and water sectors in the facilities category. This resulted in the following 9 groups: facilities, food/agriculture, government/community, health/emergency, manufacturing, retail, transportation/logistics, not essential, and unemployed/missing. We defined 4 racial/ethnic groups: Asian, Black, Latino, and White, with the definition of Latino overwriting any racial designation in the death records. Our definition of Asian, Black, and White excludes individuals identified on the death certificate as multiracial. We defined pandemic time as beginning on March 1, 2020. In some time-stratified analysis, we compared the months of March through May to the months of June and July. We chose the cutoff of June 1 because it is All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. roughly 3 weeks after the state’s post-shutdown reopening in early May, and because we anticipate lags between policy, infection, and death. Similarly, the ending date of July 31 is roughly 3 weeks after the state ordered restaurants and indoor businesses to close in early July. We conducted time-series analysis for each occupational sector, with additional stratification by race/ethnicity. For each group of interest (for example, each occupational sector of interest), we repeated the following procedure. We aggregated the data to months or weeks, using the weekly analysis for visualizations and the monthly analysis to derive summary measures. Following our previous work [4], we fit dynamic harmonic regression models with autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) errors for the number of monthly/weekly all-cause deaths, using deaths occurring among the group prior to March 1, 2020. For each iteration, we used a model-fitting procedure described by Hyndman and Khandakar [9]. Using the final model, we forecast the number of deaths for each unit of time, along with corresponding 95% prediction intervals (PI). To obtain the total number of excess deaths for the entire time window, we subtracted the total number of expected (forecast) deaths from the total number of observed deaths. We obtained a 95% PI for the total by simulating the model 10,000 times, selecting the 97.5% and 2.5% quantiles, and subtracting the total number of observed deaths. We report in our tables the observed number of deaths divided by the expected number of deaths, as predicted by our models. We interpret these ratios as risk ratios for mortality, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time. We also estimated excess mortality for all specific occupations; for individual occupations, we defined excess mortality and risk ratios by comparing 2020 deaths to the arithmetic mean of 2018 and 2019 deaths. We estimate that from March 2020 through October 2020, there were 10,047 (95% PI: 9,229–10,879) excess deaths among Californians 18–65 years of age (Table 1). Relatively large numbers of excess deaths were recorded among workers in the facilities sector (1,681; 95% PI: 1,447–1,919) and the transportation/logistics sector (1,542; 95% PI: 1,350–1,738). Relative to pre-pandemic time, mortality increased during the pandemic by 39% among food/agriculture workers (risk ratio RR=1.39; 95% PI: 1.32–1.48), 28% among transportation/logistics workers (RR=1.28; 95% PI: 1.24–1.33), 27% among facilities workers (RR=1.27; 95% PI: 1.22–1.32), and 23% (RR=1.23; 95% PI: 1.18–1.28) among manufacturing workers. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. Table 1. Excess mortality among Californians 18–65 years of age, by occupational sector: a Risk ratios are defined as the observed number of deaths divided by the expected number of deaths. They are interpretable as the risk ratio for mortality, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time. Relative increases in mortality varied over time (Fig 1) and by occupational sector (Fig 2). In March through May, there was a 14% increase in mortality among all working-age Californians (RR=1.14; 95% PI: 1.09–1.20) compared to a 31% increase among workers in the food/agriculture (RR=1.31; 95% PI: 1.17–1.49). In the months of June and July, the RR were particularly high in the food/agriculture (RR=1.61; 95% PI: 1.44–1.83), transportation/logistics (RR=1.52; 95% PI: 1.38–1.69), manufacturing (RR=1.52; 95% PI: 1.37–1.72), and facilities sectors (RR=1.44; 95% PI: 1.31–1.61). Figure 1. Risk ratios for death, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time, among Californians 18–65 years of age, March through October 2020. The dashed vertical lines mark boundaries between phases of California’s major pandemic policies, lagged to acknowledge time from policy decisions to infection to death. The first phase corresponds to a period of sheltering in place, while the second phase corresponds to a period of reopening. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. Figure 2. Risk ratios for death, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time, among Californians 18–65 years of age, by occupational sector, March through October 2020. The dashed vertical lines mark boundaries between phases of California’s major pandemic policies, lagged to acknowledge time from policy decisions to infection to death. The first phase corresponds to a period of sheltering in place, while the second phase corresponds to a period of reopening. RR also varied by race/ethnicity (Table 2). Latino Californians experienced a 36% increase in mortality during the pandemic (RR=1.36; 95% PI: 1.29–1.44), with a 59% increase among Latino food/agriculture workers (RR=1.59; 95% PI: 1.47–1.75). Black Californians experienced a 28% increase in mortality (RR=1.28; 95% PI: 1.24–1.33), with a 36% increase for Black retail workers (RR=1.36; 95% PI: 1.21–1.55). Asian Californians experienced an 18% increase (RR=1.18; 95% PI: 1.14–1.23), with a 40% increase among Asian healthcare workers (RR=1.40; 95% PI: 1.33–1.49). Mortality among White working-age Californians increased by 6% (RR=1.06; 95% PI: 1.02–1.12) with a 16% increase among White food/agriculture workers All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. Table 2. Risk ratios for mortality, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time, among California residents 18–65 years of age, by occupational sector and race/ethnicity, March Per occupation (Table 3), risk ratios for mortality comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time were highest among cooks (RR=1.60), packaging and filling machine operators and tenders (RR=1.59), miscellaneous agricultural workers (RR=1.55), bakers (RR=1.50), and construction laborers (RR=1.49). Table 3. Risk ratios for mortality, comparing pandemic time to non-pandemic time, among California residents 18–65 years of age, by occupation, March through October 2020. Packaging and filling machine operators and tenders Property, real estate, and community association managers Laborers and freight, stock, and material movers, hand Office and administrative support workers, all other a Number of deaths in pandemic time. The table is restricted to occupations with 100 All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. Our analysis of deaths among Californians between the ages of 18 and 65 shows that the pandemic’s effects on mortality have been greatest among essential workers, particularly those in the food/agriculture, transportation/logistics, facilities, and manufacturing sectors. Such workers experienced an increased risk of mortality of greater than 20% during the pandemic, with an increased risk of greater than 40% during the first two full months of the state’s reopening. Excess mortality in high-risk occupational sectors was evident in analyses stratified by race/ethnicity, especially for Latino, Black, and Asian workers. Our findings are consistent with a small but growing body of literature demonstrating occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection. For example, a study of the UK Biobank cohort found that essential workers, particularly healthcare workers, had high risks for COVID-19 [10]. Similarly, numerous studies have documented SARS-CoV-2 infection among healthcare workers [11]. Our study, however, is unique in examining excess mortality and multiple occupational sectors. Though our work is in agreement with prior studies in finding pandemic-related risks among healthcare workers [11], it suggests that the risks are even higher in other sectors, such as food/agriculture and transportation/logistics. This study is also among the first to examine deaths by both occupation and race/ethnicity. Occupational exposures have been postulated as an important contributor for disparities in excess mortality by race ethnicity, particularly because certain occupations require in-person work [4]. Though we tended to find the largest relative increases in mortality in each racial/ethnic group in the food/agriculture and transportation/logistics sectors, there was variation across race/ethnicity. For example, among Asians, the largest RR was in the health/emergency sector, even though the relative risk increases in that sector were relatively low among other racial/ethnic groups. Such differences may reflect cross-sector differences in demographics. There are, for example, a large number of Latinos who work in meat-processing facilities [12], consistent with data that show that Latinos make up a large proportion of COVID-19 cases in such settings [13]. Similarly, the large RR among Asians in the health/emergency sector could be due to the relatively large number of Filipino Americans in nursing professions [14]. During the pandemic in particular, such disproportionate representation may easily lead to cross-race variability in risk. A recent study found, for example, that Black workers are more likely to be employed in occupations that frequently require close proximity to others [15]. Inequalities in risk may be exacerbated by underlying structural inequities, such as Though non-occupational risk factors may be relevant, it is clear that eliminating COVID-19 will require addressing occupational risks. In-person essential workers are unique in that they are not protected by All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. shelter-in-place policies. Indeed, our study shows that excess mortality rose sharply in the food/agriculture sector during the state’s first shelter-in-place period, from late March through May; these increases were not seen among those working in non-essential sectors. Complementary policies are necessary to protect those who cannot work from home. These can and should include: free personal protective equipment, clearly defined and strongly enforced safety protocols, easily accessible testing, generous sick policies, and appropriate responses to workplace safety violations. As jurisdictions struggle with difficult decisions regarding vaccine distribution, our findings offer a clear point of clarity: vaccination programs prioritizing workers in sectors such as food/agriculture are likely to have disproportionately large benefits for reducing We acknowledge limitations to the study, including misclassification of occupation in death certificates due to coarse categories or inaccurate reports. The decedent’s primary occupation is typically reported by the next of kin who may not be able to precisely describe the work. The primary occupation, which is reported on the death certificate, may not match the most recent occupation, which is more likely to drive occupational risk. These limitations would in general attenuate apparent differences across occupational sectors but are unlikely Our study places a powerful lens on the unjust impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mortality of working age adults in different occupations. Our analysis is among the first to identify non-healthcare in-person essential work, such as food and agriculture, as a predictor of pandemic-related mortality. Essential workers—especially those in the food/agriculture, transportation/logistics, facilities, and manufacturing sectors—face increased risks for pandemic-related mortality. Shutdown policies by definition do not protect essential workers and must be complemented with workplace modifications and prioritized vaccine distribution. If indeed these workers are essential, we must be swift and decisive in enacting measures that 1. Weinberger DM, Chen J, Cohen T, et al. Estimation of excess deaths associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, March to May 2020. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;180(10):1336-1344. doi: 2. Woolf SH, Chapman DA, Sabo RT, Weinberger DM, Hill L, Taylor DDH. Excess deaths from COVID-19 and other causes, March-July 2020. JAMA. 2020;324(15):1562-1564. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. 3. Rossen LM, Branum AM, Ahmad FB, Sutton P, Anderson RN. Excess deaths associated with COVID-19, by age and race and ethnicity — United States, January 26–October 3, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2020;69:1522–1527. doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6942e2 4. Chen Y-H, Glymour MM, Catalano R, Fernandez A, Nguyen T, Kushel M, Bibbins-Domingo K. Excess mortality in California during the COVID-19 pandemic, March-August, 2020. JAMA Intern Med. 2020;e207578. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.7578 5. Bibbins-Domingo. K. This time bust be different: disparities during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann Intern Med. 2020;173(3):233-234. doi: 10.7326/M20-2247 6. Rodriguez-Diaz CE, Guilamo-Ramos V, Mena L, et al. Risk for COVID-19 infection and death among Latinos in the United States: examining heterogeneity in transmission dynamics. Ann Epidemiol. 2020;S1047-2797(20)30267-2. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2020.07.007 7. Yancy CW. COVID-19 and African Americans. JAMA. 2020;323(19):1891. doi: 8. State of California. Essential Workforce. https://covid19.ca.gov/essential-workforce/. Accessed 9. Hyndman RJ, Athanasopoulos G. Forecasting: Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. Melbourne, Australia: 10. Mutambudzi M, Niedwiedz C, Macdonald EB, et al. Occupation and risk of severe COVID-19: prospective cohort study of 120 075 UK Biobank participants. Occup Environ Med. Published online December 9, 2020:oemed-2020-106731. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2020-106731 11. Gholami M, Fawad I, Shadan S, et al. COVID-19 and healthcare workers: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Int J Infect Dis. Published online January 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2021.01.013 12. Kandel W, Parrado EA. Restructuring of the US meat processing industry and new Hispanic migrant destinations. Popul Dev Rev. 2005;31(3):447-471. doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4457.2005.00079.x 13. Waltenburg MA, Victoroff T, Rose CE, et al. Update: COVID-19 among workers in meat and poultry processing facilities — United States, April–May 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly 14. Wong T. Little noticed, Filipino Americans are dying of COVID-19 at an alarming rate. The Los 15. Hawkins D. Differential occupational risk for COVID-19 and other infection exposure according to race and ethnicity. Am J Ind Med. 2020;63(9):817-820. doi: 10.1002/ajim.23145 16. Riley AR, Chen Y-H, Matthay EC, et al. Excess deaths among Latino people in California during the COVID-19 pandemic. medRxiv. 2020;12.18.20248434. doi: 10.1101/2020.12.18.20248434 All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.  (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.21.21250266; this version posted January 22, 2021. aSchool of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027; bBooth School of Business, The University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637; and cDepartment of Economics, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 Edited by Geoffrey M. Heal, Columbia University, New York, NY, and approved October 16, 2020 (received for review May 19, 2020) Policy responses to the COVID-19 outbreak must strike a bal- ance between maintaining essential supply chains and limiting the spread of the virus. Our results indicate a strong positive relationship between livestock-processing plants and local com- munity transmission of COVID-19, suggesting that these plants may act as transmission vectors into the surrounding popula- tion and accelerate the spread of the virus beyond what would be predicted solely by population risk characteristics. We esti- mate the total excess COVID-19 cases and deaths associated with proximity to livestock plants to be 236,000 to 310,000 (6 to 8% of all US cases) and 4,300 to 5,200 (3 to 4% of all US deaths), respectively, as of July 21, 2020, with the vast major- ity likely related to community spread outside these plants. The association is found primarily among large processing facilities and large meatpacking companies. In addition, we find evidence that plant closures attenuated county-wide cases and that plants that received permission from the US Department of Agriculture to increase their production-line speeds saw more county-wide cases. Ensuring both public health and robust essential supply chains may require an increase in meatpacking oversight and potentially a shift toward more decentralized, smaller-scale meat COVID-19 | supply chains | livestock | agriculture | public health mong the many challenges posed by the COVID-19 out- break, maintaining essential supply chains while mitigating community spread of the virus is vital to society. Using county- level data as of July 21, 2020, we test the relationship between one such type of essential activity, livestock processing, and the local incidence of COVID-19 cases. We find that the presence of a slaughtering plant in a county is associated with four to six addi- tional COVID-19 cases per thousand, or a 51 to 75% increase from the baseline rate. We also find an increase in the death rate by 0.07 to 0.1 deaths per thousand people, or 37 to 50% over the baseline rate. Our estimates imply that excess COVID-19 infections and deaths related to livestock plants are 236,000 to 310,000 (6 to 8% of all US cases) and 4,300 to 5,200 (3 to 4% of all US deaths), respectively, with the vast majority occurring We further find the temporary closure of high-risk plants to be followed by lower rates of COVID-19 case growth. We also find that smaller, decentralized facilities do not appear to contribute to transmission and that plants that received permission from the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to increase their production-line speeds saw more county-wide cases. Our associ- ations hold after controlling for population risk factors and other potential confounders, such as testing rates. Although lacking a natural experiment to cement causality, we employ a combina- tion of empirical tools—including an event study, instrumental variables (IVs), and matching—to support our findings. The centrality of livestock processing to local economies and national food supplies implies that mitigating disease spread through this channel may take an economic toll. Understanding the public health risk posed by livestock processing is essen- tial for assessing potential impacts of policy action. However, generating case data attributable to livestock plants is chal- lenging: Contact tracing in the United States is decentralized and sporadic, and there may be incentives for companies and government bodies to obscure case reporting (1–5). Our study represents an attempt to address this gap in knowledge. The disease burden of COVID-19 is not uniformly distributed across the global population. Certain conditions appear to influ- ence the degree to which people spread the virus. Some contexts and social behaviors are believed to lead to superspreading events that disproportionately affect local populations (6, 7). Previous studies have explored links between the incidence of COVID-19 cases and a range of demographic and environmental factors, such as age, occupation, income, race, intergenerational mixing, temperature, and humidity (8–13). Social, commercial, and industrial activities are also believed to affect transmis- sion, for which reason countries worldwide have implemented a range of economic and social-distancing measures (8, 14– 20). In the United States, some industries are exempted from shelter-in-place orders and have remained operational due to their necessity to satisfy basic societal needs (21). We investi- gate the relationship between transmission and one such activity, The livestock- and poultry-processing industry is an essential component of the global food supply chain. In the United States, it is a large industry, employing 500,000 people. It is also highly concentrated: The largest four companies in beef, pork, and poultry processing capture 55 to 85% of their respective mar- kets (22–27). This degree of concentration stands in contrast to the European Union (EU), for example, where the top 15 meat companies represent 28% of EU meat production (28). The COVID-19 pandemic is a public health and economic cri- sis in which policymakers face tradeoffs between maintaining essential economic activities and mitigating disease spread. Our study suggests that, among essential industries, livestock processing poses a particular public health risk extending far beyond meatpacking companies and their employees. We esti- mate livestock plants to be associated with 236,000 to 310,000 COVID-19 cases (6 to 8% of total) and 4,300 to 5,200 deaths (3 to 4% of total) as of July 21. We also illustrate potential contributions of plant size, industrial concentration, plant shut- downs, and policy actions to this phenomenon. These results motivate investigation into supply chains, operating proce- dures, and labor relations within the meatpacking industry. Author contributions: C.A.T., C.B., and D.A. designed research, performed research, Competing interest statement: C.A.T., D.A., and editor Geoffrey M. Heal are affiliated See online for related content such as Commentaries.y 1To whom correspondence may be addressed. Email: da2152@columbia.edu.y This article contains supporting information online at https://www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/ Over the decades, the livestock- and poultry-processing indus- try in the United States has consolidated its operations into fewer, larger plants, in which meat production per plant has increased threefold since 1976 (29, 30). Today, 12 plants pro- duce over 50% of the country’s beef, and 12 others, similarly, produce over 50% of the country’s pork (30, 31). Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, livestock-processing plants worldwide experienced spikes in infections, facing shutdowns that disrupted meat and dairy supplies (32–35). In the United States, reports of COVID-19 spreading within the livestock-processing indus- try led to increased attention and updated safety guidance by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (22). Several plants were forced to shut down until, among other factors, a fed- eral executive order invoked the status of livestock processing as “critical infrastructure” for national security and mandated that Work routines in livestock processing have several character- istics that make plants susceptible to local outbreaks of respira- tory viruses. The CDC includes the following among potential risk factors: long work shifts in close proximity to coworkers, difficulty in maintaining proper face covering due to physical demands, and shared transportation among workers (22). Pre- vious research has proposed occupational exposure to livestock animals as a driver of viral spread, although an experimental study did not find pigs or chickens to be susceptible to the SARS- CoV-2 virus associated with COVID-19 (38–41). Increases in production-line speeds due to technological enhancements as well as policy changes have also been hypothesized to exacer- bate COVID-19 transmission (5, 42). Among those we investi- gate are USDA waivers on poultry-production line-speed limits for plants with strong commercial production practices and The indoor climate of livestock facilities may increase trans- mission risk. To preserve meat after slaughter, processing areas are maintained at 0 to 12 ◦C (44), and such low temperatures have been linked to increased COVID-19 risk (45, 46). Though these rooms are kept at 90 to 95% relative humidity to prevent meat from drying and losing weight, the low absolute humidity at near-freezing temperatures may encourage the transmission of airborne viruses such as influenza (47–49). Moreover, stud- ies have suggested that industrial climate control systems used to cool and ventilate meat processing facilities may further the spread of pathogenic bioaerosols, a proposed COVID-19 Workers’ socioeconomic status and labor practices may also contribute to infection and transmission. Among front-line meat- processing workers in the United States, 45% are categorized as low income, 80% are people of color, and 52% are immi- grants, many of whom are undocumented and lack ready access to healthcare and other worker protections that could facili- tate COVID-19 prevention and treatment (54–56). In addition, employees at these facilities may face incentives to continue working even while sick through company policies on med- ical leave and attendance bonuses (5, 22, 57). In addition, through consolidation over the decades, the meatpacking indus- try has potentially increased its monopsonistic power over labor markets, which has been linked to greater work hazards (58–60). We find a strong relationship between proximity of livestock plants and the incidence of COVID-19 over time. Fig. 1 plots average COVID-19 case and death rates over time by whether *The CEOs of Wayne Farms and Tyson Foods—both granted waivers in April 2020—are, respectively, chairman of the National Chicken Council (the body that initially lobbied for the line speed waivers) and a public advocate for the poultry industry, buying full- page newspaper ads in April stating that the food supply chain was “broken.” there is a large livestock facility in a given county relative to rates in counties at varying distances from a plant. In both cases, we see an increasing divergence in outcomes beginning in early April Fig. 1 does not account for county-level differences in terms of density and demographics. In Table 1, we estimate the rela- tionship between livestock plants and COVID-19 incidence as of July 21, 2020, using regression models that control for poten- tial confounding variables, including county-level measures of income; population density and its square; the timing of the first case; the proportions of elderly people, uninsured people, front- line workers, and people using public transportation; racial and ethnic characteristics; average household size; local freight traf- fic; and populations of nursing homes and prisons. We find that livestock plants are associated with an increase in COVID-19 cases by approximately four per thousand people, representing a 51% increase over the July 21 baseline rate of eight per thou- sand. Likewise, death rates increase by 0.07 per thousand, or 37% over the county baseline of 0.2 deaths per thousand. The results are robust both nationally and when only considering variation within states after including state fixed effects. We also use an alternate specification with a binary measure of whether a county has one or more livestock plants. Such counties are associated with six additional cases per thousand, or a 75% increase over the baseline, as well as 0.1 additional deaths per thousand, or 50% over the baseline county death rate.† In addition, COVID- 19 appears to arrive earlier in counties with livestock plants (SI Heterogeneity by Facility Type, Size, Operations, and Company. We now present potential characteristics of livestock facilities that might contribute to these observed relationships with the Facility type. We first looked at the relationship between reported cases and the type of animal slaughtered or processed. We found that beef, pork, and poultry plants each show a sig- nificant relationship with COVID-19 cases and deaths, with pork plants showing the greatest measured magnitude of the three in cases and beef plants showing the greatest magni- tude in deaths (SI Appendix, Table S3). As seen in the map in Fig. 2, pork and beef plants are well distributed throughout the United States, and, although, poultry plants are relatively concentrated in the southeastern United States, they are found across 10 states. Overall, the wide geographic distribution of facilities by type mitigates concerns of this being a regional Facility size. We next investigated whether there are differen- tial relationships with COVID-19 transmission based on the size of processing facilities. Livestock facility data were gathered from the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS). SI Appendix, Table S4 categorizes beef, pork, and poultry plants by order of magnitude based on the pounds per month processed: large (category 5; over 10 million), medium (category 4; over 1 million), and small (category 3; over 100,000 and under 1 mil- lion). Each size category was sufficiently represented, with 349 small plants, 126 medium plants, and 225 large plants. Very small plants (categories 1 and 2), which are often niche providers, were †In line with the literature, we find COVID-19 incidence to be strongly associated with population density, average household size, the timing of the first confirmed case, and the proportion of a county’s population who are public-transit commuters, elderly, Black, Hispanic, in a nursing home, uninsured, or institutionalized (SI Appendix, ‡In our main analyses, we included category 4 and 5 pork and beef facilities and cate- gory 5 poultry facilities (which comprise 57% of total poultry plants); see Materials and Mean county-level COVID-19 cases per thousand (A) and deaths per thousand (B) over time based on proximity to a livestock facility. “0–50 km” excludes the county itself. Counties are categorized into nonoverlapping, single categories based on the nearest facility (e.g., if a county contains a livestock facility and is within 50 km of another facility outside the county, the county is coded “In county” and not “0–50 km”). We found the relationship between livestock plants and COVID-19 transmission to be most pronounced among the largest plants, whose presence in a county is associated with a 35% higher COVID-19 case rate relative to the average coefficient for livestock plants shown in Table 1. Small and medium-sized plants were generally not found to have signifi- cant relationships with local COVID-19 transmission, suggesting that the scale of production is an important variable for industry Production line speeds. We next examined whether there is a relationship between local COVID-19 transmission and plant- operating procedures. We collected data on whether a poultry plant had been granted a waiver from the USDA permitting production-line processing speeds of 175 birds per minute, up from the statutory limit of 140. Waivers were first issued to 20 poultry plants in 2012 as part of a pilot study to test self- monitoring of safety. It was then expanded in September 2018 to allow all poultry plants the opportunity to apply for these waivers. A faster production line can result in both workers locating in greater proximity to one another and increased difficulty in main- taining personal protective equipment and thus could contribute to conditions that increase the likelihood of viral transmission. Of the 120 poultry plants in our sample, 48 plants currently have waivers, 16 of which were issued in 2020.§ An analy- sis of the relationship between line speed waivers and local COVID-19 incidence suggests, though with less precise esti- mates, that waivers predict increases in county-level case rates double those in counties with nonwaiver poultry plants (SI Appendix, Table S5). Among plants issued a waiver in 2020, the relationship is even greater in magnitude. This finding sug- gests a potential pathway between a livestock plant’s operating Facility operator. We next looked at differential relationships with COVID-19 by company. The relationship between local COVID-19 incidence and medium and large plants (FSIS cat- egories 4 or 5) owned or operated by some of the largest US processors (National Beef, JBS, Tyson, Cargill, and Smithfield) and their subsidiaries is presented in SI Appendix, Table S6. These magnitudes can be visualized in Fig. 3: The strongest §Among counties with poultry plants, those with and without waivers appear similar in their average characteristics, reducing waiver-selection concerns. The exception is that waiver counties have lower proportions of Black residents and prison populations, relationship is found with National Beef, whose indicated rela- tionship with COVID-19 case rates is approximately five times greater in magnitude than that of other livestock facilities. How- ever, all of the large companies appear to have larger coefficients than the baseline. Aside from Smithfield, the relationship with deaths is positive, albeit less significant, which may be due to Behavioral change. If livestock facilities are driving higher COVID-19 incidence, and if livestock processing is an essen- tial industry, we would expect people in livestock-plant coun- ties to work more compared to those in nonlivestock counties in response to COVID-related lockdowns. To this end, we employed county-level mobility data made available by Google for COVID-19 researchers. We constructed a baseline measure of average time-use change before and after March 13, 2020, the date the United States declared a national disaster in relation to COVID-19 and shortly after the World Health Organization We then examined how the presence of livestock plants varied with time spent working and engaging in shopping and recre- ation. We controlled for the same demographic and location- based covariates as in other models. We found that the presence of livestock plants is strongly associated with more time spent at work (SI Appendix, Table S7). This association is relative to the baseline behavior change across all other counties, indicat- ing that people in livestock-plant counties are working more (or cutting back on work less) than people in other counties. Mean- while, there is a lesser and imprecise relationship with retail and recreation activities, which may contribute to viral spread. This supports the notion that livestock plants, rather than unrelated changes in behavior in these same counties, are the more likely Plant shutdowns. Many livestock plants were temporarily shut down to halt the spread of COVID-19. In such cases, we would expect the dynamics of caseloads and deaths over time to vary negatively with the timing of shutdown, after a lag. Were con- founders instead driving our results, they would have to follow ¶In our collected sample, the number of facilities per company varies: National Beef has only seven plants in seven counties, whereas Tyson Foods has 80 plants across 69 counties. The other companies fall somewhere in between. ∥It is possible that additional time spent working, and thus out of the house, may explain some of the additional time spent on retail activities (e.g., gas stations or workday Livestock facilities and county-level COVID-19 incidence Regression model with cross-sectional county data. Dependent variable is COVID-19 cases (models 1 to 3) and deaths (models 4 to 6) per thousand. Livestock facility level is the sum of beef, pork, and poultry plants in the county. Livestock facility binary denotes a binary variable representing whether a county has at least one livestock plant. Controls include income per capita (log), density (population per built-up land area) and density squared, the number of freight miles traveled, and timing of first case (index of Julian day of first confirmed case), as well as proportions of the county population over the age of 70, Black, Hispanic, public- transit commuters, uninsured, frontline workers, or in nursing homes or prisons. State-level fixed effects (FE) are included in models 2, 3, 5, and 6. SEs are clustered at the state level. the timing of the plant shutdowns as well. This helps argue against purely static confounders, such as highway connectedness Using a dataset tracking whether and when livestock plants closed, Fig. 4 presents an event study comparing the change in weekly COVID-19 case rates before and after closure, aver- aged across counties with plants that closed and counties with plants with no evidence of closure. Among livestock plants in our sample, we have the dates of closures that occurred in 26 coun- ties, or 10% of counties with plants. The mean closure time was 9 d. Some closed for a day or two for cleaning and disinfection, while others closed for longer periods while revising their oper- ating procedures and monitoring staff. On the other hand, many plants remained open due to a perceived lack of risk, while others In this event study, we examined case growth (weekly log dif- ference), following the structure of a previous analysis (61), as well as change in case rates. In addition, we performed prepol- icy matching across the two groups based on percent case growth in the 2 wk prior to shutdown. In doing so, we selected the top quartile of growth rates among the 233 counties with livestock plants that did not have a plant shutdown. We took this step to maximize comparability between the two groups, as we observed that preclosure growth in cases was, on the whole, greater in Coefficients are plotted from a panel regression, where coun- ties (categorized as either having or not having a plant closure) are interacted with the weekly event index, both in terms of per- cent growth in cases (Fig. 4 A and C) and the change in case rates per 1,000 (Fig. 4 B and D). This model controls for state-level social distancing and stay-at-home policy and includes a fixed effect for each county, thereby isolating within-county variation Fig. 4 shows that plant closures occurred in counties experi- encing high growth in COVID-19 cases, as might be expected. Within 1 wk of closure, however, the growth rate in shutdown counties reverted to the prepolicy growth rate from a higher peak, compared to nonshutdown counties in the same time. By week 2, growth rates between the two categories, highly diver- gent in week 1, were roughly equal. By weeks 3 to 4, average growth rates in shutdown counties were, in fact, lower than even counties without plants. This lag structure for cases aligns with the fact that COVID-19 incubation periods may last for up to The lower sustained COVID-19 growth rate postclosure sug- gests that plant closures have some relationship with COVID-19 transmission, which, in turn, suggests some relationship between plant-level activity and community disease spread within the county. Given that the average closing period was only 9 d, it is unclear whether the plant closures themselves reduced COVID-19 transmission rates, or whether closures resulted in plants taking more COVID-19 precautions (e.g., implementing enhanced safety protocols). It is also true that locales initially experiencing growth spikes will likely revert to average growth rates over time. However, the speed with which growth rates rose and fell in shutdown counties suggests that some closure-related mechanism is likely at play. And while shutdown counties have higher cumulative COVID-19 caseloads on average, this is likely because closures occurred too late to suppress community spread COVID-19 testing. Next, we address concerns that these results primarily reflect differences in testing. Places with more test- ing tend to have more confirmed COVID-19 cases than places with less testing (mechanically). There does not appear to be a national database on county-level testing, so we compiled data from 31 states that have livestock facilities and testing data at the county level. Table 2 shows that, while testing is positively asso- ciated with COVID-19 incidence, the relationship to livestock facilities remains large and significant. In a second specification, we added the positivity rate (total cases divided by total tests) as a further control. The magnitude of the livestock coefficients are of a similar magnitude to those in the baseline model in Table 1. However, these estimates are not directly comparable because of the smaller sample size of counties with testing data (1,773 Manufacturing activity. It is possible that a certain type of work similar to livestock processing—but not livestock processing itself—is driving the spread of COVID-19. To test this, we con- trolled for the county-level number of manufacturing establish- ments and share of income from manufacturing. We found that the relationship between livestock plants and COVID-19 inci- dence remained largely stable, meaning that it is not explained by a correlation with manufacturing (SI Appendix, Table S8). While there is no obvious relationship with number of manu- facturing establishments, the coefficient for manufacturing share of income is positive and statistically significant, implying that Shaded counties contain at least one beef or pork facility categorized by USDA FSIS as processing more than 1 million pounds per month (categories 4 and 5) or at least one poultry facility categorized as processing more than 10 million pounds per month (category 5). manufacturing may be associated with higher COVID-19 inci- dence. Such a relationship is plausible given that, like livestock processing, employees in the manufacturing sector may work in close proximity and that many manufacturing activities are Dropping counties distant from livestock plants. Another poten- tial concern is that counties very far from livestock plants have lower population densities and different demographic makeups than counties nearer these plants. Correspondingly, there is a risk that incorporating these counties into our analysis may intro- duce bias into our livestock-plant estimates. An analysis omitting counties more than 100 km from a county with a livestock plant showed a relationship with livestock facilities greater in mag- nitude than the base specification, indicating that our findings are robust to this risk and, perhaps, somewhat conservative (SI Dependent-variable transformations. To address concerns about a skewed outcome variable, we employed the natural log and inverse hyperbolic sine of the dependent variable and found a consistently positive, but smaller-magnitude, relation- ship between livestock plants and increased COVID-19 case and Alternative Statistical Approaches to Confounding. Above, we have shown the robustness of multivariate regression results to various confounders—demographic, geographic, and behavioral—and sample-selection criteria. Additionally, we have shown that the dynamics over time of COVID-19 cases and deaths vary with the Here, we present results of additional statistical methods used to explore the relationship between livestock plants and COVID- 19 cases and deaths in the cross-section. The methods we used to help address potential bias and endogeneity concerns are IV analysis, propensity-score matching, and nearest-neighbor matching. We note that the 259 counties in our sample with live- stock plants differ in important ways from those without plants. We constructed a balance table comparing counties with and without livestock plants (SI Appendix, Table S11). Counties with plants have higher population density, a lower proportion of elderly people, higher proportions of Black and Hispanic people, and larger household sizes. Income levels, by contrast, are simi- lar. Each particular statistical method adjusts for these baseline differences in different ways. To preview, we find the observed relationship with COVID-19 incidence to be robust to all three Instrumental variables. First, we employed an IV approach using historical livestock agricultural production data. The selection of this instrument was motivated by meat processors’ need to minimize costs of transporting livestock supply when selecting the location of plants. In the first stage, we regressed the cur- rent number of livestock plants in each county on the county’s livestock-production value in 1959 in terms of animals sold, as derived from the USDA census. Note that this only includes agricultural operations, and not livestock processing. We believe that this is a strong instrument, given that most of the interstate highway system was constructed during the 1960s, most currently operating livestock processing plants were built in the 1970s or later, and livestock agricultural operations in 1959 appear unlikely to affect current public health outcomes. In the second stage, we regressed COVID-19 incidence on this predicted value of livestock plants as well as the other covariates in the primary specification. The first stage in the IV analysis, presented in SI Appendix, Table S12, shows that the instru- ment is highly relevant with the F-statistic far above Stock and Yogo’s (63) 10% maximal bias threshold. The overall IV results in Table 3 show the relationship between livestock facilities and COVID-19 case and death rates to be even stronger for each outcome, except the within-state death rate, which is of compa- rable magnitude but less precisely estimated. We note that the IV approach restricts identifying variation to that attributable to livestock agriculture proximity, thereby reducing statistical propensity-score matching and nearest-neighbor matching, we constructed comparable subsamples of our dataset with and without livestock facilities to estimate an effect of having these Relationship between COVID-19 cases and livestock plants owned or operated by large meatpacking companies. Coefficients are firm fixed- effect coefficients plotted from SI Appendix, Table S6. Error bars represent livestock facilities among otherwise similar counties on COVID- For propensity-score matching, we first predicted the probabil- ity that a county has at least one livestock facility (binary value) using a binomial regression that includes all of the covariates from our primary model specification in Table 1, as well as their quadratic terms to increase model flexibility. We then confirmed that observations were relatively balanced across covariates within each propensity-score quartile (SI Appendix, Table S13. This suggests that the propensity score is, indeed, balancing the multidimensional covariates. In a second step, we used this pre- dicted probability (i.e., the propensity score) as a control in a regression of COVID-19 incidence on livestock plants. The idea is that the propensity score helps account for bias in the location For nearest-neighbor matching, we used the MatchIt pack- age in R to restrict the sample to similar treated and control groups. The matching occurred by using a nearest-neighbor algo- rithm based on predicting the livestock binary variable with the covariates in our primary specification. To ensure an adequate sample size, we allowed the algorithm to match two nonplant counties to every one county with a livestock plant. We found the resulting 774 county subsample to be well balanced (SI Appendix, Table S14).∗∗ SI Appendix, Table S15 consolidates the results and includes outputs from Table 1 for reference. In this analy- sis, coefficients for both case and death rates remain of a similar Community spread beyond livestock plants. COVID-19 trans- mission likely extends beyond the county containing the livestock plant. SI Appendix, Fig. S3 expands our main analysis to include neighboring counties grouped by distance band, as charted in Fig. 1 and visualized in the map in SI Appendix, Fig. S1. We found evidence of a relationship between livestock plants and increased COVID-19 case rates up to 150 km away from a plant, **A balance table for the entire sample is shown in SI Appendix, Table S11. further supporting the notion of community spread beyond the To validate and contextualize our findings, we first estimated the total excess cases and deaths related to livestock plants implied by our results. For one set of estimates, we multiplied the plant-level coefficient for excess cases and deaths related to livestock plants by the total number of plants and the aver- age population per plant to arrive at a national total. A second approach used a binary measure for whether a county has one or more livestock plants and multiplied this coefficient by the county-level mean population and number of counties with live- stock plants. The estimates resulting from this exercise were, respectively, 236,000 to 310,000 cases and 4,300 to 5,200 deaths. A summary of this calculation is shown in SI Appendix, Table S19. Next, we estimated the share of cases among livestock employ- ees relative to total excess cases in an attempt to determine the share of excess cases that may be occurring outside the livestock plants. We used the CDC’s state-level aggregate count of live- stock workers testing positive for COVID-19 as of May 31 across 26 states (64). Comparing this to state-level case data as of May 31, we found that livestock workers represented 2.7% of cases in these states. Using this ratio to estimate the total number of infected livestock workers among all of the cases observed in these states on July 21, we arrived at an estimate of 35,635 infected workers, ∼7% of the industry’s entire employee base. Using our calculation of 236,000 to 310,000 cases nationwide due to livestock plants, we estimated that livestock workers repre- sent 12 to 15% of these excess total cases. In other words, for every worker infected at a livestock plant, between seven and eight local nonworkers were ultimately infected by the end of the sample period, underscoring the high potential for community Angrist and Krueger (65) noted that “one should always be wary of drawing causal inferences from observational data.” We know of no random-assignment design that could address our research question and thereby yield the most reliable path to causal inference. The best we can do here is provide an unusu- ally broad array of observational evidence. This includes (but is not limited to) ruling out the most obvious confounders, a cross-sectional IV, and the event-study analysis leveraging shutdown timing. A still more compelling natural experiment would leverage explicit and exogenous variation that drives livestock-plant shutdowns, i.e., an IV for the shutdowns or their timing. Unfortunately, we know of no such identifying variation. Readers may disagree on whether our array of analyses has isolated a causal effect. Given this, and in order to be conserva- tive, we avoided causal language throughout our text so as not to overstate the “hardness” of our method (66). This avoidance and caution stands in contrast to other recent, impactful work on Still, we believe that our array of analyses constitutes the best feasible approach to shed light on the role of livestock-processing plants in the US COVID-19 pandemic. For a question of this importance, we believe there is no “harder” method available (66). As policymakers and industry leaders seek to preserve vital food-supply chains while mitigating the pandemic’s spread, evi- dence on the potential scope of the issue is particularly valuable, as well as assessment of the relationship between temporary plant shutdowns and subsequent COVID-19 growth dynamics. ††We present summary statistics by distance band in SI Appendix, Tables S16–S18. The average number of counties in each band increases with distance. There is a clear positive relationship between COVID-19 cases and deaths in relation to livestock facil- ities, and the county-level mean case rate varies directly with a county’s proximity to a Graphs match COVID-19 pretrends of control group (green lines) to counties with plant shutdowns (red lines) based on percent growth in cases (weekly log difference) in the 2 wk prior to shutdown. Selected counties are in the top quartile of growth rates among the 233 counties with livestock plants that did not have a plant shutdown. For nonshutdown counties, week 0 is assigned to the mean shutdown date, April 22, 2020. coefficients from a panel regression, where counties are interacted with the weekly event index in terms of percent growth in cases (A) and change in case rates per 1,000 (B). Estimates are relative to the baseline trend across all counties. One week prior (week −1) is omitted as the reference level. Models control for stay-at-home orders at the state level and include a fixed effect for each county. Error bars reflect a 95% CI. line charts of the mean values of each group in terms of percent case growth and change in case rate, respectively. mated period when the effect of closing a plant would have been reflected in cases (1 to 3 wk after), given that incubation periods may last up to Although our estimate that 6 to 8% of COVID-19 cases are associated with livestock plants may appear high, it is important to recall that high levels of geographic heterogeneity in COVID- 19 incidence can be explained by some combination of individual behavior, government policy, social-distancing compliance, and economic activity: The United States, for example, has 4% of the world’s population, but approximately a quarter of all cases and deaths as of July 2020. When narrowing the geographic focus, we can imagine the distribution of COVID-19 incidence to be Kansas provides a telling example of the outsized role of live- stock facilities: As of July 20, a total of 3,200 of 23,300 state cases (14%) were directly linked to meatpacking (67). For context, there are 17,200 employees in the animal-slaughtering industry in Kansas (68), or 0.6% of the state’s population, suggesting that livestock plants had a relationship of a magnitude closer in scale to our own estimates (Kansas’ estimate is 23× their labor foot- print). Although the figure we are estimating in our study (6 to 8% of all US cases out of a national livestock workforce of 0.15%, or a multiplier of 40 to 53×) is larger, we believe that this finding is plausible, considering follow-on community spread; Kansas’ official tally, though evidently aided by some degree of contract tracing, was reportedly hampered by lags in hiring staff and leg- islative actions that have inhibited tracing efforts (69). That is, the figure we have calculated could, in fact, be more complete than the Kansas figure in capturing the spread resulting from Our analysis of individual meatpacking companies may present an opportunity to explore how differences in corpo- rate structure and operating practices may account for their differential public health outcomes. In particular, the evi- dence that shutting down plants temporarily may be related to decreases in COVID-19 case growth presents a potentially powerful transmission mitigant. In addition, the positive rela- tionship between COVID-19 transmission and production-line speed waivers issued to poultry plants, particularly those dur- ing the 2020 pandemic, is notable, given that these waivers are intended for plants with safe commercial production practices COVID-19 testing, livestock facilities, and COVID-19 incidence Regression model with cross-sectional county-level data from 31 states with livestock facilities and available data on county-level testing gathered from 31 state health departments. Dependent variables are COVID-19 cases (models 1 to 4) and deaths (models 5 to 8) per thousand. Livestock facility is the sum of beef, pork, and poultry plants in the county. Testing per thousand represents the number of tests taken per thousand people in these states as of July 14, 2020. Positivity rate is total cases divided by total tests. Controls include income per capita (log), density (population per built-up land area) and density squared, the number of freight miles traveled, and timing of first case (index of Julian day of first confirmed case), as well as proportions of the county population over the age of 70, Black, Hispanic, public-transit commuters, uninsured, frontline workers, or in nursing homes or prisons. State-level fixed effects (FE) are included in all models. SEs are clustered at and microbial control.‡‡ This finding suggests a need for An implication of this study is that some aspects of large meat- processing plants render them especially susceptible to spreading respiratory viruses. One potential explanation is that large plants simply entail more activity and employ more people. Because these plants provide a central location for moving products, it is plausible that a linear increase in the potential infected within the plant would entail a nonlinear response, owing to the com- plex and exponential nature of disease-transmission dynamics (70). Another driver may be the large physical spaces where pro- cessing occurs. Larger rooms tend to be louder and, thus, require more shouting (53), and they may require stronger climate con- trol, which we note in our introduction may aggravate COVID-19 spread. A larger space that employees must navigate in reaching their workstations may also increase the number of workplace More broadly, the finding that meatpacking plants may con- tribute to high levels of community spread underscores the potential negative public health externalities generated by the industry, which may be attributable to industrial concentration, operating practices, and labor conditions. Complicating this mat- ter from an economic standpoint is the supply-chain choke point created by large plants disrupted by COVID-19, causing food shortages, driving up prices, and incurring substantial upstream and downstream economic losses. Cataloging and addressing the underlying factors that produced this systemic risk in the first place could not only strengthen the US food system in the face of COVID-19 and future disruptions, but also help illuminate analogous weak points in other industries and supply chains. Our analysis used a county-level dataset of COVID-19 cases and deaths from the New York Times, based on reports from state and local health agencies (71). Included in counts are both confirmed and probable deaths, as cate- ‡‡In contrast, some plants receiving waivers had recent Occupational Safety and Health gorized by states. The five county boroughs of New York City are grouped into one unit. We limited the analysis to the continental United States. Our baseline model specification takes the following form: where outcomei is the COVID-19 case or death rate in county i, β is the coefficient of interest, controlsi is a vector of county-level covariates, αs is a dummy for fixed effects in state s, and ϵi is the error term. Covariate data include county-level race, ethnicity, and age structure data from the US Census and mean county-level income data from the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (72, 73). Data on nursing-home populations, incar- cerated populations, uninsured populations, average household size, and work-commuting methods come from the 2014–2018 American Commu- nity Survey (74–77). Data on manufacturing establishments come from the Regression model with an instrument for the presence of a livestock plant in a county using the county’s livestock production value in 1959 in terms of animals sold. Livestock facility is the sum of beef, pork, and poultry plants in the county. Controls include income per capita (log), density (population per built-up land area) and density squared, the number of freight miles trav- eled, and timing of first case (index of Julian day of first confirmed case), as well as proportions of the county population over the age of 70, Black, His- panic, public-transit commuters, uninsured, frontline workers, or in nursing homes or prisons. State-level fixed effects (FE) are included in models 2 and American Economic Survey (68). Number of frontline workers were derived from Center for Economic Policy Research data (54), transforming from Pub- lic Use Microdata Area-level to the county level, assuming even allocation. The freight index is from the Federal Highway Administration’s Freight Anal- ysis Framework (78) using the variable AADTT12, the annual average daily truck traffic in 2012, which we sum across all listed highways in a given county. Data on state-level social-distancing policy come from a dataset synthesizing news articles tracking these policy measures (79–81). Locations and characteristics of livestock processing facilities come from the USDA FSIS (82). Beef and pork livestock plants were filtered to include plants with volume of all processed products greater than 1 million pounds per month (categories 4 and 5), which account for the vast majority of US production. Poultry livestock were filtered to include plants with vol- umes greater than 10 million pounds per month (category 5) because that category alone accounts for the majority of US production. County-level mobility data were made accessible to COVID-19 researchers by Google (83). County-level COVID-19 testing data came from a dataset gathered from 31 state health agencies (84). Data on line-speed waivers came from the USDA FSIS (85). Data on plant closures and opening dates came from a dataset assembled from various local news reports, building on a dataset from the Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting (86, 87). Historical livestock- production data are from the 1959 USDA census of agriculture, accessed via the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research (88). Data Availability. Detailed CSV datasets concerning plant and county-level data relevant to COVID-19 employed in this study are available in Zenodo at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4069616. Further information is available in Github at https://github.com/cboulos/livestock-covid. 1. V. Subbian et al., Ethics and informatics in the age of COVID-19: Challenges and recommendations for public health organization and public policy. J. Am. Med. Inf. 2. R. J. Foley, Outbreak at Iowa pork plant was larger than state reported. AP News, July 22, 2020. https://apnews.com/article/85a02d9296053980ea47eba97f920707. Accessed 3. L. Douglas, “As more meatpacking workers fall ill from Covid-19, meat compa- nies decline to disclose data.” Fern’s AG Insider (2020). https://thefern.org/ag insider/as-more-meatpacking-workers-fall-ill-from-covid-19-meat-companies-decline- 4. C. Collins, S. Novack, COVID-19 cases now tied to meat plants in rural Texas counties wracked with coronavirus. Texas Observer, April 22, 2020. https://www. texasobserver.org/east-texas-coronavirus-chicken/. Accessed 20 May 2020. 5. J. Mayer, How Trump is helping tycoons exploit the pandemic. New Yorker, July 20, 2020. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/07/20/how-trump-is-helping- tycoons-exploit-the-pandemic. Accessed 27 July 2020. 6. L. Hamner, High SARS-CoV-2 attack rate following exposure at a choir practice— Skagit County, Washington, March 2020. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 69, 606–610 7. R. Bouffanais, S. S. Lim, Cities—try to predict superspreading hotspots for COVID-19. 8. J. B. Dowd et al., Demographic science aids in understanding the spread and fatality rates of COVID-19. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 9696–9698 (2020). 9. T. Barbieri, G. Basso, S. Scicchitano, Italian workers at risk during the COVID-19 epidemic. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3572065 (10 April 2020). 10. G. J. Borjas, Demographic determinants of testing incidence and COVID-19 infec- tions in New York City neighborhoods. https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/13115/ demographic-determinants-of-testing-incidence-and-covid-19-infections-in-new- 11. M. M. Sajadi et al., Temperature and latitude analysis to predict potential spread and seasonality for COVID-19. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3550308 (9 March 2020). 12. K. M. O’Reilly et al., Effective transmission across the globe: The role of climate in COVID-19 mitigation strategies. Lancet. Planet. Health 4, e172 (2020). 13. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, “Rapid expert consulta- tion on SARS-CoV-2 survival in relation to temperature and humidity and potential for seasonality for the COVID-19 pandemic (April 7, 2020)” (Tech. Rep., The National 14. R. M. Anderson, H. Heesterbeek, D. Klinkenberg, T. D. Hollingsworth, How will country-based mitigation measures influence the course of the COVID-19 epidemic? 15. S. H. Ebrahim, Q. A. Ahmed, E. Gozzer, P. Schlagenhauf, Z. A. Memish, Covid-19 and community mitigation strategies in a pandemic. BMJ 368, m1066 (2020). 16. J. A. Lewnard, N. C. Lo, Scientific and ethical basis for social-distancing interventions against COVID-19. Lancet Infect. Dis. 20, 631–633 (2020). 17. S. M. Moghadas et al., Projecting hospital utilization during the COVID-19 outbreaks in the United States. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 9122–9126 (2020). 18. M. U. G. Kraemer et al., The effect of human mobility and control measures on the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Science 368, 493–497 (2020). 19. C. R. Wells et al., Impact of international travel and border control measures on the global spread of the novel 2019 coronavirus outbreak. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 20. M. Roser, H. Ritchie, E. Ortiz-Ospina, J. Hasell, Coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). Our World in Data (2020). https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus. Accessed 21 July 21. US Department of Homeland Security, “Advisory memorandum on identification of essential critical infrastructure workers during COVID-19 response” (Tech. Rep., US Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC, 2020). 22. J. W. Dyal, COVID-19 among workers in meat and poultry processing facilities—19 states, April 2020. MMWR Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 69, 557–561 (2020). 23. J. M. MacDonald, W. D. McBride, “The transformation of US livestock agriculture scale, efficiency, and risks” (Economic Information Bulletin 43, US Department of 24. M. Hendrickson, P. H. Howard, D. Constance, Power, food and agriculture: Implica- tions for farmers, consumers and communities. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3066005 25. Tyson Foods Inc., Tyson Foods Facts. https://ir.tyson.com/about-tyson/facts/default. 26. M. K. Wohlgenant, Competition in the US meatpacking industry. Annu. Rev. Resour. 27. C. E. Ward, A review of causes for and consequences of economic concentra- tion in the U.S. meatpacking industry. CAFRI: Curr. Agric. Food Resour. Issues, 28. European Federation of Food Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions, “Putting meat on the bones: A report on the structure and dynamics of the European meat indus- try” (Tech. Rep., European Federation of Food Agriculture and Tourism Trade Unions, 29. M. K. Hendrickson, Resilience in a concentrated and consolidated food system. J. 30. J. Skerritt, D. Shanker, M. Hirtzer, Meat shortages reopen costly path to smaller U.S. plants. Bloomberg, 26 June 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06- 26/meat-shortages-reopen-costly-path-to-small-u-s-slaughterhouses. Accessed 2 July 31. National Pork Board, “Estimated daily US slaughter, capacity by plant (head per day)” (Tech. Rep., National Pork Board, Des Moines, IA, 2019). 32. A. Mano, Nine meat plants in southern Brazil face COVID-19 outbreaks. Reuters, 30 April 2020. https://fr.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-brazil-meatpackers- 33. D. Busvine, Coronavirus spread accelerates again in Germany, Reuters, 9 May 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-germany-cases/coronavirus- spread-accelerates-again-in-germany-idUSKBN22M019. Accessed 14 May 2020. 34. J. Scott, A. Chandler, An Australian meatworks is at the center of a virus outbreak. Bloomberg, 3 May 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-05-04/virus- outbreak-in-australian-meatworks-echoes-problems-in-u-s. Accessed 15 May 2020. 35. M. Hirtzer, T. Freitas, U.S. could be weeks from meat shortages with shutdowns spreading. Bloomberg, 24 April 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ 2020-04-24/meat-threats-grow-with-first-brazil-shutdown-u-s-turkey-halt. 36. J. Mason, T. Polansek, Trump orders U.S. meat-processing plants to stay open despite coronavirus fears. Reuters, 28 April 2020. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health- coronavirus-trump-liability/trump-orders-u-s-meat-processing-plants-to-stay-open- despite-coronavirus-fears-idUSKCN22A2OB. Accessed 15 May 2020. 37. White House, “Executive order on delegating authority under the DPA with respect to food supply chain resources during the national emergency caused by the outbreak of COVID-19” (Executive Order, White House, Washington, DC, 28 April 2020). 38. K. VanderWaal, J. Deen, Global trends in infectious diseases of swine. Proc. Natl. Acad. 39. K. P. Myers et al., Are swine workers in the United States at increased risk of infection with zoonotic influenza virus? Clin. Infect. Dis. 42, 14–20 (2006). 40. K. Schlottau et al., Experimental transmission studies of SARS-COV-2 in fruit bats, ferrets, pigs and chickens. Lancet Microbe 1, E218–E225 (2020). 41. Q. Yang et al., Assessing the role of live poultry trade in community-structured trans- mission of avian influenza in China. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 5949–5954 42. S. Thompson, D. Berkowitz, “USDA allows poultry plants to raise line speeds, exac- erbating risk of COVID-19 outbreaks and injury” (Policy & Data Brief, National 43. USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Petition to permit waivers of maximum line speeds for young chicken establishments operating under the new poultry inspection system; criteria for consideration of waiver requests for young chicken establishments to operate at line speeds of up to 175 birds per minute” (Notice, Food Safety and Inspection Service, Washington, DC, 2018). 44. G. Cano-Mu ˜noz, G. C. Mu ˜noz, “Manual on meat cold store operation and man- agement” (FAO Animal Production and Health Paper 92, Food and Agriculture 45. T. Carleton, K. C. Meng, Causal empirical estimates suggest covid-19 transmission rates are highly seasonal. medRxiv, https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.26.20044420 (30 46. S. Zuber, H. Br ¨ussow, COVID 19: Challenges for virologists in the food industry. 47. J. Shaman, M. Kohn, Absolute humidity modulates influenza survival, transmission, and seasonality. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 3243–3248 (2009). effects on influenza virus survival in grade schools. BMC Infect. Dis. 13, 71 49. E. R. Deyle, M. C. Maher, R. D. Hernandez, S. Basu, G. Sugihara, Global environmental drivers of influenza. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 113, 13081–13086 (2016). 50. S. H. Beck et al., Monitoring of pathogenic bioaerosols in beef slaughter facili- ties based on air sampling and airflow modeling. Appl. Eng. Agric. 35, 1015–1036 51. S. Asadi, N. Bouvier, A. S. Wexler, W. D. Ristenpart, The coronavirus pandemic and aerosols: Does COVID-19 transmit via expiratory particles? Aerosol Sci Technol. 54, 52. R. Mittal, R. Ni, J. H. Seo, The flow physics of COVID-19. J. Fluid Mech. 894, F2 (2020). 53. J. Borak, Airborne transmission of COVID-19. Occup. Med. 70, 297–299 (2020). 54. S. Fremstad, H. J. Rho, H. Brown, “Meatpacking workers are a diverse group who need better protections” (Tech. Rep., Center for Economic and Policy Research, 55. L. A. Compa, “Blood, sweat, and fear: Workers’ rights in US meat and poultry plants” (Tech. Rep., Human Rights Watch, New York, NY, 2004). 56. W. Kandel, E. A. Parrado, Restructuring of the US meat processing industry and new Hispanic migrant destinations. Popul. Dev. Rev. 31, 447–471 (2005). 57. M. Grabell, What happens if workers cutting up the nation’s meat get sick? Prop- ublica, 28 March 2020. https://www.propublica.org/article/what-happens-if-workers- cutting-up-the-nations-meat-get-sick. Accessed 14 May 2020. 58. D. H. Constance, F. Martinez-Gomez, G. Aboites-Manrique, A. Bonanno, “The prob- lems with poultry production and processing” in The Ethics and Economics of Agrifood Competition, H. S. James. Ed. (International Library of Environmental, Agri- cultural, and Food Ethics, Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 2013), pp. 59. J. M. MacDonald, M. Ollinger, K. E. Nelson, C. R. Handy, “Consolidation in U.S. meat- packing” (Agricultural Economic Report AER-785, Economic Research Service, US 60. W. K. Viscusi, Union, labor market structure, and the welfare implications of the 61. S. Hsiang et al., The effect of large-scale anti-contagion policies on the COVID-19 62. D. Baud et al., Real estimates of mortality following COVID-19 infection. Lancet Infect. 63. J. H. Stock, M. Yogo, “Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression” in Iden- tification and Inference for Econometric Models, D. W. K. Andrews, Ed. (Cambridge 64. M. A. Waltenburg et al., Update: COVID-19 among workers in meat and poultry processing facilities—United States, April–May 2020. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 69 65. J. D. Angrist, A. B. Krueger, “Empirical strategies in labor economics” in Handbook of Labor Economics, O. C. Ashenfelter, D. Card, Eds. (Elsevier, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 66. G. A. Akerlof, Sins of omission and the practice of economics. J. Econ. Lit. 58, 405–418 67. Kansas Department of Health and Environment, “COVID-19 (2019 novel coronavirus) summary” (Tech. Rep., Kansas Department of Health and Environment, Topeka, KS, 68. US Census Bureau, “All sectors: County business patterns by legal form of organiza- tion and employment size class for U.S., states, and selected geographics: 2018” (Tech. 69. C. Mitchell, Kansas’ top health official sounds the alarm on COVID-19, predicts current trend line will ’steepen.’ Lawrence Journal-World, 1 July 2020. https://www2.ljworld. com/news/state-region/2020/jul/01/kansas-top-health-official-sounds-the-alarm- on-covid-19-predicts-current-trend-line-will-steepen/. Accessed 15 July 2020. 70. N. C. Grassly, C. Fraser, Mathematical models of infectious disease transmission. Nat. 71. The New York Times, Data from “Coronavirus (Covid-19) data in the United States.” GitHub. https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data. Accessed 22 July 2020. 72. SEER Program, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Data from “US population data (under- lying data provided by National Center for Health Statistics).” National Cancer Institute Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. https://seer.cancer.gov/ 73. US Bureau of Economic Analysis, Data from “Table SAINC5: Personal income by major component and industry.” Bureau of Economic Analysis Interactive Data Application. https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=70step=1reqid=70step=1. Accessed May 74. US Census Bureau, “Group quarters population by group quarters type, 2004- 2018 American community survey 5-year estimates” (Tech Rep., US Census Bureau, 75. US Census Bureau, “Selected characteristics of health care coverage in the United States, 2004-2018 American community survey 5-year estimates” (Tech Rep., US 76. US Census Bureau, “Commuting characteristics by sex, 2004-2018 American com- munity survey 5-year estimates” (Tech Rep., US Census Bureau, Suitland, MD, 77. US Census Bureau, “Households and families, 2004-2018 American community survey 5-year estimates” (Tech Rep., US Census Bureau, Suitland, MD, 2019). 78. US Department of Transportation, “FAF4 network database and flow assignment: 2012 and 2045” (Tech. Rep., US Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 79. National Academy for State Health Policy, “Each state’s COVID-19 reopening and reclosing plans and mask requirements” (Tech. Rep., National Academy for State 80. J. Gershman, A guide to state coronavirus reopenings and lockdowns. Wall Street Journal, 20 May 2020. https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-state-by-state-guide-to- coronavirus-lockdowns-11584749351. Accessed 15 July 2020. 81. J. C. Lee, S. Mervosh, Y. Avila, B. Harvey, A. L. Matthews, See how all 50 states are reopening (and closing again). NY Times, 27 October 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/ interactive/2020/us/states-reopen-map-coronavirus.html. Accessed 1 August 2020. 82. USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Meat, poultry and egg product inspection directory” (Tech. Rep., USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, Washington, DC, 83. Google LLC, Google COVID-19 community mobility reports. https://www.google.com/ 84. C. A. Taylor, C. Boulos, D. Almond, County-level COVID-19 testing data. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4069616. Deposited 6 October 2020. 85. USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, “Salmonella initiative program participants table” (Tech. Rep., USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, Washington, DC, 2020). 86. S. Chadde, “Tracking covid-19’s impact on meatpacking workers and industry” (Tech. Rep., Midwest Center for Investigative Reporting, Champaign, IL, 2020). 87. C. A. Taylor, C. Boulos, D. Almond, State closures. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ 88. M. Haines, P. Fishback, P. Rhode, Data from “United States agriculture data, 1840– 2012.” Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. Accessed 1 Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal https://theconversation.com/meatpacking-plants-have-been-deadly-covid-19-hot-spots-but-policies-that-encourage-workers-to-show-up-sick-are-legal-152572 Working in meatpacking plants has always been dangerous. A recent study shows that it became deadlier in the era of COVID-19, even as company profits soared. This analysis, published in December 2020, estimates that 6%-8% of all COVID-19 cases  and 3%-4% of all COVID-19 deaths in the U.S. through July 21, 2020 were tied to meat and poultry plants. Workers in these facilities stand close together on processing lines, At the same time, companies like Tyson, which produces chicken, beef and pork, and JBS, which produces beef and pork, are reporting high earnings despite COVID-related challenges such as I am a law professor and have written about links between lax state and federal enforcement of health and safety laws and increased rates of COVID-19 infections and deaths. Thanks to punitive attendance rules and Trump administration policies, meat- and poultry-processing workers have been unnecessarily exposed to COVID-19. In my view, the best way to protect them is to reform laws that Nearly 1,000 workers at this Smithfield Foods pork-processing plant in South Dakota contracted COVID-19 between mid-March and mid-April 2020. Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal February 26, 2021 8.24am EST •Updated February 26, 2021 4.41pm EST Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal https://theconversation.com/meatpacking-plants-have-been-deadly-covid-19-hot-spots-but-policies-that-encourage-workers-to-show-up-sick-are-legal-152572 Meat- and poultry-processing companies’ standard attendance policies were punitive even before the  pandemic. Companies issued points for employees who missed work and fired those who accumulated too many points. These policies are still in place. Workers at Tyson and JBS plants are required to go to work even if they are experiencing symptoms of COVID-19 or awaiting test results. The companies excuse absences for COVID-19 only if a worker has tested positive for the virus, or in Tyson’s case, has “documented clinical symptoms.” Tyson and JBS workers have told reporters that costs and wait times make it hard for them to access testing, so That said, both companies have taken steps to control the spread of COVID-19 at their plants. Tyson  hired medical professionals, cleans its plants daily and monitors social distancing. JBS now offers unlimited personal protective equipment and tests symptomatic workers and close contacts. However, even with safety protocols, the virus can spread in the workplace if infected employees come “They will keep going until all of their employees have this virus. They would rather risk their employeesʼ health and keep their production going,” a county official wrote last April about a National Beef plant where 250+ had already tested Meat and poultry workers began calling for better protection early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Are meatpacking plants keeping essential workers safe? Are meatpacking plants keeping essential workers safe? Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal https://theconversation.com/meatpacking-plants-have-been-deadly-covid-19-hot-spots-but-policies-that-encourage-workers-to-show-up-sick-are-legal-152572 Meat and poultry plants as ‘critical infrastructure’ As COVID-19 spread in the spring of 2020, then-President Donald Trump signed an executive order that included language provided by meat trade associations designating meat and poultry plants as critical infrastructure under the Defense Production Act. The order directed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ensure that meat and poultry processing facilities stayed open or that they reopened as soon as possible during the pandemic to prevent meat shortages. In May 2020, COVID-19 infections among meat- and poultry-processing workers more than tripled, and the number of deaths quadrupled. Still, with the USDA’s help, companies invoked the executive order to maintain operations. For example, in Cold Spring, Minnesota, a Pilgrim’s Pride plant that processes chicken stayed open because of Trump’s order even though worker infections spiked from  Emails Reveal Chaos as Meatpacking Companies Fought Health Agenc… Thousands of pages of documents obtained by ProPublica show how quickly public health agencies were overwhelmed by meatpacking … Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal https://theconversation.com/meatpacking-plants-have-been-deadly-covid-19-hot-spots-but-policies-that-encourage-workers-to-show-up-sick-are-legal-152572 On Nov. 17, 2020, Tyson announced net income of US$692 million for the fourth quarter of 2020, up from $369 million for the same period in 2019. Tyson stock traded at $1.81 per share, up 49.5% from the same period in 2019. This was a result of increased production. To date, over 12,500 Tyson  Tyson currently faces a lawsuit for a COVID-19 outbreak at a plant in Waterloo, Iowa that has  sickened at least 1,000 workers and killed five. The wrongful death lawsuit filed by the families of three deceased employees charges that the company required workers – including some who were transferred from facilities with COVID-19 outbreaks – to work long hours in cramped conditions. For its part, JBS reported $581.2 million in net profits in the third quarter of 2020, beating analysts’ forecasts. On Sept. 12, 2020, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration fined the company $15,615 due to six deaths and 290 COVID-19 infections in its Greeley, Colorado plant. Commenting on the fine, two former federal regulators noted that the Trump administration could have punished JBS much more severely if it had penalized the company for violations at multiple plants and designated them as willful violations. In November 2020, 32 new infections were Critics argue that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has not adequately enforced workplace health and safety laws during the pandemic. Trump’s executive order limited OSHA’s  authority to enforce the laws and authorized the Department of Agriculture to keep meat and poultry Chart: The Conversation, CC BY-ND • Source: Center for Economic and Policy Research • Get the data Frontline meatpacking workers are disproportionately Workers who handle processing jobs in meat and poultry plants have less formal education than average U.S. workers and are more likely to be Black or Hispanic, born outside the country, and living in a home where English is not the primary language. Frontline meatpacking workers are de¦ned as people working in the “Animal Slaughtering and Processing Industry” in one of three classi¦cations: Butchers and Other Meat, Poultry, and Fish Processing Workers; Packaging and Filling Machine Operators and Tenders; and Food Processing Workers, All other. Together these groups comprise approximately 194,000 people – over 40% of all workers in the industry. Meatpacking plants have been deadly COVID-19 hot spots – but policies that encourage workers to show up sick are legal https://theconversation.com/meatpacking-plants-have-been-deadly-covid-19-hot-spots-but-policies-that-encourage-workers-to-show-up-sick-are-legal-152572 plants open despite outbreaks. Even with stronger enforcement, however, punitive attendance policies still could increase infection rates President Joe Biden issued an executive order on Jan. 21, 2021, directing the Department of Labor to issue stronger guidance on workplace safety during the pandemic. But employers do not have to comply with this guidance, and it does not address punitive attendance policies. I believe three reforms are needed to fill the gap. First, federal and state agencies could use their legal authority to prohibit punitive attendance policies. Section 5 of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 includes a “general duty standard” that requires employers to provide employees with a place of employment free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause Although this would be a new use of the “general duty” standard, it would address a recognized hazard that is likely to cause death or serious harm. This is a mandatory requirement that employers already have to comply with and does not require an in-person inspection to enforce. Second, Biden could withdraw Trump’s executive order classifying meat and poultry plants as critical infrastructure. And the Biden administration could require plants to close down if new outbreaks Finally, meat and poultry companies could be required to provide workers with hazard pay, which should increase if the companies’ net profits rise. As a precedent, Seattle, Long Beach, California and Oakland, California all recently adopted hazard pay mandates for grocery workers during the Grocery store chains are challenging the laws, arguing that their profit margins cannot support these payments. But it would be hard for meat and poultry companies to make that argument in light of Meatpacking plants emerged as hot spots of infection early in the COVID-19 pandemic. As of Feb. 24, 2021, more than 57,454 meat- and poultry-processing workers had tested positive for COVID-19 and 284 had died. In my view, it is time for legal action to protect meat and poultry workers and compensate them fairly for working in hazardous conditions during this pandemic. This article has been updated to note that the estimates cited for COVID-19 illnesses and deaths at meat and poultry plants as a fraction of all U.S. COVID-19 illnesses and deaths covered the period If confirmed as U.S. secretary of labor, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh would be the first union member to hold the post in Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ Trump issued an executive order that requires beef, pork, and poultry producers to continue operating. Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ regulations necessary to keep producers operating. due to the virus. UFCW also reported that at least have been directly impacted by the virus — meaning and 22 meatpacking plants have been closed at some meatpacking workers in the Animal Slaughtering and Processing Industry (see Methodology section below whom are also directly aAected by the order. As this workforce overall. They do dangerous work, even in the best of times, and are poorly compensated for it. enforceable, to ensure the safety of both workers and Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ People of color, immigrants, and people in relatively (44.4 percent) of meatpacking workers are Hispanic, Across all the occupations of people working in the than half of all workers are people of color (34.9 percent are Hispanic, and 22.5 percent are Black). In two-thirds of workers are people of color, including: Hand Packers and Packagers (75.3 percent); Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Material Movers, Hand (68.6 percent); and Industrial Truck and Tractor Operators frontline meatpacking occupations. About 17 percent of workers in the US workforce today are immigrants. But more than one-half (51.5 percent) of frontline older) have limited pro{ciency in English, over six Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ (38.8 percent); and Laborers and Freight, Stock, and Nearly half of frontline meatpacking workers (45.1 $52,400 for a family of four in 2020) and about one- poverty line. This compares to 20.6 percent of all workers from low-income families and 6.7 percent of Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ Source and Notes: CEPR’s Analysis of American Community Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ pandemic, they did hazardous work on a daily basis with injury and illness rates about two times higher protections for these workers during the pandemic, the current administration has increased the risks they face. In addition to yesterday’s executive order, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) speed in at least 15 poultry plants this month. As Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ the Midwest Center on Investigative Reporting, USDA granted more “waivers in one week in April than in these and other essential workers. For meatpacking °. suspending all USDA waivers that allow plants to operate at faster speeds than allowed by federal regulations; ±. ensuring that processing plants enforce physical distancing between workers, even if it means slowing the ². ensuring that all meatpacking workers have necessary ³. workers who have or may have COVID-19 stay home; ´. ensuring that all workers who need to stay home due to µ. ensuring that meatpacking workers have a voice in their report by Sharon Block and other labor law experts, a “meaningful role in designing and implementing the safety and health protocols that govern their lives on the Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ meatpacking workers are unlikely to have changed in any substantial way over the last two years, and using in the “Animal Slaughtering and Processing Industry” in one of these three occupations (as classi{ed using Butchers and Other Meat, Poultry, and Fish Processing Packaging and Filling Machine Operators and Tenders limited pro{ciency in English if none of the members Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ oBcial poverty de{nition, and does not take account changes in typical living standards (beyond in|ation) Meatpacking Workers are a Diverse Group Who Need Better Protections - Center for Economic and Policy Research https://cepr.net/meatpacking-workers-are-a-diverse-group-who-need-better-protections/ This website is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License and governed by our Privacy Policy. COVID-19 mortality in California based on death certificates:  disproportionate impacts across racial/ethnic groups and nativity  Erika Garcia, PhD a , ∗, Sandrah P. Eckel, PhD a , Zhanghua Chen, PhD a , Kenan Li, PhD b ,  a Department of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA  b Spatial Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA  Purpose: To examine characteristics of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) decedents in California (CA) and evaluate for disproportionate mortality across race/ethnicity and ethnicity/nativity.  Methods: COVID-19 deaths were identified from death certificates. Age-adjusted mortality rate ratios  (MRR) were compared across race/ethnicity. Proportionate mortality rates (PMR) were compared across  Results: We identified 10,200 COVID-19 deaths in CA occurring February 1 through July 31, 2020. The  most frequently observed characteristics among decedents were age 65 years or above, male, Hispanic, foreign-born, and educational attainment of High School or below. MRR indicated elevated COVID-19  morality rates among Asian/Pacific Islander, Black, and Hispanic groups compared with the White group, with Black and Hispanic groups having the highest MRR at 2.75 (95%CI: 2.54–2.97) and 4.18 (95%CI: 3.99– 4.37), respectively. Disparities were larger at younger ages. Similar results were observed with PMR, and patterns of age-racial/ethnic disparities remained in analyses stratified by education. Elevated PMR were observed in all ethnicity/nativity groups, especially foreign-born Hispanic individuals, relative to U.S.-born non-Hispanic individuals. These were generally larger at younger ages and persisted after stratifying by Conclusions: Differential COVID-19 mortality was observed in California across racial/ethnic groups and by ethnicity/nativity groups with evidence of greater disparities among younger age groups. Identifying COVID-19 disparities is an initial step toward mitigating disease impacts in vulnerable communities. Abbreviations: AI/AN, American Indian/Alaskan Native; A/PI, Asian/Pacific Is-  lander; CA, California; CCDF, California Comprehensive Death Files; CCMDF, Califor-  nia Comprehensive Master Death File; COVID-19, Coronavirus disease 2019; ICD-10,  International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems; MR,  mortality rates; MRR, mortality rate ratios; PM, proportionate mortality; PMR, pro-  Disclosures: Dr. Garcia reports grants from Keck School of Medicine of USC  COVID-19 Research Fund, grants from National Institute of Environmental Health  Sciences, during the conduct of the study. Dr. Gilliland has nothing to disclose. Dr.  Li has nothing to disclose. Dr. Eckel reports grants from Keck School of Medicine  of USC COVID-19 Research Fund, during the conduct of the study; grants from NIH,  outside the submitted work. Dr. Chen has nothing to disclose.  ∗ Corresponding author. Keck School of Medicine of USC, Department of Preven-  tive Medicine, 2001 N. Soto Street, SSB1 Rm 225F MC 9237, Los Angeles, CA 90089-  There is a growing body of literature on the differential im-  pacts of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in historically  marginalized groups in the United States (U.S.), including dis-  ease incidence [1-3] , hospitalization [4-8] , severity [ 5 , 9 , 10 ], and  mortality [ 3-5 , 11-13 ]. Identifying COVID-19 disparities is an initial  step toward mitigating disease impacts in vulnerable communi-  ties. Much of the current evidence, however, has relied on ecologic  analyses using aggregate data for both the characteristic under  study (e.g., percentage Black in a county) and COVID-19 outcome  (e.g., county-level mortality) [ 1 , 3 , 11 , 13-15 ]. Studies that have been  conducted with individual-level data are primarily derived from  hospital/healthcare networks or insurance companies [ 2 , 4 , 6 , 7 , 9 , 16 ],  which may not be representative of COVID-19 impacts in the gen-  1047-2797/© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.  eral population given barriers to healthcare access and insurance  among historically marginalized groups. Use of death certificate  data allows for investigation into individual-level characteristics,  captures all individuals in the catchment area, and does not suf-  fer from substantial under-reporting of key characteristics as was  seen for race/ethnicity information for COVID-19 decedents early in  the pandemic. It is important to note that any disparities observed  for COVID-19 morality are an accumulation of disproportionate im-  pacts along the entire continuum of COVID-19 disease, beginning  with exposure to the virus and culminating in death. The mech-  anisms and magnitudes of disparities likely differ for each step  of the disease pathway [17] . Appropriate estimates of disease are  needed, not only by single factors, such as racial/ethnic group, but  also by intersections with other factors, such as with age, sex, and  educational attainment, which considers that groups are not ho-  mogenous and indeed reflect diverse experiences and impacts of  the pandemic [18-20] . Intersectional analysis allows for a more nu-  anced understanding of disparate burden of COVID-19, which is  crucially needed to design and implement effective public health  The objective of this study was to examine demographic char-  acteristics of COVID-19 decedents in California (CA)—which as of  September 2020 is among the hardest hit states in terms of cases  and deaths [21] —and evaluate for disproportionate mortality across  these characteristics. In addition to descriptive information on  decedents, COVID-19 mortality was compared across racial/ethnic  groups considering age, sex, and education using mortality rate ra-  tios (MRR) and proportionate mortality ratios (PMR). We also ex-  amined COVID-19 mortality by ethnicity and nativity combined,  Data on causes of death, race/ethnicity, sex, age, educational  attainment, country of birth, and county of residence were ob-  tained using the California Comprehensive Death Files (CCDF) and  California Comprehensive Master Death File (CCMDF) from the  California Department of Public Health, Center for Health Statis-  tics and Informatics for 2016 to 2020 (CCMDF for 2016–2018  and CCDF for 2019–2020). Data for 2020 were updated weekly  and last date of data export used in this analysis was Septem-  ber 9, 2020. Race/ethnicity were grouped into non-Hispanic White,  non-Hispanic Black, Asian/Pacific Islander (regardless of Hispanic-  ity; Asian/PI), American Indian/Alaskan Native (regardless of His-  panicity; AI/AN), Hispanic (excludes A/PI, AI/AN), and Multira-  cial/Other/Unknown. County of birth was used to define decedents’  nativity status, categorized as U.S.-born or foreign-born. Categories  of ethnicity and nativity combined were U.S.-born non-Hispanic,  U.S.-born Hispanic, Foreign-born non-Hispanic, and Foreign-born  Hispanic, using Hispanicity as defined for race/ethnicity. This study  was approved by the Committee for the Protection of Human Sub-  Mortality data included the 10th revision of the International  Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-  10) codes for underlying cause of death and up to 20 relevant con-  ditions. Effective April 1, 2020, there was a new ICD-10 code for  COVID-19, U07.1; however, because we used the dynamic CCDF file  with weekly updates for recent mortality, final coded data on un-  derlying cause of death and relevant conditions were not avail-  able for all 2020 deaths. Thus, we developed an algorithm using  the code U07.1 and a keyword search to identify COVID-19-related  deaths and applied it to all deaths occurring after February 1, 2020  (e Fig. 1 ). Among deaths with coded data on underlying cause of  death and relevant conditions, our algorithm correctly identified  99.95% of deaths coded with U07.1. Analyses were restricted to  COVID-19-related deaths occurring February 1-July 31, 2020.  Temporal trends in COVID-19 mortality in CA during the study  period are presented. Descriptive statistics among decedents iden-  tified as having COVID-19 mortality were presented for the entire  study period as well as for subperiods with distinct patterns in  COVID-19 age-adjusted mortality rates (MR) per 10 0,0 0 0  person-years were calculated using direct standardization to the  2019 CA population using 5-year age intervals and were compared  across racial/ethnic groups using mortality rate ratios (MRR) by sex  and epidemic period, accounting for variation in observation time.  Non-Hispanic White was used as the referent group. Population es-  timates were obtained from the CDC WONDER Online Database  using the Bridged-Race Population Estimates for CA [22] and  racial/ethnic groups were combined to align with the categories  described above (does not include “Multiracial/Other/Unknown” group). Age-adjusted MR were also calculated and compared across  racial/ethnic groups using MRR for selected counties with greater  than 500 COVID-19 deaths using 2019 county-specific population  estimates for both population and direct standardization. COVID-19  age-specific MR were calculated and compared across racial/ethnic  groups using MRR by age groups (excluding 0–19 years category,  Analyses using proportionate mortality (PM) were restricted to  deaths among decedents aged 20 years and older and occurring  March 1-July 31 (only 2 COVID-19 deaths occurred before March 1,  2020). PM was defined as number of COVID-19 deaths in a speci-  fied subpopulation (e.g., a certain racial/ethnic group) divided by  average all-cause mortality in the same subpopulation occurring  March 1-July 31 in 2016–2019 among decedents aged 20 years and  older (multiplied by 100 to be akin to a percentage). The PM met-  ric allows for COVID-19 mortality to be interpreted as a percent-  age of “typical” mortality in a group. Mortality for past years was  restricted to match the time frame for 2020 COVID-19 deaths to  account for annual trends in mortality. All-cause mortality in 2020  was not used as the reference, which would have been common  for PM. This is because evidence suggests all-cause mortality has  been affected by the pandemic not only through COVID-19 mor-  tality [23] . PM ratios (PMR) were used to compare across dece-  dent characteristics, including racial/ethnic group, sex, educational  attainment, and ethnicity and nativity combined, as well as com-  binations of these. Educational attainment may serve as a proxy  for socioeconomic status which is linked with healthcare access,  co-morbidities, and other factors such as employment type that  may impact COVID-19 infection and mortality [24-27] . Because the  PMR metric relies on all-cause mortality, we additionally exam-  ined differences in all-cause mortality rates for 2019 by age among  racial/ethnic groups using 2019 death data and population esti-  All analyses were performed using SAS statistical software ver-  sion 9.4 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC) and statistical tests were  based on 2-sided tests with α = 0.05. Standard errors and 95%  confidence intervals (95%CI) were computed using standard meth-  We identified 10,200 COVID-19 deaths occurring in CA between  February 1 and July 31, 2020. Distinct temporal patterns in weekly  Fig. 1. Age-standardized COVID-19 mortality rates for all ages and select ages by race/ethnicity. Mortality rates are per 10 0,0 0 0 mortality identified three periods in the COVID-19 epidemic in CA  (e Fig. 2 ): the first period, through April 19, had an upward trend;  the second period, April 20–June 16, demonstrated a steady slight  decline; the third period, June 17-July 31, had an upward trend  similar to the first period. Distribution of characteristics among  decedents with COVID-19 mortality are shown for the entire study  period ( Table 1 ) and by the three epidemic periods (e Table 1 ).  Decedents were consistently older, more likely to be male, had  lower educational attainment, and most were foreign-born. His-  panic was the predominant race/ethnicity among decedents, which  Morality rates were considerably higher among older individ-  uals, but with differences observed across racial/ethnic groups  ( Fig. 1 ). Compared with the White group, MRR were elevated  among Asian/PI, Black, and Hispanic groups, with Black and His-  panic groups having the highest MRR at 2.75 (95%CI: 2.54–2.97)  and 4.18 (95%CI: 3.99–4.37), respectively ( Fig. 2 and e Fig. 3 ;  e Table 2 ). This pattern persisted within each epidemic period  (e Fig. 3 ). Analyses by county of residence for counties with greater  than 500 COVID-19 deaths (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San  Bernardino, and San Diego Counties) showed that while there were  some differences in specific MRRs estimated by racial/ethnic group,  the overall pattern of COVID-19 mortality disparity persisted (eFig.  racial/ethnic groups, with greater disproportionate mortality  among younger Black and Hispanic individuals ( Fig. 2 ; eTable  3). Compared with White individuals aged 20–54 years, the MR  was 4.7-fold (95%CI: 3.5–6.3) higher among Black individuals and  8.5-fold (95%CI: 6.9–10.4) higher among Hispanic individuals of  the same age. When examined by sex, disparities observed among  decedents aged less than 84 years were higher among females in  the Black group and among males in the Hispanic group. In the  Asian/PI group, mortality disparity was greatest among those aged  85 year or more, with the largest MRR observed for females, 1.70  Univariate analyses using PMR found elevated PM in males  compared with females, in all non-White racial/ethnic groups, in  decedents with lower educational attainment, and in all ethnic-  ity/nativity groups relative to U.S.-born non-Hispanic (eTable 4).  Analyses comparing across racial/ethnic groups by age demon-  strated greater disparities among younger decedents, similar to  those observed with MRR (eTable 5). Elevated PMR persisted in  analyses stratified by education ( Fig. 3 ; eTable 6). For example,  among decedents aged 20–64 years with high school education or  less, the PM in the Hispanic group was 8.5-fold (95%CI: 7.4–9.9)  higher compared with the White group. For the same age group,  but among those with some college or more, the PMR for Hispan-  ics remained highly elevated at 7.0 (95%CI: 5.8–8.6). All-cause mor-  tality rates for 2019 were lower compared with the White group  for all racial/ethnic group, except the Black group which were  higher. This may lead PMR to over or underestimate true COVID-19  mortality disparities which should be considered when interpret-  ing these results These differences, however, were not sufficiently  large to explain away all disparities observed (eFig. 5). Adjusting  PMR for differences in all-cause mortality produces estimates sim-  When examining ethnicity and nativity combined by age, ele-  vated PMR were observed for all groups, especially for the foreign-  born Hispanic group, relative to the U.S.-born non-Hispanic group  (eTable 8). PMR were generally larger among younger age groups.  After accounting for educational attainment by stratification, el-  Fig. 2. Age-standardized COVID-19 mortality rate ratios for all ages and select ages by race/ethnicity. Bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Referent group is non-Hispanic Fig. 3. Proportionate mortality ratios for COVID-19 by race/ethnicity, age, and educational attainment. Proportionate mortality ratios are based on COVID-19 deaths occurring between March 1-July 31, 2020 among decedents aged 20 years and older. Subpopulation proportionate mortalities were calculated using all-cause mortality in the same subpopulation occurring March 1–July 31 in 2016–2019 among decedents aged 20 years and older. Bars represent 95% confidence intervals. Distribution of selected characteristics among dece-  dents identified as having COVID-19 mortality, Cali-  evated PMR remained ( Table 2 ). Among decedents aged 20–64  years, PMR for foreign-born Hispanic compared with U.S.-born  non-Hispanic among those with a high school education or less  was PMR = 10.7 (95%CI: 9.5–12.1), while among those with some  This study used death certificate data to identify decedents  with COVID-19 mortality in CA and to investigate demographic  characteristics associated with mortality using two different met-  rics of association, MRR and PMR. Disproportionate COVID-19 mor-  tality was observed among Black, Hispanic, and Asian/PI groups in  CA. Larger relative disparities were observed at younger ages for  Black and Hispanic individuals. Disparities persisted after account-  ing for educational attainment, serving here as a proxy for socioe-  conomic status. Disproportionate mortality was also observed by  combinations of ethnicity and nativity, with all groups (especially  foreign-born Hispanic individuals) having greater COVID-19 mor-  tality compared with U.S.-born non-Hispanic individuals, particu-  larly at younger ages. Disparities by nativity remained in analy-  ses controlling for educational attainment. The larger disparities in  younger age groups are particularly important given younger popu-  lations may be overlooked in public health campaigns due to their  overall lower risk of severe disease. Here, however, we observed  the mortality rate for Black individuals aged 55–64 to be higher  than mortality rate for White individuals 10 years older, and the  mortality rate for Hispanic individuals aged 55–64 years to be ap-  proaching mortality rate for White individuals 20 years older. The  much larger disparities observed in MRR for Hispanic individuals  compared with Black individuals, for all ages but particularly for  younger ages, are likely driven in part by the high COVID-19 mor-  tality observed for foreign-born Hispanic individuals. Younger pop-  ulations should be included among targets in public health inter-  ventions. Disparities in COVID-19 mortality may be driven by a va-  riety of factors, including complex interaction between social and  structural determinates of health, barriers to accessing care, higher  prevalence of underlying co-morbidities associated with more se-  vere COVID-19 disease and adverse outcomes, and differential ex-  posure to virus due to working and living conditions [ 24 , 29-34 ]— which maybe different and interact differently among the different  groups (race/ethnicity and ethnicity/nativity) and subgroups (age-  race/ethnicity and age-ethnicity/nativity groups) examined here.  Proportionate mortality (PM) and proportionate mortality ratio (PMR) by ethnicity and nativity combined, age, and educational attainment for COVID-19 deaths among decedents aged 20 years and older, California, March 1–July 31, 2020  a Subpopulation PM were calculated using all-cause mortality in the same subpopulation occurring March 1–July 31 in 2016–2019 among decedents aged 20 years and Differences in COVID-19 mortality can develop anywhere along  the disease continuum from exposure, to incidence, severity, and  then ultimately death. The mechanisms and magnitude of these  difference are likely different for different groups (e.g., younger  Black group, older Asian/PI, etc.) at different points along the path-  way. Several studies have reported differential COVID-19 impacts  across racial/ethnic groups including for incidence [ 1 , 35 ], severity  [ 4-6 , 8-10 ], death [ 12 , 13 , 27 ], however few studies have examined  outcomes by nativity [36] . Ecologic studies have reported COVID-  19 incidence rates to be positively associated with higher pop-  ulation percentage Black [ 14 , 26 , 37 ], Hispanic/Latino [ 15 , 26 , 34 , 37 ],  or foreign-born [ 26 , 37 ]. In a Massachusetts study the association  for Latino population percentage was attenuated after accounting  for percent foreign-born noncitizens living in a community, mean  household size, and share of food service workers (all which were  also positively associated with incidence) [37] . In contrast, the as-  sociation for Black population percentage was not attenuated [37] .  In a study across 22 states, a disproportionate number of incident  COVID-19 cases relative to population demographics was reported  for Hispanic, Black, AI/AN, Asian, and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Is-  lander individuals in counties considered hotspots for COVID-19 in-  cidence [1] . Healthcare system-based studies have reported greater  severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing and test  positivity rate for non-English speakers compared with English-  speakers [36] and higher odds of infection for non-Hispanic Black  and Hispanic individuals adjusting for demographic and socioe-  conomic characteristics [35] . Higher hospitalization has been re-  ported for Black and Hispanic patients, even after adjusting for  co-morbidities and demographic and socioeconomic factors [ 4 , 6 , 8 ].  Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19 infection, non-White  patients were more likely to present with higher disease severity,  These disproportionate effects in disease incidence and sever-  ity contribute to COVID-19 mortality disparities, which have been  reported based on aggregate data or healthcare system-based stud-  ies for Black and Hispanic individuals. A study using aggregate  data on COVID-19 from regions across the U.S. report dispropor-  tionately higher COVID-19 mortality relative to population size for  Black individuals and higher estimated case-fatality [12] . Among  rural counties, average daily increase in COVID-19 mortality rates  were significantly higher in counties with the largest shares of  Black and Hispanic residents [13] . A study using electronic med-  ical record data from 24 healthcare organization reported Black  individuals having a greater odds of COVID-19 mortality, even af-  ter controlling for age, sex, and several co-morbidities [27] . Differ-  ences between Black and White individuals were larger in those  less than 50 years of age, similar to larger MRR and PMR observed  in younger age groups in the present study. Not all studies examin-  ing race/ethnicity have observed difference in COVID-19 mortality.  A large study using data from 92 U.S. hospitals found that after ad-  justing for a variety of factors including comorbidities, insurance,  and neighborhood deprivation there was no difference in mortality  between Black and White patients with COVID-19 [7] . Similarly, a  study in Louisiana found that after adjusting for sociodemographic  and clinical factors, in-hospital mortality was not different between  Black and White patients [4] . It may be that once COVID-19 pa-  tients are ill to the point of hospitalization, differences in mortality  are less appreciable. Overall, this evidence taken together supports  the notion that mortality differences across racial/ethnic groups  and by ethnicity/nativity reported in the present study are likely  the cumulative effects across the entire pathway of disease.  Quantification of COVID-19 mortality disparities is needed so  effective public health interventions can be developed to mitigate  disproportionate burden of the pandemic on vulnerable popula-  tions [38] . Factors that may contribute to mortality disparities and  could be targets for interventions include barriers to healthcare ac-  cess including medical mistrust and insurance, living and work-  ing conditions, being essential/frontline workers, underlying health  conditions including suboptimal disease management, and social  and structural determinants of health [ 24 , 29-33 , 39 ]. Interactions  between structural, social, and individual factors that contribute  to differential COVID-19 mortality are complex and vary not only  across these different historically marginalized groups (e.g., Black,  Hispanic, Asian/PI, foreign-born Hispanic), but also within these  groups (e.g., younger and older Hispanic individuals). Public health  interventions and policies should consider the differing and com-  plex risk structure across and within these groups. For example,  differential workplace exposure may contribute to increased mor-  tality among younger Black and Hispanic, including foreign-born  Hispanic, individuals. People of color are more likely to be em-  ployed in essential industries and in occupations with more expo-  sure to infections and close proximity to others [30] . Black workers  in particular face an elevated risk for these factors [30] . A study of  workplace COVID-19 outbreaks in Utah found 73% of cases were in  Hispanic or non-White workers, whereas Hispanic and non-White  workers represent only 24% of the workforce in affected industries  [33] . Immigrant families faced additional complicating factors (e.g.,  employment in jobs with higher potential exposure, no/inadequate  health insurance and paid leave, multigenerational housing, etc.  [ 40 , 41 ]) which must be considered for public health planning. For  example public charge regulations may have disincentivized im-  migrant families from accessing healthcare if they become symp-  tomatic [ 40 , 41 ]. This delays testing and treatment and may in-  crease disease transmission risk within their home and commu-  This study has limitations. First, while use of death certifi-  cate data has many advantages, there were a limited number of  available demographic and socioeconomic variables. Augmentation  of these data with neighborhood characteristics based on dece-  dent residential address is an area of future work. Second, the  variable related to socioeconomic position used in this analysis— educational attainment—is only one dimension of person’s socioe-  conomic status and does not fully capture this complex deter-  minant of health. Further, there may be misreporting of educa-  tional attainment on death certificates, with prior studies find-  ing higher underreporting of educational attainment for Black and  Hispanic decedents compared with White decedents [42] . This is  also likely for foreign-born individuals. Any differential misreport-  ing, however, would be expected to lead to less misclassification  among Black and Hispanic (and possibly also foreign-born) dece-  dents categorized as “Some college or more” yet large mortal-  ity disparities persisted in stratified analyses. Third, PM, and thus  PMR, uses as a comparison all-cause mortality, which if different  between groups may over or underestimate differences in mortal-  ity between groups. When all-cause mortality rates are lower com-  pared with the referent group, PMR will overestimate differences  in COVID-19 mortality, but as discussed differences in all-cause  mortality rates were not sufficient to explain all observed COVID-  19 disparities. When all-cause mortality rates are higher, such as  was observed for Black individuals, the PMR will underestimate  differences COVID-19 mortality. This study has several strengths.  First, to identify COVID-19 mortality we used death certificate data  which captures all mortality in the state and does not restrict to  individuals in a healthcare/insurance network. Second, we had in-  formation on individual-level demographic characteristics on dece-  dents, which was advantageous in two regards: (i) there was sub-  stantial under-reporting of race/ethnicity for COVID-19 decedents  early in the pandemic and there is still a lack of reporting by nativ-  ity, which precludes analyses by these factors, and (ii) we did not  have to rely on aggregate demographic data which could be sub-  ject to the ecologic fallacy. Third, because of this individual-level  data we were able to examine mortality by several demographic  factors in combination to better understand intersectional impacts  Differential COVID-19 mortality was observed in California  across racial/ethnic groups and by ethnicity and nativity combined,  with evidence of greater disparities among younger age groups.  Patterns of disparities persisted after accounting for educational at-  tainment. Drivers of these disparate COVID-19 impacts are likely  multifactorial and involve the interplay of structural, social, and  individual factors that must be considered in the design and im-  plementation for public health interventions to effectively mitigate  This research was supported by the National Institute of Envi-  ronmental Health Sciences ( P30ES007048 ), the Hastings Founda-  tion, and by the Keck School of Medicine of USC COVID-19 Re-  search Fund through a generous gift from the W. M. Keck Foun-  [1] Moore JT , Ricaldi JN , Rose CE , Fuld J , Parise M , Kang GJ , et al. Disparities in in-  cidence of COVID-19 among underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in counties  identified as hotspots during June 5-18, 2020 - 22 States, February-June 2020.  [2] Rozenfeld Y , Beam J , Maier H , Haggerson W , Boudreau K , Carlson J , et al. A  model of disparities: risk factors associated with COVID-19 infection. Int J Eq-  [3] Adhikari S , Pantaleo NP , Feldman JM , Ogedegbe O , Thorpe L , Troxel AB . Assess-  ment of community-level disparities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)  infections and deaths in large US metropolitan areas. JAMA Network Open  [4] Price-Haywood EG , Burton J , Fort D , Seoane L . Hospitalization and mortal-  ity among Black patients and White patients with Covid-19. N Engl J Med  [5] Poulson M , Geary A , Annesi C , Allee L , Kenzik K , Sanchez S , et al. National  disparities in COVID-19 outcomes between Black and White Americans. J Natl  [6] Azar KMJ , Shen Z , Romanelli RJ , Lockhart SH , Smits K , Robinson S , et al. Dis-  parities in outcomes among COVID-19 patients in a large health care system  in California. Health Aff (Millwood) 2020;39(7):1253–62 .  [7] Yehia BR , Winegar A , Fogel R , Fakih M , Ottenbacher A , Jesser C , et al. As-  sociation of race with mortality among patients hospitalized with coron-  avirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) at 92 US hospitals. JAMA Network Open  [8] Karaca-Mandic P , Georgiou A , Sen S . Assessment of COVID-19 hospitalizations  by race/ethnicity in 12 states. JAMA Intern Med 2021;181(1):131–4 .  [9] Ebinger JE , Achamallah N , Ji H , Claggett BL , Sun N , Botting P , et al. Pre-ex-  isting traits associated with Covid-19 illness severity. PLoS ONE  [10] Joseph NP , Reid NJ , Som A , Li MD , Hyle EP , Dugdale CM , et al. Racial and eth-  nic disparities in disease severity on admission chest radiographs among pa-  tients admitted with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019: a retrospective co-  [11] Mahajan UV , Larkins-Pettigrew M . Racial demographics and COVID-19 con-  firmed cases and deaths: a correlational analysis of 2886 US counties. J Public  [12] Holmes L Jr , Enwere M , Williams J , Ogundele B , Chavan P , Piccoli T , et al. Black-  White risk differentials in COVID-19 (SARS-COV2) transmission, mortality and  case fatality in the United States: translational epidemiologic perspective and  challenges. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17(12):4322 .  [13] Cheng KJG , Sun Y , Monnat SM . COVID-19 death rates are higher in rural coun-  ties with larger shares of Blacks and Hispanics. J Rural Health: official journal  of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care  [14] Millett GA , Jones AT , Benkeser D , Baral S , Mercer L , Beyrer C , et al. Assess-  ing differential im pacts of COVID-19 on black communities. Ann Epidemiol  [15] Rodriguez-Diaz CE , Guilamo-Ramos V , Mena L , Hall E , Honermann B , Crow-  ley JS , et al. Risk for COVID-19 infection and death among Latinos in the  United States: examining heterogeneity in transmission dynamics. Ann Epi-  [16] Alobuia WM , Dalva-Baird NP , Forrester JD , Bendavid E , Bhattacharya J , Ke-  bebew E . Racial disparities in knowledge, attitudes and practices related to  COVID-19 in the USA. J Public Health (Oxford, England) 2020;42(3):470–8 .  [17] Holtgrave DR , Barranco MA , Tesoriero JM , Blog DS , Rosenberg ES . Assessing  racial and ethnic disparities using a COVID-19 outcomes continuum for New  [18] Hankivsky O , Kapilashrami A . Beyond sex and gender analysis: an intersec-  tional view of the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak and response. London, UK:  Global Policy Institute, Queen Mary University of London; 2020 .  [19] Crenshaw K . Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and vio-  lence against women of color. Stan L Rev 1990;43:1241 .  [20] Collins PH . Intersectionality’s definitional dilemmas. Annu Rev Sociol  [21] Dong E , Du H , Gardner L . An interactive web-based dashboard to track  COVID-19 in real time. Lancet Infect Dis 2020;20(5):533–4 .  [22] United States Department of Health and Human Services (US DHHS), Centers  for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Center for Health Statis-  tics (NCHS), Bridged-Race Population Estimates, United States July 1st res-  ident population by state, county, age, sex, bridged-race, and Hispanic ori-  gin. Compiled from 1990-1999 bridged-race intercensal population estimates  (released by NCHS on 7/26/2004); revised bridged-race 20 0 0-20 09 inter-  censal population estimates (released by NCHS on 10/26/2012); and bridged-  race Vintage 2019 (2010-2019) postcensal population estimates (released by  NCHS on 7/9/2020). CDC WONDER Online Database. http://wonder.cdc.gov/  bridged- race- v2019.html . Accessed Sep 2, 2020.  [23] Weinberger DM , Chen J , Cohen T , Crawford FW , Mostashari F , Olson D ,  et al. Estimation of excess deaths associated with the COVID-19 pan-  demic in the United States, March to May 2020. JAMA Intern Med  [24] Dorn AV , Cooney RE , Sabin ML . COVID-19 exacerbating inequalities in the US.  [25] Abedi V , Olulana O , Avula V , Chaudhary D , Khan A , Shahjouei S , et al. Racial,  economic, and health inequality and COVID-19 infection in the United States. J  [26] Maroko AR , Nash D , Pavilonis BT . COVID-19 and inequity: a comparative spatial  analysis of New York city and chicago hot spots. J Urban Health: Bull New York  [27] Harrison SL , Fazio-Eynullayeva E , Lane DA , Underhill P , Lip GYH . Comor-  bidities associated with mortality in 31,461 adults with COVID-19 in the  United States: A federated electronic medical record analysis. PLoS Med  [28] Greenland S , Rothman KJ . Ch. 14: Introduction to Categorical Statistics. In:  Rothman KJ, Greenland S, Lash TL, editors. Modern Epidemiology. 3rd ed.  Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (LWW); 2008. p. 238–57 .  [29] Chamie G , Marquez C , Crawford E , Peng J , Petersen M , Schwab D , et al. SARS– CoV-2 community transmission disproportionately affects Latinx population  during Shelter-in-Place in San Francisco. Clin Infect Dis 2020 Epub ahead of  [30] Hawkins D . Differential occupational risk for COVID-19 and other infection ex-  posure according to race and ethnicity. Am J Ind Med 2020;63(9):817–20 .  [31] Tai DBG , Shah A , Doubeni CA , Sia IG , Wieland ML . The Disproportionate Impact  of COVID-19 on Racial and Ethnic Minorities in the United States. Clin Infect  [32] Evans MK . Covid’s Color Line - Infectious Disease, Inequity, and Racial Justice.  [33] Bui DP , McCaffrey K , Friedrichs M , LaCross N , Lewis NM , Sage K , et al. Racial  and Ethnic Disparities Among COVID-19 Cases in Workplace Outbreaks by In-  dustry Sector - Utah, March 6-June 5, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep  [34] Vijayan T , Shin M , Adamson PC , Harris C , Seeman T , Norris KC , et al. Beyond  the 405 and the 5: geographic variations and factors associated with SARS– CoV-2 positivity rates in Los Angeles County. Clin Infect Dis 2020 Epub ahead  [35] Vahidy FS , Nicolas JC , Meeks JR , Khan O , Pan A , Jones SL , et al. Racial  and ethnic disparities in SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: analysis of a COVID-19 ob-  servational registry for a diverse US metropolitan population. BMJ Open  [36] Kim HN , Lan KF , Nkyekyer E , Neme S , Pierre-Louis M , Chew L , et al. Assess-  ment of disparities in COVID-19 testing and infection across language groups  in seattle, Washington. JAMA Network Open 2020;3(9):e2021213 .  [37] Figueroa JF , Wadhera RK , Lee D , Yeh RW , Sommers BD . Community-level fac-  tors associated with racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 rates in Mas-  sachusetts. Health Aff (Millwood) 2020;39(11):1984–92 .  [38] Webb Hooper M , Napoles AM , Perez-Stable EJ . COVID-19 and racial/ethnic dis-  [39] Kopel J , Perisetti A , Roghani A , Aziz M , Gajendran M , Goyal H . Racial and gen-  der-based differences in COVID-19. Front Public Health 2020;8:418 .  [40] Cholera R , Falusi OO , Linton JM . Sheltering in place in a xenopho-  bic climate: COVID-19 and children in immigrant families. Pediatrics  [41] Wilson FA , Stimpson JP . US policies increase vulnerability of immigrant com-  munities to the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann Glob Health 2020;86(1):57 .  [42] Rostron BL , Boies JL , Arias E . Education reporting and classification on death  certificates in the United States. Vital and health statistics Series 2. Data Eval "
            },
            {
                "answer": "More meatpacking workers died of COVID-19 in 18 months than died of work-related causes in the preceding 15 years, she said.",
                "question": "How does the number of COVID-19 cases among meat packing workers compare to other occupations, such as health care workers?",
                "url": "https://www.agriculture.com/news/business/covid-19-cases-deaths-among-meatpacking-workers-3-times-worse-than-thought",
                "scraped_text": "News Business News COVID-19 cases, deaths among meatpacking workers 3 times worse than thought House Committee compiled report of at least 59,000 infections and at least 269 deaths of employees at five large meatpackers.c By Chuck Abbott Chuck Abbott Title: Contributing editor. Experience The slow-talking son of an Illinois farm family, I have covered U.S. food and agriculture policy in its many forms since 1988, from farm bills (six so far) and crop insurance reform to school lunch, ag research, biofuels and the Dietary Guidelines. Successful Farming's Editorial Guidelines Published on October 28, 2021 Trending Videos Close this video player Photo: Getty Images Five large meatpackers fell staggeringly short of their duty to protect their workers during the pandemic, with at least 269 deaths and at least 59,000 infections from COVID-19 among their employees — roughly three times more than thought — said Rep. James Clyburn, chairman of the House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis on Wednesday. \"Our investigation found that the Trump administration's response to the outbreaks in meatpacking plants was wholly insufficient.\" Trump appointees at the Labor Department decided against issuing an emergency rule during the early months of the pandemic to require meatpackers to take specific precautions, said a report written by the subcommittee's Democratic staffers. At the same time, companies kept plants operating, with workers often standing shoulder to shoulder on the production floor and with few safeguards in place against the airborne virus. The report called for meatpackers to assure that workers are vaccinated against COVID-19 and for OSHA \"to ensure the success of vaccine mandates through regulatory standards.\" A former OSHA official, labor law expert Debbie Berkowitz, said she expected the agency would soon issue an emergency temporary standard that would require workers at large companies to be vaccinated or to get tested weekly. Most meatpackers kept their coronavirus counts secret, although outbreaks forced some of the largest slaughterhouses to slow or stop production temporarily in spring 2020. Five of the dominant beef and pork processors — JBS USA, Tyson Foods, Smithfield Foods, Cargill, and National Beef — provided documentation to the subcommittee, which it used to compile a one-year tally of at least 59,000 infections and at least 269 deaths of employees, numbers it called \"substantially higher than previously reported.\" \"The full extent of coronavirus infections and deaths at these meatpacking companies was likely much worse,\" said the report, since meatpacker data in many instances did not include cases confirmed by off-site testing or self-reported by employees. The best independent source of the coronavirus' impact among meat workers has been FERN's COVID-19 Mapping Project, which relied on public reports of outbreaks. With meatpackers not required to report COVID-19 data, an OSHA official told the subcommittee, the agency had \"relied at least in part on data from FERN to track worker infections and deaths,\" and the subcommittee report cited FERN's data as its baseline for previously reported cases. The numbers reported Wednesday by the five meatpackers were about three times higher than the numbers compiled by FERN. FERN ended the mapping project last month due to the chronic lack of data from private companies and public health departments. \"Let's be clear. The wildfire spread of COVID among meat and poultry workers was not inevitable. It was preventable,\" said Berkowitz, a senior fellow at the National Employment Law Project. \"The meat industry decided to thumb their noses\" at federal recommendations such as social distancing at work. More meatpacking workers died of COVID-19 in 18 months than died of work-related causes in the preceding 15 years, she said. According to data provided by the meatpackers, Tyson Foods had 29,462 infections and 151 deaths; JBS USA had 12,859 infections and 62 deaths; Smithfield had 9,666 infections and 25 deaths; Cargill had 4,690 infections and 25 deaths; and National Beef had 2,470 infections and six deaths. The five companies account for 80% of beef production and 60% of pork production in America. \"What we have learned is staggering,\" said Clyburn. \"Had the Trump administration acted, these numbers could have been lower.\" President Trump issued an executive order in April 2020 \"to ensure that meat and poultry processors continue operations\" during the pandemic, overriding state officials worried about coronavirus outbreaks. On Tuesday, the United Food and Commercial Workers union and Tyson Foods announced that 96% of frontline workers at the company were vaccinated. The UFCW represents 26,000 Tyson workers. To read the subcommittee report, click here. To watch a video of the hearing, click here. Was this page helpful? Thanks for your feedback! Tell us why! Other Submit"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Dozens of meatpacking workers have died of COVID-19, leading to lawsuits from families of those workers who are accusing the companies of ignoring safety guidelines.",
                "question": "What were the reported COVID-19 cases and deaths among meatpacking workers compared to health care workers?",
                "url": "https://www.cbsnews.com/news/osha-meatpacking-guidelines-arent-enforceable-osha-is-hiding/",
                "scraped_text": "OSHA meatpacking guidelines aren't enforceable: \"OSHA is hiding\" Federal recommendations meant to keep meatpacking workers safe as they return to plants that were shuttered by the coronavirus have little enforcement muscle behind them. That's fueling anxieties that working conditions could put employees' lives at risk. Extensive guidance issued last month by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommends that meatpacking companies erect physical barriers, enforce social distancing and install more hand-sanitizing stations, among other steps. \"It's like, 'Here's what we'd like you to do. But if you don't want to do it, you don't have to,'\" said Mark Lauritsen, international vice president and director of the food processing and meatpacking division for the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union. Dozens of meatpacking workers have died of COVID-19, leading to lawsuits from families of those workers who are accusing the companies of ignoring safety guidelines. In one suit, a Pennsylvania family sued beef processor JBS over the death of Enock Benjamin, a 70-year-old man who died April 30 after contracting COVID-19 at the company's Souderton plant. That lawsuit accuses JBS, the second-largest meat processor in the U.S., of ignoring recommendations issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in early March that meat companies position plant workers at least six feet apart and provide them with gloves. Experts say OSHA should make the guidelines mandatory. The pandemic is \"the most massive workers' safety crisis in many decades, and OSHA is in the closet. OSHA is hiding,\" said David Michaels, an epidemiologist who was the agency's assistant secretary of labor under President Barack Obama. Michaels called on OSHA to make the guidelines mandatory and enforceable, which would include the threat of fines. OSHA's general guidance plainly says the recommendations are advisory and \"not a standard or regulation,\" and they create \"no new legal obligations.\" But the guidance also says employers must follow a law known as the general duty clause, which requires companies to provide a workplace free of recognized hazards. Critics say that rule is unlikely to be enforced, especially after President Donald Trump signed an executive order in April aimed at keeping meat plants open. Already, examples have emerged of questionable enforcement efforts and pressure to keeping plants running: — Shortly before Trump's order, state regulators in Iowa declined to inspect a Tyson Foods pork plant despite a complaint alleging workers had been exposed to the virus in crowded conditions. Documents obtained by The Associated Press show it took the Iowa division of OSHA nine days to seek a response from Tyson and eight more to get a reply. The state agency ultimately found Tyson's voluntary efforts to improve social distancing at the Perry plant were \"satisfactory\" and closed the case without an inspection. A week later, 730 workers — almost 60% of the workforce — had tested positive. — In Kansas, the state softened its quarantine guidelines after industry executives pushed to allow potentially exposed employees to continue going to work, according to emails and text messages obtained by The Kansas City Star and The Wichita Eagle. The state had previously advised such employees to quarantine for two weeks, before conforming to the more lenient CDC guideline, which allows employees to continue working if they have no symptoms and use precautions. The move came after Tyson raised a concern with the state of rising worker absenteeism. After Trump's executive order — developed with input from the industry — the Labor Department and OSHA said OSHA would use discretion and consider \"good faith attempts\" to follow safety recommendations. Employers would be given a chance to explain if some are not met. Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue made clear in letters earlier this month that the Department of Agriculture expected state and local officials to work with meat plants to keep them running. And he said any closed plants without a timetable to reopen had to submit protocols to the USDA. The USDA did not respond to repeated requests to provide those company plans to the AP. When asked how guidelines would be enforced, a USDA spokesperson said enforcement was up to OSHA. Major meatpackers JBS, Smithfield and Tyson have said worker safety is their highest priority. They provided the AP with summaries of their efforts to improve safety, but the plans themselves have not been made public. Tyson said because the temporary suspension of its operations was voluntary and the company was already meeting or exceeding federal guidance, it was not required to submit a reopening plan to the USDA. One plan obtained by the AP, for the reopening of a JBS pork plant in Worthington, Minnesota, details multiple safety improvements, including installing physical barriers, increasing spacing between workers and requiring protective equipment. The plan includes photos. It says employees will be screened for health issues, but it makes no mention of requiring testing. JBS spokesman Cameron Bruett said the plan \"demonstrates the extraordinary measures\" the plant has taken \"to keep our team members safe as they provide food for the country.\" In an emailed response to questions about how guidance would be enforced and what role OSHA would play in protecting workers, the Department of Labor said OSHA received 55 complaints in the animal-processing industry and opened 22 inspections since Feb. 1. Echoing language from the general duty clause, the agency also noted longstanding rules that require employers to provide a safe workplace. \"OSHA's standards remain in place and enforceable, and they will continue to be as workers return to their workplaces,\" a labor spokesperson said. Michaels, the former OSHA official, said the clause has no preventive effect and is generally enforced only after a worker is injured. He said it's effective only in cases in which OSHA conducts an inspection and issues citations and the employer agrees to fix the problem — so any impact is felt months or years later. Michaels said OSHA will not issue citations if employers are doing their best to eliminate a hazard but find it's not feasible. Jeffrey Lancaster, founder and CEO of Lancaster Safety Consulting in Wexford, Pennsylvania, said violations of the general duty clause can get expensive, especially if companies are found to be repeat violators, have a willful violation, or fail to fix an issue. \"The laws have been in place,\" he said. \"It's just a new ballgame – a new hazard.\" Minnesota is one of 22 states or territories with worker-protection agencies that cover private and government workers, and the state OSHA has the power to enforce the CDC and state Department of Health's COVID-19 safety guidelines under the general duty clause, spokesman James Honerman said. The agency has two open investigations into the meatpacking businesses — one at a JBS plant in Worthington and one at a Pilgrim's Pride plant in Cold Spring, said Honerman, who could not discuss the investigations because they are pending. Lauritsen, with the food workers' union, said OSHA has not done enough to hold employers accountable. The union is advocating for access to daily testing for all meat-production workers, personal protective equipment if necessary and paid sick leave. \"By and large, if our members are healthy enough, if they are not sick or on quarantine, they are going to show up to do their job,\" Lauritsen said. \"But that doesn't mean that they're not anxious or not nervous.\""
            },
            {
                "answer": "- At least 20 meat-packing workers have died of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Over 5,000 more have been hospitalized or shown symptoms of the virus.",
                "question": "What is the number of COVID-19 cases and deaths reported among meat packing workers compared to healthcare workers?",
                "url": "https://www.businessinsider.com/osha-stops-enforcement-for-meat-plants-good-faith-safety-efforts-2020-4",
                "scraped_text": "- OSHA, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, has stopped enforcing coronavirus-related safety guidelines in meat factories, according to a statement released on Tuesday. - Enforcement is suspended for factories that show a \"good faith\" effort to keep workers safe. - The Department of Labor will consider defending meat corporations from lawsuits filed by workers, OSHA added. - At least 20 meat-packing workers have died of COVID-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Over 5,000 more have been hospitalized or shown symptoms of the virus. - Last month, the Trump administration suspended the Environmental Protection Agency's regulations, citing the pandemic. - Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories. On Tuesday, President Donald Trump ordered all meat-packing plants to remain open, even as plant workers around the country are dying of COVID-19. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration, will not enforce coronavirus-related safety guidelines for the plants so long as they demonstrate \"good faith\" efforts to keep workers safe, according to OSHA Solicitor of Labor Kate O'Scannlain and Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Loren Sweatt. If the \"good faith\" condition is met, the Department of Labor will consider heading off worker lawsuits against their employers, O'Scannlain and Sweatt said in a statement on Tuesday. \"Likewise, the Department of Labor will consider similar requests by workers if their employer has not taken steps in good faith to follow the Joint Meat Processing Guidance,\" OSHA added. Employers are not required to track coronavirus cases among workers, per recent OSHA guidance, and does not require on-site inspections for worker complaints related to the virus. The statement did not say what constituted a \"good faith\" effort to comply with its guidelines. OSHA did not immediately respond to Business Insider's request for comment. No fewer than 20 meat-packing plants have closed since the pandemic began, the Washington Post reported. At least 20 factory workers have died of COVID-19, the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union said on Tuesday, and \"more than 5,000 workers have been hospitalized or are showing symptoms.\" Democrats pushed back on the guidance, saying OSHA must ensure 'workers are meaningfully protected from COVID-19' One day after that statement was released, Democratic Sens. Patty Murray of Washington, Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico strongly rebuked the new OSHA guidance in a letter to Labor Secretary Eugene Scalia. OSHA must \"ensure our nation's workers are meaningfully protected from COVID-19,\" said the letter, signed by 24 other Democrats and Independent Sens. The senators wrote that OSHA must issue emergency temporary standards, enforceable protections for workers, and general guidance to employers for protecting their workers. They also demanded that OSHA withdraw its previous guidance that allowed most employers not to track coronavirus cases, and withdraw its prevention of on-site inspections. \"Employers need clear guidance on what they should do to ensure safe workplaces—and workers across the country have been waiting for your leadership,\" the letter said. Trump administration recently suspended government enforcement elsewhere OSHA is not the first government entity to ease up on enforcement rules in the wake of the novel coronavirus pandemic. Last month, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it would stop enforcing a host of environmental regulations because of the virus outbreak. Facilities must comply with regulations \"where reasonably practicable,\" the EPA said in a statement on March 26. But the agency will not \"seek penalties for noncompliance with routine monitoring and reporting obligations.\" The agency's normal regulations would unnecessarily hamper companies that emit pollutants, said Administrator Andrew Wheeler since the companies are also trying to \"protect workers and the public from COVID-19,\" the disease caused by the virus. The policy applies to civil violations, according to the statement, but \"does not provide leniency for intentional criminal violations of law.\""
            },
            {
                "answer": "meatpacking workers had contracted COVID-19, making it ",
                "question": "How many COVID-19 cases have been reported among meatpacking workers compared to healthcare workers?",
                "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/jbs-covid-19-worker-safety-ib.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "JBS is the world’s largest meat processing company, producing beef, chicken, and pork as well as by-products from the processing of these meats.1 JBS is worth an estimated $11.7 billion (US), with annual sales recently reaching $51.8 billion.2 In total, the company employs around 242,000 workers in 400 production units in 15 countries.3    JBS’S INACTION AND DISREGARD FOR WORKER SAFETY HAVE INCREASED  THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 IN THE UNITED STATES AND BRAZIL Butchers chop meat at a JBS packing plant in São Paulo, Brazil. The JBS parent company (JBS South America, or SA) is  based in Brazil, where 120,000 employees work in more  than 150 JBS-owned processing plants and distribution  centers.4 Additionally, as a global conglomerate, JBS  encompasses dozens of subsidiaries. The largest of these  is JBS USA, which is the second-largest U.S. meatpacker,  behind Tyson Foods.5 JBS USA employs more than 78,000  workers and operates more than 100 facilities in the  United States, Canada, Mexico, Europe, Australia, and  New Zealand.6 As holder of 78.5 percent of shares, JBS is  also the majority owner of Pilgrim’s Pride, a global chicken  processor with an additional 30,000 U.S. employees across  12 states.7 Herein, we will use JBS to refer to the parent  company and all its subsidiaries, both wholly-owned  subsidiaries like JBS USA and majority-owned subsidiaries  As slaughterhouses have increased in size across the  globe, owners of processing plants have increased line  speeds, squeezing in more workers to keep up with the  blistering pace of production. This, however, is causing a  quiet epidemic of crippling injuries.8,9 The work is not only  backbreaking but also dangerous; workers stand shoulder- to-shoulder on both sides of long conveyor belts, wielding  scissors and knives under cold, damp, and noisy conditions.  As Debbie Berkowitz, a senior official at the Occupational  Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the Obama  administration, recently testified before Congress:10  According to the industry’s own self-reported statistics  over the last few years, meat and poultry workers are  injured at rates on average 50 percent higher than all  other workers in the private sector, with injury rates in  red meat plants running almost twice as high. Further,  the government has found that these statistics are an  undercount; the real rates of injury and illness are  much higher. The meat and poultry slaughtering and  processing companies report more severe injuries, such  as amputations and injuries or illnesses that result in the  overnight stay at a hospital, to OSHA than industries that  are popularly recognized as hazardous, like sawmills,  industrial building construction, and oil and gas well  The meatpacking industry is often criticized for its  disregard of workers. Its practices are also viewed  as damaging to the environment, thanks to rampant  deforestation in the meatpacking supply chain and  the industry’s greenhouse gas emissions. Still, JBS is  exceptional for the extent and documentation of its  irresponsible practices, including human rights abuses,  widespread corruption, and illegal deforestation around  the world [see “JBS’s Abysmal Record on Deforestation,  Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Human Rights,” below].11  Experts have warned for some time that the conditions  causing so many worker injuries were leaving those same  workers vulnerable to pandemic infections. A 2007 report  by the US National Infrastructure Council anticipated that  a future pandemic could seriously disrupt operations in the  private sector (including meatpacking); it warned that up to  40 percent of private sector staff could be absent for periods  of about two weeks at the height of a pandemic.12 The  council recommended steps to mitigate the health risks and  possible workplace disruptions, such as continuity planning  to identify critical facilities and workers, and to facilitate  better collaboration between companies and public health  agencies.13 A 2015 federal report, however, found that the  meat industry still did not have a pandemic plan in place.14  At the same time, OSHA was being chronically starved of  staff and resources to fulfill its mandate to protect workers.  inspectors reached their lowest level since 1975.15  As a result, it came as little surprise when meatpacking  plants, in Brazil as well as in the United States, emerged as  hot spots early in the outbreak. Even as evidence mounted  that slaughterhouse workers were especially vulnerable  to infection, however, many of those plants including  ones owned by JBS, simply refused to slow down. “The  problem was, at these plants that were closing, they weren’t  making any changes. They were just running full throttle and  business as usual,” said Matt Utrecht, president of the union  representing 1,850 of the workers at JBS’s enormous pork  Basically, JBS failed to adopt continuity planning to  protect workers after either the 2007 or the 2015 report.  The multiple pandemic-related disruptions to plant  operations since early in 2020 were a direct result.17 The  company has yet to publicly announce plans to adopt  the recommendations of the reports and thus appears  vulnerable to future disruptions whether from coronavirus  A worker heads into the JBS meatpacking plant Monday, Oct. 12, 2020,  These are just a few examples of how the spread of COVID-19 affected meatpackers and surrounding communities in Brazil and the United n  In Mato Grosso do Sul, one of three southern states where meatpacking is very prominent, more than one-quarter of the 4,000 workers at one JBS plant tested positive for COVID-19 in July 2020.18  n  After more than 40 percent of the 940 workers at a JBS plant in the small town of São Miguel do Guaporé, in the Amazonian state of Rondônia, became infected, a judge ordered the plant to close. At the time (July 2020), the plant accounted for more than half of the town’s n  In Colíder, a small city in the northern state of Mato Grosso, meatpacking workers at a JBS plant accounted for about 17 percent of the city’s n  Cases mounted rapidly after the first worker tested positive for COVID-19 at JBS’s Greeley, Colorado, beef plant on March 3, 2020, eventually forcing an eight-day closure in mid-April. Almost immediately after its reopening, the number of confirmed worker cases more than doubled, from 120 on April 25 to 245 just four days later.21 By July 12, Colorado was reporting 447 coronavirus cases (and 10 deaths) statewide; the Greeley plant contributed 290 cases, or 65 percent of the state total.22 To date, the Greeley plant stands as the site of the third-largest outbreak of COVID-19 in the state.23 Seven months after it began, Colorado finally pronounced the plant outbreak “resolved” on September 30. Just six weeks later, a new active outbreak was declared in the same plant, with 10 additional infected workers as of April 1, 2021.24 n  The huge JBS plant in Worthington employs more than 2,000 workers, and accounts for about 4 percent of the nation’s entire pork supply. JBS only took action and closed the plant on April 20 after hundreds of workers started calling in sick or had already tested positive for COVID-19.25 Nine days later, plant workers accounted for 39 percent (239 out of 615) of all the confirmed COVID-19 cases in the entire county.26 By June 2020, a total of 791 workers at the plant had been positively diagnosed with coronavirus, the most at any JBS-owned plant n  On May 11, dozens of workers from the Pilgrim’s Pride chicken processing plant in Cold Spring, Minnesota, drove around the plant honking, demanding that it be closed for two weeks.28 At that point, 194 of the plant’s 1,100 workers had been diagnosed with The pandemic has had significant physical, mental health,  and/or economic impacts on just about everyone. But  those burdens fall hardest on the least powerful members  of society. Meatpacking plants in Brazil and the United  States employ large numbers of immigrants and Black,  Latino, Indigenous, or other workers from racial or ethnic  minorities.30 In July, the Centers for Disease Control and  Prevention (CDC) stated that in the U.S. meatpacking  plants that reported the race and ethnicity breakdown of  their employees, 87 percent of workers infected with the  The pandemic’s outsize impact on meatpacking workers,  and on the surrounding communities whose economies rely  on the plants, is tragic but unsurprising. Unsavory business  practices appear to be the glue that ties JBS together,  from its enormous carbon footprint to its deforestation  to its willingness to sacrifice the health and safety of its  workforce. In a sense, the pandemic has only thrown those  issues into starker relief. COVID-19 has shined a bright  light onto the ways in which workers and their communities  suffer when meatpackers like JBS duck their corporate  responsibilities and turn a blind eye to the health and safety  consequences of their longstanding plant conditions and  Even after stay-at-home and social distancing measures  were instituted in the United States in March 2020,  forcing the closure of schools and most workplaces,  U.S. meatpacking plants initially continued operating as  usual.32 Not surprisingly, without the recommended safety  measures in place, COVID-19 outbreaks began to overwhelm  these plants across the country, triggering temporary  closures. Among them were two of JBS USA’s largest, the  Greeley, Colorado, beef plant, with 3,200 workers, and the  Worthington, Minnesota, pork plant, with 2,000 workers.33 Protections for meatpacking workers appear to have been  largely ignored until the number of coronavirus infections  among them skyrocketed.34 Throughout the pandemic,  slaughterhouse workers in both Brazil and the United States  have reported a culture in which employees have to work  while sick (there is no sick leave) and face mask and social  distancing rules are routinely not enforced.35 In the United  States this has been partially due to political pressure  to remain open amid consumer fears of meat shortages,  amounting to a government endorsement of treating  workers as disposable for the sake of consumer interests.36  In the United States as well as in Brazil, JBS has faced few  consequences for its blatant disregard for workers’ lives  during the pandemic. After nearly 300 JBS workers in the  Greeley beef plant were infected with COVID-19 and 6  died, the company was cited for two OSHA violations on  September 11, 2020, and fined a paltry $15,160. The more  serious violation, accounting for 89 percent of the total fine,  was JBS’s failure under the general duty clause of the OSHA  Act of 1970 to provide a workplace “free from recognized  hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or  serious physical harm to [its] employees.”38 JBS quickly  contested the citations and refused to pay.39 Speaking on  behalf of more than 3,000 workers at the plant, the local  union president told the Denver Post that the trivial fine  “only incentivizes the company to continue endangering  its employees.”40 Previously, JBS had also contested five  pandemic-related citations issued for health and safety  violations at its Worthington pork plant in July 2020,  refusing to pay the associated fines totaling $29,400.41 Outbreaks began hitting Brazil’s meat plants at about the  same time as in the United States, in March/April 2020,  and labor lawyers and prosecutors organized to protect  workers. They petitioned the courts to temporarily shut  down some plants, which a judge eventually ordered in July  2020, but only after the outbreaks had reached a fevered  pitch.42 The courts also ordered that workers be tested for  COVID-19 at four JBS SA plants in Rio Grande do Sul.43  For several months into the pandemic, JBS SA was the  only meatpacking company in Brazil to resist an agreement  with the Brazilian Public Labor Ministry (MPT) to improve  worker safety. Eventually the MPT took steps toward  stopping operations at 12 JBS SA plants for failing to  protect their workers during the pandemic. On July 27 the  company finally agreed, in accordance with the MPT, to  supply workers at the Três Passos plant with PFF2 masks  (the Brazilian equivalent of N95) and to test all workers  for COVID-19. However, JBS SA refused to offer workers  replacement masks on a daily basis, causing employees to  reuse contaminated masks for an entire week or more.44 Labor prosecutors also worked with companies and workers  to ensure that when plants reopened, workers would be  protected. However, while other companies signed on to  these prosecutor-brokered agreements, JBS failed to do so.  Moreover, JBS SA declined to comment on outbreaks at its  individual plants; the company maintains that in responding  to the disease outbreak, it has followed or exceeded CDC  guidelines at its plants worldwide.45 However, neither  enforcement actions nor workers’ stories indicate as much.  When one JBS meatpacker in Brazil, Leandro da Conceição,  complained about feeling ill to his supervisor, he was  ignored. He stayed on the job, getting sicker and sicker, until  he tested a positive for COVID. “His focus was the cows, not  the employees,” Conceição told The Guardian, in reference  to his supervisor.46 A Washington Post story about the  workers in JBS’s Greeley plant who fell ill in March tells a  Neither the United States nor Brazil has provided  comprehensive and up-to-date tracking and reporting of  confirmed COVID-19 cases among meatpacking workers.  Perhaps as a reaction to that failure, Leah Douglas, a  reporter at the Food and Environment Reporting Network,  has sifted through county public health announcements  and local news reports to compile and maintain a much  more complete record of meatpacking worker cases and  deaths in the United States since April 2020, broken down  by company and by individual plant. Douglas’s latest tally  Family members of longtime JBS USA meat packing plant employee Saul Sanchez,  from left, wife Carolina Sanchez, and daughter Estela Hernanez, Beatriz Rangel  and Patty Rangel hold a photo of him after he died of coronavirus disease  (COVID-19) in Greeley, Colorado, U.S. April 10, 2020. In the Amazon, trees are cut down to make space for cattle ranching. Extensive  cattle farming is a major driver of Amazon deforestation, and beef production  for export has increased by ten times in the last two decades, led by three huge  (as of April 1, 2021) is 58,313 confirmed cases of COVID-19  in meatpacking workers in 572 plants in 35 U.S. states,  with 286 deaths.48 Similarly, the Brazilian MPT confirmed  that by June 2020 there had been 11,500 COVID-19 cases  among workers in 104 factories in just the three southern  states that are home to about half of Brazil’s 500,000  meatpackers.49 By August, an estimated one in five Brazilian  meatpacking workers had contracted COVID-19, making it  one of the world’s worst sector-wide workplace outbreaks.50 Unfortunately, outbreaks among workers also impact the  communities where these plants are located. A recent study  in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  concluded that meatpacking plants, at least in the United  States, serve as vectors in spreading COVID-19 to their  neighbors. As of July 21, 2020, the study estimates U.S.  meat processing plants were associated with 236,000 to  310,000 COVID-19 cases (6 to 8 percent of the U.S. total at  the time), along with 4,300 to 5,200 deaths (3 to 4 percent  of the U.S. total). Public health researchers concluded  that “poultry plants showed a significant relationship  with COVID-19 cases, with pork plants showing the  strongest relationship. Beef plants showed the strongest  relationship with deaths from the illness.”51 A subsequent  U.S. Department of Agriculture analysis concluded that the  highest COVID-19 case rates among non-metro U.S. counties  had been found in those that are dependent on farming and  manufacturing, due in part to “higher COVID-19 case rates  in meatpacking-dependent counties,” defined as counties  where more than 20 percent of adults are employed by  For JBS USA and Pilgrim’s Pride plants in particular,  Douglas’s database documents at least 3,935 COVID-19  cases and 20 deaths involving workers in 16 states.53 And in  Brazil, at least 4,000 workers in 23 JBS SA plants in seven  Holding JBS, or the meatpacking industry in general, more  fully accountable is not possible without accurate and  more public data on COVID-19 cases among meatpacking  workers. If those data were available, it’s likely that the  numbers would, unfortunately, be significantly higher.55 Individual journalists and activists have been doing their  best to compile the limited data where they exist, forced  into this role by the lack of a public mandate for federal and  state governments to provide this information. Meatpacking  companies also could be acting with more responsibility and  It would seem to be part of the pattern of meatpacking  companies generally, including JBS, to shirk whatever  obligation they have not only to provide a safe workplace,  but also to be a good neighbor to the surrounding  communities.56 To paraphrase Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D–CT)  writing in her 2017 book, The Least Among Us: Waging the  Battle for the Vulnerable, if we depend on corporate good  JBS’S ABYSMAL RECORD ON DEFORESTATION, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, AND HUMAN RIGHTS  JBS has repeatedly been linked to illegal deforestation in its meat supply chain. JBS operates 20 slaughterhouses in the Amazon region, but the company monitors only its direct suppliers. In 2020 JBS was accused of acquiring cattle from farms linked to illegal deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Cattle are heavily tracked in Brazil through a system of tags and checkpoints to ensure that they are not coming from farms in illegally deforested areas. However, in a “cattle laundering” process, farms that have been cited for deforestation or other violations often sell their cattle to suppliers or to other farms considered to be operating legally, where those cattle are then fattened and eventually sold to slaughterhouses, thus forming part of the indirect process.58  As a result, JBS’s total deforestation footprint may be as high as  494,210 acres (200,000 hectares) in its direct supply chain and  3.7 million acres (1.5 million hectares) in its indirect supply chain,  according to estimates from Chain Reaction Research.59 In other  words, JBS’s enormous size, combined with its practice of buying  cattle originating from illegally deforested land, makes it one of  the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases. Its operations  are estimated to produce around half of the comparable fossil fuel  emissions of petroleum company giants such as ExxonMobil, Royal  JBS has also been accused of perpetuating slavery-like conditions  for its workers by, for instance, withholding wages or ignoring  horrendous living conditions in the housing it provides. For example,  a labor inspector told Réporter Brasil, an organization that monitors  human rights violations in Brazil, about a middleman housing JBS  workers in a disused mine. The horrific conditions he saw there, he  said, “cannot be described in words.” Many of these workers have no  The Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources  (IBAMA) seizes 7,387 logs illegally extracted from Pirititi Indigenous Land, IMPACT OF JBS NEGLIGENCE: INCREASED COVID-19 SPREAD   In refusing to take adequate steps to protect worker health  and safety, JBS is essentially allowing COVID-19 to run  rampant through its worker population and the communities  surrounding its plants. Increased spread of the coronavirus  is dangerous for everyone, but it disproportionately affects  have always operated under crowded and unsanitary  conditions, were both more exposed and more vulnerable  to the disease. These workers undeniably are vectors in  the spread of COVID-19 from the plants themselves into  Indigenous reserves and other underprepared rural areas  in Brazil. The impacts of the virus have been particularly  disastrous among Indigenous people, who face high risks of  transmission. People in many of those communities live in  close quarters and share cookware, lack access to soap and  water or hand sanitizer, and often have limited access to  health care.62 During fire season (from June to November),  smoke fills the air around many Indigenous communities  and made it more difficult to breathe—exacerbating the  Using census, race, and employment data, researchers have  shown that among rural areas, municipalities that are home  to slaughterhouses have some of the highest COVID-19  infection rates in Brazil. This is also the case for rural  In Mato Grosso do Sul, COVID-19 entered the Dourados  Indigenous Reserve through 33 Indigenous employees  of a JBS slaughterhouse who tested positive; more than  150 residents were eventually infected, 90 percent of  whom were directly or indirectly associated with JBS SA,  according to the state secretary of health. The same pattern  of spread is seen throughout Brazil, where many COVID- positive Indigenous residents either work as slaughterhouse  employees or came into contact with them.65 The reserve  closest to Dourados also became a COVID-19 hot spot,  reporting around 3,500 cases by mid-July 2020, or around  30 percent of the total cases in the state at that time.66  Both the MPT and the Federal Prosecution Ministry (MPF)  have taken action to inspect and/or require additional safety  measures by meatpacking companies. After being pushed  by these ministries, JBS officials said that the company  had removed its Indigenous workers upon confirmation  of the first coronavirus cases, subsequently putting all of  them on paid leave, and said it had initiated steps to control  and prevent new outbreaks. According to the experts  and Indigenous leaders interviewed by Réporter Brasil,  however, the company was slow to act, and the safety  measures taken have been inadequate. JBS’s slaughterhouse  in Dourados, for example, continued to transport Indigenous  workers in small, overcrowded buses after the pandemic  While early coronavirus outbreaks in U.S. cities like New  Orleans and New York City initially grabbed headlines, the  news of outbreaks in meatpacking plants soon followed. The  affected plants have mostly been in smaller towns in the  thinly populated states of the agricultural heartland.  While 58 percent of JBS USA’s managers are white, its  factory workers are primarily minorities. According to the  local union representing workers at the Greeley plant, 70  percent of those workers are minorities, including all six  employees who died of COVID-19 complications through  September 2020.68 Worker advocacy groups filed a civil  rights complaint in July 2020 against JBS, as well as Tyson  Foods, citing their failure to prevent coronavirus outbreaks  Not surprisingly, JBS does not accept any blame. Besides  the two OSHA citations and $15,160 in fines levied against  the JBS Greeley plant in mid-September, there also were  $79,400 in total fines for violations at the Worthington  plant, plus $13,494 in COVID-19 related fines for violations  at the Green Bay, WI plant. In each case, JBS quickly  contested the citations, and still have not paid any of the  fines. In Greeley, just a few weeks after Colorado regulators  levied the fines, JBS also denied payment of workers’  compensation claims lodged by families of three of the six  dead employees. The company actually argued that the dead  workers’ COVID-19 illnesses were not work-related.70   When meatpacking companies like JBS are allowed to  act irresponsibly, the broader consequences have always  been dire. That much has not changed. Add in the current  pandemic, however, and the stakes have only gotten higher.  That holds especially true for JBS workers, who number  in the hundreds of thousands across the United States and  Brazil. For them, corporate irresponsibility during the  An adequate response to COVID-19 would have required   much earlier investment in worker safety, including  personal protective gear and paid sick leave, for example.  JBS’s priority instead was to keep its plants running with as  many workers as possible; amid the pandemic, the company  posted record net revenues of $51.8 billion in 2020. The  JBS response to COVID-19 is largely in keeping with its  longstanding record—one of disregarding the health and  well-being of its workers, abusing other human rights, and  contributing to climate change.71 The coronavirus pandemic  has simply clarified the egregiousness and lethality of JBS’s  Investors and the public can no longer remain silent about  JBS’s bad behavior and lack of corporate responsibility.  environmental record and its pandemic response in its  decision to sell JBS shares, worth 40 million euros,  across all of its funds, in August 2020.72 As JBS considers  launching a public stock offering to spin off its large U.S.  subsidiary, other investors should also divest from JBS in  Ultimately, however, improved conditions for the highly  diverse workforce at huge meatpackers such as JBS will  require not only an overhaul of company practices to ensure  accountability, but also large-scale changes to public policy.  As noted by Representative DeLauro in 2017, workers are  typically assured safe workplaces in democracies when  government takes strong action to hold corporations  accountable, rather than depending solely on the latter’s  That’s why NRDC expects urgent action by the U.S.  government to ensure companies like JBS meet their  obligation, under the general duty clause of the 1970 OSHA  Act, to provide safe workplaces. One essential step forward  will be the new Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS)  written by OSHA in response to a January 2021 executive  order, and reportedly awaiting clearance at the Office of  Management and Budget. Longer term, we also strongly  support calls for OSHA to begin writing a permanent  infectious disease standard for workplaces.74,75   But neither should JBS wait for government action that  we know or strongly believe to be in process to begin  demonstrating better accountability in protecting its  workers.76 Therefore we also urge JBS, among other  meatpacking companies, to fully and expeditiously take the  n  In support of greater transparency, create and regularly  update a publicly accessible COVID-19 dashboard that  reports the numbers of JBS workers with confirmed  COVID-19 cases and related deaths, by plant, in both the  n  Accept responsibility for workplace safety violations  found at these plants during the pandemic thus far, and  pay the nominal fines. Pay workers’ compensation claims  related to COVID-19 filed by current and former JBS  n  Commit the company to expedite its compliance with  OSHA’s newly written Emergency Temporary Standard  (ETS). JBS should commit to compliance at all its  facilities, both within and outside the United States. n  Post a pandemic preparedness guide for the company as a  whole, including a timeline for implementing within each  facility the guidelines initially laid out in 2007 by the US   JBS SA, “About JBS,” https://jbssa.com/about/ (accessed September 9, 2020).   Forbes, “JBS,” https://www.forbes.com/companies/jbs/?sh=5c047ca5305f (accessed February 10, 2021).  JBS, “Unidades de Négocios,” last updated June 26, 2020, https://ri.jbs.com.br/a-jbs/unidades-de-negocios/. Report,” press release, May 29, 2020, https://jbs.com.br/en/press/releases-en/jbs-publishes-its-2019-annual-and-sustainability-report/. United States Securities and Exchange Commission, “JBS USA Holdings Inc. Form S-1 Registration Statement,” July 22, 2009, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/ USA Today, “Brazil’s JBS Buys Majority Stake in Pilgrim’s Pride for $800M,” September 16, 2009, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/brazils-jbs-buys-majority- stake-pilgrims-pride-800m/story?id=8591393. Macrotrends, “Pilgrim’s Pride: Number of Employees 2006-2020,” https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PPC/ pilgrims-pride/number-of-employees (accessed February 16, 2020).  Ted Genoways, The Chain: Farm, Factory and the State of Our Food (New York: Harper Collins, 2014), 259 (quoting Darcy Tromanhauser of the Nebraska Appleseed Human Rights Watch, “When We’re Dead and Buried, Our Bones Will Keep Hurting,” September 4, 2019, https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/09/04/when-were- dead-and-buried-our-bones-will-keep-hurting/workers-rights-under-threat#_ftn61. 10  Debbie Berkowitz, “Testimony Before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies: Health and Safety Protections for Meatpacking, Poultry, and Agricultural Workers,” March 2, 2021, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/ AP07/20210302/111253/HHRG-117-AP07-Wstate-BerkowitzD-20210302.pdf.  11  Greenpeace, How JBS Is Still Slaughtering the Amazon, August 2020, https://storage.googleapis.com/planet4-international-stateless/2020/08/60e2cd00- greenpeace_stillslaughtering_pages-1.pdf. Amnesty International, From Forest to Farmland: Cattle Illegally Grazed in Brazil Found in JBS’s Supply Chain, July 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/AMR1926572020ENGLISH.PDF. 12  Rebecca F. Denlinger, Martha H. Marsh, and Bruce A. Rohde, The Prioritization of Critical Infrastructure for a Pandemic Outbreak in the United States Working Group, National Infrastructure Advisory Council, January 16, 2007, https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/niac/niac-pandemic-wg_v8-011707.pdf. 13  Ibid. The report also recommended that “businesses with high population density work environments” stockpile enough masks to supply their workers with two 14  Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Food and Agriculture Sector-Specific Plan, 2015, https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/nipp-ssp-food-ag-2015-508.pdf.  15  Berkowitz, “Testimony Before the House Committee.” 16  Adam Belz, Elizabeth Flores and Greg Stanley, “As Coronavirus Loomed, Worthington Pork Plant Refused to Slow Down,” Star Tribune, May 16, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/as-coronavirus-loomed-worthington-pork-plant-refused-to-slow-down/570516612/ (accessed March 29, 2021). 17  Michael Grabell and Bernice Yeung, “Meatpacking Companies Dismissed Years of Warnings but Now Say Nobody Could Have Prepared for COVID-19,” ProPublica, August 20, 2020, https://www.propublica.org/article/meatpacking-companies-dismissed-years-of-warnings-but-now-say-nobody-could-have-prepared-for-covid-19. Tim Steinweg, Gerard Rijk, and Matt Piotrowski, “Outsized Deforestation in Supply Chain, COVID-19 Pose Fundamental Business Risks,” Chain Reaction Research, August 2020, https://chainreactionresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/JBS-CRR-Report-1.pdf.  18  Gabriel Maymone, “Com Esportações Suspensas, Frigoríficos de MS Têm Mais de 1 Mil Casos de Covid-19,” Midiamax, July 6, 2020, https://www.midiamax.com.br/ cotidiano/2020/em-meio-a-suspensao-de-exportacoes-frigorificos-de-ms-tem-mais-de-1-mil-casos-de-covid-19. 19  Rôndonia Rural, “Justiça Suspende Atividades da JBS Pela 2ª Vez Após Casos de Coronavírus Subirem 1000% em São Miguel, RO,” June 22, 2020, https://g1.globo. com/ro/rondonia/rondonia-rural/noticia/2020/06/22/justica-suspende-atividades-da-jbs-pela-2a-vez-apos-casos-de-coronavirus-subirem-1000percent-em-sao- 20  Kessillen Lopes, “Contaminação por Coronavírus em Frigorífico de MT é 12 Vezes Mais Intensa que em Cidade Onde Está Instalado,” Globo Mato Grosso, July 28, 2020, https://g1.globo.com/mt/mato-grosso/noticia/2020/07/28/contaminacao-por-coronavirus-em-frigorifico-de-mt-e-12-vezes-mais-intensa-que-em-cidade-onde- 21  Reuters, “Confirmed Coronovirus Cases Surge in Reopened JBS Colordo Beef Plant; Worker Dies: Union,” April 30, 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us- health-coronavirus-usa-meat/confirmed-coronavirus-cases-surge-in-reopened-jbs-colorado-beef-plant-worker-dies-union-idUSKBN22C3VR. 22  See Shelly Bradbury, “How Coronavirus Spread Through JBS’s Greeley Beef Plant,” July 12, 2020, Denver Post, https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/12/jbs- 23  Robert Klemko and Kimberly Kindy, “He Fled Congo to Work in a U.S. Meat Plant. Then He—and Hundreds of His Co-workers—Got the Coronavirus,” Washington Post, August 6, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/he-fled-the-congo-to-work-in-a-us-meat-plant-then-he--and-hundreds-of-his-co-workers--got-the- coronavirus/2020/08/06/11e7e13e-c526-11ea-8ffe-372be8d82298_story.html.  24  Lindsay Fendt, “The JBS Coronavirus Outbreak Is Officially Resolved, but Workers’ Families Are Still Fighting for Compensation,” Colorado Public Radio, September 30, 2020, https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/30/colorado-coronavirus-jbs-outbreak-resolved-workers-families-want-compensation/. Chuck Murphy, “Meatpacking Giant JBS Battles New Coronavirus Outbreaks at Greeley Plant and Corporate Offices,” CPR News, November 25, 2020, https://www.cpr. org/2020/11/25/meatpacking-giant-jbs-battles-new-coronavirus-outbreaks-at-greeley-plant-and-corporate-offices/. Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Colorado COVID-19 Data: Map of Outbreaks, updated March 17, 2021, https://covid19.colorado.gov/data; Leah Douglas, “Mapping Covid-19 Outbreaks in the Food System,” Food and Environment Reporting Network, April 22, 2020, updated April 1, 2021, https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in- 25  Adam Belz, Elizabeth Flores, and Craig Stanley, “As Coronavirus Loomed, Worthington Pork Plant Refused to Slow Down,” Star Tribune, May 16, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/as-coronavirus-loomed-worthington-pork-plant-refused-to-slow-down/570516612/?refresh=true. 26  David Wallinga, “COVID-19 Hot Spots Put Meatpacker Giants on the Front Burner,” NRDC Expert Blog, May 5, 2020, https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-wallinga- md/covid-19-hot-spots-put-meatpacker-giants-front-burner.  27 Leah Douglas, “Mapping Covid-19 Outbreaks in the Food System,” Food and Environment Reporting Network, April 22, 2020, updated April 1, 2021, https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in-meat-and-food-processing-plants/. Mike Hughlett, “More Than 200 at Quality Pork, Hormel in Austin Test Positive for COVID-19,” Star Tribune, June 5, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/more-than-200-at-hormel-quality-pork-processors-test-positive-for- 28  James Walsh and Mike Hughlett, “COVID-19 Cases Hit 194 at Minnesota Meat Processing Plant,” Star Tribune, May 12, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/covid- 19-cases-hit-194-at-pilgrim-s-pride-plant/570392152/.  30  Michelle A. Waltenburg et al., “Update: COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities—United States, April–May 2020,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 69, no. 27 (July 10, 2020): 887-92, http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6927e2external icon. em Frigoríficos e Põe Brasileiros e Imigrantes em Risco,” BBC News—Brasil, July 22, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/brasil-53477319. Matt Perez, “87% of Meatpacking Workers Infected With Coronavius Have Been Racial and Ethnic Minorities, CDC Says,” Forbes, July 7, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ mattperez/2020/07/07/87-of-meatpacking-workers-infected-with-coronavirus-have-been-racial-and-ethnic-minorities-cdc-says/?sh=1ab155a1634f (accessed 31  Matt Perez, “87% of Meatpacking Workers Infected with Coronavius Have Been Racial and Ethnic Minorities, CDC Says,” Forbes, July 7, 2020, https://www.forbes. com/sites/mattperez/2020/07/07/87-of-meatpacking-workers-infected-with-coronavirus-have-been-racial-and-ethnic-minorities-cdc-says/?sh=1ab155a1634f. 32  Tonya Mosley and Cassady Rosenblum, “Do You Know Who Makes Your Meat? Inside JBS, the No.1 Meatpacker in the World,” WBUR “Here and Now,” July 17, 2020, https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/07/17/meat-packers-jbs-lawsuit-coronavirus. Eric Schlosser, “America’s Slaughterhouses Aren’t Just Killing Animals,” The Atlantic, May 12, 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/essentials-meatpeacking-coronavirus/611437/. 33  Sky Chadde, “Tracking Covid-19’s Impact on Meatpacking Workers and Industry,” Investigate Midwest, April 16, 2020, https://investigatemidwest.org/2020/04/16/ tracking-covid-19s-impact-on-meatpacking-workers-and-industry/. Associated Press, “JBS Meatpacking Plant in Greeley Accused of Negligence After COVID-19 Outbreak,” Colorado Sun, October 8, 2020, https://coloradosun.com/2020/10/08/jbs-meatpacking-plant-coronavirus-negligence/. 35  Nataly Foscaches and Tatiane Klein, ”Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana: Como o Agronegócio Expôs Indígenas à Covid-19,” Repórter Brasil, June 24, 2020, https://reporterbrasil.org.br/2020/06/dos-frigorificos-as-plantacoes-de-cana-como-o-agronegocio-expos-indigenas-a-covid-19/. Veras Mota, “Covid-19 se em Frigoríficos.” Sebastian Martinez Valdivia and Dan Margolies, “Workers Sue Smithfield Foods, Allege Conditions Put Them at Risk for COVID-19,” NPR, April 24, 2020, https://www.npr.org/2020/04/24/844644200/workers-sue-smithfield-foods-allege-conditions-put-them-at-risk-for-covid-19. 36  Kimberly Kindy, “More Than 200 Meat Plant Workers in the U.S. Have Died of Covid-19. Federal Regulators Just Issued Two Modest Fines,” Washington Post, September 13, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/osha-covid-meat-plant-fines/2020/09/13/1dca3e14-f395-11ea-bc45-e5d48ab44b9f_story.html. 37  Morgann Jezequel, “Global Appetite for Beef, Soy Fuels Amazon Fires,” Phys Org, August 25, 2019, https://phys.org/news/2019-08-global-appetite-beef-soy- 38  Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Inspection Detail for JBS, Greeley, Colorado, https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/establishment.inspection_ 40  Matt Sebastian, “OSHA Fines JBS Greeley,” Denver Post, September 11, 2020, https://www.denverpost.com/2020/09/11/osha-fines-jbs-greeley/. 41  Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Inspection Detail for Swift Pork Company dba JBS USA, Worthington, Minnesota, https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/ establishment.inspection_detail?id=1472850.015 (accessed March 9, 2021). 42  Ana Mano and Marcelo Rochabrun, “Brazil Judge Orders All Workers at JBS Plant to Stay Home Due to Coronavirus,” Reuters, July 17, 2020, https://www.reuters. com/article/us-health-coronavirus-jbs-brazil/brazil-judge-orders-all-workers-at-jbs-plant-to-stay-home-due-to-coronavirus-idUSKCN24I2FR. 43  Dom Phillips, “ ‘There’s a Direct Relationship’: Brazil Meat Plants Linked to Spread of Covid-19,” The Guardian, July 15, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2020/jul/15/brazil-meat-plants-linked-to-spread-of-covid-19. 44  Larissa Linder and Hyury Potter, “JBS Raciona Mascaras Para Empregados Após Frigoríficos Causarem Surtos de COVID-19,” The Intercept Brasil, August 6, 2020, https://theintercept.com/2020/08/06/jbs-frigorificos-mascaras-covid/. 45  Dom Phillips, “ ‘There’s a Direct Relationship.’ ” JBS USA, “Responding to COVID-19,” https://sustainability.jbssa.com/chapters/communities/our-covid-19- 49  Veras Mota, “Covid-19 se Alastra em Frigoríficos.” 50  Straits Times, “One in Five Workers in Brazil’s Meat Plants Caught Covid-19,” August 19, 2020, https://www.straitstimes.com/world/americas/one-in-five-workers- 51  Charles A. Taylor, Christopher Coulos, and Douglas Almond, “Livestock Plants and COVID-19 Transmission,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 50 (December 15, 2020): 31706-15, https://www.pnas.org/content/117/50/31706. 52  U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, “The COVID-19 Pandemic and Rural America,” last updated December 2020, https://www.ers.usda.gov/ 54  Ana Mano, “Special Report: How COVID-19 Swept the Brazilian Slaughterhouses of JBS, World’s Top Meatpacker,” Reuters, September 8, 2020, https://www. reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-jbs-specialreport/special-report-how-covid-19-swept-the-brazilian-slaughterhouses-of-jbs-worlds-top-meatpacker- 56  Hearing of the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Health and Safety Protections for Meatpacking, Poultry, and Agricultural Workers,” March 2, 2021 (hearing transcript accessed March 5, 2021 at https://appropriations.house.gov/ subcommittees/labor-health-and-human-services-education-and-related-agencies-117th-congress/congress_hearing). 57  Rosa DeLauro, The Last Among Us: Waging the Battle for the Vulnerable, 2017, Harper Collins: New York, NY. The full quote is as follows: “It bears repeating that corporations do not feel free to poison us, sell us spoiled meat, lock our daughters up in ninth-floor sweatshops with no fire escapes, employ our underage sons in coal mines, force us to work thirteen-hour shifts without overtime or a break, or call in private armies to fire rifles at those of us who dare strike for higher wages is not because corporations experienced a moment of Zen and decided to evolve. No. They were forced into greater accountability and social concern by the legitimate actions of a democratic government. In other words, if we depend on good will, we are all screwed.” 58  André Campos et al., “Revealed: New Evidence Links Brazil Meat Giant JBS to Amazon Deforestation,” The Guardian, July 27 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2020/jul/27/revealed-new-evidence-links-brazil-meat-giant-jbs-to-amazon-deforestation. 59  Steinweg, Rijk, and Piotrowski, “JBS: Outsized Deforestation in Supply Chain.”  60  Greenpeace, How JBS is Still Slaughtering the Amazon. 61  Shefali Sharma, The Rise of Big Meat: Brazil’s Extractive Industry, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, November 2017, https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/ 62  Joao Fellet, “Coronavirus ‘could wipe out Brazil’s Indigenous People,’” BBC News, April 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-52139875. (accessed 63  Global Fire Data, “Amazon Region,” https://www.globalfiredata.org/regional.html (accessed July 25, 2020). 64  Foscaches and Klein, “Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana.” USDA, “The Meatpacking Industry in Rural America During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” December 20, 2020, https://www.ers.usda.gov/covid-19/rural-america/meatpacking-industry/.  65  Foscaches and Klein, “Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana.” 66  Greenpeace, How JBS Is Still Slaughtering the Amazon, 39. 68  Murphy, “Meatpacking Giant JBS Battles New Coronavirus Outbreaks.”  69  Laura Riley, “As Coronavirus Ravaged Meatpackers, Minorities Bore the Brunt. Now Worker Groups Say Tyson and JBS Violated the Civil Rights Act,” Washington Post, July 13, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/13/coronavirus-meat-tyson-jbs-racial-discrimination/. 70  Fendt, “The JBS Coronavirus Outbreak Is Officially Resolved.” 71  Roy Graber, “JBS Reports Record Net Revenue in 2019,” Watt Poultry, March 26, 2020, https://www.wattagnet.com/articles/39910-jbs-reports-record-net-revenue- in-2019?v=preview#:~:text=Net%20revenue%20for%20JBS%20reached,billion)%20for%20the%20full%20year. 72  Ana Mano, “Nordea Drops JBS Over Environment, COVID-19 Response,” Reuters, August 1, 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-jbs-nordea/nordea- drops-jbs-shares-over-environment-covid-19-response-idUSKBN24X3VD.  73  Christopher Doering, “JBS To Restart Plans for US IPO,” Food Dive, August 17, 2020, https://www.fooddive.com/news/jbs-to-restart-plans-for-us-ipo/583578/, 74 The National Review, “OSHA Taking Its Time to Issue COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard,” March 18, 2021 75 The White House. Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety. January 21, 2021. 76  President Biden took a positive first step on his first complete day in office, when he issued Executive Order 13999, “Protecting Worker Health and Safety.”"
            },
            {
                "answer": "In the United States, more than 57,500 meatpacking workers have contracted COVID-19 in 571 outbreaks, and at least 284 workers have died.",
                "question": "How many COVID-19 cases have been reported among meatpacking workers compared to healthcare workers in the United States?",
                "url": "https://www.motherjones.com/food/2021/03/a-covid-outbreak-at-a-california-meatpacking-plant-started-a-year-ago-and-never-went-away/",
                "scraped_text": "This story was originally published by the Food and Environment Reporting Network. A coronavirus outbreak at the Farmer John pork processing plant in Los Angeles County began nearly a year ago. But it never went away. In recent months, as the county has become a COVID-19 epicenter, in part driven by outbreaks at manufacturing facilities, the cases at the Smithfield Foods-owned plant have more than doubled—with more than 300 cases reported in January alone. The Vernon plant has been the focus of two state investigations and was cited in November for violations related to how it handled the outbreak last year. The workplace safety investigation found that the plant failed to adequately train workers or report virus-related data to public officials. Internal county and city health department emails, obtained by the Documenting COVID-19 project in collaboration with the Food and Environment Reporting Network (FERN), further reveal that the plant inconsistently reported cases to local officials and violated a state public health protocol even as the California investigation was underway. Currently, 784 workers at the plant have tested positive for COVID-19, including the new infections in January, according to county health department data. The total amounts to nearly half of the plant’s workforce. Five have died. It is the largest outbreak at any food-processing facility or other similar worksite in Los Angeles, according to the county public health department, and one of the largest meatpacking plant outbreaks in the country. The spike in recent infections since the November citation prompted state safety regulators to reopen an investigation at the plant in December. With California’s adoption late last year of more rigorous workplace safety standards, experts and labor advocates say more should be done to protect workers at Farmer John and other meatpacking facilities where the virus continues to spread. That includes vaccinating food-manufacturing workers, who became eligible to receive the COVID-19 vaccine in Los Angeles County on March 1. Given the more rigorous state standards, the facility should also be inspected again in person, “ideally without notice,” to “determine whether there are any repeat violations that would now fall under the scope,” said Mara Ortenburger, director of communication and research at Worksafe, a worker safety advocacy group in Oakland, California. “This is an incredible emergency. Workers are dying and their families are impacted.” In February 2020, when the Farmer John outbreak began, the plant was reporting worker cases to city officials, as well as to the county health department. Health officials use this data to pinpoint outbreaks and determine whether additional measures need to be taken to curtail the spread of the disease. But on May 6, Fredrick Agyin, director of the health and environmental control department for the city of Vernon, wrote to Greg Hernandez, the plant manager, saying: “Our office will no longer require Smithfield to submit the confirmed COVID-19 positive cases to us.” Agyin says that at the time, he was focused on helping the company get worker testing protocols in place. “Our point was really to pivot to how do we help them to stay open,” he says. In his May email, Agyin referenced then-President Trump’s April executive order on the meat supply chain, which, he wrote, “mandate[s] meat processing plants to stay open to maintain the continuity of the nation’s food supply.” However, the order did not directly require plants to continue operating but only authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to “take all appropriate action…to ensure that meat and poultry processors continue operations.” Agyin denies that he told the plant to stop reporting worker cases because of the executive order. Yet Agyin’s email meant that for over two weeks at the height of the pandemic’s spread in meatpacking plants, Smithfield was not reporting worker cases to city health officials. On May 19, after consulting with the county health department, Agyin walked back his directive and asked Hernandez to “report the COVID-19 confirmed cases that meet the outbreak threshold” of at least three cases. That month, Smithfield had also failed to appropriately report worker illness to state health authorities, according to the state workplace safety investigation. The company “failed to consider at least 303 COVID-19 illnesses of its own employees and contract employees of CitiStaff Solutions, to be work-related,” in violation of California state regulations, according to the November citation. “Smithfield has complied with all applicable COVID-19 requirements, including reporting requirements,” the company said in a statement. “It is our policy and practice to communicate and collaborate with local health departments and to comply with local mandates.” Inconsistent reporting of worker cases wasn’t the only issue at the plant. Later in the spring, county officials intervened after discovering that the plant was violating a public health order. Dr. Roshan Reporter, of the county’s Acute Communicable Disease Control Unit, wrote to plant manager Hernandez on June 6 about the company’s practice of “testing the employees and letting them return to work if the test was negative,” even if they were exposed to a co-worker who had tested positive. This practice violated the state’s Health Officer Order requiring anyone in close contact with someone diagnosed with COVID-19 to quarantine for 10 days. At the time, 166 of the plant’s 1,837 workers—residents of three counties—had contracted COVID-19. “Please do not use testing to return to work,” Reporter wrote. “This is not a dependable method to ensure that a person will not become infectious to others.” “Effective control of the spread of COVID-19 within worksites requires both effective control measures within the facility as well as assurance that ill and exposed workers comply with orders to remain in isolation and quarantine, respectively,” Reporter continued. “However, these measures will only be successful at protecting worksites to the extent that businesses and members of the public comply with protocols and restrictions.” Smithfield says that since the beginning of the pandemic it has followed federal guidance for critical infrastructure, including allowing workers who have been exposed to Covid-19 but remained asymptomatic and have not tested positive to return to work. The company also says that it complied with mandates issued by local health departments. (See the company’s full comments here.) Agyin says that after the company was contacted by the county, it changed its practices. In November, after a six-month investigation, California’s Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA) fined Smithfield and its temporary staffing agency nearly $105,000 for the violations, the “largest citation at a meatpacking plant nationwide,” according to the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) union, which represents meatpacking workers nationwide. The union said that at the time of the citation, more than 315 worker cases were tied to the facility. Cal/OSHA found that the company failed to ensure workers wore masks, did not train workers on the risks of Covid-19, did not ensure its workers were stationed at least six feet apart, and improperly reported data on the spread of the virus among workers. “You can see that in general their recording and reporting practices were clearly really inadequate,” says Worksafe’s Ortenburger, who said the violations “don’t point to a picture of a health and safety culture at the plant.” In response to questions about the Cal/OSHA investigation for this story, a Smithfield spokesperson said in an email that Cal/OSHA has “taken the surprising position that every single person working at the plant who contracted COVID-19 caught the virus at work,” which “completely rejects the clear evidence established by health experts that community spread exists.” The company has also said it plans to contest the citation. Smithfield has had 14 reported outbreaks at its meatpacking plants since the pandemic began, with over 3,600 worker cases and 13 deaths, according to data collected by FERN from news reports and public health agencies. The Farmer John outbreak is the second-largest for the company, and the sixth-largest at any meatpacking plant nationwide. In the United States, more than 57,500 meatpacking workers have contracted COVID-19 in 571 outbreaks, and at least 284 workers have died. Agyin says that outbreaks at workplaces like Farmer John have had an impact on the spread of the virus in Vernon, home to many other essential workers and businesses. “You have employees that never had the benefit of being able to stay at home and quarantine or isolate and then go into work,” he says. “The fact that most of these businesses were essential and people have to work, I think that really did have an impact on people testing positive.” Since the plant was fined, worker cases have more than doubled, according to data collected by the Los Angeles County Health Department. John Grant, the president of UFCW Local 770, which represents Farmer John workers, says that the rise in cases is in part due to the conditions inside the facility. When workers first fell sick in the spring, the company was responsive to workers’ concerns, he says. But soon, they “lawyered up” and the process has been “exasperating” since. Workers struggled for months to access personal protective equipment (PPE), and nearly a year into the pandemic have been asked to reuse masks and gloves, Grant says. “They’ll do stuff like remove tables for breaks or lunch” to avoid workers congregating, but as a result, “you have people like musical chairs … trying to wolf down their lunch, sitting next to each other on the ground.” And break times haven’t been staggered to allow for more distancing. “The breaks and lunches are petri dishes,” Grant says. When asked about the specific allegations, a Smithfield spokesman said via email that the company has provided PPE to workers throughout the pandemic and has staggered break and lunch times. Plant manager Hernandez said in a statement that “there is not a COVID-19 outbreak” at the plant, noting that there had been one positive worker case in the previous 10 days. However, the plant is still included in Los Angeles County’s list of non-residential settings with Covid-19 outbreaks. To curtail the spread now, Grant says that enforcement actions need to be ongoing and flexible to account for changing conditions inside the plant. “The infection contact points are like the virus. They mutate and change,” he says. A workplace safety investigator “is in many respects a photographer. And this is a movie, it’s not a snapshot. You’ve got all these moving parts. You need something that’s more dynamic.” For Debbie Berkowitz, the worker health and safety program director at the National Employment Law Project, the severity of this plant outbreak is emblematic of the meat industry’s handling of the pandemic as a whole and a remnant of the Trump administration’s lax approach to worker safety enforcement. Berkowitz, who was a senior OSHA official during the Obama administration and previously was the UFCW’s health and safety director, says the meat industry is accustomed to relaxed regulatory oversight. “[In other industries] OSHA fines and OSHA citations become a deterrent,” she says. But “after four years of the Trump administration signalling to the [meat] industry, no one’s going to hold you accountable for unsafe practices, [the] industry is emboldened. And they are going to fight and fight so they don’t have to make any changes.” In November, California passed an emergency temporary standard (ETS) laying out workplace safety requirements for protecting workers from COVID-19 that are more stringent than the existing federal guidance. The ETS, which went into effect December 1, requires employers to distance workers at least six feet apart, provide worker testing in the case of a major outbreak, reduce transmission risk through the use of PPE and physical barriers, and provide COVID-19 training to workers. On December 10, Cal/OSHA opened a new investigation into the Farmer John plant, which is still underway. Because Smithfield’s fine predated the ETS, it’s appropriate to inspect the facility again to see how it is complying with the new requirements, says Ortenburger. “It seemed that the inspectors didn’t have the tools at their disposal to be able to cite these really important COVID violations,” she says. “Some of that was built into the ETS to make it more straightforward for inspectors and more transparent for employers.” After Los Angeles County made food manufacturing workers eligible for the COVID-19 vaccine this week, the county health department said there will be dedicated appointment slots for those workers on Tuesdays and Thursdays at county-run vaccination sites. “We are partnering with people and organizations that not only reach these groups, but are also trusted by them,” said a department spokesperson in an email. “This includes workplace and community leaders, media outlets and promotoras [trained community healthcare liaisons] so that we can connect these community-based partnerships with vaccine providers.” Hernandez said that the plant has “established on-site third-party medical capabilities and we have begun providing a limited number of available vaccine doses to our employees.” The Biden administration may also soon take action to strengthen workplace safety requirements at meatpacking plants and other high-risk workplaces. In a January executive order, President Biden directed OSHA to investigate a federal ETS and, if it finds such a standard necessary, to issue it by March 15. President Biden, who as a candidate denounced Trump’s handling of workplace safety issues, has also ordered OSHA to increase its enforcement of existing standards. The agency has been criticized for closing complaints about workplace COVID-19 exposure and conducting few investigations. “I’m hoping that the new administration understands this challenge,” says Berkowitz. “The workers are still working shoulder to shoulder, elbow to elbow.” Grant says that moving forward, Smithfield should also turn to workers for ideas on how to curtail the spread of the virus inside the facility. “When you empower workers to identify and bring resolution to those problems, you’re able to stop this stuff,” he says. “That’s what’s missing in the bigger picture of all this.”"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Meat packing and nursing homes are both certainly correlated with higher rates of COVID cases, ",
                "question": "What industries have been reported to have higher rates of COVID-19 cases?",
                "url": "https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/WP_169-Ferg-Jorg-Chen-The-Knife-Edge-Election.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "American Politics Between Washington, Kabul, and Weimar  This paper analyzes the 2020 election, focusing on voters, not political money, and emphasizing  the importance of economic geography. Drawing extensively on county election returns, it  analyzes how spatial factors combined with industrial structures to shape the outcome.  It treats  * Thomas Ferguson is Professor Emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Boston; Director of Research at the Institute for New Economic Thinking, and a Senior Fellow at Better Markets. Paul Jorgensen is Associate Professor of Environmental Studies in the School of Interdisciplinary Programs and Community Engagement at the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley. Jie Chen is University Statistician at the University of Massachusetts, Boston. COVID complicates acknowledgements for this paper. When the pandemic hit, we accepted invitations to work under Chatham House rules with many statisticians and epidemiologists organized in several different working groups. Over time, physicians, reporters, former federal officials, and working people reached out to us in confidence to discuss issues of worker safety, sometimes at genuine peril to themselves. We learned a great deal from these discussions, though we cannot individually name anyone. We are very grateful to Servaas Storm for extended comments on a draft of the paper and to James Kurth and William Lazonick for many discussions. thank Arturo Chang, Edward Kane, Pia Malaney, Antonella Palumbo, Ryan Rafaty, Allesandro Roncaglia, Claudia Sahm, Lance Taylor, and Peter Temin for comments on various drafts. The paper represents the views of the authors and not any institution with which they are affiliated.  COVID 19’s role at length. The paper reviews studies suggesting that COVID 19 did not matter  much, but then sets out a new approach indicating it mattered a great deal. The study analyzes  the impact on the vote not only of unemployment but differences in income and industry  structures, along with demographic factors, including religion, ethnicity, and race. It also studies how the waves of wildcat strikes and social protests that punctuated 2020 affected the vote in  specific areas. Trump’s very controversial trade policies and his little discussed farm policies  receive detailed attention. The paper concludes with a look at how political money helped make  the results of the Congressional election different from the Presidential race. It also highlights  the continuing importance of private equity and energy sectors opposed to government action  to reverse climate change as conservative forces in (especially) the Republican Party, together  Keywords: political economy, voting, 2020 presidential election, Donald Trump, Populism,  trade policy, farm policy, political money, Joe Biden, private equity  JEL Classifications: D71, D72, G38, P16, N22, L51  As the returns trickled in on Election Night, 2020, the already deeply polarized American  political system began to melt down. A furious President Trump first tried to pressure Fox News  and other networks not to call the election in favor of his opponent and then began to implore  supporters to “stop the steal.” Over the next few weeks, as contributions rolled into various  Trump campaign vehicles from major donors in industries especially favored by the President,  notably oil and gas, the White House mounted increasingly far-fetched legal challenges to  individual state voting returns. After all were dismissed, the President and his supporters  continued to press their case via social media posts, public events, and demonstrations filled with  escalating threats and increasingly blustery rhetoric.1   For months before the election, supporters of Joe Biden and many other Americans had fretted  over the president’s many hints that he might not accept defeat at the polls. Though many details  remain shrouded in obscurity, it is clear that in the spring, various groups started talking about  possible remedies. Involved were leading figures in both business and labor organizations; many  avowed Republicans, and a variety of non-profits.2 As we will show later in this paper, widely  published claims before the election that Trump’s supporters in “big business” were abandoning  him were far from the truth, but the President’s “Stop the Steal” fulminations did alienate many  supporters. The resulting post-election elite consensus is perhaps best summarized by the  Conference Board, an old and very prominent big business organization: “On January 4, 2021,  the U.S. business community did something remarkable: through statements issued or organized  by the Partnership for New York City, the Business Roundtable, US Chamber of Commerce, and  National Association of Manufacturers, business leaders called on Congress to accept the results  of the Electoral College without delay.” Key military leaders had been signaling their tacit  agreement with this strategy even before Election Day, but in case anyone missed the implication  every living former Secretary of Defense signed a joint public statement that made headlines on  January 3.3 The message was clear: most of big business, labor and what Trump derided as the  On the sixth of January, 2021, what was now clearly a disjointed campaign to overturn the U.S.  constitutional order reached an explosive climax: crowds of angry Trump supporters burst  through police lines and entered the Capitol vainly hoping to prevent Congress from certifying  President elect Joe Biden’s Electoral College win. But for all the future trouble that the long  post-election trauma foreshadowed, from a clinical standpoint, the voting returns had hardly  changed: in most jurisdictions, turnout soared, but the margins differed only modestly from 2016  1This paper often collects most references at the end of paragraphs for reasons of space. The final days of the Trump administration have been covered extensively; a convenient source for many separate incidents together is the set of narratives published by (Axios, 2021), (Wolff, 2021), and (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021) and (Woodward & Costa, 2021), including the court challenges and the storming of the Capitol . We have tracked political contributions after the election and will analyze them in a subsequent paper.  2 The most detailed account is (Ball, 2020), but see also (Woodward & Costa, 2021).  3 (Washington & Spierings, 2021); for the former Secretaries of Defense, see, e.g., (Lamothe, 2021); for the military, cf. (Copp, 2020). See also (Carmiel, 2020) for an earlier public statement by top business leaders that marked a new – just enough to provide Biden with an edge bigger than any possible voting irregularities could  Where results did diverge, less than perfect polls along with the returns from specific areas  suggested that the swerve arose from unexpected quarters: far more Hispanics voted for Trump  than in 2016 – as many as 33%, 8% higher than in 2016; along with much smaller, but still  striking, percentages of Blacks, especially Black males.5 Trump’s advantage among white  women with some college or less education remained very high – 27 points more.6 While  Biden’s margins among both union members and affluent voters improved modestly on Hillary  Clinton’s, little heralded polls showed Trump retained a strong hold on the affections of very  affluent voters. Voters making more than $200,000 split evenly between Trump and Biden, while  voters making between $100,000 and $199,999 favored Trump by 58% to 41%.7 Perhaps the  most surprising outcomes came in races for the House and Senate. In both Republicans ran  stronger than expected, with many of their candidates running ahead of Trump.   In a political system so polarized that assessments of the economy now often display substantial  – though rarely overwhelming – dependence on partisanship, the flood of new voting results set  off near-cannibalistic rites of scrutiny and exhortation. Democrats debated whether criticism of  4 See, among many sources, CNN’s tabulation of election results, at (CNN, 2020a) or (Post, 2020). More Trump supporters appear to have voted on Election Day than by mail and counting the latter meant totals would change. The problem was anticipated, however, and networks and many analysts took that in stride. Trump plainly did not, seizing on the changing tabulations as more evidence of a “steal.”  5 The literature on vote shifts is voluminous and sometimes highly political. The subject is muddied by (mostly) small differences between various polls relied on in both election years; see, for example, the discussion in (Collins, 2020), but also (Griffin, 2020) and (Zhang & Fox, 2020) . Our reading of this literature is that there is more heat than light, in that basic qualitative facts only occasionally are unclear. For example, Collins suggests that Trump gained either 2 or 4 percent more votes from Blacks overall, with a larger margin among males. (Frey, 2020) reports a 6% difference change overall. Later estimates by (Ghitza & Robinson, 2021) for Catalist, a Democratic-oriented group with a large database of its own, suggest Biden lost about 3% of the two party Black vote from 2016, in an election in which turnout rose substantially. The basic finding seems clear enough.  No one disputes the huge change in Hispanic voting, only the reasons for it. The shift, again, varies by sources and polls. Catalist proposed 8%. See also the discussion in (Beard, 2021) comparing analyses of the Hispanic change and the figures in (Lenski, Webster, & Brown, 2021). That displays a graph from Robert Griffin indicating that most of the shift among Hispanics happened well before the Fall campaign started. More on that below. Note that U.S. Census usage of the term “Hispanic” has stimulated a large literature on race, culture, and related questions, with many authors preferring different terms and usages. See, e.g., (Navarro, 2012). The Census has certainly tried to respond to that discussion. This paper relies heavily on Census data and we perforce follow its nomenclature. 6 (Post, 2020); see also (Zhang & Fox, 2020): “’Trump support among women stayed consistent among non-college educated white women and evangelical women,’ said Kelly Dittmar, director of research at the Center for American Women and Politics. White women without college degrees voted for Mr. Trump with a margin of between 14 and 27 points, according to various election surveys the organization has compiled.”  Discussions of ethnicity, race, and gender would all benefit by reporting controls for stratification by income, which virtually no one does. The step would virtually always reduce the size of reported disparities.  7 Many accounts of exit polls report only a few levels of income. When fuller results are reported, the limitations of the commonly expressed claim that affluent voters backed Biden are clear. See, e.g., CNN’s more detailed exit poll breakdown, (CNN, 2020c). Biden won all the other, lower income cohorts, which speaks volumes about silly claims that Trump’s voter base was in blue collar workers. Cf. the discussion below on Trump’s support from private police or proposals to abolish the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE)  helped explain their failure to do better in Congressional races. Republicans and conservative  Democrats hurried to pin responsibility for the lackluster results on the Democratic  advocates of  social democracy, though with the Democratic victories in the Georgia Senate races in early  January and the popularity of the new administration’s first big relief package, that debate  By then, however, it was obvious that American politics only looked like the movie Groundhog  Day, in which the characters endlessly cycle through the same routines. In reality, nothing like an  eternal recurrence of same is in the cards, for either the U.S. or the rest of the world. Instead a  frightening combination of globalized production, deregulated finance, climate change, and the  wrenching effects of the COVID 19 pandemic is accelerating the famous spiral of world history.  It is bringing forward trends that otherwise might have taken decades to flower, intensifying  inequality at many levels, polarizing electoral cultures, and reshaping the world economy, while  posing a range of startling new challenges to countries and older great power alignments.   In both houses of Congress, the Democrats’ hold on power is razor thin. In the House, their lead  is currently a very shaky eight seats. In the Senate, their victories in the January special elections in Georgia boosted them into a dead heat with the Republicans, making their grip dependent on  Vice President Kamala Harris’ power to break ties. And even before the Democrats’ losses in  state elections in November, 2021, everyone in both parties was acutely aware of the disasters  that engulfed the last two Democratic Presidents in the midterm elections right after each entered  The result is a riot of speculation about the future of the country that still likes to style itself the “Leader of the Free World.” Many foreign observers and Democrats, who never warmed to  Trump anyway, keep wondering how he could possibly have rolled up more than seventy-four  million votes in 2020 – as he said, more than any sitting president in history. Conversely,  supporters of the former President and members of the Republican establishment advance all  kinds of theories, some quite outlandish, to explain how the Democrats managed to win.  Meanwhile everyone is pondering the long term implications of the Trump movement’s  transformation into an openly anti-system political formation uncomfortably reminiscent of the  Weimar Republic as well as the breathtaking way big tech companies selectively shut off access  to their systems following the storming of the Capitol. As the changes sweeping through the  international system become more obvious, new worries are also rising: in particular, whether  8 This paper has to stay focused on the 2020 election. We will analyze the 2021 results another time. obvious that many analyses of  those elections repeat mistakes made in 2016 and 2020. Many commentators, for example, claim that education was a decisive issue in Virginia. In fact, the Washington Post exit poll shows that voters asked which single issue they considered most important responded by naming the economy (33%) or taxes (15%) – which is twice the percentage of voters who named education (24). See (Washington Post, 2021). the shocking American exit from Afghanistan is a warning that the establishments of both  political parties are living in a fool’s paradise.  All this persuades us that a careful look at what happened in the 2020 election is not idle  curiosity. Elections, especially in money-driven political systems, are complicated affairs that  repay analysis at many different levels. That political money played a vital role in the  Democratic primaries was obvious even at the time. For example, regardless of their merits, late  entering candidates like Michael Bloomberg would have been ignored by the press and political  leaders, were they not billionaires. Nor could anyone except someone from the 1% ever have  garnered more than 12% of the votes in states culturally light years from New York City, like  Tennessee, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama, Utah, Texas, or Colorado after just a few weeks of  campaigning. Roughly the same holds for Tom Steyer, whose 12% of the vote in the South  Carolina primary would likely have been zero without all his money.9 Even more obvious and  more significant was the Golden Hoard of contributions that the Democratic establishment  mobilized to turn back Sanders and, with some qualifications, Warren. But for reasons of space,  we cannot try to unravel the primaries in this paper nor, because everything else would have to  get short shrift, can we analyze the behavior of investor blocs in the election in any detail.  Instead this paper focuses on voters. What factors from their side help explain the differences in  the presidential vote between 2016 and 2020? While the question is simple, getting the answers,  and, even more, presenting them in an accessible form, are not. One needs first of all to extract  important lessons from the long, often acrimonious, debates about the 2016 election. In our   view, these point to the desirability of a change in focus in how elections should be analyzed,  with far reaching implications for the types of data that are relevant. Then one has to come to  grips with how COVID 19 reshaped the entire context of the election, which requires discussion  of several important topics that have thus far received very little attention. Only then does it  make sense to assess the familiar economic, demographic, and other factors that analysts  We thus divide this paper into seven distinct sections. The first reviews previous work on the  2016 election. It explains why this paper concentrates on place, industrial structure, and related  variables to account for 2020’s outcome. A second long section looks at COVID 19.  We analyze  how failed policy responses led to sweeping economic and social changes, with heavy costs to  most of the population and dramatic alterations in the distribution of healthy, wealth, and income  Sections 3, 4, and 5 set out our formal spatial model of 2020’s differences from 2016. The  discussion is designed to be widely accessible; the actual formal model is presented in Appendix  1. Section 3 critically reviews accounts of the election that suggest that COVID 19 did not matter  9 (CNN, 2020b); for Steyer’s campaign including various controversies involving spending, see, e.g., (Golshan, that much. We set out a new approach that shows it mattered a great deal. Section 4 explores the  unusual ways the economy influenced voters in 2020. We consider not only unemployment but  differences in income and industrial structures, together with demographic and other factors  more commonly discussed, including religion, ethnicity, and race. Section 4 analyzes Trump’s  very controversial trade policy. Section 5 describes how Trump’s rarely discussed farm policies  turned into his secret weapon, amounting to a dramatic political business cycle of remarkable  proportions. Section 6 analyzes the influence on voting of the waves of wildcat strikes and social  protests that punctuated most of the year. Section 7 considers what the future may hold.  We take  a first look at why the presidential election differed so dramatically from the outcome of the  Congressional elections. Building on our earlier analysis of Trump’s support within big business  in 2016, we also highlight the continuing importance of private equity and other champions of  free market fundamentalism in the Republican coalition along with the outsized importance of  sectors like coal and oil opposed to government action to reverse climate change.10  1. Learning From 2016: The Importance of Place and How To Analyze It  Our research design tries to take seriously lessons from studies of the 2016 election. At the time,  mainstream analysts were all but unanimous in rooting the Trump phenomenon in cultural  reactions against the Other: foreigners, women, and racial minorities, to the exclusion of  economic issues. But research that looked more closely into geography, economics, and local  industrial structures revealed more complex patterns betraying obvious economic influences.11  Comparative research into right wing populism has also identified parallel cases in other  Since 2016 studies of the American “dual economy” have piled up, making even stronger the  case for taking a more holistic view of the economy’s role.13 The already substantial literature on  trade, technological change and voting has proliferated. While we cannot critically examine all  this work here, studies of the 2020 election have begun to draw on it.14   To make further progress in understanding the Trump phenomenon, we think two moves  characteristic of this growing literature are especially important. The first is to take place – that is: geography – very seriously. The second is to look carefully at how particular industrial  structures in places link with broader social patterns in voting.  10 (Ferguson, Jorgensen, & Chen, 2018) exhaustively analyzes business support in the 2016 presidential campaign. 11 See the references and discussion in (Ferguson, Page, Rothschild, Chang, & Chen, 2020).  12 On the role of import polarization in other countries, see (Dippel, Heblich, & Gold, 2015), (Dipple, Gold, Heblich, & Pinto, 2021), inter alia. For the U.S. cf. (Autor, Dorn, Hansen, & Majlesi, 2020). This paper presses a more general case for labor market deterioration, roughly equivalent to a dual economy approach. For the dual economy, see, e.g. (Taylor & Ömer, 2020); (Temin, 2016); (Lazonick, 2016); (Lazonick, 2017); (Dipple et al., 2021) (Storm, 2017) ; (Ferguson et al., 2018); compare the discussion of local austerity on Italian voting (Cavallaro, 2021). 13 See e.g., (Temin, 2016); (Taylor & Ömer, 2020); (Storm, 2017); (Lazonick, Sakinç, & Hopkins, 2020) and the 14 See e.g., (Lake & Nie, 2021) and the discussion of trade in the election below.  Neither task is advanced simply by paying more attention to customary demographic variables  about cities or town, or tacking those on to data about voters’ occupations or even what  industries they work in. The problem is more complicated: to recognize that in the dual economy  that has developed in the United States, relatively affluent people in declining regions or poor  people in areas dominated by specific industries such as the oil industry are likely to react rather differently – in some cases very differently – from similar individuals in other circumstances. In  2016, for example, researchers who took the trouble to look found telling evidence of how place  mattered in election outcomes. An especially striking example was how voters in Congressional  districts with high percentages of defective bridges from years of austerity warmed to Trump – a  phenomenon that shows up in elections in other countries contested by right wing populists.15   2016 also offered striking lessons about how, in a society where the power of organized labor  has shrunk so much, industrial structures themselves help structure mass political choices. Where  the oil and gas industry was strong, for example, the Trump vote ran higher. The same was true  for agriculture, mining, coal, and manufacturing in general. A large high tech information sector  had a strong negative influence on votes for Trump.16 Evidence that imports negatively affected  Hillary Clinton’s chances in certain districts in 2016 is also compelling, and, again, shows many  Research designs taking place into account are in principle not complicated. Ideally researchers  combine survey data about individual voters with evidence about industry structures and regional  patterns of economic growth. In practice, though, the way American voter surveys are typically  One problem, which can be exaggerated, arises from concerns about the reliability of many polls  in recent elections. When the 2020 election turned out to be closer than most polls anticipated,  many commentators invoked the specter of 2016 and advanced sweeping claims about how 2020  confirmed the general uselessness of polls.  The conclusion is far too strong. The actual record of  serious polls in 2016 is much better than their reputation. Most national polls were not far off at  all – about 2 percent.18 Some crucial state polls were off, most likely because they  underweighted groups that went heavily for Trump, such as voters with high school educations  or less.  In a very close election in which the Electoral College gets the last word, that was a  formula for true embarrassment. And predicting who actually turns out to vote has always been  difficult, whether in 1948, 1980, 2016, or 2020. But as a celebrated German philosopher wrote  long ago, the owl of Minerva, the goddess of wisdom, flies at dusk. For understanding elections  afterward, errors of this kind are not fatal. One makes due allowance and continues.  15 (Ferguson et al., 2020); on the general importance of place in 2016, see especially (Monnat & Brown, 2017). 16 (Ferguson et al., 2020) for the industry and high tech influences. That data concerned congressional districts, not 17 (Autor, Dorn, Hanson, & Majlesi, 2017); (Autor et al., 2020); (Dipple, Heblich, & Gold, 2015).  18 For 2016, cf. (Gelman, 2016); for 2020, (Gelman, Morris, Vittert, & Xiao-Lee, 2020).  The more intractable problem arises from the high cost of quality, nationally representative  social science surveys, such as the American National Election Survey – widely esteemed as the  gold standard for understanding electoral behavior. These are superb for what they are designed  to do, which is to represent a true cross section of voters (and non-voters) in the country as a  whole. But they face limits on feasible sample sizes: they cannot afford to poll in depth all over  the United States. Inevitably, in jurisdictions with small populations, only a handful of voters  find their way into the samples. That creates difficulties for using them to generalize about local  influences. Vast, dense areas like New York City or Los Angeles likely contain more than  enough cases to do this. By contrast, in Alaska, good luck finding, for example, even one Native  American; remote rural areas in general pose a problem, though they are important for  understanding the Trump vote. The need to safeguard the privacy of respondents adds a hurdle.  Information about areas other than the Congressional district in which a respondent lives is  protected. These problems create serious technical problems with survey weights optimal for  multilevel models of the type we would prefer to run. Nor does it help that in contrast to work in  regional science, the special statistical problems of analyzing areas spatially adjacent to each  other are not widely appreciated in political science or economics.19  These caveats come with a silver lining: Where place is a central concern, not too much is gained  by waiting for the major social science national election surveys to open to researchers. They are  not designed to address many problems that most interest us. This paper, accordingly, tries to  make a virtue out of necessity. Our universe of analysis is by design frankly spatial: the more  than 3,000 counties of the United States, analyzed via a research design that takes explicit  account of the states each is located in. Formally our model is a spatial regression model with  separate intercepts for each state. The technical details are in the Appendix; our main text strives With the qualification that data about individual counties are sometimes imperfect, this focus  suggest a host of factors mattered that rarely appear in accounts of the 2020 vote that rely on  individual poll responses. This point holds with special force for conclusions from election night  exit polls, though the problem also afflicts even very good social science surveys. The exit polls,  for example, said virtually nothing about the impact of the Trump tariffs and retaliatory measures  these triggered from China and other U.S. trading partners on voters. They mostly seem not to  have asked the question. Nor, a fortiori, did they offer any hints on the importance of the  remarkable system of agricultural subsidies that the administration quietly set in motion to  cushion farmers from the effects of its China policy. Amounting to one of the greatest political  business cycles of all time, these passed under the radar of most analysts on election night and  after, even as pundits puzzled over the immense Trump vote.   19 See the discussion and references in (Ferguson et al., 2020). A good general account of spatial statistics is (Cliff & A focus on space also throws sharp new light on Trump’s economic appeal to many voters.  Nothing was normal about the economy of 2020. But that makes even more valuable the ability  to isolate the effect of small area differences in economic growth on voting in both the short term  and over longer periods of time. Both of these approaches are illuminating, as we will see. The  spatial emphasis also affords high resolution accounts of COVID 19’s differential effects on  particular areas. We can analyze not only how county differences in COVID cases mattered, but  also consider effects of the U.S. K-shaped recovery that have so far received little attention from  election analysts, such as the waves of labor protests and wildcat strikes spawned by the grave  threats to worker safety and deepening of inequalities that the pandemic brought.  We are particularly interested in understanding how protests associated with the Black Lives  Matter movement and the police killings that inspired it affected the election. Finally, attending  to space throws sharp new light on how industrial structures shaped the 2020 vote. Though some  thorny data problems require care, it is likely that not only vertically, but horizontally, industrial structures often mattered not just for investor blocs, but mass politics. While many analysts  noticed that higher income voters turned toward the Democrats in 2016, few pondered the  sectoral composition of these shifts. The consequence is that the historically specific mainsprings  of the system’s political economy get lost in vague generalities about higher or lower income  It is possible to overplay even strong hands, however. A focus on analyzing specific areas does  mean some very significant questions are virtually impossible to address. The most important  come from the simple fact that all our findings are about aggregates. The literature on the  “ecological fallacy” in statistics is very long. The way patterns at aggregate levels translate into the behavior of individuals is often far more complicated than readily imagined. Often what  appears to be a straightforward inference from general results to specific voters is deceptive.  Before surveys became ubiquitous, for example, election analysts often drew their evidence  about how specific ethnic groups voted from returns in precincts where the group lived en masse.  That skipped past questions about whether voters in less concentrated areas might be different or  whether other groups in the district might alter their behavior in response and change overall  results. Similar mistakes are easy to make with county data.20    An issue of this sort relevant to the Trump phenomenon concerns the much discussed question of  the roles race and sexism plays in his appeal. That the former President went out of his way to  invoke stereotypes to fire up his “base” is obvious by now, one hopes. His various appeals to  white supremacy – some coded, many rather less so – certainly helped bring some voters to him.  So did his targeting of specific women in public life and the news. But strong claims entered by  many mainstream analysts that these factors powered the whole vast movement we think are  plainly wrong: direct comparisons using poll data for individual voters show economic factors  20 The classic paper is by (Robinson, 1950); the literature since is enormous.  were also important.21 Careful attempts to measure how racial antagonism aligned with  individual voting decisions between 2008 and 2016 suggest that such sentiments increasingly  took the form of differences between rather than within the major parties.22 Or in other words,  whites harboring strong animosities toward non-whites tended to drift away from the Democrats  over to the Republican Party. Despite the very slight uptick in Black voting for Trump, we doubt  that that trend was truly broken in 2020. The question is not easily addressed in studies like  our’s, though our findings about unemployment rates once again underscore the importance of  Many other mistakes translating between wholes and parts are possible, indeed, likely. In 2020,  for example, some changes in counties’ votes may simply reflect differential turnout – an  important result, but not the same as the evolution of views within groups. And where protests  are heavy, it should be obvious that differences in final election results could stem from any  number of factors, ranging from real changes in views by supporters and former opponents or  differential mobilization rates. Conclusions about how religion factored into the vote are  hazardous for similar reasons, though on that subject we are reasonably confident of one  Data on individual county industrial structures also pose unique problems that have no  counterparts in individual surveys. U.S. government economic statistics mask data that might  yield information about specific companies. In areas the size of counties, the concealment is  sometimes obtrusive. One chillingly instructive example discussed in our Appendix 3 makes the  point: what appears to be the largest producer of a certain type of aluminum in the country  completely disappeared from Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for one county.    The many possibilities for misinterpretation raise yellow, not red flags, in our view. As we  discuss in Appendix 3, most of the problems involving masked data for industries have  workarounds, thanks to researchers who have used sophisticated techniques to reconstruct the  original data.23 Using the corrected data means some very small counties, mainly in Virginia,  have to be dropped from our dataset, but the accuracy of the rest is much improved. Our analysis  of the effects of the administration’s farm subsidies on producers of grains, fruits, and vegetables escapes the problem entirely, since we rely on new data produced by agricultural economists  where masking is unlikely to be a problem. We acknowledge that our estimates for livestock are  more problematic, but they concern only one industry and, as we explain below, there are  reasons to believe our estimates are likely not far off the mark.  Concerns about aggregate inferences also need to be kept in proportion. Social scientists, and  especially economists, have long debated the need for microfoundations. We are skeptical of  22 See the evidence from the American National Election Surveys for those years in (Ferguson et al., 2020). 23 See the discussion in Appendix 3; the basic source is (Eckert, Fort, Schott, & Yang, 2021b) and their data Appendix to that paper. (Eckert, Fort, Schott, & Yang, 2021a).  general cases for that, but not for voting studies.24 Ideally one would like to reintegrate aggregate results back into specific accounts of how individual voters are affected. Given the problems  with surveys and data, though, that implies more than one paper. Meantime one has to start  somewhere: we think it is sensible to proceed while keeping careful watch on individual surveys,  in all their imperfections, even if their data cannot be directly linked to the broad patterns under The mutual conditioning between method and object in our study requires a few more comments.  Firstly, our research question is about the differences in voting between 2016 and 2020. These  we know in the aggregate are relatively small. Approaching the election in this way means that  the many cases in which views about Trump or the parties did not change recede into the  background. The caution is important, because it can lead to confusion: for example, the  evidence of great enthusiasm in 2016 for Trump in areas where oil and gas interests bulked large  is very strong.25 The President delivered for the industry in high style once he took office, but it is unlikely that he made many new converts in 2020 – probably everyone in the sector and many  who lived off its fruits were on board already. Finding that his vote changed little in these areas  does not mean that the voting bloc or the oil concerns were not important. It just means their  influence did not change much over four years. Certainly, as discussed below, the ranks of his  contributors show Trump’s powerful appeal to oil and gas interests. The principle holds for  several other groups, as will shortly be evident. A few, notably coal, also faced strong campaigns  mounted by green political groups that rather clearly affected voters likely not affiliated with the industry in some districts. Given the many continuities in the vote, an accumulation of small  changes is more likely than dramatic new evidence of major sectoral or group shifts – though  Secondly, our focus on counties inevitably raises a question about spillovers across borders. It is  surely reasonable to ask how localized the effects and causes that we analyze really are.  Whether, in other words, some people working in counties might live (and thus vote) in one of  Our answer is twofold. First, in principle of course they might. But there is a second reason to  take this possibility seriously. As our Appendix 3 explains, most of the industrial data we and  others rely on reflects establishment employment totals, rather than residential counts. To see the  difference, just reflect on what that means for Manhattan: all those people working in  skyscrapers downtown are counted as employed in New York county (Manhattan), even if they  reside in one of the nearby counties and thus vote there.   24 See, on the general position, esp. (King, 2012)  25 (Ferguson et al., 2020). Note that financing patterns for Trump’s 2016 campaign changed considerably over time. Contributions from both oil and coal rose sharply in the closing “populist” phase of his turnaround campaign. the discussion and Table 6 in (Ferguson et al., 2018).  The problem, though, is less than meets the eye. We will bypass one obvious retort, that if you  are trying to identify counties where, for example, finance is important, you could do much  worse than use the raw figures. We will just stipulate the desirability of focusing on voting bases. Instead, we note that we can compare residential and establishment differentials for every  county; these suggests strongly that the disproportion in New York is uniquely large, with a few  other urban agglomerations showing the syndrome to a lesser degree.   More broadly, the “neighborhood” problem is one of the major reasons we routinely employ  various spatial models when we analyze our data. These take account not only how neighboring  areas behave, but also of patterns of errors. These methods should catch many kinds of  spillovers, especially since most U.S. counties are substantially larger than towns. They stretch  for good distances, so that everyone is not constantly transiting over nearby borders. But to be  safe, rather than sorry, we run our regressions with dummies for New York, Kings, and Bronx  counties, which our tests indicated may have unique problems of disproportion. The results did  This paper’s focus on county data also comes with a real benefit: U.S. counties are very  numerous. Their abundance offers real advantages for testing research findings from many  different fields: not simply history and political science, but economics, sociology, and  geography. Each of these disciplines approaches elections in somewhat different ways. They  sometimes depart from radically different premises and lavish most of their attention on  particular forms of data, with little consideration of what other fields do. Fair tests of the  different points of view thus require sorting through many variables. Small sample sizes can  paralyze such efforts, but with more than 3000 U.S. counties, genuinely synoptic efforts are  possible, despite the well-known statistical hazards all such efforts can encounter. The broad  range of approaches, though, means one has to be prepared to consider many variables.  A final qualification is in order. Because Donald Trump and government policies figured so  significantly in the chain of catastrophes COVID touched off, discussion of the pandemic and the  economy has already generated a large, often highly partisan, literature. The role of experts, the  President, lockdowns, state governors, vaccines – almost every topic is now intensely  ideological. Even basic facts are often contested. Because this is a paper and not a book, we have  to move swiftly through many topics to focus on those that mattered most directly. Alternative  interpretations and many details all have to be treated in footnotes, to the extent we can consider  them at all. We have to save space to discuss factors that have received little or no attention as  possible influences on the election, such as the wave of wildcat labor disturbances – many over  health and safety issues – that COVID spawned. Those have been treated in no election analysis.  Our spatially centered analysis of Biden’s narrow victory rests on a statistical model of the  change in the percentage of the total vote Donald Trump received in each county between 2016  and 2020.26  To make our discussion as accessible as possible, we set out our formal model in  Appendix 1; Appendix 4 displays a map of the differences across the entire United States. Our  main text here reviews and critically analyzes the many factors that have been invoked to explain  the election’s outcome by other analysts and explains our reasoning and data.   In early February, 2020, the Trump team’s own polling indicated that Trump would sweep to  victory on the strength of his economic record. The calculation was that while the President  would “lose on personality,” his economic record was so strong that he would “win in a  Bob Woodward’s account of his private conversations with the President demonstrates that top  American officials knew far more than they were saying from very early on, but details of who  knew what and exactly when remain shrouded in obscurity.28 It does not help that two features of  the disease – the role of airborne transmission in spreading it and the fact that many people  carrying it displayed no symptoms but could pass it along to others – sowed early confusion. The  uncertainty helped sustain illusions to which many policymakers and interested lobbies were  deeply attached and, because ventilation changes in buildings and workplaces would be very  costly, gave many interested parties reasons to dig in.  In the end, though, the plague’s swift and relentless spread provided the perfect squelch to  postmodern claims that decisions rendered by hierarchies of credentialed experts settle questions  of what is real. In a globalized world, the disease took off with the speed of jet aircraft,  regardless of whether national medical authorities acknowledged airborne transmission or not.  Some Pacific Rim countries, with greater experience of internationally transmitted diseases and  closer links to China, reacted fast, shut down airports and economies, encouraged mask wearing,  and launched intensive campaigns to test, trace, and isolate cases.29 Until vaccines arrived – most  were slow to take those up, sometimes for the excellent reason that vaccines were expensive and  rationed – these countries stood out as paragons of intelligent policy.   But most of the world, including financial markets, could not quite believe what was happening  until the toll of the sick and dying made it impossible to continue with business as usual. In  Austria, Italy, and many other countries, national authorities were loath to close ski resorts,  sporting events, and other seasonal activities that packed crowds of people into small spaces and  26 Like many other analysts, we do not include Alaska in our sample. The peculiar nature of the state’s organization and the difficulties that creates for linking data from many sources creates prohibitively high barriers. 27 (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021), pp. 51-52; the quotations are from Brad Parscale to Trump and are on p. 52. implied balancing out of personal and economic factors is very close to the view of voting in 2016 in (Ferguson et 29 The literature on the diffusion and efforts to remediate COVID is far too large to survey here. We are struck by how differently countries fared at various times. A fine comparative review is (Storm, 2021b), one of the few to take full account of the many years of cuts in health care budgets in many countries. For COVID, we use the statistics compiled at https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data No set of COVID statistics is innocent but debating details were vital for local economies. The result was a rash of super-spreading incidents and virulent  As the scale of the impending disaster became clear, business groups and allied experts around  the world began speaking up about dangers arising from even temporary shutdowns of the  economy. Prominent industrialists of the European Business Roundtable, German economic  experts, and many U.K. Conservatives all piped up about the potential threats to social order that  could arise from prolonged unemployment. They derided ideas that the most reliable way to save  the economy was to save lives and looked for ways to avoid shut downs.30   Evidence on the record and from investigative reporting suggest that many top political leaders  and health experts were aware from very early on of the possibility that the disease might spread  through the air. Regardless of what the World Health Organization did or did not know or say,  social media, reports from cruise ships in which passengers who never left their cabins still  became ill, and other forms of news across countries crackled with warnings. Even if doubts  remained, at least the potential importance of masks was fairly obvious, simply from watching  how China and other Pacific Rim countries were successfully combatting the disease. Not for  nothing did White House China experts quickly don masks and stick with them, while many  individual doctors, nurses, and some official experts proposed wearing masks as prudent  precaution.31  But the vast extension of globalized supply chains meant that most western  countries had off-shored production of masks and other personal protective equipment to China  and other developing countries. Those far off lands faced problems of their own ramping up  production to meet surging domestic demand. The embarrassment of admitting this in public  would have been great.32 It would have raised fundamental questions about the wisdom of so  much off shoring and whether national crash programs were necessary. After a generation of  Neoliberalism, however, ideas of special government run programs to produce any but high tech  products were anathema to governments in the west. Though governments sometimes invoked  war time analogies, they only rarely followed through.   Grasping at straws was easier and stirred up less trouble. Not only political and business leaders,  but many national medical authorities chimed in that masks would not help. More than a few  30 For the Roundtable, see (Milne, 2020); for Lars Feld, (Seibel, 2020); for the Netherlands, whose Prime Minister wavered, see e.g., (Cohen, 2020); for the UK, (Shipman & Wheeler, 2020).   31 Cf. the transcript of the interview with former Trump NSC China adviser Mathew Pottinger, (CBSNews.com, 32 Pottinger, (CBSNews.com, 2021), is clear on the role domestic shortages played in the advice the CDC, Anthony Fauci, and other medical advisers rendered in public early in the pandemic. The slowness of the CDC to acknowledge airborne transmission has since attracted considerable adverse comment. We ourselves know American researchers or officials who received warnings about airborne transmission early in the pandemic, including at least one very senior adviser who had gathered important evidence directly.  politicians and business figures in Sweden, Netherlands, and UK at least coquetted with notions  of allowing the disease to run its course in hopes of rapidly attaining “herd immunity.”33   At the time, relations between the White House and U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson were  unusually warm. Trump had endorsed Johnson’s challenge to take over as leader of the  Conservative Party. He had also cheered on the aggressive “Leave” campaign that carried  Johnson to victory in the December, 2019 British election. The American President, a strong  champion of “free enterprise,” so consistently downplayed the hazards of COVID 19 that some  critics, such as Thomas Friedman of the New York Times, eventually described him as really  In any case, the President’s misgivings about lockdowns were clear from the earliest days, as  were some sources reinforcing his thinking.  Trump consulted regularly with a “Kitchen  Cabinet” of business leaders that he trusted more than federal bureaucrats and policymakers in  D.C. Press reports instanced Rupert Murdoch, a force in both the UK and the US press, Larry  Ellison of Oracle, Blackstone CEO Steven Schwarzman, and some other Wall Street private  equity executives, as leading members. According to news reports, “the advice the president  receives from corporate moguls he trusts has been to worry about the effect of an extended  With cases rising, talk about herd immunity in the UK abruptly diminished when researchers  associated with the Imperial College published a statistical model projecting enormous number  of deaths. This led to a painful reappraisal and a decision to lock down.36 That news reverberated  As COVID cases galloped ahead in the U.S., “the president continued to be surrounded by  divided factions even as it became clearer that avoiding more aggressive steps was not tenable.  Mr. Trump had agreed to give an Oval Office address on the evening of March 11 announcing  restrictions on travel from Europe, where the virus was ravaging Italy. But responding to the  views of his business friends and others, he continued to resist calls for social distancing, school closures and other steps that would imperil the economy…Always attuned to anything that could  trigger a stock market decline or an economic slowdown that could hamper his re-election effort,  Mr. Trump also reached out to prominent investors like Stephen A. Schwarzman, the chief  33 For the UK, (Shipman & Wheeler, 2020); for the Netherlands, (Cohen, 2020); for Sweden, (Bjorklund, 2020) is revealing on government officials’ real calculations, though it takes no notice of the early comments of the Swedish member of the European Business Roundtable in (Milne, 2020).   34 (Friedman, 2020); see also  (Wilson, Diaz, & Klein, 2020), for clear evidence that Trump administration appointees pursued that strategy. We expect that as more files become public, evidence on this point will grow. Atlas, another controversial Trump adviser, was an outspoken admirer of Sweden and herd immunity  (Abutaleb & 35 (Dealbook, 2020), quoting the Times White House correspondent Maggie Haberman. For Ellison, see, e.g., (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021). References to the Kitchen Cabinet are strangely absent in the latter work. 36 (Shipman & Wheeler, 2020); more recently dramatic testimony about the UK by former Boris Johnson adviser Dominic Cummings has brought new attention to the story. We leave this discussion for another time.  executive of Blackstone Group, a private equity firm. ‘Everybody questioned it for a while, not  everybody, but a good portion questioned it,” Mr. Trump said earlier this month. “They said,  Though both Trump and Johnson bent under pressure as COVID cases ballooned, neither stuck  with lockdowns for very long. In both cases, business lobbying pressures to ease off were  powerful. Vice President Pence, whom Trump eventually placed in charge of coordinating the  administration’s response to COVID, repeatedly delayed crucial decisions for fear of “alienating  corporate America.”38 The White House also worked up cheerier economic models of its own  with the idea, according to reporters, of weakening the authority of its own medical experts.39  Stories and headlines in major news media vividly register the resulting decision trajectories:  “Tory grandees tell PM: it’s time to ease the coronavirus lockdown.” “A pincer movement of  Conservative Party donors, cabinet ministers and senior Tory backbenchers is putting Boris  Johnson under concerted pressure to ease the lockdown.”40  In the U.S.: “Conservative groups  advising White House push fast reopening, not testing.” Social media sites, half of them bots,  meaning they were simply reflecting messages from another source, echoed this claim. “Top  executives from some of America’s biggest companies pressed President Donald Trump to move  toward reopening the U.S. economy, while urging him to ensure that robust testing regimes are  in place, according to people familiar with the discussions.”41   The last set of headlines points to differences within the business community that became salient  as the number of cases rose. In the early days of the pandemic, prominent Silicon Valley  business leaders were prone to grandiose proclamations about how their technological prowess  could work miracles to fix the situation.  The precise miracles promised varied with their firms’  specialties. Some proposed new COVID tests they claimed could be scaled up to produce timely  data on who was getting sick and where.42 The tests that garnered headlines mostly proved  problematic: they were often not reliable, making high numbers of mistakes, both positive and  negative. Nor were many really that inexpensive. When the Trump administration abandoned all  interest in a national testing program, following an epic series of management failures and crony  capitalist profiteering, those efforts petered out.43   40 (Wheeler, Shah, Harper, & Calver, 2020); the second quotation is from that story. See also the artless Daily Mail: “Six donors including Phones4U founder John Caudwell and three cabinet ministers join calls for action”(Elsom, 41 (Lawder, 2020); (Holmes, 2020); (Fabian & Jacobs, 2020).  43 See the striking account in (Burleigh, 2021). The administration declined to use a World Health Organization test that became available before the pandemic had really hit the U.S. It did not want to do anything that would redound to that organization’s credit. The CDC botched its own test. Later efforts to work with Silicon Valley by a taskforce organized by the President’s nephew, Jared Kushner sank into a swamp, to put it politely.  Other firms pushed contact tracing of infected patients through cellphone apps, though this idea  inspired widespread resistance from skeptics who mistrusted what the firms would do with the  data.44 The possibility of partnering with the White House to build a website that desperate  Americans could consult to locate nearby testing sites intrigued several internet giants. But while  the firms realized that this venture could yield a treasure trove of data, they were wary of  repeating the disastrous experience of the rollout of the Obama administration’s Affordable Care  website.  Amid a saturnalia of behind the scenes lobbying, the big players first checked one  another and then pulled back.45 A consortium of major high tech firms that had been planning a  broad campaign for increased government support keyed to the idea that the U.S. needed a much  bigger response to China’s economic challenge abruptly retooled, to take advantage of the  pandemic.46 With less fanfare, key leaders of that effort also lined up with the Biden campaign.  All the while, of course, pharmaceutical firms talked up treatments for the disease or the  The Trump administration was closer to Big Pharma than most of high tech, despite occasional  bluster from Trump about regulating prices. Support for innovative technologies under terms  highly favorable to the companies was something the Trump White House was comfortable with.  Indeed, the strategy was time worn and not especially partisan: every single new drug approved  by the Federal Drug Administration for sale since 2010, for example, developed with important  federal government support, usually from the National Institutes of Health but sometimes other  agencies, notably the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.47 The administration moved  quickly to fund not one but a suite of vaccine candidates using procedures outside of customary  Otherwise, however, the administration hewed pretty much to the spirit of the pandemic laissez  faire favored by the President’s kitchen cabinet.  Trump was quite unwilling to superintend  major government efforts directed at ordinary Americans. The White House rejected a plan to  distribute free masks to people using the post office. It also declined to mount a large scale  national testing effort. Instead it rapidly devolved responsibility for combatting COVID to the  44 (Rita Rubin, 2020), for early contact tracing.   45 (Eban, 2020) has some relevant material, but our main sources came through investigative reporting. 46 (Klein, 2020); see also the FOIA memos and other material cited in (Webb, 2020).  47 (Cleary, Jackson, & Ledley, 2020); funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency has received much recent attention. See, e.g., (Burleigh, 2021).  48 (Burleigh, 2021). Her account shows how lame a common justification for the lax procedure – that the effort did after all develop vaccines – really is. Many key innovators received nothing for their work, while connected executives, scientists, and officials claimed huge awards. Right now the public image of the vaccine program treats it as a rousing success; more temperate views suggest that the number of candidate vaccines was really too low and that some rethinking about how to deal with pandemics is urgently necessary. Note that parallel efforts to produce remedial treatments did not meet with the same success and the vaccine roll out was much less than ideal. defects of private markets for vaccine production, see, e.g., (Monrad, Sandbrink, & Cherian, 2021). See also the notable series of articles on vaccine production by  (Lazonick, Tulum, & Jacobson, 2021).  states, clearly anticipating that state Governors, not the White House, would take the heat for  individual lockdown decisions, school closings, or mask mandates.49   Pitting states against each other to find and bid for supplies was predictably disastrous. State  health agencies had never been very large and years of austerity had enfeebled them still more.  In addition, state governors often preferred to marginalize them in favor of politically connected  new vendors with no track records in the area. Trump’s own public disdain for efforts to combat  the disease and readiness to treat lockdowns as violations of individual freedom diffused rapidly  throughout the Republican Party, greatly complicating crisis management by state governors.50  Neither did it help that so many people occupying high administration positions in health and  welfare were there not because of their expertise in those areas but because they could be relied  upon to fervently support conservative social values, such as opposition to abortion.51  How much support the administration’s vanishing act and overt contempt for taking precautions  against COVID cost it in the election has been disputed, but there is no question that Trump’s  handling of the pandemic disgusted many Americans, including many high level business  executives. For many of these, working from home posed only modest problems. For them and  other affluent – and mostly white – Americans who could afford to pay other people, many of  whom were not white, to shop for them, lockdowns and even school closings were relatively  tolerable, especially after they relocated to suburban homes.52  Not surprisingly, accordingly, prominent financiers and big business executives in capital  intensive firms or high tech were much more tolerant of lockdowns and open to formal  collaboration with medical experts than the Trump White House, whose disdain for even its own  health care specialists was already evident. Former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin,  who was then working in the background on behalf of Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic  nominee against Trump, for example, urged the administration and Congress to work together.  They should, he urged, “convene a small group of independent and respected public health  experts and economists to weigh…interdependent health and economic considerations. The  experts’ framework should reflect economic forecasts under different health scenarios and start  with the emerging consensus that the transition will be gradual, that large-scale testing is  essential, that different cities or regions may be on different timelines and that the guidance for  people with antibodies may differ from that for those who remain vulnerable.” He also urged  50 (Burleigh, 2021) is a detailed account, though many confirming analyses exist.  52 For who was able to work from home, see, e.g.,(Dingel & Neiman, 2020); (Mongey, Pilossoph, & Weinberg, 2021) add some important details. Some outdoor or transitory indoor jobs probably have low rates of danger. contrast, some white collar jobs may be turning into “Information Age blue collar positions”: notably teaching at all levels and vast parts of the non-profit sector, including much of the arts. Health care may share features of this, where random contacts with patients without much protection are likely inevitable. Intersectional studies suggest Hispanic women and Black women were especially hard hit by unemployment. See (Gezici & Ozay, 2020) A substantial literature suggests that women were disproportionately burdened by COVID’s impact, not least because working at home came on top of taking care of children and other problems.  much larger packages of aid to both individuals and small businesses than anything on the  administration’s radar. Remarkably similar to what President Biden later proposed, Rubin  suggested a multistage plan: a substantial first program for quick relief should be followed by  The White House had very different views. Often openly berating health experts, the President  and his key advisers initially favored a set of very modest relief and spending measures heavily  weighted toward big business and specific industries, such as airlines and hospitals, and a  temporary cut in the payroll tax. The latter would, of course, do nothing for workers who had  already lost their jobs and would accelerate projected shortfalls in Social Security.   The package pointedly did not include any significant support for restructuring the ways firms  organized work to keep their employees healthy.54 The administration’s main policy on that  score was simply to continue dismantling the Occupational Safety and Health Agency, which  had legal responsibility for regulating safety conditions in most industries.55 The administration  also looked askance at more than small expenditures to supplement paltry state levels of  unemployment assistance, suspensions of apartment evictions, or moratoria on student loan  payments. As key Republican Senators openly avowed, a major consideration was fear that  temporary support programs would reduce pressures on workers to remain employed – a goal  that hardly mattered for high tech and capital intensive firms, but was very important to the many  American businesses whose business models were built around abundant supplies of low wage  But Democrats controlled the House of Representatives and thus could not be ignored. When  they proposed and actually passed a much larger package of relief and support spending totaling  $3 trillion, the White House and Republican Congressional leaders dug in. The Republican  dominated Senate, with erratic White House support, countered with a proposal a third of that  size and flatly rejected a Democratic offer to split the difference. With the economy nosediving,  Amid intense infighting, the administration and the Democrats eventually hammered out a series  of compromise agreements in March and April, though with important adjustments later. The full  package comprised not one, but several major pieces of legislation and executive actions. Trump  and the Republicans had to accept some large scale relief assistance, including supplementary  unemployment assistance to many more workers than would normally have qualified for it,  temporary federal aid to pay costs of COVID testing and some medical bills, and a bitterly  53 (Robert Rubin, 2020). There is one clear switch with Biden: the emphasis on later deficit reduction. striking change in viewpoint, of which more another time. For a brief discussion of changes, see (Ferguson, 2021) 55 (Michaels & Wagner, 2021); (Rosenberg, 2021); a detailed critical evaluation of OSHA under Trump by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Inspector General is (General, 2021).  56 (A. Smith, 2020); a fine empirical criticism of claims advanced in the Wall Street Journal and other organs that the unemployment insurance provisions killed jobs by Casey Mulligan and Stephen Moore is (N. Smith, 2020). contested one time stimulus payment of $1,200 per person and $500 per child.57  When the  spring legislation’s short, imperfectly enforced moratorium on evictions expired in July, the  Center for Disease Control issued another on September 1 that ran until the end of the year –  well after the election. Some forms of unemployment insurance expired in July; they were  extended in September under prodding from the Democrats through the end of the year. In the  end, the additional stimulus payments prevented broad wage deflation and kept many Americans  The administration’s fiscal response to the pandemic thus represented a compromise that  compelled it to accept far more spending than it wanted. But its answer to the crisis had another  track that was much less equivocal – one that moved with the speed of light and on a scale that  took the world’s breath away. As bad news from Italy and other western countries piled up in  late February, financial markets swooned. A dash for cash of colossal dimensions began. Facing  calls for more margin and demands for loan repayments, many firms had to sell off U.S.  Treasuries and other safe assets for whatever the market would offer. Their urge to purge drove  prices down further, intensifying the squeeze with each turn of the downward spiral. Not just  finance, but the real economy threatened to collapse completely.  As markets melted down, the champions of laissez faire on Wall Street who had mocked Senator  Bernie Sanders’ “Medicare for All” as fiscally irresponsible abruptly lost any misgivings about  reaching into Uncle Sam’s wallet. Suddenly “whatever it takes” became the order of the day.  Almost overnight they embraced socialism of a very special sort: a gigantic government financed  bailout all their own. The Federal Reserve and Trump’s Treasury Department collaborated to  launch the greatest “single payer” insurance program in world history. The aim was to bring  financial markets back to life, not just in the U.S., but across the world. The Fed flooded markets  with “liquidity” using open market operations, bank repurchase agreements, quantitative easing,  and a brace of new special credit facilities and special purpose vehicles for purchases in  particular markets. Through swap lines with other central banks and other means, the central  bank also poured dollars out to world markets, snuffing out fire sales of assets and bank failures  elsewhere. The Fed privatized much of the bailout to large private asset managers like  BlackRock and kept widening classes of assets it bought, while pushing interest rates down close  57 The bill, however, did not require that patients be told their costs would be covered. Many hospitals did not, leaving people under heavy pressure for no legal reason. See (Farmer, 2020).  58 (Levine & Bresnahan, 2020); (Cochrane & Tankersley, 2020); (Emma & Levine, 2020). For the importance of low wage labor, see the dual economy literature cited earlier. It is striking that the Federal Supplementary Poverty Measure for 2020, which reflects a broader range of federal support than the official poverty definition, produced a lower estimate of Americans in poverty. (Fox & Burns, 2021)  59 There is no end of literature on the Fed’s response to the pandemic. A good overview of some basic facts is (Congressional Research Service, 2021). For the contracting out, see, e.g.,(Podkul & Lim, 2020) and (E. Brown, 2020) . The economic issues are mostly obscured in the literature, but see the series of papers Edward J. Kane for the Institute for New Economic Thinking, esp. (Kane, 2020).  The massive interventions, backed by a provision in one of the fiscal packages providing $454  billion dollars to the Treasury to absorb any Fed losses, dramatically reconfirmed the Fed’s  status as the world lender of last resort. The effort was so successful that in the end most special programs barely were needed and could be rapidly wound down.60 The rapid fall in interest rates  made issuing new private debt very cheap while also raising the values of firms’ discounted  future cash flows. The result was a wave of new private debt issuance, a dramatic stock market  revival, and new rounds of corporate takeover bids. In effect, the central bank was indirectly  financing the restructuring of the economy by private firms by providing selective access to  credit, even as soaring unemployment and short time work wrecked the lives and livelihoods of  Resonant promises that the bailout would help “Main Street” along with Wall Street were  hollow: even the parts of the package that were supposed to be reserved for small businesses  went heavily to affluent clients of major banks responsible for making the loans.61 The result was  the eerie K shaped recovery: news reports spotlighted gains to billionaires’ wealth and income in  the same breath as they tracked ever rising unemployment, small business shutterings, and  COVID ravaging through low income and minority communities and nursing homes. Statistics  compiled by the Federal Reserve indicate the extent of the upward shift in wealth to the 1% that  60 (Congressional Research Service, 2021). For the details of the Treasury support for the Fed, cf.(Wiggins & 61 (O'Connell, Dam, Gregg, & Flowers, 2020), among many sources. ProPublica published a notable series of articles available on its website: https://www.propublica.org/ including racial disparities in lending under the Total Net Worth of the 1%: The Big Jump Under COVID  Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (US), Total Net Worth Held by the Top 1% (99th to 100th Wealth Percentiles) [WFRBLT01026], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis;  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WFRBLT01026, August 16, 2021.  With some obvious exceptions -- airlines, tourist facilities, retail stores, restaurants, and other  sectors hard hit by lockdowns or the collapse of demand for their products – white collar  executives were mostly able to work remotely from comfortable homes and continued to be paid.  While they toiled, their stock holdings and pension funds soared in value as the stock market  rocketed back up. Meantime vast numbers of small businesses suspended operations, cut back, or  failed. Pushed to the wall, individual owners laid off workers or put them on short time. Only  rarely able to get loans from banks, owners of small enterprises, like many of their employees,  rolled up credit card debt. Major parts of the non-profit sector, along with many in arts, found  themselves in the same situation and without a lot of help. See Figure 2, which shows that until  the Biden administration took over, the percentages of families losing income varied heavily by  social class and were only modestly recouped by jobless benefits.62  62 We are grateful to Dr. Claudia Sahm for the chart.   The Trump administration had quite deliberately downgraded the Occupational Health and  Safety Agency since taking office. The haste with which the agency rolled back existing  regulations, and its failure to issue emergency rules or even enforce existing regulations  eventually became a scandal, albeit a very low key one.63 Though steep racial and ethnic  disparities in exposure to occupational hazards were obvious, interest in safety issues by most of  the media was very minimal, even from news outlets and reporters who in other contexts rushed  While some outdoor construction jobs were perhaps not too dangerous, much indoor work was,  with many jobs in specific sectors such as meat packing, being very dangerous indeed.65 Given  all the holes in the U.S. safety net, especially the lack of regular medical insurance coverage,  many individual workers could not afford to take time off from work if they felt ill. They had to  show up to work because they needed the paycheck, endangering not only themselves but co- workers. A large subset of white collar workers whose routines involved intensive personal  contact also faced substantial hazards, unless or until their workplaces improvised some form of  remote work, as ultimately many educational institutions finally were driven to. The pandemic,  63 See the references and discussion above, but especially (General, 2021).  64 An exception was Bloomberg, on meat packing, as will become clear below.  65 (General, 2021); (Michaels & Wagner, 2021). Studies of occupations, though, suggest that construction work was in this respect, confirmed that many white collar jobs were firmly lodged in the lower tier of  Meantime, as unemployment soared to among the highest levels in the developed world, blue  collar workers, many of whom were non-white, struggled to survive. In many states  unemployment benefits were meager and health insurance, even with special temporary federal  support, was less than complete. Few enterprises tested very much for COVID; small ones could  not afford to, while many bigger businesses simply refused to do more than the law required. We  are sorry to report that medical safety device experts have related to us how in their  conversations with corporate managements, many executives stated forthrightly they would not  do more than the law required. At Amazon, which expanded fabulously during the pandemic, a  senior executive with a distinguished record resigned after the firm fired employees protesting  safety conditions, citing “evidence of a vein of toxicity running through the company culture.”67   Meat packing and, ironically, hospitals and nursing homes provided especially shocking  examples of how regulatory neglect and the pursuit of profit combined to produce disastrous  outcomes. The industrial organization of the meat industry has changed greatly in recent  decades. Many meat packing plants now employ large numbers of Hispanic and Black workers  in relatively remote rural areas. In many, COVID raged out of control at least part of the time. In  some instances, white collar managers even placed bets on how many employees would sicken.68  Nursing homes were also heavily exposed and, again, Hispanic and Black workers, along with  In hospitals, many doctors and nurses were in touch via social media with physicians, nurses, and  analysts in other countries. Some knew virtually from the outset that COVID 19 almost certainly  transmitted through the air, though top U.S. health experts and the Center for Disease Control for  a long time did not highlight that possibility. But when they improvised masks for themselves  (good ones were virtually unavailable at any price) or their patients, they often met with stern  official disapproval. When they protested the lack of appropriate personal protective equipment  or encouraged colleagues and patients to wear masks, they were often threatened. More than a  67 For unemployment rates, cf. (Storm, 2021b); for workplace responses, (General, 2021); for levels of unemployment insurance, see, e.g., (Porter, 2021); for Amazon, cf. (Zaveri, 2020).  68 (Hirtzer, 2020); (Mosendz, Waldman, & Mulvaney, 2020) comment that: “The actual work of processing animal carcasses is hidden, tucked away in small towns and rural areas. Workers are often minorities and immigrants, who lack significant political representation. There are no exact statistics on how many undocumented or noncitizen workers are employed in the industry, but the nonprofit Food Empowerment Project found that 38% of meat processing workers were born outside the country.” For the betting pool, (Dorning, 2020). Overall rates of COVID in meatpacking and chicken processing were very high. See (Saitone, Schaefer, & Scheitrum, 2021). A recent House of Representatives investigation of meatpacking revealed that both fatalities and the number of workers who became ill were much larger than previous studies suggested (Telford, 2021).   69 (Artiga, Rae, Pham, Hamel, & Muñana, 2020). In some states, hospitals appear to have sent desperately ill patients to nursing homes. That artificially forced up counts of death rates for the latter, while lowering them for the senders. New York has been instanced as such a case, but there were others. See (Barker & Harris, 2021) few were dismissed by hospitals and clinics. OSHA remained virtually moribund; a long  campaign by very dedicated researchers finally brought the airborne character of the virus to the  attention of the CDC, which only haltingly recognized it.70   Meantime American workers who suspected they were at high risk at work had to find ways to  save themselves. With virtually no publicity, many tried. In perhaps the least appreciated chapter  of COVID’s deadly surge, a wave of wildcat strikes, walk outs, demonstrations, and campaigns  by workers welled up. Many focused on safety; others also sought hazard pay or simply higher  wages. A few protested dismissals of other workers.71  A labor reporter who realized that something unusual was afoot started trying to tabulate these  mostly unsanctioned workplace actions. He and colleagues began to track them. Our Figure 1,  based on a reworking of data from their website, displays trends over time. From the start the  numbers are impressive; by summer, around the time that a separate – and separately tabulated –  wave of protests and demonstrations associated with the Black Live Matter movement took off,  workplace protests soared, too. Though precise numbers are unlikely ever to be pinned down, it  seems safe to conclude that Black and Hispanic workers were heavily represented in these  protests. We converted geographic coordinates in the original dataset to yield counts by county  so that we could explore their impact on the vote. We discuss that below, when we consider the  much larger and better covered Black Live Matter movement.  70 The case of the first physician fired in the United States remains an object lesson. See the discussion in (Parramore, 2020); for many more examples of health care workers, see the entries for various days in Mike Elk’s Payday website at https://paydayreport.com/  and (McNamara, 2020); on the slowness of the CDC, see, e.g., (Gale, 2021) ; helpful also is (Molteni, 2021). Work by Dr. Kim Prather and her colleagues at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography and the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at UC San Diego certainly played a substantial role in bringing the airborne hypothesis to the attention of senior government medical advisers, but the government responses remained weak for a long time. Note that recognition of the importance of airborne transmission would entail substantial costs to refitting buildings and schools. See the discussion in (Gurdasani, Alvelda, & Ferguson, 2021) and the subsequent exchanges between Randi Weingarten of the American Federation of Teachers, the CDC, and the Department of Education in (Erickson, 2021).  71 For the basic data, see the account in (Leon & Elk, 2021) on the Payday website. We reviewed and corrected a number of entries for the time period we analyzed. Some critics have questioned whether this data series can be fairly compared to the government’s official strike statistics, which show much lower rates based on higher cut off points for the size of the strike and also benefits from large scale efforts obtain full coverage. A few also probably were sanctioned by one or another local labor organization, though since there are so few of those now, the numbers must be small. Our comment is that such criticism misses all the important points. We think this dataset most resembles the various indices compiled by historians for eras in which official statistics for strikes and protests were rudimentary; cf., for example, (Shorter & Tilly, 1974). It does not have to be perfect to be very informative. States Won by Biden or Trump and Number of Wildcat Strikes  3. COVID, Economy, Demography and the Vote: Empirical Tests  The wave of wildcat strikes was one among many the many effects of COVID on the U.S.  political economy and highlights the need to arrive at an estimate of how much of a difference  the pandemic really had on the election. With our focus on county data, that question can be  reinterpreted as asking how varying county rates of COVID 19 affected local electoral results.  Here, however, is the rub: this question has already been tackled by several groups of  researchers. As bizarre as it may sound, their conclusions differ sharply. Two carefully  researched papers, for example, reach divergent conclusions. One is confident that Trump’s  mishandling of COVID cost him rather heavily; the other concludes that COVID’s influence on  the vote was negligible. The small army of media polling analysts reach similarly discordant  The problem cannot be solved by simply correlating votes for candidates with county rates of  COVID. A famous pitfall of election analysis, committed all the time by talking heads in the  media, is to assume that views on issues are prior to individual decisions to support candidates.  72 (Lake & Nie, 2021); (Baccini, Brodeur, & Weymouth, 2021). For a survey of post-election polls, see (Masket, 2021), which concludes: “Not as much as one might expect.”  But in the case of COVID 19, the possibility of “rationalization” – that voters may adapt their  views on issues to positions espoused by candidates they like – is quite real. In 2020, Trump’s  public contempt for social distancing, lockdowns, and mask wearing transformed these everyday  precautions into bitterly partisan litmus tests.73 Some of his maskless and anything but socially  distanced campaign rallies and White House events even turned into super-spreader events. One  therefore has to reckon with the possibility that Trump voters may well have not blamed him,  regardless of local conditions. They could also have contracted COVID at higher rates simply  because they were strong supporters, which would not imply that higher rates of COVID led to  The classic statistical method for resolving problems of reciprocal causation (“endogeneity” in  the jargon) is to find a stand in for the explanatory variable that you suspect is contaminated  because it is both cause and effect. This proxy variable has to meet very demanding conditions: it  needs to be correlated with the suspect explanatory variable (in this case: COVID) but it cannot  itself exercise any separate influence on what you are trying to understand (Trump voting). The  cleaned up “instrumental variable” is then used instead to estimate the true effect.74   In practice resorting to instrumental variables is akin to treating COVID patients with untested  personal protective equipment. One can only try and hope for the best. There is usually no way  to verify the absence of indirect effects. The main piece of evidence offered is typically that no  one can think of any.75 The previous papers that have tackled this question represent  sophisticated and thoughtful attempts, but we are not persuaded that the instrumental variable  both use – the presence within counties of meatpacking plants or nursing homes – does the job.  Meat packing and nursing homes are both certainly correlated with higher rates of COVID cases,  but they are also industries that employ many non-white workers. Minority populations not only  contract COVID at higher rates, but our statistical analysis reveals that percentages of Hispanics  and Blacks both affect county voting results (see Appendix 1). Members of these groups were  also prominent in the wave of wildcat labor disturbances discussed above and those protests, as  we will show shortly, also affected voting. The evidence is also strong that firms in  sectors tried to hide the real totals of both illnesses and fatalities.76  As in some of our previous work on political money, our skepticism leads us to try a different  tack. What matters in 2020 are possible spurious correlations between Trump votes and COVID  incidence – Biden was not downplaying the threat or urging his followers not to take precautions.  As many have noticed, many U.S. counties display fairly heavy majorities for one or the other  candidate. For this paper, we use those lopsided districts as natural experiments. Let us accept  that Trump voters do not believe that masking and other non-pharmaceutical interventions matter  75 (Stock & Watson, 2010); cf. also the extended discussion in  (Ferguson, Jorgensen, & Chen, 2019). 76 (Baccini et al., 2021); (Lake & Nie, 2021) and the discussion below on meatpacking and wildcat labor disturbances for voting influences. For efforts to hide totals, see above, notes 68 and 69.  or even that COVID is real – any rationalization they accept that gets Trump off the hook for  making the pandemic worse suffices for our stratagem. What matters is that his supporters just  will not hold him responsible. But heavy Biden districts should be much less cavalier.   We separate counties into High and Low Biden districts. The former are counties in which  Trump won less than 40% of the vote; all other districts are designated as Low Biden districts.  Then we assess how rates of COVID 19 (adjusted for county population) affected each type of  district. The differences are dramatic: as our statistical results in Appendix 1 show, in High  Biden counties increases in COVID 19 rates drastically affect the vote. For every 1 % increase in  the rates, Trump voting falls by .16 from 2016. In the low Biden districts, rates of COVID do not  matter. Fully a quarter of all counties endured rates of COVID above 3.85, implying substantial  Our solution is not perfect – every county, after all, mixed Trump and Biden voters – but this  method yields a better estimate than other approaches based on aggregate data.  Because of the  Electoral College and peculiarities of the distribution of High Biden counties across states, we  are cautious, but it seems likely that the effect of Trump’s handling of COVID was indeed  substantial: possibly enough by itself to indeed have cost him some states and perhaps the  election. (See Figure 5, which graphs changes in Trump’s share of the vote together with the  States Won by Biden or Trump and Number of High Biden Counties  This assessment of how COVID affected the vote leads naturally to questions about how the  economy figured in the election. Theories about how economic considerations affect voters’  decisions come in many flavors, even excluding the very special case of Trump. Thoroughly  examining each in light of the extraordinary circumstances of 2020 would hopelessly complicate  our discussion. Here we cut to the chase and focus on what our empirical research suggests really  The problem in 2020 is understanding how COVID’s irregular but savagely bipolar economic  impact changed electoral behavior. Normally with an incumbent president running for reelection,  one would consider how the usual indicators behaved through time – rates of growth and  unemployment, real disposable personal income per capita, etc. But the economy’s shocking  plunge in the second quarter of 2020 from unemployment rates near historic lows to Depression  levels means that customary benchmarks are likely to mislead. Economic performance in the  tailspin that followed COVID will be overshadowed by questions of who or what voters blamed  and the key question of which candidate they trusted most to bring the economy back. That, in  turn, is likely to be heavily influenced by events and trends before COVID struck.  Our evidence suggests strongly that that is indeed the case. We tested a variety of models. All  point in one very interesting and clear direction. Actual economic performance in 2020 does  count, but not in any normal fashion. The economy’s slow and uneven recovery in 2020 from its  Spring nadir for example, does not seem to matter. County level changes in unemployment rates  between February and October, 2020, are not statistically significant for predicting Trump  voting. The rate of unemployment in October is important, but in a manner drastically different  from what one would customarily expect: counties with higher unemployment vote at higher  rates for the incumbent. For every 1 percent increase in the October 2020 unemployment rate,  Trump’s expected change of votes from 2016 increases by 0.06%. Given that rates in some  We think these results are less paradoxical than they look. Two other findings help to understand  them. First, the change in unemployment from 2016 through 2019 is very strongly related to  higher rates of Trump voting. That time period spans the full length of his term up until national  income collapsed. It suggests forcefully that many voters were impressed by the strength of the  economy that Trump constantly boasted about and when they voted they remembered that.  Another strong predictor of Trump voting in 2020 points in the same direction: counties with the  biggest increases in population between 2010 and 2019 show markedly lower rates of Trump  voting in 2020. For every 1% increase of the population from 2010 to 2019, Trump's expected  share of the vote decreases by 5.2%. We are hardly the first to notice this, but we think this fact  is best interpreted in the light of the evidence about the changes in unemployment rates in just  discussed. Not accidentally, as a group the counties that grew the most after 2010 also have  higher median incomes than most others over the whole period. We have already alluded to 2016  evidence suggesting that voters in places left behind by the Obama recovery were  disproportionately attracted to Trump’s promises to Make American Great Again (MAGA) –  even in the face of strong misgivings about him personally.  The 2020 evidence suggests that  We repeat that racism and sexism were plainly woven into Trump’s appeals to voters. But an  exclusive focus on those factors obscures a vital part of his appeal – one that we suspect may  matter for the future. Excessively partisan assessments of his record have not helped clarify  matters, either. Even through 2020’s roughest moments, the President and his supporters  trumpeted his success in achieving an economic revival of historic proportions – an upturn that  brought down rates of unemployment for Blacks, Hispanics, and other minority groups to levels  not seen in decades. Along with the big drops in unemployment came modestly higher  participation rates in the labor force and substantial increases in median family incomes in all  The President’s partisans typically credit this success to his outspokenly pro-business policies.  They point in particular to the giant business tax cuts enacted in 2017; his broad deregulatory  initiatives, his championing of oil and coal, and his dramatic turnabout from the environmental  priorities of the Obama administration. Critics riposte that the revival began under Obama and  that Trump administration mostly just went along for the ride. Nor was its strength measured as a  percent of GDP at all remarkable from a long term perspective.79 They also point to compelling  evidence that the tax bill failed miserably to deliver the promised spur to U.S. investment, with  much money flowing into corporate stock buybacks that simply enriched managements and  shareholders.80 Skeptics also note that deregulation and broad neglect of the environment are not  magic sources of new wealth; they are simply devices to shift costs on to customers, workers,  citizens –indeed now, on to the rest of planet earth. Assessments strictly in terms of income also  leave out entirely a vital point: that modest rises in incomes do essentially nothing for wealth  accumulation of Blacks and many other minorities, which continued to stagnate.81  We agree completely with all these strictures, but they skip too lightly past one very important  consideration, an error that some compound by their choice of a base year for assessing Trump’s  economic record. Normally it takes the better part of a year for a new President’s economic  policies to take hold. It thus usually makes sense to chalk up the first year’s economic record  mostly to his predecessor. But precisely because Trump piggybacked on the Obama boom, that  procedure is misleading. 2016 should count as the zero point, not 2017.  The reason is simple: though the Federal Reserve only formally enshrined its commitment to  moving preemptively against inflation a few years before Trump assumed office, in fact the Fed  had for decades has been almost preternaturally sensitive to any sign of economic overheating.  When it thought it perceived that, it typically moved rapidly – “preemptively” – to nip inflation  in the bud, usually by raising interest rates. The justifications for pursuing this policy changed  over time, though most had roots in some version of the Phillips Curve, a supposed tradeoff  between inflation and unemployment in the short run. The increasingly feeble evidence for these  rationales hardly mattered; over and over the Fed moved to choke off economic expansions when  78 For a representative survey of claims, cf. (Hilsenrath, 2020); for unemployment, labor force participation and other basic data, see e.g., FRED, the site maintained by the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank,  79 See the comparative statistics presented in (Amadeo, 2021).  80 For the meager effect of the tax bill, (Kopp, Leigh, Mursula, & Tambunlertchai, 2019); for the tax bill and stock the US still had a long way to go before reaching full employment, to the growing ire of many  critics, including, eventually, some within the Fed itself.82   When Trump assumed office, an expansion was indeed underway. But with inflation hawks  already circling, the question was whether the Fed would try to put the brakes on. In stark  contrast to his predecessors, Trump flatly refused to abide by the time honored convention that  Presidents do not openly criticize Federal Reserve policies. On many occasions he went out of  his way to warn the Fed against aborting the recovery. The political and economic establishment  in both parties was shocked. They reproached him, but he persisted.83   When Fed Chair Janet Yellen’s term as Fed Chair expired, Trump replaced her with Jerome  Powell. Fed Chairs typically strike the posture that they do not respond to political pressure.  When Powell raised rates soon after he took over Trump laid into him in public. Observers have  different views about the effect of Trump’s critique, not least because Yellen and some other  economists in and out of the Fed were indeed reconsidering the evidence about the Phillips  Curve and related macroeconomic rules of thumb. But to put it kindly, we doubt that the Fed’s  rethink – which continued under Powell – would have been so powerful so fast if the President  of the United States were not loudly commenting from the outside. Certainly Powell’s quick  move after he was appointed to raise rates tells against such hopes. We thus credit the statistical  studies indicating that under Powell the Fed did respond to Trump’s pressure to refrain from  raising rates. Trump, accordingly, should be given a share of the credit for the Fed’s willingness  to let the recovery run, even if he did not start it.84   We would not like to be misunderstood. It is absolutely true that by historical standards, the time  path of economic growth under Trump was not remarkable, even before 2020. For all the reasons  just mentioned, his overall economic policies powerfully reinforced the stark divides of  America’s dual economy. But as 2018 turned into 2019 and inflation failed to take off despite  story after story in the business press about the difficulties businesses were having finding  workers, only the most doctrinaire economists could cling to traditional macroeconomic and  central banking dogma. Wages were hardly rising despite the economic revival; that was  precisely the important result for theory. But in the short run incomes were increasing because  people could at last get more hours of relatively low paid work as employers became more  willing to look at people they had previously written off. People were reentering the labor force  and even long term rates of unemployment were falling.85 It was also easier to find second and  third precarious gig jobs, if people wanted them.   82 For the Fed and inflation cf. (Taylor & Barbosa-Filo, 2021). For the evidence that potential output in the U.S. has for a long time been far more than usually realized, see, above all, (Fontanari, Palumbo, & Salvatori, 2019a) and (Fontanari, Palumbo, & Salvatori, 2019b). See also discussion in (Meloni, Romaniello, & Stirati, 2021). 84 See, e.g., (Camous & Matveev, 2019); (Bianchi, Thilo, & Kung, 2019).   As rates of unemployment for Blacks, Hispanics, and other groups fell to historically low levels  before the pandemic, it should not be too surprising if, as can be documented from voter survey  data for 2016, some voters, including minority voters, concluded that Trump with all his failings  might still be the best ticket to economic recovery in 2020. County voting data indicate that  Trump’s percent of the vote fell tailed off from 2016 in counties with higher percentages of  Black residents – by about .024% for every 1% increase in the percentage of the Black  population. This is consistent with many reports of large-scale efforts by the Democrats to turn  out voters in those districts. We don’t believe that either those reports or the facts are  inconsistent with individual survey results earlier discussed indicating that a very small  percentage of Blacks (3%), mostly males, voted in slightly higher proportions for Trump.   By contrast, both our results and surveys suggest that Hispanics voted much more heavily for  Trump than in 2016.86 As we discuss below, the precise effect on Trump voting of the percentage  of Hispanics in counties varies with the level of social protests. But when those are controlled,  questions remain about factors emphasized by other analysts. Analyses drawing on surveys have  focused on how diversity within the communities falling within the broad Census designation  might provide an explanation. Many suggest, for example, that high proportions of Venezuelan  and Cuban immigrants living in Florida helped push up Trump’s vote, though some analysts  have pointed to the failure of the Democratic campaign in that state to emphasize issues like the  minimum wage which were likely important for Hispanics.87 By contrast, the big increase in  votes Trump garnered in Texas and in some other western states has triggered all kinds of  speculation. Perhaps the most popular accounts focus on traditional values that many Hispanics  Anyone familiar with the region is likely to find that explanation reasonable, but also a bit lame:  the allegiance of many Hispanics to traditional values had not kept many from voting heavily  Democratic in many elections before 2020. Or prevented many in those counties from showing  heavily in favor of Senator Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primary.  What really explains the changeover? Some polls of Hispanic opinion over time suggest that the  Democratic loss came mostly in 2019 and was not primarily an Election Day phenomenon.89 No  test of our’s can say anything directly about that. But some newspaper accounts suggest that  anxieties about employment in the oil industry played a role.90 It is a fact that oil and gas  industry payrolls for extraction in Texas peaked in 2018 and then started to decline rather  sharply.91 Some Hispanic voters in Texas also explained their vote for Trump in exactly those  terms.92 We thus looked carefully, but our results do not support strong claims. Tests of  interactions between high percentages of Hispanic voters and a substantial presence of the oil  86 As explained below, the Hispanic vote’s effect on Trump voting varies with the level of social protests. estimated coefficient for the percent Hispanic is 0.049 with no social protests. In other words, for every 1% increase in the Hispanic percentage of the population in a county, Trump's expected change of votes from 2016 to 2020 increases by 0.049%. The overall county average number of social protests  is 6.6. At the average level, the estimated coefficient (slope ) for the Hispanics % is .344, which means that for every 1%  increase in the percentage of Hispanics, Trump's expected change of votes from 2016 to 2020 increases by 0.344%. We caution against any simple interpretation of where those votes come from, though, for reasons explained earlier. In particular, it is possible most did not come from Hispanics at all. One will need surveys to learn much more, though the cost in 87 (Campo-Flores & Findell, 2020); (Ghitza & Robinson, 2021); (Cadava, 2020); for the minimum wage in Florida (Schueler, 2020), whose point is equally germane to Texas. Contemporary historians stressing business orientations of Hispanics seem loath to develop this obvious fact.  91 See the striking graph and statistics over time, available at “Oil and Gas Extraction Payroll Employment in Texas,” at the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis FRED site:  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/TX10211000A674FRBDAL . Oil prices had also fallen in 2014-15 and risen after industry is perhaps hazardous in a national study with heavy regional concentrations, but we did  run them. They were positive but only without proper spatial controls; when those were applied,  We also checked claims that the spread of Evangelical Protestant groups among Hispanics might  help explain the shift. The data are less than perfect, but we cannot find any evidence confirming  that view, though in this case surveys of individual voters in specific areas would surely be better instruments. Percentages of either Catholics or evangelical Protestants within counties does not  appear to matter. The only really substantive case where religion did appear significant is one we  have nowhere seen discussed: the case of the Mormons. In sharp contrast to 2016, where  Trump’s vote in Utah and a few other states with large Mormon contingents was off normal  Republican levels, in 2020 most of the waverers returned to form.93 But that is irrelevant to the  We think the question of what happened with the Hispanic vote and the Democrats can stand  more analysis. Future research should reckon with the possibility that fears about the local  economic effects of suspending construction of Trump’s famous wall worried voters, even  though most of the money for that venture did not flow directly to border counties. We are struck  by one result of our analysis: that while counties with high percentages of foreign born citizens  usually voted at lower rates for Trump – which is hardly surprising –  counties at or near the  southern border of the United States display markedly higher rates of voting in favor of him. The  effect is substantial: the Trump voting percentage is 3.8 percent higher in the border counties  compared with the rest. By contrast, a 10% increase in the percentage of the foreign born  population (a very large jump) decreases the vote for Trump by 0.23 percent, a relatively small  effect. The border advantage admits of a variety of interpretations, but local Keynesian anxieties  No matter how one finally assesses the Texas results, in 2020, as in 2016, industry effects clearly  mattered in many places. Like other analysts, we find that counties with higher median incomes  voted less enthusiastically in the aggregate for Trump, though finer grained individual survey  data reveals that he remained popular among the much smaller numbers of super-rich Americans.  But with a spatial approach, it is relatively easy to test hypotheses that go well beyond a simple  93 Statistics for religion by counties come from the Association of Religion Data Archives,  https://www.thearda.com/ The data are from its last complete census for 2010; COVID slowed the planned 2020 effort. The results come from surveys of local churches and similar bodies. For some denominations, that may lead to gaps in coverage where very few adherents live. That leads to a decision about missing data; we treat no entries as zero; this is likely not far from the truth, especially for groups heavily concentrated in certain regions. of the regional distribution of such counties convinces us that results for Mormons are likely highly accurate. does a visual examination of the vote shifts from 2016 in Utah, Idaho, and Nevada, where Mormons are known to be 94 See our Appendix 1. This is as good a place as any to mention a negative result. As (Lake & Nie, 2021) indicate, several analyses of the 2018 Congressional elections suggest that Democratic efforts to expand health care insurance We can analyze how sectoral differences mattered – something that students of American voting  behavior rarely consider. Even controlling for median income, our results show that counties  with particularly heavy concentrations professional, scientific, and technical workers voted less  for Trump than they did in 2016. Counties with high percentages of the labor force in finance  were also markedly less enthusiastic. But we caution that this latter finding is treacherous.  Finance as a sector is almost impossibly diverse and our result is for the sector as a whole. As we  discuss below, data on political contributions indicate that some of the most affluent segments of  For now, the point we want to emphasize is that our data raises major questions about some of  the most popular generalizations about the political economy of the Trump era. Contrasts  between successful globalizing firms and others more narrowly national in their focus have  become ubiquitous, even in the popular press. Our data suggest that they are also misleading.  Take the quintessential pro-Trump industries – coal and oil. American coal companies export  around the world and Trump spent considerable time and effort trying to widen their market.  Within the oil industry, it is true that many domestic shale producers – such as Harold Hamm –  were outspoken supporters of the President – but, as we discuss below, our analysis of political  contributions reveals that many people working in the multinational giants also supported him  and his policies, if sometimes less flamboyantly. On close examination, many of the “domestic”  shale producers also turn out to have significant overseas operations.   The conclusion has to be one that is very familiar from the perspective of an investment  approach to political coalitions: many significant political divisions often have sectoral roots,  though within-sector differences are also frequently important. Counties in which coal and oil are  heavy presences – which, in the latter case, for sure include major multinational firms – do not  display any significant differences from 2016. As already suggested, we do not find this  mysterious: industries that started close to 100% for Trump cannot do much better than that.95  Large scale sectoral differences matter, not just for political money, but for voting behavior,  IV. Trump’s Secret Weapon: From Trade to Unique Agricultural Political Business Cycle   Sectoral conflicts certainly figured importantly in the most sensational of all of Trump’s  departures from traditional establishment policies: his readiness to employ tariffs as weapons in  aided the party at that time. They suggest that continued Republican resistance also cost Trump in 2020. election panel design includes improvements in coverage after 2012. We do not doubt that the expansion after that time may have helped the Democrats, but most of growth predates Trump's victory in November, 2016. We thus tested whether Democrats benefited from expanding social insurance during Trump’s presidency. The test is muddied because later estimates of coverage were affected by COVID, but we found no effect. It is possible that local effects in 2018 were stronger given the absence of a national candidate with his own very distinct brand that may not have been entirely aligned with local Republican candidates.   95 In Pennsylvania and some other states green opponents mounted intensive campaigns against political champions of these industries. They may have shifted some votes, but not enough to show in our results.  both commercial and foreign policy disputes. We have always thought that the most bizarre  aspect of the vast literature ascribing Trump’s voter appeal exclusively to racism and sexism was  the way it blankly ignores his forthright statements on foreign economic policy in the 2016  campaign and the world wide reverberations of his tariff battles with Mexico, Canada, Japan,  China, the European Union, South Korea and other countries once in office. As one study aptly  summarized “there are virtually no modern episodes of a large, advanced economy raising tariffs  in a way comparable to the U.S. in 2018-2019.”96   In 2020, many media accounts of the campaign covered Trumps views on tariffs and industrial  reconstruction sparingly or not at all, but no serious analysis of the election can ignore the  subject. In both his speeches and ads, he was as forthright as ever.97 But whether this  commitment to protectionism helped or hurt him is not obvious. In 2020, as in 2016, the contrast  between Trump and his Democratic opponent was so clear cut that one might reasonably expect  that on trade, as with the oil and coal, not too many votes switched.   Some analysts have examined the evidence and indeed concluded that trade played only a  “limited role in the election outcome.”98 We reach the same conclusion but by a more circuitous  route. We think another look at trade is worthwhile, in part because we disagree with some  claims about agriculture, but also because there is a genuine puzzle about the issue’s role in  2020: The evidence is strong that the Republicans’ poor showing in the 2018 off year elections  stemmed in part from the economic costs of the President’s trade wars, especially with China.  Presidential campaigns are distinctly different from mid-term elections (though 2018’s soaring  voting turnout was more typical of the former), so an obvious question is what changed between  Here again, we preface our analysis with a wall of yellow caution flags. In the best of times,  linking gains and losses from trade to specific localities involves a series of calculations akin to stacking Russian dolls. In Trump’s case, the problem is intensified because while the  administration appears to have carefully prepared at least the first parts of the package dealing  with China, the way it put its policies into effect was classic Trump: flamboyantly transactional,  bombastic, and erratic. Announced tariff changes were subject to constant renegotiation and  frequently withdrawn or altered by exclusions sometimes before actually going into effect, with  details emerging only weeks later in the fine print of regulations. As one skeptical analysis  summarized the process: “More often than not, presidential Tweets differed from White House  announcements, which differed from policy implementation. Headline numbers were often  meaningless, and dates of policy changes would often shift considerably or disappear entirely.”99   97 It is illuminating to compare the text of Trump’s speech at the Convention with media accounts. The speech had many passages on rebuilding American manufacturing. See (Trump, 2020); few reports we saw devoted much space But this policymaking parody of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty principle – in which one could  glimpse where trade policy was or in what direction it was heading, but not both at once – only  scratches the surface of the difficulties in discerning how Trump’s tariff policies impinged on the  election. As an instrument for interpreting the world, mainstream international trade theory is a  blunt instrument, problematic at many levels. To start with, we are troubled by what we regard as  its essentially question begging nature. Few analysts acknowledge that most growth in East Asia  would never have happened if those countries had followed traditional free trade policies, though  the reality of the “East Asian miracle” is obvious. Almost everyone now concedes, too, that  American trade analysts and policymakers badly misjudged the domestic effects of opening up  the American economy as they negotiated China’s entry into the World Trade Organization,  though in public many still cannot quite bring themselves to admit this.100  While orthodox trade theory continues to evolve, its trajectory resembles mainstream  macroeconomics after the Great Financial Crisis – theory and practice have altered, but mostly  on the margin. As critics have trenchantly observed, most expositions still hurry past the  empirically minuscule sums of “Harberger Triangles” that purport to capture the overall gains  from trade envisioned in the theory’s static versions. More sophisticated cases for substantive  advantages arising from “dynamic” versions of free trade theory involve much hand waving. The  presumption in favor of full employment that lies just below the surface of many modeling  exercises – and sometimes, even now, right on the surface – remains ubiquitous. Such accounts  continue to nourish exaggerated claims about the welfare gains from trade. They also ignore the  reality that losers are almost never compensated for losses.101   Most efforts to apply the theory rely on computable general equilibrium models. These are first  cousins to the now much criticized dynamic stochastic general equilibrium models and they vary  widely in how they incorporate several key considerations.102 One concerns the ease with which  companies, if not countries, can escape the impacts of tariffs by relocating production to other  countries.103 The models actually used to estimate the effects of the U.S. trade wars also mostly  pass over in silence conflicts of interest within firms and their employees; the companies may  prefer to shift production, which does nothing for their local workforces except threaten their  livelihoods. Neither do these models have any means for assessing whether or not the  administration was successful in some of its key objectives, because they are designed to analyze  short run trade in goods, rather than more basic, longer term issues of property rights and  changes in legal and institutional processes: the point of the U.S. tariffs on electrical  100 The literature is too large to survey, see, e.g., (Stiglitz, 2003). For later misgivings, see, e.g., (Setser, 2018). 101 (Kohler & Storm, 2016) is a fine statement of widely shared views with detailed empirical discussion. 102 On the problems of DSGE models, see (Storm, 2021a) and the symposium in that issue of International Journal 103 (W. Li, Qiu, Whang, & Zeng, 2021); a contrary view is (Cigna, Meinen, Schulte, & Steinhof, 2020). empirical claims about the Trump tariffs is strikingly wide, but we cannot examine the full literature here. manufacturing (and likely many others), for example, was to squeeze the Chinese to tighten their  laws on intellectual property. That is in nobody’s computable general equilibrium model.104   An emerging literature relying on newer statistical approaches to analyzing regional growth  patterns deepens these doubts. This research suggests that trade linkages are less important in  explaining regional growth differentials than commonly supposed and that concentrating on, for  example, export shares, is not especially helpful. Instead trade linkages are heavily mediated by  how local industrial structures affect the pass through of costs and local wage bargaining.105   But the most important issue pushed aside in the mainstream literature is that views about tariff  protection are sometimes highly “ideological,” not in the sense that they are impervious to facts  (though of course they may also be that), but that they reflect deeply held, preexisting views.  Public opinion polling in recent years has tended to underestimate these. Careful comparisons of  closed with open ended questions about foreign trade and tariffs in the 2016 American National  Election Survey highlighted the likelihood that reservations about free trade ran considerably  deeper than most conventional surveys suggest. They also showed that Trump’s openness to  tariffs made him attractive to significant numbers of voters, in both the primaries and the general  election.106 Major media press accounts have often downplayed this to the point of disregarding  warnings from losing Democratic candidates in farm areas that the administration’s tariff  measures were not in fact turning farmers against him.107  Given the problems with existing surveys, the true extent of protectionist sentiments within the  electorate is hard to assess. Older polls with better formulated questions commissioned by the  Chicago Council of Foreign Relations, along with some other data, suggest that the numbers may  Some facts, though, are clear. In 2020, if you liked tariffs, Trump was obviously your man and,  in contrast to 2018, he was on the ballot himself, which surely affected voter responses. Given  the many rapid reversals, suspensions, and sotto voce changes in the administration’s policies,  along with the fact that we know many voters recognized, that for much of Trump’s term, the  U.S. was nearer to full employment than it had been in years, it is not obvious that many voters,  especially those with strong opinions, would have had sufficient time to sort out either the  precise nature of the rapidly changing policies or assay their consequences, especially if they  sympathized with the administration’s claims about the importance of the long term. These  104 It is extraordinary how the many papers trying to estimate the effects of the Trump tariffs on the economy pass over this fundamental point. An exceptionally clear statement that the tariff policy was not basically about tariffs, is 105 (Chudik & Pesaran, 2016) (Elhorst, Gross, & Terenau, 2021); (Chudik, Koech, & Wynne, 2021); cf. the latter’s “indicators of size and industry composition dwarf the explanatory power of trade linkages in explaining the 106 (Ferguson et al., 2020); a detailed examination of common poll questions is (Chang, Ferguson, Rothschild, & considerations buttress the comparison with coal or oil: why switch, if you liked Trump in 2016  for his tariff policy? Some communicants, indeed, might have appreciated a politician who  actually seemed to be trying to redeem his promises, even at the price of infuriating critics they  All the models by economists skip past such considerations. Instead they take the structure of  production for granted and focus on very short run estimates of income flows to grind out  estimates of how the economy as a whole reacted to the tariffs.110 We then have to infer that the  claimed gains and losses affected voters. Not surprisingly, the cottage industry that has grown up  debating the finer points of the trade war, especially with China, differs on important details.   Some analysts who critically evaluated the elasticity of substitution of products in the tariff war  between the U.S. and China, for example, suggest that the big winners from Trump’s tariff were  countries like Vietnam and Canada, but the range of estimates is fairly large and some papers  dash past that point. That would imply lower losses for American consumers out of the whole  imbroglio. That would reinforce the point that until COVID hit, many workers were seeing rises  in incomes, albeit at the cost of working for long hours with modest rises in wages. After  COVID stuck, as we have seen, the evidence is strong that many of those affected trusted Trump  more to return to prosperity. Resting one’s case on computable general equilibrium models of  trade effects in such cases is quite a leap of faith.  Doubts increase the more one scrutinizes the exact calculations. How data on trade and industries  in the U.S. (and many other countries) are compiled is a first problem, though we can only touch  on the issue here. As an approach to understanding the actual behavior of firms, especially large  firms, existing classification schemes for products and industries bring to mind the English  proverb about the dangers of slips ‘twixt the cup and the lip. Empirical studies of trade policy  impact usually start from data for products reported in terms of an internationally harmonized  system of product and industry classifications. They then translate that classification system back  into the different grids used by individual countries, such as the U.S. North American Industrial  Classification (NAICS – the successor to the old Standard Industrial Classification or SIC  System). Levels of detail in all these are exceedingly fine – virtually at the product level, as one might expect for schemes designed for use in tariff negotiations. The translations from one  classification system into the other inevitably lose a bit of detail at a simple descriptive level.111 Most government data involving industries also deliberately masks entries that might identify  109 In 2018, Trump was not on the ballot himself; offset payments were generally smaller than later, and the din over the tariffs was huge. But as discussed below, we are struck that what we consider the most believable account of voter responses following very carefully targeted Chinese responses were so small: four House seats (Kim & Margalit, 2021). That is not to be dismissed, but neither is it at all impressive. A reasonable policymaker might well conclude that with a bit more of an effort to counter the costs, she or he could continue in relative safety. 110 A common procedure is to assume that overall national patterns are evenly or close to evenly distributed across 111 See the discussion in (Flaaen & Pierce, 2019).   individual firms. This is not news, but as discussed in our Appendix 3, our exploration of this  data convinced us that this problem poses much bigger challenges than generally recognized.  Sifting out what the data about products means for firm policies is even more daunting and we  are convinced that the existing literature has skipped past this too quickly. Everyone agrees that  real firms typically operate not in one, but in broader sets of the fine grained “industries”  distinguished in the classification systems.  If, as certainly happened in aluminum, steel, and  other industries caught up in the trade war, the intermediate imports companies rely on are hit by  tariffs while their final products benefit from protection, then the firms face short run price rises or interruptions in supplies they need for their own production of protected final products. They  then must make judgment calls about their political stances toward the tariff package as a whole.  The same holds for their workers and incentives to misstate everyone’s public views are  sometimes strong. But there are no government statistics on such things, though one can draw  inferences from other data, such as corporate political contributions and occasional public  statements. We believe key steps local and national politicians take in response to trade pressures  are explicable only in terms of political money, which is different from talk or aggregate  economic statistics. Models involving median voters, which dominate much of the literature, fail  to explain the weakness of counter-pressures and, though the subject is too big for this paper,  misstate how the trade desires of elites relate to other issues used locally as diversions.112  Finally, the most common ways analysts map industrial data back into political structures adds  additional layers of complexity. We are very skeptical about the tangled chains of calculation  (often involving masked data) usually used to estimate county economic gains or losses. The  towering pile of approximations stretches too high in the clouds. If one is testing for political  effects, as distinct from economic impacts, we strongly prefer methods that minimize reliance on  assumptions of how aware the locals were of those estimated losses, multiplier effects on the  local economy, or assessments about how local investment responded. A bright spot in all the  darkness is that in practice no one makes allowances for second order price effects on consumers  Simpler and more directly testable procedures are preferable, particularly for cases like the  Trump tariffs, many of which came and went like the grin of the Cheshire Cat. Our preferred  methods are akin to those we used to assess how oil or coal affected voting in 2016: identify  112 In particular, they fail to explain why at the presidential level especially, the Democratic Party was so completely dominated by free trade advocates. The Party’s voting constituency was devastated by the free trade policies. e.g., (Wright, 2020) or (Ferguson, 1995b). The latter explains in simple English what really happened. (Ferguson & Rogers, 1986). Current discussions of Congressional voting on tariffs, in our view, should pay more attention to why the national party establishments that – until Trump – stuck with free trade so long and should more carefully consider what apparent votes against trade by in Congress really meant. But that is for another time. now, we observe that when a real protectionist showed up, you didn’t need a weatherman to tell that the weather had 113 Much work starts with commuting zones, for which the data is often quite dated, then traces how those fared through a series of changing congressional districts. See, e.g., (Autor, Dorn, Hanson, & Majlesi, 2016). specific industries that are affected and check if the percentages of employment in those sectors  in districts affects voting results, using data that, as far as possible, corrects for government  masking.114 Especially if you cannot reliably sum all the aggregate effects, this procedure should  offer a useful guide to net effects on the vote, with proper controls.  We apply these methods to Trump’s tariffs by building on Flaaen and Pierce’s discussion of the  three principle ways the tariffs affected specific leading industries in the short run.115 First, some profited from protection. Secondly, because tariffs were sometimes levied on intermediate goods  used in their own production processes, certain industries – sometimes the same protected  industries – faced higher prices, though how those affected them depends on variables that are  even more difficult to assess in ensembles. Finally some American industries lost export markets  due to retaliatory tariffs imposed by countries hit by Trump’s tariffs. In a twist we had not  initially expected, this last set of cases became of towering significance, though by a route that  received little recognition outside of specialized sectoral media: the magic of executive action  and agency discretion transformed trade policy into a hardy perennial of American politics,  The flux in the administration’s trade policy mentioned earlier was a stumbling block for our  examination and impels us to warn again that our results are more than usually tentative. We  began by cataloging “industries” to test. The full list contains more than the industries discussed  by Flaaen and Pierce, but many of the later tariffs were in effect only briefly either because the  duties were slapped on late or they were simply not very high.116 We thus began by examining  the three different rosters of “top ten” industries compiled by Flaaen and Pierce.117 We tested  each industry in all three groups individually and ran tests on the entire ensembles since those  should  most readily show effects since they sum employment in all the industries.118 Our tests  for all three ensembles were almost uniformly negative; only results for tariffs on electrical  manufacturing and some forms of steel appear to have affected any votes and the steel result was  perverse, though it can perhaps be rationalized in terms of tariff-affected input costs. The one  industry that stood out as strongly pro-Trump, saw mills, has a far more direct interpretation than  114 That can be done industry but industry, but one also needs to test entire ensembles, since the whole might add up to much more than subsets of parts. In some, mostly low frequency, cases, the BLS veils data to protect identities of specific firms. There are also other errors, including some missing data. Some researchers make various adjustments for these; but we are not working on large regions and we need to analyze only a few industries. To deal with the masked data problems, we relied on the new, recalculated datasets developed by  (Eckert et al., 2021a) and (Eckert et al., 2021b). Our Appendix 3 discusses this in more detail. Perforce, we use employment rather than any form of 115 (Flaaen & Pierce, 2019). Their paper covers tariffs put on in 2018; there were additional tariffs put on later, but these were often unevenly implemented. In some cases they were postponed to avoid antagonizing American consumers during the Christmas season or waived for other reasons. And many rates were quite low. See the 116 We drew on all the papers mentioned earlier, but also (M. Li, Balistreri, & Zhang, 2020).  117 Some on the lists overlap for reasons already explained about intermediate imports.  118 Of course the expected results vary, depending on whether the industry is receiving higher protection or higher the tariffs, as we discuss at the conclusion of the paper. We conclude that Trump’s protectionism  was indeed old news in 2020 and did not affect many votes.   The case of agriculture is more complicated. No search for answers to the question of how  Trump amassed more than seventy four million votes can bypass this sector, which only a very  small number of specialized media sources paid attention to around the time of the election itself.  As will shortly become obvious, by 2019 Trump’s offsets to the consequences of his tariffs on  agriculture were morphing into a much grander shift in farm policy, swamping the tariff  V. The Ace in the Hole That Almost Worked: Trump’s Farm Policy  Here again, still more advance cautions are necessary. Next to finance and perhaps defense, one  might argue that agriculture constitutes the most important case of full throated socialism within  the American economy. Federal government subsidies over long periods have played a vital role  in the industry’s rise to world dominance and state aid remains ubiquitous.119 It is also  noteworthy that the usual intense partisanship in American politics often seems to stop at the  Farm Belt. A closer inspection will reveal a more discriminating picture, but the frequency with  which farm state Republicans and Democrats close ranks in favor of lavish aid for big farmers,  giant grain companies, specialized insurers, and other firms in the agricultural circuit is obvious. But this paper cannot review the tangled history; we must pass rapidly to how the Trump  administration engineered one of the most remarkable agricultural political business cycles in  The starting point was, indeed, the tariffs Trump slapped on industrial imports from China in  2018. These came in several waves: first in February, when the administration relied on Section  201 of the Trade Act of 1974; then in April, this time citing Section 232 of the Trade Expansion  Act of 1962. When the Chinese retaliated by placing tariffs on American agricultural exports, the  administration responded by levying additional tariffs, appealing to different sections of existing  trade and national security legislation. The result was several more rounds of tit for tat from each Up to then China had figured as an important, but not decisive market for American farm  produce. For soybeans, cotton, and several other crops, however, Chinese demand bulked very  large. Comparative analysis of how various countries responded to Trump’s tariffs suggests that  the Chinese responses were much more carefully calibrated than, for example, those of the  119 (Ferleger & Lazonick, 1993) is a particularly acute formulation. But see also (Donald Hadwiger, 1971) on how the research program shortchanged small producers.  120 (C. Brown, 2021), which also references various chronologies he compiled; (Flaaen & Pierce, 2019) are also helpful on the part of the trade war they deal with.  European Union. They focused sharply on borderline districts in agricultural areas and likely did  cost Republicans a few seats – but only a few, perhaps 4 – in 2018.121   The administration continued sparring with China (and other U.S. trading partners) both verbally  and administratively through 2019. But with the presidential election looming, it started dialing  down its bellicosity. In January, 2020, the administration signed a new “Economic Trade  Agreement” with China. This went into force, ironically, on Valentine’s Day. As one might  expect with Trump, this “Phase I Agreement” departed dramatically from conventional  multilateral trade agreements. It eschewed traditional “most favored nation” clauses that passed  advantages automatically to other trading partners. It also bypassed the World Trade  Organization in favor of a bilateral accord between the U.S. and China. The Chinese agreed to a  “voluntary import expansion” agreement committing them to purchase substantial amounts of  American agricultural, manufacturing, and other goods and services. They also promised to  refrain from currency manipulation and to reform their laws on intellectual property and in a few  By the time agreement came into force, of course, COVID had begun its deadly march across the  earth. Economies were crashing, along with world trade volumes. The steep fall in U.S. imports,  coupled with the still sizeable Chinese purchases of U.S. goods (amounting to about two thirds  of what they had promised, despite the pandemic) lowered the temperature between the two most  But for American farmers, COVID brought a host of new problems that could not be pinned on  China. Domestic restaurant and school demand for their products collapsed. In addition, bad  weather, fires, and droughts ravaged important growing areas. With many farm areas facing  deeper disaster, the Trump administration responded with another historic single payer insurance  program, this time using existing farm programs. As one journal summarized an account for  To compensate farmers directly impacted by retaliatory tariffs, the Trump  administration began making Market Facilitation Payments (MFP) in the summer  of 2018, and a second round was made in the spring of '19.  Those payments were expected to cease after a trade deal with China was  announced Schaefer said. However, the COVID-19 pandemic began wreaking  havoc on agricultural markets in early 2020 with the closing of schools,  restaurants and other institutions dependent on food deliveries.  To keep farmers in business and families fed, Trump's USDA [United States  Department of Agriculture] instituted the Coronavirus Food Assistance Program  (CFAP). Between MFP and CFAP, the government paid out $46 billion, creating  121 (Cheng & Hillberry, 2018) for the trade significance; for the politics, see (Kim & Margalit, 2021). a \"massive spike\" of agricultural support unlike any since the original farm bill  \"This is the most support we've ever seen for agriculture\" Schaefer said. These  (payments) were unique in size and the way paid. Previously, through the farm  bill, these kinds of payments were negotiated in a bipartisan fashion under  \"Both the MFP and CFAP were appropriated solely by the Administration — Trump didn't go through Congress to get these.\"123  Assessing how these programs affected voting in specific farming areas is a formidable task, not  least because no one with access to detailed data responded to our queries for basic data. A U.S.  General Accounting Office report detailed the program’s broad features, though not the all- important roster of quantitative assistance to counties. But we were able to locate support price  lists by county for the Market Facilitation Program expressly created to compensate farmers who  suffered losses from the trade war with China.124 Their most important provision was that  “specialty crops” were treated differently from “non-specialty crops.” These latter included most  crops, and their payment rates were set not by crop, but by which county they were grown in.  Payment rates diverged widely – from $15 to $190 an acre – a truly gigantic disparity. A close  reading of farm periodicals shows that many informed observers read between the lines and  sensed that perhaps not everything in the scheme hinged on Chinese trade losses. A handful of  articles appearing around the time of the election voiced suspicions that the program involved  favored counties likely to vote for Trump. Our test for relations between the Trump vote in 2016  and the county prices suggested that there was nothing foolish about the guess, but the  relationship fell short of statistical significance (.20).  This tantalizing but inconclusive result left in abeyance the question of all the spending’s impact  on the election. Compounding the problem was the fact that, as suggested just above, while the  Market Facilitation Program was a major part of the Trump administration’s election year farm  support program, it was not alone. Along with the Food program already mentioned, came vast  subsidized loan programs and new assistance for areas impacted by bad weather, among others.  Given the dearth of relevant information, it made sense to treat agriculture as a special case of  industrial structure analysis as we have long practiced it and test whether counties dominated by  specific farm sectors showed clear evidence of changes in voting patterns. The logic is exactly  the same as our other tests: with proper controls, the sector’s influence should show, just like oil 123(Grinczel, 2021), quoting Aleks Schaefer, a Michigan State University Extension economist.  124 For the GAO analysis, see (Office, 2020). The report is enclosed with a letter from GAO Director of Natural Resources and Environment Steve D. Morris to The Honorable Debbie Stabenow. Ranking Member, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, United States Senate, USDA Market Facilitation Program: Information on Payments for 2019, on the web at https://www.gao.gov/pdf/product/708942  The price lists by county can be found or coal. The data required for this are not, alas, available off the shelf. We used newly published  estimates of production by county for specific crops produced by independent agricultural  economists for most tests.125 But those didn’t cover livestock and a few other sectors. For these,  we had to rely on Bureau of Labor Statistics data for farm employment by sectors to run the  Our results are striking and tally closely with claims in the specialized farm literature: a number  of sectors, notably cotton, did not change materially from 2016 (when it showed heavily for  Trump). Neither did milk and dairy where regional and local rules are very important. But apple  producers, who bitterly protested being left high and dry in the China offset programs, swung  sharply against the President, though for Trump the cost was limited since they are not  numerous.127 But three big sectors with significant sales to China showed substantial swings in  favor of Trump: soybeans, corn silage, and rice. A final sector that also tilted heavily in favor of Trump, which we report without comment save to note that it has been sharply criticized for  endemic pollution and water problems, was pig farming.   This paper has already alluded to the surges in labor walkouts and protests that the onset of  COVID triggered. These received very little press attention and most too small to show in  official Labor Department statistics. By contrast the tidal wave of protest that brought the Black  Lives Matter movement to national attention received very intense coverage. (See Figures 7 and  8.) The dramatic video showing George Floyd’s brutal death in the custody of Minneapolis  police ran and reran in the media, on Twitter, and elsewhere. The outpouring of anger and  indignation was overwhelming, leading to demonstrations and protests across the nation. These  ebbed and flowed for weeks, rising to dramatic climaxes when counter-demonstrations by Trump  supporters, police clampdowns, and other police killings made headlines.    125 (Wagner, Niles, & Roy, 2019). The data include estimates of total production, so the relative concentration is 126 These, and only these, are likely subject to some government masking. We looked closely, comparing data for individual counties from state agricultural associations with the federal data. The masking is obvious in the case of a state like Indiana. In the one case that proved out discussed below, pig farming, we concluded that corrections to the 127 For the apple producers, see, e.g., (Blaine, 2019).  Source: Armed Conflict and Event Location Project, see text  States Won by Biden or Trump vs. Number of Social Protests of All Kinds  For a while it seemed possible that police behavior and the protest movement might restructure  the entire campaign. Suspicions that the Trump administration was hoping for a reaction similar  to those of earlier Republican campaigns, especially Richard Nixon’s famously effective 1968  and 1972 campaign pitches, have been confirmed by post-election accounts.128  The President  kept trying to turn the question of “law and order” into a decisive political issue and sought  opportunities to dramatize himself as its foremost champion. His “made for television” spectacle  in front of St. John’s Episcopal Church on June 1 in Washington, D.C., sent shock waves around  the world. His Bible waving speech on the steps of the Church and images of the dispersal and  tear gassing of park protesters that preceded his appearance there sent powerful messages to  many different audiences. The President kept encouraging state governors to respond to protests  with heavy hands, demanding that they call out the National Guard to restore order. At times, he  even threatened to use regular army troops. The messages did not go down well with big city  mayors, who were nearly all Democrats, or with the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  As  national Democratic leaders rather clearly held their collective breath, the mayors sought to  avoid confrontations. Meantime claims and counterclaims blaming violence on right wing  128 See, e.g., (Wolff, 2021) and (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021); (Woodward & Costa, 2021).  militias, or “Antifa,” and its alleged connections to “socialists” and communists filled the  This paper cannot do justice to the myriad events and incidents in this epochal tapestry or the  wildcat labor disturbances. We can only treat a few key points summarily. Thanks to the Armed  Conflict and Event Location Project, an excellent statistical record of the social protests  associated with the Black Lives Matter movement and many other groups all through the year  exists. Though many accounts by partisan Republicans implied the opposite, it is clear that the  police responded far more often with force to protests from the left than those from the right.  Right wing demonstrations were also far more likely to involve violence, though it featured in a  small proportion of left events. Police killings also continued with dismaying frequency.130  It is also important to note that Black Lives Matter groups long predated the Minneapolis  incident. The various groups usually regarded as leading that movement received an influx of  support, including money, from various foundations, while some prominent corporations also  started to take public stands in favor of racial justice.131   But 2020 witnessed many other events and demonstrations from a wide array of groups in favor  of other causes. If we refer to all of these collectively as “social protest” events, they were  running at very high levels even in January, as groups protesting on behalf of the environment,  human rights causes, and issues associated with the political right all took to the streets.  COVID’s advent also led to the waves of walkouts, wildcat strikes, and labor-related protests  already discussed. As jurisdictions locked down from COVID, protests against those also  erupted, to an extent that is perhaps not widely appreciated.   We are convinced that studying how each of these different kinds of protest affected the election  would likely be rewarding. But the more than 23,000 events for which data exists are hugely  diverse and a proper effort to distinguish among them would be a major undertaking in its own  right.132 Thus in this paper we focus on what we consider the most important point: how did the  entire set of disturbances affect the change in the presidential vote?   Our reading of history suggests that pooling the labor disturbances, which come from a different  data set anyway, with the much bigger dataset covering the broader social protests is unwise. We  129 In the voluminous literature, see, e.g., (Wolff, 2021) and (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021).  130 The data comes from the Armed Conflict and Event Location Project, “US Crisis Monitor Releases Full Data for 2020”; https://acleddata.com/2021/02/05/us-crisis-monitor-releases-full-data-for-2020/ For the assessment and statistics comparative violence, see (Kishi, Stall, Wolfson, & Jones, 2021). They suggest 14% for events on the right vs. just under 7% for leftist events, though they note that who instigated is often unclear. Their police statistics are 131 The follow through was complicated, but less than rousing. See the tabulation for large companies in (Jan & 132 These data, again, come from the Armed Conflict and Event Location Project, “US Crisis Monitor Releases Full Data for 2020”;   https://acleddata.com/2021/02/05/us-crisis-monitor-releases-full-data-for-2020/   thus separately estimate the effect of the two types of protests on county voting. Incomplete  estimates for the sizes of crowds makes it impossible to use those as an indicator.  So we sum all  types of “social protests” within counties and then analyze how the total influenced voting. Our  results indicate that “law and order” responses did not in general rally voters to Trump’s cause:  as the number of social protests rose in counties, votes in favor of Trump declined.  There is an  interesting exception: in communities with many Hispanics as defined by the census, voting for  Trump rises somewhat as the protests increase. The effect is particularly marked in a number of  large cities mostly in the west and southwest.133     By contrast, outside of a few big cities with very high costs of living, higher numbers of wildcat  strikes and other labor disturbances tend to occur in counties with modestly higher shares of  Trump vote. It may be that the various ethnic and racial cleavages overlay economic differences  arising from low wages and dangerous working conditions and heightened those tensions. But  that is for another paper. A striking fact is that Google Trends searches for “strikes” show –  rather surprisingly – that by far the highest relative number of searches in the period from  February 2 to Election Day occurs in three southern states: Georgia, South Carolina, and  Alabama, not in the old industrial heartland. Our results indicate that higher levels of the  “wildcat protests” slightly pushed up Trump voting.134  VII. In Lieu of A Conclusion: American Politics Between Washington, Weimar, and Kabul  All through the many years we have studied American politics, one or another set of analysts  could usually be found voicing fears that the system was sliding into crisis. We have generally  resisted this siren song: we are greatly impressed by the ability of money-driven political systems  to regenerate themselves even in the face of challenges as formidable as the Great Financial  Crisis. But the evidence that something fundamental is altering is now too strong to ignore. If the  litany of striking developments ticked off at the opening of this essay does not convince, then  some of the juicier details trickling out from the stream of memoirs, official investigations, and  “inside” accounts of the President’s Final Days should. When the Chair of the Joint Chiefs of  Staff starts talking about a “Reichstag Moment,” everyone needs pay attention. And the  revelation that Rupert Murdoch personally gave the go ahead for Fox News to call Arizona for  Biden on Election Night, carries an equally clear message: that, as we have stressed for many  years, big business and corporate media are active players in American politics. They do not  133 Appendix 1 shows the estimated coefficient of social protests varies with the percentage of Hispanics in the county. Where the Hispanic percentage is zero, Trump's expected change of votes from 2016 to 2020 falls by 1.276% for every increase of 100 social protests. At the average % of Hispanics in counties ( 9.7%), for every 100 social protests, Trump's expected vote shift  decreases by .84%. Note that while the median number of protests is zero, some counties have hundreds. We caution again about simple inferences from aggregate results.  134 The number of wildcat strikes is much lower, so the basic unit is one strike. For each, strike Trump’s expected delegate critical decisions to faceless bureaucrats or “independent” editors devoted to higher  truths, no matter how many journalists assure us otherwise.135   This paper, though, has concentrated almost entirely on voters, which complicates the task of  writing a succinct conclusion. The fundamental problem is that the US political system is  money-driven, full stop. The direct statistical evidence that voters do not drive policy just keeps  mounting and has recently been buttressed by a creative use of machine learning techniques.  These give a striking new twist to older statistical findings.136 We have also carefully reviewed  the quantitative evidence on role small contributions played in 2020; as our Appendix 2 shows in  detail, their much ballyhooed role is way overblown. While some candidates – mostly losing  candidates – build campaign war chests heavily out of small donations (defined as those totaling  less than $200 from a single contributor), that is not true for most major party winning  candidates and for the parties themselves. In 2020, we estimate, seventy percent of all political  money came from contributions over that cut off. With the conspicuous exceptions of the  Sanders movement, the Justice Democrats,  and similar groups that are authentically “populist”  in the sense that media discussions of that term largely ignore, an unsympathetic observer might  well conclude that the waves of small contributions just help float a system that is then steered  As a consequence, any serious assessment of the dynamics of the system must concentrate on  precisely what this paper has treated only glancingly. Since a full scale analysis of political  money in 2020 would require another paper at least as long as this one, we must content  ourselves with some closing observations that draw heavily from research in progress.   We begin by reviewing this paper’s findings, with all the cautions concerning the limitations of  data and methods that we have previously discussed.  We think that the story that emerges is  Though no one can say for sure, it seems likely that the Trump camp’s calculation that they were  cruising to reelection in January 2020 was likely right. For all his barely coded racist and sexist  appeals, the advantages of incumbency together with the steady drop in unemployment and  increases in very modestly remunerated working hours for so many low paid groups might well  But then came COVID, which as Trump himself later acknowledged, “changed the whole  ballgame.”137 The President’s insistence on keeping the economy open was fatal. By framing the  policy choice as a decision on locking down to save lives or sustain the economy, Trump, like  the UK’s Boris Johnson, simply guaranteed a disastrous cycle of stop/go policies. The only real  135 For the Chair of the Joint Chiefs, see (Leonnig & Rucker, 2021); for Murdoch, see (Wolff, 2021). 136 (Maguire & Delahunt, 2020); (Ferguson, 2020).  way to save the economy was to save the people. But the failure to quickly put in place systems  to test, trace, and isolate COVID cases, procure and distribute personal protective equipment and  medical supplies, and mandate serious worker safety standards led straight to longer and bigger  lockdowns along with vast numbers of unnecessary deaths and illnesses, especially among  minorities and the poor. Among developed countries, the US and UK, which pursued much the  same course on COVID, show uniquely disastrous outcomes.138 Both spent fortunes propping up  the economy with comparatively dismal results. Until the god from the machine – the vaccines –  came on stage, the US expended far more resources pumping up the economy, without any  comparable rate of economic success. It also failed to protect its population, especially its low  Unlike some studies, our results indicate that COVID cost Trump heavily. Our findings suggest  that his mishandling of the pandemic turned off many upper income voters who might otherwise  have been willing to hold their noses and vote for him, as many had in 2016. The revulsion ran  especially deep in sectors with large numbers of scientific, technical, and professional workers  and in finance. The administration’s lack of interest in worker safety also stimulated thousands  of workers left without protection to take matters into their hands and mobilize. While the waves  of small, often wildcat walkouts appear to have strengthened reactions by conservatives in many  communities, we suspect that the broader wave of protests associated with Black Lives Matter  and other groups likely also drew strength from the President’s obvious disinterest in safety and  health issues, though that remains to be shown. What does seem clear is that the giant swelling  wave of social protests worked on the whole to increase the Democratic vote, helped along by  the COVID induced legal changes that made voting easier. Trump’s calculations that he could  counter the mobilization from below with a Nixon-like counter-mobilization of the right were  mistaken overall, though in some places the appeals to law and order may have played well.   This diagnosis helps only modestly in answering the most important question of all: what our  results imply about the future. Here is where focusing on political money immediately brings  important clarification. As mentioned earlier, a major question is why the Democrats fared so  much worse in the Congressional races. Though it won the presidency, the party actually lost  seats in the House and failed in its bid to take control of the Senate. The disappointment – or, for Republicans, relief – was all the greater in that in the weeks before the election, virtually every  major media outlet trumpeted stories of what was said to be overwhelming Democratic  advantages in fundraising – more than twenty, by our incomplete count.139  The morning after the election, though, the press flip-flopped. Without stopping to wonder if the  October pre-election counts were misleading or simply wrong, the major media ran story after  story highlighting the extravagance of strong claims about the money-driven character of  138 (Storm, 2021b); (Alvelda, Ferguson, & Mallery, 2020); the reference is not merely to total deaths but to the huge but fruitless expenditures involved, as both of these papers illustrate well.  139 (Ferguson, Jorgensen, & Chen, 2021). The next few paragraphs draw heavily on our discussion there. American elections. Reporters celebrated how canny voters in Maine and other states saw  through the clouds of out of state big money. Our favorite summary – it should be enshrined  forever in the Madame Tussaud’s of hasty social science misjudgments – was a tweet by Edward  Luttwak that “The very good news of 2020: money does not win elections in America. Because  of the proclivities of American billionaires, Democratic candidates had x2 or x3 or x4 the money  of Republicans in House, Senate & WH elections. Holder, Obama’s AG spent hugely in States  Before the election, when we were asked, we cautioned about claims of a one-sided Democratic  advantage. We did not doubt the stories drawing on partial, pre-election fundraising reports,  testified to strong Democratic fundraising efforts. Nor did we believe that polls suggesting that  the Democrats were probably then ahead in the polls were necessarily wrong. But we knew that  the flows of money streaming into campaigns in the final weeks of elections are often gigantic  and do not necessarily reflect polls. The epic, come from behind struggle in 2016 to salvage  Republican control of the Senate was particularly fresh in our minds, since we had just published  a study analyzing it in detail. That effort’s defining feature was a rip tide of late money that  turned around an apparently hopeless situation at a time when most observers believed their  party’s presidential standard bearer was doomed.141   In 2020, signs that similar efforts might be afoot were obvious. In Maine, for example, in mid- October, a single private equity magnate dropped his third contribution of $500,000 dollars in the  election cycle into a single candidate super-PAC supporting Republican Senator Collins.142 We  were confident that our “linear model” of House and Senate races – so-called because the  relation between the two-party split of the money and the outcome of the vote looks like a  straight line when you plot it – would prove out, as it had in every previous election for which  the data exists to compute it. And we doubted that trailing in the polls would put off many big  Republican contributors, any more than in 2016. The whole point of our work is that political  money does not move in lockstep with the prospects of candidates; it independently reshapes  Figures 9 and 10 confirm we were right. At a moment when everything appears to be up for  grabs in American politics, some things have not changed: the system is still money-driven. The  figures for both the House and the Senate are simple scatter diagrams.  Along the bottom from  left to right runs the Democratic percentage of the total amount spent on any given race – not the  cost of votes per ballot or other measures that vary with district size and other characteristics.  The vertical axis going up the left side benchmarks the percentage of the two-party vote that the  Democrats garner. That axis is scaled as the difference between the Democratic and Republican  shares of the vote, meaning that as the difference goes positive for the Democrats (roughly in the  middle of the figure), they start winning seats. At the bottom left corner, in other words, the  Democrats get no or hardly any money and win no or hardly any seats. At the upper right, they  The Straight Truth: Money and Major Party Votes in the House  Data: Money From the FEC; Votes from Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections  The Straight Truth: Money and Votes in the Senate  Data: Money From the FEC; Votes from Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections  Display Includes the Special Senate Elections in Georgia in January, Though They Are Not Included in the The spread of the dots around the line – outcomes of actual races – shows how far reality  diverged from the pure linear model. The discordance in 2020, as in so many elections before,  was not much. Some races did deviate – they always do, and in 2020 Democrats lost some close  ones they might normally have won. But the big story is the continued dominance of the linear  model. The best ways to summarize the model’s strength are highly technical; we thus put the  details in our Appendix 2, along with a brief explanation of how to see through the perennial last  hope of orthodox political science and economics, that seeing cannot be believing, because the  money must be following polls. Comparisons of gambling odds with money flows demonstrate   Now let us consider what our analysis of 2020 implies about some of the dynamics of opposition  within the Republican Party. The most important conclusion derives from our findings about  how geography and industrial structures combine in space.   Our earlier study of the 2016 election documented how Trump won important support from  major energy sectors and extreme laissez faire parts of finance (that is, private equity), especially in the closing stages of the campaign as he woke up to the true costs of waging a national  campaign. The coal industry also backed him heavily. 144 These patterns repeated themselves in  Our 2016 data showed clearly that not private equity in general but the “big business” players  within the sector were the true Trump enthusiasts.145 For 2020, we undertook an especially  detailed investigation of this sector that now bulks so large in American life and politics. What  we found is sobering and sends a clear message about the future. As Appendix 5 shows, at first  glance, Biden looks to have garnered more support from this sector than Trump: almost $20  million dollars compared to Trump’s $13 million. But when one examines where those sums  came from, a startling difference emerges. Fully seventy-six percent of Trump’s come from the  “big business” end of private equity, compared to 13% of Biden’s money.146   143 For a detailed discussion, see (Ferguson et al., 2019); also the statistical analysis of bandwagons in (Chen, Ferguson, & Jorgensen, 2020). The case of 2016 is particularly stark: money was clearly reshaping polls and 144 (Ferguson et al., 2018), but see also (Ferguson et al., 2020).  145 “Big business” here refers to private equity investors in the Forbes 400 or firms ranking in the top 350 firms on the Fortune list or privately held firms of equivalent size. See (Ferguson et al., 2018). Identifying private equity firms outside of the big business lists is fraught with difficulty. We cross-listed the list of private equity firms provided by Private Equity Info (https://www.privateequityinfo.com/) with the list of firms in the 2020 campaign finance records to find all known private equity campaign contributors, including firms, executives, and PACs. 146 These totals and all the ones below for the Presidential campaign count only contributions narrowly focused on the presidency; not all political contributions. Contributions to the Republican and Democratic National Committees are counted as part of the presidential money, though not the many millions that pass through to other campaigns, especially to Congress. To identify coal and oil and gas contributors, including firms, executives, and PACs, we cross-listed the list of firms provided by Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers (https://www.dnb.com/) with the list of firms in the 2020 campaign finance records. We conducted a manual search through the campaign finance records to find additional smaller firms. To generate the list from Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers, we defined oil and gas using the following 4-digit sic codes: 1311, 1321, 1381, 1382, 1389, 2911, 4612, 4613, 4619, 4922, 4923, 4924, 4925, 4932, Put simply, the biggest and most aggressive players in this ascendant sector overwhelming  supported Donald Trump for reelection. The full significance of this finding emerges when one  reflects that our results refer only to public, on the record, funds. They take no account of so- called “dark money” that allows donors to take advantage of famously lax regulatory structures  and route contributions through legal entities that are required only to report their expenditures,  not where the money came from. Given the lopsided skew of top incomes in the United States, it  is safe to conclude that many private equity titans are among the most likely users of such  vehicles. Our results, accordingly, likely underestimate the true political reach of this group by a By contrast, the cases of coal and oil are easier to parse, especially the former. In 2020, just as in 2016, coal companies overwhelmingly favored Trump. As Appendix 5 indicates, essentially all  the contributions by coal companies in the presidential campaign, totaling just under $2 million  dollars, went to Trump. Biden by contrast picked up just under $17,000. Oil was also lopsidedly  for Trump and the volume of money was vastly larger. Again, as detailed in Appendix 5, the oil  and gas sector gave more than $28 million dollars to Trump. Almost exactly half of that came  from Big Oil, in the sense of firms and investors whose operations place them among the top 350  largest firms on the Fortune 500 list, comparably large private firms, or the Forbes 400 list of  Another time we can take up in in more detail the question of “green investors” and pressures on  energy companies. The bottom line among heavy carbon emitters, though, remains the bottom  line. When large international oil majors respond to “green” investor pressures by selling off  shale oil holdings, many smaller oil firms, themselves huge when measured against anything  smaller than Exxon or Shell, are happy to buy them. They are well aware that those holdings can  yield a stream of profits for a long time, especially if firms protect their investments by  deploying political money on a large scale. In more than a few cases, these energy companies are  assisted or even owned by gigantic private equity and commodity dealing firms.147 Coal  companies also remain significant players in American politics too, as does the Koch group of  companies, whose major ties to the Trump administration came through Vice President Pence’s  Add heavy industry, paper, the chemical industry, and other heavy polluters discussed in our  earlier paper on the 2012 election as part of the core of the Republican Party and you have a  powerful bloc of firms to bulwark a go-slow, conservative coalition against serious measures of  5983, 5984, 5989, 6792, and the largest firms in 5172 and 5541. For coal, we used 1221, 1222, and 1241 in addition to a manual search of the campaign finance records.  147 For a striking example, cf. (Kennedy & Biesheuvel, 2021).  148 For the transfers of oil assets from super-majors to other large firms and private equity, see (Jenkins, 2021); (Raval, 2021). For the Kochs and Pence, see (Wolff, 2021) and more generally (MacLean, 2017).  climate change, higher taxes, or tighter regulatory policies.149 In many cases, they view increased  government efforts to combat climate change as creeping socialism and aggressively promote the  Our analysis of the 2020 election adds important spatial detail about the sources of this bloc’s  rock-like stability. Agriculture as a sector nowadays provides major allies to this conservative  industrial bloc. We do not want to overstate the case. Conflicts within and between agricultural  sectors have flared throughout American history and they figured importantly in the battles over  the renewal of Farm Bill in 2018.150 But since the early decades of the last century, a pivotal  factor in farm policy deliberations has been clashes between major crop groups. For a long time,  the most important of those were corn, cotton, and wheat, though soybeans and other crops have  since risen dramatically in significance.151 The steady growth of world demand for meat has  altered how some of these sectors do business, as have the changing world market conditions  facing each crop. Many more players have also joined the fray, including finance and firms  producing vital inputs such fertilizer and seeds.152   But the broad shape of what has happened to the farm sector is apparent, as is its significance for  American politics. Big farms, often increasingly tied into major processing, fertilizer, and other  food related giants, dominate the system. They are responsible for over 51% percent of farm  output, up from 31% as recently as 1991.153 Intermediate sized producers have been almost  entirely squeezed out. While many small producers still exist, their collective share of output is  minuscule: barely 1%.154 The big firms garner the lion’s share of federal support and for many  years agricultural research conducted by government and most other sources serves principally  149 For 2012, see (Ferguson, Jorgensen, & Chen, 2013); that paper documented the huge influence in the GOP of 152 (Scheingate, Scatterday, Martin, & Nachman, 2017). Many political science treatments identify state policies constructed by independent experts as the most important shapers of farm policy in the New Deal and often after. (Ferguson, 1997) observed that the paradigm case cited in favor of the importance of experts rested on a mistaken attribution; the key document was in fact ghosted by Beardsley Ruml, perhaps the most important of all the Rockefeller advisers, not any academic. There is no reason to deny that state structures influence farm politics; cf., for example, the long Southern dominance of the Congress and the Supreme Court’s Baker vs. Carr decision forcing reapportionment. Nor any reason to scoff at notions that rising urban populations contribute to increasing scrutiny of farm programs. But for detailed evidence of how crop bloc coalitions in the world market drive the process, see (Winders, 2004) or (Winders, 2009). Some social scientists who should know better also treat the increasing role of finance, fertilizer, and other interests as the spread of “pluralism.” These simply bring other giants into the 153 (MacDonald, Hoppe, & Newton, 2018). ‘Large farms’ refers to farms with a total value of production over a $1 million dollars, adjusted for price changes. For an economic analysis, see (MacDonald, 2012)  154 (MacDonald et al., 2018). Livestock is an exception to these trends, though it is now under a lot of pressure. It is a truism that large farmers dominate the American Farm Bureau Federation and that the  Bureau has historically been very close to the Republican Party, but we repeat our caution that  sectoral crop bloc building is critical and often spills over into party politics. Just as with major industrial firms, major agricultural investors and farms are powerful actors in their own right and  smaller “coalitions of the willing” form all the time.156 But the focus on specific crops helps  smother any chance small producers have of asserting interests of their own.157 In periods of  falling prices, the smaller producers occasionally break away to form new interest groups, but  these only rarely succeed.158 Big farmers love subsidies (justified in public, however absurdly, in  the name of preserving “family farms”), but they share the intense hostility of heavy industry to  efforts to regulate pollution – indeed, in the world as a whole, the food system may be  responsible for a third of all greenhouse gas emissions.159 They are also very jealous of water  rights and wary of increases in taxation either on their enterprises or themselves. Inheritance  taxes are a particular bane for some, also, since farm size is closely associated to economic  viability. They also are very sensitive to regulations on farm labor and safety issues and strongly  anti-union. When Trump tapped into this vast and powerful set of interests, he knew what he was  doing. And his approach – massive direct payments – spoke a language both he and the  recipients understood. Media stories predicting a revolt on the farm over his China policy were  In an age in which serious weather and climate problems are now chronic, whether the  Democrats can cobble any viable response together is an interesting question. For decades now,  the Party has toyed with various formulas, but with little success. The context has admittedly  been difficult. A stylized set of facts pinpoints the challenge: since the late New Deal, the once  mixed hue blue and red states of the farm belt have turned ever more monochromatically red.  This evolution is completely mystified if it is approached principally in ideological terms or  differences in “education.” New Deal Democrats once ran strongly in many states that are today  Republican bastions. Once the halcyon days of the New Deal had passed, they could still win  votes in some crop areas from smaller farmers and in towns and cities in Iowa, Wisconsin,  Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and other states that once also had thriving industrial bases. Together  this crop-specific, small farmer – worker coalition was viable for decades. But over time, both  pillars of the Democratic Party base splintered and then collapsed: small and intermediate sized  farms became increasingly less important; while import competition, technological change, and  runaway shops that globalization enabled wrecked the industrial heartland and unions anchored  156 See, e.g., (Donald  Hadwiger, 1976) or (Donald Hadwiger & Talbot, 1967). This is to restate the point in (Ferguson, 2020); social scientists spend way too much time on peak organizations.  157 This was brilliantly summarized by Donald Hadwiger: “the commodity coalition eventually prevented the development of any structures which could serve or speak for the interests of small farmers or farm workers. both economic and political, went to the larger farmers-also to the agribusiness firms which assumed much of the production function. Those institutions that had been created to serve small-unit agriculture were converted by stages to serve large-farm agriculture” (Donald  Hadwiger, 1976).   there.160 In many areas, population declined proportionately and sometimes even absolutely,  impelling further outward flows of people and money. During the Obama presidency, the  Democrats left the field, sometimes literally. The party famously rejected proposals by former  Vermont Governor Howard Dean to build up organizations in all fifty states, in favor of  concentrating on urban America. Today, conservative big farmers and their industrial and  financial allies dominate most farm area politics, though giant anti-labor retailers are also  moving in to build warehouses paying modest wages.   In the Pacific Northwest, Minnesota, and some other areas, another dynamic compounds the  Democrats’ problems with voters in the periphery. Here our results for saw mills and the Trump  vote are striking. Many parts of Oregon, Washington state, Minnesota, and other areas were once  flourishing timber producers, often with sizeable unions. But federal regulations championed by  environmentalists whose political strength is mostly centered in urban, bi-coastal areas has  seriously affected the old industries. Their populations, mostly white and less well educated, do  not see the federal government as a friendly force. We are not surprised that groups like the  Proud Boys appear to recruit rather heavily from such areas.161   The growing chasm between cities – “world cities” in current parlance – and the periphery raises  deep questions about the future of American democracy. The historically inclined will inevitably  think of France after 1848, when rural areas fiercely resisted urban efforts to tax them for the  benefit of cities or, indeed, many parts of Europe today. The spatial implications of the American  dual economy are a mainspring of the Trump electoral phenomenon, though we caution that  within the big cities the growing urban-based, low wage dual economy nourishes the Sanders  wing of the Democratic Party and related radical movements. The slow collapse of public goods  such as transportation and education also leads more and more of the middle class in the  In both the country and cities, the economy was working for only a small portion of the  population when COVID hit.  The pandemic made matters worse, though for a while federal  support programs significantly cushioned its crushing weight on many Americans. As it assumed  power, the Biden administration moved boldly to push through far-reaching relief programs. But  back to “Normalcy” is unviable. The status quo ante is what produced Trump. The new  administration is  trying to follow up its first success with designs for further large scale  reconstruction. Some combine serious proposals on climate change with programs that hold  160 “Small” here means very small in the sense of (MacDonald et al., 2018), p. 5. To some extent the numbers over time are artificially swelled by absolutely rising prices, which means that firms too tiny to make it into older censuses now appear. Many of these dwarfs, one suspects, represent either hobbies by families that probably vote elsewhere, garner most of their income from other jobs, or are sad cases reminiscent of Tobacco Road. many minority owned farms are small and sparse and have long been shortchanged by the Department of  161 A few areas with abundant water resources have sometimes transited into leisure-based recreational centers and have thrived, often in the process become more liberal.   promise for preserving wages and jobs for average Americans, notably the proposals to  encourage electric cars and remake the automobile sector.   Whether these efforts are big enough to meet the need is, perhaps, doubtful. But immediate  problems loom, even if the administration succeeds in putting across its truncated infrastructure  and human capitals programs. The party establishment remains closely tied to Silicon Valley, big  finance, and major parts of telecommunications, paralyzing efforts for real change. Both the  administration and Democratic congressional leaders are also dug in on protecting the disastrous  and fabulously expensive system of private medical care that clearly fails most of the population.   Republicans and establishment Democrats also pushed the President to let lapse the special  legislative and regulatory measures put in place during COVID to protect the poor and  vulnerable, such as the moratoria on evictions and student loan payments. The Supreme Court  threw out the administration’s halting, last minute attempt to postpone evictions again after it had collected campaign cash from real estate groups.162 The supplementary unemployment payments  have now expired and there are questions about how long the restrictions on charges for COVID  tests and other medical assistance will survive. It is clear that many hospitals have continued to  Most ominously of all, every passing day suggests that the administration is failing to keep up  with COVID’s mutations. Though it is spending a lot of money, when it assumed power, it failed  to prioritize cheap, accessible tests open to anyone who needs them, left too much basic data  gathering to scholars or the media, and made at best half-hearted pushes in favor of improved  ventilation, air filters, and other obvious steps that would minimize indoor COVID problems,  especially in schools.164 It also did essentially nothing to put reliable face masks in the hands of the population and failed even to set standards for advertising and sales of facemasks, leaving a  vast market to charlatans. It still has no program in place for large scale random testing that can  swiftly identify new variants and it has failed to create an effective national set of statistics with public dashboards anyone can access. Essentially it has staked everything on vaccines that will  need regular, costly updates in a country with no national healthcare system. It is obvious that the administration’s hopes for an end to the COVID nightmare are premature.  Beyond all this sits the giant dilemma highlighted by the tumultuous American exit from  Afghanistan. The entire Democratic establishment bought into the administration’s sunny foreign  policy rhetoric that “America is back” and the importance of maintaining a rules-based  international order. The new Biden foreign policy team missed few opportunities to lecture  China, Russia, Iran, and other revisionist countries about the importance of adhering to norms  and standards in diplomacy. Most of the Republican establishment shares this conviction, in  stark contrast to the Trump wing of the party.165   But there is a fundamental problem: the approach presupposes a stable world order with a clear  hegemon. We no longer live in this setting, but in a multipolar world more akin to the nineteen  twenties and thirties. Listening to the commentary about global supply chains and the importance  of access to “rare earths” that are vital for production in the digital age, one must wonder how  long the administration’s focus on internal reconstruction can survive. The motivation for  Biden’s decision not to prolong the U.S. presence in Afghanistan past August 31st is easy to  understand: he did not want to be rolled by the military and its industrial suppliers like Obama  was and that only Trump finally overrode on his way out.  But the President’s  national security  advisers did not pick up on the real situation on the ground. No one in authority seems to have  anticipated the swift collapse of the deeply corrupt Afghan government. The result is the military  and foreign policy counterpart of 2008’s Great Financial Crisis: the failure of a clueless national  security state leadership that is out of touch with reality and whose “theories” of international  relations and diplomacy are as delusional as free market fundamentalism.166 Already one can see  an alliance forming between inflation hawks and war hawks in both parties in favor of new  rounds of military spending that glosses over the history of corruption and mendacity that  enabled both Vietnam and the Afghan war and efforts to blame China for policy failures that  Which brings us to the most important question of all: if the Biden administration fails, what  then? At the opening of this essay, we saw how most of big business, even parts of it otherwise  friendly to Trump’s policies, were not prepared to tolerate the disjointed efforts by the President  and a minority of his supporters to overthrow the election results. But it is already obvious that  the resonant promises by many businesses to cut off supporters of the January 6 putsch from  The threat is not yet mortal. Most of big business is well aware that Joe Biden is no Socialist or  even Franklin D. Roosevelt, even as anxieties rise that he might be Jimmy Carter. For all the talk  about inflation, the fact is that the Democratic congressional effort to raise the minimum wage  165 Though the discussion predates the Biden administration’s assumption of power, see above all (Kurth, 2019). 166 The comparison with the nineteen seventies is inevitable, though we think it is more than a little misleading. that is for another essay. Much recent literature on the revival of the right in American political life pays little attention to budget tensions between “world order” and domestic reconstruction, especially from the standpoint of Neoliberal economics. See by contrast, (Ferguson & Rogers, 1986).   167 The literature is already vast and will grow. A succinct first-hand account of corruption in Afghanistan is (Chayes, 2021); on the broader issue of misinformation and mendacity, see, e.g., the sketch in (Greenwald, 2021). Comparisons of the rest of this decade with the nineteen seventies are inevitable, though we think they are likely more than a little misleading. But that is for another essay. Much recent literature on the revival of the right in American political life pays little attention to (claimed) budget tensions between “world order” and domestic reconstruction, especially from the standpoint of Neoliberal economics. See by contrast, (Ferguson & Rogers, 1986). On rare earths, see, e.g., (Dizard, 2021). On the over-extension of military spending, see, e.g., (Galbraith, 2021). failed. So did the vast union effort to organize Amazon in Alabama, and despite pre-election  promises, the Occupational Health and Safety Administration has been slow to issue stricter rules  on worker safety, even as COVID rates remain high and the special pandemic programs lapse,  Despite a lot of rhetoric, the Biden regime at best parallels the First, not the Second New Deal.168 But while we share the administration’s confidence that sustained general inflation is not in the  cards, food and energy price rises are running very high, while wages are not keeping pace.   Especially if the administration cannot get a better grip on COVID (which heavily impacts day  care, schools, and older workers near retirement and thus labor supply), then serious  deterioration in the living standards of many Americans becomes a real possibility. Recent  statistical studies suggesting that “deaths of despair” and related pathologies largely mirrored  dismal existing patterns rather than increasing should be a red flag, given the lapse of pandemic  Yet despite the great rise in the stock market with the vast upward transfer of wealth that it  implies, every major business organization in the United States opposes the quite moderate  Biden tax proposals.170 Green New Deal programs are facing massive opposition. Republicans  are now mounting major campaigns to restrict voting rights and, most alarming of all, give state  legislators far more active roles in supervising elections and counting ballots. Total spending in  campaigns for state offices that have influence over the counting of ballots is increasing  markedly.171 That is a warning sign that only fools can miss. One must wonder what could  happen in the event of another economic downturn or a resurgence of movements for social  justice and the defense of living standards squeezed by food and energy price inflation. Putsch  attempts that started out looking like opéra bouffe have sometimes led to much worse.  169 (Case & Deaton, 2021). The administration’s new child tax credit assuredly helps families with children, but the program is too narrow to reach broad masses of voters in major ways.  170 Some environmental levies have attracted some business support; these are an exception.  This Appendix sets out our formal model of the election. We want to explain the difference in  the percentage of votes Trump received between 2016 and 2020 in the different counties of the  United States. We subtract Trump’s percentage in 2016 from the figure for 2020, so that positive  signs on the model’s coefficients indicate factors associated with gains for Trump and negative  Counties are not random points; they are located in specific geographical areas with  definite neighbors. From many previous efforts, we expected to find strong spatial correlation in  our data. Spatial autocorrelation rather resembles temporal autocorrelation: both make trouble for  statistical analysis.  Moran tests are the customary method for discovering whether spatial  autocorrelation is present in the data. When our tests showed that it was, we switched from  ordinary least squares regression to spatial error regression based on Lagrange Multiplier tests.173 The model is a spatial version of a fixed effect general linear model. This includes  separate intercepts for each state to take account of heterogeneity between them.    where s is the number of states, s = 49,  ni is the number   is the total number of counties in the sample, be the  dependent variable, which is the difference between Trump’s percentage of all votes between  be the predictors then the spatial fixed effect model is  where αi are state-specific intercepts that capture heterogeneities across states and λ is the spatial correlation. Spatial dependence is captured through spatial autoregressive specification of the  172 As discussed in the text, Alaska is not included in the analysis. Data for a few counties in some variables our model draws on is missing, so that a few counties had to be dropped. The data for 2020 come from David Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections, https://uselectionatlas.org/  The 2016 data come from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, https://electionlab.mit.edu/data  We made small corrections to reported votes in a few counties in Arizona in 2016 based on official county election returns. Because of the way Leip reports results in Jackson County, Missouri, we also have adjusted his statistics for that one county. We paid careful attention to multicollinearity as we developed our model. The Condition Index of the full model is well under the widely  The coefficients are estimated in the following tables  with Nagelkerke Pseudo-R-squared = .637 and spatial correlation l= 0.499.   Fixed effects spatial error model for the difference in county votes for Trump in 2020 vs.  Campaign Contributions Data and Tables for Figures 9 and 10; Small Donor Calculations  This appendix explains how we calculate this paper’s data on political contributions and presents  We begin with our Figures 9 and 10 in the main text: Money and Major Party Votes in the House  All our methods and data sources are spelled out in the Appendices to Thomas Ferguson, Paul,  Jorgensen, and Jie Chen, “How Money Drives US Congressional Elections: Linear models of  Money and Outcomes,” Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 2019,  For 2020, we proceeded as usual: we gather all candidate disbursements and outside money from  any source spent in support of the candidate, including negative advertising against opponents, to  construct the percent of all money favoring the Democratic candidate in each House and Senate  election. The campaign spending data derives from multiple Federal Election Commission  data/?tab=candidates, https://www.fec.gov/data/browse-data/?tab=spending )  containing candidate summary spending totals, independent expenditures (from Super PACs and  dark money groups), party coordinated expenditures, electioneering communications (which we  examine to clearly identify support of or opposition to candidates), and communications costs  (campaigning internal to some corporations and unions). Note that these include “dark money,”  though those totals do not allow identification of the real source of the money.  For our models we drop races without two major party candidates; see our Structural Change  and Economic Dynamics discussion. In many cases those are best viewed as auctions. We always  test for spatial autocorrelation in races. This is often present in House elections and sometimes  for Senate elections. We include the final outcomes of the Georgia Senate races on the graph, but  since they were stand alones, not in calculating the model fit for 2020.  The strongly linear character of the models, which holds for all elections for which data exists,  has been a standing embarrassment to voter centered accounts of politics from the moment it was  published. Many critical responses are simply silly; they don’t pay enough attention to details.  But we take the force of the objection that in theory the money could be following polls, in  whole or in part, making the apparent correlation spurious.   The usual social science device to deal with problems of “endogeneity” is some form of  instrumental variable. In our earlier work, we developed a spatial version of the latent  instrumental variable model developed by Peter Ebbes and analyzed in detail by Irene Hueter to  assess such possibilities.174 Our Structural Change piece discusses these, but in addition, shows  how to use published gambling odds to confirm our conclusions that while two-way causality  happens, it does not dominate; the 2016 Republican Senate recovery was a particularly dramatic  case in point. Note that since we developed the linear model, other researchers find evidence for  it in other countries; it is not specific to the United States.  Our presentation of results here follows those in our longer essay. As usual, the House elections  in Figure 9 showed marked spatial autocorrelation based on a Moran I test. This indicated that  the residuals of the OLS model displayed significant spatial dependence (PV(I) < .001).  For the  House we thus report, successively, results using ordinary least squares, then a spatial Durbin  model, followed by the Bayesian spatial latent instrumental variable regression with 4 clusters  we prefer, along with Pseudo R squared measures for both spatial models, followed by N, the  Modeling Money and Major Party Votes in 2020 Congressional Elections  Our Figure 10 for the Senate includes the final outcomes of the Georgia Senate races on the  graph, but since they were stand alones, not in calculating the model fit. Spatial models were  unnecessary for the Senate elections, so the table does not show any. We present results for the  OLS model and for a Bayesian latent instrumental variable regression with 3 clusters.  Modeling Money and Major Party Votes in the Senate  174 See the discussion and references to their work in (Ferguson et al., 2019).  Obtaining the percentage of small donors to a single committee representing a candidate, group,  company, union, or party is a straightforward procedure. Each committee reports an  “unitemized” total, which sums money contributed by individuals who give the committee $200  dollars or less in the two-year election cycle. Each committee also reports its total receipts for  that same cycle. A committee’s reliance upon small donors to fund its operation is the percentage  of total receipts it receives from unitemized donors. We downloaded this and other data required  for more nuanced accounting, which we document below, from the Federal Election Commission  (https://www.fec.gov/data/browse-data/?tab=committees).   Unfortunately, the figure for the reliance on small donors of any one committee is not of much  interest since that committee is likely to be unrepresentative of the whole. For example, using the  above method, small donors to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee represented  25.12% of its total receipts, while the figure was 30.63% for the Democratic Senatorial  Campaign Committee and 23.91% for the Democratic National Committee. The equivalent  Republican committees were roughly comparable, as small donors to the National Republican  Congressional Committee represented 27.45% of its total receipts, while the figure was 23.59%  for the National Republican Senatorial Committee and 28.41% for the Republican National  But the parties also operate super PACs that spend millions of dollars. The percentages of small  donors for these are far lower. For the Democrats, the House Majority PAC received 3.57% of its  total receipts from small donors and for the Senate Majority PAC it was 7.95%. For the  Republican equivalents, the percentages were even lower. The Congressional Leadership Fund  reported 1.27% of its total receipts coming from small donors and the Senate Leadership Fund  (think Mitch McConnell) reported a miniscule .022%. A true picture of the role small donors  play in party fundraising requires an accounting method that accurately aggregates unitemized  donors and total receipts across the full spectrum of committees owned and operated on behalf of  Our sample includes all committees known to be operated by or on behalf of the Democratic and  Republican general election candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate. These  committees include the candidates’ principal campaign committees, leadership committees, and  super PACs. Our sample includes all the joint committees operated by those candidates and two  major parties. We also include the six major party committees (DNC, RNC, DSCC, NRSC,  DCCC, NRCC), and the super PACs affiliated with each party in each chamber. Some of these  outside spending committees are organized as “hybrids”, which are committees with two bank  accounts, one for direct cash contributions to federal candidates and another for either  advertising and other expenditures that benefit candidates or non-federal disbursements. While it  is conventional to refer to the House Majority PAC as a super PAC, as we do above, it is  formally organized as a hybrid committee with different accounts. Our sample includes the  presidential equivalent of all these committees, including principal campaign committees, joint  committees, and super/hybrid PACs. We do not include candidate committees of candidates who  lost in the House, Senate, or Presidential primaries.   Finally, our sample includes all super and hybrid PACs that are not directly affiliated with either  political party but spend money in ways that help either the Democrats or Republicans  exclusively in congressional, senatorial, and/or presidential races. We call these “para-party”  committees. Examples include The Lincoln Project for Democrats and American Crossroads for  Republicans. We do not include industries or groups that have a policy focus, which aligns with  one party in this particular political era as “para-party” committees. For example, we do not  include Planned Parenthood, union-run committees, or the Chamber of Commerce; however,  these organizations do contribute large sums to the “para-party” committees and those show in  our tabulations. By including these “para-party” organizations, our sample covers 88% of all  super PAC receipts. In other words, we can link 88% of all super PAC money either directly to  candidate-run operations or to efforts to help one party or the other exclusively.   We identified all super PACs registered with the FEC for the 2020 election cycle. Those super  PACS not included either spent money on behalf of both Republican and Democratic candidates  or represented a particular industry that could not be tied to the parties. Our hybrid PAC sample  includes all of those committees that are associated with either the Democratic or Republican  Parties or associated directly with a general election candidate, plus the “para-party” hybrid  PACs that are in the top 150 of hybrid PACs ranked by total receipts. Our sample thus includes  93% of all hybrid PAC money, but two big party fund aggregators, ActBlue and WinRed, are not  included in these totals even though they are officially registered as committees with a non- contribution account used to disseminate money at the state level.   We do not include a direct analysis of ActBlue and WinRed at this juncture because they act  primarily as conduits and help link donors to candidate and party committees. We proceed this  way to minimize double counting. Money coming through the two conduit groups will still show  in our data. ActBlue and WinRed itemize all their donors and transactions regardless of whether  a donor aggregates to below $200. This reporting practice means that ActBlue and WinRed do  receive money from donors who give less than or equal to $200 but itemize those donors rather  than report a lump sum. ActBlue reported zero unitemized contributions in 2020, and  $4,318,377,981 in itemized total receipts. WinRed, following ActBlue’s reporting standard in  this specific instance, received $2,240,123,103 and listed only $2,009 in unitemized  contributions.  The FEC decides which of those donors to ActBlue and WinRed appear in the  itemized file using the $200 threshold. A few small donors below that threshold will sometimes  appear in the FEC itemized file, but those donors represent an extremely small percent of the  small donor pie. A complete analysis of small donor contributions funneled through these  conduits would therefore require a comparison of their filings with the FEC itemized file. The  small donors using ActBlue or WinRed should be included in the unitemized total reported by  each candidate. We are planning a detailed inventory as part of our future research, but from past  experiences we are confident already that any differences with totals reported here will be very  Increasing the sample size from one committee to an entire slate of candidates, parties, or even  Congress as a whole requires still more nuanced accounting procedures. Rather like the market  for inter-bank funds, candidates often operate more than one committee and these committees all  contribute and transfer money to other candidate and party committees. These contributions and  transfers to other committees would inflate total receipts and cause an artificial deflation of  small-donor percentages. When interest is centered on one committee, as in the examples above,  it is rational to keep these transfers and contributions because it shows how much the committee  relies on others in addition to small donors. The recipient committee may not know or care how  much its contributors acquired their receipts from small donors; however, there are times when  transfers and other contributions should be subtracted from the total receipts of a committee.  It is likely that a candidate, especially an incumbent, will run a principal campaign committee, a  leadership committee, and a super PAC. Small donors and receipts from those three committees  must be aggregated appropriately to obtain a true total for that candidate. When candidates are  aggregated into larger groups, such as Democrats and Republicans, total receipts balloon because  the committees of one candidate give to the committees of other candidates and party  committees. In other words, the total receipts of one committee become part of the total receipts  of another committee. In the samples and percentages reported in the paper, we account for all  transfers and contributions (read: recycled money) that occur within the sample. Accounting for  this recycled money requires additional data than what is provided in the summary finance files.  We use the itemized transaction files provided by the Federal Election Commission  (https://www.fec.gov/data/browse-data/?tab=bulk-data). These files require a sizeable amount of  computing and processing power to clean and reorganize the data to avoid mistakes.  These itemized files contain each transfer and contribution from one committee in the sample to  another. Flow of funds in this system is treacherous: Transfers and contributions between  committees can be missed or double-counted because both the donor and recipient can report the  same transaction. It is more common for a committee to report giving money to another  committee (a transaction labeled with 24K by the FEC) than receiving money from another  Given that the number of 24K transactions greatly outpaces the number of 18K transactions,  when they should be equal, it is tempting to only count the 24K transactions and assume the 18K  transactions are duplicates. This assumption is incorrect. It is possible that committees will report receiving money (18K), but the committee giving the money does not report that transaction  (24K). We developed a transaction-matching routine to identify when an 18K transaction is  duplicated and when it is not. In the 2020 election cycle, committees reported giving  $1,570,957,935 to other committees (24K). Committees reported receiving $553,875,524 (18K),  or just 35% of what was reported being given. To assume that all of that nearly $554 million  dollars are duplicated would miss $146,609,340 of unique committee contributions that are only  reported by the committee receiving them – over a quarter of the amount that could be  A similar problem occurs with committee contributions to super PACs. The super PAC reports  receiving the contribution (a transaction labeled with 10 by the FEC) and the committee reports  giving to the super PAC (24K). With super PACs, the problem is compounded because the  committee identification numbers are stripped from the super PAC reporting of the contribution.  In other words, the committee name is listed as the donor without the committee identification  number. We adjusted our transaction-matching routine to find the duplicate and unique  committee contributions to super PACs. In the 2020 election cycle, super PACs reported  receiving $1,501,110,754, but $315,224,685 or 21% of that amount were committees  contributing to super PACs, which duplicated the transactions found elsewhere in the data. Of  the committees we tabulate in our sample, our transaction-matching routine found $75,516,149  of contributions to super PACs that did not have the appropriate committee identification number  The problem of generating an accurate figure of total receipts when aggregating committees into  larger groups is exacerbated by the presence of joint committees. Joint committees are umbrella  organizations that raise money in large increments and then distribute subdivisions of those large  checks to committees that are constituent members of the joint committee. These member  committees can be principal campaign committees, leadership committees, and party  committees. When we include joint committees in our sample with candidates and parties, we  subtract the amount of subdivided contributions that the joint committee provides to its  constituent committees, to eliminate double counting.  This sample includes all general election candidates for House and Senate from the two major  parties, and all the known committees associated with those candidates. These committees  include the principal campaign committees, leadership committees, and super/hybrid PACs  connected to the candidates. We include the House and Senate party-run super/hybrid PACs in  this sample because they are closely associated with the party leaders of the chamber. More  specifically, the House Majority PAC is tied to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the Senate Majority PAC is  tied to Sen. Charles Schumer, the Congressional Leadership Fund is tied to Rep. Kevin  McCarthy, and the Senate Leadership Fund is tied to Sen. Mitch McConnell. Sen. Schumer did  not have an election in 2020 but is counted as a candidate and winner for this analysis because he  ran the top super PAC for the Democrats in the Senate and remains in office after the 2020  All Candidates for House & Senate (of those who raised money, n=874)  Percent Small Donors for All House & Senate Candidates = 23.49%  All Candidates for House & Senate – Republicans (of those who raised money, n=420),   Percent Small Donors for Rep. House & Senate Gen. Elect. Candidates = 18.7%  All Candidates for House & Senate – Democrats (of those who raised money, n=454)  Percent Small Donors for Dem. House & Senate Gen. Elect. Candidates = 27.56%  All Winners for House & Senate (includes Schumer & Senate Majority PAC, n=470)  Percent Small Donors for House & Senate Winners = 20.08%  All Losers for House & Senate (of those who raised money, n=404)  Percent Small Donors for House & Senate Losers = 29.05%  All Winners for House & Senate - Republicans (n=233)  Percent Small Donors for Rep House & Senate Winners = 15.41%  All Winners for House & Senate - Democrats (includes Schumer & Senate Majority PAC,  Percent Small Donors for Dem House & Senate Winner = 25.92%  All Joint Committees for House and Senate (of those that raised money, n=838)  Percent Small Donors in Joint Committee System = 5.24%  All Joint Committees for House and Senate - Republicans (of those that raised money, n=378)  Percent Small Donors in Joint Committee System = 5.21%  All Joint Committees for House and Senate - Democrats (of those that raised money, n=460)  Percent Small Donors in Joint Committee System = 5.29%  All Para-Party (Hybrid & Super PACs, of those that raised money, n=727)  Percent Small Donors in Para-Party System = 17.1%  Cut Off for Top 25% of Hybrid/Super PACs by Total Net Receipts = $648,533, n=182  Top 25, Total Net Receipts = 1,694,993,689.54 (96.8% of Total Net Receipts)  Top 25, Total Unitemized = 290,681,221.19 (97.2% of Total Unitemized)  Cut Off for Top 10% of Hybrid/Super PACs by Total Net Receipts = $3,733,085.58,  Top 10, Total Net Receipts = $1,525,087,780.22 (87.1% of Total Net Receipts)  Top 10, Total Unitemized = $266,739,222.48 (89.2% of Total Unitemized)  Top 10, of those 72 PACs, mean=18.4%, median= .48%, min=0, max=99%  Cut Off for Top 1% of Hybrid/Super PACs by Total Net Receipts = $68,909,090.71, n=7  Top 1, Total Net Receipts = $583,660,995.58 (33.3% of Total Net Receipts)  Top 1, Total Unitemized = $101,298,149.14 (33.88% of Total Unitemized)  Top 1, of those 7 PACs, mean=16.34%, median= .89%, min=0, max=57%  Small Donor Percentages of Top 1% of Para-Party Hybrid/Super PACs by Total Receipts  All Major Party Committees (RNC, DNC, NRSC, DSCC, NRCC, DCCC, n=6)  Percent Small Donors to Major Party Committees = 27.46%  The presidential sample includes the committees operated by and/or aligned with Trump and  Biden. These figures do not include the RNC or DNC, which we customarily group with the  party nominees. We analyze the party committees separately regarding small donors and then  group the parties, candidates, and para-party committees together for a final judgment about  party reliance on small donors. For Trump and Biden, we group together their principal  campaign committees, joint committees, and all outside committees that are associated with  them. We do not include the para-party PACs that certainly spent money to promote Biden or  All Entities (Candidates, Parties, Joint, Hybrid, Super PACs, n=2447)  Unitemized Total = $3,509,351,830 (74.19% of the entire unitemized figure of  All Entities - Republicans (Candidates, Parties, Joint, Hybrid, Super PACs, n=1,124)  All Entities - Democrats (Candidates, Parties, Joint, Hybrid, Super PACs, n=1,323)  These results show yet again that large donors supply the vast majority of campaign funds in  federal elections. There are small differences: candidates who win their races rely less on small  donors than those who lose those races. Winners in the House and Senate, as a group, rely on  small donors for only 20% of their campaign stash, but that figure jumps to 30% for the losers of  those races. Summaries of total spending need to take full account of the large sums of money  that come in the form of “outside” advertisements and “outside” money. When we include these  spending streams, including contributions to the Super PACs raising and spending in the  presidential race, we find that small donors fund approximately 30% of federal general elections.   It is obvious that understanding elections and party conflict requires analyzing the large donors  who supply the other 70% of the funds supporting the two major political parties in the U.S.   Data Issues for Industry and Agriculture and Sources  Most of our data comes from standard sources in the list appended below and do not raise  particularly thorny questions. But the county data we rely on for industries and some segments of  agriculture require a word of explanation. Our paper draws heavily on wage data for individual  industries and counties from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. The basic source we  https://data.bls.gov/cew/apps/data_views/data_views.htm#tab=Tables But these, like many other  U.S. government data sources, including many from the U.S. Department of Agriculture,  deliberately mask entries that could be used to reveal information about individual businesses.  The tables and explanatory material are clear about this and usually indicate where masking  happens. Other researchers who have relied on this or similar government data sources make  adjustments for this. A popular one is to take the midpoint of a range of values.   It became clear that this could be a very hazardous strategy. A single example can make the  point. Hancock County in Kentucky “is dominated by aluminum smelters and aluminum  products companies.”175 But the entry for Hancock in the full downloaded table for 2019 (the  county does not appear at all in the short summary table that the site offers without downloading)  shows zero employment and no wages in NAICS Industry 3313, which should include those sub- sectors.176 The same holds for the more detailed 331315, which as indicated below, employs  hundreds of workers there, as do several other subsectors. This is masking in a form that taking  Fortunately, a group of economists have recently reworked the data using linear programming  and other techniques and made their files available to researchers. We are grateful for what  appears to be very careful work and we use their data, which we regard as a major contribution  to spatial studies of industry.177 They caution that their data for 2017 and 2018 are more  hazardous because of a change in masking techniques. We accordingly use the data for 2016.  Note that their data does not cover the entire economy; some very substantial sectors are left out,  including much of agriculture. Total employment in counties in the sense we require it cannot,  accordingly, be found by summing their totals. Given that the data is for establishments as  explained in our main text, we need data that covers all jobs in the county. We thus turned to the  data compiled by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis for total employment in 2016. See the  discussion of the data from different government bureaus and the BEA’s own tables here:  https://www.bea.gov/data/employment/employment-county-metro-and-other-areas    https://data.bls.gov/cew/apps/table_maker/v4/table_maker.htm#type=1&year=2019&qtr=A&own=5&ind=3313&su 177 (Eckert et al., 2021a); (Eckert et al., 2021b).   Map of Differences in Trump’s Share of the Vote Between 2016 and 2020 in Counties  Campaign Contributions from Private Equity, Coal, and Oil  These totals are compiled along the lines of our previous work.178 Unlike most studies, we try to  include individual contributions from executives in firms, as well as PAC contributions, and so- called 527 money, which is only available in data from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). We  combine the IRS statistics with the FEC data in the totals below. These industries and many  others contribute large sums to 527’s such as the major party governors’ associations. So-called  “dark money” is not included here since it cannot be attributed reliably. “Big business” firms  refers to enterprises on the scale of the top 350 firms on the Fortune 500 list and comparably  sized private firms, along with investors on the Forbes 400 lists for 2019 and 2020.   Identifying private equity firms outside of the big business lists is fraught with difficulty. We  cross-listed the list of private equity firms provided by Private Equity Info  (https://www.privateequityinfo.com/) with the list of firms in the 2020 campaign finance records  to find all known private equity campaign contributors, including firms, executives, and PACs.  To identify coal and oil and gas contributors, including firms, executives, and PACs, we cross- listed the list of firms provided by Dun & Bradstreet Hoovers (https://www.dnb.com/) with the  list of firms in the 2020 campaign finance records. We conducted a manual search through the  campaign finance records to find additional smaller firms. To generate the list from Dun &  Bradstreet Hoovers, we defined oil and gas using the following 4-digit sic codes: 1311, 1321,  1381, 1382, 1389, 2911, 4612, 4613, 4619, 4922, 4923, 4924, 4925, 4932, 5983, 5984, 5989,  6792, and the largest firms in 5172 and 5541. For coal, we used 1221, 1222, and 1241 in addition  to a manual search of the campaign finance records.  Appendix Table 5: Campaign Contributions from Private Equity, Coal, and Oil & Gas  *This column alone includes contributions to industry PACs as well as industry PAC spending to  other entities outside the presidential general election candidates. The PAC spending should be  discounted to avoid double counting industry totals. Private equity PACs spent $1,402,000; coal  PACs spent $1,365,752; and oil and gas PACs spent $19,769,314.   178 (Ferguson et al., 2018); (Ferguson et al., 2013); (Ferguson et al., 2019).  Abutaleb, Y., & Dawsey, J. (2021, August 31, 2020). New Trump Pandemic Adviser Pushes Controversial ‘Herd Immunity’ Strategy, Worrying Public Health Officials Washington Post. Retrieved from  https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-coronavirus-scott-atlas-herd-immunity/2020/08/30/925e68fe-e93b- Addo, F. R., & Derity, W. R., Jr. (2021). Disparate Recoveries: Wealth, Race, and the Working Class After the Great Recession. Annals of the American Academcy, 695 (May), 173-192. Retrieved from  Agriculture, Department  of  (2019). Market Facilitation Program 2019 County Per Acre Payment Rate. Retrieved from https://www.farmers.gov/sites/default/files/documents/PaymentRates.pdf   Alvelda, P., Ferguson, T., & Mallery, J. (2020). To Save the Economy, Save People First Retrieved from Institute for New Economic Thinking; https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/to-save-the-economy-save-people- Amadeo, K. (2021, June 11, 2021 Updated). How Every President Since Hoover Has Affected the Economy. The Balance. Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/gdp-growth-by-president-highs-lows-averages-4801102 Anselin, L. (2002). Under the Hood: Issues in the Specification and Interpretation of Spatial Regression Models. Artiga, S., Rae, M., Pham, O., Hamel, L., & Muñana, C. (2020). COVID-19 Risks and Impacts Among Health Care Workers by Race/Ethnicity. Retrieved from KFF.org.com: https://www.kff.org/report-section/COVID-19-risks-and- impacts-among-health-care-workers-by-race-ethnicity-issue-brief/  Autor, D., Dorn, D., Hansen, G., & Majlesi, K. (2020). Importing Political Polarization? The ElectoralConsequences of Rising Trade Exposure. American Economic Review, 110(10), 3139–3183. Retrieved from  Autor, D., Dorn, D., Hanson, G., & Majlesi, K. (2016). Importing Political Polarization? The Electoral Consequences of Rising Trade Exposure. Retrieved from Cambridge, Massachusetts:  https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/news/2016/11/29/293816/the-role-of-midwestern-housing- Autor, D., Dorn, D., Hanson, G., & Majlesi, K. (2017). A Note on the Effect of Rising Trade Exposure on the 2016 Election. Retrieved from Cambridge, Massachusetts: https://economics.mit.edu/files/12418  Axios. (2021). 1 Big Thing ... \"Off the rails\": Swan Series on Trump's Final Days.  Baccini, L., Brodeur, A., & Weymouth, S. (2021). The COVID-19 Pandemic and the 2020 US Presidential Election. Journal of Population Economics, 34, 739-767. Retrieved from  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00148-020-00820-3   Ball, M. (2020, February 4). The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/  Barker, K., & Harris, A. J. (2021, Updated March 15, 2021). Playing Russian Roulette’: Nursing Homes Told to Take the Infected. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/us/nursing-homes- Barth, B. (2019). Can the Democrats Win Back Farm Country? . Modern Farmer. Retrieved from  https://modernfarmer.com/2019/07/can-the-democrats-win-back-farm-country/  Beard, D. (2021). Three Explanations for the Shift Towards Trump Among Latino Voters. Retrieved June 4 https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/3/12/2020739/-Three-explanations-for-the-shift-towards-Trump-among- Bianchi, F., Thilo, K., & Kung, H. (2019). Threats to Central Bank Independence: High-Frequency Identification with Twitter. Retrieved from Cambridge: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26308/w26308.pdf Bjorklund, K. (2020). The Inside Story of How Sweden Botched Its Coronavirus Response. Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/12/22/sweden-coronavirus-COVID-response/  Blaine, S. B. (2019, September 22, 2019). Opinion: Trump’s Tariffs Are Killing Apple Farmers Like Us. Oregonian. Retrieved from https://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/2019/09/opinion-trumps-tariffs-are-killing-apple- Brown, C. (2021). The US-China Trade War and Phase One Agreement. Peterson Institute for International Economics Working Paper 21-2; Retrieved from https://www.piie.com/publications/working-papers/us-china-trade- Brown, E. (2020). Meet BlackRock, the New Great Vampire Squid. Common Dreams. Retrieved from  https://www.commondreams.org/views/2020/06/22/meet-blackrock-new-great-vampire-squid  Bruggeman, L. (2020, April 18, 2020). Inside the Silicon Valley ‘Brain Trust’ Taking Aim at COVID-19. News. Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/Health/inside-silicon-valley-brain-trust-taking-aim- Burleigh, N. (2021). Virus: Vaccinations, the CDC, and the Hijacking of America's Response to the Pandemic. Cadava, G. (2020, December 29, 2020). The Deep Origins of Latino Support for Trump. The New Yorker. Retrieved from https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-political-scene/the-deep-origins-of-latino-support-for-trump Camous, A., & Matveev, D. (2019). Furor over the Fed : Presidential Tweets and Central Bank Independence. Retrieved from Ottawa, Canada: https://www.bankofcanada.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/san2019-33.pdf Campo-Flores, A., & Findell, E. (2020, November 5 Updated). Latino Voters Drifted From Democrats in Florida and Texas Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/latino-voters-drifted-from-democrats- Carmiel, O. (2020). Business Leaders Urge Trump to Begin Presidential Transition. Retrieved June 8, 2021 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-23/business-leaders-urge-trump-to-begin-transition-n-y-times- Case, A., & Deaton, A. (2021). The Great Divide: Education, Despair, and Death. National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 29241: https://www.nber.org/papers/w29241  Cavallaro, M. (2021). Local David Versus Global Goliath: Populist Parties and the Decline of Progressive Politics in Italy Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 80. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/local-david-versus-global-goliath-populist-parties-and-the- CBSNews.com. (2021). Transcript: Matt Pottinger on \"Face the Nation,\" February 21, 2021. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/transcript-matt-pottinger-on-face-the-nation-february-21-2021/  Chang, A., Ferguson, T., Rothschild, J., & Page, B. (2021). Ambivalence About International Trade in Open- and Closed-ended Survey Responses. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 162,  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/ambivalence-about-international-trade-in-open-and-closed- Chayes, S. (2021). The Ides of August. www.sarahchayes.org. Retrieved from  https://www.sarahchayes.org/post/the-ides-of-august  Chen, J., Ferguson, T., & Jorgensen, P. (2020). Using Scan Statistics for Cluster Detection: Recognizing Real Bandwagons. Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, 20, 1481–1491. Retrieved from  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11009-019-09737-1  Cheng, Y., & Hillberry, R. (2018). U.S. County-Level Impacts of Growth in China’s Demand for Agricultural Imports. Paper presented at the Presented at the 21st Annual Conference on Global Economic Analysis, Cartagena, Columbia. https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/9078.pdf  Chudik, A., Koech, J., & Wynne, M. (2021). The Heterogeneous Effects of Global and National Business Cycles on Employment in US States and Metropolitan Areas. Oxford Bulletin of Statistics and Economics 83(2), 495-517. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/obes.12402  Chudik, A., & Pesaran, M. H. (2016). Theory and Practice of GVAR Modelling. Journal of Economic Surveys, 30(1), 165–197. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/joes.12095  Cigna, S., Meinen, P., Schulte, P., & Steinhof, N. (2020). The Impact of US Tariffs Against China on US imports: Evidence for Trade Diversion? Frankfurt: European Central Bank Retrieved from  https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwin5pnMjaTxAhVBm- AKHYjVA0YQFjAAegQIBBAF&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecb.europa.eu%2Fpub%2Fpdf%2Fscpwps%2Fecb. wp2503~ca71d98a53.en.pdf&usg=AOvVaw3l9-lGRfmNiP5jPWuGQYHx  Cleary, E., Jackson, M., & Ledley, F. (2020). Government as the First Investor in Biopharmaceutical  Innovation:Evidence From New Drug Approvals 2010–2019. Retrieved from New York:  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/government-as-the-first-investor-in-biopharmaceutical- innovation-evidence-from-new-drug-approvals-2010-2019  Cliff, A. D., & Ord, J. K. (1981). Spatial Processes: Models and Applications. London: Pion Limited. CNN. (2020a). America's Choice 2020: Presidential Results. https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/results/president CNN. (2020b). America's Choice 2020: Primaries and Caucuses. Retrieved from  https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/primaries-and-caucuses .  Retrieved June 5, 2021.  CNN. (2020c). Exit Polls. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/election/2020/exit-polls/president/national-results Cochrane, E., & Tankersley, J. (2020, December 2, 2020). Top Democrats Back Compromise Plan to Revive Stimulus Talks. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/02/us/politics/coronavirus- Cohen, J. (2020, March 27, 2020). Caught Between Herd Immunity And National Lockdown, The Netherlands Hit Hard By COVID-19 (Update). Forbes. Retrieved from  https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshuacohen/2020/03/27/caught-between-herd-immunity-and-national-lockdown- Collins, S. (2020). Trump Made Gains with Black Voters in Some States. Here’s why. Retrieved from  https://www.vox.com/2020/11/4/21537966/trump-black-voters-exit-polls  Collman, A. (2020). Trump's New Tactic for Reelection is Blaming Governors for the Coronavirus Response. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-coronavirus-blaming-governors-reelection-tactic-2020-4 Condon, C. (2019, July 21, 2019 Updated). Bloomberg. Com. Here’s a Timeline of Trump’s Key Quotes on Powell and the Fed. Retrieved from https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/all-the-trump-quotes-on-powell-as-fed- Congressional Research Service. (2021). The Federal Reserve’s Response to COVID-19: Policy Issues. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from https://crsreports.congress.gov   Copp, T. (2020). If Trump Loses But Refuses to Leave the White House, What Will the Military Do? Retrieved from https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article247017117.html  Crippa, M., Solazzo, E., Guizzardi, D., Montforti-Ferrario, Tubiello, F. N., & Leip, A. (2021). Food Systems Are Responsible For a Third of GlobalAnthropogenic GHG Emissions. Nature Food, 2(March), 198–209. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/s43016-021-00225-9  Dealbook. (2020, April 3, 2020). The Business Leaders Trump Asks for Advice on the Coronavirus. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/03/business/dealbook/trump-coronavirus-advisors.html DeSilver, D. (2019). As Trade Disputes Intensify, U.S. Counties That Rely Most on Exports Tend To Be Small and in South, Midwest. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/06/19/us- counties-that-rely-most-on-exports-tend-to-be-small-in-south-midwest/  Dingel, J., & Neiman, B. (2020). How Many Jobs Can Be Done at Home? National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 26948;  https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w26948/w26948.pdf   Dippel, C., Heblich, S., & Gold, R. (2015). Globalization and Its (Dis-)Content: Trade Shocks and Voting Behavior. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 21812: https://www.nber.org/papers/w21812  Dipple, C., S., Gold, R., Heblich, S., & Pinto, R. (2021). The Effect of Trade on Workers and Voters Economic Journal, in press. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/ej/ueab041  Dizard, J. (2021, August 20, 2021). War Will Shape the Future of the US Industrial Base. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/636d15c1-c4ef-44de-bffc-43752d4bf552  Dorning, M. (2020). Tyson Suspends Managers Accused of COVID Betting Pool. Retrieved from  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-19/tyson-suspends-workers-after-lawsuits-allege-COVID- betting-pool?sref=pyiu6SiD .  Retrieved June 13, 2021  Eban, K. (2020, July 30, 2020). How Jared Kushner’s Secret Testing Plan “Went Poof Into Thin Air”. Vanity Fair. Retrieved from https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/07/how-jared-kushners-secret-testing-plan-went-poof-into- Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., & Yang, N. J. (2021a). County Business Pattern Database.   Eckert, F., Fort, T. C., Schott, P. K., & Yang, N. J. (2021b). Imputing Missing Values in the US Census Bureau's County Business Patterns. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 26632;  Elhorst, J. P., Gross, M., & Terenau, E. (2021). Cross-Sectional Dependence and Spillovers in Space and Time: Where Spatial Econometrics and Global VAR Models Meet. Journal of Economic Surveys, 35(1), 192-226.  Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/joes.12391  Elsom, J. (2020, April 26, 2020 Updated). Tory Grandees Urge Boris Johnson to Ease Coronavirus Lockdown: Six Donors Including Phones4U Founder John Caudwell and Three Cabinet Ministers Join Calls for Action. Daily Mail Online. Retrieved from https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8257513/Six-Tory-donors-urge-Boris-Johnson- Emma, C., & Levine, M. (2020). Breaking Down the $900B stimulus package and $1.4T Omnibus Bill. Politico. Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/20/details-stimulus-package-omnibus-bill-449499 Erickson, B. (2021, March 23, 2021). Teachers Union \"Not Convinced\" Social Distancing Can Safely Be Cut to 3 Feet. CBSNews.com. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/school-social-distancing-3-feet-teachers-not- Fabian, J., & Jacobs, J. (2020). Trump Hears Testing Pleas From Companies in Talks on Reopening. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-15/trump-s-task-force-to-reopen-u-s-becomes-a-day-of-phone- Farmer, B. (2020, October 22, 2020). Hospital Bills For Uninsured COVID-19 Patients Are Covered, But No One Tells Them. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/10/22/925942412/hospital-bills-for- uninsured-COVID-19-patients-are-covered-but-no-one-tells-them  Ferguson, T. (2020). Affluent Authoritarianism: McGuire and Delahunt’s New Evidence on Public Opinion and Policy Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/affluent-authoritarianism-mcguire-and-delahunts-new-evidence- Ferguson, T. (2021). Is the World Undergoing A Fiscal/Debt Revolution? International Economy Magazine, Winter 2021, 20. Retrieved from http://www.international-economy.com/  Ferguson, T. (1995a). From 'Normalcy' To New Deal: Industrial Structure, Party Competition and American Public Policy in the Great Depression. In T. Ferguson (Ed.), Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Party Competition and the Logic of Money-Driven Political Systems (pp. 113-172). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Ferguson, T. (1995b). Golden Rule: The Investment Theory Of Party Competition And The Logic  Of Money-Driven Political Systems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.  Ferguson, T. (1997). Review of Finegold and Skocpol, State and Party in America's New Deal. Journal of American History, 84(2), 713-714. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.2307/2952691  Ferguson, T. (2020). Affluent Authoritarianism: McGuire and Delahunt’s New Evidence on Public Opinion and Policy Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/affluent-authoritarianism-mcguire-and-delahunts-new-evidence- Ferguson, T. (2021). Is the World Undergoing A Fiscal/Debt Revolution? International Economy Magazine, Winter 2021, 20. Retrieved from http://www.international-economy.com/  Ferguson, T., Jorgensen, P., & Chen, J. (2013). Party Compeititon and Industrial Structure in the 2012 Elections: . International Journal of Political Economy, 42(2), 3-41.  Ferguson, T., Jorgensen, P., & Chen, J. (2018). Industrial Structure and Political Outcomes: The Case of the 2016 Election. In I. Cardinale & I. Scazzeri (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Political Economy (pp. 333-440). Ferguson, T., Jorgensen, P., & Chen, J. (2019). How Money Drives US Congressional Elections: Linear Models of Money and Outcomes. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics. Retrieved from  Ferguson, T., Jorgensen, P., & Chen, J. (2021; February, 11, 2021). Big Money Drove the Congressional Elections—Again Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/big-money-drove-the-congressional-elections-again   Ferguson, T., Page, B., Rothschild, J., Chang, A., & Chen, J. (2020). The Roots of Right-Wing Populism: Donald Trumpin 2016. International Journal of Political Economy, 49, 102-123. Retrieved from  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08911916.2020.1778861   Ferguson, T., & Rogers, J. (1986). Right Turn: The Decline Of The Democrats And The Future of American Politics. Ferleger, L., & Lazonick, W. (1993). The Managerial Revolution and the Developmental State: The Case of U.S. Agriculture Business and Economic History 22(2), 67-98. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/23702908 Ferman, M. (2020, November 13, 2020). Donald Trump Made Inroads in South Texas This year. These voters Explain Why. Texas Tribune. Retrieved from https://www.texastribune.org/2020/11/13/south-texas-voters-donald- Findell, E. (2020, November 8, 2020). Why Democrats Lost So Many South Texas Latinos—the Economy Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-democrats-lost-so-many-south-texas-latinosthe- Flaaen, A., & Pierce, J. (2019). Disentangling the Effects of the 2018-2019 Tariffs on a Globally Connected U.S. Manufacturing Sector (2019-086). Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2019-086.  Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.17016/FEDS.2019.086   Fontanari, C., Palumbo, A., & Salvatori, C. (2019a). Demand-Determined Potential Output: A Revision and Update of Okun’s Original Method  Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 93; Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/demand-determined-potential-output-a-revision-and- Fontanari, C., Palumbo, A., & Salvatori, C. (2019b). Is it Really \"Full Employment\"? Margins for Expansion in the US Economy in the Middle of 2019. Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/is-it-really- Fox, L. E., & Burns, K. (2021). The Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2020. (P60-275). Washington, D.C.: Census Bureau Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2021/demo/p60-275.html  Frey, W. H. (2020). Exit Polls Show Both Familiar and New Boting Blocs Sealed Biden’s Win. Retrieved June 3, 2021 https://www.brookings.edu/research/2020-exit-polls-show-a-scrambling-of-democrats-and-republicans- Friedman, T. (2020, April 18, 2020). Trump Is Asking Us to Play Russian Roulette With Our Lives. New York Times; https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/18/opinion/trump-coronavirus-testing.html   Galbraith, J. (2021, August 20, 2021). Afghanistan Was Always About American Politics. Project Syndicate. Retrieved from https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/afghan-war-was-about-us-politics-by-james-k- Gale, J. (2021, May 16, 2021). COVID Is Airborne, Scientists Say. Now Authorities Think So, Too.  Bloomberg.com. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-05-16/COVID-is-airborne- scientists-say-now-authorities-think-so-too?sref=pyiu6SiD  Gelman, A. (2016, December 8, 2016). 19 Things We Learned From the 2016 Election. Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science. Retrieved from http://andrewgelman.com/2016/12/08/19-things-learned-2016- Gelman, A., Morris, G. E., Vittert, L., & Xiao-Lee, M. (2020). Post-Election Interview with Andrew Gelman and G. Elliott Morris. Harvard Data Science Review. Retrieved from  https://hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/qqms394f/release/1?readingCollection=f10c13ea  General, O. o. I. (2021). COVID-19: Increased Worksite Complaints and Reduced OSHA Inspections Leave U.S. Workers' Safety at Increased Risk. (19-21-003-10-105). Washington, D.C. Retrieved from  https://www.oig.dol.gov/cgi-bin/oa_rpts-v4.cgi?s=&y=2021&a=all  Gezici, A., & Ozay, O. (2020). How Race and Gender Shape COVID-19 Unemployment Probability. Retrieved from Amherst, Massachusetts: https://www.peri.umass.edu/publication/item/1335-how-race-and-gender-shape-COVID- Ghitza, Y., & Robinson, J. (2021). What Happened in 2020? Retrieved from https://catalist.us/wh-national/. Retrieved June 3, 2021 https://catalist.us/wh-national/  Gollwitzer, A., Martel, C., Brady, W. J., Pärnamets, P., Freedman, I., Knowles, E. D., & Van Bevel, J. J. (2020). Partisan Differences in Physical Distancing Are Linked to Health Outcomes During the COVID-19 Pandemic. Nature Human Behavior, 4, 1186-1197. Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-00977-7 Golshan, T. (2020, February 13). Tom Steyer Really Is Everywhere In South Carolina. Huff Post. Retrieved from https://www.huffpost.com/entry/tom-steyer-south-carolina_n_5e446833c5b626d15fdd68cd  Greenwald, G. (2021). The U.S. Government Lied For Two Decades About Afghanistan. Glenn Greenwald  Retrieved from https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-government-lied-for-two-decades  Griffin, R. (2020, November 10). Don’t trust the exit polls. This explains why. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/11/10/dont-trust-exit-polls-this-explains-why/  Grinczel, S. (2021). Biden's Trade Actions Could Mirror Trump's. Farmer's Exchange Online Edition. Retrieved from http://www.farmers-exchange.net/detailPage.aspx?articleID=20385  Gurdasani, D., Alvelda, P., & Ferguson, T. (2021). New CDC Guidelines to Reopen Schools Could be Dangerous Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/new-cdc- Hadwiger, D. (1971). The Freeman Administration and the Poor. Agricultural History, 45(1), 21-32. Retrieved from Hadwiger, D. (1976). Farmers in Politics. Agricultural History, 50(1), 156-170. Retrieved from  Hadwiger, D., & Talbot, R. B. (1967). Government Programs: What are the Near-Term Prospects? In R. K. Buck, L. V. Mayer, C. B. Baker, & J. W. Goodwin (Eds.), Abundance and Uncertainty...Farm Policy Problems (pp. 131- Hilsenrath, J. (2020, October 20, 2020). The Verdict on Trump’s Economic Stewardship, Before COVID and After Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-economic-record-is-divided-before- Hirtzer, M. (2020). Senators Blast ‘Feckless’ OSHA Response to Meat Plants’ Virus Outbreaks. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-22/senators-say-osha-feckless-to-virus-safety-at-u-s-meat- plants?sref=pyiu6SiD.  Retrieved June 13, 2021 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-22/senators- say-osha-feckless-to-virus-safety-at-u-s-meat-plants?sref=pyiu6SiD   Holmes, A. (2020). Roughly Half of the Twitter Accounts Pushing to 'Reopen America' are Bots, Researchers Found. Retrieved from https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/roughly-half-of-the-twitter-accounts-pushing-to- reopen-america-are-bots-researchers-found/articleshow/75897895.cms.  Retrieved June 9, 2021  https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/roughly-half-of-the-twitter-accounts-pushing-to-reopen-america-are-bots- Jan, T. M., Jena, & Hoyer, M. (2021, August 23, 2021). Corporate America’s $50 Billion Promise. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/interactive/2021/george-floyd-corporate-america- Jenkins, P. (2021). The Private Equity Backlash against ESG. Financial Times. Retrieved from  https://www.ft.com/content/7e8edfd5-fccd-4f3c-9fda-c616b805c856  Kagan, R. (2021, September 23, 2021). Our Constitutional Crisis Is Already Here. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/23/robert-kagan-constitutional-crisis/  Kane, E. J. (2020). Immaculate Deception: How (and Why) Bankers Still Enjoy a Global Rescue Network. Institute https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj1- dSL4Yb0AhVXoHIEHaFlDHIQFnoECAoQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ineteconomics.org%2Fuploads%2F papers%2FWP_130-Kane-Immaculate-Deception.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2it8St_tMNJzOE2qGDL65r   Kennedy, W., & Biesheuvel, T. (2021, June 29, 2021 Updated). Billionaire Glasenberg’s Last Deal Says Coal Isn’t Dead Yet. Bloomberg. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-28/in-last-deal- glasenberg-bets-on-coal-s-long-lucrative-twilight?sref=pyiu6SiD  Kim, S. E., & Margalit, Y. (2021). Tariffs As Electoral Weapons: The Political Geography of the US–China Trade War. International Organization, 75(1), 1-38. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818320000612 Kimball, S. (2019, September 16, 2019 Updated). 'It's Not A Free Market': These Manufacturers Say Tariffs Help :evel the Playing Field with China. CNBC.com. Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/15/american- manufacturers-say-tariffs-can-level-the-playing-field-with-china.html  King, J. E. (2012). The Microfoundations Delusion: Metaphor and Dogma in the History of Macroeconomics. Kishi, R., Stall, H., Wolfson, A., & Jones, S. (2021). A Year of Racial Justice Protests: Key Trends in Demonstrations Supporting the BLM Movement. Retrieved from https://acleddata.com/2021/05/25/a-year-of-racial- justice-protests-key-trends-in-demonstrations-supporting-the-blm-movement/  Klein, N. (2020, May 8, 2020). Screen New Deal. The Intercept. Retrieved from  https://theintercept.com/2020/05/08/andrew-cuomo-eric-schmidt-coronavirus-tech-shock-doctrine/  Kliff, S. (2021, May 21, 2021). COVID Killed His Father. Then Came $1 Million in Medical Bills. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/21/upshot/COVID-bills-financial-long- Kohler, P., & Storm, S. (2016). CETA without Blinders: How Cutting 'Trade Costs and More' Will Cause Unemployment, Inequality, and Welfare Losses. International Journal of Political Economy, 45, 257–293. Retrieved from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08911916.2016.1270081  Kopp, E., Leigh, D., Mursula, S., & Tambunlertchai, S. (2019). U.S. Investment Since the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Retrieved from https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WP/Issues/2019/05/31/U-S-46942  Kurth, J. (2019). The American Way of Empire: How America Won a World--But Lost Her Way. Clearwater, Lake, J., & Nie, J. (2021). Did COVID Cost Trump the Election? Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute. Working Paper No. 8856.  Retrieved from Munich, Germany:  https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3774663  Lamothe, D. (2021, January 3). The Time to Question Election Results Has Passed, All Living Former Defense Secretaries Say. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/former- defense-secretaries-rebuke-trump-election/2021/01/03/1c708f64-4de5-11eb-b2e8-3339e73d9da2_story.html Lawder, D. (2020, May 1, 2020). Conservative Groups Advising White House Push Fast Reopening, Not Testing. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-plans-analysis- Lazonick, W. (2016). The Value Extracting CEO: How Executive Stock-Based Pay Undermines Investment in Productive Capabilities. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper  No. 54;  https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/WP_54-Lazonick-Value-Extracting-CEO-2016.pdf  Lazonick, W. (2017). The Functions of the Stock Market and the Fallacies of Shareholder Value. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper 58; https://www.ineteconomics.org/uploads/papers/WP_58-Lazonick- Lazonick, W., Sakinç, M. E., & Hopkins, M. (2020). Why Stock Buybacks Are Dangerous for the Economy. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2020/01/why-stock-buybacks-are-dangerous-for-the- Lazonick, W., Tulum, O., & Jacobson, K. (2021). Mass Producing COVID-19 Vaccine. Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/mass-producing-COVID-19-vaccine Lenski, J., Webster, T., & Brown, R. (2021). What We Learned from the 2020 Election Exit Polls Edson Research Blog. Retrieved from https://www.edisonresearch.com/what-we-learned-from-the-2020-election-exit-polls-2/ Leon, C. A., & Elk, M. (2021, July 13, 2021). The Bureau of Labor Statistics Counted Only Eight Strikes in 2020, Payday Report Counted 1,200 Institute for New Economic Thinking Blog;  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/the-bureau-of-labor-statistics-counted-only-eight-strikes-in-2020- Leonnig, C., & Rucker, P. (2021). I Alone Can Fix It: Donald J. Trump's Catastrophic Final Year. New York: LeSage, J., & Pace, R. K. (2009). Introduction to Spatial Econometrics. Boca Raton: Chapman & Hall/CRC Press. Levine, M., & Bresnahan, J. (2020). Republicans Struggle to Break Logjam on Coronavirus Relief. Politico (August 3, 2020 Updated). Retrieved from https://www.politico.com/news/2020/08/03/senate-faces-crucial-week-on- coronavirus-relief-talks-390907?nname=playbook&nid=0000014f-1646-d88f-a1cf-5f46b7bd0000&nrid=0000014e- Li, M., Balistreri, E. J., & Zhang, W. (2020). The U.S.-China Trade War: Tariff Data and General Equilibrium Analysis. Journal of Asian Economics, 69, 1-13. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2020.101216 Li, W., Qiu, B., Whang, Z., & Zeng, Y. (2021). Armington Elasticities and the Third-Country Effects of Trade Conflicts. Forum for Research in International Trade, Working Paper 1751. Retrieved from https://www.freit.org/ Lipton, E., Sanger, D., Haberman, M., Shear, M., Mazzetti, M., & Barnes, J. (2020, April 26, 2020 Updated). Could Have Seen What Was Coming: Behind Trump’s Failure on the Virus. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/11/us/politics/coronavirus-trump-response.html  MacDonald, J. M. (2012). Why Are Farms Getting Larger? The Case of the US. Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V., 47, 25-46. Retrieved from  MacDonald, J. M., Hoppe, R. A., & Newton, D. (2018). Three Decades of Consolidation in U.S. Agriculture (EIB 189). Retrieved from Washington, D.C.: https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub- details/?pubid=88056#:~:text=%20%EE%80%80Three%20Decades%20of%20Consolidation%20in%20U.S.%20A griculture%EE%80%81.,in%20pasture%2Fgrazing%20land%20and%20in%20the%20associated%20  MacLean, N. (2017). Democracy in Chains. New York: Viking.  Maguire, S. K., & Delahunt, C. B. (2020). Predicting United States Policy Outcomes  with Random Forests. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 138. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/predicting-united-states-policy-outcomes-with-random- Masket, S. (2021, January 27, 2021). How Much Did COVID-19 Affect The 2020 Election? . Fivethirtyeight.com. Retrieved from https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-much-did-COVID-19-affect-the-2020-election/  McFadden, A. (October 28, 2020, October 28, 2020). With $1.5 Million Contributed, Blackstone CEO Is Collins’ Biggest Billionaire Backer. Maine Beacon. Retrieved from https://mainebeacon.com/with-1-5-million-contributed- blackstone-ceo-is-collins-biggest-billionaire-backer/  McNamara, A. (2020, March 28, 2020). Nurses Across the Country Protest Lack of Protective Equipment. CBSNews.com. Retrieved from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/health-care-workers-protest-lack-of-protective- Meloni, W., Romaniello, D., & Stirati, A. (2021). On the Non-Inflationary Effects of Long-Term Unemployment Reductions Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/on-the-non-inflationary-effects- Michaels, D., & Wagner, G. (2021). How Biden Can Protect Workers on Day 1 Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/how-biden-can-protect-workers-on-day- Milne, R. (2020, March 26, 2020). Coronavirus ‘Medicine’ Could Trigger Social Breakdown. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/3b8ec9fe-6eb8-11ea-89df-41bea055720b  Molteni, M. (2021). The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped COVID Kill. Wired. Retrieved from https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwup-that-helped-COVID-kill/  Mongey, S., Pilossoph, L., & Weinberg, A. (2021). Which Workers Bear the Burden of Social Distancing? Retrieved from https://www.nber.org/papers/w27085  Monnat, S., & Brown, D. (2017). Deaths of Despair and Support For Trump in the 2016 Presidential Election. Journal of Rural Studies, 55(October), 227-236. Retrieved from  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0743016717307386  Monrad, J. T., Sandbrink, J. B., & Cherian, N. G. (2021). Promoting Versatile Vaccine Development for Emerging Pandemics. NPJ, 6. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1038/s41541-021-00290-y  Mosendz, P., Waldman, P., & Mulvaney, P. (2020). U.S. Meat Plants Are Deadly as Ever, With No Incentive to Change. Retrieved from https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-06-18/how-meat-plants-were-allowed-to- become-coronavirus-hot-spots?sref=pyiu6SiD.  Retrieved June 13, 2021  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2020-06-18/how-meat-plants-were-allowed-to-become-coronavirus-hot- Navarro, M. (2012, January 13, 2012). For Many Latinos, Racial Identity Is More Culture Than Color. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/14/us/for-many-latinos-race-is-more-culture-than- keywords=auddevgate&gclid=CjwKCAjw95yJBhAgEiwAmRrutNJxzwzNFJPzGXSntEZRv- 69E9ASu35o5L7Di16b1ZgSPRxMBiXe8hoCuC8QAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds  Nilsen, E., & Zhou, L. (2020). The High-Stakes Fight Over A Coronavirus Economic Stimulus Package, Explained. Vox. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/2020/3/10/21173244/coronavirus-economic-stimulus-payroll-tax-cut O'Connell, J., Dam, A. V., Gregg, A., & Flowers, A. (2020, December 2, 2020). More Than Half of Emergency Small-Business Funds Went to Larger Businesses, New Data Shows. Washington Post. Retrieved from  https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/12/01/ppp-sba-data/  Office, G. A. (2020). USDA Market Facilitation Program: Information on Payments for 2019 Briefing to Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. Retrieved from https://www.gao.gov/pdf/product/708942 Parramore, L. (2020, October 20, 2020). Profits Over Human Life? ER Doctor’s Story is Fearful Lesson for U.S. Workers During Pandemic Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/profits-over-human-life-er-doctors-story-is-fearful-lesson-for-u-s- Parramore, L. (2021, August 19, 2021). “We Are Running A Giant Experiment on Children”: COVID Deniers Put Kids at Risk. Institute for New Economic Thinking. Retrieved from  https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/we-are-running-a-giant-experiment-on-children-COVID-deniers- Perez, A., & Warner, J. (2021, August 3, 2021). Dems Scored Real Estate Cash Before Letting Eviction Ban Expire. The Daily Poster. Retrieved from https://www.dailyposter.com/dems-scored-real-estate-cash-before-letting- Podkul, C., & Lim, D. (2020, September 18, 2020). Fed Hires BlackRock to Help Calm Markets. Its ETF Business Wins Big. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/fed-hires-blackrock-to-help-calm- Porter, E. (2021, May 10, 2021 Updated). How the American Unemployment System Failed. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/21/business/economy/unemployment-insurance.html  Raval, A. (2021). A $140bn Asset Sale: The Investors Cashing in on Big Oil’s Push to Net Zero. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/4dee7080-3a1b-479f-a50c-c3641c82c142  Reid, T., Layne, N., & Lange, J. (2021, September 22, 2021). Special Report: Backers of Trump's False Fraud Claims Seek to Control Next Elections. Reuters. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com/world/us/backers-trumps- false-fraud-claims-seek-control-next-us-elections-2021-09-22/  Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological Correlations and the Behavior of Individuals. American Sociological Review, Rosenberg, E. (2021, March 2, 2021). New Report Says Failures at OSHA Under Trump Could Have Put More Workers at Risk During Pandemic. Washington Post. Retrieved from  https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/03/02/osha-inspections-COVID-oig-report/  Rubin, R. (2020, April 17, 2020). Bringing the Economy Back to Life. New York Times. Retrieved from  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/17/opinion/robert-rubin-coronavirus-economy.html  Rubin, R. (2020). Building an “Army of Disease Detectives” to Trace COVID-19 Contacts. Journal of the American Medical Association, 323(23), 2357-2360. Retrieved from  https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766558  Saitone, T. L., Schaefer, K. A., & Scheitrum, D. P. (2021). COVID-19 Morbidity and Mortality in U.S. Meatpacking. Food Policy, 101(May). doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.foodpol.2021.102072  Scheingate, A., Scatterday, A., Martin, B., & Nachman, K. (2017). Post-Exceptionalism and Corporate Interests in US Agricultural Policy. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(11), 1641–1657. Retrieved from  Schueler, M. (2020, November 13, 2020). The $15 Minimum Wage Won in Florida, But Biden Didn't. Here's Why. In These Times. Retrieved from https://inthesetimes.com/article/fight-for-15-minimum-wage-workers-seiu-labor- Seibel, K. (2020, March 22, 2020). Länger als drei Monate halten wir das nicht durch. Die Zeit. Retrieved from https://www.welt.de/wirtschaft/article206701063/Wirtschaftsweiser-Feld-Laenger-als-drei-Monate-halten-wir-das- Congressional Research Service. (2021). The Federal Reserve’s Response to COVID-19: Policy Issues. Washington, D.C. R46411. Retrieved from https://crsreports.congress.gov   Setser, B. (2018, July 9, 2018). U.S.-China Trade War: How We Got Here. Council on Foreign Relations Blog. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/blog/us-china-trade-war-how-we-got-here   Shipman, T., & Wheeler, C. (2020, March 22, 2020). Coronavirus: Ten Days That Shook Britain — and Changed the Nation Forever. Sunday Times. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/coronavirus-ten-days-that- shook-britain-and-changed-the-nation-for-ever-spz6sc9vb  Shorter, E., & Tilly, C. (1974). Strikes in France 1830-1968: Cambridge University.  Smith, A. (2020). Handful of GOP Senators Threaten to Delay Senate Coronavirus Bill Over Unemployment Payments. NBCNews.com. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/handful-gop-senators- threaten-delay-senate-coronavirus-bill-over-drafting-n1168766  Smith, N. (2020). No, Pandemic UI Didn't Kill Jobs. Noahpinion. Retrieved from  https://noahpinion.substack.com/p/no-pandemic-ui-didnt-kill-jobs  Stiglitz, J. (2003). Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: Norton.  Stock, J. H., & Watson, M. W. (2010). Introduction to Econometrics (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson Addison Wesley. Storm, S. (2017). The New Normal: Demand, Secular Stagnation, and the Vanishing Middle Class. International Journal of Political Economy, 46(4), 169-210. Retrieved from  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08911916.2017.1407742  Storm, S. (2021a). Cordon of Conformity Why DSGE Models Are Not the Future of Macroeconomics. International Journal of Political Economy, 50(2), 77-98. Retrieved from  https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08911916.2021.1929582  Storm, S. (2021b). Lessons for the Age of Consequences:COVID-19 and the Macroeconomy. Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 152 ;  https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/lessons-for- the-age-of-consequences-COVID-19-and-the-macroeconomy   Taylor, L., & Barbosa-Filo, N. (2021). Inflation? It’s Import Prices and the Labor Share! Institute for New Economic Thinking Working Paper No. 145; Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research- papers/inflation-its-import-prices-and-the-labor-share  Taylor, L., & Ömer, Ö. (2020). Macroeconomic Inequality from Reagan to TrumpMarket Power, Wage Repression, Asset Price Inflation, and Industrial Decline. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Telford, T. (2021, October 27, 2021). COVID Cases and Deaths Grossly Underestimated Among Meatpackers, House Investigation Finds. Washington Post. Retrieved from  https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/10/27/meatpacking-house-report/  Temin, P. (2016). Race and the Vanishing Middle Class. Cambridge: MIT Press.  Trump, D. (2020). Full Text: President Trump's 2020 RNC Acceptance Speech. Retrieved from  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/read-full-text-president-donald-trump-s-acceptance-speech-rnc- n1238636. Retrieved June 18, 2021 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/read-full-text-president- Wagner, C. R. H., Niles, M., & Roy, E. D. (2019). US County-Level Agricultural Crop Production Typology. Res Notes 12(552). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-019-4594-4  Washington, P., & Spierings, M. (2021). Under A Microscope: A New Era of Scrutiny for Corporate Political Activity. Retrieved from New York: https://www.conference-board.org/publications/Under-a-Microscope-A-New- Washington Post, (2020, December 14). Exit Poll Results and Analysis for the 2020 Presidential Election. from https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2020/exit-polls/presidential-election-exit-polls/ Washington Post (2021). Exit Poll Results From the 2021 Election for Virginia Governor. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/elections/interactive/2021/exit-polls-virginia-governor/#h- Webb, W. (2020). Techno-Tyranny: How The US National Security State Is Using Coronavirus To Fulfill An Orwellian Vision. Retrieved May 17, 2020 https://www.thelastamericanvagabond.com/top-news/techno-tyranny- how-us-national-security-state-using-coronavirus-fulfill-orwellian-vision/  Wheeler, C., Shah, O., Harper, T., & Calver, T. (2020, April 26, 2020). Tory Grandees Tell PM: It’s Time to Ease the Coronavirus Lockdown. Sunday Times. Retrieved from https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tory-grandees-tell- pm-its-time-to-ease-the-coronavirus-lockdown-dsc593ktm   Wiggins, R. Z., & Feldberg, G. (2020). Mnuchin Clarifies that Treasury is Prepared to Lose Money on Fed Programs Retrieved from https://som.yale.edu/blog/mnuchin-clarifies-that-treasury-is-prepared-to-lose-money-on- Wilson, K., Diaz, D., & Klein, B. (2020). Former Trump Appointee Encouraged Herd Immunity Strategy for COVID-19, Internal Emails Reveal Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/16/politics/trump-administration- herd-immunity/index.html. Retrieved June 8, 2021 https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/16/politics/trump-administration- Winders, B. (2004). Sliding Toward the Free Market: Shifting Political Coalitions and U.S. Agricultural Policy, 1945–1975. Rural Sociology, 69(4), 467–489. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1526/0036011042722750  Winders, B. (2009). The Vanishing Free Market: The Formation and Spread of the British and US Food Regimes. Journal of Agrarian Change, 9(3), 315–344. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0366.2009.00214.x Winders, B. (2020). The Global Context of the US Farm Bill in 2018: World Markets, Instability and Policy Preferences in Agriculture. Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 35, 367–375. Retrieved from  Wolff, M. (2021). Landslide: The Final Days of the Trump Presidency. New York: Henry Holt.  Woodward, B. (2020). Rage. New York: Simon & Schuster.  Woodward, B., & Costa, R. (2021). Peril. New York: Simon & Schuster.  Wright, G. (2020). Voting Rights, Deindustrialization, and Republican Ascendancy in the South Retrieved from https://www.ineteconomics.org/research/research-papers/voting-rights-deindustrialization-and-republican- Zaveri, M. (2020, July 22, 2020 Updated). An Amazon Vice President Quit Over Firings of Employees Who Protested. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/04/business/amazon-tim-bray- Zhang, C., & Fox, B. (2020, November 23). How A Coalition of Women Won It for Joe Biden. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www.ft.com/content/2b0eba6f-ba33-42e6-b49a-f7e53d67341f "
            },
            {
                "answer": "OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — At least 59,000 meatpacking workers became ill with COVID-19 and 269 workers died when the virus tore through the industry last year, which is significantly more than previously thought, according to a new U.S. House report released Wednesday.",
                "question": "How many meatpacking workers became ill with COVID-19?",
                "url": "https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/at-least-59000-u-s-meat-workers-caught-covid-19-in-2020-269-died",
                "scraped_text": "OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — At least 59,000 meatpacking workers became ill with COVID-19 and 269 workers died when the virus tore through the industry last year, which is significantly more than previously thought, according to a new U.S. House report released Wednesday. With workers standing shoulder-to-shoulder along production lines, the meatpacking industry was one of the early epicenters of the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis, which used internal documents from five of the biggest meatpacking companies for its report, said companies could have done more to protect their workers. The new estimate of infections in the industry is nearly three times higher than the 22,400 that the United Food and Commercial Workers Union has said were infected. And the true number of infections could be even higher because the company documents generally don’t account for coronavirus cases confirmed by outside testing or self-reported by employees. READ MORE: Meat, farm workers to get $600 grants in new $700 million aid plan At the height of the outbreaks last spring, U.S. meatpacking production fell to about 60% of normal levels as several major plants were forced to temporarily close for deep cleaning and safety upgrades or operated at slower speeds because of worker shortages. The report said companies were slow to take protective steps such as checking employee temperatures, distributing protective equipment such as masks and installing barriers between work stations. “Instead of addressing the clear indications that workers were contracting the coronavirus at alarming rates due to conditions in meatpacking facilities, meatpacking companies prioritized profits and production over worker safety, continuing to employ practices that led to crowded facilities in which the virus spread easily,” the report said. The North American Meat Institute trade group defended the industry’s response to the pandemic. “Frontline meat and poultry workers were among the first impacted by the pandemic, but publicly available data confirm that comprehensive measures implemented in the sector since spring 2020, including extensive infection prevention and vaccination efforts, have successfully protected the sector’s dedicated and diverse workforce as they have continued feeding Americans and keeping our economy working,” said Julie Anna Potts, president and CEO of the trade group The report is based on documents from JBS, Tyson Foods, Smithfield Foods, Cargill and National Beef. Together they control over 80% of the U.S. beef market and over 60% of the pork market nationwide. Cargill, Tyson and JBS released statements Wednesday saying they worked aggressively to meet federal health and safety standards for the coronavirus and took additional measures to protect their employees, such as conducting widespread testing during the height of the pandemic and urging employees to get vaccinated. READ MORE: Tyson suspends managers at Iowa plant who allegedly bet on COVID-19 outbreaks “Throughout the pandemic, we’ve worked hard to maintain safe and consistent operations. At the same time, we have not hesitated to temporarily idle or reduce capacity at processing plants when we determined it necessary to do so,” Cargill spokesman Daniel Sullivan said. The companies expressed regret at the toll the virus has taken. “Even one illness or loss of life to COVID-19 is one too many, which is why we’ve taken progressive action from the start of the pandemic to protect the health and safety of our workers, including extensive testing and a vaccine requirement that has led to over 96% of our U.S. workforce being vaccinated,” Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson said. According to the report, infection rates were especially high at some meatpacking plants. For instance, 54% of the workforce at a JBS plant in Hyrum, Utah, contracted the virus between March 2020 and February 2021. Nearly 50% of workers at a Tyson plant in Amarillo, Texas, were infected in the same time frame. And 44% of employees at National Beef’s plant in Tama, Iowa, caught COVID-19 from April 2020 to February 2021. newsletter for analysis you won’t find anywhere else."
            },
            {
                "answer": "confirmed COVID-19 cases among meatpacking workers. ",
                "question": "What evidence exists regarding COVID-19 cases among meatpacking workers?",
                "url": "https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/jbs-covid-19-worker-safety-ib.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "JBS is the world’s largest meat processing company, producing beef, chicken, and pork as well as by-products from the processing of these meats.1 JBS is worth an estimated $11.7 billion (US), with annual sales recently reaching $51.8 billion.2 In total, the company employs around 242,000 workers in 400 production units in 15 countries.3    JBS’S INACTION AND DISREGARD FOR WORKER SAFETY HAVE INCREASED  THE SPREAD OF COVID-19 IN THE UNITED STATES AND BRAZIL Butchers chop meat at a JBS packing plant in São Paulo, Brazil. The JBS parent company (JBS South America, or SA) is  based in Brazil, where 120,000 employees work in more  than 150 JBS-owned processing plants and distribution  centers.4 Additionally, as a global conglomerate, JBS  encompasses dozens of subsidiaries. The largest of these  is JBS USA, which is the second-largest U.S. meatpacker,  behind Tyson Foods.5 JBS USA employs more than 78,000  workers and operates more than 100 facilities in the  United States, Canada, Mexico, Europe, Australia, and  New Zealand.6 As holder of 78.5 percent of shares, JBS is  also the majority owner of Pilgrim’s Pride, a global chicken  processor with an additional 30,000 U.S. employees across  12 states.7 Herein, we will use JBS to refer to the parent  company and all its subsidiaries, both wholly-owned  subsidiaries like JBS USA and majority-owned subsidiaries  As slaughterhouses have increased in size across the  globe, owners of processing plants have increased line  speeds, squeezing in more workers to keep up with the  blistering pace of production. This, however, is causing a  quiet epidemic of crippling injuries.8,9 The work is not only  backbreaking but also dangerous; workers stand shoulder- to-shoulder on both sides of long conveyor belts, wielding  scissors and knives under cold, damp, and noisy conditions.  As Debbie Berkowitz, a senior official at the Occupational  Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in the Obama  administration, recently testified before Congress:10  According to the industry’s own self-reported statistics  over the last few years, meat and poultry workers are  injured at rates on average 50 percent higher than all  other workers in the private sector, with injury rates in  red meat plants running almost twice as high. Further,  the government has found that these statistics are an  undercount; the real rates of injury and illness are  much higher. The meat and poultry slaughtering and  processing companies report more severe injuries, such  as amputations and injuries or illnesses that result in the  overnight stay at a hospital, to OSHA than industries that  are popularly recognized as hazardous, like sawmills,  industrial building construction, and oil and gas well  The meatpacking industry is often criticized for its  disregard of workers. Its practices are also viewed  as damaging to the environment, thanks to rampant  deforestation in the meatpacking supply chain and  the industry’s greenhouse gas emissions. Still, JBS is  exceptional for the extent and documentation of its  irresponsible practices, including human rights abuses,  widespread corruption, and illegal deforestation around  the world [see “JBS’s Abysmal Record on Deforestation,  Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Human Rights,” below].11  Experts have warned for some time that the conditions  causing so many worker injuries were leaving those same  workers vulnerable to pandemic infections. A 2007 report  by the US National Infrastructure Council anticipated that  a future pandemic could seriously disrupt operations in the  private sector (including meatpacking); it warned that up to  40 percent of private sector staff could be absent for periods  of about two weeks at the height of a pandemic.12 The  council recommended steps to mitigate the health risks and  possible workplace disruptions, such as continuity planning  to identify critical facilities and workers, and to facilitate  better collaboration between companies and public health  agencies.13 A 2015 federal report, however, found that the  meat industry still did not have a pandemic plan in place.14  At the same time, OSHA was being chronically starved of  staff and resources to fulfill its mandate to protect workers.  inspectors reached their lowest level since 1975.15  As a result, it came as little surprise when meatpacking  plants, in Brazil as well as in the United States, emerged as  hot spots early in the outbreak. Even as evidence mounted  that slaughterhouse workers were especially vulnerable  to infection, however, many of those plants including  ones owned by JBS, simply refused to slow down. “The  problem was, at these plants that were closing, they weren’t  making any changes. They were just running full throttle and  business as usual,” said Matt Utrecht, president of the union  representing 1,850 of the workers at JBS’s enormous pork  Basically, JBS failed to adopt continuity planning to  protect workers after either the 2007 or the 2015 report.  The multiple pandemic-related disruptions to plant  operations since early in 2020 were a direct result.17 The  company has yet to publicly announce plans to adopt  the recommendations of the reports and thus appears  vulnerable to future disruptions whether from coronavirus  A worker heads into the JBS meatpacking plant Monday, Oct. 12, 2020,  These are just a few examples of how the spread of COVID-19 affected meatpackers and surrounding communities in Brazil and the United n  In Mato Grosso do Sul, one of three southern states where meatpacking is very prominent, more than one-quarter of the 4,000 workers at one JBS plant tested positive for COVID-19 in July 2020.18  n  After more than 40 percent of the 940 workers at a JBS plant in the small town of São Miguel do Guaporé, in the Amazonian state of Rondônia, became infected, a judge ordered the plant to close. At the time (July 2020), the plant accounted for more than half of the town’s n  In Colíder, a small city in the northern state of Mato Grosso, meatpacking workers at a JBS plant accounted for about 17 percent of the city’s n  Cases mounted rapidly after the first worker tested positive for COVID-19 at JBS’s Greeley, Colorado, beef plant on March 3, 2020, eventually forcing an eight-day closure in mid-April. Almost immediately after its reopening, the number of confirmed worker cases more than doubled, from 120 on April 25 to 245 just four days later.21 By July 12, Colorado was reporting 447 coronavirus cases (and 10 deaths) statewide; the Greeley plant contributed 290 cases, or 65 percent of the state total.22 To date, the Greeley plant stands as the site of the third-largest outbreak of COVID-19 in the state.23 Seven months after it began, Colorado finally pronounced the plant outbreak “resolved” on September 30. Just six weeks later, a new active outbreak was declared in the same plant, with 10 additional infected workers as of April 1, 2021.24 n  The huge JBS plant in Worthington employs more than 2,000 workers, and accounts for about 4 percent of the nation’s entire pork supply. JBS only took action and closed the plant on April 20 after hundreds of workers started calling in sick or had already tested positive for COVID-19.25 Nine days later, plant workers accounted for 39 percent (239 out of 615) of all the confirmed COVID-19 cases in the entire county.26 By June 2020, a total of 791 workers at the plant had been positively diagnosed with coronavirus, the most at any JBS-owned plant n  On May 11, dozens of workers from the Pilgrim’s Pride chicken processing plant in Cold Spring, Minnesota, drove around the plant honking, demanding that it be closed for two weeks.28 At that point, 194 of the plant’s 1,100 workers had been diagnosed with The pandemic has had significant physical, mental health,  and/or economic impacts on just about everyone. But  those burdens fall hardest on the least powerful members  of society. Meatpacking plants in Brazil and the United  States employ large numbers of immigrants and Black,  Latino, Indigenous, or other workers from racial or ethnic  minorities.30 In July, the Centers for Disease Control and  Prevention (CDC) stated that in the U.S. meatpacking  plants that reported the race and ethnicity breakdown of  their employees, 87 percent of workers infected with the  The pandemic’s outsize impact on meatpacking workers,  and on the surrounding communities whose economies rely  on the plants, is tragic but unsurprising. Unsavory business  practices appear to be the glue that ties JBS together,  from its enormous carbon footprint to its deforestation  to its willingness to sacrifice the health and safety of its  workforce. In a sense, the pandemic has only thrown those  issues into starker relief. COVID-19 has shined a bright  light onto the ways in which workers and their communities  suffer when meatpackers like JBS duck their corporate  responsibilities and turn a blind eye to the health and safety  consequences of their longstanding plant conditions and  Even after stay-at-home and social distancing measures  were instituted in the United States in March 2020,  forcing the closure of schools and most workplaces,  U.S. meatpacking plants initially continued operating as  usual.32 Not surprisingly, without the recommended safety  measures in place, COVID-19 outbreaks began to overwhelm  these plants across the country, triggering temporary  closures. Among them were two of JBS USA’s largest, the  Greeley, Colorado, beef plant, with 3,200 workers, and the  Worthington, Minnesota, pork plant, with 2,000 workers.33 Protections for meatpacking workers appear to have been  largely ignored until the number of coronavirus infections  among them skyrocketed.34 Throughout the pandemic,  slaughterhouse workers in both Brazil and the United States  have reported a culture in which employees have to work  while sick (there is no sick leave) and face mask and social  distancing rules are routinely not enforced.35 In the United  States this has been partially due to political pressure  to remain open amid consumer fears of meat shortages,  amounting to a government endorsement of treating  workers as disposable for the sake of consumer interests.36  In the United States as well as in Brazil, JBS has faced few  consequences for its blatant disregard for workers’ lives  during the pandemic. After nearly 300 JBS workers in the  Greeley beef plant were infected with COVID-19 and 6  died, the company was cited for two OSHA violations on  September 11, 2020, and fined a paltry $15,160. The more  serious violation, accounting for 89 percent of the total fine,  was JBS’s failure under the general duty clause of the OSHA  Act of 1970 to provide a workplace “free from recognized  hazards that are causing or are likely to cause death or  serious physical harm to [its] employees.”38 JBS quickly  contested the citations and refused to pay.39 Speaking on  behalf of more than 3,000 workers at the plant, the local  union president told the Denver Post that the trivial fine  “only incentivizes the company to continue endangering  its employees.”40 Previously, JBS had also contested five  pandemic-related citations issued for health and safety  violations at its Worthington pork plant in July 2020,  refusing to pay the associated fines totaling $29,400.41 Outbreaks began hitting Brazil’s meat plants at about the  same time as in the United States, in March/April 2020,  and labor lawyers and prosecutors organized to protect  workers. They petitioned the courts to temporarily shut  down some plants, which a judge eventually ordered in July  2020, but only after the outbreaks had reached a fevered  pitch.42 The courts also ordered that workers be tested for  COVID-19 at four JBS SA plants in Rio Grande do Sul.43  For several months into the pandemic, JBS SA was the  only meatpacking company in Brazil to resist an agreement  with the Brazilian Public Labor Ministry (MPT) to improve  worker safety. Eventually the MPT took steps toward  stopping operations at 12 JBS SA plants for failing to  protect their workers during the pandemic. On July 27 the  company finally agreed, in accordance with the MPT, to  supply workers at the Três Passos plant with PFF2 masks  (the Brazilian equivalent of N95) and to test all workers  for COVID-19. However, JBS SA refused to offer workers  replacement masks on a daily basis, causing employees to  reuse contaminated masks for an entire week or more.44 Labor prosecutors also worked with companies and workers  to ensure that when plants reopened, workers would be  protected. However, while other companies signed on to  these prosecutor-brokered agreements, JBS failed to do so.  Moreover, JBS SA declined to comment on outbreaks at its  individual plants; the company maintains that in responding  to the disease outbreak, it has followed or exceeded CDC  guidelines at its plants worldwide.45 However, neither  enforcement actions nor workers’ stories indicate as much.  When one JBS meatpacker in Brazil, Leandro da Conceição,  complained about feeling ill to his supervisor, he was  ignored. He stayed on the job, getting sicker and sicker, until  he tested a positive for COVID. “His focus was the cows, not  the employees,” Conceição told The Guardian, in reference  to his supervisor.46 A Washington Post story about the  workers in JBS’s Greeley plant who fell ill in March tells a  Neither the United States nor Brazil has provided  comprehensive and up-to-date tracking and reporting of  confirmed COVID-19 cases among meatpacking workers.  Perhaps as a reaction to that failure, Leah Douglas, a  reporter at the Food and Environment Reporting Network,  has sifted through county public health announcements  and local news reports to compile and maintain a much  more complete record of meatpacking worker cases and  deaths in the United States since April 2020, broken down  by company and by individual plant. Douglas’s latest tally  Family members of longtime JBS USA meat packing plant employee Saul Sanchez,  from left, wife Carolina Sanchez, and daughter Estela Hernanez, Beatriz Rangel  and Patty Rangel hold a photo of him after he died of coronavirus disease  (COVID-19) in Greeley, Colorado, U.S. April 10, 2020. In the Amazon, trees are cut down to make space for cattle ranching. Extensive  cattle farming is a major driver of Amazon deforestation, and beef production  for export has increased by ten times in the last two decades, led by three huge  (as of April 1, 2021) is 58,313 confirmed cases of COVID-19  in meatpacking workers in 572 plants in 35 U.S. states,  with 286 deaths.48 Similarly, the Brazilian MPT confirmed  that by June 2020 there had been 11,500 COVID-19 cases  among workers in 104 factories in just the three southern  states that are home to about half of Brazil’s 500,000  meatpackers.49 By August, an estimated one in five Brazilian  meatpacking workers had contracted COVID-19, making it  one of the world’s worst sector-wide workplace outbreaks.50 Unfortunately, outbreaks among workers also impact the  communities where these plants are located. A recent study  in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences  concluded that meatpacking plants, at least in the United  States, serve as vectors in spreading COVID-19 to their  neighbors. As of July 21, 2020, the study estimates U.S.  meat processing plants were associated with 236,000 to  310,000 COVID-19 cases (6 to 8 percent of the U.S. total at  the time), along with 4,300 to 5,200 deaths (3 to 4 percent  of the U.S. total). Public health researchers concluded  that “poultry plants showed a significant relationship  with COVID-19 cases, with pork plants showing the  strongest relationship. Beef plants showed the strongest  relationship with deaths from the illness.”51 A subsequent  U.S. Department of Agriculture analysis concluded that the  highest COVID-19 case rates among non-metro U.S. counties  had been found in those that are dependent on farming and  manufacturing, due in part to “higher COVID-19 case rates  in meatpacking-dependent counties,” defined as counties  where more than 20 percent of adults are employed by  For JBS USA and Pilgrim’s Pride plants in particular,  Douglas’s database documents at least 3,935 COVID-19  cases and 20 deaths involving workers in 16 states.53 And in  Brazil, at least 4,000 workers in 23 JBS SA plants in seven  Holding JBS, or the meatpacking industry in general, more  fully accountable is not possible without accurate and  more public data on COVID-19 cases among meatpacking  workers. If those data were available, it’s likely that the  numbers would, unfortunately, be significantly higher.55 Individual journalists and activists have been doing their  best to compile the limited data where they exist, forced  into this role by the lack of a public mandate for federal and  state governments to provide this information. Meatpacking  companies also could be acting with more responsibility and  It would seem to be part of the pattern of meatpacking  companies generally, including JBS, to shirk whatever  obligation they have not only to provide a safe workplace,  but also to be a good neighbor to the surrounding  communities.56 To paraphrase Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D–CT)  writing in her 2017 book, The Least Among Us: Waging the  Battle for the Vulnerable, if we depend on corporate good  JBS’S ABYSMAL RECORD ON DEFORESTATION, GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, AND HUMAN RIGHTS  JBS has repeatedly been linked to illegal deforestation in its meat supply chain. JBS operates 20 slaughterhouses in the Amazon region, but the company monitors only its direct suppliers. In 2020 JBS was accused of acquiring cattle from farms linked to illegal deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. Cattle are heavily tracked in Brazil through a system of tags and checkpoints to ensure that they are not coming from farms in illegally deforested areas. However, in a “cattle laundering” process, farms that have been cited for deforestation or other violations often sell their cattle to suppliers or to other farms considered to be operating legally, where those cattle are then fattened and eventually sold to slaughterhouses, thus forming part of the indirect process.58  As a result, JBS’s total deforestation footprint may be as high as  494,210 acres (200,000 hectares) in its direct supply chain and  3.7 million acres (1.5 million hectares) in its indirect supply chain,  according to estimates from Chain Reaction Research.59 In other  words, JBS’s enormous size, combined with its practice of buying  cattle originating from illegally deforested land, makes it one of  the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases. Its operations  are estimated to produce around half of the comparable fossil fuel  emissions of petroleum company giants such as ExxonMobil, Royal  JBS has also been accused of perpetuating slavery-like conditions  for its workers by, for instance, withholding wages or ignoring  horrendous living conditions in the housing it provides. For example,  a labor inspector told Réporter Brasil, an organization that monitors  human rights violations in Brazil, about a middleman housing JBS  workers in a disused mine. The horrific conditions he saw there, he  said, “cannot be described in words.” Many of these workers have no  The Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources  (IBAMA) seizes 7,387 logs illegally extracted from Pirititi Indigenous Land, IMPACT OF JBS NEGLIGENCE: INCREASED COVID-19 SPREAD   In refusing to take adequate steps to protect worker health  and safety, JBS is essentially allowing COVID-19 to run  rampant through its worker population and the communities  surrounding its plants. Increased spread of the coronavirus  is dangerous for everyone, but it disproportionately affects  have always operated under crowded and unsanitary  conditions, were both more exposed and more vulnerable  to the disease. These workers undeniably are vectors in  the spread of COVID-19 from the plants themselves into  Indigenous reserves and other underprepared rural areas  in Brazil. The impacts of the virus have been particularly  disastrous among Indigenous people, who face high risks of  transmission. People in many of those communities live in  close quarters and share cookware, lack access to soap and  water or hand sanitizer, and often have limited access to  health care.62 During fire season (from June to November),  smoke fills the air around many Indigenous communities  and made it more difficult to breathe—exacerbating the  Using census, race, and employment data, researchers have  shown that among rural areas, municipalities that are home  to slaughterhouses have some of the highest COVID-19  infection rates in Brazil. This is also the case for rural  In Mato Grosso do Sul, COVID-19 entered the Dourados  Indigenous Reserve through 33 Indigenous employees  of a JBS slaughterhouse who tested positive; more than  150 residents were eventually infected, 90 percent of  whom were directly or indirectly associated with JBS SA,  according to the state secretary of health. The same pattern  of spread is seen throughout Brazil, where many COVID- positive Indigenous residents either work as slaughterhouse  employees or came into contact with them.65 The reserve  closest to Dourados also became a COVID-19 hot spot,  reporting around 3,500 cases by mid-July 2020, or around  30 percent of the total cases in the state at that time.66  Both the MPT and the Federal Prosecution Ministry (MPF)  have taken action to inspect and/or require additional safety  measures by meatpacking companies. After being pushed  by these ministries, JBS officials said that the company  had removed its Indigenous workers upon confirmation  of the first coronavirus cases, subsequently putting all of  them on paid leave, and said it had initiated steps to control  and prevent new outbreaks. According to the experts  and Indigenous leaders interviewed by Réporter Brasil,  however, the company was slow to act, and the safety  measures taken have been inadequate. JBS’s slaughterhouse  in Dourados, for example, continued to transport Indigenous  workers in small, overcrowded buses after the pandemic  While early coronavirus outbreaks in U.S. cities like New  Orleans and New York City initially grabbed headlines, the  news of outbreaks in meatpacking plants soon followed. The  affected plants have mostly been in smaller towns in the  thinly populated states of the agricultural heartland.  While 58 percent of JBS USA’s managers are white, its  factory workers are primarily minorities. According to the  local union representing workers at the Greeley plant, 70  percent of those workers are minorities, including all six  employees who died of COVID-19 complications through  September 2020.68 Worker advocacy groups filed a civil  rights complaint in July 2020 against JBS, as well as Tyson  Foods, citing their failure to prevent coronavirus outbreaks  Not surprisingly, JBS does not accept any blame. Besides  the two OSHA citations and $15,160 in fines levied against  the JBS Greeley plant in mid-September, there also were  $79,400 in total fines for violations at the Worthington  plant, plus $13,494 in COVID-19 related fines for violations  at the Green Bay, WI plant. In each case, JBS quickly  contested the citations, and still have not paid any of the  fines. In Greeley, just a few weeks after Colorado regulators  levied the fines, JBS also denied payment of workers’  compensation claims lodged by families of three of the six  dead employees. The company actually argued that the dead  workers’ COVID-19 illnesses were not work-related.70   When meatpacking companies like JBS are allowed to  act irresponsibly, the broader consequences have always  been dire. That much has not changed. Add in the current  pandemic, however, and the stakes have only gotten higher.  That holds especially true for JBS workers, who number  in the hundreds of thousands across the United States and  Brazil. For them, corporate irresponsibility during the  An adequate response to COVID-19 would have required   much earlier investment in worker safety, including  personal protective gear and paid sick leave, for example.  JBS’s priority instead was to keep its plants running with as  many workers as possible; amid the pandemic, the company  posted record net revenues of $51.8 billion in 2020. The  JBS response to COVID-19 is largely in keeping with its  longstanding record—one of disregarding the health and  well-being of its workers, abusing other human rights, and  contributing to climate change.71 The coronavirus pandemic  has simply clarified the egregiousness and lethality of JBS’s  Investors and the public can no longer remain silent about  JBS’s bad behavior and lack of corporate responsibility.  environmental record and its pandemic response in its  decision to sell JBS shares, worth 40 million euros,  across all of its funds, in August 2020.72 As JBS considers  launching a public stock offering to spin off its large U.S.  subsidiary, other investors should also divest from JBS in  Ultimately, however, improved conditions for the highly  diverse workforce at huge meatpackers such as JBS will  require not only an overhaul of company practices to ensure  accountability, but also large-scale changes to public policy.  As noted by Representative DeLauro in 2017, workers are  typically assured safe workplaces in democracies when  government takes strong action to hold corporations  accountable, rather than depending solely on the latter’s  That’s why NRDC expects urgent action by the U.S.  government to ensure companies like JBS meet their  obligation, under the general duty clause of the 1970 OSHA  Act, to provide safe workplaces. One essential step forward  will be the new Emergency Temporary Standard (ETS)  written by OSHA in response to a January 2021 executive  order, and reportedly awaiting clearance at the Office of  Management and Budget. Longer term, we also strongly  support calls for OSHA to begin writing a permanent  infectious disease standard for workplaces.74,75   But neither should JBS wait for government action that  we know or strongly believe to be in process to begin  demonstrating better accountability in protecting its  workers.76 Therefore we also urge JBS, among other  meatpacking companies, to fully and expeditiously take the  n  In support of greater transparency, create and regularly  update a publicly accessible COVID-19 dashboard that  reports the numbers of JBS workers with confirmed  COVID-19 cases and related deaths, by plant, in both the  n  Accept responsibility for workplace safety violations  found at these plants during the pandemic thus far, and  pay the nominal fines. Pay workers’ compensation claims  related to COVID-19 filed by current and former JBS  n  Commit the company to expedite its compliance with  OSHA’s newly written Emergency Temporary Standard  (ETS). JBS should commit to compliance at all its  facilities, both within and outside the United States. n  Post a pandemic preparedness guide for the company as a  whole, including a timeline for implementing within each  facility the guidelines initially laid out in 2007 by the US   JBS SA, “About JBS,” https://jbssa.com/about/ (accessed September 9, 2020).   Forbes, “JBS,” https://www.forbes.com/companies/jbs/?sh=5c047ca5305f (accessed February 10, 2021).  JBS, “Unidades de Négocios,” last updated June 26, 2020, https://ri.jbs.com.br/a-jbs/unidades-de-negocios/. Report,” press release, May 29, 2020, https://jbs.com.br/en/press/releases-en/jbs-publishes-its-2019-annual-and-sustainability-report/. United States Securities and Exchange Commission, “JBS USA Holdings Inc. Form S-1 Registration Statement,” July 22, 2009, https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/ USA Today, “Brazil’s JBS Buys Majority Stake in Pilgrim’s Pride for $800M,” September 16, 2009, https://abcnews.go.com/Business/brazils-jbs-buys-majority- stake-pilgrims-pride-800m/story?id=8591393. Macrotrends, “Pilgrim’s Pride: Number of Employees 2006-2020,” https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/PPC/ pilgrims-pride/number-of-employees (accessed February 16, 2020).  Ted Genoways, The Chain: Farm, Factory and the State of Our Food (New York: Harper Collins, 2014), 259 (quoting Darcy Tromanhauser of the Nebraska Appleseed Human Rights Watch, “When We’re Dead and Buried, Our Bones Will Keep Hurting,” September 4, 2019, https://www.hrw.org/report/2019/09/04/when-were- dead-and-buried-our-bones-will-keep-hurting/workers-rights-under-threat#_ftn61. 10  Debbie Berkowitz, “Testimony Before the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies: Health and Safety Protections for Meatpacking, Poultry, and Agricultural Workers,” March 2, 2021, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/AP/ AP07/20210302/111253/HHRG-117-AP07-Wstate-BerkowitzD-20210302.pdf.  11  Greenpeace, How JBS Is Still Slaughtering the Amazon, August 2020, https://storage.googleapis.com/planet4-international-stateless/2020/08/60e2cd00- greenpeace_stillslaughtering_pages-1.pdf. Amnesty International, From Forest to Farmland: Cattle Illegally Grazed in Brazil Found in JBS’s Supply Chain, July 2020, https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/AMR1926572020ENGLISH.PDF. 12  Rebecca F. Denlinger, Martha H. Marsh, and Bruce A. Rohde, The Prioritization of Critical Infrastructure for a Pandemic Outbreak in the United States Working Group, National Infrastructure Advisory Council, January 16, 2007, https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/niac/niac-pandemic-wg_v8-011707.pdf. 13  Ibid. The report also recommended that “businesses with high population density work environments” stockpile enough masks to supply their workers with two 14  Food and Drug Administration, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Food and Agriculture Sector-Specific Plan, 2015, https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/nipp-ssp-food-ag-2015-508.pdf.  15  Berkowitz, “Testimony Before the House Committee.” 16  Adam Belz, Elizabeth Flores and Greg Stanley, “As Coronavirus Loomed, Worthington Pork Plant Refused to Slow Down,” Star Tribune, May 16, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/as-coronavirus-loomed-worthington-pork-plant-refused-to-slow-down/570516612/ (accessed March 29, 2021). 17  Michael Grabell and Bernice Yeung, “Meatpacking Companies Dismissed Years of Warnings but Now Say Nobody Could Have Prepared for COVID-19,” ProPublica, August 20, 2020, https://www.propublica.org/article/meatpacking-companies-dismissed-years-of-warnings-but-now-say-nobody-could-have-prepared-for-covid-19. Tim Steinweg, Gerard Rijk, and Matt Piotrowski, “Outsized Deforestation in Supply Chain, COVID-19 Pose Fundamental Business Risks,” Chain Reaction Research, August 2020, https://chainreactionresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/JBS-CRR-Report-1.pdf.  18  Gabriel Maymone, “Com Esportações Suspensas, Frigoríficos de MS Têm Mais de 1 Mil Casos de Covid-19,” Midiamax, July 6, 2020, https://www.midiamax.com.br/ cotidiano/2020/em-meio-a-suspensao-de-exportacoes-frigorificos-de-ms-tem-mais-de-1-mil-casos-de-covid-19. 19  Rôndonia Rural, “Justiça Suspende Atividades da JBS Pela 2ª Vez Após Casos de Coronavírus Subirem 1000% em São Miguel, RO,” June 22, 2020, https://g1.globo. com/ro/rondonia/rondonia-rural/noticia/2020/06/22/justica-suspende-atividades-da-jbs-pela-2a-vez-apos-casos-de-coronavirus-subirem-1000percent-em-sao- 20  Kessillen Lopes, “Contaminação por Coronavírus em Frigorífico de MT é 12 Vezes Mais Intensa que em Cidade Onde Está Instalado,” Globo Mato Grosso, July 28, 2020, https://g1.globo.com/mt/mato-grosso/noticia/2020/07/28/contaminacao-por-coronavirus-em-frigorifico-de-mt-e-12-vezes-mais-intensa-que-em-cidade-onde- 21  Reuters, “Confirmed Coronovirus Cases Surge in Reopened JBS Colordo Beef Plant; Worker Dies: Union,” April 30, 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us- health-coronavirus-usa-meat/confirmed-coronavirus-cases-surge-in-reopened-jbs-colorado-beef-plant-worker-dies-union-idUSKBN22C3VR. 22  See Shelly Bradbury, “How Coronavirus Spread Through JBS’s Greeley Beef Plant,” July 12, 2020, Denver Post, https://www.denverpost.com/2020/07/12/jbs- 23  Robert Klemko and Kimberly Kindy, “He Fled Congo to Work in a U.S. Meat Plant. Then He—and Hundreds of His Co-workers—Got the Coronavirus,” Washington Post, August 6, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/he-fled-the-congo-to-work-in-a-us-meat-plant-then-he--and-hundreds-of-his-co-workers--got-the- coronavirus/2020/08/06/11e7e13e-c526-11ea-8ffe-372be8d82298_story.html.  24  Lindsay Fendt, “The JBS Coronavirus Outbreak Is Officially Resolved, but Workers’ Families Are Still Fighting for Compensation,” Colorado Public Radio, September 30, 2020, https://www.cpr.org/2020/09/30/colorado-coronavirus-jbs-outbreak-resolved-workers-families-want-compensation/. Chuck Murphy, “Meatpacking Giant JBS Battles New Coronavirus Outbreaks at Greeley Plant and Corporate Offices,” CPR News, November 25, 2020, https://www.cpr. org/2020/11/25/meatpacking-giant-jbs-battles-new-coronavirus-outbreaks-at-greeley-plant-and-corporate-offices/. Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Colorado COVID-19 Data: Map of Outbreaks, updated March 17, 2021, https://covid19.colorado.gov/data; Leah Douglas, “Mapping Covid-19 Outbreaks in the Food System,” Food and Environment Reporting Network, April 22, 2020, updated April 1, 2021, https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in- 25  Adam Belz, Elizabeth Flores, and Craig Stanley, “As Coronavirus Loomed, Worthington Pork Plant Refused to Slow Down,” Star Tribune, May 16, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/as-coronavirus-loomed-worthington-pork-plant-refused-to-slow-down/570516612/?refresh=true. 26  David Wallinga, “COVID-19 Hot Spots Put Meatpacker Giants on the Front Burner,” NRDC Expert Blog, May 5, 2020, https://www.nrdc.org/experts/david-wallinga- md/covid-19-hot-spots-put-meatpacker-giants-front-burner.  27 Leah Douglas, “Mapping Covid-19 Outbreaks in the Food System,” Food and Environment Reporting Network, April 22, 2020, updated April 1, 2021, https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in-meat-and-food-processing-plants/. Mike Hughlett, “More Than 200 at Quality Pork, Hormel in Austin Test Positive for COVID-19,” Star Tribune, June 5, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/more-than-200-at-hormel-quality-pork-processors-test-positive-for- 28  James Walsh and Mike Hughlett, “COVID-19 Cases Hit 194 at Minnesota Meat Processing Plant,” Star Tribune, May 12, 2020, https://www.startribune.com/covid- 19-cases-hit-194-at-pilgrim-s-pride-plant/570392152/.  30  Michelle A. Waltenburg et al., “Update: COVID-19 Among Workers in Meat and Poultry Processing Facilities—United States, April–May 2020,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report 69, no. 27 (July 10, 2020): 887-92, http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6927e2external icon. em Frigoríficos e Põe Brasileiros e Imigrantes em Risco,” BBC News—Brasil, July 22, 2020, https://www.bbc.com/portuguese/brasil-53477319. Matt Perez, “87% of Meatpacking Workers Infected With Coronavius Have Been Racial and Ethnic Minorities, CDC Says,” Forbes, July 7, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/ mattperez/2020/07/07/87-of-meatpacking-workers-infected-with-coronavirus-have-been-racial-and-ethnic-minorities-cdc-says/?sh=1ab155a1634f (accessed 31  Matt Perez, “87% of Meatpacking Workers Infected with Coronavius Have Been Racial and Ethnic Minorities, CDC Says,” Forbes, July 7, 2020, https://www.forbes. com/sites/mattperez/2020/07/07/87-of-meatpacking-workers-infected-with-coronavirus-have-been-racial-and-ethnic-minorities-cdc-says/?sh=1ab155a1634f. 32  Tonya Mosley and Cassady Rosenblum, “Do You Know Who Makes Your Meat? Inside JBS, the No.1 Meatpacker in the World,” WBUR “Here and Now,” July 17, 2020, https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2020/07/17/meat-packers-jbs-lawsuit-coronavirus. Eric Schlosser, “America’s Slaughterhouses Aren’t Just Killing Animals,” The Atlantic, May 12, 2020, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/essentials-meatpeacking-coronavirus/611437/. 33  Sky Chadde, “Tracking Covid-19’s Impact on Meatpacking Workers and Industry,” Investigate Midwest, April 16, 2020, https://investigatemidwest.org/2020/04/16/ tracking-covid-19s-impact-on-meatpacking-workers-and-industry/. Associated Press, “JBS Meatpacking Plant in Greeley Accused of Negligence After COVID-19 Outbreak,” Colorado Sun, October 8, 2020, https://coloradosun.com/2020/10/08/jbs-meatpacking-plant-coronavirus-negligence/. 35  Nataly Foscaches and Tatiane Klein, ”Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana: Como o Agronegócio Expôs Indígenas à Covid-19,” Repórter Brasil, June 24, 2020, https://reporterbrasil.org.br/2020/06/dos-frigorificos-as-plantacoes-de-cana-como-o-agronegocio-expos-indigenas-a-covid-19/. Veras Mota, “Covid-19 se em Frigoríficos.” Sebastian Martinez Valdivia and Dan Margolies, “Workers Sue Smithfield Foods, Allege Conditions Put Them at Risk for COVID-19,” NPR, April 24, 2020, https://www.npr.org/2020/04/24/844644200/workers-sue-smithfield-foods-allege-conditions-put-them-at-risk-for-covid-19. 36  Kimberly Kindy, “More Than 200 Meat Plant Workers in the U.S. Have Died of Covid-19. Federal Regulators Just Issued Two Modest Fines,” Washington Post, September 13, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/osha-covid-meat-plant-fines/2020/09/13/1dca3e14-f395-11ea-bc45-e5d48ab44b9f_story.html. 37  Morgann Jezequel, “Global Appetite for Beef, Soy Fuels Amazon Fires,” Phys Org, August 25, 2019, https://phys.org/news/2019-08-global-appetite-beef-soy- 38  Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Inspection Detail for JBS, Greeley, Colorado, https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/establishment.inspection_ 40  Matt Sebastian, “OSHA Fines JBS Greeley,” Denver Post, September 11, 2020, https://www.denverpost.com/2020/09/11/osha-fines-jbs-greeley/. 41  Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Inspection Detail for Swift Pork Company dba JBS USA, Worthington, Minnesota, https://www.osha.gov/pls/imis/ establishment.inspection_detail?id=1472850.015 (accessed March 9, 2021). 42  Ana Mano and Marcelo Rochabrun, “Brazil Judge Orders All Workers at JBS Plant to Stay Home Due to Coronavirus,” Reuters, July 17, 2020, https://www.reuters. com/article/us-health-coronavirus-jbs-brazil/brazil-judge-orders-all-workers-at-jbs-plant-to-stay-home-due-to-coronavirus-idUSKCN24I2FR. 43  Dom Phillips, “ ‘There’s a Direct Relationship’: Brazil Meat Plants Linked to Spread of Covid-19,” The Guardian, July 15, 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2020/jul/15/brazil-meat-plants-linked-to-spread-of-covid-19. 44  Larissa Linder and Hyury Potter, “JBS Raciona Mascaras Para Empregados Após Frigoríficos Causarem Surtos de COVID-19,” The Intercept Brasil, August 6, 2020, https://theintercept.com/2020/08/06/jbs-frigorificos-mascaras-covid/. 45  Dom Phillips, “ ‘There’s a Direct Relationship.’ ” JBS USA, “Responding to COVID-19,” https://sustainability.jbssa.com/chapters/communities/our-covid-19- 49  Veras Mota, “Covid-19 se Alastra em Frigoríficos.” 50  Straits Times, “One in Five Workers in Brazil’s Meat Plants Caught Covid-19,” August 19, 2020, https://www.straitstimes.com/world/americas/one-in-five-workers- 51  Charles A. Taylor, Christopher Coulos, and Douglas Almond, “Livestock Plants and COVID-19 Transmission,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 117, no. 50 (December 15, 2020): 31706-15, https://www.pnas.org/content/117/50/31706. 52  U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, “The COVID-19 Pandemic and Rural America,” last updated December 2020, https://www.ers.usda.gov/ 54  Ana Mano, “Special Report: How COVID-19 Swept the Brazilian Slaughterhouses of JBS, World’s Top Meatpacker,” Reuters, September 8, 2020, https://www. reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-jbs-specialreport/special-report-how-covid-19-swept-the-brazilian-slaughterhouses-of-jbs-worlds-top-meatpacker- 56  Hearing of the House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies, Health and Safety Protections for Meatpacking, Poultry, and Agricultural Workers,” March 2, 2021 (hearing transcript accessed March 5, 2021 at https://appropriations.house.gov/ subcommittees/labor-health-and-human-services-education-and-related-agencies-117th-congress/congress_hearing). 57  Rosa DeLauro, The Last Among Us: Waging the Battle for the Vulnerable, 2017, Harper Collins: New York, NY. The full quote is as follows: “It bears repeating that corporations do not feel free to poison us, sell us spoiled meat, lock our daughters up in ninth-floor sweatshops with no fire escapes, employ our underage sons in coal mines, force us to work thirteen-hour shifts without overtime or a break, or call in private armies to fire rifles at those of us who dare strike for higher wages is not because corporations experienced a moment of Zen and decided to evolve. No. They were forced into greater accountability and social concern by the legitimate actions of a democratic government. In other words, if we depend on good will, we are all screwed.” 58  André Campos et al., “Revealed: New Evidence Links Brazil Meat Giant JBS to Amazon Deforestation,” The Guardian, July 27 2020, https://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2020/jul/27/revealed-new-evidence-links-brazil-meat-giant-jbs-to-amazon-deforestation. 59  Steinweg, Rijk, and Piotrowski, “JBS: Outsized Deforestation in Supply Chain.”  60  Greenpeace, How JBS is Still Slaughtering the Amazon. 61  Shefali Sharma, The Rise of Big Meat: Brazil’s Extractive Industry, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, November 2017, https://www.iatp.org/sites/default/ 62  Joao Fellet, “Coronavirus ‘could wipe out Brazil’s Indigenous People,’” BBC News, April 2020, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-52139875. (accessed 63  Global Fire Data, “Amazon Region,” https://www.globalfiredata.org/regional.html (accessed July 25, 2020). 64  Foscaches and Klein, “Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana.” USDA, “The Meatpacking Industry in Rural America During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” December 20, 2020, https://www.ers.usda.gov/covid-19/rural-america/meatpacking-industry/.  65  Foscaches and Klein, “Dos Frigoríficos às Plantações de Cana.” 66  Greenpeace, How JBS Is Still Slaughtering the Amazon, 39. 68  Murphy, “Meatpacking Giant JBS Battles New Coronavirus Outbreaks.”  69  Laura Riley, “As Coronavirus Ravaged Meatpackers, Minorities Bore the Brunt. Now Worker Groups Say Tyson and JBS Violated the Civil Rights Act,” Washington Post, July 13, 2020, https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/07/13/coronavirus-meat-tyson-jbs-racial-discrimination/. 70  Fendt, “The JBS Coronavirus Outbreak Is Officially Resolved.” 71  Roy Graber, “JBS Reports Record Net Revenue in 2019,” Watt Poultry, March 26, 2020, https://www.wattagnet.com/articles/39910-jbs-reports-record-net-revenue- in-2019?v=preview#:~:text=Net%20revenue%20for%20JBS%20reached,billion)%20for%20the%20full%20year. 72  Ana Mano, “Nordea Drops JBS Over Environment, COVID-19 Response,” Reuters, August 1, 2020, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-jbs-nordea/nordea- drops-jbs-shares-over-environment-covid-19-response-idUSKBN24X3VD.  73  Christopher Doering, “JBS To Restart Plans for US IPO,” Food Dive, August 17, 2020, https://www.fooddive.com/news/jbs-to-restart-plans-for-us-ipo/583578/, 74 The National Review, “OSHA Taking Its Time to Issue COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standard,” March 18, 2021 75 The White House. Executive Order on Protecting Worker Health and Safety. January 21, 2021. 76  President Biden took a positive first step on his first complete day in office, when he issued Executive Order 13999, “Protecting Worker Health and Safety.”"
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Supported"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 2,
        "claim": "South African hospital found that traces of the novel coronavirus had survived on the surface of fresh food items for 12 hours during lab tests.",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "Posts shared on Facebook and WhatsApp claim a South African hospital found that traces of the novel coronavirus had survived on the surface of fresh food items for 12 hours during lab tests.",
                "question": "What did the lab tests conducted by the South African hospital reveal about the survival time of the novel coronavirus on fresh food items?",
                "url": "https://factcheck.afp.com/busting-coronavirus-myths",
                "scraped_text": "Rumours, myths and misinformation about Covid-19 have spread as quickly as the disease itself. AFP Factcheck has been debunking disinformation as it emerges along with new cases across the world. Here is a list of our 1395 fact-checks in English so far, starting with the most recent: 1395. Covid-19 vaccines not linked to Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndromes Social media posts claim \"Sudden Adult Death Syndrome\" is a new condition linked to the Covid-19 vaccine, proving that Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) is also a vaccine side effect. This is false; leading health organizations and medical experts say Sudden Arrhythmic Death Syndromes (SADS) -- misnamed in the posts -- is not a new set of heart disorders, and neither SADS nor SIDS has been identified as an adverse event following vaccination. 1394. US author Naomi Wolf falsely claims Covid-19 vaccinated mothers caused 'baby die-off' A video clip of US author Naomi Wolf claiming that \"there is a baby die-off\" in infants born to Covid-19 vaccinated mothers has been viewed hundreds of times on Facebook. But the claim is false. Doctors' statements contradict Wolf's claims, and multiple studies show that vaccination against Covid-19 during pregnancy is safe. 1393. Article falsely claims Justin Bieber linked facial paralysis to vaccine Social media users shared an article that claims Justin Bieber said his facial paralysis was due to the Covid-19 vaccine. This is false; there is no evidence that Bieber made such a public comment, and the article comes from a website that has previously published false claims under the guise of \"satire.\" 1392. Malaysian social media users falsely claim 'Bill Gates has prepared billions of monkeypox vaccines' A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and TikTok alongside a claim that billionaire Bill Gates has \"billions of doses of monkeypox vaccine on standby\" as more than a thousand infections have emerged worldwide. However the video has been shared in a false context. The footage was taken during Gates' visit to a Covid-19 vaccine storage facility in Abu Dhabi in May 2022. His charity, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, has told AFP that the claim is untrue. 1391. Posts misleadingly link AstraZeneca Covid jab to monkeypox cases Social media posts shared worldwide claim that recent cases of monkeypox outside of countries where it is endemic are a \"side effect\" of the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine, which uses a weakened chimpanzee adenovirus vector that has been altered so it does not infect humans or replicate. This is misleading; health experts told AFP the virus that causes monkeypox is different from AstraZeneca's adenovirus vector, which does not cause disease in humans. 1390. This video was filmed in Paris -- it does not show students protesting Covid curbs in Beijing A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple social media posts alongside the claim it shows a violent police crackdown on students protesting a Covid-19 lockdown at a university in Beijing. While there were reports of student protests against pandemic restrictions in the Chinese capital, the video was shared in a false context. It shows clips of May Day protests that turned violent in Paris. 1389. Monkeypox not a side effect of Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine Posts on social media claim recent monkeypox outbreaks are the result of a \"side effect\" of Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine. This is false; health experts say monkeypox cannot be contracted via Covid-19 vaccination, and Pfizer told AFP the virus is not a side effect of the shot. 1388. Posts misrepresent monkeypox and make misleading link with Covid vaccine After the World Health Organization (WHO) reported outbreaks of monkeypox in countries where the disease is not endemic, multiple social media posts claimed that the virus is the same as shingles and therefore a \"side effect\" of the Covid-19 vaccine. However, health experts told AFP that the virus causing shingles and the one causing Covid are completely unrelated. Furthermore, Australia's vaccine regulator told AFP there is currently insufficient evidence that Covid vaccines \"trigger\" shingles. The posts shared a stock image of shingles that was erroneously used to illustrate monkeypox. 1387. WHO did not approve Thai food supplement to 'prevent long Covid' Facebook posts circulating in Thailand claim the World Health Organization approved a dietary supplement to prevent long Covid. However, the WHO said it made no such announcement as of May 30, 2022, while health experts warned the only way to prevent long Covid was to avoid catching the virus in the first place. Social media posts say the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved a new monkeypox vaccine from Pfizer. This is false; the only vaccine for the prevention of monkeypox was approved by the FDA in 2019, and Pfizer does not manufacture it. 1385. Image does not show authentic Global News article on Covid vaccine An image shared tens of thousands of times on social media purports to show an article from Global News that says the Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine is only 12 percent effective. This is false; the Canadian news organization did not publish the article, and Pfizer's clinical trial data showed the vaccine to be 95 percent effective. 1384. Damaged goods found at department store in Malaysia in 2020, not Shanghai in 2022 As Shanghai emerged from a two-month lockdown, social media posts shared photos of mouldy shoes and bags that they claim show products at a department store in the Chinese megacity. However, the pictures were taken in Malaysia in 2020 at a store that was preparing to reopen following a Covid-related closure. 1383. Edited video misrepresents Pfizer CEO's comments at World Economic Forum A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in social media posts that claim it shows Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla saying the US pharmaceutical giant aims to cut the world's population in half by 2023. However, the video has been edited. In the original clip, Bourla told Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum (WEF), that Pfizer plans to cut the number of people who cannot afford their medicine by half. 1382. Video shows children wearing hazmat suits in northern China, not 'Shanghai during lockdown' A video of a group of children wearing hazmat suits has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in social media posts that claim it shows them attending school in Shanghai during the city's Covid-19 lockdown. However, the video was actually filmed in China's northern Hebei province. Schools in Shanghai -- China's largest city -- reverted to online learning in mid-March and in-person classes were not scheduled to resume until June. 1381. Airlines in Spain and Russia have not 'warned Covid vaccinated people not to fly' Social media posts shared hundreds of times claim airlines in Spain and Russia warned people who have been vaccinated for Covid-19 not to fly because they have an increased risk of developing blood clots. This is false: airlines in those countries have issued no such advice as of May 25, 2022. Health experts say blood clots are a rare side effect of the Covid-19 vaccine and are not the same as those that occur during flights. 1380. UK govt rejects fake Covid vaccine injury poster shared on Facebook A screenshot of a poster about Covid-19 vaccines that was purportedly issued by the UK government is circulating on Facebook. It urges people to apply for compensation if they were not \"made fully aware of the health risks\" of the jab. However, the poster is a fabrication; a government spokesperson said it was not an official publication and used government logos \"without knowledge or permission\". 1379. No evidence Australian political parties 'plan mandatory Covid-19 vaccination' Ahead of Australia's first federal elections since the emergence of Covid-19, multiple social media users shared a claim that three political parties plan to make vaccinations mandatory if they win the May 21 vote. But the claim is misleading. An Australian university researcher who focuses on mandatory vaccinations told AFP the federal government does not have the power to force nationwide inoculations. The Liberal-National Party coalition, Labor and Greens told AFP they do not support mandatory vaccinations. 1378. Canada's CTV did not publish story on segregating unvaccinated travelers Social media posts claim to show an article from the Canadian outlet CTV News, reporting that Ottawa is considering segregating travelers on airplanes by Covid-19 vaccination status. This is false; CTV News said it did not publish such an article, and the Canadian government denied considering such a policy. 1377. China's Covid mass testing photos misrepresented as 'disinfection of uninhabited mountains' Two photos of China's \"big whites\" -- health workers in hazmat suits -- in a snowy expanse have been shared hundreds of times in social media posts that claim they were part of a disinfection drive in a deserted part of the remote northwestern Qinghai province. Disinfectant spraying has been part of China's arsenal in its fight against the coronavirus, but the photos were actually taken during a Covid-19 testing drive in a mountainous township in Qinghai. AFP did not find any official reports of health workers disinfecting uninhabited mountains in China. 1376. Posts share false Covid lockdown notice for Manila after Philippine elections Facebook posts have repeatedly shared a purported news graphic stating the Philippine capital Manila and four neighbouring provinces were placed under \"heightened Covid restriction\" shortly after the May presidential elections. This is false: the image in the posts had been digitally altered from an old news graphic. Manila and its four neighbouring provinces remain under the lowest pandemic restrictions as of May 19, 2022. 1375. Video shows people in China's Zhejiang province and not 'Shanghai after Covid lockdown eased' A photo of shoppers buying large amounts of pork has been shared hundreds of times in social media posts that claim it shows residents in the central Chinese city of Zhengzhou preparing for a weeklong lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19 in May 2022. However, the photo has been shared in a misleading context; the image has circulated in reports since November 2021 about lavish pork buying practices in China's western Sichuan province. 1374. Posts mislead after Covid lockdown sparks panic buying in Chinese city A photo of shoppers buying large amounts of pork has been shared hundreds of times in social media posts that claim it shows residents in the central Chinese city of Zhengzhou preparing for a weeklong lockdown to curb the spread of Covid-19 in May 2022. However, the photo has been shared in a misleading context; the image has circulated in reports since November 2021 about lavish pork buying practices in China's western Sichuan province. 1373. Pfizer documents do not reveal dangers of Covid-19 vaccine Social media posts and online articles have made a series of inaccurate claims about the safety and efficacy of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine, sometimes asserting the revelations come from leaks of confidential documents from the pharmaceutical company. But health regulators and independent experts say the data -- which is being officially released by the US Food and Drug Administration -- does not show the shot is dangerous or ineffective. 1372. Article reporting Pfizer VP's arrest is satire Social media posts say that Pfizer's Executive Vice President Rady Johnson has been arrested and charged with fraud. This is false; the article that originated the claim says that it is satire, and a Pfizer representative said the allegation was untrue, branding it \"ridiculous.\" 1371. Posts falsely claim Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine dangerous during pregnancy Social media posts claim documents recently released by Pfizer show that the company's Covid-19 vaccine is unsafe for those who are pregnant or breastfeeding. This is false; health regulators and independent medical experts say no serious safety signals have been identified following vaccination during pregnancy, and the image in the posts does not show guidance from the pharmaceutical giant but is in fact outdated advice published by the United Kingdom in 2020. 1370. Social media posts mislead on vaccination programme pause in Denmark A claim that Denmark has entirely shut down its Covid-19 vaccination programme has been shared thousands of times in social media posts in April 2022. However, the claim is misleading; the Danish Health Authority says that the voluntary vaccination programme has only been paused for the time being and has not been discontinued entirely. 1369. Old photos misleadingly linked to end of outdoor mask mandate in South Korea Two images have circulated online in South Korea alongside a claim they show foreign students not wearing face masks while local students kept theirs on after the government lifted its outdoor mask mandate. While a poll found majority of South Koreans still prefer masking outdoors, the photos were shared in a misleading context. The first image of a group of maskless foreign students predates the Covid pandemic, while the second photo circulated in news reports weeks before South Korea's outdoor mask mandate was eased. 1368. False posts about 'Covid vaccine requirement for voters' spread ahead of Philippine poll Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok posts circulating ahead of the Philippines' polls on May 9 claim voters are required to present proof of Covid vaccination or a negative coronavirus test in order to vote. This is false: voters only need to wear a face mask to vote, according to the country's elections agency Comelec. The video featured in the posts -- watched over a million times -- shows an erroneous news report aired on local broadcaster TV5 that was later corrected. 1367. Social media posts mislead about Covid death rates in Australian state Social media posts shared hundreds of times claim it is \"insane\" that authorities in Australia are still encouraging Covid-19 vaccination given more vaccinated people than unvaccinated people died from the disease in the state of New South Wales on April 15, 2022. Although the posts shared genuine data from a single day in April, health experts told AFP vaccination is still critical to reducing the overall rate of death and severe illness from Covid-19. All of the deaths mentioned in the post were in people aged 60 or above, who experts said were at an increased risk of death from the disease. 1366. Hepatitis outbreak in children misleadingly linked to Covid-19 vaccination Online articles shared hundreds of thousands of times on social media claim the global outbreak of severe hepatitis in children is linked to Covid-19 vaccines, citing an April 2022 study as evidence. But health authorities and independent experts dismissed the idea that the shots are to blame, saying most of those affected were too young to be vaccinated and that the study refers to the case of an adult with a different type of hepatitis. 1365. Misleading video suggests people in China 'face death penalty for not wearing a mask' A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media appears to show a Chinese official warning that residents could face the death penalty if they do not wear a mask in public. But the video was edited in a misleading way to combine unrelated remarks from Beijing's justice department. People in China do not face the death penalty if they fail to wear a mask outside. However, they do risk capital punishment if they knowingly conceal their contact history in Covid-19 outbreak areas. 1364. This video shows a 2014 protest, not an anti-lockdown rally at a Shanghai university in 2022 A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple social media posts claiming it shows a protest at Shanghai's Fudan University in April 2022, during an ongoing lockdown in the Chinese city. The claim is false. The video has appeared in 2014 news reports about a clash between urban management officers and civilians in a town in China's Zhejiang province. AFP could not find any other record of the alleged incident at the university. 1363. Old drink-driving footage falsely shared as 'police clash during Shanghai lockdown' A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in Chinese-language social media posts alongside a claim it shows residents of China's largest city Shanghai clashing with the police during a coronavirus lockdown in 2022. Although Shanghai residents have scuffled with the police after the megacity became the heart of China's biggest virus outbreak since Wuhan, the video was actually filmed in the eastern Chinese city of Bengbu. The clip corresponds to reports circulating since 2021 about a drink-driving incident. 1362. Pfizer's stock was not 'delisted from the New York Stock Exchange' A screenshot of a document has circulated in Facebook posts that claim it shows an application by US pharmaceutical giant Pfizer to remove all its shares from the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) after a court ordered the release of its vaccine data. The claim is false; Pfizer was still listed on the NYSE, as of April 22, 2022. The posts actually shared an application to delist a type of debt instrument called notes, which were delisted because they had been paid in full. 1361. Fauci remark on flu vaccination does not negate Covid-19 advice Facebook posts claim top US infectious diseases expert Anthony Fauci contradicted himself by advising all Americans to get vaccinated against Covid-19, citing a years-old clip in which the doctor says a person who recovered from influenza need not receive a flu shot. But Covid-19 and the flu are distinct diseases, Fauci's advice in the 2004 video was specific to one person, and scientists are still researching the durability of natural immunity following Covid-19 infection. 1360. Anthony Fauci was not arrested by US military An online article claims that American special forces arrested top US infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci on April 9, 2022 on charges of treason, malpractice, conspiracy and homicide. This is false; the Pentagon called it a \"total and utter fabrication,\" the health agency Fauci heads denied the claim, and the scientist has made public appearances after the date of the alleged arrest. 1359. Old photo shows aid from China to Russia, not 'Russia sending food to Shanghai in 2022' A photo has been shared more than a thousand times in social media posts that claim it shows \"Russia sending food to help Shanghai\", as the city's residents faced food shortages during a weeks-long lockdown to stamp out its worst Covid-19 outbreak in 2022. However, the image circulated in state media reports in April 2020 and shows a shipment of medical supplies China sent to Moscow in the early days of the Covid-19 pandemic. 1358. Video does not show 'Shane Warne's son speaking about father's death' Following the sudden death of Australian cricketing legend Shane Warne in Thailand, a video was viewed hundreds of thousands of times in social media posts that claimed it shows the late sportsman's son suggesting his father's death was related to the Covid-19 vaccine. However, the posts are misleading. The video actually shows a former Australian far-right leader speaking about Warne's death. Thai authorities have stated that Warne died of natural causes. 1357. Posts mislead with claim Malaysians will be 'fined for wearing uncertified masks' An infographic has been shared multiple times in social media posts that claim Malaysians must wear face masks with official government certification or face a fine of up to 100,000 Malaysian ringgit ($23,600) under new regulations. However, the claim is misleading; the new rules and penalties apply to companies and individuals producing or importing face masks, rather than the general public, Malaysia's Ministry of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs said. 1356. Korean posts share misleading advice on using Covid self-test kits Korean-language Facebook posts have repeatedly shared a graphic advising users of Covid-19 self-test kits to swab from the back of the throat to guarantee accurate results. However, health experts told AFP only trained professionals should collect swab samples from the back of the throat to avoid injury. South Korea's health officials advise that swabbing from just inside the nostrils is sufficient for self-test kits. 1355. Posts share misleading claim about Covid-19 vaccination requirements in Malaysia A video of Malaysian Prime Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob making an announcement has been viewed thousands of times on social media alongside a claim that the Southeast Asian country's Covid-19 vaccination requirements have been \"abolished\". This is misleading. The video shows Ismail Sabri speaking at a press conference on March 8, 2022, during which he said vaccination requirements would be abolished for interstate travel and some workplaces. As of April 8, 2022, some activities in Malaysia — such as recreational sports, religious gatherings and dining in restaurants — require participants to have received at least the primary dose of a Covid vaccine. 1354. False claims that Covid-19 boosters cause AIDS spread online Online articles claim that recipients of Covid-19 booster shots will develop acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). But medical experts rejected the claim, saying there is no evidence that Covid-19 vaccines can cause the chronic, life-threatening condition. 1353. Posts share false 'vaccination requirement' claim about Ukraine war relief fund Multiple social media posts shared online in March 2022 claimed that \"only vaccinated Ukrainian citizens\" were eligible for an emergency government payment to aid workers impacted by the Russian invasion. This is false; as of April 4, 2022, neither Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky nor the ministry in charge of the scheme has said immunisation for Covid-19 or any other disease is a requirement to receive the benefit. 1352. CNN did not report that Ukraine war is causing myocarditis Social media posts claim that American news channel CNN reported that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is causing cases of myocarditis, or inflammation of the heart. But the posts feature an altered image from a satire website with comments suggesting it was true, and the media company said the apparent newscast is a fake. 1351. Nurofen tablets do not contain graphene oxide Videos showing black particles swirling about in a glass of dissolved Nurofen tablets have been shared in a string of social media posts claiming they are graphene oxide. However, the claim is false. The pain relief medication's manufacturer said the particles are black iron oxide, which health authorities and experts say is widely used as a colouring agent in the pharmaceutical industry and is safe for consumption. 1350. False graphic shared in misleading posts claiming 'Malaysians should get fourth Covid-19 jab' An infographic purportedly issued by Malaysian health authorities has been shared multiple times on social media with a claim that residents should get a fourth dose of the Covid-19 vaccine because \"the Omicron variant will spread\" after Malaysia reopens borders on April 1, 2022. However, the claim is false; the Malaysian Ministry of Health denies issuing the infographic. As of March 25, 2022, the government has not issued any statement about plans for the fourth dose in the country. 1349. Posts share misleading claim about pharmaceutical companies' offices in war-torn Ukraine A video that shows dozens of listings for pharmaceutical companies with offices in the Ukrainian capital Kyiv has been viewed tens of thousands of times on social media. The posts alluded to unproven claims -- promoted by Russian state media -- that US-funded labs in war-torn Ukraine are developing biological weapons. But the video has been shared in a misleading context; while the companies shown in the video all have offices in Kyiv, most are headquartered elsewhere and also have other global offices. 1348. Scientific paper does not prove Moderna 'created' coronavirus Online articles and social media posts cite a scientific paper to claim that pharmaceutical giant and Covid-19 vaccine manufacturer Moderna created the virus that causes the disease. But the lead author of the study said its findings do not implicate the company, and independent experts say the report itself lacks merit. 1347. Article misleads on US goverment-funded Covid-19 vaccine advocacy An article published by anti-vaccine organization Children's Health Defense (CHD) claims the US government made secret payments to media organizations to promote Covid-19 shots and to suppress unfavorable coverage. The claim is misleading; in fact, the educational program referred to was publicly announced and described in detail on a dedicated website, and the payments made were for advertising. 1346. This video shows Chinese pandemic workers in eastern China, not Hong Kong After mainland Chinese medics were sent to Hong Kong to help combat the city's worst Covid-19 outbreak to date, a video circulated in multiple social media posts alongside a claim it shows pandemic workers sleeping on the floor at a convention centre in the virus-hit city. But the video has been shared in a misleading context: it shows pandemic workers in China's eastern Shandong province. A spokesperson for Hong Kong's Hospital Authority separately told AFP it had \"arranged suitable and proper accommodation for the mainland medical team\". 1345. This video has circulated since January 2020 -- before any Covid-19 vaccines were available As South Korea recorded a surge in Covid-19 cases fuelled by the highly transmissible Omicron variant, a video circulated alongside a Korean-language claim that it shows a triple-jabbed doctor collapsing while performing surgery in Australia. However, the video -- which has been viewed hundreds of times -- has been shared in a false context. It has previously circulated in news reports about an incident in China since January 2020, when Covid-19 vaccines were not yet available. 1344. No evidence that Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine causes encephalitis, health experts say As Australian health authorities battled to control an unprecedented spread of the mosquito-borne Japanese encephalitis virus, social media posts claimed the potentially deadly virus was an adverse effect of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine. But the posts -- shared hundreds of times -- are false. Health experts told AFP there is no link between encephalitis -- an inflammation of the brain -- and the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The posts misrepresented a document that Pfizer submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). 1343. False posts that Covid vaccines alter DNA share pre-pandemic photo Korean-language social media posts alleging Covid-19 vaccines alter human DNA have shared an image alongside a claim it shows a \"genetically modified human\". These posts are false; AFP has repeatedly debunked claims that Covid-19 vaccines change human DNA. The image shared in the posts shows a digitally altered stock photo that predates the pandemic. 1342. Australian health official did not say vaccinated 'dying from myocarditis' A video is circulating in multiple social media posts that claim it shows a top Australian health official \"admitting\" people vaccinated against Covid-19 are dying from myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle. This is false; the clip was taken from longer footage that shows Queensland chief health officer John Gerrard talking about myocarditis deaths in Covid-19 patients, not vaccinated people. Australia's drugs regulator said it had not recorded any myocarditis deaths caused by Covid-19 vaccines. 1341. South Korean social media users share misleading claims about Novavax Covid vaccine Korean-language social media posts have shared multiple claims about a Covid-19 vaccine made by US pharma giant Novavax after South Korea's regulators approved the jab for use in January 2022. The posts suggest the Nuvaxovid jab is not safe for humans because it \"contains moth and spider DNA\", and claim more than 200 \"cases of serious side effects\" from the vaccine have been reported. These claims are misleading: as of March 11, 2022 Nuvaxovid has been approved as safe to use by health authorities in dozens of countries including South Korea. Experts told AFP the vaccine does not contain animal DNA. 1340. Video of US planes that fight wildfires shared in Indonesian misleading posts about 'spreading Covid' A video has been viewed millions of times online in Indonesia alongside a claim it shows planes spraying substances that can make people ill with Covid-19 symptoms. This is misleading. Scientists say overwhelming evidence shows the virus is generally transmitted from person to person. A spokesman for the Indonesian Air Force told AFP the claim was \"a hoax\" and that the planes in the video are not Indonesian. AFP found they are actually modified military aircraft used to fight forest fires in the United States. 1339. Posts misleadingly link New Zealand's euthanasia law to Covid Social media posts shared thousands of times globally claim New Zealand has \"approved euthanasia for Covid-19 patients\" and \"would rather kill people than treat them\". The posts circulated as the island country battled a wave of infections after being largely virus-free for much of the pandemic. However, these posts misrepresent New Zealand's euthanasia law that passed before the pandemic. The New Zealand health ministry, a medical expert and a legal scholar separately told AFP that Covid-19 patients \"have treatment options\" and are unlikely to meet the law's eligibility criteria. 1338. Sri Lankan social media users share misleading 'mask exemption' claim Facebook posts have circulated in Sri Lanka claiming anyone living in the island nation who has received a Covid-19 booster jab will be exempted from a law enacted in 2020 that made mask-wearing mandatory in public places. The posts are misleading; as of March 2, 2022, Sri Lanka does not have mask exemptions for vaccinated people, including those who have received a booster jab. 1337. Posts share unverified list of 'countries that have scrapped quarantine and virus testing' Facebook posts circulating in February 2022 claim a string of countries including Turkey, Brazil and Britain have scrapped \"all quarantine procedures\" and Covid-19 testing. The posts — shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter — claim that ten countries have decided to treat the virus as though it is a \"seasonal flu\". The claims are misleading; many of the countries included in the list still have Covid-19 quarantine and testing procedures for incoming travellers, as of February 26, 2022. 1336. Online posts tout fake hydroxychloroquine recipes Facebook posts claim hydroxychloroquine can be made at home using grapefruit and lemon peels to prevent viruses such as Covid-19. This is false; the drug is synthetic and cannot be produced by boiling citrus rinds, and infectious disease experts said the medication had not been found to prevent Covid-19. 1335. Photo of Covid-19 lockdown in mainland China misleadingly linked to Hong Kong pandemic relief A photo has been shared in multiple Facebook posts claiming it shows representatives from mainland China ready to \"save Hong Kong\" as Beijing pledged to support the financial hub's efforts to tackle a Covid-19 outbreak. However, the photo was shared in a misleading context; it corresponds to scenes from a Covid-19 lockdown in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen, where medical workers were combating a local outbreak in early February 2022. 1334. Misleading posts allege CDC coverup of pandemic measures harming children Social media posts claim the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lowered child speech development standards to cover up damage caused by mask use and lockdowns. But the agency and experts say the change was underway before the Covid-19 pandemic and is aimed at encouraging caregivers of children who miss milestones to seek help, not an attempt to minimize warning signs. 1333. Australian TV programme issues correction after report on Queen Elizabeth II's Covid treatment A video has been viewed more than two million times in posts that claim a doctor on an Australian TV programme endorsed deworming drug stromectol — which contains ivermectin — to treat Queen Elizabeth II after she tested positive for Covid-19. However, the Australian network that broadcast the programme said it had mistakenly referenced stromectol in the report. The doctor who was interviewed on the programme issued a clarification on Twitter that he had not endorsed stromectol as a Covid-19 treatment. 1332. US study misrepresented in false posts about PCR tests Multiple social media posts circulating in South Korea claim that a 2020 research paper by academics at Johns Hopkins University in the US shows PCR swab tests for Covid-19 are actually \"covert vaccinations\". These posts are false; Johns Hopkins University told AFP its scientists performed laboratory experiments on devices that \"have been neither tested nor used for vaccine delivery\". As of February 23, no Covid-19 vaccines have been administered through swabs. 1331. Image of Facebook login page requiring vaccination ID is fake An image shared in multiple social media posts appears to show Facebook requesting vaccination ID for login. The posts have circulated since the tech giant announced it was changing its name to Meta in October 2021. This is false; AFP confirmed that as of the date of this publication, the image does not show a real Facebook login screen. A spokesperson for Meta, the parent company of Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp, said the image is fake. 1330. UN plane in Canada for maintenance, not Ottawa protest Social media posts suggest a United Nations plane was used to fly in security forces who removed anti-vaccine mandate protesters from Canada's capital. But Ottawa police say only Canadian officers were involved, and an aircraft service company says the plane had been undergoing maintenance for weeks. 1329. Social media posts share false claim about Covid deaths in Australia Multiple social media posts shared in February 2022 claim the Australian government has only recorded 83 deaths from Covid-19 since the beginning of the pandemic. The country has endured nearly two years of some of the toughest coronavirus restrictions in the world. But the posts are false; Australia has recorded 2,556 Covid deaths as of February 23, 2022. 1328. False posts share chemtrails conspiracy theory, claiming white trails 'spread Covid-19' Social media posts claim white trails that linger in the sky after a passing plane are \"chemical trails\" that spread Covid-19. However, the claim is false. These white trails are condensation trails, which do not cause harm to humans, while experts have debunked conspiracy theories about \"chemtrails\". There is scientific consensus that Covid-19 is caused by the virus SARS-CoV-2. 1327. Unproven claims of masks harming speech development spread online Social media posts claim that mask use impairs children's speech development. But experts say that while more research is needed on the topic, preliminary data does not support this conclusion. 1326. Facebook posts share false claim about size of anti-vaccine mandate protest in Australia Social media posts circulating online following an anti-vaccine mandate protest in Australia’s capital Canberra claim \"police report they let 1.4 million vehicles\" into the city for a demonstration that attracted millions of people. The claim is false: the Australian Federal Police told AFP they counted about 6000 vehicles at the demonstration and approximately 10,000 protesters. National and international news reports estimated thousands of protesters attended the rally, not millions. 1325. Newspaper rejects fake report about New Zealand govt 'adding vaccines to water supply' As New Zealand faced a surge in Covid-19 infections, social media posts claimed the government planned to add vaccines to the water supply in a bid to increase inoculation rates. The posts purported to show a report from a popular newspaper announcing the plan. However, the purported report is fabricated, the newspaper and the health ministry told AFP. A health expert said the idea of adding vaccines to the water supply was \"simply ridiculous\". 1324. Posts falsely claim half of Ottawa police resigned during protest Social media posts claim that half of the Ottawa police force resigned during the anti-vaccine mandate protest in Canada's capital city. But both the Ottawa Police Service and the association representing its officers dismissed the claim. 1323. Qantas CEO pie video unrelated to Covid-19 vaccine mandate A clip showing a man smashing a pie into the face of Qantas Airways CEO Alan Joyce is circulating online along with the claim that it shows a response to the airline's Covid-19 vaccination requirement. This is false; the video is from 2017 and relates to Joyce's support for same-sex marriage in Australia, not the pandemic that came years later. 1322. Anti-vaccine poster circulates in misleading posts about 'Japan Pfizer emergency' Chinese-language social media posts claim Japan has declared a state of emergency following side effects from the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false; Japan has placed much of the country under a \"quasi-state of emergency\" to reduce the spread of Covid-19, not because of side effects from vaccines. Moreover, the social media posts show a Japanese poster that contains a string of falsehoods about the virus. 1321. Health experts dismiss false claim circulating in Indonesia that 'air pollution causes Covid-19' A video of an Indonesian podcaster who has organised anti-vaccine rallies claiming the Covid-19 pandemic is caused by air pollution has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple social media posts. However, the claim is false; although the Indonesian government has come under fire from residents for toxic levels of air pollution in the capital Jakarta, health experts told AFP Covid-19 is a disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. 1320. Philippine health department denounces fake Omicron 'alert' As Covid-19 ripped through the Philippines, social media posts purported to share an official government health warning about the Omicron variant. The posts are misleading; the health department said it had not issued the warning, which makes a string of baseless claims about the virus. 1319. Video of Brazilian trucks not related to Canada protest Social media posts claim a video clip shows Brazilian truckers expressing solidarity with protesters in Canada who oppose vaccine mandates. This is false; the footage was posted online months before the Canadian trucker demonstration began. 1318. Canada police not ordered to return fuel to Ottawa protesters Social media posts and online videos claim a judge ordered Ottawa police to return fuel to anti-vaccine mandate protesters after seizing supplies from the demonstrators. This is false; the Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General says no such order exists, and the police say they did not return any fuel. 1317. Posts spread fake letter from Canada's Trudeau to Ottawa protesters Social media posts claim Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wrote a letter saying he is willing to meet members of the \"Freedom Convoy\" and its supporters protesting Covid-19 vaccine mandates, providing an image as evidence. This is false; the premier's office says the letter did not come from his team, and he has made no public moves to meet with the demonstrators. 1316. Rock-filled dumpster not placed by Canada government to incite protester violence Social media posts claim a dumpster full of rocks was placed in central Ottawa by Canada's government to incite violence by \"Freedom Convoy\" protesters opposing Covid-19 vaccine mandates. This is false; the owner of the company that leased the container said it had been there since before the protest to collect rubble from work on a nearby parking garage, and an AFP journalist confirmed that it has now been removed from the site. 1315. Misleading posts claim Covid-19 antibodies cause breast milk to change color Social media posts featuring an image of two bags of breast milk claim one is greenish because the mother is producing antibodies in response to the child having Covid-19. But experts say breast milk color can change for many reasons and a green tint does not necessarily mean that either mother or child are sick with the disease. 1314. Posts shared in Australia make misleading link between vaccines and tobacco blood clot warning Social media posts circulating in Australia claim a new blood clot warning was added to the country's tobacco packaging in January 2022 -- which they suggest is linked to the rollout of Covid-19 vaccines. But the posts are misleading: the blood clot warning predates the pandemic, a tobacco control organisation told AFP. The warning is based on a decade-old law, Australia's health department separately told AFP. 1313. These photos of Malaysia's health minister were taken at two different Covid-19 vaccine events Facebook posts circulating in Malaysia claim photos of a politician posing after his first and second Covid-19 vaccine doses were in fact taken on the same day, accusing him of lying about being double-jabbed. The posts point to the fact he appears to be wearing the same outfit in both photos. The claim is false; while Khairy Jamaluddin wore the same black t-shirt and trousers to both his Covid-19 vaccinations in March and April 2021, he sported different shoes and socks. 1312. Canada children's hospital did not expand to treat Covid-19 vaccine side effects Social media posts claim that the cardiac unit of a children's hospital in Toronto was \"expanded\" in anticipation of a surge of side effects following the Covid-19 vaccination campaign for children aged five to 11. This is false; SickKids said the hospital has not expanded services within its department of cardiology, and available data shows that the risk of heart inflammation following vaccination in this age range is very low. 1311. Aerial convoy photo unrelated to 2022 Canada trucker protest Facebook posts claim an image of a miles-long line of cars and trucks shows the 2022 \"Freedom Convoy\" protesting Covid-19 vaccine mandates in Canada. This is false; the photographer who shot the aerial image says it was taken in the province of Alberta in December 2018. 1310. Photos show Indonesian leader attending Chinese Lunar New Year event before pandemic Three photos have been shared thousands of times in social media posts that claim Indonesian President Joko Widodo was pictured maskless at an event to celebrate the Chinese Lunar New Year in 2022. The posts claim the president ignored \"health protocols\". The photos were shared in a false context: they were taken in January 2020, more than one month before Indonesia reported its first Covid-19 cases. 1309. Error in article fuels ivermectin misinformation online Global news agency Reuters published an article that said a Japanese company found ivermectin to be effective against the Omicron variant of the coronavirus in human trials. The article was corrected to say that trials were non-clinical, meaning they did not test on people, but social media posts are still spreading the article's original incorrect assertion that the drug was proven effective against Covid-19 in human test subjects. 1308. Social media post falsely attributed to Canada PM Trudeau An image of a social media post that appears to be from Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and urges people to shun unvaccinated family members is circulating online. But Trudeau's office says he did not post the message, and there is no trace of it on his official social media accounts. 1307. Video shows Italian festival, not anti-mandate trucker protest A video showing dozens of trucks driving through a town and honking was shared thousands of times alongside claims it shows Italian truckers inspired by a convoy of Canadians who drove to Ottawa in 2022 to protest Covid-19 vaccine mandates. This is false; the video was taken in September 2021 during a city festival in the Piedmont region of Italy. 1306. Posts falsely claim photo shows 2022 Dutch farmers' Covid protest Social media posts feature a photo of tractors blocking a highway and claim that it shows a convoy in the Netherlands inspired by truckers protesting Covid-19 vaccine mandates in Canada. This is false; the photo appeared online in a 2019 article about farmers protesting enviromental regulations before the pandemic started. 1305. Photo depicts 1991 Moscow protest, not 2022 anti-mandate Canada convoy Facebook users shared a photo of a crowd hundreds of thousands strong, alongside a claim it showed a 2022 anti-vaccine mandate protest in Ottawa, Canada. This is false; the photo was taken during an anti-government protest in Moscow in 1991. 1304. Fake 'vaccine exemption cards' in the Philippines tout Covid misinformation An image is circulating in social media posts in the Philippines that claim it shows a vaccination exemption card. The card -- which features a QR code -- spread online as the government announced temporary restrictions for the unvaccinated in January 2022 as the country battled a record surge in Covid infections. However, the card is a fake, according to multiple government officials. The QR code on the card leads to a document that touts Covid misinformation previously debunked by AFP. 1303. Facebook posts about pandemic misrepresent London Olympics opening ceremony A segment of the 2012 London Olympics opening ceremony has been misrepresented in social media posts that claim it shows a \"giant figure of death holding a needle\" foreshadowing the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim is misleading; the cloaked figure in the ceremony was a puppet holding a wand, representing Harry Potter's antagonist Voldemort, who appeared alongside various villains from children's literature. 1302. Anti-vaccine group targets London street with fake public health warning As the highly contagious Omicron Covid-19 variant pushed governments to speed up rollouts of booster jabs, social media posts purported to share a poster issued by Britain's National Health Service (NHS) warning that the vaccines \"cause Bell's palsy\". The claim is false; Britain's health department and local authorities in the town where the poster was displayed said it was not made by the NHS. Bell's palsy, a condition that causes temporary facial drooping, is a rare side effect of Covid-19 vaccines. 1301. Footage from The Simpsons was edited to look like the show predicted Canada’s Covid truckers protest Posts shared on social media in South Africa and the United States claim that an old episode of The Simpsons TV show predicted the January 2022 Covid-19 trucker protest in Canada. But the claim is false: AFP Fact Check found that the video is an edit of two different episodes made to look like the show’s producers predicted the event. 1300. Video makes misleading infertility claim about development of GM crops A video featuring the founder of a far-right US-based website claims scientists can now genetically modify crops in order \"to cause infertility in black people\" by using a specific type of technology. This is misleading; experts told AFP the video misrepresents a natural process that has evolved in plants as a defence against viruses, which they said is not harmful to humans. 1299. Posts mislead on primary school closures in Pakistan after virus outbreak Facebook posts circulating in Pakistan claim the country's top body overseeing its pandemic response tweeted that \"all primary schools\" would be closed in January 2022 to curb the spread of coronavirus. This is misleading. Pakistan's National Command and Control Center (NCOC) said the posts shared a screenshot of a tweet from an imposter account. Although Pakistani authorities ordered some schools to close temporarily in January after Covid-19 outbreaks were detected, there has been no national closure of primary schools as of January 28, 2022. 1298. Traffic cameras not disabled to hide Canada anti-vaccine mandate convoy Social media posts claim traffic cameras on an Ontario highway were disabled to hide the passage of a convoy heading to Canada's capital to protest Covid-19 vaccine mandates for truckers. But the city of Windsor and Ontario's Ministry of Transportation both denied the claims, and supporters of the protest could be seen on footage from traffic cameras as the convoy passed through the Greater Toronto Area. 1297. False claim about deadly Covid-19 vaccine batches spreads online Online articles and social media posts claim US government data reveals there are problematic batches of Covid-19 shots that are responsible for all deaths caused by the vaccines. But American health authorities have not identified issues with specific vaccine lots, independent health experts say the claim is meritless, and the data cited is not proof that a shot was responsible for a fatality. 1296. Video of US charity parade misrepresented as anti-vaccine mandate convoy Supporters of Canada's \"Freedom Convoy 2022,\" an anti-vaccine mandate protest on wheels, shared a video of a trucker convoy from South Carolina claiming it showed US sympathizers also heading to the rally in Ottawa. This is false; the video was taken in August 2021 in South Carolina during a Special Olympics fundraiser, the man who shot the clip told AFP. 1295. Canada anti-vaccine mandate convoy did not set Guinness World Record Social media posts claim that a convoy heading to Canada's capital to protest Covid-19 vaccine mandates for truckers set a Guinness World Record for being the longest. This is false; the global authority on record-breaking said the honor is held by a parade that took place in Egypt in 2020, and specific conditions have to be met for an official record attempt to be registered by Guinness. 1294. Police did not arrest child at New York vaccine mandate protest Online articles claim a young girl was arrested at the Natural History Museum in New York City for refusing to show proof of vaccination. This is false; the New York Police Department (NYPD) and the museum say the girl was brought by adults protesting the city's vaccination requirement, and that she was escorted from the building while the others were arrested for refusing to leave at closing time. 1293. This video shows police in France protesting against reforms in 2020 -- not an 'anti-vaccine protest' A video has been shared repeatedly in social media posts that claim it shows an anti-vaccine protest by the French police. The posts circulated after protesters in France demonstrated against tighter restrictions for unvaccinated people in January 2022. But the video has been shared in a false context; it actually shows French police officers protesting against police reforms proposed by the then-French interior minister Christophe Castaner in June 2020. 1292. Video of expired Covid vaccines being destroyed in Nigeria recirculates in misleading posts A video has been shared repeatedly in Korean-language social media posts that claim it shows Nigerian authorities destroying one million doses of a Covid-19 vaccine. Some posts praised Africa's most populous country for being \"wiser\" than South Korea and other Western countries. But the video has been shared in a misleading context: the footage has circulated in news reports since December 2021 about Nigeria disposing of one million expired AstraZeneca vaccine doses. Nigeria has pledged to inoculate more than half of its population by the end of 2022 -- but its vaccine rollout has so far been slow. 1291. Social media posts share false stats on Australia's vaccine rollout for children As Australia started administering Covid-19 vaccines for children, multiple social media posts circulating in January claimed that \"three [child] deaths\" were recorded following vaccinations. The posts included a purported tweet from the chief health officer for the state of New South Wales. The claim is false. As of January 25, 2022, Australia's vaccine safety regulators have recorded no child deaths linked to vaccinations. The purported tweet was fabricated, according to the state health department. 1290. Posts falsely claim pneumonia caused by Covid-19 is allergic reaction Facebook posts claim pneumonia caused by Covid-19 is an allergic reaction that should be treated with antihistamines. But experts dismissed the claim, saying pneumonia associated with the disease is not related to allergies, and that antihistamines have not been proven to be beneficial in treating Covid-19. 1289. False claim about Covid-19 vaccine genocide convictions spreads online Social media posts claim public figures including Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Britain's Queen Elizabeth, and Pope Francis have been convicted of genocide and face arrest over their support for Covid-19 vaccination. This is false; the Canadian government and independent experts say the document shared as evidence does not come from a legitimate court. 1288. Video does not show 'tennis player collapsing at Australian Open after vaccination' A video has been shared in social media posts that claim it shows Slovenian tennis player Dalila Jakupovic collapsing at the Australian Open in January 2022 after being vaccinated. The video circulated online after defending men's champion Novak Djokovic lost a court bid to stay in Australia for the tournament without being vaccinated against Covid. But the video has been shared in a false context; it has circulated in reports before the pandemic about Jakupovic suffering breathing difficulties at the tournament in January 2020 as smoke from surrounding bushfires blanketed Melbourne. 1287. The image shows a simulation in a Canadian hospital in 2020 Social media posts share a photo of a mannequin in a hospital bed that they claim was passed off as a Covid-19 patient in France in a bid to exaggerate the severity of the Omicron outbreak. The claim is misleading; the image was filmed in 2020 at a Canadian hospital as part of a series of videos promoting its handling of Covid patients. 1286. Video misleads on patient access to Covid-19 vaccine safety data A video shared on social media shows a person suggesting Covid-19 vaccine safety information is being concealed from patients because a US pharmacist provided a blank sheet from a manufacturer when asked for data on the shots. This is misleading; both the US Food and Drug Administration and the pharmacy chain say the information is available online. 1285. Posts misrepresent Pfizer CEO's remarks on Covid-19 vaccine efficacy Social media posts and online articles claim Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla said two Covid-19 shots offer \"very limited\" protection against the disease. This is misleading; Bourla's full remarks in a recent interview make clear he was speaking about the efficacy of two doses against the Omicron variant, not Covid-19 in general. 1284. Ontario is not barring unvaccinated voters from polls Social media posts claim that unvaccinated individuals will be barred from voting in person in the June 2022 Ontario provincial election. But Elections Ontario says the Covid-19 policy shown in the posts only applies to individuals who work or conduct business in its offices, not to voters. 1283. Hoax linking Covid-19 to bacteria and 5G mobile technology resurfaces in South Africa A post shared on Facebook in South Africa claims Italian doctors discovered that Covid-19 is not caused by a virus but a bacterium. The post also claims that the World Health Organization (WHO) has banned autopsies on people who die from Covid-19 and that the disease is exacerbated by 5G technology and can be cured by taking aspirin. But Italy’s health ministry previously told AFP Fact Check this is a “hoax” and available health research confirms the claims are false. 1282. Posts mislead on Philippine city's 'face shield requirement' as Covid cases surge As Covid-19 cases surged in the Philippines in January, Facebook posts shared copies of a local ordinance alongside claims the most populous city in the country has made it mandatory for the public to wear plastic shields on top of face masks \"within the city area\". But these posts are inaccurate, according to the Quezon City government that issued the ordinance. As of January 13, face shields are only required in \"high risk\" areas like hospitals, a spokesperson for the city told AFP. 1281. CDC director's edited remarks spark misleading claims on Covid-19 deaths Social media posts and online articles say US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Director Rochelle Walensky admitted in a television interview that most Covid-19 deaths were among people with other illnesses, sparking claims that the threat posed by the disease has been exaggerated. But Walensky's remarks were edited for time by ABC News, and the full version shows she was speaking about the results of a study involving people vaccinated against Covid-19, not all deaths that it has caused. 1280. Video of Syria blast victim misleadingly shared alongside 'Covid vaccination' claim Dramatic footage of a distressed man crying next to the body of a dead girl has circulated in social media posts worldwide in January 2022 alongside a claim the child died after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. However, the journalist who filmed the footage said it shows a child killed by a bomb in Syria in October 2021. A spokesperson for UNICEF told AFP that no children in Syria had received Covid-19 vaccines as of January 11, 2022. 1279. Bob Saget target of unproven Covid-19 vaccine death claim Social media posts claim that US comedian Bob Saget died because he had received a Covid-19 booster shot. These claims are unsubstantiated; the \"Full House\" star had said that he received a third dose of the vaccine, but the Florida medical examiner's office that conducted his autopsy has not released its findings, nor indicated that vaccination was responsible for his death. 1278. Authorities say no vaccines stored in Italy’s Carabinieri police barracks when fire started Footage of a building in flames is circulating on social media across several countries. The clip accompanies posts claiming that the fire gutted a military barracks supposedly housing Covid-19 vaccines in Italy after mandatory vaccination was approved for security forces in the country. The claim is misleading: although Italy’s first Covid-19 vaccines were initially stored at the military camp in 2020, there were no doses in the building at the time of the accidental fire, according to a Carabinieri spokesperson. 1277. 'Flurona': Simultaneous infections, not new coronavirus variant Social media posts claim \"flurona\" is a new variant of the virus that causes Covid-19. This is false; experts say the term refers to simultaneous but separate influenza and coronavirus infections rather than a new variant, and that such cases are rare but have been detected before. 1276. Nuremberg Code does not say mandating masks a 'war crime' Social media posts claim the Nuremberg Code -- a set of research ethics principles established after World War II -- classifies face mask mandates as a \"war crime.\" This is false; the document does not say this, and experts say it addresses human experimentation and does not apply to public health measures. 1275. Betty White's death falsely linked to Covid-19 booster shot Social media posts claim that five-time Emmy award-winning actress Betty White died a few days after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine booster, suggesting that it caused her death. This is false; one of White's agents says she had not received a booster, and a media outlet that some posts tied to an alleged quote about the star getting the shot says it is fake. 1274. Misleading posts claim study shows vaccines increase Omicron infection risk A tweet shared tens of thousands of times claims a study found that mRNA Covid-19 vaccines increase the chances of infection with the Omicron variant. But experts said the shots do not increase the risk of infection, and the authors of the Danish study said the claim misinterpreted the data, overlooking key factors including more frequent testing and more potential exposure among the vaccinated, which would account for the higher reported infection rate in that group. 1273. South Korea does not count Covid cases in double-jabbed as 'unvaccinated infections' As South Korea battled record Covid-19 cases, social media posts shared a purported government health agency message saying that people with Covid-19 who had not received a booster shot would be classed as \"unvaccinated infections\". The claim is false; the screenshot of the message shared online is doctored. The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) says people who have received two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna and AstraZeneca vaccine or one dose of the Janssen vaccine are classified as breakthrough infections if they catch the disease, regardless of whether they have gotten a booster shot. 1272. Video repeats false claims about safety of Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine A video produced by a group claiming to represent Canadian doctors and health care professionals alleges that the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine is dangerous. But the video repeats several previously debunked assertions about the safety of the shot, experts say the benefits outweigh the risks of rare side effects, and the Canadian government recommends it to prevent hospitalization and death. 1271. Century-old poster does not echo Covid-19 pandemic safety guidelines Social media posts claim to show a public health poster from the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic that echoes Covid-19 safety guidelines -- wear a mask, wash hands, keep a \"safe distance\" from others. But the image text has been altered; the original version was used in a 1919 Red Cross Christmas campaign to fight tuberculosis, and it did not contain such instructions. 1270. Outdated news report misleads on Covid booster jab safety As the Philippines launched its Covid-19 booster shot campaign, a screenshot of a news report circulated in social media posts that claimed the health department warned the vaccines were dangerous. The posts are misleading; the news report was broadcast in November, when authorities warned the public against seeking boosters before they had been approved. The Philippine health chief said approved jabs were safe and effective. 1269. Posts misrepresent WHO chief's remarks on Covid vaccine inequity Social media posts circulating in multiple languages claim World Health Organization (WHO) chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus warned some countries were administering vaccine booster shots in order to \"kill children\". The posts spread online in December as countries around the world saw record surges of Covid-19 cases, likely driven by the Omicron coronavirus variant. But a review of Tedros' actual remarks found he was in fact discussing global vaccine inequity -- not commenting on the safety of Covid-19 vaccine boosters. A representative for the WHO told AFP that Tedros stuttered when delivering his remarks. 1268. Posts push unproven and dangerous post-vaccination 'treatments' Social media posts circulating in South Korea suggest various \"treatments\" for cleansing the body after a Covid-19 vaccination. The posts claim the methods will \"get rid of parasites and other nasty things\". However, health experts warned the purported treatments could actually be harmful. Experts have previously told AFP that Covid-19 vaccines do not contain live parasites. 1267. Videos showing misuse of Covid-19 tests mislead on their accuracy Videos shared on social media show rapid Covid-19 tests giving positive results when exposed to water, suggesting that the kits are inaccurate. But the manufacturers and scientists say the tests were not designed to be used with water, and health officials say they are an important tool to identify cases of the disease. 1266. Posts falsely claim 2020 US flu cases misrepresented as Covid-19 Social media posts claim low influenza numbers in the United States in 2020 were due to cases being misrepresented as Covid-19. But the diseases are distinct and are tracked separately by US health authorities, who say that strict safety measures undertaken to stop the spread of Covid-19 likely also reduced flu cases. 1265. 'Omikron' video game not related to Bill Gates or Covid-19 variant Social media posts in late 2021 claim a 1999 video game named \"Omikron\" is linked to Bill Gates and Microsoft, the company he co-founded, suggesting that it foreshadowed the Omicron variant of the coronavirus. This is false; Microsoft says that neither it nor Gates -- a favored target of conspiracy theorists -- were involved in the game's development, and it is unrelated to the deadly pandemic that came two decades later. 1264. Video shows German farmers' protest from 2019, not a rally against Covid rules A video has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows a protest against the German government's \"medical tyranny\" in December 2021. The claim circulated online after Germany imposed sweeping curbs on people not vaccinated against Covid-19. However, the claim is false: the video shows German farmers protesting in Berlin in November 2019 over new agricultural rules. 1263. This photo shows a fence at a mall in Latvia -- not Germany -- during a Covid-19 'emergency' A photo of two people holding hands through a fence has been shared hundreds of times in Facebook and Twitter posts that claim it shows a \"new Berlin Wall\" separating \"vaccinated and non-vaccinated people\" in a German supermarket. The posts circulated online as parts of Europe faced a new surge of coronavirus infections. However, the claim is misleading. The photo -- which was taken in October 2021 -- shows people in a Latvian supermarket, where a fence was installed to separate vaccinated and unvaccinated customers during a three-month state of emergency. 1262. This video shows an experiment with frog cells, not vaccines A video of cells moving in a dish has been shared repeatedly in Korean-language Facebook posts that claim it shows \"nanorobots in Covid-19 vaccines\". This is false: the video has circulated in reports since November 2021 about an experiment with frog cells, not vaccines. A researcher involved in the experiment told AFP it has no connection to vaccines. Health experts have separately told AFP that Covid-19 vaccines do not contain nanorobots. 1261. Video makes inaccurate claims about Covid-19 shots harming children A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times online features researcher Robert Malone making a series of claims about mRNA Covid-19 shots causing harm to children. But experts say the claims are inaccurate, and a physician from a leading children's hospital called the video \"dangerously and flagrantly incorrect.\" 1260. Taiwan's vaccine stats misrepresented by US-based television network A misleading video report from a US-based television network has been viewed thousands of times in Twitter and Facebook posts sharing its claim that \"more people die from vaccines than from [Covid-19]\" in Taiwan. The report wrongly claims deaths reported to the island’s vaccine adverse events database were found to have been directly caused by Covid-19 jabs. Taiwanese health authorities told AFP they were still investigating the causes of deaths reported to the database, and have yet to conclude whether any of them were directly related to the vaccine. 1259. Posts mislead on Australia's Covid travel restrictions after Omicron cases recorded Posts shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter have questioned how the new Omicron coronavirus variant reached Australia if \"the unvaccinated cannot leave or enter\", implying that vaccines provide ineffective protection against the disease. The claim, however, is misleading: unvaccinated Australians are allowed to leave or enter the country under certain exemptions. Experts have consistently said that while Covid-19 vaccines reduce the chances of severe disease and death, vaccinated individuals can still transmit the virus. 1258. Posts share misleadingly edited video of Trudeau's year-end interview Social media posts feature a clip of Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaking about \"attacking fundamental rights,\" with some suggesting he was referencing his government's response to Covid-19. But the clip has been misleadingly edited, and the Liberal leader was answering a question about part of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, not speaking about the pandemic. 1257. Posts misrepresent Sri Lankan expert's advice on vaccine protection against Omicron Posts circulating in Sri Lanka claim two local experts gave conflicting remarks about the need for people to be vaccinated against the Omicron coronavirus variant. The posts -- which shared two screenshots of local media reports -- circulated online as the island nation reported its first case of Omicron. But the posts are misleading; AFP found that the original comments from one of the experts were misrepresented. 1256. Posts falsely claim Canada hospital treated hundreds of vaccine-injured children Social media posts claim 400 children were treated in one week for adverse reactions to Covid-19 shots at a Calgary hospital. But the health authority that runs the facility says it has not had any pediatric hospitalizations related to the shot, and Canadian federal data shows fewer than 400 adverse events following Covid-19 vaccination reported per week over the past month for all ages nationwide. 1255. False claim that Covid-19 shots undermine immune system spreads online Online articles and social media posts claim that Covid-19 shots compromise the immune systems of recipients, causing \"vaccine acquired immune deficiency syndrome.\" This is false; medical experts -- one of them an author of a study cited in support of the claim -- say the vaccines do not have this effect. 1254. Articles inaccurately claim document reveals Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine deaths Online articles shared on social media claim a document released by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) revealed more than 1,200 deaths related to Pfizer-BioNTech's Covid-19 vaccine in a 90-day period. But the pharmaceutical giant says the document does not indicate the fatalities are linked to vaccination, and it concludes the shots are safe -- a finding supported by US health authorities as well as clinical research. 1253. Old interview with BioNTech chief recirculates with false claim he 'admitted he is not vaccinated' A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in posts in early December that claim it shows the chief of BioNTech -- the company that developed a Covid-19 jab with Pfizer -- admitting he has not been vaccinated against the coronavirus. The posts circulated online as scientists tested the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine's efficacy against the Omicron coronavirus variant. But the video has been shared in a false context; it shows an interview with Ugur Sahin in late 2020 in which he said he would not jump the vaccination \"priority\" line. Sahin was vaccinated in early 2021, BioNTech told AFP. 1252. This image is fake -- it does not show a real 'booster jab advert' featuring Jacinda Ardern A photo shared thousands of times around the world appears to show a billboard featuring New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern inviting Kiwis to get a \"Christmas booster [jab]\" in exchange for \"up to six months' worth of freedoms\". The claim circulated online shortly after New Zealand said it would not reopen to foreign travellers until at least the end of April 2022, as it slowly relaxes some of the world's toughest pandemic border restrictions. But the image has been digitally manipulated from an old election advert. The New Zealand Prime Minister’s office told AFP the image was a “fake”. 1251. Singapore clarifies confusion over its consulate in Malaysia after border travel curbs eased Facebook posts that have been shared hundreds of times claim that Singapore's Foreign Ministry has recently opened a consular office in the Malaysian city of Johor Bahru. The posts — shared in November 2021, the month when the two countries eased Covid-19 travel restrictions — claim the consulate will provide support to Singaporeans who face difficulties crossing the border. But the Singaporean Foreign Ministry said the posts were misleading as its consular office in Johor Bahru has been open since 2009. 1250. Singapore doctor rejects 'comments' doubting efficacy of Covid-19 vaccines in elderly Multiple Facebook posts claim a Singapore doctor told Chinese media that people aged over 60 who take routine medication may find it reduces the effectiveness of their Covid-19 vaccines. However, the doctor and the clinic at which he works have said that he has never made such comments. AFP found no record of him publicly making that claim. 1249. World Economic Forum did not report Omicron variant in July 2021, original article was updated Posts shared on social media in the United States and South Africa claim that the World Economic Forum (WEF) made reference to the newly discovered Omicron variant in a report dated July 2021 – months before the latest mutation of the Covid-19 virus was announced. But this is false: the original WEF article cited on social media made no mention of Omicron, and it was only updated in November 2021 with details about the latest variant. 1248. Posts falsely claim weather-linked health warnings aimed at hiding vaccine harm Social media posts claim an article warning about an increased risk of heart issues during cold weather is part of a conspiracy to cover up rare cardiovascular illness caused by Covid-19 vaccines. But several studies have shown that falling temperatures can cause stress on the heart, and health authorities and experts say people who remain unvaccinated are at greater risk of contracting the virus and suffering related heart complications. 1247. Nova Scotia defibrillator purchases falsely tied to Covid-19 pandemic Social media posts claim a decision by Canada's Nova Scotia to equip public schools with defibrillators is linked to rare side effects of Covid-19 vaccines. But the provincial government said the move is unrelated to the pandemic, and a Canadian foundation said efforts to make the life-saving devices accessible in public buildings, including schools, have been ongoing for more than a decade. 1246. False claims on Ursula von der Leyen's vaccine remarks spread online Social media posts and online articles claim European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called for scrapping the Nuremberg Code and forcing people to receive a Covid-19 vaccination. But she made no mention of the Nuremberg Code when questioned about moves to require vaccination in some European countries, instead suggesting a \"discussion\" and \"common approach\" to implementing policies. 1245. Research summary misleadingly cited as evidence Covid-19 shots are dangerous A preliminary summary of research in an American Heart Association (AHA) journal claiming that common Covid-19 vaccines more than double the risk of heart problems is being cited as evidence the shots are dangerous. But the AHA says there are potential errors in the research, which has not been peer reviewed, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and an expert raised questions about its conclusion and methodology. 1244. Health authority dismisses claim Canadian child died after Covid-19 vaccination Social media posts claim a six-year-old child died near Ottawa, Canada after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. But the local health authority said a review of data from coroners as well as partners at a children's hospital showed the claim is false, and monitoring systems are in place to investigate potential adverse events following vaccination. 1243. This image of a Karl Marx statue in Germany has been doctored An image circulating on social media appears to show a statue of German philosopher Karl Marx donning a coronavirus-shaped crown and virus-patterned cloak. The posts claim locals in Marx's birth city added the details as an insult to China, which gifted them the sculpture to mark the revolutionary's 200th birthday. The image has been doctored; the original photo shows a bronze statue that was unveiled in Trier in 2018 with no crown or virus patterns. 1242. Melbourne anti-lockdown protest sparks false 'sonic weapon' claim After violent protests against Covid-19 vaccine mandates in Melbourne, social media posts claimed police used a sonic weapon to make demonstrators soil themselves. The claim is false; the posts used a photo from a 2018 prank video by an Australian YouTuber. An acoustic weapons expert told AFP it was \"improbable\" that infrasound technology could have the effect described in the posts. There have been no official reports that Victoria police used sonic weapons at the protest. 1241. Movie poster was altered to read 'The Omicron variant' Social media posts share a poster for a purported 1963 science-fiction movie called \"The Omicron Variant\" to suggest that the pandemic and the appearance of the latest coronavirus variant of concern was planned in advance. But the poster is a digital fabrication based on one for a 1974 film named \"Phase IV.\" 1240. Pre-pandemic video shared in misleading posts about girl 'collapsing after Covid-19 vaccine' A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple social media posts in November 2021 that suggest it may show a girl in China receiving first aid after a Covid-19 vaccine caused her to collapse. But the footage predates the pandemic. It has circulated since at least 2018 in reports about a girl who received first aid after fainting in the eastern Chinese city of Qingdao. 1239. Australian politician hit by fake article claiming he referred to unvaccinated with racial slur Facebook posts circulating in Australia purport to a show an article reporting that Daniel Andrews, the premier of Victoria state, referred to unvaccinated people using a racial slur. However, the article is fabricated to look like a report by 7NEWS, which said it did not publish any such story. Keyword searches found the purported article does not correspond to any report on the broadcaster's website. 1238. This video shows football fans marching through an Austrian town in 2019, not an anti-lockdown rally A video has been shared multiple times on social media in South Korea alongside a claim it shows a protest against Covid-19 restrictions in Austria. The claim is false: the video was first posted online in November 2019, at least one month before the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. It shows football fans marching along a street ahead of a Europa League match in Austria. 1237. Mexico's Father Ángel Cuevas is alive and well A video of a priest collapsing during a service has spread online alongside the claim that he died following vaccination against Covid-19. But Father Ángel Cuevas did not die, and an AFP journalist met with him in Mexico's Acapulco more than two months after he fainted in an episode he said was unrelated to vaccination. 1236. Speech bubble from 1957 comic strip was altered to make reference to Covid-19 Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times purport to show a vintage comic strip panel from 1957 with a speech bubble that makes reference to a \"China virus\". However, this is false; the words in the original comic from decades ago were digitally altered. 1235. Coronavirus variants are not released as part of staged pandemic A chart purporting to show a schedule of pre-planned coronavirus variants has been shared thousands of times on social media as proof of a baseless conspiracy theory that the pandemic was staged. But viruses mutate unpredictably, several of the variants have already been detected ahead of the supposed timetable, and the groups whose logos appear in the posts -- including the World Health Organization -- told AFP that the image is not genuine. 1234. Social media posts misrepresent WHO data on vaccine side effects A graphic has been shared repeatedly in social media posts that claim it shows the \"total number of vaccine injuries for each vaccine\" administered during the Covid-19 pandemic. The purported data was shared alongside a logo for the World Health Organization (WHO). The posts, however, are misleading. A spokesperson for the WHO told AFP the data shows vaccine cases for which potential side effects were reported, but said further investigation was needed to confirm any causal link. 1233. Inaccurate claim on Covid-19 vaccines causing Canada stillbirths spread online Articles and video footage shared on social media claim mothers vaccinated against Covid-19 suffered 13 stillbirths in 24 hours at a hospital in western Canada. But there is no evidence that this occurred, local health authorities say there is \"no truth\" to the claim, and independent experts say available data does not show that the shots caused an increase in stillbirths. 1232. Photo of 1991 Moscow protest shared as anti-vaccine mandate march in Vienna in 2021 Social media posts have shared a photo purporting to show a mass demonstration against Covid-19 restrictions in the Austrian capital Vienna in November 2021. The claim is false; the image was taken in Moscow in 1991, during a protest against then Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev. 1231. US video misrepresented in false posts as 'Australia Covid-19 protest' A video that shows police officers knocking over a man in a wheelchair has been viewed thousands of times on social media with a claim that it was filmed during protests against Covid-19 restrictions in Australia in 2021. But the video has been shared in a false context; it was filmed in the US. The clip has circulated in reports about police arresting a Black Lives Matter protester in 2020. 1230. Medics rubbish claims that Covid-19 PCR tests are 'unreliable and dangerous' Facebook posts shared repeatedly in Thailand warn that Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) nose swab tests for Covid-19 are inaccurate and harmful to human health, including claims that they can damage nerves and the brain. But experts told AFP there is no evidence that PCR tests are dangerous. International health bodies have approved the test as the gold standard for diagnosing Covid-19. 1229. Old image shared alongside false claim that the Sinovac vaccine is only for 'clinical trial' Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts in Indonesia claim that Sinovac Covid-19 vaccines distributed in the country's inoculation drive are unsafe as they are marked \"for clinical trial\" only. The claim is false; the posts show a photo of the Sinovac vaccine packaging from August 2020, when the vaccine was not yet available to the public. 1228. Misleading report claims Covid-19 vaccines in Australia more deadly than disease itself An article circulating on Facebook claims Covid-19 vaccines have killed more people in Australia in 2021 than the disease itself, citing figures from the national drug regulator. The claim is misleading; the regulator's database shows adverse reactions reported following vaccination but does not mean they were caused by the jab. There have been significantly fewer confirmed deaths from Covid-19 vaccination than from Covid-19 in Australia in 2021. 1227. Japan has not stopped using vaccines to combat Covid-19 Multiple Facebook posts have shared a claim that Japan has stopped using vaccines against Covid-19 and prescribed antiparasitic drug ivermectin, ending the pandemic in the country “almost overnight”. The claims is false; Japan are still administering Covid-19 vaccines. Japanese authorities have not approved ivermectin to treat Covid-19. 1226. Posts falsely say Pfizer CEO's wife died from vaccine complications An online article said Myriam Bourla, wife of Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, died of complications arising from a Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false, the pharmaceutical company and the hospital mentioned in the article told AFP, and Myriam Bourla attended a public event after the article erroneously announced her death. 1225. Video falsely claimed to show children who died due to Covid-19 vaccination A video has been shared repeatedly in Facebook posts that claim it shows 13 children who died because of the Covid-19 vaccination in South Africa. However, the claim is false: the video was in fact shot in Kenya in February 2020, months before South Africa rolled out the Covid-19 vaccination programme; The pupils died because of a stampede at their school. 1224. Posts misleadingly link childhood stroke warning to vaccines Social media posts share a picture of a bus advertisement about paediatric stroke awareness in Canada and suggest it is related to Covid-19 vaccines. But the ad has nothing to do with the shots, and health authorities and independent experts say available data does not show a causal link between mRNA vaccines and strokes in children. 1223. Colorado governor’s order targets hospital crowding, not unvaccinated patients Social media posts and online articles claim Colorado Governor Jared Polis signed an executive order to let hospitals turn away unvaccinated patients. But the text of the order says that people can be sent to other facilities or denied admission due to capacity issues, not based on Covid-19 vaccination status, and the governor's office and a hospital association in the western US state say the claim is inaccurate. 1222. Misleading posts claim Australia biosecurity bill targets residents with forced vaccination Facebook posts claim that a proposed bill to amend Australia's biosecurity law targets unvaccinated citizens with forced quarantine and Covid-19 vaccination. The posts are misleading. The text of the bill indicates that the amendments would apply to people arriving in Australia from overseas and states that \"force must not be used\" to require individuals to comply with biosecurity measures. 1221. Post falsely claims Covid-19 shots more dangerous for children than virus An Instagram post claims children are 50 times more likely to die from Covid-19 shots than from the virus, citing a former Pfizer researcher. This is false; the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says it has not detected an unusual pattern of such deaths following Covid-19 vaccination, Pfizer says there have been no vaccine-related fatalities among children who received its shots, and a pediatrician described the risk of the disease as being far higher than that of the vaccine. 1220. Inaccurate claims about 'rabbinical court' opposing Covid-19 vaccination spread online Online articles and social media posts claim a \"rabbinical court\" that is part of Israel's legal system ruled against Covid-19 vaccination for young people and children in a binding decision for observant Jews. But leading rabbinical authorities in both Israel and the United States have endorsed vaccination, and experts say the ruling did not come from a widely recognized Jewish legal authority. 1219. US cardiologist makes misleading claims about Malaysia's Covid-19 vaccine drive A video has been shared repeatedly on social media that shows American cardiologist Dr Peter McCullough urging Malaysia to dismantle its Covid-19 vaccination program because vaccines are purportedly unsafe and create virus mutations. The claims — many of which have previously been debunked by AFP — are misleading, according to experts. 1218. Covid-19 vaccination sign did not call for child organ donations Facebook posts feature a photo of a sign at a vaccination stand that urges people to remember to donate their children's organs, suggesting that the shots will kill them. But the image has been manipulated; the original banner advertised vaccinations in English and Spanish, with no mention of organ donation. 1217. Facebook posts falsely link Astroworld deaths to Covid-19 vaccines Facebook posts claim the deadly crush at rapper Travis Scott's Astroworld Festival was caused by graphene oxide in Covid-19 vaccines that allowed concertgoers to be controlled. This is false; the substance is not an ingredient in any of the shots authorized in the United States, and authorities are still investigating events at the Houston, Texas, concert. 1216. Video of Kamala Harris manipulated to include anti-vaccine message Tweets feature a video of US Vice President Kamala Harris appearing to say that almost all hospitalized Covid-19 patients are vaccinated against the disease. But the official White House footage and transcript of her remarks, as well as media coverage of the event at which she spoke, show that she said \"unvaccinated,\" not \"vaccinated.\" 1215. Social media users falsely link Pfizer to Covid-19 monitoring invention Multiple Facebook posts have shared an image of a US patent registration document alongside a claim that it shows Pfizer's Covid-19 vaccine has been approved to be used for \"remote contact tracing of all vaccinated humans worldwide\". The claim is false. The registered patent is not intended for tracking vaccinated people and has no connection with Pfizer, the patent’s creators and the pharmaceuticals company told AFP. 1214. Italy did not revise down its Covid-19 death toll Social media posts and online articles claim Italian authorities revised down the country's Covid-19 death toll from more than 130,000 to less than 4,000. This is false; the posts and articles misrepresented a report by Italy's leading health institute, which described the claim as \"fake news.\" 1213. New Pfizer vaccine ingredient addresses storage issues, not heart problems Social media posts and an online article say pharmaceutical giant Pfizer added an ingredient used to stabilize heart attack victims to its Covid-19 vaccine for children, linking the move to reports of rare side effects from the shots. This is misleading; Pfizer's new formula containing tromethamine will be used for both children and adults, and the ingredient's purpose is to ease and prolong vaccine storage, the company and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) say. 1212. This photo shows a music festival in Switzerland in 2018 A photo of huge crowds lining the streets is circulating in Facebook posts that claim it shows an anti-vaccine protest in Italy. The claim is false; the photo shows a street music festival in Switzerland in 2018. 1211. Posts falsely claim Pfizer drug treats Covid-19 vaccine side effect Social media posts claim Pfizer is profiting from myocarditis caused by its Covid-19 vaccine through a drug it sells that treats inflammation of the heart, which has been reported as a rare side effect of the shots. But the drug referenced in the posts treats a different heart disease, according to the pharmaceutical company, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and an independent cardiologist. 1210. White House press secretary's Covid-19 case triggers vaccine misinformation Social media posts claim that because White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was fully vaccinated when she tested positive for Covid-19, shots against the disease do not work. But US health authorities say that while the vaccines are effective at preventing serious illness and death, breakthrough cases among some individuals who have received the shots will still occur. 1209. Using your own pen in South Africa’s municipal elections not mandatory, but recommended Multiple Facebook posts shared in South Africa ahead of local government elections claim that voters need to bring their own pens to mark their ballots. The claim is misleading; while South Africa’s Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) did encourage voters to bring their own pens as a Covid-19 safety precaution, it said pens would be provided as well. 1208. Fake poster from Irish health agency spreads false claims about Covid-19 vaccine side effects An image has been shared repeatedly in social media posts around the world that purports to show a poster from an Irish health agency listing \"vaccine side effects\" that include \"sudden death\". The image is a hoax; the Irish health agency says it did not issue the poster. 1207. False reports claim police rubber bullets killed anti-lockdown protester in Melbourne A photo of a man with a bloodied face is circulating in Facebook posts that claim it shows a man called Kyle Mitchell who \"died after being hit by rubber bullets\" at ananti-lockdown protest in Melbourne, Australia. The claim is false; police said they recorded no such death, while Mitchell told AFP the footage showed him injured after a fight with a store clerk. 1206. No evidence that five heads of state were assassinated for rejecting Covid-19 vaccines A meme shared on Facebook claims that the former leaders of Haiti, Tanzania, Burundi, eSwatini and Ivory Coast were assassinated because they opposed Covid-19 vaccines. But the claim is false: there is no evidence to suggest that the five politicians, who died in the past 16 months, were killed for refusing vaccines. 1205. Medical experts discredit claims that Covid-19 swabs are vaccines in disguise A Facebook post of a video interview featuring American doctor Lorraine Day making multiple false claims about Covid-19 on a YouTube channel called “Israeli News Live” has been viewed thousands of times. Day alleges that “people who have tested for Covid-19 have unknowingly been vaccinated” and insists that vaccines are disguised as tests. But medical experts dismissed the false claim, and the World Health Organization (WHO) confirmed that vaccines cannot be administered using a swab. 1204. Video about 'forced vaccination' in Russia is from a satirical YouTube channel A video has been viewed millions of times in social media posts that claim it shows a mandatory vaccination campaign in Russia. The claim is misleading; the footage was taken from a satirical video that makes fun of Russian bureaucracy. Covid-19 vaccination is only compulsory for certain key workers in Russia, as of October 28, 2021. 1203. CDC did not say shots are riskier for children than Covid-19 Social media posts claim US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data shows children are 107 times more likely to die from Covid-19 shots than from the disease itself. But the CDC says the claim is false, and that it has not found any instances of Covid-19 vaccines causing or contributing to deaths in children. 1202. Graphene is not a Covid-19 vaccine ingredient, nor is it found in beach sand A video shared hundreds of times on Facebook in South Africa features two Australian women using a magnet to trap particles of black beach sand, which they claim is graphene that ends up in vaccines, food and other items. But these claims are false: experts have repeatedly said that none of the Covid-19 vaccines contains graphene. A geologist told AFP Fact Check that the dark beach particles occur naturally all over the world and are not graphene, which is a synthesised material. 1201. This video shows a pre-pandemic protest by indigenous groups in Brazil A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple social media posts that claim it shows indigenous Australians defending themselves with bows and arrows against compulsory Covid-19 vaccinations. The claim is false: the video predates the pandemic. It shows indigenous groups in Brazil protesting in 2019 against a proposal to transfer indigenous health services from the federal government to municipalities. Covid-19 vaccination is only compulsory at a national level for certain key workers in Australia, as of October 27, 2021. 1200. Social media posts push unproven and 'dangerous' Covid-19 treatments Social media posts claim that doctors who do not treat hospitalized Covid-19 patients with a combination of ivermectin, hydroxychloroquine and several other drugs are guilty of malpractice if the sick person dies. This is false; health agencies and experts advise against several of the treatments listed, and legal experts say that for this reason the claim does not describe malpractice. 1199. Posts misleadingly claim anti-viral drug could replace Covid-19 vaccines A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter claims that the oral anti-viral drug molnupiravir can \"cure\" Covid-19, rendering vaccines pointless. The claim is misleading: although clinical trials indicate molnuprivir could be an effective treatment for Covid-19, it has not been approved by national or international health authorities for use as of October 25, 2021. Health experts have warned the drug should not be considered a replacement for Covid-19 vaccines. 1198. Flawed experiments fail to prove Covid-19 vaccines contain dangerous substances An American osteopath warns against taking Covid-19 shots, claiming an experiment she conducted revealed a tentacled \"object or organism\" in Moderna's vaccine. But experts say the experiment was not conducted under appropriate conditions and that its results cannot be verified, and that the doctor's claim that Johnson & Johnson's shot contains graphene is false. 1197. US remarks on economy misleadingly portrayed as threat to unvaccinated An RT article suggests a top US Treasury official sought to blackmail unvaccinated Americans by saying shortages of goods would continue until they all receive Covid-19 shots. But the shortages and higher prices are caused by increased demand and a lack of workers rather than a government plot, and the Treasury official said worldwide vaccination is needed to return the economy to a more consistent state that resembles what came before the coronavirus pandemic. 1196. Covid-19 vaccines do not contain live parasites, experts say A claim that Covid-19 vaccines contain parasites that could grow inside an inoculated person's body has been shared repeatedly on several social media posts in South Korea. But these posts -- which recommend those who were vaccinated to take the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin -- are false. Vaccines are manufactured in sterile environments and do not contain parasites as ingredients, experts told AFP. They also warned against the use of ivermectin, citing health risks. 1195. Sri Lankan minister did not promise new drug can 'eradicate' Covid Facebook posts circulating in Sri Lanka claim a junior health minister said in a statement that antiviral drug molnupiravir could soon be used to \"fully eradicate\" Covid-19 in the island nation. The posts are misleading: the junior minister said molnupiravir could be used to treat Covid-19 patients, but he did not state it could \"eradicate\" the illness. Health experts warned the drug should not be considered as a replacement for Covid-19 vaccines. The drug's manufacturer said it may significantly reduce the risk of hospitalisation and death in high-risk patients suffering from an early stage of the disease based on a clinical trial it did. 1194. Colin Powell's death sparks misleading claims about Covid-19 vaccines Social media posts claim that Colin Powell's death from complications caused by Covid-19 means vaccines against the disease are ineffective. This is misleading; Powell had a type of cancer that experts say undermines the efficacy of the shots, and data shows his age left him especially vulnerable. 1193. This video circulated in pre-pandemic posts about a man smashing an airport check-in machine A video has been viewed thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts that claim it shows a man destroying a \"vaccine passport machine\" at an airport. But the posts are misleading; the clip was filmed before the pandemic and circulated in posts about a man destroying check-in machines in South Korea's Incheon airport. 1192. Retired US chiropractor makes multiple false claims about Covid-19 During a meeting in Orange County, Florida, a retired chiropractor made several false claims about Covid-19 and vaccines. A three-minute video of his testimony has been shared widely on social media. In the video, Kevin Stillwagon repeats previously debunked myths about Covid-19. 1191. Footage shows US security guards clashing with Nevada politician and not the state’s governor A video of security guards frogmarching a Black man has been shared thousands of times on Facebook in Nigeria alongside a claim that it shows the governor of Nevada state being manhandled because he is an African-American unknown to the police. However, the man in the clip is Republican politician Mack Miller, who is vying for the office of lieutenant governor in Nevada, but is not the incumbent governor. Another video of the same events shows Miller was not the only one ejected from the meeting where local officials passed a resolution declaring Covid-19 misinformation a public health crisis. 1190. False posts misrepresent Australian TV show's debunk of Covid 'crisis actors' conspiracy A clip from the Australian TV show \"Media Watch\" has been shared repeatedly in social media posts that claim it revealed how actors posed as Covid-19 patients in a hospital in Sydney. The claim is false: the clip has been edited from a longer report that actually debunked rumours about the \"crisis actors\" and showed that they were genuine Covid patients. 1189. This video of Indonesian President Joko Widodo was taken before the Covid-19 pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts that claim it shows Indonesian President Joko Widodo and his wife dancing without face masks at the National Games event in October 2021. The claim is false; the footage was filmed in October 2019, months before Indonesia reported its first Covid-19 cases. 1188. Australian army chief did not announce 'mandatory vaccination' A video of Australian Lieutenant General John Frewen has been viewed tens of thousands of times in social media posts that claim he announced all Australians must get at least one Covid-19 jab before Christmas 2021. The claim is misleading; Frewen said every Australian would be offered at least one jab before Christmas. Covid-19 vaccination is only compulsory for certain key workers in Australia, as of October 18. 1187. US chiropractor misleads on Covid-19 vaccines harming immune system A chiropractor claims in an online video that Covid-19 shots can undermine the immune system, citing test results from a patient. But experts in immunology and infectious diseases say the results do not prove the chiropractor's claims, and an epidemiologist says the vaccines are safe even for people who are already experiencing problems with their immune systems. 1186. US military is not dishonorably discharging 350,000 Covid-19 vaccine holdouts An online article shared on social media in October 2021 claims that some 350,000 US military personnel are being dishonorably discharged for refusing to be vaccinated against Covid-19. This is false; the Pentagon says the figure is inaccurate, and that the requirements are not yet in effect. 1185. Posts falsely claim White House staff exempt from vaccination order Social media posts claim US government workers and pharmaceutical company staff are exempt from Covid-19 vaccination requirements. But President Joe Biden did issue an executive order directing federal employees to get vaccinated, while pharmaceutical firms are also telling their staff to get the shots. 1184. Posts falsely claim Taiwan president's Covid-19 jab 'had no needle' A video of Taiwan's President Tsai Ing-wen receiving her Covid-19 shot at a Taipei hospital has been viewed thousands of times in multiple social media posts alongside a claim there was no needle in the jab. The claim is false: the needle can be seen in other footage taken during Tsai's vaccination. The hospital told AFP that Tsai was vaccinated with a pre-filled syringe which has an undetachable needle. 1183. Pre-pandemic video of Indian baby with deformed limbs does not relate to vaccines A video has circulated in Korean-language social media posts that claim it shows a baby born with defects caused by a Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false: the video shows a baby born in India more than one year before the country started vaccinating its population against Covid-19. Global health experts have recommended pregnant women should get vaccinated for Covid-19, saying the benefits outweigh any potential risks. 1182. Posts falsely claim to share 'Macron's speech about unvaccinated people' Social media posts circulating worldwide have shared what they claim is a speech by French President Emmanuel Macron ordering those unvaccinated against Covid-19 to \"stay at home\". The posts circulated online after France introduced a \"Covid health pass\" for restaurants, bars, cultural venues, trains, and planes. The claim is false: the posts shared comments originally published by Italian journalist Selvaggia Lucarelli. As of October 14, 2021, there was no evidence that Macron made the comments. 1181. Canadian news footage fuels inaccurate claims about Covid-19 hospitalizations Social media posts suggest the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic is being exaggerated, claiming that a Canadian hospital has mannequins in its beds instead of patients suffering from the disease. But the posts feature an image of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) footage that was recorded in a training center, not a hospital. 1180. Inhaling vinegar cannot treat Covid-19 symptoms Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and TikTok claim that inhaling vinegar can treat symptoms of Covid-19 by clearing sputum from a patient's airways. The claim is false. Health experts say the claim is “baseless” and the method “can be potentially harmful, both directly and indirectly”. 1179. Israeli doctor's comments on Covid-19 vaccines misrepresented in social media posts Footage of an Israeli doctor speaking about Covid-19 vaccines has been viewed more than one million times in social media posts that claim he criticises the jabs. The posts are misleading; the doctor was in fact encouraging vaccination in the full interview, which has been edited to make it appear he says the shot is ineffective. 1178. Vaccination does not increase the likelihood of Covid-19 infection Online articles and social media posts use studies on Covid-19 vaccination to claim that the shots make people more vulnerable to contracting the disease. But experts say the claims misrepresent the research, and that unvaccinated people are at greater risk of infection, hospitalization and death. 1177. Photo falsely claimed to show French protest against vaccine mandate Instagram posts about opposition to \"mandatory vaccination\" feature a photo of a large crowd in front of the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. But the photo predates the Covid-19 pandemic, and was taken during anti-government protests in France in 2018. 1176. Covid-19 vaccination does not make MRI scans dangerous Social media posts claim \"electromagnetism\" from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans can be dangerous for people who have recently been vaccinated against Covid-19. This is false; medical experts say MRIs pose no such risk, and have repeatedly debunked claims that the vaccines contain magnetic ingredients. 1175. This photo shows an anti-government protest in Algiers before the Covid-19 pandemic A photo of crowds gathered in the street is doing the rounds in Facebook posts claiming it shows a \"revolution\" against Covid-19 restrictions in Algeria. The claim is false; the photo shows a March 2019 protest in the capital Algiers against the re-election of former president Abdelaziz Bouteflika. The picture was taken nearly a year before the first Covid-19 case was detected in Algeria in February 2020. 1174. Canadian province's Covid-19 order does not authorize martial law A video shared on social media claims that martial law will be imposed in Canada in October 2021. This is false; the document cited as evidence is an emergency order aimed at curbing the Covid-19 pandemic in the province of Saskatchewan, and does not authorize a military deployment. 1173. Basketball star's shirt altered in social media photos Social media posts feature an image of NBA player Draymond Green wearing a white T-shirt emblazoned with a cartoon syringe and strong language, as the league pushes for players to be vaccinated. But the picture has been digitally altered, and the original version was shared in 2017, years before Covid-19 swept through the United States. 1172. Old photo recirculates in false posts about 2021 anti-vaccination protests in Melbourne An image has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows an anti-vaccination protest in Melbourne -- Australia's second-largest city -- in September 2021. The claim is false: the image shows workers in Melbourne rallying against labour laws in 2006. 1171. Canadian doctor's remark misrepresented as evidence of inflated Covid-19 count Social media posts claim Canada's Alberta is inflating its Covid-19 case count, citing a remark by the province's chief medical officer about people who are ill but do not get tested being considered part of the outbreak. This is misleading; Alberta's government says Deena Hinshaw was discussing protocols for school outbreaks, and the doctor clarified that the official Covid-19 tally does not include cases not confirmed through testing. 1170. Graphic photos do not show Melbourne protesters wounded by rubber bullets Facebook and Instagram posts are sharing photos they claim show protesters wounded by rubber bullets at an anti-lockdown march in Melbourne, Australia. The claim is false; the photos were taken after protests in Argentina and the United States. 1169. Flawed Canadian study cited as evidence Covid-19 shots are dangerous Online articles and social media posts cite a Canadian study on the risk of heart inflammation following Covid-19 vaccination to claim the shots are dangerous. But the study was withdrawn at the request of its authors, who said the paper contained a \"major error.\" 1168. False posts misrepresent sketch as actual video of Philippine police slapping Covid mask violators A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in social media posts that claim it shows actual footage of a Philippine police officer slapping people in the street for failing to follow Covid mask rules. The claim is false. The video shows a sketch created by a Philippine production studio that has a history of publishing provocative content. 1167. Video shows South Africa heritage celebration, not Zulu anti-vaccine protest Social media posts claim a video shows South Africa's Zulus protesting against mandatory vaccination. This is false; while South Africa has announced plans for vaccine passports, the video shows people celebrating the country's Heritage Day, not opposing mandatory shots. 1166. Video shows anti-corruption rally in Romania in 2017 -- its vaccination centres remain open in 2021 Footage of a huge protest has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter alongside a claim the demonstration forced the Romanian government to close all vaccination centres. The claim is false. The footage actually shows an anti-corruption rally in Romania in 2017. The Romanian government closed some of its Covid-19 vaccination centres in September 2021 — but hundreds remain open as of September 23, 2021, officials told AFP. 1165. Vaccine cards are not required to get hired in South Africa A Facebook post shared thousands of times in South Africa claimed that proof of Covid-19 vaccination was now compulsory for job seekers. But this is misleading: while some companies have introduced mandatory vaccination, this does not apply to all job seekers. The government said it would not force anyone to get the jab but instead encouraged voluntary inoculations. 1164. No evidence Canada teen was hospitalized after Covid-19 shot A video circulating online shows a woman claiming that a teenager in Halifax, Canada, was hospitalized due to cardiac arrest after receiving a Covid-19 shot. But the Nova Scotia Department of Health described the claim as \"misinformation\" and said there is no evidence the incident occurred. 1163. Imposter account falsely claims unvaccinated Australians will be sent to 'isolation camps' A social media post from an Instagram page named \"7newsvictoria\" claims Australians who \"are not vaccinated by the end of the year will be put into isolation camps\". But the image -- which has been shared repeatedly on Facebook -- is a hoax. The Australian Health Department told AFP the claim was false. Australian broadcaster 7NEWS said the now-deleted Instagram page does not belong to them. 1162. Vaccine certificate shared online is from 1906, historians say A photo of a vaccine certificate has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and TikTok alongside a claim that it shows the \"world's oldest vaccine certificate\" that was issued in 1721 under the Ottoman Empire. However, the claim is false. Historians told AFP that the document, written mostly in Ottoman Turkish, dates from 1906 — and is not the world's oldest vaccine certificate. 1161. Australian vaccine safety figures do not show link between Covid jabs and miscarriages Social media posts have shared a claim that four miscarriages in women who received the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid jab were reported by Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) from August 28 to 30. Comments to the posts indicate people thought the vaccine caused the miscarriages. But the posts are false. Figures from the TGA -- Australia's drug regulator -- show no reports of miscarriages for the said period. Experts say \"no link\" has been found between Covid-19 vaccines and miscarriages. 1160. Old photo misused in false posts about Lee Hsien Loong lining up for Covid-19 jab An image has been shared in multiple social media posts alongside a claim it shows Singapore's prime minister Lee Hsien Loong \"queue[ing] up for the Covid-19 vaccine with the citizens\" of the city-state. But the claim is false; the photo predates the Covid-19 pandemic. It has circulated online since 2014 in reports about Lee queuing up for fried chicken wings. 1159. South African party mispresents health data to draw false conclusions about safety of Covid-19 vaccines A South African political party claims in widely shared Facebook posts that Covid-19 jabs are unsafe, based on reported side effects experienced by vaccinated people. But AFP Fact Check found the basic research used as evidence in the claim comes from a database that clearly explains how reported reactions to various drugs do not necessarily equate to actual side effects. Vaccines have scientifically been proven to be safe and outweigh any potential risks. The political party also promotes ivermectin as a Covid-19 drug but regulators say there is inadequate proof to show it is a viable treatment for the disease. 1158. False testimony at FDA meeting claims Covid-19 shots are dangerous Public testimony at a US Food and Drug Administration meeting claimed that more lives are lost to Covid-19 vaccines than are saved by the shots. But the FDA described the statements as \"not based in science,\" and medical experts say the comments are inaccurate. 1157. US counties cannot access CDC and Census data to identify the unvaccinated An online article says US Census data and CDC vaccination numbers were compared by a Kentucky county health department to determine the vaccination status of its residents. This is false; the Census Bureau and the CDC deny sharing any data with local officials that would lead to singling out the vaccinated from the unvaccinated, noting that to do so would break the law. Social media posts claim that Covid-19 vaccines negatively affect blood, using a photo of two bags of the liquid -- one lighter red than the other -- as evidence. This is false; experts say the difference in color is due to oxygenation levels, and that the shots will not impact blood color. 1155. Fake message circulates in Australia warning 'troops will enforce mandatory vaccination' A purported text message circulating in Australia claims troops will be sent door-to-door to enforce Covid-19 vaccinations in New South Wales -- the country's most populous state. A government spokesperson, however, said the purported message was fake. As of September 23, 2021, Covid-19 vaccination remains voluntary for all Australians except for certain key workers. 1154. Doctored images of health officials circulate online A compilation of images of health officials from around the world is circulating on social media in posts that attempt to discredit people who have been the public face of the response to the Covid-19 pandemic. But the images of officials from Canada and the US city of Los Angeles have been doctored. 1153. Facebook users share misleading claim about former FDA official Multiple Facebook posts claim that a former vice president of US agribusiness Monsanto is also the \"current Deputy Commissioner\" of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The posts -- shared repeatedly online in August 2021 -- shared two identical photos of US lawyer Michael R Taylor. The claim is misleading: Taylor stepped down from his role at the FDA in 2016. 1152. Covid-19 case numbers do not show that vaccines are ineffective Social media posts claim peak active cases of Covid-19 were lower in 2020 than after the rollout of vaccines in 2021, suggesting this means the shots are ineffective. But experts say hospitalizations and deaths -- which are much likelier to occur among the unvaccinated -- are the key metrics of how well the shots work. 1151. Posts mislead about coronavirus response in Canada, Japan, Germany Facebook posts say Canada's Alberta province lifted all coronavirus pandemic measures, Germany suspended licenses for Covid-19 vaccines, and Japan is recommending the drug ivermectin as a treatment for the disease. But the posts -- some of which include claims about Romania as well as Denmark -- repeat inaccurate assertions that have been previously fact-checked by AFP. 1150. This video has circulated in reports about a woman who 'refused to go into quarantine' in Vietnam A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on social media platforms alongside a claim it shows health workers attempting to forcibly vaccinate a woman in China. The claim is false: the video has circulated in reports about healthcare workers approaching a woman who \"refused to go to quarantine\" in Vietnam. 1149. Sri Lankan posts misleadingly tout traditional medicine as coronavirus 'cure' Facebook posts circulating in Sri Lanka have shared an image of a newspaper article claiming thousands of Covid-19 patients \"completely recovered\" after being treated with traditional Ayurveda medicine. The posts are misleading: the article refers to people who were treated with traditional medicine for mild and moderate Covid-19 symptoms at the island's Ayurveda hospitals. Sri Lankan health authorities warned that herbal remedies had not been proven to \"cure\" Covid-19. 1148. This photo of crowded beach in Sydney was taken years before the Covid-19 pandemic Facebook posts shared hundreds of times purport to show a photo of crowds packed onto Sydney's Bondi Beach in September 2021 as the city imposed strict lockdown measures to curb a spike in Covid-19 cases. However, the claim is false. The photo has circulated online since at least 2012. 1147. US not requiring Covid-19 shots for veterans to receive benefits An online article claims US President Joe Biden ordered the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to withhold health benefits from former members of the military who have not been vaccinated against Covid-19. But the department says the claim is untrue, and the article appears on a website that states its content is \"made up.\" 1146. CDC has not warned of polio-like illness outbreak in 2021 An article shared hundreds of times on social media claims that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has warned of an expected outbreak of a polio-like illness in 2021, with some social media users suggesting this is an attempt to cover up adverse reactions to vaccines. This is false: the CDC's alert was from 2020 and it has issued no such warning in 2021. Furthermore, there is no link between that illness and Covid-19 vaccination, the public health agency told AFP, while data shows that Covid-19 vaccines are overwhelmingly safe. 1145. List of employers that supposedly do not mandate Covid-19 shots is mostly false A graphic published on Facebook in South Africa claims that Covid-19 vaccine mandates do not apply to staff at various federal US agencies, pharmaceutical companies and the World Health Organization (WHO). This is partly false; six of the seven entities listed in the graphic have made it mandatory for employees to get vaccinated against Covid-19. 1144. Anthony Fauci’s wife is not head of the US Food and Drug Administration Facebook and TikTok posts viewed thousands of times claim that the wife of top US Covid-19 advisor Anthony Fauci is the acting head of the US Food and Drug Administration and \"approved the Pfizer vaccine\". The claims are false; Christine Grady is the chief of bioethics at the US National Institutes for Health, which was not involved in the approval of Pfizer Covid-19 vaccines in the United States. 1143. Fabricated poll results show Canada's PPC leading major parties Social media posts feature a graphic showing the right-wing People's Party of Canada (PPC) polling ahead of major parties in the run-up to the Canadian federal election. This is false; despite a recent surge in popularity, the PPC has never reached 22 percent of voting intentions nationally, according to the polling company referenced in the graphic. 1142. Experts dismiss claim that ivermectin causes sterility in men Social media posts claim that the anti-parasitic drug ivermectin causes sterility in 85 percent of men who take it. But experts say the claim is not backed by evidence, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not list sterility as a side effect for the medication. 1141. Misleading Nicki Minaj tweet spreads Covid-19 vaccine impotence fears Rapper Nicki Minaj suggested on Twitter that Covid-19 vaccines can cause male impotence, saying a relative's friend suffered that condition as well as testicular swelling after being immunized. But experts dismissed the claim, saying the shots have not been found to affect fertility or male genitalia. 1140. Covid-19 vaccination not required to shop at Walmart in Canada Social media posts claim that proof of Covid-19 vaccination will be required to shop at Walmart stores in Canada starting on November 1, 2021. But the retail giant told AFP the statement circulating online is false. 1139. US Marine chief did not 'warn against getting Covid-19 jabs' Social media posts claim the commandant of the US Marine Corps, General David Berger, described Covid-19 jabs as \"potentially hazardous\" and rebuked mandatory shots for his troops. The posts circulated online after the Pentagon said all members of the US military would be required to be vaccinated for Covid-19 from mid-September. Some social media users appeared to believe the posts showed Berger's genuine remarks. But the purported comments in fact originated on a satirical website. 1138. Satirical article about Bill Gates' 'vaccine warning' misleads social media users Multiple Facebook posts circulating in Thailand have shared a claim that billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates said Covid-19 vaccines are \"far more dangerous than anyone imagined\". But the purported comments -- which some social media users appeared to believe were genuine -- originated in a satirical report. A spokesperson for the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation told AFP that Bill Gates did not make the purported remarks. 1137. Germany has not 'terminated all Covid-19 vaccinations' due to safety fears A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in social media posts in August 2021 that claim it shows Germany terminated all Covid-19 vaccinations over safety fears. The claim is false, according to Germany's Federal Ministry of Health. As of September 13, 2021, four vaccines approved by the European Union are being administered in Germany. The video actually shows a \"pandemic exit\" simulation staged by an anti-lockdown group. 1136. Posts about 'plans for cashless system' in Australian state share fake press release Social media posts circulating in September 2021 claim the Australian state of New South Wales announced plans to establish a \"cashless society by 2022\" in order to reduce the spread of Covid-19. However, the claim is false. The posts share a fake press release and a government spokesperson told AFP that the reports were baseless. 1135. List of tips for fighting Covid-19 contains misleading advice Facebook posts list tips for battling a Covid-19 infection at home that are said to be from a \"nurse friend.\" But medical experts say some of the advice is misguided or ineffective. 1134. Malaysian Health Ministry denies imposing fine for not using new function on contact tracing app As Malaysia's Health Ministry introduced a new \"check out\" function on its official contact tracing app in September 2021, multiple social media posts claim that people who do not check out on the app when they leave any location or premise will be fined 1,500 ringgit ($361). However, the claim is false; the Malaysian Ministry of Health denies the existence of the purported fine. 1133. Misleading posts on purported 'Covid jab deaths' in Australia push anti-vaccine fears Social media posts in Australia have shared graphics that they claim show actual \"Covid-19 vaccine deaths\" and adverse events in the country. The posts claim the figures were released by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), the country's medical regulator. But these graphics -- which have caused alarm around Covid-19 jabs -- have misrepresented TGA figures. Similar fake graphics have been previously disowned by the TGA. 1132. Fake report claims Sri Lankan army alleged 'corruption' at Covid-19 vaccine drive Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim a Sri Lankan army officer wrote to President Gotabaya Rajapaksa alleging corruption at a Covid-19 vaccination drive at a military hospital. The posts purport to show an article reporting the news. However, the claim is false; the article is a fabrication, while the army said the story was \"baseless\". 1131. No, the US Senate has not declared the novel coronavirus is 'a scam' A video of a press conference held by US senators has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim that the US Senate has announced that \"corona is a scam\". This is misleading. The US Senate has never made such a declaration, a spokesman for the Senate majority leader told AFP. While the Republican senators in the video are raising questions about the origin of the novel coronavirus, they are not doubting its existence. 1130. This image from an episode of The Simpsons has been digitally altered to add a reference to vaccines An image has been shared multiple times in Facebook posts that claim it shows a character from The Simpsons holding a piece of paper supposedly containing a phrase that predicted the vaccine rollout in 2021. The image, however, has been digitally altered: in the original Simpsons episode, the paper has a different phrase unrelated to vaccines written on it. 1129. Inhaling onion fumes does not kill Covid-19, experts say A post has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and in multiple blog posts that claim the coronavirus can be killed by inhaling onion fumes and eating onions. But the claim is false; health experts say there is no evidence that onions can kill the virus or prevent Covid-19 infections. 1128. Study did not say vaccinated Covid-19 patients carry higher viral load Online articles and social media posts claim a University of Oxford study found that vaccinated Covid-19 patients carry 251 times the viral load of those who have not received the shots. But the study's authors said the claim is a misrepresentation of their findings, as did a public health expert. 1127. South Korea has not proposed legislation to make PCR tests mandatory Multiple social media posts circulating in August 2021 claim South Korea has proposed a new bill that would make PCR tests mandatory. However, the claim is misleading: as of September 8, 2021, the bill contains no such reference to mandatory PCR tests. The lawmaker's office that proposed the bill told AFP there was no intention it could be used to compel such tests. 1126. Oklahoma hospitals are not overwhelmed by ivermectin overdoses Online articles and social media posts claim that overdose cases from people using anti-parasitic drug ivermectin against Covid-19 are overwhelming hospitals in Oklahoma, citing remarks by a doctor in the US state. But hospitals at which the doctor has worked rejected the claim, and the Oklahoma Center for Poison and Drug Information said it has received limited calls about problems related to the drug. 1125. False posts about 'depopulation through forced vaccination' target Bill Gates As more Covid-19 jabs are administered globally, social media posts have shared a newspaper report with a claim that it shows billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates calling for \"depopulation through forced vaccination\". The claim is false. The newspaper -- which has a history of publishing vaccine misinformation -- has misrepresented remarks made by Gates in 2010 about population growth, where he made no reference to \"depopulation\". 1124. This photo shows people in the Philippines waiting for the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine A photo has circulated in Chinese-language social media posts that claim it shows crowds in Singapore queuing for Chinese Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is false: the photo actually shows people in the Philippines waiting in line for German-made Pfizer-BioNTech jabs. 1123. Japan has not endorsed ivermectin as Covid-19 treatment Social media posts suggest that Japan's government recommends using antiparasitic drug ivermectin to treat Covid-19, citing remarks by the chairman of the Tokyo Medical Association. This is misleading; while he cautiously supported the treatment, the association does not represent the country's government, which has not endorsed ivermectin for that use. 1122. Protest video spreads false claims in South Africa about Covid-19 and vaccines An anti-vaccine protester makes a string of false allegations about Covid-19 in a video shared on Facebook in South Africa, including that vaccines have not been officially approved, children don’t die from the disease, and PCR tests are fraudulent. AFP Fact Check has investigated and debunked the claims. 1121. Posts mislead on vaccination centre closures in Romania A video has been viewed thousands of times on YouTube and Facebook in August 2021 alongside a claim that all Covid-19 vaccination centres were set to be closed in Romania due to declining demand for vaccines. The claim is misleading: Romanian health authorities said while some Covid-19 vaccination centres had been temporarily wound down, vaccines were still available at centres across the country. 1120. This photo shows Ajith Rohana with friends before his Covid-19 hospitalisation A photo has been shared in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows former Sri Lankan police official Ajith Rohana reunited with his children after he was hospitalised with Covid-19. The posts are misleading; the picture shows Rohana with a local musician and his wife before his ordeal with Covid-19. 1119. Footage of Covid-19 victim in Indonesia misused in posts about Filipino comedian’s death A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in social media posts that claim it shows someone mourning the death of a popular Filipino comedian who died from Covid-19 in the Philippines. This is false: the footage was actually taken in Indonesia. It has circulated in reports about an Indonesian health worker who died from Covid-19. 1118. South African heart surgeon uses webinar to spread Covid-19 vaccine misinformation A BitChute video featuring South African cardiothoracic specialist Dr Susan Vosloo sharing her views on Covid-19 and vaccines during an online meeting has circulated widely on social media. In the clip, Vosloo makes a string of false allegations about the disease and reiterates previously debunked myths about Covid-19 vaccines. 1117. Companies refute claim they stopped offering life insurance in response to Covid-19 vaccines Multiple Facebook posts claim that several Australian companies' decisions to stop offering life insurance policies are linked to Covid-19 vaccines, and that the companies will not cover people who have been vaccinated. However, the claim is misleading; all three companies involved told AFP that their decisions were not related to Covid-19 vaccines, and that receiving a Covid-19 vaccination approved for use in Australia would not exclude people from existing life insurance policies. 1116. Hoax report promotes 'Covid-19 cash handouts for mothers' in the Philippines Multiple Facebook posts have shared a purported news report claiming mothers in the Philippines became eligible for a 10,000 pesos (USD200) handout after a Covid-19 lockdown was announced in some regions. But multiple government officials told AFP the claim is false. The hoax report was originally posted by an imposter site. 1115. Myanmar social media users share misleading Delta variant posts Facebook users in Myanmar have shared claims that patients infected with the more transmissible Delta coronavirus variant manifest \"new\" and \"untestable\" symptoms. The claims are misleading. Experts say patients infected with the Delta variant show similar symptoms to those infected with other Covid-19 variants, and the symptoms can be detected through nasal swab tests. 1114. Footage of crowd shows university protest in Kenya, not Covid-19 demonstration in France A video shared hundreds of times on Facebook claims to show people in France being dispersed by police during a protest against Covid-19 vaccines. But the claim is false: the clip shows students from the University of Nairobi in Kenya demonstrating against fee increases. 1113. False posts claiming 'vaccination causes coronavirus to mutate' spread online in Sri Lanka Social media users in Sri Lanka have shared a video featuring an indigenous medicine practitioner who claims Covid-19 vaccinations cause an increase in coronavirus variants and kill more people. But these claims are false. Experts told AFP viruses mutate \"independent of the vaccine\", and approved Covid-19 vaccines prevent severe disease and death. 1112. This photo does not show a vaccine passport protest in France -- it was taken at a demonstration in 2015 An image has been shared in multiple social media posts about protests against so-called vaccine passports in France. The posts, however, are misleading: the image was taken by an AFP photographer at a demonstration in Paris following the Charlie Hebdo attacks in January 2015. 1111. Video does not show Putin supporting US probe into pandemic origin A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Twitter alongside a claim it shows Russian President Vladimir Putin pledging his support for a US-led investigation into the origins of the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the clip shows Putin speaking about Russian Covid-19 vaccines in February, months before US President Joe Biden ordered the investigation. 1110. Tenpenny's gospel: How an indebted anti-vaxxer sells Covid falsehoods For Sherri Tenpenny, God is on the side of those who spurn Covid-19 vaccines. Making money, critics say, is the Ohio osteopath's higher calling. 1109. US regulators approved Pfizer-BioNTech shot under new name Articles and social media posts shared thousands of times claim that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not give full approval to the Covid-19 vaccine from Pfizer-BioNTech. This is false; the agency signed off on the shot for Americans aged 16 and older on August 23, 2021. 1108. Video makes false claim about 'children dying after Covid-19 vaccinations in Australia' A video viewed tens of thousands of times on social media claims that two children died from a Covid-19 vaccine in Australia's most populous city, Sydney. The claim is false: as of August 31, Australia has not recorded any deaths from the Pfizer-BioNTech jab, the only coronavirus vaccine that has been given to under-18s in the country. 1107. Newspaper article spreads misinformation in Pakistan about Covid-19 vaccinations As Pakistan battled a fourth coronavirus wave, a screenshot of an Urdu-language newspaper article warned about the \"dangerous consequences\" of Covid-19 vaccines. The article -- which was shared thousands of times on Facebook -- makes a string of misleading claims about the jabs. 1106. This video of robots 'attacking' shoppers is computer-generated A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in social media posts claiming it shows a few \"pandemic robots\" enforcing mask-wearing rules in a shopping mall. But the claim is false: the video actually shows computer-generated imagery created by a visual artist. 1105. This photo shows Pope Francis' visit to Brazil in 2013 A photo has been shared repeatedly in Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows anti-lockdown protesters on a beach in Sydney, Australia's largest city. The claim is false: the AFP photo actually shows crowds gathered on a beach in Brazil during Pope Francis' visit in July 2013. There have been anti-lockdown protests in Australian cities but as of August 30, 2021, the crowds have been far smaller than the one shown in the photo. 1104. Proof of vaccination not required to vote in Canada Social media posts urge those not yet vaccinated against Covid-19 to vote early in the upcoming Canadian federal election, before proof of vaccination requirements enter into effect in the province of British Columbia. But Elections Canada and the provincial government say that no proof of vaccination will be required to vote. 1103. Social media users share false list of Chinese guidelines for Sinovac's vaccine Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts have shared a purported list of China’s guidelines for its CoronaVac jab, produced by Chinese biopharmaceutical firm Sinovac. The posts claim the list was released by the “Beijing Vaccination Prevention Center”. The claims are false: the official guidelines for China’s vaccination program -- released by its National Health Commission -- are not specific to CoronaVac. They also do not correspond with the guidelines listed in the misleading social media posts. 1102. Misleading posts about 'Australia buying fake vaccines from Poland' misuse news report Shortly after Australia announced that it had purchased Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccines from Poland, Facebook users began sharing a BBC news report about fake jabs in the European country. These posts are misleading and have misrepresented the news report. The BBC reported in April that Polish authorities found no one had received the fake doses. Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines that arrived in Australia from Poland have been found \"satisfactory for release\" by drug regulators. 1101. Hoax advert touting cheap Covid-19 tests circulates in Sri Lanka An advert that purports to show cheap \"rapid antigen kit produced in Sri Lanka\" has circulated on Facebook as Covid-19 infections surged in the island nation in August. The advert is a hoax. It shows an image of a professional-use test kit produced in Switzerland -- not Sri Lanka. Contact details indicated in the advert belong to a former politician who called the posts a \"shameful false claim\". Home test kits for Covid-19 have not been approved in Sri Lanka as of August 26. 1100. US drug regulator did not approve thalidomide in the 1960s Social media posts claim the US Food and Drug Administration approved the drug thalidomide, which caused serious birth defects in the 1950s and 1960s. But the regulatory agency did not do so at the time, procedures have been tightened in the last 60 years, and a recently approved Covid-19 vaccine was subject to clinical trials and independent review. 1099. Fake chain message claims Thai doctor ordered lockdown after Covid-19 variant 'outbreak' A message circulating on Facebook, Twitter and Line claims a doctor at Thailand's largest hospital warned people in the kingdom to stay indoors after medics recorded an outbreak of a Covid-19 variant known as Lambda. The claim is false: as of August 26, 2021, the Thai Department of Disease Control said no outbreak of the Lambda variant had been recorded in the kingdom. The hospital that employs the doctors cited in the posts said he had not issued the purported warning. 1098. Posts falsely claim Kadhafi 'predicted the Covid-19 pandemic' A claim has been shared widely on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube that the late Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi predicted the Covid-19 pandemic. The posts, which included an image of Kadhafi speaking at the United Nations in 2009, cite a comment he purportedly made: \"They will create the viruses themselves and sell you the antidotes.\" The claim is misleading: the posts have misquoted Kadhafi 's 2009 speech. 1097. Satirical article about 'Australian prisoner's jail time extension request' misleads online Several social media posts have shared an article that claims a prisoner in an Australian jail requested to extend his sentence in response to harsh lockdowns in the country's largest city, Sydney. The article, however, originated from a satirical website. 1096. Tennessee order does not allow forced relocation to Covid-19 camps Online articles and social media posts claim an order by the governor of the US state of Tennessee allows National Guard troops to \"kidnap\" people and take them to Covid-19 \"internment camps.\" This is false; the order allows National Guard members to assist medical workers in a health care system strained by rising case numbers, but makes no mention of abductions, and the governor's office has said the claim is inaccurate. 1095. Vaccinated people are not 'creating' coronavirus variants Social media posts claim Covid-19 vaccines lead to virus mutations and say vaccinated people are responsible for variants, citing the case of a different disease that affects chickens as evidence. But experts say the analogy is flawed, and that vaccines reduce rather than enhance the risks posed by Covid-19. 1094. Ethiopian Facebook post falsely claims WHO chief barred from seeking fresh term A post shared on Facebook in Ethiopia claims the BBC reported that World Health Organization (WHO) chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has been barred from running for re-election. But the claim is false: the BBC ran a story in August 2021 about a US non-profit group opposing Tedros seeking another term, but there is no record of reports about him being prohibited from doing so. 1093. This video shows football fans in Iceland following Euro 2016 Multiple social media posts have shared a video they claim shows a protest in France against so-called vaccine passports. The claim is false: the footage actually shows football fans in Iceland celebrating their national team arriving home following the Euro 2016 tournament. 1092. False reports claim John Cena died from Covid-19 Social media posts shared thousands of times claim that American wrestler and actor John Cena died on August 11, 2021 after being infected with Covid-19. The claim is false: Cena competed in WWE's Summer Slam 2021 on August 21. He has also been active on social media since the hoax reports circulated. 1091. Canada mayor did not testify that Covid-19 is a 'hoax' Social media posts claim Naheed Nenshi, the mayor of the city of Calgary in Canada, testified that Covid-19 is a hoax and suggested he was forced to impose measures to control the spread of the disease. But a spokesperson for the mayor's office said the transcript cited as evidence is fake, and Nenshi has been a vocal supporter of steps aimed at curbing the pandemic. 1090. Vegetable soup remedy touted by Sri Lankan Facebook users cannot cure Covid-19 A recipe for vegetable soup has been shared by Sri Lankan Facebook users alongside a claim it will \"cure\" Covid-19 infection within three days. The claim is false: medical professionals said there is no evidence the purported remedy can cure Covid-19. 1089. An image shows 2018 French protests against a tax on fuel, not Covid-19 restrictions Three photos have been shared hundreds of times on Facebook in South Africa and Australia alongside a claim that they show Covid-19 related demonstrations in France and Greece. But the claim is misleading; while two of the images show Greeks protesting against their country’s Covid-19 vaccination programme, a third image, purportedly of a France anti-vaccination protest, was taken in 2018 during the “gilets jaunes” protests in France, before the pandemic. 1088. US doctor spreads false information about Covid-19 mRNA vaccines A video shared on Facebook in which an American doctor makes several claims about mRNA vaccines against Covid-19 has been viewed nearly 900 times in Ethiopia. But the doctor’s claims are false, experts told AFP Fact Check. The Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines that use mRNA technology are considered safe, and millions of doses have been administered. 1087. Misleading posts claiming Sri Lanka 'ranked first' in global Covid-19 deaths circulate online A claim has been shared in multiple Facebook posts that Sri Lanka \"surpassed all other nations and ranked first\" in Covid-19 death rates on August 8, 2021. But these posts are misleading: they show incomplete data from a database of global Covid-19 trends. The full database in fact shows at least 20 other countries had higher virus death rates on August 8. 1086. Indonesian cemetery photo wrongly shared in posts about Sri Lankan coronavirus deaths An image of a burial ground has been shared in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a site for Covid-19 fatalities in Sri Lanka. The claim is false: the image actually shows a cemetery in Indonesia. 1085. Indiana doctor spreads Covid-19 misinformation during school board meeting A video has been shared across social media of Dr Daniel Stock, as he makes several false and misleading statements while giving testimony at a school board meeting in the US state of Indiana. He repeats previously debunked myths about Covid-19 vaccines, inaccurately claims that face masks are ineffective in slowing the spread of the virus, and touts unapproved treatments. 1084. Dennis Rodman photo doctored to add anti-mask message As US cities reinstate mask mandates to combat the highly-contagious Delta variant of the coronavirus, Facebook users are sharing a photo of Dennis Rodman wearing a T-shirt with an anti-mask message. The image has been doctored; the original taken by an AFP photographer showed the former basketball star dressed in a shirt advertising a cryptocurrency. 1083. Image of fake corpses from Thai protest used to mislead about Covid-19 deaths An image appearing to a show a pile of \"body bags\" has been shared among multiple Facebook users in Sri Lanka with a claim it shows coronavirus fatalities. The claim is false; the image actually shows a pile of mock corpses staged by pro-democracy protesters in Thailand during a demonstration held in July 2021. 1082. False posts about Covid-19 state of emergency in Sri Lankan hospital misuse photos from other countries Facebook posts have circulated in Sri Lanka claiming a hospital in the capital Colombo \"declared a state of emergency\" in early August as Covid-19 infections surged. These posts also show several photos of exhausted health workers. The posts are false: the hospital denied it had declared a state of emergency as of August 12. The photos were previously shared online in posts that state they show health workers from other countries -- not Sri Lanka. 1081. French police did not demonstrate against Covid-19 health pass Social media posts are sharing a photo of police at a protest in France alongside the claim that officers sided with the demonstrators against vaccine \"passports\". This is false; police were there to secure the rally, not to take part in it, they and the photographer confirmed. 1080. Texas school board testimony repeats false claims about Covid-19 In a video shared across social media, a man makes several false statements in testimony to a school board meeting in the US state of Texas, repeating previously debunked claims about Covid-19 tests, face masks, vaccine data and treatments. 1079. False claim circulates online that Baduy community in Indonesia have never been vaccinated Multiple social media posts have shared a claim that the Baduy indigenous community in Indonesia have never been vaccinated. This claim is false. The Baduy community have received various immunisations, from polio to diphtheria vaccines, and more recently Covid-19, according to local media reports and traditional leaders. 1078. This video has been falsely subtitled to claim North Korea executed a Covid-19 patient A video purporting to show a North Korean news anchor announcing the country had achieved all-out success in fighting Covid-19 by executing a patient has been viewed tens of thousands of times on social media posts. The video is likely satirical: the Chinese subtitles in the video do not match the anchor's actual speech. The news anchor is announcing the launch of a rocket, and the video has circulated online since at least December 2012. 1077. Misleading posts share outdated Covid-19 vaccine advice from Pakistan's health ministry Facebook and Twitter posts circulating in Pakistan purport to show health ministry guidelines listing groups of people who should not receive the Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccine, including pregnant women. The posts are misleading: the guidance is out of date. The health ministry later changed its advice to recommend the jab for expectant mothers. 1076. Coronavirus variants are not released as part of staged pandemic A chart purporting to show a schedule of pre-planned coronavirus variants has been shared thousands of times on social media as proof of a baseless conspiracy theory that the pandemic was staged. But viruses mutate unpredictably, several of the variants have already been detected ahead of the supposed timetable, and the groups whose logos appear in the posts -- including the World Health Organization -- told AFP that the image is not genuine. A video of a substance in a petri dish responding to an electrical current has been viewed hundreds of times in Instagram posts which claim the substance is graphene which makes up \"90 percent\" of Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is false; the clip shows an experiment using ball bearings and castor oil recreated by students at Stanford University. Graphene is not present in Covid-19 vaccines, experts said. 1074. This video shows vaccination cards made by a Malaysian printing company and not sanctioned by the government A video is circulating on Facebook and TikTok along with a claim that it shows Covid-19 vaccination cards that are \"original certificates\" for vaccinated people in Malaysia. The claim is misleading. A Malaysian printing company confirms that they took the video to promote their card-printing service. The agency in charge of the vaccine rollout in Malaysia says the government does not issue \"physical vaccination certificates\" for those who have completed their Covid-19 vaccinations. 1073. Canadian court case unrelated to lifting of Covid-19 restrictions in Alberta An interview with an Alberta man has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times online, via social media posts that claim his court case led to the lifting of public health measures designed to mitigate the pandemic. This is false; the case, a dispute about a fine for violating the provincial Public Health Act, was unsuccessful, and the government of Alberta says that the lifting of Covid-19 restrictions had nothing to do with it. 1072. Popular Nigerian pastor falsely claims Covid-19 vaccines alter DNA Popular Nigerian pastor Chris Oyakhilome has claimed that the Covid-19 vaccine is gene therapy that alters people’s DNA. This is false; experts say the vaccine does not alter DNA. Oyakhilome is known for spreading misinformation about Covid-19 to his followers in Nigeria and across the world. 1071. Pfizer CEO is fully vaccinated against Covid-19 Social media posts shared thousands of times in August 2021 link to an Israeli newspaper article to claim that the head of Pfizer, which manufactures the most widely-used shot against Covid-19 in the US, is not fully vaccinated. But the article is dated before the pharmaceutical chief received his second jab, on March 10, 2021, and his company confirmed that he has received the full complement of shots. 1070. Facebook posts share false claim that Singapore conducted the world's first Covid-19 autopsy Facebook posts share a claim attributed to Singapore's Ministry of Health saying that the city-state conducted the first Covid-19 autopsy and discovered the disease is caused by a bacterium, not a virus. But the claims are false: the first Covid-19 autopsy was conducted in China in February 2020. Health authorities and medical experts all say Covid-19 is caused by a virus called SARS-CoV-2. Singapore's Health Ministry have also said the claims are not true. 1069. Anti-mask message falsely attributed to actor Tim Roth A photo of English actor Tim Roth has been shared thousands of times on social media alongside a message criticizing the use of masks to curb the spread of Covid-19. But the actor's spokeswoman said the remark did not come from him, and he has publicly expressed support for masks. 1068. Experts deny claims that taking painkillers after Covid-19 vaccine causes death Multiple posts on Facebook and WhatsApp in Nigeria claim that taking anti-inflammatory medication diclofenac or having “any anaesthesia” within two years of a Covid-19 vaccine leads to death. This is false; while experts discourage the use of analgesics before taking the vaccine, this is because the effect on the jab’s ability to create an immune response is unclear. There is no evidence to show that painkillers taken after the Covid-19 vaccine cause death. 1067. England data misrepresented in false claims linking deaths to Covid-19 shots Online articles claim that English health data indicates vaccinated people are far more likely to die of Covid-19 than those who have not received the shots. This is false; Public Health England says the claims misrepresent its findings, experts described the calculations in the articles as flawed, and data shows that the vaccines work. 1066. South African agency warns of fake notice for Covid-19 social relief grant Social media users have been sharing a notice purportedly issued by the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) outlining the application process for its Covid-19 social relief grant, which was recently reinstated. However, the post is a hoax; the agency distanced itself from the notice and cautioned individuals to not divulge personal information to unknown websites. 1065. Testing by Canadian doctor does not prove Covid-19 shots cause clots A Canadian physician claims in a video clip shared on social media that most people who receive widely-used Covid-19 vaccines will experience blood clots. But experts say his conclusion stems from an analysis that was not published in accordance with scientific method, was not peer-reviewed, and does not prove the shots are causing clots. 1064. Flawed scientific papers fueling Covid-19 misinformation Scientific studies with poor methodology and inaccurate findings are exacerbating a Covid-19 misinformation crisis that is discouraging vaccination and putting lives at risk. 1063. US health agencies are not scrapping common coronavirus test Social media posts claim American health authorities are revoking authorization for widely used coronavirus tests because they are inaccurate. This is false; one US agency said it made no such announcement and the tests are the \"gold standard\" for Covid-19 diagnosis, while another said a requested change in authorization cited in some posts was not due to poor performance. 1062. Posts misrepresent European data on Covid-19 vaccines deaths Social media posts share a video of a Swiss-based researcher who claims that the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has \"linked\" Covid-19 vaccines to 18,000 deaths. This is false; a report of a fatality following vaccination in the EMA's database is not proof of a tie between the two,and though serious side effects following vaccination have been recorded, they remain rare, according to the health agency. 1061. Anti-vaxxers misrepresent article on Covid deaths in jabbed patients As a wave of anti-vaccine messages swept across social media, Facebook posts shared a report that most Covid-19 patients who die in England have been vaccinated. They used the report to suggest the Covid-19 shots were unsafe. The posts are misleading: the article actually explained that the trend was \"expected\", as high numbers of older people -- who have a greater chance of dying from the disease -- have been vaccinated in the UK. 1060. Chinese official shares TIME magazine cover in misleading tweet about 'pandemic origins' As tensions rose between the United States and China over the origins of the pandemic, Beijing's foreign ministry spokeswoman tweeted a TIME magazine cover story she claimed illustrated that Washington was \"the origin of the epidemic\". The claim is misleading: the magazine story actually focused on a Covid-19 cluster at the White House in October 2020. The first major outbreak of Covid-19 was recorded in the Chinese city of Wuhan in late December 2019. A Tik Tok video claims that Covid-19 swabs sterilized with ethylene oxide gas are killing people. However, US and Australian public health agencies say the chemical is safely used to sterilize a range of medical products, the CDC says the test kits are not dangerous, and a professor said there is no basis for claims that the tests can lead to cancer. 1058. Facebook posts mislead after UK chief scientific adviser's comments on virus hospitalisations Multiple Facebook posts claim the UK's chief scientific adviser Patrick Vallance said all vaccines are 'useless' because '60 percent of UK hospital Covid-19 admissions have received two doses of the vaccine'. The claim is misleading: the posts cited a report in which Vallance did not say vaccines were 'useless'. On July 20, 2021, Vallance clarified that 60 percent of recent Covid-19 patients in UK hospitals were unvaccinated. 1057. Thai social media users share misleading claim about 'Covid-19 throat spray' As Thailand's healthcare system struggled to cope with surging Covid-19 cases in July, multiple Facebook posts claimed a brand of throat spray could \"contain the infection\". The posts are misleading: health experts say the throat spray has not been proven to treat or cure Covid-19. The posts also shared false claims about other home remedies that experts say do not treat or cure the virus. 1056. Facebook users share fake 'lockdown extension' notice for Australian state An image shared repeatedly on Facebook purports to show an official notice from Australia's New South Wales Ministry of Health announcing that a lockdown in greater Sydney will be extended until December 2021. The image, however, has been doctored from a July 14 announcement extending the lockdown to July 30, 2021. 1055. Doctored collage falsely claims union leader slammed Sri Lanka's government for buying Covid-19 vaccines A photo collage has been shared in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows a news report where a union leader purportedly criticised the government for procuring Covid-19 vaccines instead of paying teachers' salaries. But the claim is false: the photos in the collage have been doctored to add fabricated remarks into an original report that aired before the wide availability of Covid-19 vaccines in the country. 1054. Bangladesh religious procession image shared in false posts about Indian political rally A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple social media posts that claim it shows a large rally for an Indian Muslim politician during the pandemic. The claim is false: the photo shows an Islamic procession in Bangladesh in 2019. 1053. Malaysian authorities rubbish posts linking 'Covid-19 vaccine death' to eating durian Facebook users in Malaysia are sharing posts that warn against eating durian before or after receiving a Covid-19 jab because it can be \"fatal\". Some of the posts share a photo of a man who purportedly died a day after he was vaccinated because he ate the fruit. The claim is false. The Malaysian deputy health minister said the warning has no medical basis, while police told AFP a post-mortem examination found the man died from heart disease. 1052. This video has been edited -- US charity says it will continue to grant 'wishes' to unvaccinated children Multiple social media posts shared in June 2021 claim a US charity that grants \"wishes\" to critically ill children will no longer reward them if they are unvaccinated against Covid-19. The claim is misleading: the posts shared an edited video from the charity's CEO in which he outlined vaccination requirements for rewards that involve air travel and large gatherings. The charity told AFP that its Covid-19 vaccine policy will not apply to children who have received an end-of-life prognosis. 1051. Posts mislead on proportion of vaccinated Covid-19 victims in Australian state's hospitals Multiple social media posts shared in July 2021 claim that all Covid-19 patients being treated in hospitals in the Australian state of New South Wales had been vaccinated. The claim is misleading: as of July 26, all of the hospitalised Covid-19 patients were unvaccinated except for one, the state's health authority told AFP. 1050. French president's security detail did not resign over Covid-19 bill A French member of parliament and an American radio host claimed that Emmanuel Macron's entire security detail resigned to protest the French president's initiative imposing health passes to participate in many aspects of public life. This is false; the Republican Guard did not resign, and it is tasked with presidential palace security, not his direct physical safety. 1049. mRNA Covid-19 vaccines do not contain cells from aborted human foetuses A video shared hundreds of times on Facebook in South Africa and Zambia claims that mRNA Covid-19 vaccines contain cells taken from aborted human foetuses. The claim is false: the World Health Organization and the National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD) in South Africa told AFP Fact Check that Covid-19 vaccines do not contain cells from aborted foetuses or other human tissue. 1048. Joe Biden exaggerated Covid-19 vaccine efficacy US President Joe Biden claimed during a CNN town hall that vaccinated people will not get Covid-19. This is false; despite the high efficacy of the shots, infections still occur among the fully vaccinated population, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says. 1047. Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine does not contain dangerous ingredient A video featuring a US pundit who claims the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine is dangerous because it contains the nanoparticle graphene oxide has been watched more than a million times on social media. But the claims are based on a study whose methodology experts have questioned, Pfizer said the substance is not used in the manufacturing of its shot, and researchers told AFP there is no evidence graphene oxide is used in any vaccines currently on the market. 1046. This video shows protesters rallying against a deal to rename Macedonia in 2019 As thousands took to the streets in Greece to protest new coronavirus measures, social media posts shared what they claimed to be footage of the demonstration. However, the claim is false; the video shows a protest in Athens in January 2019 against a controversial agreement to rename Macedonia. 1045. This video shows an anti-government protest in Colombia -- not virus victims in Indonesia A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows Covid-19 victims wrapped in plastic bags in Indonesia. The claim is false: the clip actually shows an anti-government protest in Colombia in May 2021. 1044. False claim circulates in Indonesia that 'no Covid-19 victims died outside hospitals' Multiple Facebook posts circulating in Indonesia claim that nobody has died from Covid-19 outside of the Southeast Asian nation's hospitals. The posts misleadingly question whether the disease is deadly whilst implying Indonesian hospitals are responsible for its virus deaths. The claims are false: thousands of Covid-19 victims in Indonesia have died outside hospitals, according to data recorded by a volunteer group. AFP and other media have reported people died of Covid-19 while self-isolating at home and elsewhere after hospitals became overwhelmed with patients. 1043. Vaccinated people do not face greatest risk from coronavirus Delta variant A Facebook video cites Harvard research to claim that people vaccinated against Covid-19 are at greatest risk from the coronavirus Delta variant that causes the disease. However, a Harvard professor confirmed that the video misrepresents his analysis, and health authorities and studies suggest the best protection from the virus is through vaccination. 1042 . Indonesian Facebook users share misleading claim about Turkey's mosque closures during pandemic An image of Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim that he announced no mosque in Turkey would be closed due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim circulated online in Indonesia after the country imposed social restrictions in early July 2021. The claim is misleading: Turkey previously ordered all mosques to close in March 2020 in a bid to reduce the spread of Covid-19. As of July 22, 2021, AFP found no evidence that Erdogan announced he would not close Turkey's mosques in 2020 or 2021. 1041. Facebook users in Sri Lanka misrepresent image of Covid-19 victims in Myanma An image of several bodies on a hospital floor has circulated in Facebook posts that claim it shows the aftermath of a protest staged by nurses in Sri Lanka in July 2021. But this claim is false: the photo is unrelated to the protest in Sri Lanka; it has in fact circulated in reports about Covid-19 fatalities in a town in Myanmar. 1040. Available vaccines do not contain graphene oxide, experts say Multiple Facebook posts have repeatedly shared a claim that all commercially available vaccines purportedly contain a cancer-causing substance called graphene oxide. But these posts are misleading: experts separately told AFP that graphene oxide is not used in commercially available vaccines. The most commonly used vaccines go through rigorous testing and have been safely used for decades, according to the World Health Organization. 1039. Ivermectin has not been approved as a Covid-19 treatment in South Africa A screenshot of a tweet stating that the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority (SAHPRA) has approved ivermectin for use to treat Covid-19 patients has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook. But the claim is false: SAHPRA has not approved ivermectin as a Covid-19 treatment and only permits its use as a topical cream to treat skin inflammation among adults. Furthermore, a doctor must apply to use ivermectin to treat skin conditions in humans. 1038. Biden did not announce 'quarantine camps' for unvaccinated Americans Instagram posts claim US President Joe Biden announced that unvaccinated Americans will be sent to \"quarantine camps\" if they do not receive Covid-19 shots by 2022. But the claim originates from a satirical site, and the White House website makes no mention of such a plan. 1037. Canada does not bar pilots vaccinated against Covid-19 from flying Online articles claim pilots vaccinated against Covid-19 are barred from flying in Canada because they are part of a medical trial. This is false; Transport Canada said that aviators who have received the shots are still permitted to fly. 1036. Filipino social media users share false vaccination video A video circulating online shows a Filpino church leader making claims about Covid-19 vaccines, including that they can only be injected into a person's right arm in order to stabilise harmful \"nanotechnology\". The clip -- viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and TikTok posts -- promotes false claims, according to experts. Covid-19 vaccines do not contain harmful nanotechnology and can be administered in either arm. 1035. This video has circulated in reports about a gas leak in a Malaysian factory in 2019 Footage of panicked factory workers running has been viewed thousands of times in Facebook, Instagram and YouTube posts that claim it shows employees at Malaysia's Top Glove — the world's largest glove manufacturer — fleeing a police raid after being banned from operating under Covid-19 lockdown rules. But the claim is false. The video has circulated online since 2019, months before Malaysia reported its first Covid-19 cases. It actually shows workers at a chicken processing factory running away from an ammonia gas leak. 1034. This photo shows an anti-government protest in Paris in 2018 -- it is not related to the pandemic A photo has circulated on social media since July 2021 alongside a claim it shows a protest in France against Covid-19 vaccinations. The claim is false: the photo has circulated in reports since November 2018 about anti-government protests in the French capital Paris. 1033. US Supreme Court ruling did not allow patenting of vaccinated people Social media posts claim a 2013 US Supreme Court ruling means that people vaccinated against Covid-19 are no longer legally human and are therefore patentable. This is false; the decision makes no mention of vaccines, and experts say the court ruled that nothing naturally occurring -- including humans -- can be patented. 1032. Photo shows French football celebration, not vaccine protest Facebook posts claim that a photo showing a crowd hundreds of thousands strong was taken during a protest against mandatory vaccination in Paris. But the photo depicts people celebrating France's 2018 World Cup win, not the demonstration in Paris on July 17, 2021. 1031. Posts mislead on vaccine side effects recorded in Australia Multiple Facebook posts have shared a graphic purportedly issued by an Australian government-funded organisation that monitors Covid-19 vaccination side effects. Figures in the graphic purportedly show vaccines are not safe. But these posts are misleading: the graphic was not issued by the organisation. The actual figures for reported vaccination side effects were generally mild or in fact unrelated to Covid-19 vaccination. The Covid-19 vaccines being administered in Australia have been approved by international and national health authorities. 1030. Posts mislead on protection provided by Covid-19 vaccines Social media posts downplay the protection provided by Covid-19 vaccines, saying survival rates are the same whether people receive the shots or not. This is misleading; health authorities say that more than 99 percent of people who have recently died of Covid-19 in the United States have not been vaccinated against the disease. 1029. This photo was taken in Chiang Rai, Thailand in 2019 As Myanmar battled a shortage of medical oxygen during a third wave of Covid-19 infections, a photo of a baby on a motorbike with an oxygen cylinder circulated in social media posts that claimed it shows a scene in Myanmar. The image, however, has been shared in a misleading context: it actually shows a scene in Thailand in 2019. The child in the picture was suffering from a respiratory illness, not Covid-19, local media reported at the time. 1028. BJP politicians share misleading posts critical of Delhi chief minister Politicians from India's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) have shared photos they claim show various crises under the rule of Delhi's chief minister and opposition politician Arvind Kejriwal. The claim is misleading: most of the images were taken before Arvind was elected as Delhi's chief minister, or do not show events in Delhi. Social media posts claim that courts in Canada have \"revoked\" Covid-19 emergency orders, and that mask mandates and other public health measures are unlawful. This is misleading; one order in the country's largest province, Ontario, was revoked on June 9, 2021, but the courts had nothing to do with it, and the province still has regulations which try to limit the spread of the deadly coronavirus. 1026. US study used to falsely link Covid-19 shots, miscarriages Social media posts claim a study by US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) scientists determined that those vaccinated against Covid-19 early in pregnancy suffered miscarriages at a rate of 82 percent. But the report found no signs of vaccine safety problems in pregnant people, and experts called the posts \"inaccurate\" and \"dangerous.\" 1025. Covid-19 vaccines protect both individuals and society from deadly disease Facebook posts dismiss the personal benefit of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine, saying it is aimed at protecting those who have already received their shots. But experts say unvaccinated people are at the highest risk of contracting and dying from Covid-19, and immunization campaigns seek to protect these individuals as well as society as a whole. 1024. Inhaling clove vapour cannot cure Covid-19, medical experts say A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, YouTube and TikTok, with a claim that inhaling clove vapour can treat Covid-19. The claim is false. There is no scientific evidence that inhaling clove vapour can cure Covid-19, medical experts told AFP. 1023. Hoax posts about microchips in Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine misuse unrelated video A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple social media posts that claim it shows microchips purportedly found in the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine. But this claim is false: the video shows research-level microrobots that are impossible to add onto vaccines. 1022. Covid-19 vaccines do not contain DNA-altering robots Social media posts claim that Covid-19 vaccines contain robotic \"nanotechnology\" that can change people's DNA. While they do include tiny fat bubbles to protect mRNA molecules -- an essential component of the shots -- they do not feature miniature robots, and experts say Covid-19 jabs cannot alter a person's genetic makeup. 1021. Homemade device does not produce enough oxygen for Covid-19 patients, experts say A video that shows how to make an oxygen device from aquarium air pumps has been viewed thousands of times on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook along with a claim that it can be used for Covid-19 patients self-isolating at home. However, this claim is false. Experts say that the homemade device does not produce sufficient oxygen for Covid-19 patients with breathing difficulties. 1020. Flawed study misrepresents Covid-19 vaccination fatality rate A peer-reviewed study that spread on social media claims Covid-19 shots are dangerous and governments should rethink their vaccination campaigns. But the scientific paper used a flawed methodology and has been retracted by the journal. 1019. YouTube video spreads misinformation about Ugandan leader’s “death” A video claiming that Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni died after being admitted to a Kenyan hospital has been viewed thousands of times and shared in multiple Facebook posts. The claim is false; Museveni has made several public appearances since the rumours surfaced online and dismissed the rumours on camera. 1018. Posts falsely claim Sri Lanka becomes the first South Asian country to receive Pfizer vaccines After Sri Lanka received its first batch of Pfizer vaccines, multiple posts shared among Sri Lankan Facebook users claim Sri Lanka was the first South Asian nation to receive the American-made Covid-19 jabs. The claim, however, is misleading: both the Maldives and Bhutan in South Asia received Pfizer vaccines through a global vaccine sharing facility before Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka was the first country in South Asia to purchase a contingent of Pfizer vaccines. 1017. Video makes false claims on Covid-19 vaccines and ‘magnetofection’ Social media posts share a video of a US pundit claiming that Covid-19 messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccines can cause people to develop a \"magnetic force\" due to a process called magnetofection. This is false; experts say the process is not used in the shots, which do not have magnetic components listed in their ingredients, and the web page about magnetofection used as a proof comes from a German company that says its their work has nothing to do with Covid-19 vaccines. 1016. Posts mislead on 'first vaccine-related death in India' Multiple Twitter and Facebook posts claim that a male doctor they name as the spokesman for the Indian health ministry died on June 16, 2021 after receiving a Covid-19 vaccination. The claim is false: as of July 12, 2021, the man -- Dr Subramanian Swaminathan -- is not dead. He is the director of infectious diseases at an Indian hospital, not the spokesman for the Indian health ministry. The video shared in the posts shows him talking about India's first suspected vaccine-related death. 1015. Posts mislead that different vaccines were offered to Muslims and non-Muslims in Malaysia A photo of a Malaysian newspaper article has been shared widely on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that a Malaysian minister said Muslims and non-Muslims would be given different brands of Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is misleading: the Malaysian newspaper issued a correction after it published an erroneous paragraph about Malaysia's Covid-19 vaccine rollout. The Malaysian minister has denied claims that Muslims and non-Muslims have been offered different brands of Covid-19 vaccine. 1014. False posts target World Economic Forum founder with hoax Covid-19 conspiracy An image has been shared repeatedly in social media posts that claim it shows a book passage where World Economic Forum founder Klaus Schwab purportedly wrote billions will die from 'organized epidemics'. The claim is false: the image has been taken from a book that touts a global conspiracy theory -- not Schwab's book about plans to revive the global economy after the Covid-19 pandemic. 1013. Lab analysis of ‘dangerous pathogens’ on children’s masks lack scientific credibility, experts say Posts purporting to show alarming laboratory results from tests carried out on children’s masks have been shared more than 1,300 times on Facebook by anti-lockdown groups who claim the findings are scientific evidence that masks cause harm. But experts have dismissed the reports that appeared on social media as incomplete and lacking scientific rigour, pointing out that many of the “dangerous pathogens” on the masks are commonly found on human skin. 1012. The Covid-19 test kits are not for use with water, manufacturer says A video has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter along with a claim that it shows tap water tested positive for Covid-19. The claim is false. The manufacturer of the test kit clarifies that the test device is “not for use with water or any other foods or liquids”. 1011. False posts claim Sri Lankan regulators approved traditional medicine as Covid-19 cure A claim has been shared in multiple social media posts that Sri Lankan regulators have purportedly approved a brand of traditional medication as treatment for Covid-19. But this claim is false: an official told AFP no traditional medication has been approved as treatment for Covid-19 as of July 7, 2021; and warned against using unproven remedies for the disease. 1010. There is no evidence that Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni has been admitted to the hospital Posts claiming Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni was airlifted to Germany after suddenly collapsing have been viewed thousands of times online. The rumour, which surfaced on June 27, 2021, is false. On the same day, Museveni delivered a speech during the opening of the World Health Summit at Uganda's Makerere University, which was broadcast live. AFP Fact Check has seen a recording of the address. In addition, the Ugandan leader also attended a virtual UN summit of African heads of state on July 1, 2021. 1009. False claim circulates that Thailand tops global data for new Covid-19 cases on June 28 As Thailand grappled with its worst-ever Covid-19 wave, Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claimed that the kingdom ranked highest in the world for new coronavirus cases on June 28, 2021. The claim is false; at least three other countries, including Brazil, India, and the United States had more new Covid-19 cases than Thailand on that day, according to the data from the World Health Organization (WHO) and John Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center. 1008. Covid-19 vaccines do not contain tracking devices Social media posts claim Covid-19 vaccines could contain trackers, citing a video showing a positive reading when a device designed to detect pet chips is held over the arm of a vaccinated woman. This is false; the person who posted the video subsequently described it as a joke, and US health authorities say the vaccines do not contain trackers. 1007. Posts make misleading comparison of virus restrictions in Sri Lanka and Hungary Multiple Facebook posts shared repeatedly in June 2021 have compared the pandemic restrictions in Sri Lanka with Hungary. The posts, which shared an image of Hungarian football fans attending a Euro 2020 match in Budapest, criticised Sri Lanka's strict lockdown. The posts are misleading: as of June 28, 2021, almost half of Hungary's population had received a Covid-19 vaccine, compared to less than five percent of people in Sri Lanka. 1006. Misleading posts distort health minister's remarks about Covid-19 deaths in Australia A video has been shared in multiple social media posts that claim Australia's Federal Health Minister Greg Hunt announced in June 2021 no one infected with Covid-19 has died. The posts are misleading: the video shows Hunt commenting on Covid-19 deaths in Australia between January and July 2021. 1005. Posts falsely claim leading French economist Jacques Attali discusses depopulation in a book A post on Instagram claims that French economist Jacques Attali discussed depopulating the planet by orchestrating a pandemic in his book “The Future of Life” published in 1981. This is false: while Attali was interviewed in a book called \"Future Life\" (first published in French as \"L'Avenir de La Vie\" in 1981), he did not write it, and he does not mention depopulation in his interview. 1004. Online posts falsely claim Covid-19 shots damage blood cells Social media posts featuring four microscope slides supposedly showing blood cells before and after Covid-19 vaccination claim that immunization permanently alters human blood. This is false; experts told AFP that the images show incorrectly prepared red blood cell samples unrelated to Covid-19 inoculation, and said that the posts are unscientific. 1003. Facebook posts falsely claim video shows empty casket intended for Ugandan Covid-19 victim A video viewed thousands of times has been shared on Facebook with the claim that it shows Ugandan officials putting an empty coffin, intended for a Covid-19 victim, into the ground. The claim is false; part of the corpse’s head can be seen at one point in the blurry recording, while the dead man’s daughter confirmed to AFP Fact Check that her father’s body was in the coffin when he was buried. 1002. Airlines have not advised Covid-19 vaccinated travellers against flying A video shared on Facebook and Instagram shows Sky News host Cory Bernardi claiming airlines have warned people who have been vaccinated for Covid-19 not to travel due to an increased risk of blood clots. The claim is false: international airline associations said they had not issued the purported advice. Health experts say rare blood clots linked to Covid-19 vaccines are different to clots linked to air travel. 1001. Moderna had not developed a Covid-19 vaccine in 2019 Online articles and social media posts claim that Moderna developed a Covid-19 vaccine prior to the pandemic. This is false; the “secret documents” touted as proof are an agreement between a university in North Carolina, a US government research group, and the pharmaceutical company for vaccine research related to a different virus within the larger family of coronaviruses. 1000. Malaysia gets additional hajj quota only after the pandemic situation ‘fully recovers’ A screenshot of a news report that Saudi Arabia has given Malaysia additional hajj quota has been shared multiple times by Indonesian social media users on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter alongside a claim that Malaysia can perform the hajj pilgrimage during the pandemic while Indonesia has cancelled the hajj. The claim is misleading: the additional quota for Malaysia will only be implemented when the Covid-19 pandemic is under control, the Malaysian prime minister said. This year, Saudi Arabia only allows a scaled down hajj for fully vaccinated residents of the kingdom. 999. False posts circulate in Thailand about the use of anaesthesia after Covid-19 vaccination As Thailand races to boost its coronavirus vaccine roll-out to curb a surge in infections, Facebook posts warned against the use of anaesthesia after receiving the jab, claiming it could “cause death”. The posts also claim such warning \"also exists on the Covid-19 vaccine boxes\". However, the claims are false; health experts say anaesthesia can be used both before and after the jab, while AstraZeneca and Sinovac said there was no such warning on their vaccine packages. 998. Posts mislead on Covid-19 testing in South Korea Multiple Facebook posts claim that Covid-19 testing in South Korea does not follow “normal” standards. The posts suggest the testing has inflated the number of people diagnosed with the disease. The posts are misleading, according to a health expert, who said they had misinterpreted the measurements used in the tests. South Korea generally uses RT-PCR (reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction) tests, which the World Health Organization (WHO) says are the “gold standard” for detecting Covid-19. 997. Posts mislead on why some people experience Covid-19 vaccine side effects Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook claim that people who do not experience side effects after receiving a Covid-19 jab are “unhealthy”. The claim is misleading: a person's reaction to receiving the vaccine does not necessarily reflect how healthy they are, a health expert told AFP. The World Health Organization (WHO) says experiencing no side effects does not mean the vaccine is \"ineffective\" and everyone \"responds differently\" to the vaccine. 996. Authorities reject rumours that Sri Lankan influencer Piumi Hansamali did not complete two-week quarantine Multiple Facebook posts shared a video clip featuring a Sri Lankan social media influencer who was forced to quarantine after breaking Covid-19 restrictions. The video claims lifestyle and beauty vlogger Piumi Hansamali broke her mandatory two-week quarantine and went home. The claim is misleading: authorities told AFP she completed the quarantine; the video clip is from an Instagram Live broadcast at least four years ago. 995. Immunologist’s misinterpretation of data fuels misleading Covid-19 vaccine claims Social media users are sharing a radio interview in which a Canadian immunologist claims that widely used Covid-19 vaccines are dangerous. But a pharmaceutical company document and Harvard study presented by the professor as evidence have been misinterpreted, and experts said the jabs are working safely and effectively as intended. 994. Pakistan health minister’s comments on vaccination misrepresented in edited video A video has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube that purport to show Pakistan health minister saying she will not get vaccinated for Covid-19 because of the possible side effects. The claim is false: the video has been edited to misrepresent her comments at a press conference. In the original footage, she described the jab’s possible side effects and outlined which groups would receive it first. 993. False claim that coconut water concoction can 'cure Covid-19' circulates online Multiple posts shared on Facebook claim that a concoction of coconut water; salt; honey and lime juice, can cure Covid-19 infection. The claim is false: the recipe has not been proven as a remedy for Covid-19, medical experts told AFP. 992. Viral video falsely claims pandemic is staged A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts claiming they are evidence that the pandemic is a hoax. The claim is false. The video features various short clips which have been taken out of context, and actually show events such as protests, music videos and news reports. 991. Video makes misleading vaccine claim about US health company's biosensor A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook that claims a biosensor made by US digital health company Profusa is set to be injected into people through Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is misleading: Profusa and the UK health products regulator both separately told AFP the biosensor was being developed for a UK-based study and would not be used in Covid-19 vaccines. 990. Bangladeshi broadcaster airs hoax report about ‘magnetic’ effect of vaccination in India A Bangladeshi broadcaster has aired a report about Indians who allegedly became “magnetic” after receiving a coronavirus vaccine. The report was quickly picked up by various news outlets and social media users who shared the video of men sticking coins and metal pliers to themselves. The claim is misleading: the broadcaster told AFP it has removed its original video as it contained inaccurate reporting. Experts have rubbished the claim that Covid-19 vaccines can make the human body magnetic. 989. Posts tout unproven remedies for Covid-19 vaccination side effects Facebook posts have shared a list of purported remedies for the side effects of Covid-19 vaccination. The posts are misleading: health experts say some of the purported remedies have not been proven to be effective. 988. Coronavirus was not staged by philanthropists to control people A German lawyer claims in a video interview with Steve Bannon that the coronavirus pandemic was planned by global elites including the Rockefeller Foundation as part of an elaborate scheme to exert control of citizens. To do this, governments used PCR tests to justify lockdowns and other measures, the lawyer alleges. This is false; while the Rockefeller Foundation and other experts did study pandemic scenarios, they in no way fabricated a deadly outbreak, and health authorities say PCR tests are reliable. 987. Posts falsely claim Covid-19 vaccines contain electronic devices that can activate light bulbs Multiple Facebook posts claim Covid-19 vaccines contain electronic devices that can turn on light bulbs. The claim is false, according to health experts. The misleading posts included a screenshot of a video that shows a light bulb trick. 986. Social media posts share misleading claim that traditional herb prevents Covid-19 Multiple social media posts in Thailand have shared a claim that Kratom, a tree leaf used to treat various ailments, prevents Covid-19. The posts are misleading: health experts say there is no scientific evidence that Kratom leaves can be used to prevent or cure Covid-19. They also warn against unregulated use of the plant as it contains addictive substances. 985. Video offers false medical advice on Covid-19 treatment, vaccines In a video shared across social media, a woman claiming to be a doctor touts hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19, despite multiple studies finding it is not effective, and repeats previously debunked myths about the mRNA vaccines granted emergency authorization for use in the United States. 984. EFF party leader did not file lawsuit to shut South Africa’s schools amid Covid-19 surge A post shared hundreds of times on Facebook in South Africa claims that schools in the country will be closed after politician Julius Malema won a court case forcing the government to shutter classrooms due to a surge in Covid-19 infections. But this is false: the South African education department refuted the claim that schools have been ordered shut, and a spokeswoman for Malema’s party, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), said that neither he nor his party had filed any such lawsuit. 983. Indian newspaper did not run dating advert for ‘vaccinated’ groom-to-be An image purporting to show an advert in an Indian newspaper from a \"vaccinated\" woman seeking a \"vaccinated\" man to marry has been widely shared on social media, attracting thousands of reactions on Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. The purported ad, however, is fake. It was created using an online tool. 982. Footballer Christian Eriksen did not collapse because of a Covid-19 vaccine Social media posts shared around the world claim that Danish footballer Christian Eriksen collapsed mid-match due to a Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false: the director of Eriksen’s club Inter Milan and the Danish Football Association said the player has not been vaccinated. The cause of his collapse is not known, as of June 16, 2021. 981. Online posts mislead on birth control pills and Covid-19 vaccination Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook warn women to avoid taking birth control pills two weeks before and two weeks after their Covid-19 vaccination. The posts claim that failure to do so will result in blood clots and death. The posts are misleading: health experts say there is no credible scientific evidence that birth control pills pose risks when taken alongside Covid-19 vaccines. 980. This video has circulated since 2020 in reports about medical workers returning to Guangxi A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple social media posts that claim it shows medical aid arriving in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong in May 2021 after it faced a new Covid-19 outbreak. The claim is false: the clip has circulated online since March 2020 in reports about medical workers returning to the neighbouring region of Guangxi from the city of Wuhan. 979. Anti-vaxxer's testimony to lawmakers recites Covid-19 misinformation Prominent anti-vaccine advocate Dr Sherri Tenpenny, appeared before the Ohio legislature on June 8, 2021 testifying in support of a state bill prohibiting vaccination requirements. During her statement she made several inaccurate claims and shared conspiracy theories that have been disproven by medical professionals. 978. Online posts mislead on Covid-19 vaccinations in Europe Multiple Instagram and Facebook posts have shared a purported graphic of Covid-19 “vaccine deaths and injuries” which they claim shows data from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). The claim is misleading: an EMA spokesperson told AFP it had not issued the graphic in the posts. Actual data released by the agency in fact show adverse events reported after Covid-19 vaccination that are “not necessarily related to or caused by” vaccines. 977. False ‘magnetic’ claims circulate online about AstraZeneca vaccine Multiple social media posts have shared claims that electronic devices “recognise” people who have received the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine. The posts go on to claim that anyone who receives the vaccine will become “magnetic”; will have their DNA altered and will die from blood clots. 976. Australian government document misrepresented in posts about Covid-19 vaccines An Australian government document about Covid-19 vaccines that includes the word \"poison\" has been shared multiple times on Instagram and Facebook. The posts claim the document shows coronavirus jabs are dangerous. This is misleading: experts told AFP “poison” is a generic term used in Australian law to refer to all pharmaceutical substances and is not synonymous with \"dangerous\". The Covid-19 vaccines administered in Australia -- AstraZeneca and Pfizer/BioNTech -- have been certified safe by Australia's medicine regulator and the World Health Organization (WHO). 975. In another video, US doctor spreads Covid-19 vaccine misinformation Sherri Tenpenny, an American physician named among the biggest “profiteers” from anti-vaccination misinformation, appears on a YouTube channel sharing misleading claims about coronavirus shots. In a video viewed almost 100,000 times, she said they cause deaths, “transmit” side effects to the unvaccinated, and cause infertility risks. All of these claims are scientifically inaccurate, multiple experts have stated. 974. Inaccurate posts target Toronto Covid-19 vaccine clinic Social media posts claim that a Covid-19 clinic in Toronto lured children to accept a vaccination without parental consent by offering ice cream while police ensured guardians remained outside. But the video used as evidence shows anti-vaccination protesters confronting officers at the clinic, and the event organizer said that despite a local law allowing youths to agree to vaccination, parents were present throughout. 973. Image shows supporters in Nairobi welcoming back Kenya opposition leader in 2017 An image published dozens of times on Facebook in Kenya has been shared with a claim that it shows President Uhuru Kenyatta and a crowd of supporters in Kisumu city on May 31, 2021, during an official tour of the region. However, the claim is false: the image shows opposition leader Raila Odinga’s supporters welcoming him back to the country in 2017 after he visited the United States. 972. Misleading posts spread online claiming Sri Lankan politician hosted cricket match during Covid-19 lockdown Multiple images have circulated in Facebook and Twitter posts that claim they show a cricket match hosted by a Sri Lankan politician in June 2021 as the island nation was under Covid-19 lockdown. But these posts are misleading: the images show a cricket match that was held in March 2021, months before Sri Lanka imposed mobility restrictions to curb rising Covid-19 infections. 971. Misleading posts claim brothels but not gyms allowed to reopen in Melbourne Multiple social media posts have shared a claim that brothels will reopen but gyms will remain closed in Melbourne as Australia’s Victoria state eases Covid-19 restrictions starting the night of June 10, 2021. But the claim is misleading: both venues will remain closed in Melbourne while Covid-19 restrictions are eased for the rest of Victoria. 970. False ‘reasons’ to refuse Covid-19 vaccines circulate online As South Korea races to speed up its Covid-19 vaccine roll-out, posts emerged on social media sharing a list of “reasons” not to get the jab. The claims are false: AFP has previously debunked all purported reasons cited in the misleading posts, including claims that coronavirus vaccines have not been tested on animals or that their ingredients have not been published by pharmaceutical companies. 969. These images were shot during Hindu festivals that predate the Covid-19 pandemic Images of Hindu idols have been shared in Facebook posts that claim the statues were destroyed after the gods failed to protect India from Covid-19. This claim is false: the images predate the Covid-19 pandemic; they have previously circulated in online posts about unrelated Hindu festivals. 968. Video of crowds rushing for vaccine shows wrong Chinese city A video of crowds packed along a street has been viewed tens of thousands of times in Twitter posts claiming it shows people rushing to receive Covid-19 jabs in the southern Chinese city of Yulin. The video has been shared in a misleading context: it was actually filmed in China’s Chengdu city. 967. Face mask requirements aim to protect unvaccinated people Social media posts claim that remaining US mask requirements exist to protect vaccinated people from those who have not been immunized against Covid-19. This is false; experts say that the reverse is true -- masking is primarily intended to protect those who have not been inoculated. 966. Online posts falsely claim Sweden stopped using PCR tests for Covid-19 in May 2021 A claim has been shared in multiple Facebook posts since May 2021 that Sweden stopped using PCR tests for diagnosing Covid-19 as these tests are purportedly unable to detect contagiousness. The claim is false: Sweden continues to use PCR tests in a bid to curb the spread of Covid-19 as of June 4, 2021. Swedish health authorities use clinical criteria -- not PCR tests -- to assess whether someone infected with the virus is still contagious. 965. Posts falsely claim Merriam-Webster ‘changed dictionary definition of anti-vaxxer’ Facebook posts shared in May 2021 claim the US dictionary Merriam-Webster “changed [its] definition of anti-vaxxer” to include “people who oppose laws that mandate vaccination”. The claim is false: Merriam-Webster told AFP its definition of the term has not changed since its inception in 2018. Archived versions of the dictionary’s website also show its definition of the term has not changed since 2018. 964. Health experts warn against using zinc as coronavirus treatment A video viewed thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube shows a purported doctor claiming that consuming a \"high concentration\" of zinc treats Covid-19 infection. The claim is false: health experts say there is insufficient evidence that zinc can treat Covid-19 infection and warn consuming large amounts of it could be harmful. 963. Fauci email misrepresented as evidence masks are ineffective against Covid-19 Social media posts cite a February 2020 email in which Dr Anthony Fauci advised against mask use as evidence that face coverings do not prevent the spread of Covid-19. But the email from the top US infectious disease specialist reflected the consensus among health authorities early in the Covid-19 emergency, before it was determined that widespread mask use helps curb transmission of the disease. 962. US military did not arrest Trump pandemic task force coordinator Online articles claim the US military arrested former White House coronavirus response coordinator Deborah Birx for lying to the American public about the efficacy of face masks during the pandemic. This is false; the Department of Defense says it has no knowledge of Birx’s arrest, and that the military does not have the authority to detain her. 961. Medical journal did not say Covid-19 vaccines offer limited protection Social media posts claim research by medical journal The Lancet shows that Covid-19 vaccines offer little to no protection. But the posts misrepresent one measure of vaccine efficacy referred to in an article as evidence that the inoculations are ineffective, and its authors say the shots work. 960. Coronavirus tests do not make your forehead magnetic Multiple posts shared online in South Korea claim that taking a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test repeatedly for Covid-19 can make your forehead magnetic. However, the claim is the latest in a string of misleading claims linking coronavirus tests and vaccines to magnets. 959. Fake graphic misrepresents government data on Covid-19 vaccines in Australia A graphic bearing the logo of Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has circulated online alongside a claim that it shows there have been hundreds of “Covid-19 vaccine deaths” in the country. The posts are misleading: the TGA said it had not issued the graphic. The data in the graphic misrepresent actual figures on Covid-19 vaccinations released by the TGA on May 27, 2021. 958. Facebook posts falsely purport to show black fungus patient in Sri Lanka A photo of a man with a black growth on his face has been shared in Facebook posts which claim the image shows a case of mucormycosis -- black fungus infection -- in Sri Lanka's eastern Ampara town. The claim is false: the image has previously circulated in media reports about an outbreak of black fungus in India amid a deadly second wave of Covid-19 infections. Doctors said the Ampara case had no connection to black fungus. The health ministry has said there were no reported Covid-related black fungus infections in Sri Lanka as of May 2021. 957. Canadian doctors recycle inaccurate Covid-19 claims A video featuring Canadian doctors warning about the purported harm to children from Covid-19 mitigation measures and vaccines is circulating on social media. But the 22-minute video includes multiple false or misleading assertions about mask wearing and the shots, several of which have been previously debunked. 956. AFP image shared in false posts about 'Indian couple refusing ambulance decorated with Hindu god sticker' Facebook and Twitter posts have shared an image alongside a claim that an Indian couple refused medical treatment from an ambulance decorated with a Hindu god sticker. The claim is false: the posts shared a photo taken by an AFP photographer, who said the story was fabricated. The Indian news organisation that the posts claimed published the story said it had not published any such report. 955. Posts reshare old photo of ex-Sri Lankan MP in hospital alongside misleading virus claim An image of a former Sri Lankan parliamentarian in hospital was shared repeatedly in May 2021 in Facebook posts that claim the ex-MP was being treated for Covid-19. But the photo has been shared in a misleading context: the image has actually circulated online since 2020. The former MP told AFP the image shows him receiving hospital treatment last year for an illness that was unrelated to Covid-19. 954. American Red Cross accepts plasma donations from Covid-19 vaccine recipients Social media posts claim that people who have received a Covid-19 shot are ineligible to donate plasma to the American Red Cross because the vaccine destroys antibodies -- an assertion the non-profit organization says is false. 953. 5G technology is not to blame for India's coronavirus deaths A message shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter in India claims that the country's catastrophic second wave of Covid-19 cases was caused by 5G technology. The claim is misleading: the World Health Organization (WHO), radiation experts, and health authorities have said there is no evidence that radiation emitted from 5G is harmful to human health. 952. The video shows Chinese citizens being evacuated from Iran in 2020 A video has been viewed hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts in May 2021 alongside a claim it shows China evacuating its citizens from India. The claim is misleading: the video actually shows Chinese citizens being evacuated from Iran in March 2020. 951. Facebook posts give false advice on how to prepare for Covid-19 vaccination Facebook posts shared thousands of times have listed purported tips for how people should prepare to receive a Covid-19 vaccine. The claims are misleading: many of the purported tips have not been proven to prevent Covid-19 vaccine side effects, according to health experts. 950. This Australian news report about new Covid-19 treatments has been misleadingly edited Multiple social media posts purport to show a news presenter announcing that an Australian biotech firm has “developed a new treatment it hopes will prevent people dying from the Covid-19 vaccine.” However, the video has been deceptively edited: the full news report is about a drug to prevent deaths from Covid-19, not from the vaccine. 949. Only a few schools have shut so far in South Africa as third Covid-19 wave looms Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that all schools in South Africa are closing this week. The claim is false: while a handful of schools were closed due to rising Covid-19 cases ahead of a looming third wave, the education department refuted the claims as false on May 25, 2021. 948. Video falsely claims Moderna Covid-19 vaccine contains unsafe ingredient An online video says the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine contains a cancer-causing ingredient that is not fit for human use. But the warning in the data sheet used to “prove” the claim is about chloroform, a toxic compound that regulators do not list as being in the vaccine. A lengthy text post shared on Facebook repeats multiple false claims about Covid-19 vaccines, including that the shots will cause sterilization and that they were not adequately tested. 946. Inhaling saltwater droplets could be harmful and does not cure Covid-19, health experts warn Multiple social media posts circulating in South Korea claim that inhaling saltwater droplets produced by a humidifier can cure Covid-19. The claim is false: health experts said the advice was “baseless” and could be harmful. 945. This steam inhalation device cannot prevent or cure Covid-19 infection, health experts say Several images of a steam inhalation device have been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that it could help prevent or cure Covid-19 infection. The claim is false: health experts said there is no evidence that inhaling steam can prevent or cure Covid-19, warning the purported treatment could be harmful. 944. South Korean president did not ask US for Covid-19 vaccines for North Korea A screenshot of a news report has been shared on Facebook alongside a claim it shows South Korean President Moon Jae-in demanded the US provide Covid-19 vaccines for North Korea. But these posts are misleading: the screenshot shows an inaccurate Korean-language translation of a news report about Moon's bilateral meeting with US President Joe Biden in May 2021. The news report in fact states Moon was seeking US support for Covid-19 vaccination in South Korea, not North Korea. 943. Covid-19 vaccines were subject to animal trials Social media posts claim that pharmaceutical companies “skipped” animal trials while developing Covid-19 vaccines because the subjects kept dying. This is false; the three vaccines authorized for emergency use by US regulators went through animal testing, and research organizations and a biologist said the trials did not reveal safety issues. 942. This footage has circulated online since July 2020 in reports about an ammonia leak in India A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts that claim it shows medical oxygen being deliberately wasted in India despite a deadly second wave of Covid-19 infections. The claim is false: the video has circulated in reports since July 2020 about an ammonia gas leak in India. 941. Pre-pandemic photo of bodies in river recirculates online as India's Covid-19 death toll mounts A photo of corpses floating in a river has been shared repeatedly in Facebook posts that claim it shows Covid-19 fatalities in the east Indian state of Bihar. The claim is false: the image has actually circulated online since 2015 in media reports about bodies found in a river near a cremation site in India. 940. Putting lemon drops up your nose does not kill Covid-19, experts say A video has been shared repeatedly on Facebook in which a Hindu priest claims that putting lemon drops up your nose will kill the coronavirus. The claim is false: the World Health Organization (WHO) said there is no scientific evidence that lemon can fight the virus. Experts also said there is not enough scientific evidence to prove that vitamin C can prevent or treat Covid-19. 939. Health experts warn against gargling potassium-based mixture to treat Covid-19 A claim has circulated online in India that gargling a mixture of hot water and potassium alum \"can save\" people from Covid-19. But this claim is misleading. Global health experts warned of harmful side effects from using potassium alum, a salt-like substance used in industrial and cosmetic products. As of May 21, 2021, there is not enough scientific research to suggest potassium alum prevents or treats Covid-19. 938. US government database exploited by Covid-19 vaccine critics Misinformation has repeatedly undermined America’s response to Covid-19, encouraging people to view the disease as trivial, and to ignore measures meant to minimize the risk posed by the coronavirus. 937. Ontario politician makes inaccurate claims about pandemic A tweet from a member of the Ontario provincial parliament that claims to offer major pandemic-related findings, including Covid-19 vaccines causing harm and lockdowns being useless, has been shared thousands of times on social media. But the tweet misrepresents recent official remarks, and neither the Salk Institute nor the University of British Columbia released reports as the politician claimed. 936. Philippine regulators did not approve antiparasitic drug ivermectin as Covid-19 vaccine substitute Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times in the Philippines claim that ivermectin, an antiparasitic drug, can be used as a substitute for Covid-19 vaccination. The posts shared an advisory for a drugstore stating the drug had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The posts are misleading: the posts shared an advisory that states government regulators approved ivermectin to treat parasitic roundworms. There is currently no clear evidence that ivermectin is an effective treatment for Covid-19, according to the FDA. 935. False posts misrepresent image of lung scan taken before wide Covid-19 vaccine roll-out An image purporting to compare the lungs of person vaccinated against Covid-19 with someone who has not received the jab has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts. The claim is false: the image is unrelated to vaccination. It shows a medical scan of a Covid-19 patient’s lungs from a Canadian university study that has circulated online since at least April 2020. The study does not mention vaccination and predates the mass roll-out of Covid-19 jabs. 934. False claims touting raw onion with salt as 'Covid-19 cure' not backed by scientific evidence As Covid-19 cases surged in India, Facebook and Instagram posts shared a claim that consuming raw onion with salt can cure the disease within minutes. The claim is false, according to experts. There are no credible reports the purported remedy can treat Covid-19 patients. 933. US government data does not show Covid-19 vaccine ‘death toll’ An article claims that US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) data shows that Covid-19 shots have killed more people than all the other vaccines in the last 20 years combined. This is false; the data does not show the “death toll” from the vaccines as the article claims, and instead includes reported fatalities that occurred after inoculation, regardless of the cause. 932. Hoax online report shares 'WHO's virus death toll warning for India' Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned of 50,000 daily deaths in India as it battles a surge in Covid-19 cases. The claim is false: the WHO said it did not issue the purported warning; its daily tally shows some 4,000 people are dying every day from the virus in India as of May 2021. 931. False posts misrepresent video of Israeli PM Netanyahu talking about his Covid-19 vaccination A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands times in Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok posts that claim it shows Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu purportedly threatening to kill Muslims with vaccines. The claim is false: the video in fact shows Netanyahu discussing the syringe used when he was vaccinated against Covid-19; and nowhere in the video does he mention “killing Muslims”. 930. Facebook posts falsely tout an indigenous medication in Sri Lanka as Covid-19 cure Multiple online posts have shared a claim that Thai citizens can get inoculated against Covid-19 with their vaccine of choice when they visit as tourists in neighbouring Laos. This claim is false: as of May 18, 2021 foreign tourists were not permitted to enter Laos; the country only administers the Chinese-made Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccine to those eligible for jabs. 929. Online posts falsely claim Thai tourists can get free Covid-19 vaccines in neighbouring Laos Multiple online posts have shared a claim that Thai citizens can get inoculated against Covid-19 with their vaccine of choice when they visit as tourists in neighbouring Laos. This claim is false: as of May 18, 2021 foreign tourists were not permitted to enter Laos; the country only administers the Chinese-made Sinopharm Covid-19 vaccine to those eligible for jabs. 928. Facebook posts falsely tout an indigenous medication in Sri Lanka as Covid-19 cure As Sri Lanka faces a surge in Covid-19 cases, multiple Facebook posts claim that an indigenous medication has been discovered in a southern village as a ‘cure’ for Covid-19 induced pneumonia, alongside images purported to show crowds already thronging to the area to obtain the medicine. The claims are false: both international and indigenous health experts said there was no scientific basis for the purported medicine as effective Covid-19 cure and they warn the public against falling prey to such fraudulent claims. 927. Korean Facebook posts falsely claim Covid-19 is a ‘common cold that we see every year’ Facebook posts circulating in South Korea claim that Covid-19 is \"merely a common cold that we see every year\", referencing news reports from 2013 which mentioned a \"novel coronavirus\". The claim is false: the 2013 reports referred to the MERS outbreak in South Korea, which was caused by a different virus, according to health experts. 926. Covid-19 shots not designed to increase cold, flu lethality Instagram posts claim Covid-19 vaccines will leave people exposed to deadly illness during the next cold and flu season, and that germ theory -- the proven concept that pathogens can cause disease -- is a hoax. These claims are false; experts say they are biologically implausible, germ theory is a foundation of modern medicine, and the shots against coronavirus are safe and effective. 925. Posts falsely claim China ditched Covid-19 jabs in favour of 'inhaled vaccines' Facebook posts circulating in May 2021 claim that China has abandoned Covid-19 jabs in favour of a vaccine that can be inhaled. The claim is false: while a Chinese vaccine company is carrying out trials for an “inhaled vaccine”, the product has not been rolled out as of May 14, 2021. China has continued to use traditional Covid-19 jabs and has made no indication it will abandon them. 924. This video of a busy market during the pandemic was filmed in Pakistan, not India As India’s coronavirus death toll soared, a video of shoppers at a packed market surfaced in Facebook posts alongside a claim it was filmed in Delhi. The claim is false: the video has circulated in news reports since April 2021 about a market in Lahore -- Pakistan's second-largest city -- where authorities have closed a string of shops for flouting coronavirus rules. 923. Covid-19 vaccines do not contain magnetic microchips Social media posts claim Covid-19 inoculations are an elaborate cover for the implantation of microchips, with videos suggesting people’s arms exhibit magnetic properties afterwards. But this is a hoax. The posts are the latest incarnation of a microchip conspiracy theory pushed by individuals and groups whose amplification of falsehoods are adding to vaccine hesitancy. 922. Only a small percentage of all blue surgical masks contain graphene A post shared on Facebook claims that Chinese-manufactured blue masks “widely used” in Uganda contain graphene, a material that could be harmful to the lungs when inhaled. This is misleading; not all “blue masks” contain graphene, according to experts. Furthermore, studies are still ongoing to determine whether tiny particles of graphene found in some masks are harmful to people. 921. Posts misrepresent US study on dangers of coronavirus spike protein Multiple Facebook posts have shared parts of a study by US-based scientists that analysed spike proteins of the novel coronavirus. The posts suggest the study is evidence that some Covid-19 vaccines could be harmful. The claim is misleading: both the research institute that published the study and independent experts told AFP that it did not show Covid-19 vaccines are harmful. 920. Canada’s top court is not hearing case about Covid-19 ‘crimes’ Social media posts claim that the Supreme Court of Canada agreed to hear a case accusing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Ontario Premier Doug Ford and other civic officials of “crimes against humanity” for implementing public health measures against Covid-19. This is false; the document used as proof was filed in a provincial court where it was dismissed pending appeal, and the country’s top court confirmed that no such case exists on its docket. 919. Study falsely claims Covid-19 vaccines may cause neurodegenerative diseases Articles claim a study found that the Covid-19 vaccine developed by Pfizer-BioNTech may cause diseases such as Alzheimer’s. But medical experts say the study linking mRNA shots to neurodegenerative diseases has no scientific basis, the paper is published in a for-profit journal, and is written by a doctor with a history of opposing vaccination. 918. Nigerian pastor falsely claims Covid-19 jabs are 'death warrants' and mandatory in the country Nigerian preacher David Oyedepo claimed during a church service that Covid-19 vaccines are effectively death warrants, stating that the jabs were not tested before they were distributed globally. He also told followers that the shots are mandatory in Nigeria. These claims are false; Covid-19 vaccines are recommended in Nigeria, but not obligatory, while the national agency in charge of managing the disease has reported no deaths linked to vaccinations since their rollout began in March 2021. The Covid-19 vaccines endorsed by the World Health Organization have undergone rigorous testing for emergency use approval. 917. Safe for breastfeeding mothers to get vaccinated, health authorities say Multiple online posts have shared a report they claim is “evidence” that Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 jabs are dangerous for breastfeeding mothers. The posts are misleading: they cite a spurious report about a breastfeeding mother who was allegedly vaccinated in March 2020, two months before Pfizer-BioNTech started clinical trials for its Covid-19 jabs. As of early May 2021, health authorities said it was safe for breastfeeding mothers to get vaccinated against Covid-19. 916. Scientist makes inaccurate claims on Covid-19 vaccine safety An American scientist claims that Covid-19 vaccines pose safety concerns, including sterilization and changes to DNA, in remarks shared on social media. But experts and public health bodies say there is no evidence that mRNA shots are causing reproductive problems, and are not modifying the genes of recipients. 915. Thai herbal medicine does not cure Covid-19, drug company says As Thailand faced a surge in coronavirus cases, a message circulated on Facebook that claimed a Thai herbal drink can cure Covid-19. The claim is false: the pharmaceutical company that developed the herbal drink said it “does not have any effects on the coronavirus”. Health experts said there was no evidence the purported medicine can treat people infected with Covid-19. 914. This video shows shoppers at an Indonesian market during Ramadan 2021 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times after it was shared on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows crowds of shoppers at a mall in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, during the Islamic holy month of Ramadan this year. The claim is false; while the video was filmed during Ramadan 2021, it shows shoppers at a market in the Indonesian capital Jakarta, not in Malaysia. 913. Supplement falsely touted as Covid-19 treatment in Sri Lanka is a 'scam', health experts say Facebook posts shared thousands of times in Sri Lanka promote a food supplement as a Covid-19 treatment, claiming the remedy cured patients at a local hospital. The claim is false: health experts warned the purported treatment was a \"scam\". The hospital's director told AFP it had \"no involvement\" with the drug. 912. Social media posts misrepresent IMF report on South Korea's post-pandemic recovery Multiple posts shared repeatedly on social media claim the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned South Korea’s economy will not recover from the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic until at least 2026. The claim is misleading: the posts have misrepresented an IMF report published in April 2021 that focused on government fiscal expenditures, not economic recovery. Separately, the IMF projected that South Korea’s economy will show signs of recovery from 2021. 911. These images are from India’s Kumbh Mela festival in 2019, not 2021 Two aerial photos of massive crowds have been shared in Facebook posts that purport to show celebrations at the Hindu festival Kumbh Mela in the northern Indian city of Haridwar as the country grapples with a surge in coronavirus cases. However, the posts are misleading. While millions of pilgrims gathered for Kumbh Mela 2021 despite virus fears, the photos were actually taken at the festival in 2019 in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. 910. Bidens followed mask guidance when visiting Carters indoors Social media posts and articles shared thousands of times criticize President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden for not wearing masks while visiting former president Jimmy Carter and his wife. But both couples are fully vaccinated, and guidance from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says not wearing masks during such a meeting is permitted and would likely be low-risk. 909. Tucker Carlson misrepresents government data on Covid-19 vaccines Fox News host Tucker Carlson claims US government figures show the “apparent death rate” from Covid-19 vaccines. But the statistics he refers to come from a system that warns it may contain “incomplete” or “inaccurate” information, and says its reports alone cannot be used to determine if deaths or other adverse events were caused by immunization. 908. Indian villagers are not 'rebelling against Covid-19 testing' in social media video As a surge in Covid-19 infections overwhelmed Indian hospitals, a video emerged online in posts that claimed it shows villagers attacking health workers who tried to test them for the virus. The claim is false: the video shows a group of villagers attacking a police van after a detainee’s death in eastern India in January 2021. 907. Covid-19 vaccine does not cause impotence, health experts say Social media posts share an image combining photographs of well-known Indian doctors with a claim that Covid-19 jabs can cause permanent impotence and infertility. The claims are false. India's drug regulation authorities dismissed the claims as \"absolute rubbish\"; the World Health Organization (WHO) says there is no scientific evidence that Covid-19 vaccines cause impotence or infertility. 906. Video of vaccination error in Mexico shared in misleading posts about Covid-19 surge in India A video that appears to show a failed vaccination attempt has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and Weibo. The clip was shared alongside a claim that it was filmed in India as Covid-19 cases surged. But the video has been shared in a misleading context: it was filmed in Mexico and shows a vaccination error. The man in the video has since received a Covid-19 vaccine, according to the government. 905. This clip actually shows a Kazakh newscaster performing tongue twisters A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts claiming it shows a news report announcing that Indonesia has lifted a travel ban for the Muslim festival of Eid al-Fitr this year. However, the posts are intended as satire. The clip actually shows a newscaster performing tongue twisters in Kazakh. An Indonesian Transportation Ministry spokeswoman told AFP that travel is still banned during Eid in May 2021. 904. Images of Filipino students 'calling for end to free food stalls' have been doctored Three photos shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts purport to show students in the Philippines calling for an end to community-run stalls offering free food during the Covid-19 pandemic. But these photos have been doctored: they originally show students supporting the food stalls. 903. Instagram video falsely claims pandemics happen every 100 years An Instagram video with more than 600,000 views claims pandemics recur like clockwork once a century. This is false; the clip has incorrectly dated some of the widespread infectious disease outbreaks, and medical historians say it ignores many others while including a localized epidemic from France. 902. False posts claim a woman's menstrual cycle affects efficacy of Covid-19 vaccination Facebook posts circulating online in India claim women should avoid receiving the Covid-19 vaccine on specific dates during their menstrual cycle. The claim is false, health experts said. Vaccine manufacturers in India have not warned that a woman's menstrual cycle affects the efficacy or safety of Covid-19 vaccines. 901. This video shows mass prayers in Russia during Ramadan 2019 A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook along with a claim that it shows Muslims in Russia praying without masks or social distancing during Ramadan in 2021, amid the pandemic. The claim is false: the video is actually from 2019, before Covid-19 lockdowns, social distancing and masks became standard practice in many countries. 900. This video shows Indian police dispersing a village fair that breached pandemic restrictions A video has been shared repeatedly in social media posts that claim it shows scuffles in an Indian village after soldiers tried to force people to receive Covid-19 vaccinations. The claim is false: the video has circulated in reports about police dispersing a fair which breached pandemic restrictions. Police told AFP that officers dispersed the crowd because the event \"flouted\" local restrictions. 899. Homeopathy medicine not a substitute for oxygen when treating Covid-19 patients, experts say Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram claim that a homeopathy medicine could substitute for oxygen therapy when treating severely ill Covid-19 patients. The posts circulated online in India as it faced a shortage of medical oxygen while coronavirus cases soared. The claim is false, according to health experts. The World Health Organization (WHO) also said it would not recommend the homeopathy medicine as an alternative to oxygen as of May 4, 2021. 898. Facebook users misrepresent viral video of Brazillian nurses in empty coronavirus ward A video showing health workers singing in an empty hospital ward has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it portrays the “truth” of the coronavirus pandemic in Brazil. The claim is misleading: the clip shows a wing of a hospital in Brazil, which was treating more than 70 patients for Covid-19 in other wards. In the city where the video was filmed, the occupancy of adult intensive care beds was 93% at the time the video was recorded. 897. Arizona parents did not oust school board over mask mandate Social media posts claim that a group of parents in Vail, Arizona successfully and legally took over the school board and revoked a mask requirement. This is false; a spokeswoman for the school system said the original board members remain in place, as does the mask rule, and a senior education official reiterated that face coverings are still required as protection against coronavirus. 896. Gargling antiseptic does not prevent coronavirus, health experts warn A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter features a purported doctor claiming that gargling an antiseptic prevents Covid-19 infection. 895. Misleading videos alleging Belgian politician faked Covid-19 jab in fact show vaccination practice run A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on YouTube, Twitter and Facebook alongside a claim it shows a Belgian politician faking his Covid-19 vaccination. The claim is misleading: the video shows a trial run for coronavirus vaccinations in Belgium for which caps were intentionally left on syringes. 894. US protest photo again misrepresented as image of Montreal rally Facebook posts claim a photograph shows protesters filling several blocks at a May 2021 rally in Montreal to oppose Covid-19 restrictions. This is false; the image was taken more than three years earlier in Washington, the US capital, during a march against gun violence. 893. Online posts misrepresent video of routine birth procedure as Covid-19 ‘abuse’ A video of a mother and her newborn baby purportedly separated by a plastic sheet has been viewed thousands of times in posts that claim it shows medical “child abuse” justified by the pandemic. The claim is misleading: the baby's mother and various doctors told AFP the video shows a routine birthing procedure unrelated to coronavirus restrictions. 892. Fake US CDC graphic about 'vaccine refusal' circulates online An infographic that carries the logo of the US Centers for Disease and Control and Prevention (CDC) warns refusing the coronavirus vaccine \"is a form of racism\" because it \"harms people of color”. The graphic, however, has been manipulated: it was not issued by the CDC. 891. Facebook posts exaggerate size of London protest against coronavirus rules Facebook posts claim that a rally in the British capital of London against coronavirus rules on April 24, 2021 attracted 750,000 protesters. This figure, however, has been exaggerated; British media reported the rally attracted around 10,000 protesters -- an estimate which is borne out by photos and videos of the event. An AFP journalist who covered the rally on the ground said there were “certainly not hundreds of thousands” of protesters. 890. Social media posts mislead on reasons for India's lack of oxygen plants As India's coronavirus disaster deepened, Facebook and Twitter posts, including a tweet from a top Bollywood actress, accused the chief ministers of Maharashtra and Delhi states of failing to build sufficient oxygen plants despite being given funding in January 2021. But the claim lacks important context: although the oxygen plants mentioned in the posts were indeed not constructed in time, the funding had actually been allocated to the Central Medical Supply Store, part of India's Ministry of Health; official documents show the state governments were not involved. 889. Old photo of Indian funeral pyres shared in misleading context A photo of funeral pyres has been shared repeatedly in Facebook and Twitter posts alongside captions about a surge in Covid-19 deaths in India. The photo has been shared in a misleading context: it has circulated online since 2012 and does not relate to the coronavirus pandemic. 888. Experts reject claim that supplements can counter Covid-19 vaccines Articles shared on social media claim several dietary supplements can serve to “neutralize” effects of widely-used Covid-19 shots. This is false; doctors dismiss the claim, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says the inoculations are safe and effective. 887. Small percentage of vaccinated people will get Covid-19 Social media posts seek to raise doubts about vaccines by saying those who believe immunized people are at risk from others who have not received shots do not think they work. But while studies have found that vaccines protect against Covid-19, US health authorities say that a small percentage of recipients will still contract the potentially deadly disease. 886. Covid-19 vaccine does not make people dangerous to others Social media posts claim that people vaccinated against Covid-19 pose a health risk to those who have not been immunized by “shedding” spike proteins. But experts say this is impossible, and that there is also no proof for the claim that the shots affect fertility. 885. This photo shows a Tanzanian member of parliament meeting a retired Israeli paratrooper A photo is being shared on Twitter alongside a claim that it shows Tanzanian member of parliament Hamisi Kigwangalla meeting Microsoft founder and billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates. The claim is false; the photo was taken in Tel Aviv, Israel in 2019 when the Tanzanian politician met Shlomo Carmel, a former member of the elite Israeli paratroopers who rescued over 100 hostages held at Uganda’s Entebbe airport in 1976.Rumors, myths and misinformation about Covid-19 have spread as quickly as the disease itself. AFP Factcheck has been debunking disinformation as it emerges along with new cases across the world. 884. Photo shows march calling for referendum on final Brexit deal in 2018, not anti-lockdown protest Multiple Instagram, Facebook and Twitter posts have shared an aerial photo which they claim shows a protest against coronavirus lockdowns in the UK capital of London in April 2021. The claim is false: the photo shows a march in October 2018 that called for a fresh referendum on Brexit. 883. This photo shows a school-turned makeshift Covid-19 hospital in Delhi A photo has been shared on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram alongside a claim that it shows a 1,500-bed hospital set up to cope with surging Covid-19 cases in the northern Indian city of Lucknow. The claim is false: the image is actually from a school in Delhi that was converted into a makeshift Covid-19 hospital in April 2021. 882. Misleading flu statistics fuel ‘fake pandemic’ claims online A graphic purporting to show that flu cases have fallen dramatically since 2020 has been shared by Facebook users worldwide alongside a claim it proves health authorities are falsely passing influenza cases off as Covid-19 cases. The graphic, however, has been shared in a misleading context: it compares confirmed positive flu tests in the United States for 2020-21 with estimated cases for 2019-20. Health experts told AFP that the decline in flu cases since 2020 was likely due to lockdowns, mask-wearing and better hand hygiene during the coronavirus pandemic. 881. Misleading face mask graphic shared in incorrect virus posts Multiple online posts have shared a graphic that purports to show the virus that causes Covid-19 is small enough to pass through certain face masks. The claim is misleading, according to health experts. The virus spreads as part of larger particles -- created by sneezing or coughing -- that are effectively blocked by face masks, they said. 880. This video shows victims of a gas leak at an Indian chemical plant in May 2020 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and Weibo posts that claim it shows victims of India’s second Covid-19 wave in 2021. The claim is false: the video actually shows victims of a gas leak in an industrial port city in south India in 2020. 879. South Korean Facebook users share false Covid-19 prevention tips Facebook users in South Korea have shared a list of purported Covid-19 prevention tips, which they claim was issued by the “Samsung Alternative Medicine Institute”. The claims are false: the purported remedies are not proven treatments for Covid-19, according to health experts. There is no evidence the “Samsung Alternative Medicine Institute” exists. Separately, the Samsung Medical Center, an affiliate of Samsung Group, said it had not issued the purported tips. 878. US doctor makes false claims about risk of Covid-19 vaccination An American physician and anti-vaccination advocate claims in a video viewed more than 169,000 times that widely used Covid-19 vaccines have not been properly tested and pose long-term health risks. But experts say her claims are inaccurate, the technology used in the inoculations was under development well before the pandemic, the shots were trialed on tens of thousands of people, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that long-term side effects are unlikely. 877. Video of large Indian Muslim gathering shared in wrong context as India's virus death toll surges A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows crowds of Indian Muslims gathered during Ramadan in the southern Indian city of Hyderabad. The posts circulated online as India endured a huge second wave of coronavirus cases that has partly been blamed on large religious gatherings. But the video has been shared in the wrong context: it actually shows Muslims mourning the death of a cleric in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. 876. The US Supreme Court did not rule against mandatory vaccination A post shared on Facebook in South Africa claims that the US Supreme Court “overturned” mandatory vaccination following a lawsuit filed by attorney Robert F. Kennedy Jr. This is false; the precedent for mandatory vaccination dates back to a Supreme Court decision from 1905 and has not been challenged since. Furthermore, getting vaccinated against Covid-19 is currently not mandatory in the United States. 875. Pre-pandemic photo of elderly woman on roadside shared in posts about India coronavirus surge As Indian hospitals buckle under record Covid-19 infections, a photo of an elderly woman sitting by the road with an oxygen tank has been circulating on Facebook and Twitter. The claim is false; the image predates the pandemic and has circulated online since April 2018. 874. A Danish health official who fainted at a press conference later said she was fine A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Instagram alongside a claim that it shows a health official who died at a press conference where Denmark announced it would suspend AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccinations. The claim is false: the head of the Danish Medicines Agency Tanja Erichsen later tweeted that she had recovered. 873. Study making false claims about masks is misattributed to Stanford University Online articles claim a study from Stanford University found that mask wearing, which is recommended to help slow spread of Covid-19, is “ineffective” and harmful. But the study’s author is not employed by the prestigious California university, and it repeats previously debunked claims about the use of face coverings during the pandemic. 872. Doctored report falsely warns of new nationwide curfew in Thailand after Covid-19 infections surge As Covid-19 infections surged in Thailand, multiple Facebook posts shared a purported news report stating a new nationwide curfew would be announced on April 23, 2021. The claim is false: the photo has been doctored from an old news report about an earlier nationwide curfew. In response to the misleading Facebook posts, the Thai government said the purported announcement was “fake”. 871. Radical Pakistan party leader misleadingly claims praying at Muslim shrine can cure Covid-19 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple social media posts that shows the leader of a Pakistan extremist party encouraging people to pray at a notable Muslim shrine in the city of Lahore so they can be “healed” from Covid-19. The claim is misleading: there is no credible evidence that prayer can cure Covid-19. International health experts have previously warned against mass gatherings over fears they could exacerbate the spread of Covid-19. 870. 'Positive' and 'negative' control swabs in Covid-19 test kits only used for quality control, experts say An image purporting to show components of a Covid-19 test kit has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim that the “positive” and “negative” control swabs are proof that test results are “fixed” in advance. The claim is false: the swabs shown in the image are used to maintain quality control, not for patient testing, experts say. 869. Covid-19 shots not found to have caused deaths that followed vaccinations Social media posts claim there have been 3,005 “Covid vaccine deaths” since December 1, 2020. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says it has received that many reports of deaths among people who took a Covid-19 vaccine, but found no evidence of the immunizations contributing to the fatalities. 868. Experts say there are numerous factors behind erectile dysfunction, but the Covid-19 vaccine is not one of them Posts claiming that Covid-19 vaccinations are causing erectile dysfunction in men have been circulating widely on Instagram, Facebook and Twitter in Indonesia. The claim is false: vaccine manufacturers say there are no documented instances of Covid-19 vaccinations causing male impotence; experts told AFP that erectile dysfunction is most often caused by psychological not physical issues. 867. Satirical article about Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine ‘upgrade’ misleads Facebook users Facebook posts shared repeatedly by social media users worldwide claim that Pfizer has announced an “upgrade” to its Covid-19 vaccine that includes a “Microsoft chip for reduced symptoms”. The claim is false: the article originated on a satirical website. A search of both Pfizer and Microsoft’s media releases found neither company has announced an “upgrade” to any Covid-19 vaccine. 866. Covid-19 vaccinations offered by Ontario mobile clinics are voluntary Social media posts claim that medical authorities are going door-to-door to force people to get Covid-19 vaccines in Ontario. This is false; vaccination is not mandatory in Canada, and public health experts say mobile clinics have been set up in Ontario to reach mostly older people in densely populated, high-risk neighborhoods who otherwise might have difficulties accessing the shots. 865. Covid-19 precautions do not mean vaccines are ineffective Fox News host Tucker Carlson asks in a video viewed more than 450,000 times on Facebook why people immunized against Covid-19 need to observe measures such as mask use if vaccines are effective. But the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) makes clear that precautions remain necessary because it is not yet known how well the shots protect against variants or prevent people from spreading Covid-19. 864. Viral post misleads on health insurer’s response to Covid-19 vaccine coverage Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim a major New Zealand health insurer said it “will not pay out on Life Insurance policies or medical if one has had the Covid vaccine”. The claim is misleading; Southern Cross Insurance told AFP health and life insurance policies will continue as normal for people who have received a Covid-19 vaccine. New Zealand's government-run Accident Compensation Corporation also said that they cover vaccine-related injuries. 863. Florida local coronavirus measures still in place despite prohibitions on fines Social media posts from April 2021 claim Florida has no mask mandates or other coronavirus-related restrictions and yet is not seeing a spike in cases. This is misleading; major Florida counties still have measures aimed at curbing the spread of Covid-19 in place, though the governor has prohibited the assessment of fines for violations, and new cases of the disease have been on the rise in the state. 862. Hoax reports falsely claim popular Filipino comedian Jose Manalo is 'dead' A claim that Philippine television host and comedian Jose Manalo is dead has been shared in multiple Facebook, YouTube and blog posts since April 1, 2021. The claim is false: Manalo is “alive, well and kicking” according to his management team, and has appeared in live episodes of his television show after the hoax circulated. The posts that shared the false claim also contain a doctored news report. 861. 'Vitamins, sunlight and alkaline foods': false list of purported Covid-19 treatments recirculates online As the Philippines struggled to contain a surge in Covid-19 cases, a list of purported home remedies to treat the disease recirculated on social media. The posts claimed the purported treatments were endorsed by a director at a Manila hospital. This is false. In 2020, health experts told AFP the purported coronavirus remedies were not cures for Covid-19. The Manila hospital cited in the recent social media posts said the list was not issued by any of its doctors. 860. Pre-pandemic video of Brazil police closing beach fuels anti-lockdown sentiment A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in social media posts that claim it shows police attempting to close down a beach in Brazil due to Covid-19 restrictions. The video has been shared by anti-lockdown pages on Facebook and Instagram. But the claim is false: the video has circulated online since 2012; it actually shows crowds being dispersed due to restrictions on playing “altinha”, a popular beach game in Rio de Janeiro, local media reported at the time. 859. Canada’s federal government does not mandate vaccination Social media posts claim a Canadian lawyer won a case against “forced immunization” and the result now has the force of federal law. This is false; vaccination is not mandatory at the federal level in Canada, provinces that require proof of immunization for school attendance allow exemptions, and two vaccine-related cases in which the attorney is involved remain unresolved. 858. Black threads in face masks are harmless textile fibres, scientists say Several videos showing close-up shots of face masks have been shared online alongside a claim that the masks' black threads are “worms” or “parasites”. The claim is false, according to scientists who told AFP that the threads are harmless fibres. Social media posts shared thousands of times criticize the use of masks to curb the deadly Covid-19 pandemic, asking why one person should have to wear a face covering if somebody else’s works. This is misleading; according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, masks help prevent people from spreading or contracting Covid-19, and widespread use makes them more effective. 856. Posts falsely claim Chinese official touted antibiotic oxytetracycline as Covid-19 treatment Facebook, Twitter and Weibo posts purport to show a Chinese official promoting antimalarial drug chloroquine phosphate, which they claim is also known as oxytetracycline, as a Covid-19 treatment at a press conference in 2021. The claim is misleading: the official made the comments in February 2020; While she touted chloroquine phosphate as a Covid treatment, she did not mention oxytetracycline, which is a different drug. 855. Moderna boss did not say 'vaccines change your DNA' An article shared thousands of times on social media claims that Tal Zaks, the chief medical officer of US pharma firm Moderna, said messenger RNA vaccines can \"alter\" human DNA. The posts, which circulated online as Moderna's mRNA Covid-19 vaccine was administered to millions of people around the world, claim Zaks made the comments during a TEDx Talk. The claim is false: Zaks did not make the purported comments. Scientists have previously rejected false claims that mRNA vaccines can alter DNA. 854. The video shows officers protesting over government handling of police brutality complaints in June 2020 Facebook, Instagram and TikTok posts circulating in April 2021 share a video they claim shows French police throwing their handcuffs to the ground to protest coronavirus lockdowns. The claim is false: the footage actually shows officers protesting a perceived lack of support from the government over police brutality complaints in June 2020. 853. US cardiologist makes false claims about Covid-19 vaccination Video of a cardiologist claiming that there is no reason for healthy people under the age of 50 or those who have recovered from Covid-19 to be vaccinated against the virus has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media. But medical experts say younger people should be inoculated because they can still be affected by the virus, and that the shots also benefit those who have already had the disease. 852. This man was arrested at a demonstration supporting WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in January 2021 Facebook and Instagram posts purport to show a video of an elderly man who was arrested for not wearing a facemask, despite allegedly being vaccinated against Covid-19. The claim is misleading: the man was arrested for breaching coronavirus restrictions at a demonstration in support of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in London in January 2021. Health authorities recommend wearing masks and social distancing even for people who have been fully vaccinated. 851. This photo was taken in November 2019, before India detected its first Covid-19 case A photo of top officials in the Indian capital Delhi has been shared in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts alongside a claim that it shows them placing a mask on a boy's face while they themselves are not wearing masks, despite rising Covid-19 cases. The claim is false: the original photo was taken in November 2019, when authorities distributed masks to students to protect them from air pollution. India declared its first coronavirus case in January 2020. 850. Papua New Guinea posts misrepresent AstraZeneca roll-out in Australia Facebook posts circulating in Papua New Guinea in March 2021 share a screenshot of an Australian news report about the temporary suspension of the AstraZeneca coronavirus vaccine in Europe over blood clot concerns. The posts claim the vaccine is being \"questioned\" by Australian authorities. The posts have shared the news report in a misleading context: it shows an interview with Australian Environment Minister Sussan Ley on March 16, in which she said she had confidence in the AstraZeneca vaccine. Australian health authorities later recommended the jab only be given to people over the age of 50 after rare blood clot cases. 849. Pakistani social media users share debunked coronavirus myths A video has been shared tens of thousands of times by Pakistani Facebook users that claims Italian doctors discovered Covid-19 is caused by a bacteria. The video goes on to claim the bacteria is somehow spread through the \"poisonous waves of 5G\", causing an infection that is curable by taking paracetamol or aspirin. These claims are false, according to international health experts. Italy’s health ministry previously told AFP the claims were a “hoax\" after they circulated online in the Philippines. 848. Misleading Facebook posts claim Covid-19 vaccine increases risk of catching the novel coronavirus Multiple Facebook posts share a claim that people become more prone to Covid-19 infection after they receive their first of two vaccine doses. The claim is misleading: while people who have received the Covid-19 jab can still contract the virus, getting the vaccine itself does not increase the risk of Covid-19 infection. 847. Facebook posts misleadingly claim only one politician has died from Covid-19 Multiple Facebook posts have shared a claim that “not a single politician in the world” died of Covid-19 except John Magufuli, a former president of Tanzania known for downplaying the scale of the pandemic. The claim is misleading: at least eight serving and former politicians globally have died of Covid-19, according to an AFP tally. Tanzanian authorities said Magufuli died of a heart condition, while his opponents insisted he contracted the coronavirus before his death. 846. Article misrepresents US data on deaths after vaccinations An article claims the number of “vaccine related deaths” in the United States in 2021 surpasses that of the past decade, as a national Covid-19 inoculation campaign accelerates. But the government reporting system cited in the piece makes clear that the deaths have not been definitively linked to immunization, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the data generally cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused a fatality. 845. Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine are not proven Covid-19 treatments Two videos shared hundreds of times on Facebook feature a Kenyan doctor alleging that two drugs -- ivermectin on its own and hydroxychloroquine in combination with zinc and azithromycin -- are effective in treating Covid-19. But the claims are false: there is no scientific evidence that either medication can help treat the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. 844. This video does not show Covid-19 victims -- it shows a Russian music video being filmed A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts claiming it shows “dead bodies piled up from Covid”. One of the purported corpses can be seen smoking a cigarette, prompting claims that he could be a “crisis actor”. The claims are false: the clip does not show coronavirus victims. It has circulated online in social media posts since September 2020 about the filming of a Russian music video. 843. Husband of Toronto Covid response chief has not been arrested An article suggests that the husband of Toronto public health official Eileen de Villa has been arrested, that he put “pressure” on her to enact tight restrictions against Covid-19, and that he has a conflict of interest over vaccines. The claims, based on social media posts, are false; Toronto police said there was no arrest, the health department rejected the conflict of interest allegation, and the man in question has disclosed his financial ties with drug companies. 842. Mass Covid-19 vaccination will not lead to ‘out of control’ variants A scientist’s open letter to the World Health Organization claims that the large-scale Covid-19 vaccination drives currently underway around the world should cease before they produce the catastrophic appearance of more deadly variants of the coronavirus and increased risk for younger people. But medical experts say the claims are false and that vaccination is urgently needed to control virus mutation through widespread immunity. 841. Facebook posts mislead on meaning of 'AstraZeneca' Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim AstraZeneca, the name of a British-Swedish drugmaker, means \"weapon that kills\" in a combination of three languages. The posts circulated online after millions of Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccines were administered to people around the world. The claim is misleading: the name \"AstraZeneca\" was created from the names of two other companies. \"Astra\" derives from the Greek word \"astron\", meaning \"star\", while \"Zeneca\" refers to \"Zeneca Group\", a British company whose name was invented by a branding agency. 840. Footage from Israeli coronavirus vaccination clinic circulates alongside false claim about a vaccine-related death A video has been shared in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that it shows a person who died “within 15 minutes” of receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. The claim, however, is false: the footage in fact shows a man who collapsed from an unrelated ailment at a vaccination clinic in Israel and was later released home, the administering healthcare organisation told AFP; an Israeli government report on Covid-19 vaccine safety also makes no mention of any vaccine-related deaths. 839. False claim circulates online in Thailand about coronavirus vaccine eligibility As Thailand launched its coronavirus vaccination drive, a claim circulated on Facebook and messaging app Line in late March 2021 that all adults aged over 19 could receive the jab in the Thai capital Bangkok. The claim is false: as of March 30, 2021, a top official in Thailand’s disease control department told AFP that Covid-19 vaccines would only initially be available to people in certain risk groups. In response to the social media posts, the Thai government urged people not to share “fake information”. 838. This image has been doctored to show a fabricated message from Queen Elizabeth II An image has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts alongside a claim it shows a UK billboard displaying a message from Queen Elizabeth II thanking Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for providing Britain with Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is false: the image has been digitally manipulated to include a fabricated quote from the Queen, who has not made any such statement as of March 30, 2021. 837. Disneyland has not banned screaming on its rides Facebook posts shared more than 150,000 times claim that California theme park Disneyland banned screaming on its rides. This is false; a Walt Disney Company spokesperson said it does not have such a policy, and there is no mention of it on the park’s official website, which lists mask-wearing and other measures to help combat Covid-19 when it reopens. 836. Facebook account impersonating Ugandan newspaper promotes fabricated job listings A Facebook account purporting to be run by Ugandan newspaper Daily Monitor is spreading the claim that the country’s Covid-19 task force is hiring more staff. This is false; the account is fake and not affiliated with the newspaper. Furthermore, AFP Fact Check confirmed with Uganda’s Ministry of Health that the job listings are a hoax. 835. US doctor makes false claims in video about Covid-19 A video from a Texas doctor warning against Covid-19 immunizations and touting drugs he says can treat the disease has been shared tens of thousands of times on social media. But medical experts say the physician’s claims about the safety and efficacy of the widely-used vaccines are false, and medications he advocates are not recommended by health authorities. 834. This photo was taken at a rally in Bulgaria in 2013 An image of a tearful woman gazing into the eyes of a police officer in riot gear has been shared in multiple Facebook posts which claim the picture was taken in the Netherlands in March 2021 amid protests against coronavirus lockdown restrictions. The claim is false; the image shows an anti-corruption protest in Bulgaria in 2013. 833. Former top medical official makes misleading claims about Papua New Guinea vaccine roll-out A Facebook post written by the former chairman of Papua New Guinea’s Institute of Medical Research claims vaccines being rolled out for health workers in the country have bypassed the appropriate regulatory authorities and are being rolled out “for monetary gains”. The claims are misleading: experts told AFP that the vaccine has passed necessary regulation and is provided free of charge, while institutions linked to the professor have distanced themselves from his remarks and endorsed the vaccine roll-out. 832. Facebook posts misleadingly tout pineapple drink as Covid-19 remedy A screenshot of a news report detailing research on a potential coronavirus treatment that involves pineapple plants has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook alongside photos of pineapple drinks. The posts suggest pineapple-based drinks could be a \"natural remedy\" for Covid-19. The claim is misleading: in August 2020, researchers in Australia studied a potential Covid-19 treatment that combined the pineapple enzyme with another agent; a researcher involved in the project told AFP in March 2021 that pineapple drinks “will not work” against Covid-19. 831. Film portraying a pandemic’s devastation is not set in 2021 A Facebook post claims the years-old movie “I Am Legend,” which depicts the world devastated by a deadly virus after a cancer cure goes wrong, is set in 2021 -- an attempt at linking the sci-fi thriller’s plot with coronavirus and Covid-19 vaccines. 830. AstraZeneca rejects rumours it is planning to sue South Korean media Facebook posts circulating in March 2021 claim that AstraZeneca is preparing to file a lawsuit against South Korean media outlets for damages. The claim is missing context: the pharmaceutical giant told AFP the claim is groundless and that it has reported the “fake news” to authorities; a lawyer told AFP that disputes between companies and domestic media are typically handled by the Press Arbitration Commission in South Korea, not by lawsuit. 829. This image shows an anti-Brexit demonstration in London in 2019 An aerial image of a large protest has been shared on Facebook and Instagram alongside a claim that it shows an anti-lockdown demonstration in the UK capital of London in March 2021. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows an anti-Brexit protest in March 2019. 828. Anti-lockdown group promotes misleading claims about face masks as 'fact check' A Facebook post in South Africa makes several claims about masks, including that they are ineffective in preventing the spread of Covid-19 in the general population and that they inhibit children’s social development. But these allegations are missing context: health experts say masks reduce virus transmission when worn properly. AFP Fact Check has previously debunked similar claims about masks affecting children’s psychological evolution. 827. Papua New Guinea post shares Covid-19 vaccine misinformation A Facebook post circulating in Papua New Guinea warns that Covid-19 vaccines are being trialled on people in the country and advises them to “stay away from hospital” if they develop symptoms. The post adds that the disease is “just a seasonal flu” and advises at-home treatments. The claims are false: the vaccines being rolled out in Papua New Guinea have been rigorously tested for safety in other countries and experts say those who develop flu-like symptoms should get a Covid-19 test and seek medical help if needed. 826. Australian military refutes claim of ‘severe side effects’ from Covid-19 vaccines amongst Navy service members Multiple social media posts claim that 80 percent of Australian Navy service members who received the AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccine are experiencing “severe side effects,” while the remaining 20 percent have “mild side effects”. The claim is false; the Australian Department of Defence said the claim is “not true” and Australian health officials have not reported any abnormal side effects. 825. Covid-19 vaccination does not invalidate US life insurance policies Social media posts say that life insurance companies will not pay claims if a person dies within one year of receiving a vaccination against Covid-19. This is false, according to the organization that represents American life insurance firms and several US state regulators. 824. This footage circulated before the Covid-19 pandemic in reports about students fleeing tear gas at a school in Nigeria Footage of students fleeing a building has been shared in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that it shows children running from a school where “live virus” Covid-19 vaccines were being forcibly administered to black kids. The claim, however, is false: the video has circulated since 2019 -- months before Covid-19 became a global concern -- in reports about students in Nigeria running from a tear gas canister that was accidentally opened in a school. 823. Misleading Facebook posts tell people with Covid symptoms not to get tested in Papua New Guinea Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times advise people with Covid symptoms in Papua New Guinea that they “must manage themselves at home” and not to go for Covid-19 tests. The posts also list “home remedies'' for the disease. The posts are misleading: PNG’s Covid-19 Joint Task Force recommends that everyone exhibiting Covid-19 symptoms get tested and follow public health advice when being treated for the disease; health experts say the misleading post's recommendations go against the country’s current public health advice and could be dangerous. 822. The picture of Pfizer vaccines sold online is ‘fake’ – Malaysia prohibits the sale of Covid-19 vaccines A picture has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccines are sold on popular e-shopping platform Shopee in Malaysia. The claim is false; Shopee says the photo is “fake” and Covid-19 vaccines have never been listed on its platform. The Malaysian Health Ministry says only the government can supply Covid-19 vaccines and the sale of Covid-19 vaccines is prohibited. 821. New Zealand-based anti-lockdown page shares misleading anti-vaccine video A video posted on Facebook by a New Zealand-based anti-lockdown page makes a number of claims, including that Covid-19 vaccines are the “most rushed vaccines ever”. The claim is misleading: according to experts, Covid-19 vaccines have been developed in ground-breaking time because governments have poured unusual amounts of resources into the development process. 820. Pre-pandemic photo recirculates in false posts about Covid-19 outbreak linked to Hong Kong gym Following the detection of a Covid-19 infection cluster in Hong Kong linked to a gym, multiple Facebook and online forum posts have shared a photo that they claim shows an employee at the gym and a club member engaging in indelicate behaviour. The claim is false: the photo has circulated online since 2016 in posts about a fitness instructor and his wife in Thailand. 819. Study did not find link between Covid-19 mRNA vaccines and cancer An article shared thousands of times on social media claims a study from a renowned US cancer center found that Covid-19 mRNA vaccines could be linked to cancer. But the researchers did not examine such vaccines, and the article falsely portrays the actual findings of the study, the center and medical experts say. 818. Boxing great Hagler’s death not linked to Covid-19 vaccine Social media posts claim middleweight boxing legend Marvelous Marvin Hagler’s death was linked to a Covid-19 vaccination. But Hagler’s wife denied vaccine involvement, his official website says he died of natural causes, and the state medical examiner is not investigating the fatality. 817. Covid-19 vaccination does not impact Canada life insurance coverage Social media posts claim that Canadian company Manulife will deny life insurance payments to people who have been immunized against Covid-19 because the vaccines are “experimental.” This is false; both the firm and the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association said coverage would not be affected. 816. Old video recirculates online in misleading posts about Philippine economy during Covid-19 pandemic Multiple Facebook, Twitter and TikTok posts have shared a video in March 2021, claiming it shows the World Bank has praised the Philippine government for the country’s “strong” economic performance despite the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim is misleading: the video shows a news report that has circulated online since 2019, months before the country declared its first Covid-19 infection; the Philippine economy in fact shrank to record levels during the pandemic, according to the country’s statistics agency. 815. US regulatory document circulates in misleading Facebook posts that undermine the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine A US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) document detailing the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine has been shared in multiple Australian Facebook posts that sow doubt over the vaccine and note specifically how the FDA states it is an “unapproved vaccine.” The posts, however, are misleading: the full FDA document explains how the Pfizer vaccine was granted emergency use authorization in the US and Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration has also approved the vaccine. 814. Social media posts falsely claim link between AstraZeneca Covid-19 jab and Australian minister’s skin infection A claim that Australian Health Minister Greg Hunt has suffered cellulitis caused by an AstraZeneca Covid-19 jab has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter. The claim is false: according to medical experts, cellulitis is a skin infection that may occur when bacteria enter the skin; Hunt suffered from cellulitis on his leg, not his arm where the vaccine was administered. 813. Misleading social media posts circulate claiming a Covid-19 vaccination centre in Jakarta is open to all A claim circulating on Facebook says that a Covid-19 vaccination centre in the Indonesian capital of Jakarta is open to everyone with an Indonesian ID card. The claim is false: the programme is only open for the elderly and employees of state-run companies who are registered as Jakarta residents. 812. Catholic doctors in Kenya reject Covid-19 vaccines, repeat false claims in statement The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association recently issued a press statement discouraging people from getting Covid-19 vaccines, calling them “unnecessary” and “unsafe”. The press release, however, was wrong on a number of points, including claims that steam and hydroxychloroquine can treat Covid-19. The document also punted population control conspiracies; AFP Fact Check has previously debunked these and other claims. The World Health Organization (WHO) dismissed the statement and assured the public that the vaccines were safe. 811. Doctored newspaper front page claims medics advise against Covid-19 jab An image has been shared in multiple Facebook posts that purportedly shows a headline in the February 16, 2021 edition of The Times that reads “Doctors and experts advise against taking experimental jab”. The posts circulated amid widespread mistrust and misinformation around Covid-19 vaccines. However, the image is a fabrication; The Times’s archive shows a different front page on February 16 and the newspaper published an article calling out the story as “fake”. 810. Canadian doctors make inaccurate Covid-19 claims in video A video titled “Canadian Doctors Speak Out,” which claims to offer the top reasons not to fear Covid-19, has been shared thousands of times on social media. But public health experts said it includes misleading claims about variants of the disease and immunity, and recommends treatments that have not been proven effective against the virus. 809. Covid-19 relief act does not include bonus for US lawmakers Facebook posts claim that the $1.9 trillion US pandemic relief act includes a $25 million bonus for members of the House of Representatives. This is false; it mentions no such measure, and a government official said the claim is inaccurate. 808. Article misrepresents CDC study on mask mandate effectiveness An article from One America News Network shared thousands of times on Facebook claims that a study by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found face masks do little to prevent the spread of Covid-19. This is false; the research examined the effectiveness of mask mandates, not masks, finding that state-issued orders requiring face coverings were linked to a decreased growth rate in Covid-19 cases and deaths, and a CDC spokeswoman said masks are very effective against the deadly illness. 807. The video was originally uploaded as satire by a Greece-based Facebook user A video that appears to show a radio-frequency identification (RFID) tracking chip in a face mask was published by a New Zealand-based Facebook user alongside a claim that masks made in China “often contain RFID chips”. The claim, however, is false; the video was originally uploaded as satire by a Greece-based Facebook user who inserted the chip into the face mask as a joke. 806. This photo shows South Korea’s governor taking part in a Covid-19 vaccination simulation exercise A photo has been shared on multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Naver blog alongside a claim that Kim Kyoung-soo, the governor of South Korea’s South Gyeongsang province, received a Covid-19 vaccine shot through his jacket. The claim is misleading: the photo was taken during a mock vaccination exercise on March 2, 2021; no actual Covid-19 vaccine shots were given that day, a government official says. 805. False claim about Covid-19 vaccine causing infertility circulates online A video post claims pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline’s Covid-19 vaccine contains ingredients that will cause infertility, and that immunized men can make unvaccinated women sterile, which would cause a global population decline. This is false; the drug company does not have its own Covid-19 vaccine, and doctors say such shots could not cause infertility. 804. Facebook posts misleadingly claim half of South Koreans suffer from underlying medical conditions Multiple Facebook posts shared repeatedly in March 2021 claim that 50 percent of South Koreans suffer from underlying medical conditions. The claim is misleading: there are no official reports to support the claim and the figures cited in the misleading posts are either outdated or inaccurate. 803. Misleading Facebook posts claim woman died from Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine in Japan Facebook posts circulating in the Philippines share a news report about a “victim” of Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine who died after receiving the jab in Japan. However, the posts are misleading; they exclude the part of the news report that explains health authorities found no link between the woman’s death and her vaccination. 802. This poster has been doctored from a health notice promoting the coronavirus jab Multiple South Korean Facebook users have shared an image of a public health campaign poster, purportedly from a Swiss medical organisation, which advises people not to take a Covid-19 vaccine. The poster is a fake; it has been doctored from a real Swiss public health campaign which urged people to get the jab. The organisation mentioned in the misleading poster does not exist and the logos on the poster are unrelated to public health. 801. David Icke interview resurfaces with multiple false claims about Covid-19 A video of British author David Icke talking about Covid-19 has been viewed millions of times since it was first published in April 2020, and recently picked up steam again on social media. The hour-long clip shared on Facebook is from a longer video, since removed from YouTube. In the clip, Icke, who is known for promoting conspiracy theories, presents himself as a researcher and claims that the Covid-19 pandemic was orchestrated by supernatural forces attempting to “dismantle” the world economic system and “control” the population using new technologies like 5G. But this popular conspiracy theory is based on false and misleading claims, as several experts told AFP Fact Check. 800. Misleading posts claim Australia’s New South Wales declared end to Covid-19 pandemic Multiple Facebook posts claim the Australian state of New South Wales declared an end to the Covid-19 pandemic and that the state, without a mask mandate, recorded no cases in over a month. The claim is misleading: while the state marked its 50th consecutive day of no locally transmitted Covid-19 cases on March 8, 2021, it did record several imported cases; residents are also still required to wear masks in certain circumstances. 799. This is a manipulated picture that the Singaporean hospital has rejected as ‘fake news’ A picture has been shared widely on Facebook and Twitter in Singapore alongside a claim that it shows a Covid-19 vaccination certificate that contained a warning that the shots will prolong erections and increase penis size. The claim is false; the hospital denied the allegation and genuine vaccine recipients contain no mention of the warning. 798. Canadian activist makes inaccurate claims about Covid-19 vaccine safety An Ontario anti-mask activist makes false claims in an Instagram video about the safety of Covid-19 vaccines available in Canada and misleadingly refers to potential adverse vaccine reactions recorded in the United States. Medical experts said the shots do not alter the DNA of recipients or make people infectious, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that it has not detected safety issues with the vaccines. 797. South Korean health authorities' seizure of Covid-19 vaccines sparks false claims online Three images have been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts in February 2021 alongside a claim that South Korean health authorities destroyed a batch of Oxford/AstraZeneca Covid-19 vaccines after they were exposed to colder temperatures than is recommended. The claim is false: two images show South Korean health authorities conducting drills for the distribution of Covid-19 vaccines. The third image originates from a Korean media report about officials seizing a batch of Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccines after they were briefly exposed to unsuitable temperatures. The Korea Disease Control and Prevention Agency (KDCA) said the vaccines were not destroyed and would still be used for the inoculations. 796. Post falsely claims Johnson & Johnson didn't update public after vaccine trial volunteer fell ill A Facebook post claims that vaccine maker Johnson & Johnson has failed to update the public on why “volunteers” fell ill during the trials of its Covid-19 shot in 2020, an event that brought a temporary halt to clinical testing. This claim is misleading; only one trial participant reportedly fell sick, and while the illness remains unexplained, the company released a statement of its findings in October 2020 that ruled out the vaccine as a cause. 795. Inhaling steam from herbal tea does not help treat or prevent Covid-19 A post shared hundreds of times on social media in South Africa claims that inhaling steam from a tea made from guava leaves, eucalyptus and an artemisia variety known as mhlonyane will \"kill\" the virus that causes Covid-19. But this is false: the World Health Organization (WHO) does not recommend steam inhalation to treat or prevent Covid-19. 794. Change of needles is not evidence that Malaysian PM ‘faked’ Covid-19 vaccination, experts say Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim health authorities should “explain” why two needles were used to give Malaysian Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin a Covid-19 vaccine. The posts came after several other world leaders faced false accusations that they faked their Covid-19 vaccinations. The claim is misleading: it is common to change needles between the preparation and administration of vaccines for hygiene and practical reasons, according to health experts. 793. Video shows a patient having a seizure at a hospital in Argentina, not a Covid-19 vaccine recipient A clip of a woman convulsing on the ground has spread across social media worldwide in multiple languages alongside a claim that she is suffering from side effects after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. But this claim is false: the video showed a patient suffering a seizure at the Larcade hospital near Buenos Aires in Argentina, and doctors there told AFP that the woman had not been vaccinated against Covid-19. 792. These images show different vaccinations in recent years A collage of seven photos featuring Bavarian Minister-President Markus Söder receiving vaccinations has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook, purporting to show the evidence of “fake jabs” as countries including Germany and Australia roll out their Covid-19 vaccination campaigns. The claim is misleading: the photos actually show Söder receiving different vaccinations at separate events between 2009 and 2020. 791. Kentucky monastery Covid-19 cases not evidence of vaccine problems Online articles say that dozens of nuns in the US state of Kentucky tested positive for Covid-19 after being vaccinated against the disease and two died, questioning the efficacy and the safety of the shots. But one nun said another sister at the monastery contracted the disease prior to the vaccinations, prompting others to be tested after receiving the vaccine, and that the deaths were the result of Covid-19. 790. Video falsely claims Indonesia’s religious affairs minister banned communal Friday prayers A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on YouTube and Facebook alongside a claim that it shows Indonesia's Religious Affairs Minister banned communal Friday prayers. The claim is false, according to the Religious Affairs Ministry. The video shared on YouTube and Facebook in fact shows scenes at a mosque captured in March 2020, months before Yaqut was appointed as religious affairs minister. The letter shown in the video is a regional directive issued by an official in the Indonesian city of Kupang, not Yaqut. 789. Doctored news graphic falsely claims Filipino official advised giving China's Sinovac vaccine to poor people As the Philippines gave emergency approval to the Chinese-made Sinovac coronavirus vaccine, a purported news graphic circulated online that appeared to show genuine comments about the jab from the Philippines' head of vaccine procurement, Carlito Galvez. The posts allege Galvez suggested the vaccine should be reserved for \"poor Filipinos\". The claim is false: the purported news graphic, which was shared in multiple Twitter and Facebook posts, has been fabricated. Galvez's office denied he made the alleged remarks in a post on Twitter on February 23, 2021. 788. Covid-19 measures won’t be lifted on March 1 in Canada Social media posts claim that all public health measures to curb the spread of Covid-19 in Canada, including lockdowns, mask mandates and social distancing, will end on March 1, 2021. This is false, according to provincial governments which are responsible for most rules related to the deadly virus. 787. Indian social media posts, media reports falsely claim WHO approved herbal medicine as Covid-19 treatment Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claim the World Health Organization (WHO) approved Coronil, an Indian herbal medication, as a Covid-19 treatment. The claim was also shared in multiple Indian news reports. The claim is false: while Coronil was approved as a Covid-19 treatment by Indian government regulators, it has not been certified as a coronavirus treatment by the WHO as of February 26, 2021. 786. President Cyril Ramaphosa did not receive his Covid-19 vaccine with a capped needle Social media posts have claimed that South African President Cyril Ramaphosa received a Covid-19 shot with a syringe that still had the needle covered by a cap. This is false; various images and videos taken from different angles show Ramaphosa was vaccinated with an exposed needle. 785. This photo shows an anti-government protest in Bucharest in 2017, not 2021 An image has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows protesters in Romania rallying against Covid-19 restrictions. The claim is false: the photo shows an anti-government protest in the Romanian capital Bucharest in 2017. 784. Social media posts falsely claim Vietnam has recorded no deaths from Covid-19 Multiple posts on Facebook claim that Vietnam has recorded no deaths from Covid-19 due to widespread consumption of hot lemon tea in the population. The claim is false: as of February 22, 2021, Vietnam has recorded 35 coronavirus deaths. Health experts said there is \"no evidence\" that hot lemon tea is an effective Covid-19 treatment. 783. Unrelated photos published in false report about Moderna Covid-19 vaccine side effects Two photos have been published in a purported news report that claims they show people suffering from side effects caused by Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine. The report has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Korean online forum Naver Blog. The claim is false: the photos have both circulated online in unrelated reports published before the coronavirus pandemic. The purported report shared in the social media posts was not published by a credible news outlet. 782. Facebook posts falsely claim Australian PM’s Covid-19 vaccination was 'faked' Multiple Facebook posts claim Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s Covid-19 vaccination -- broadcast live on national television on February 21, 2021 -- was faked. The posts claim the doctor who vaccinated Morrison left the cap on the syringe. But the claim is false: the medic used an exposed needle to vaccinate Morrison, photos and video footage of the procedure show. 781. Weibo user's satirical TV report about coronavirus lockdowns in China is lost in translation A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook and YouTube posts alongside a claim it shows a CNN journalist deliberately mistranslating a Chinese man’s comments in a report about coronavirus lockdowns in China. The posts claim the purported journalist attempted to exaggerate the severity of the lockdown in a Chinese city. The footage, however, is not a genuine CNN report: it was taken from a satirical video created by a Weibo user that mocked Western media reporting. 780. US health authority has not established a link between Covid-19 vaccines and reported deaths A Facebook post shared in South Africa alleges that the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccines have “killed” hundreds of people in the United States, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). But this claim is misleading; as of February 22, 2021, the US national public health institute said the reported deaths had “no link with vaccination”. The CDC considers both Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines “safe and effective”. 779. This photo shows a Sri Lankan minister being vaccinated for Covid-19, not a Sri Lankan shaman A photo has been shared in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows a Sri Lankan ayurvedic practitioner being vaccinated for Covid-19 after he touted a false herbal cure for the disease. The claim is false: the image actually shows a senior Sri Lankan minister being vaccinated for Covid-19. 778. The CDC did not illegally change mortality count rules, inflate Covid-19 toll Articles shared thousands of times on Facebook claim the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) increased the Covid-19 death toll by 1,600 percent because they illegally altered rules for reporting mortality data. This is false; the CDC’s chief of mortality statistics said the claim “doesn’t have any validity,” and public health attorneys said the agency’s actions did not violate the law. 777. Beware of fake websites claiming to give out Covid-19 aid on behalf of Nigeria's government A website shared thousands of times on Facebook is inviting Nigerians to apply for financial help from a Covid-19 survival fund provided by the government of Africa’s most populous country. But AFP Fact Check found the site is a fraudulent version of the official state aid portal, which features the government’s web domain “gov.ng”. 776. Miscarriage reports are not proof of Covid-19 vaccine danger to pregnancy Social media posts warn of miscarriages following Covid-19 shots, citing data from a US government reporting system. But a causal link between the two has not been established: the reports are not proof that a vaccine caused a problem, and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says there is currently no evidence of an increase in miscarriages after Covid-19 immunization. 775. Fabricated news report falsely claims South Korea PM threatened to arrest people who refuse Covid-19 vaccination A fabricated news report shared repeatedly on Facebook states South Korea's Prime Minister threatened to arrest citizens who refuse to receive a Covid-19 vaccination. The report, however, is not a genuine article from a South Korean media outlet. A spokesperson for the Prime Minister's Secretariat told AFP on February 17, 2021, that he made no such comments about Covid-19 vaccinations. The South Korean media outlet that was imitated in the Facebook posts said it did not publish the purported report. 774. Misleading claim circulates on Facebook that only South Koreans have Covid-19 antibodies Multiple Facebook posts circulating online in February 2021 claim that only people from South Korea have Covid-19 antibodies, citing a South Korean scientific study as evidence. The claim is misleading: according to one of the co-authors of the scientific study published in January 2021, researchers analysed coronavirus antibodies found in Covid-19 patients from the United States and South Korea. Social media posts and online articles claim face masks, recommended to help curb the spread of Covid-19, cause lung cancer. But medical experts say there is no scientific evidence proving a direct link between long-term mask use and cancer. Facebook posts claim Amish religious communities have not been affected by the deadly Covid-19 pandemic. But the administrator of a Pennsylvania medical center that mainly treats Amish patients said they have experienced higher than average Covid-19 infection rates, US health authorities documented cases in an Amish community in Ohio, and there are first-hand accounts of the disease spreading in the Christian Anabaptist group. 771. Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones falsely claims Australia and France ditched coronavirus vaccination drives A video of far-right broadcaster Alex Jones claiming that Australia and France have suspended Covid-19 vaccination campaigns because the jab “does not work” has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook in February 2021. The claim is misleading: as of February 11, 2021, Australia has not started its coronavirus vaccination campaign, while France has vaccinated more than 1.9 million people in its ongoing Covid-19 vaccination programme. 770. US rapper Pitbull falsely claims Covid-19 pandemic was planned In a video clip viewed hundreds of thousands of times on social media, US rapper Pitbull repeats the false assertion that the Covid-19 pandemic was planned. 769. Misleading claim circulates that US medical journal endorsed hydroxychloroquine as Covid treatment Facebook posts shared around the world, including by US conservative website Gateway Pundit and an Australian politician, claim the American Journal of Medicine endorsed hydroxychloroquine as a Covid-19 treatment. This is misleading; the journal published a study assessing the drug as a potential treatment for the disease, but this was not equivalent to recommending it, the editor-in-chief said. 768. Anti-vaxxer messages circulate online in Sri Lanka as island nation prepares for coronavirus vaccination drive As Sri Lanka prepared to kick off a mass coronavirus vaccination drive, messages circulated on Facebook urging people in the island nation to consume herbal remedies instead of taking the Covid-19 vaccine. The misleading claim was shared repeatedly in multiple posts. Medical experts told AFP that the purported remedies were not proven to prevent infection from Covid-19. They also emphasised that approved Covid-19 vaccines being offered in the country -- including the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines -- had passed rigorous clinical trials and were safe. 767. Facebook posts falsely claim hydroxychloroquine can be homemade as treatment for Covid-19 Multiple Facebook posts shared in February 2021 claim police have detained discredited US researcher Judy Mikovits for \"discovering evidence that deadly retroviruses are transmitted through vaccines\". This is false: Mikovits has not been arrested in 2021. She was arrested and briefly jailed in 2011 for unlawfully taking data from her former employer, court documents show. The charges against her were dropped in 2012, according to US media reports. A 2009 study she co-authored on retroviruses did not focus on vaccines and was retracted. There are no credible reports that Mikovits has been detained in 2021. 766. Facebook posts falsely report 'arrest' of discredited US researcher who featured in 'Plandemic' video Multiple Facebook posts shared in February 2021 claim police have detained discredited US researcher Judy Mikovits for \"discovering evidence that deadly retroviruses are transmitted through vaccines\". This is false: Mikovits has not been arrested in 2021. She was arrested and briefly jailed in 2011 for unlawfully taking data from her former employer, court documents show. The charges against her were dropped in 2012, according to US media reports. A 2009 study she co-authored on retroviruses did not focus on vaccines and was retracted. There are no credible reports that Mikovits has been detained in 2021. 765. Article misleads on Merck’s decision to drop Covid-19 vaccines An article shared on social media claims US pharmaceutical company Merck discontinued Covid-19 vaccine research and said recovering from the virus would be more effective. This is inaccurate; the company said it scrapped its vaccine candidates because they did not offer the same level of protection as other shots and produced an immune response “inferior” to that of natural infection, while medical experts said immunization is the safer option. 764. Social media posts falsely claim old video shows Covid-19 vaccine side effects A video has been shared in multiple social media posts that claim it shows a girl suffering from severe side effects after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false: the clip has circulated since at least 2015 in reports about a girl in Kazakhstan who was admitted to hospital after being vaccinated for measles. 763. Social media posts mislead on reliability of Indonesia's Covid-19 breathalyser machines A video circulating on Facebook claims that coronavirus breathalyser tests can provide a Covid-19 result within 10 seconds at a 99.9 percent accuracy rate. The claim is misleading: the technology, known as GeNose C 19, can test for the disease within 45 seconds and has a 95 percent accuracy rate, according to its developers. The Indonesian government has warned GeNose tests should not replace PCR swab tests. 762. Doctor with expired license falsely claims masks don’t work A YouTube video and social media posts claim a man blowing vape smoke through various face masks shows that they do not help prevent the spread of coronavirus. This is false; experts agree that while the virus itself is small enough to fit through mask fibers -- as is vape smoke -- masks do help stop the much-larger respiratory droplets that carry potentially infectious particles, and multiple studies have indicated that masks reduce transmission of the virus causing Covid-19. 761. False social media posts claim WHO advised against wearing face masks in 2021, despite raging pandemic Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times in January 2021 claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has issued new advice against wearing face masks during the coronavirus pandemic. The posts contain a screenshot of an article that purports to report on a WHO press conference held on January 22, 2021. The claim is false: as of February 4, 2021, the WHO recommends that people should wear face masks during the pandemic, as well as adhering to social distancing guidelines and washing their hands regularly. The screenshot in the misleading posts shows an article published on January 25, 2021 that was later updated to include the WHO's latest advice, outlining how wearing face masks can provide some protection from the coronavirus for the general population. 760. Posts falsely claim face mask use harms children A post spreading on social media claims that wearing face masks to help stop the spread of Covid-19 will cause children physical and psychological problems. But medical and psychological experts say the claims it makes about masks are false, and the post is part of a larger disinformation campaign. 759. This video has circulated in reports since 2018 about a nurse trying to give a Chinese man an injection A video of a man crying in fear while a nurse attempts to give him an injection has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts alongside a claim that it shows Thailand's health minister receiving the Covid-19 vaccine. The claim is false: the video has circulated in reports since February 2018 about a nurse trying to give a man in China an injection. In the clip, the nurse and the man can be heard speaking Mandarin. 758. Clip from German TV programme circulates in misleading posts about coronavirus vaccines and Bill Gates As countries around the world scramble to roll out vaccination campaigns, a video showing computer-generated images of people being implanted with microchips is circulating online alongside warnings that Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates plans to \"obtain total control\" of the world through vaccination. This claim is misleading; the original clip is from a German TV report about coronavirus conspiracy theories. AFP has previously debunked similar claims about Gates and implants. 757. Posts mischaracterize WHO advice on coronavirus testing equipment Social media posts and online articles claim the World Health Organization admitted that PCR tests are resulting in widespread false positives for the virus that causes Covid-19, and asked laboratories to change the way they are conducted. But a January 2021 WHO notice only reminded labs to ensure testing equipment is properly calibrated, following reports of a small number of both false positive and negative results. 757. There’s no scientific proof that a tonic of onions, ginger, garlic and lemon can cure Covid-19 A video shared thousands of times on Facebook claims that a tonic made of onions, ginger, garlic, lemon and hot water can cure Covid-19. This is false; health professionals, including those at the World Health Organization (WHO), have repeatedly refuted these claims. 756. Pfizer’s CEO said he will get Covid-19 jab – when it’s his rightful turn An extract from a TV interview with Pfizer's chief executive Albert Bourla is being shared online alongside the claim that the head of the pharmaceutical giant refused to take the Covid-19 vaccine manufactured by his company because “my type is not recommended”. This is misleading; Bourla only said he will not jump the queue to get the shot. He will wait until his age group is eligible; current government guidelines prioritize high-risk individuals and seniors. 755. Video misleads on UK PM Boris Johnson’s comments about efficacy of Covid-19 testing A video of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson has been viewed thousands of times in multiple social media posts that show him saying Covid-19 testing “only works in seven per cent of the cases”. The posts were shared with a caption that reads: “COVID tests 93% inaccurate”. The claim is misleading: Johnson was not commenting on the overall efficacy of Covid-19 testing. The video shows him quoting a government report that states Covid-19 testing for people coming into the UK detected just seven per cent of cases on the first test. The report stated that between 85 and 98 per cent of cases were detected if a second Covid-19 test was given to returned travellers during their quarantine period. 754. Indonesian president’s Covid-19 jab remarks included in 2018 diphtheria vaccination video A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times on TikTok, Facebook and YouTube purports to show hundreds of children falling sick after receiving Covid-19 vaccines in Indonesia. The claim is false; the footage actually shows students who fell ill following a diphtheria jab in 2018; the audio in the video has been edited to include Indonesian President Joko Widodo's remarks about Covid-19 vaccines. 753. This video shows Indonesian students falling ill after being vaccinated for diphtheria in 2018 A video viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, YouTube and TikTok purports to show people fainting after receiving Covid-19 vaccines in Indonesia. The claim is false: the video in fact shows students getting sick after receiving diphtheria vaccines in Indonesia’s Madura island in 2018. 752. The US National Institutes of Health did not recommend ivermectin to treat Covid-19 patients A Facebook post claiming the anti-parasite drug ivermectin has been “officially recommended” by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to treat Covid-19 in the US has been shared more than 100 times in South Africa. The claim is false; the NIH confirmed to AFP Fact Check that there is not yet enough data to “recommend either for or against the use of ivermectin for the treatment of Covid-19” in the US. Furthermore, it is the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) that approves drugs in the US, not the NIH. 751. Debunked claim of children dying in Guinea from Covid-19 vaccine resurfaces A YouTube video shared hundreds of times has resurfaced with an old claim that two children in Guinea died after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. This is false; the video was based on a news report about Guinean children who fell ill in March 2019 after taking anti-parasite drugs. AFP Fact Check previously debunked this claim in May 2020, months before any Covid-19 vaccine contenders had been approved. 750. Facebook users in South Korea share misleading advice outlining 'how to refuse' Covid-19 vaccinations As South Korean lawmakers debate new legislation that would stipulate how Covid-19 vaccines should be administered in the country, some South Korean social media users shared posts which claimed citizens can refuse to be vaccinated based on two medical ethic codes. The claim, however, lacks important context: the two ethics codes — the Oath of Hippocrates and the Declaration of Geneva — do not relate to a patient’s rights and are not legally binding. The proposed Covid-19 vaccination bill in South Korea is set to include exemptions for people with \"special circumstances\", such as underlying diseases or allergies, according to a spokesperson for one lawmaker who proposed it. 749. Hall of Famer Hank Aaron’s death unrelated to Covid-19 vaccination Social media posts and an online article link Atlanta baseball legend Hank Aaron’s death to his Moderna Covid-19 vaccination, with some posts seeking to raise fears among Black people about the safety of vaccines against the disease. But the vaccines have been tested for safety, and a medical examiner as well as Morehouse School of Medicine, where Aaron was vaccinated, said his death was unrelated to the immunization. 748. Fraudulent Facebook posts claim the World Bank is giving loans to small businesses in Africa Facebook posts inviting small business owners impacted by Covid-19 in Africa to apply for loans from the World Bank through the International Finance Corporation (IFC) have been shared hundreds of times. But the claim is false; the World Bank confirmed to AFP Fact Check that the posts emanated from fraudulent accounts linked to cybercrime attacks targeting the institution. 747. Social media posts misrepresent Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccinations in Germany A screenshot of an article about the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine being administered in Germany has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts that emphasise ten people died after receiving a vaccine dose. The posts present the vaccine drive in a misleading context: multiple medical experts have said the current evidence indicates the deaths were not directly linked to the vaccines. As of January 27, 2021, scientists say there is no evidence that links the deaths with Covid-19 vaccines. 746. Sri Lankan social media users share misleading posts about cremations of Covid-19 fatalities in US Multiple Facebook posts shared by Sri Lankan social media users in January 2021 claim that California's Los Angeles County suspended cremations for people who have died after contracting Covid-19. The posts circulated online after the Sri Lankan government faced criticism for mandating cremations for Covid-19 fatalities, rejecting calls to allow the Muslim minority to bury their dead in line with Islamic custom. The claim is misleading: the posts refer to a CNN article that accurately stated a cremation limit in Los Angeles County was in fact temporarily suspended due to a \"backlog\" of bodies. 745. Indian ruling party members amplify false claim that 'Indian Muslim cleric warned of vaccine microchip conspiracy' A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook and YouTube posts that claim it shows an Indian Muslim cleric talking about a mind-controlling microchip injected through Covid-19 vaccinations. The video was promoted online by official spokesmen for India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who mocked the cleric in their tweets. The claim that the man speaking in the video is an Indian Muslim cleric, however, is false: the video has circulated in reports about a cleric in Pakistan. Health experts have refuted the cleric's suggestions about Covid-19 vaccines. 744. Social media posts mislead on Pfizer-BioNTech vaccinations in Norway Multiple Facebook posts shared repeatedly in January 2021 claim 23 people are “dead from” the Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine in Norway. The claim is misleading: as of January 22, 2021, health authorities in Norway have said there was no direct causal link between the deaths and the Covid-19 vaccinations. 743. False claim that Covid-19 is not real misattributed to US professor Social media posts and an online article claim a Cornell University professor said seven university labs are suing US health authorities for fraud after determining that Covid-19 does not exist. This is false; Covid-19 is a contagious disease that has killed more than two million people worldwide, Professor Robert Oswald described the comments attributed to him as a “fabrication,” and the universities identified by name said they are not involved in such a lawsuit. 742. These photos show a doctor in Yemen offering free services from his car during the pandemic Two images have been shared alongside a claim that they show a doctor in Pakistan offering free treatment to those in need. The photos appear to show a message in Urdu advertising the free services on the back of his car. The images, however, have been altered; the photos in fact show a doctor in Yemen and the original message on the car is in Arabic. 741. This video actually shows a simulation exercise in Indonesia, not a real Covid-19 vaccination A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times after being posted on Facebook, YouTube and TikTok alongside a claim that it shows a man fainting after receiving the Covid-19 vaccine in Indonesia’s West Nusa Tenggara province. The claim is false: the footage actually shows a vaccine simulation exercise in East Nusa Tenggara province; a government official said that the exercise included \"a simulation on how to handle a person who suddenly faints\". 740. False Facebook posts claim WHO ranked Sri Lanka 'fifth best country for Covid-19 pandemic response' Multiple Facebook posts claim the World Health Organization (WHO) ranked Sri Lanka fifth in a table of countries' responses to the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false: the WHO said it had not created any such ranking system. 739. Discredited US naturopath makes false claims about Gates A 2019 video has resurfaced in South Africa with claims by a discredited US naturopath that billionaire Bill Gates said the world should be depopulated of billions of people, starting in Africa. However, there is no public record of Gates making these remarks. Since the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Microsoft founder -- who has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into the fight against the novel coronavirus -- has been the target of many false or misleading allegations, including about forced population control. His foundation has repeatedly refuted these claims, which have also been debunked by AFP Fact Check. 738. Footage of movie props and flu shot clips used to falsely claim world leaders' Covid-19 vaccines were 'staged' A video has been viewed thousands of times in Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts that claim it shows a man explaining how retractable syringes are used to stage the Covid-19 vaccinations of world leaders. The claim is false: the footage of a retractable syringe has been taken from the TikTok account of a movie prop master. Two of the other clips used in the misleading video actually show public figures getting flu vaccines in 2019. 737. Doctored news graphic falsely claims Filipino official branded poor people a ‘burden’ in coronavirus vaccination drive A photo repeatedly shared on Facebook purports to show a news graphic containing genuine remarks by a Philippine presidential spokesperson that poor people are a “burden” on the government's coronavirus vaccination efforts. The claim is false: the purported graphic has been doctored to add the fabricated remarks about the poor. 736. Social media posts mislead on South Korean coronavirus vaccine Social media posts claim the South Korean government will provide all citizens with a free Covid-19 vaccine made by pharmaceutical giant Celltrion. The claim is false; Celltrion told AFP that it is not developing or producing a Covid-19 vaccine and has no plans to do so. 735. Anti-parasite medication ivermectin is not a scientifically proven treatment for Covid-19 As Covid-19 vaccination campaigns roll out across the world, posts circulating on social media in several countries claim that anti-parasite medication ivermectin is a “miracle drug” that cures the disease. This is misleading: as of January 14, 2021, the drug has not been scientifically proven as a prevention or treatment for Covid-19. Several scientists told AFP it should not be touted as a “cure” or “miracle drug”. 734. False social media posts purport to share coronavirus 'cure' from Thai hospital dean A video has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows the dean of Thailand’s Siriraj Hospital recommending certain treatments for Covid-19, including taking \"3,000-5,000 mg\" of vitamin C each day. The claim is false; the man in the misleading footage is not Siriraj hospital’s dean. Health experts warn against following the purported advice in the video. 733. Image of hoax poster from Irish health service circulates online as Covid-19 cases soar As coronavirus cases surge in Ireland, a picture of a poster that appears to be from the national health service asking people to report their neighbours for not wearing a mask has been circulating on Facebook around the world. The image is a hoax; the poster lists an old fax number for the Irish Times newspaper and Ireland’s Health Services said they did not issue it. 732. South African newspaper clarifies it used photo of British woman receiving Covid-19 vaccine in satirical article Screenshots of two news reports have been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts that claim they show a woman receiving a Covid-19 vaccine in the UK and South Africa. The posts suggest the image has been staged by the media to mislead the public about the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false: the British woman pictured in the posts received a Covid-19 vaccine in England in December 2020, according to a Getty Images photo. The other screenshot in the posts shows a satirical article from a South African newspaper about a woman receiving the vaccine in the South African town of Ventersdorp that was “not meant to be interpreted literally\", its editor-in-chief told AFP. 731. Non-medical masks can offer some protection against Covid-19, scientists say As Covid-19 cases surge in Thailand, claims that non-medical masks are ineffective in preventing the spread of the disease are circulating online. This is misleading: scientists told AFP that these masks offer some form of protection. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and World Health Organization (WHO) recommend non-medical or fabric masks for the general public. 730. Researcher’s speech used to mislead about Covid-19 vaccine safety A speech by a biomedical researcher stating that 21 percent of patients from the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine trial have experienced “serious adverse events” has been shared thousands of times on social media. But he is referencing data from phase 1 of the vaccine trial, in which researchers did not identify “trial-limiting safety concerns,” and only 0.5 percent of vaccine recipients reported serious reactions in the phase 3 trial, which involved thousands of people. 729. This video of Indonesian officials dancing was taken before the country detected its first Covid-19 case A video viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook purports to show Indonesia’s top officials “dancing without obeying health protocols” during the pandemic. The claim is false; the video was filmed in January 2020, weeks before Indonesia announced its first Covid-19 case. 728. Potassium chloride in Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine is not dangerous Social media posts claim the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine is “poison” because it contains potassium chloride -- a chemical also used to stop the heart during a process of lethal injection. The claim is false; the coronavirus vaccine was tested for safety in clinical trials, and medical experts say the minimal amount of potassium chloride used in the shot will not harm recipients. 727. Article headline misleads on study into Covid-19 asymptomatic transmission A screenshot of an article headline reporting that a study showed that asymptomatic transmission of Covid-19 “didn’t occur at all” has been shared in multiple Facebook and Instagram posts. The claim is misleading; the authors of the study said their results do not show that asymptomatic carriers cannot transmit Covid-19 and warned against generalising the study’s findings. 726. South Korean officials set to investigate nasal dilator over unproven Covid-19 prevention claim Multiple posts circulating on South Korean social media advertise a nasal dilator that can \"prevent and kill\" Covid-19. However, South Korea’s Ministry of Food and Drug Safety said it was planning to investigate the product, which is certified to protect against bacteria, not viruses. 725. This video shows Thai king and queen attending a Koran recitation competition A footage has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows the king of Thailand summoned Muslim clerics to pray to get rid of Covid-19. The claim is false; the video shows Thai King Maha Vajiralongkorn and Queen Suthida presiding over the annual Koran recitation competition in 2020. 724. This video shows people in a coronavirus quarantine centre in Malaysia, not Thailand A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook that claims it shows Covid-19 patients in a Thai field hospital after a coronavirus outbreak in the Thai province of Samut Sakhon in December 2020. The claim is false; the video shows a Covid-19 quarantine centre for migrants in the Malaysian state of Pahang. 723. Doctored video shared alongside false claim that Filipino official 'beat man for violating coronavirus restrictions' A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and blog posts alongside a claim it shows a Filipino official beating a man after he violated coronavirus restrictions. The claim is false: the clip has been doctored to include a Tagalog-language audio track. The original video has circulated in unrelated reports about police violence in Colombia. 722. This video circulated online in 2019 in reports about Indian celebrities celebrating a Hindu festival Footage of celebrities and politicians attending an event at the home of an Indian billionaire has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts in December 2020 alongside a claim that the gathering breached social distancing regulations during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video and similar footage has circulated since September 2019 in reports about celebrities attending a Hindu festival celebration. 721. Old photo of South Korean president’s son shared alongside misleading mask claim A photo of South Korean President Moon Jae-in’s son has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook in December 2020 alongside a claim that it shows him violating social distancing measures by attending an art exhibition without wearing a mask. The photo has been shared in a misleading context: the image was taken in October 2020 at a press event for an art gallery where wearing masks was not mandatory, according to the South Korean health ministry’s guidelines at that time. 720. This video shares a misleading claim from an Austrian politician that 'Coca-Cola tested positive for Covid-19' A video of an Austrian politician purporting to show that a glass of Coca-Cola tested positive for Covid-19 in a rapid antigen test has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. The posts suggest the video is evidence that the tests are unreliable at detecting Covid-19. The claim is misleading; experts told AFP the test carried out by the politician in the clip was not performed correctly. In response to the misleading claim, the manufacturer of the rapid antigen test said the same test actually returned a negative result for Coca-Cola when performed correctly. 719. This photo has circulated online since 2019 in reports about gun violence -- it does not relate to the coronavirus pandemic An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts that claim it shows a television report about violence breaking out at a US hospital after patients were vaccinated against the novel coronavirus. The claim is false: the photo in the purported report has circulated online since February 2019 in reports about US gun violence, one year before the coronavirus pandemic. The image has been manipulated for comedic effect to include a false chyron and has been shared on joke websites. 718. Tweets on US stimulus misrepresent Canada's Covid-19 aid A tweet claiming Canadians were given $2,000 a month by the government during the Covid-19 pandemic was shared across social media in posts criticizing the US Congress for backing a one-time $600 stimulus payment for most Americans. But the tweet misrepresents the relief available in Canada, where most financial support was reserved for individuals who lost their jobs due to the public health crisis. 717. Pelosi, Pence did not fake Covid-19 vaccinations using capped needles Social media posts claim US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and US Vice President Mike Pence pretended to receive Covid-19 vaccines using syringes that had caps over the needles. This is false; images of the two politicians being vaccinated show that the needles were uncovered when the shots were administered. 716. Needle not capped when Pence received Covid-19 vaccine Social media posts claim US Vice President Mike Pence faked receiving a Covid-19 vaccine using a syringe that had the needle covered by a cap. This is false; an image of Pence being vaccinated shows that the needle was exposed. 715. Canadian doctor’s open letter about Covid-19 contains false claims An open letter to Alberta’s premier by former heart surgeon Dennis L Modry has been shared on social media as the Canadian province enacted stricter measures aimed at curbing the Covid-19 pandemic. But medical experts say several claims in the letter are false or unproven, and Modry is not currently licensed to practice, according to the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Alberta. 714. AFP photo of 2018 World Cup celebrations shared online alongside false claim about Covid-19 protest in Paris An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows a major protest in Paris against coronavirus restrictions in December 2020. The claim is false; the image, taken by an AFP photographer, actually shows celebrations in Paris following France’s World Cup win in 2018. 713. Nurse’s collapse does not mean Covid-19 vaccines are unsafe Social media posts say a nurse collapsed after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine, seeking to raise doubts about its safety. But the nurse has a history of passing out, and a doctor said there is no reason to believe the vaccine itself was responsible. 712. Social media posts share false claim that South Korea’s Covid-19 frontline workers are paid $13 daily wage Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook claim that South Korean frontline health workers are paid US $13.35 (14,600 South Korean won) per day during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; South Korea's Health Ministry told AFP that the figure is a subsidy paid to frontline workers, not their total wage. 711. Social media posts inaccurately compare Covid-19 vaccines to 1950s-era drug Social media posts warn of rapidly developed pharmaceuticals such as the Covid-19 vaccines by citing thalidomide, a sedative from the 1950s that caused serious birth defects. But the US regulator responsible for approving drugs did not accept thalidomide at the time, regulations have been considerably tightened since, and Covid-19 vaccines are the result of extensive research and were subject to clinical trials and independent review. 710. US medical association did not change stance on hydroxychloroquine as Covid-19 treatment American conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh claims the American Medical Association (AMA) admitted it “lied” about hydroxychloroquine and rescinded a recommendation against using it to treat Covid-19. This is false; the AMA said it stands by its previous position -- which was not a blanket advisory against using the drug for that purpose -- and its original statement on the issue still appears on the organization’s website. 709. US medical association did not change stance on hydroxychloroquine as Covid-19 treatment American conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh claims the American Medical Association (AMA) admitted it “lied” about hydroxychloroquine and rescinded a recommendation against using it to treat Covid-19. This is false; the AMA said it stands by its previous position -- which was not a blanket advisory against using the drug for that purpose -- and its original statement on the issue still appears on the organization’s website. 708. Video makes misleading claims about Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine trial A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on YouTube and Facebook alongside a claim that two people died during trials for Pfizer-BioNTech’s Covid-19 vaccine, according to US government records. The claim is misleading; the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) document referred to in the posts states that while six participants died during the trials, investigators found none of the deaths were related to the vaccine. 707. This image shows a satirical article about the Pope and the Covid-19 vaccine An image has been circulated on social media that purports to show a genuine news article about Pope Francis announcing that people must receive the Covid-19 vaccine in order to enter heaven. The posts, shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts, criticise the Pope's alleged comments. But the image in the posts is actually a screenshot of a satirical article; as of December 9, 2020 there are no credible reports of Pope Francis making such a statement. 706. Online posts minimize Covid-19’s deadly impact in US Social media posts downplay the impact of the coronavirus pandemic by comparing a partial 2020 US death toll with higher numbers from previous years. But the 2020 statistics cited in the posts are not the final figures, and Covid-19 has killed more than 285,000 people in the country this year. 705. These ‘anti-virus’ cards are ineffective in preventing Covid-19 infection, experts say Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook purport to show a “virus removal card” that can prevent infection from Covid-19 when worn around the neck. The claim is misleading; scientists told AFP that the cards are not effective in protecting the wearer from Covid-19. 704. This video shows a procession for a politician shot dead in Mumbai A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts which claim it shows a large funeral procession in Gujarat for an Indian politician who died after contracting Covid-19. The claim is false; the video actually shows a procession for an Indian politician in the Indian state of Maharashtra after he was shot dead in November 2020. 703. These photos of coffins have been doctored to include Sri Lankan opposition party symbols Two photos have been shared repeatedly on Facebook alongside a claim they show coffins donated by a Sri Lankan opposition party for victims of the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the photos have been manipulated to include Sri Lankan opposition party symbols on the coffins; a spokesperson for the party denied it had made such a donation. 702. This is not a genuine newspaper article about a Sri Lankan opposition leader A purported screenshot of a Sinhala-language newspaper has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a quote from a Sri Lankan opposition leader, stating he has no faith in an alleged traditional medicine “cure” for Covid-19. The posts circulated online shortly after a Sri Lankan doctor of traditional medicine said he had found a “cure” for Covid-19. However, the claim is misleading; AFP could not locate the purported article in the newspaper’s archives, and a spokesperson for the newspaper said the purported article was doctored. As of December 3, 2020, there is no universally recognised “cure” for Covid-19. 701. Retired Italian doctor’s false claims about Covid-19 tests and vaccines circulate globally online A viral video of a retired Italian doctor making several false claims about Covid-19 has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple languages on Facebook. The false claims include; PCR tests are ineffective at detecting the virus; and vaccines can “weaken” someone’s immune system. The claims are false according to experts, who say PCR tests are “sensitive and accurate” and the vaccine has not been shown to lead to a weakened immune system. 700. Korean social media posts share misleading claim about China-made coronavirus vaccines after Chinese foreign minister's visit Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook claim that South Korean President Moon Jae-in announced the country had procured enough doses of China-made Covid-19 vaccines to vaccinate 45 million people. The posts, which circulated online in late November 2020, allege the agreement is a direct result of Chinese foreign minister Wang Yi’s state visit to Seoul last month. The claim is misleading; official South Korean government records of bilateral meetings held with Wang make no reference to vaccines; as of December 3, 2020, there are no credible media or government reports that say South Korea has acquired China-made vaccines following Wang’s visit. 699. These photos show people being vaccinated against diphtheria in Peru A collage of three photos has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook alongside a claim that it shows Peruvian authorities administering \"forced\" vaccinations. The images circulated online in November 2020, as countries around the world raced to procure Covid-19 vaccines. The claim is false; the photos show doctors, accompanied by military personnel, vaccinating people against diphtheria in Peru. 698. This photo shows an Indian politician celebrating Diwali in 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic A photo of an Indian politician celebrating Diwali with lit sparklers has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows him flouting coronavirus restrictions in November 2020. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows the politician celebrating Diwali in October 2019, before the coronavirus pandemic. 697. Experts refute false claim that Covid-19 vaccine can 'manipulate' human genes A claim that a vaccine “stored at -80 degrees isn’t a vaccine” and is instead a “living transfection agent” that will cause “genetic manipulation” has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook. The claim is false; multiple experts say the Covid-19 vaccine that requires storage at extremely cold temperatures cannot alter human genomes. 696. Canadian doctor falsely claims pandemic is a ‘hoax’ Facebook posts of a doctor calling the Covid-19 pandemic a “hoax” in remarks to the Edmonton City Council have been shared thousands of times since November 13, 2020. Contrary to accepted medical advice, Roger Hodkinson falsely claimed masks and social distancing are useless, in remarks refuted by Canadian authorities and medical experts. 695. Stock photo of actors posing as medical workers shared in misleading Facebook posts promoting coronavirus pandemic denial A stock photo of two actors posing as medical workers while carrying a fake body bag has been shared hundreds of times in misleading Facebook posts which promote coronavirus pandemic denial. The original photo agency that licensed the image clearly labelled it as a staged photo. 694. Bill Gates was talking about side effects and did not say 700,000 people would be killed or permanently disabled by a Covid-19 vaccine An article shared thousands of times on Facebook claimed that Microsoft founder Bill Gates said there will be 700,000 “victims” of death or disability from a Covid-19 vaccine. This claim is misleading; in an interview earlier this year, Gates said the side effects of a vaccine potentially could affect up to 700,000 people. But at no point did he say these side effects would be fatal or cause permanent damage. 693. Misleading viral posts shared in Myanmar warn of 'Zombie deer virus' outbreak after Covid-19 spike Multiple Facebook posts shared in Myanmar claim that health experts have expressed “great concern” over a “Zombie deer virus” which they claim is “scarier than the coronavirus” and can spread among deer. The posts, which circulated online weeks after a spike in coronavirus cases in Myanmar, go on to claim the virus affects brain activity in the infected deer, increasing the animal's “desire to attack [humans]” and to “suck blood”. The claim is misleading; experts say there is no such virus that causes deer to “attack” or “suck blood”; as of November 2020, there are no reports of animal to human transmission of neurological diseases affecting deer, including chronic wasting disease (CWD). 692. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa didn't tell world leaders Covid-19 vaccines will be mandatory Posts shared on Facebook claim that South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa told a G20 meeting that a Covid-19 vaccine would be mandatory and “everyone will have” it. This is false; Ramaphosa was actually asking leaders to ensure that all countries would have access to the new vaccines once they become available. 691. The UAE’s temporary suspension of visas for Pakistanis is due to Covid-19, Pakistan says Multiple TikTok and YouTube videos viewed thousands of times claim the United Arab Emirates stopped issuing visas for Pakistanis and other nationals of Muslim countries because of their continued refusal to recognise the state of Israel. The claim, however, is misleading; the UAE’s suspension of visitor visas from 12 countries, including Pakistan, in mid-November 2020 was because of their high rates of Covid-19, according to Pakistan’s Foreign Minister. Online users accused president-elect Joe Biden of hypocrisy after Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms tweeted a video of them unmasked at an indoor party for his birthday. This is misleading; the video was shot at Biden’s birthday in 2019, before the pandemic. The former vice-president is known to always wear a mask in public, and for urging the country to mask-up. 689. Hoax circulates online that Afghanistan announced $30 million Covid-19 aid package for Pakistan An image of a purported news report by a Pakistani broadcaster has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter in November 2020 alongside a claim that Afghanistan announced a $30 million aid package for Pakistan to support the country during the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim is false; the Pakistani broadcaster whose logo was shown in the posts told AFP it had not aired the purported segment; the Pakistani government also said the claim was “fake news”. 688. This video has circulated in reports since 2018 about a crowded railway station in West Bengal A video that shows a huge crowd on a railway station platform has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter that claim the scene was filmed in the Indian city of Kolkata in November 2020. The posts claim train passengers breached social distancing guidelines following the resumption of local railway services. The claim is false; the video has circulated online since September 2018 in reports about police exam candidates at a train station in the northeastern Indian state of West Bengal. 687. Scientists warn against over-the-counter coronavirus ‘cures’ As vaccine trials show promising results that could eventually suppress coronavirus infections across the globe, social media posts are claiming that over-the-counter products such as vitamins and tonic water are the key to tackling the pandemic. The touting of unproven “cures” has been a feature since the start of the coronavirus crisis, but nothing has changed over time regarding their effectiveness and scientists stress none of the mentioned products have been effective in treating Covid-19. 686. Claims of pandemic spike in suicides are not backed by data Posts spread by celebrities and liked about 250,000 times on Instagram claim suicides have risen 200 percent since pandemic-linked lockdowns in America began. This is false; there is no data to support such a statement, the timing of which coincides with new restrictions against record coronavirus cases as the US enters winter. 685. Scam alert: Africa’s richest man is not running a Facebook giveaway for youths affected by Covid-19 Widely-shared posts on Facebook claim that Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote, is giving away money, food and other assistance to 10,000 youths who have lost loved ones to the Covid-19 pandemic. This is misleading; the Nigerian billionaire has committed hundreds of millions of naira to help Nigerians recover from the health and economic effects of Covid-19, but he is not running a giveaway on Facebook. 684. Report falsely claims that US health protection agency ‘admits’ Covid-19 does not exist A photo of an article reporting that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) “admits there is no Covid-19” has been shared in multiple Facebook posts. The report cites an agency document which explains how a virus test works as its source. The claim is false: a US pathology expert said the CDC document was misinterpreted, stating that “there is no question” Covid-19 exists. 683. Pfizer’s role in Operation Warp Speed misconstrued online News of promising results from a coronavirus vaccine developed by pharmaceutical giant Pfizer sparked misinformation about the company’s role in the Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed, an effort to deliver a Covid-19 shot nationwide. While Pfizer benefited from the government's vaccine fund, this was to supply and distribute the vaccine, not to develop it. 682. This photo shows a mother who tested positive for Covid-19 in Myanmar, according to photographer A photo that shows a health worker carrying a baby while a tearful woman looks on has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts that suggest it shows the separation of a mother from her baby in Sri Lanka. The claim, however, is misleading; the photo in fact shows a mother in Myanmar who tested postive for Covid-19, according to the photographer and a local health worker. 681. This photo has circulated online in Facebook posts about Sri Lanka since March 2020 An image of two lorries transporting coffins has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows preparations for Sri Lanka’s second wave of coronavirus cases in November 2020. The claim is misleading; the photo has been circulating online since at least March 2020. 680. This video has circulated in reports about a woman arrested for allegedly assaulting a stranger in Singapore A video that shows police detaining a woman on a street has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and online forums alongside a claim she was arrested for not wearing a mask during the coronavirus pandemic in Singapore. The video, however, has been shared in a misleading context; it has circulated online in reports since October 2020 about a woman who was arrested for allegedly assaulting a stranger in Singapore. 679. Misleading claim circulates in Burmese about WHO ‘designating’ Russia’s Covid-19 vaccine as official inoculation A Burmese-language blog post, which has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, claims that the World Health Organization (WHO) has designated the Russian Covid-19 vaccine as the official inoculation against the coronavirus. The claim is misleading: the WHO has not designated any Covid-19 vaccine. 678. Mystery Covid-19 test result rumor fuels claims Canada figures inflated A Facebook post describing a person in Canada who was allegedly diagnosed with Covid-19 after cancelling a swab appointment is circulating online amid claims that the number of infections is inflated. The Alberta government said any such situation, if they occur, should be reported to the province for investigation, and an expert said the government is likely undercounting Covid-19 cases. 677. This video shows a scene from a Mexican television drama that aired in 2010 A video of a couple together in hospital has been shared in multiple Facebook, YouTube and TikTok posts alongside a claim that the individuals are Italian Covid-19 victims. This is false; the video in fact shows a scene from a Mexican television drama that aired in 2010. 676. This photo was taken as part of a themed photoshoot in India A photo purporting to show exhausted health workers in full personal protective equipment has been shared multiple times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows overworked frontline workers in Sri Lanka “at this point in time”. However, the claim is false; the photo was actually taken in the southern Indian state of Kerala as part of a themed photoshoot. 675. WHO head did not say he tested positive for Covid-19, only that he was quarantining after a contact tested positive Reports in Nigerian media claiming that the World Health Organization’s (WHO) director-general said he had tested positive for Covid-19 were shared in multiple social media posts in the country. However, it is not what Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus actually said, as the article itself goes on to explain: He tweeted that he was identified as a contact person of someone who had tested positive -- not that he had tested positive himself. 674. Facebook posts make misleading claim that 220,000 coronavirus fatalities in US were caused by other medical conditions Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim the US Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has reported that 220,000 people who were recorded as dying from Covid-19 actually died from other medical conditions. The CDC data referenced in the posts has been presented in a misleading context; the data shows medical conditions that may have contributed to the deaths of people infected with Covid-19, as well as co-morbidities such as pneumonia that were caused by Covid-19. 673. Flu and Covid-19 tracked separately in Canada Facebook and Instagram posts in Canada are sharing a chart showing only six reported cases of the flu for this season alongside claims that the government is falsely passing off flu cases as Covid-19. The claims are false; influenza and Covid-19 are tested, tracked and reported separately by the provinces and territories, and public health measures against the novel coronavirus have also contributed to fewer flu cases than usual. 672. Experts say wearing face masks does not cause neurological damage Posts based on a video by a German neurologist have been shared thousands of times on Facebook making several claims about the alleged dangers of wearing face masks, notably that rebreathing oxygen in the mask leads to neurological damage. According to experts, this is false, since these masks allow fresh air to pass through and oxygen to be inhaled. 671. Hoax circulates online that Sri Lankan opposition party offered quarantine facilities in coronavirus hotspots Multiple Facebook posts shared repeatedly in October 2020 claim that a Sri Lankan opposition party offered quarantine facilities and financial support for those infected with the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; on October 20, 2020, a spokesperson for the party told AFP it had made no such announcement. 670. Bacterial pneumonia, a complication of influenza, not linked to mask wearing A claim posted on Twitter says that most deaths in the 1918 influenza pandemic originated from bacterial pneumonia caused by face masks and that Dr Anthony Fauci, the US government’s top expert in the fight against Covid-19, knew about it. This is false; the 2008 study referred to in the tweet, and which Fauci co-authored, aimed to help plan for future pandemics and made no link to mask-wearing. 669. False claim circulates online that British research company Ipsos MORI derives its name from Latin for ‘they die’ Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claim that Ipsos MORI, a British market research company investigating novel coronavirus testing in the UK, derives its name from a Latin phrase that translates as \"they die\". The posts suggest the translation reveals the company’s “motives” during the pandemic. The claim is false: the company’s name derives from two other companies which merged in 2005, 15 years before the pandemic was declared. 668. This satirical video was made in 2020 using old black and white movie clips A video supposedly made in 1956 that warns of a deadly virus that will spread from “somewhere in Asia to the rest of the world” by “the year 2020” has been shared on Facebook thousands of times alongside a claim it accurately predicted the Covid-19 pandemic. The claim is false; the video creator told AFP it was made in 2020 for satire, in response to Covid-19 misinformation. An alleged leak from a Liberal Party of Canada member about a government coronavirus “road map,” including restriction of movement and military deployment, has been shared thousands of times on Facebook. The posts are false; the Liberal Party confirmed that the “Strategic Committee” referenced in the posts does not exist, and an expert on disinformation cautioned that this kind of information should be met with skepticism. 666. Facebook posts promote false conspiracy that coronavirus testing patent was submitted in 2015 Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim that a person named Richard A. Rothschild filed a patent for novel coronavirus tests in 2015. The claim is false; the image shows a supplemental application that was filed in 2020 following the submission of another patent application in 2015 that was not related to the coronavirus; a spokesperson for the financial services firm Rothschild & Co. said the patent’s applicant had no link to the company. 665. Misleading claim circulates online that suspected coronavirus patients fled bus after road accident in Sri Lanka A photo has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts and in an online article alongside a claim it shows suspected coronavirus patients fleeing a quarantine centre-bound bus after a road accident in Sri Lanka. The claim, however, is misleading; law enforcement and health officials said no one left the vehicle after the accident on October 9, 2020 and all passengers were transported to the quarantine centre. 664. Misleading description of Canada’s quarantine sites feeds Covid-19 conspiracy After an Ontario politician condemned the Canadian federal government’s Covid-19 quarantine sites as “internment camps,” social media posts suggested that these sites would eventually be used to jail Canadians. This is false; the sites are facilities rented by the federal government for travellers who have no alternative for mandatory quarantine, Health Canada told AFP. 663. New hoax shared in Sri Lanka suggests WHO approved water, salt and vinegar remedy for coronavirus Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Instagram and Facebook in Sri Lanka claim that drinking lots of water or gargling warm water mixed with salt and vinegar can prevent novel coronavirus infection. The claim was shared alongside an image that shows a World Health Organization (WHO) logo. The claim is false; no international health body, including the WHO, has issued such guidance about Covid-19. 662. WHO did not say Bill Gates adds sterilisation formula to vaccines Multiple social media posts make a string of false and unsubstantiated claims about vaccine campaigns funded by billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates, including that he has been adding a 'sterilization formula' to vaccines for the past decade. AFP Fact Check debunks the main claims making the rounds. 661. Doctored photo telling Africans to avoid Covid-19 vaccine circulates online A photo showing a doctor holding up a sign has been making rounds on social networks with claims he is urging Africans to refuse the Covid-19 vaccine. This is false; the image was doctored and the original photo shows a medic holding a sign asking people to stay home to prevent the spread of the virus. 660. Misleading claim circulates online about infection fatality ratio of Covid-19 in the US Multiple Facebook and Instagram posts have shared a screenshot of a Fox News graphic that purports to show infection fatality ratios in the United States for the novel coronavirus, based on various age groups. The graphic was shared alongside a claim that there was \"never a pandemic\". The graphic, however, is not accurate and has been shared in a misleading context; Fox News said the figures were “shown in error” on air as percentages rather than ratios; a health metrics expert said the values aired by Fox News are not accurate. 659. Patients are not getting coronavirus from the flu shot Instagram posts claim that the influenza vaccine will give patients the coronavirus. This is false; the chart provided as evidence is from a study which did not find that the flu shot is spreading the deadly virus, and Immunize Canada and the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control (BCCDC) said larger, multiseason studies found no evidence that the vaccine increases coronavirus risk. 658. Misinformation targets New Jersey flu vaccine mandate plan Instagram posts opposing a proposed New Jersey law to mandate the influenza vaccine for students claim that the immunization raises one’s risk of coronavirus infection. Large studies in the US and Canada found no evidence that flu shots increase the odds of contracting a coronavirus, and public health agencies recommend the inoculation to help prevent serious illness, as well as to avoid additional burdens on health care systems during the Covid-19 pandemic. 657. Image of 'bacteria growth from face mask' is misleading, microbiologists say An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Instagram posts that claim it shows bacteria growth that was collected from a face mask after a person wore it for just 20 minutes. The claim is misleading; microbiologists told AFP that the growth seen in the petri dish had likely \"been incubating for a long time\" and shows other microbes, not just bacteria from a face mask. 656. Video of South African bikers falsely shared as footage of prayer for Trump’s health A video showing hundreds of bikers, apparently gathered in prayer for Donald Trump, was shared tens of thousands of times on social media -- including by a campaign staffer -- after the US president was hospitalized for Covid-19. This is false; the footage was taken in South Africa, not the United States, more than a month earlier, and the bikers were protesting farm murders. 655. False claim circulates on Facebook in Myanmar that chewing betel quid can prevent Covid-19 infection Multiple Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times claim that chewing betel quids can prevent infection from the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease Covid-19. The claim is false, health experts say; representatives for Myanmar’s Ministry of Health and Sport and the European Food Safety Authority both separately told AFP that the claim was not true. 654. Alberta’s health laws used to make misleading claims about mandatory vaccination during Covid-19 pandemic Posts shared more than 10,000 times in Canada have claimed that recent changes to Alberta's health statutes will bring in forced medical isolation and vaccination. This is misleading; giving power to medical officers to prevent the spread of communicable diseases is not new, according to a legal expert, and Alberta’s premier, health minister and chief medical officer do not support mandatory vaccination. 653. CDC did not give contradictory advice on mask use for smoke, Covid-19 Social media posts claim the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) contradicted itself by advising people to wear cloth masks against the novel coronavirus while also saying masks do not stop smoke inhalation during a wildfire. These claims are misleading; the agency explained that a mask is recommended to contain respiratory droplets, which are larger than smoke particles. 652. These drugs are COVID-19 treatments, not vaccines, and they are available in Western countries Photos of alleged Covid-19 “vaccines” are being shared on social media with claims that the drugs are not for sale in the US, Canada, and the European Union because they are unsafe and still undergoing testing in developing countries. This is false: these products are not vaccines. They are generic forms of remdesivir, an anti-viral drug recommended for the treatment of Covid-19 and which is sold under a different name in developed markets. 651. This video shows a Shiite leader in Iran marking the holy day of Ashura during the Covid-19 pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, a top Shiite leader in Iraq, meeting with a crowd of worshippers on an Islamic holiday despite the risk of coronavirus infection. The claim, however, is false; the footage actually shows Grand Ayatollah Sayid Sadiq Shirazi, a Shiite leader in Iran, observing the Islamic holiday of Ashura in August 2020. 650. Poster shared in South Africa makes false claims about face masks A poster that makes multiple claims about the use and legality of face masks during the novel coronavirus pandemic has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook in South Africa. It comes after a high court ruled in June that the country’s lockdown laws were unconstitutional. But the regulations remain in place and masks are still mandatory in public pending the outcome of the government’s appeal, experts say. The poster also makes a series of other claims previously debunked by AFP Fact Check. 649. Seasonal flu vaccines are safe, needed during Covid-19 pandemic Instagram posts and a video shared on Facebook claim that the influenza vaccine Fluzone is more deadly than Covid-19. This is false; the posts have misinterpreted data on the immunization, and the Public Health Agency of Canada said flu vaccines are a safe, important means of preventing illness and avoiding additional burdens being placed on the health care system during the coronavirus pandemic. 648. This video shows the filming of a music video in Moscow A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows 200 bodies of dead novel coronavirus victims being lowered into a garbage truck in Russia. The claim is false; the clip shows the filming of a rap music video in the Russian capital of Moscow. 647. Australian state leader misquoted in misleading Facebook posts which shared satirical article as fact An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a genuine quote from Australian politician Daniel Andrews, the current Premier in the state of Victoria. The claim is misleading; the purported quote originated in a satirical article published on September 15, 2020; in response to the misleading posts on September 21, the Victorian government separately denied Andrews made the purported remarks. 646. AFP photo of Indian migrant workers leaving Delhi falsely circulated as 'Myanmar people fleeing to Thailand after coronavirus outbreak' Five photos have been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim they show people fleeing Myanmar and crossing the border to Thailand because of the coronavirus. The claim is false: two of the images -- one of which was taken by AFP -- actually show Indian migrant workers leaving Delhi during a government-imposed nationwide lockdown in March 2020. Other photos used in the misleading post have circulated in Thai media reports about border control measures. 645. False claim circulates online that Australian TV network predicted coronavirus cases in state of Victoria An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Instagram posts that claim it shows Australian television network 7 News accurately predicted coronavirus case numbers for the state of Victoria on Sunday, September 13. The claim is false; the image has been taken from a 7 News report which was later updated to correct a typographical error; the official Covid-19 case number released by the state government for September 13 did not correspond with the purported case number in the misleading posts. 644. New Zealand doctor makes misleading claims about the country’s PCR testing regime in widely shared YouTube video A video showing a New Zealand-based doctor claiming the PCR testing method for the novel coronavirus does not “actually test for the virus” and is being used inappropriately has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook. The claims are misleading; multiple experts told AFP the PCR test being used in New Zealand tests for specific RNA sequences unique to the SARS-CoV-2 virus and it is not being used inappropriately by medical staff. 643. Medical experts say having a dry throat 'does not increase the risk' of infection Multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Line messaging app claim that having a dry throat will cause germs to enter one’s body. The claim is false; the Thai Public Health Ministry denies it has ever issued such advice; medical experts say dry throat does not increase the risk of infection. 642. Conspiracy theorist ‘hoax pandemic’ video goes viral despite Facebook ban As social media platforms fight to curb a wave of online conspiracy theories, a video by far-right broadcaster Alex Jones claiming the coronavirus outbreak is a “hoax” has been viewed more than one million times in recent months. 641. The original image from Australia’s Liberal MP Karen Andrews has been doctored to include a yellow star A purported screenshot of a Facebook post from Australia’s Liberal MP Karen Andrews has been shared in multiple Facebook posts claiming Andrews drew a comparison between people who are against the proposed Covid-19 vaccine and Jewish people during the Holocaust. The claim is false; the original image posted by Karen Andrews has been doctored to include the Jewish badge, a form of identification for Jewish people during the Nazi era. 640. Hoax circulates online that Switzerland has ‘officially confirmed’ coronavirus tests are ‘fake’ A claim that the Swiss authorities have “officially confirmed” that the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test used to diagnose novel coronavirus is “fake” has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook. The posts cite the Swiss public health authority Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) and Swissmedic, the national supervisory body for medical products, as the source. The claim, however, is false; the posts have taken excerpts of the Swissmedic report out of context; the actual report gives weight to the efficacy of the PCR tests in detecting novel coronavirus. 639. International health experts refute claim that coronavirus death rate is lower than that of the flu A claim that the death rate from the novel coronavirus disease, Covid-19, is lower than that of the flu has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts. The claim is false; available evidence from multiple expert sources show the Covid-19 death rate is higher than the flu’s death rate. 638. Countries were not buying Covid-19 test kits in 2018 Facebook posts feature images of tables from a World Bank-linked website alongside the claim that they prove countries were purchasing Covid-19 test kits in 2018. The claim is false; the tables actually list the imports and exports of medical devices that existed in 2018 and which were classified as “Covid-19 products” in April 2020 because of their use fighting the pandemic, according to the World Bank. 637. Kentucky governor did not attend state’s 2020 Derby Facebook posts claim Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear attended the 2020 edition of the state’s famous horse race, and didn’t wear a mask for protection during the Covid-19 pandemic. This is false; the 2020 Kentucky Derby took place without spectators except for necessary staff, and the photo illustrating the claims dates from 2017. 636. Experts dismiss claim that holding your breath helps test for COVID-19 A video purporting to be from an Indian hospital alleges you can find out if you have COVID-19 by simply holding your breath. But the claim is false; the WHO and a pulmonologist told AFP Fact Check that the technique cannot diagnose the illness caused by the novel coronavirus. The Indian hospital mentioned in the post has also denied any link to the video. 635. Saudi medical staff celebrate the closure of the hospital’s isolation rooms A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim that it shows Russian healthcare workers celebrating a new vaccine for the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video shows medical staff celebrating the closures of isolation rooms at King Saud Medical City Al-Shumaisi Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 634. This video shows a Seoul rally in October 2019, months before Covid-19 was first reported in South Korea A video of a large protest has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter in August 2020 alongside a claim it shows a rally against coronavirus restrictions in the South Korean capital of Seoul. The claim is false; the video was first published online in October 2019, nearly four months before the first case of Covid-19 was reported in South Korea in January 2020. 633. This image shows Liverpool fans celebrating their team’s UEFA Champions League win in 2005 An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows a protest against coronavirus restrictions in the British capital of London. The claim is false; the image shows football fans celebrating in the English city of Liverpool after Liverpool Football Club won the UEFA Champions League in 2005. 632. False claim circulates online comparing SARS and Covid-19 outbreaks in the Philippines Multiple Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times purport show an accurate comparison between the Philippine government's responses to the 2003 SARS outbreak and the 2020 novel coronavirus pandemic. The posts claim a prompt travel ban in 2003 resulted in zero SARS cases in the country, whereas a delayed ban in 2020 led to the Philippines recording the highest Covid-19 cases in Asia. The claim is false; Philippine government records show no travel ban was implemented in 2003; World Health Organisation (WHO) data shows the Philippines recorded 14 SARS cases that year; several Asian countries have recorded higher numbers of Covid-19 cases than the Philippines as of September 4, 2020. 631. This photo shows a 1997 music festival in Berlin A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook which claim it shows millions of people protesting against coronavirus restrictions at a rally in Berlin in late August 2020. The claim is false; the image shows a music festival in Berlin in 1997; thousands of people, not millions, protested against Covid-19 restrictions in Berlin on August 29, 2020. 630. Outdated guidance on masks circulates on Facebook in Manitoba Facebook posts shared hundreds of times in Manitoba claim that the official guidance from Canada’s central province on mask-wearing states it is ineffective at preventing illnesses like the novel coronavirus. The posts feature an image of a document from February 2020 and do not reflect the provincial health department's current advice on wearing masks to help slow the spread of Covid-19. 629. This video actually shows an anti-government protest in Belarus A video has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim that it shows a rally against coronavirus restrictions in the British capital of London. The claim is false; the footage shows an anti-government protest in Belarus in August 2020. 628. Trump retweets false claim that CDC cut Covid-19 death toll by 94% Social media posts shared thousands of times and retweeted by President Donald Trump claim the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cut the national Covid-19 death toll by 94 percent, citing a CDC comorbidity chart. The claim is false; the head of the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) said everyone included in the fatalities died from Covid-19 but the disease usually causes additional conditions, which are also listed. 627. This image shows an Italian artist's illustration of a futuristic vehicle, not a prediction of what 2022 would look like An illustration of people driving single-occupancy vehicles has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram alongside a claim it was created by an Italian artist in 1962 to show what he imagined the world would look like in 2022. The claim is false; the image shows an illustration by the Italian artist of a futuristic vehicle he imagined could improve traffic in big cities. 626. This video does not show a Covid-19 patient who was nearly buried alive A video viewed thousands of times claims to show a Covid-19 patient in a Kenyan village who was “nearly buried alive” during his own funeral. The claim is false; county officials confirmed to AFP Fact Check that while the video was indeed taken during a burial ceremony, the man seen lying on the ground wearing protective gear had fainted and is a relative of the deceased. 625. Covid-19 poses risks to children, and health authorities recommend they wear masks A flyer shared on Facebook claims children have little chance of dying of Covid-19, they have essentially no chance of spreading the disease asymptomatically, and that they face a series of risks from wearing face masks. This is misleading; doctors say children can die from the disease and can also spread it, and US health authorities recommend that most youngsters over the age of two wear masks. 624. This image shows an Italian artist's illustration of a futuristic vehicle, not a prediction of what 2022 would look like An illustration of people driving single-occupancy vehicles has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram alongside a claim it was created by an Italian artist in 1962 to show what he imagined the world would look like in 2022. The claim is false; the image shows an illustration by the Italian artist of a futuristic vehicle he imagined could improve traffic in big cities. 623. All grades in South Africa are scheduled to complete the school year, not repeat it Facebook posts shared in South Africa claim that some grades will be repeating the current school year in 2021. However, this is false; no such announcement has been made, and the school year calendar has in fact been amended by the education department in an attempt to recover the time lost due to the Covid-19 pandemic. 622. CDC program involves Covid-19 vaccine distribution, not injection, in North Dakota Facebook posts claim Native Americans in North Dakota will be the first subjects to receive a novel coronavirus vaccine, in one case citing a local news article as “evidence.” This is false; North Dakota was selected by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to be part of a project preparing for vaccine distribution -- not injection -- once Covid-19 shots are approved. 621. Taking your temperature with an infrared thermometer does not damage the pineal gland A Facebook post shared thousands of times claims that taking a person’s temperature with an infrared thermometer near their head risks damaging the pineal gland, which is located in the brain. This is false, said neuroscience experts, who explained that this type of thermometer does not emit infrared radiation but captures wavelengths from the body. 620. Posts criticize Democrats for not wearing masks at a time when they weren’t recommended Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times during the Democratic National Convention criticize Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and other top Democrats for appearing in a crowd without masks. This is misleading; the photos in the posts are from a Democratic event held weeks before US health authorities began recommending that the general population wear face coverings to help curb the spread of COVID-19. 619. The World Health Organization has not been kicked out of Tanzania An article claiming that the Tanzanian government has kicked the World Health Organization (WHO) out of the country has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook. The claim is false; there is no evidence of any such directive and a WHO representative in Tanzania confirmed that the office is still operational. 618. This video shows a mock funeral procession during an anti-citizenship law protest in India in 2019 A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows a mock funeral procession to \"celebrate\" Indian Home Minister Amit Shah testing positive for the novel coronavirus. The claim, however, is false; the video shows a mock funeral procession staged during an anti-citizenship law protest in the east Indian state of West Bengal in 2019. 617. Misleading claims about COVID-19 vaccine spread by ‘Plandemic’ video A six-minute clip from the film titled “Plandemic: Indoctornation” seeks to raise fears about the vaccines that could help address the COVID-19 pandemic, and it makes misleading claims about the vaccines currently in clinical trials. An image appearing to show an official World Health Organization (WHO) publication highlighting scientific research has been shared on social media in an attempt to prove the global health body does not recommend mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. But the WHO said the document did not originate from them and includes “cherry picked” studies. The agency -- like numerous other health bodies -- recommends mask wearing to help curb the spread of the novel coronavirus. 615. Misleading claim circulates on Facebook about dangers of face masks alongside photos of skin conditions Five images have been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim they show images of people suffering from skin problems that have been caused by wearing face masks. The claim is misleading; three of the images show cases of chickenpox, eczema, and rosacea unrelated to wearing face masks, while the other two relate to wearing face masks. 614. New ‘Plandemic’ film promotes coronavirus conspiracy theory A film titled “Plandemic: Indoctornation” promotes the idea that the coronavirus pandemic ravaging countries around the world is the result of an elaborate conspiracy. It makes multiple unfounded claims, including that the deadly virus was designed in a lab and global health leaders knew the crisis would occur, and also seeks to stoke fears about vaccines. 613. Misleading claim circulates online about Philippine Health Department's guidelines for face shields An image has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows guidelines issued by the Philippine Department of Health about appropriate face shields to protect from the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; the Philippine health authority said it did not issue the image in its guidelines; no official government statement on face shields features the image in the misleading posts. 612. False claim circulates on Facebook that Australians 'will be fined if they discuss COVID-19 conspiracies' Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim that “Aussies will be fined if they are found to be talking about conspiracies to do with [COVID-19]”. The posts included a screenshot of a segment from an Australian breakfast television show as evidence for the claim. But the claim is false; an Australian legal expert said as of August 18, 2020, he was not aware of any legislation that banned discussions of COVID-19 conspiracy theories; the Attorney General's Department also said it was not aware of any legislation banning such discussions; the television show pictured in the posts, Nine Network’s Today Extra, said it had been reporting the results of a viewer poll about conspiracy theorists, rather than a piece of legislation. 611. This photo shows Vladimir Putin meeting a young patient from an oncology centre in 2012 A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows Russian President Vladimir Putin sitting at a table with his daughter, who he announced in August 2020 had taken part in a novel coronavirus vaccine trial in Russia. The posts go on to claim that the COVID-19 vaccine developed in Russia will “save the world from corona”. The claims are misleading; the photo in fact shows the Russian leader sitting next to a young patient from a Moscow medical centre during a visit to the Kremlin in 2012; on August 12, the World Health Organization (WHO) said it was looking forward to reviewing clinical trials of a potential coronavirus vaccine developed in Russia, which it listed as being in the first stage of development. 610. Misleading claim circulates online that Singapore has 'banned' sale of US produce due to coronavirus A claim has been shared repeatedly on Line Messenger and Facebook that states Singapore has “banned” people from buying fruit and vegetables imported from the US over fears it could be contaminated with the novel coronavirus. The post goes on to allege the US has been transporting produce in trucks that also carry “dead bodies infected with COVID-19”. The claim is misleading; Singapore's government said it had “not issued any statement discouraging consumption of imports from the US\"; health experts say there is insufficient evidence that COVID-19 can be transmitted to humans through food. 609. This woman is an ordinary volunteer in Russia’s coronavirus vaccine trial, state media reports Shortly after President Vladimir Putin declared Russia the first country to approve a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, a photo began circulating in Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts that claimed it showed Putin’s daughter receiving the jab. The claim is misleading; the woman in the image has been identified by Russian state media as Natalia, a volunteer in the vaccine trial; the images in the misleading post correspond to video of the vaccine trial that has circulated online since June; Natalia’s features do not correspond to publicly-available images of Putin’s two daughters. 608.Face mask use does not lead to Legionnaires’ disease Posts shared thousands of times on social media claim Legionnaires' disease, a serious type of pneumonia, can be contracted through reusable face masks, implying that it could be mistaken for COVID-19. This is false; experts say Legionnaires’ disease cannot be caught or spread via masks, and that it is not related to spikes in COVID-19. 607. No tourists have been allowed to visit New Zealand since March 2020 -- this photo has circulated online since 2016 An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts in August 2020 which claim it shows “Chinese tourists allowed to go out of the Auckland bubble”. The posts were shared after New Zealand's government reimposed a coronavirus lockdown on the city of Auckland after it recorded the country’s first local transmissions of COVID-19 in more than 100 days. The claim in the posts is false; the image has circulated online in news reports since at least 2016; New Zealand health officials said no tourists have been allowed into the country since March 2020 due to the coronavirus pandemic. 606. Canadian children with COVID-19 symptoms can quarantine with a parent or guardian Facebook posts shared thousands of times in Canada claim that parliament has passed a law that would allow the government to quarantine a child who showed COVID-19 symptoms at school separately from a parent. This is false; Canada’s legislature has not passed any such law during the pandemic, and an expert said such legislation, federal or provincial, would easily be struck down as unconstitutional in the courts. 605. US far from reaching herd immunity for COVID-19 A Facebook post shared thousands of times claims the United States has reached herd immunity for COVID-19. But experts say this is false, and that the country is far from the point where enough people have the immunity necessary to curb the disease’s spread. 604. False claim circulates online that Australian government paid nursing homes to register deaths as caused by COVID-19 Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim the Australian government paid nursing homes AUS$25,000 for “labelling [COVID-19] as the main cause of deaths on death certificates”. The posts cite a purported broadcast with an unidentified man on an Australian radio station as evidence for the claim. The claim is false; the local radio station that broadcast the segment with the anonymous caller from the general public said the claim was “immediately recognised as potentially inaccurate information” and was not aired again after the initial live broadcast; in response to the misleading posts, Australia’s Department of Health said the claim was “false” and that only registered doctors can issue death certificates. 603. Misleading claim circulates online about New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern's visit to Hindu temple A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern visiting a Hindu temple after declaring the country had reached its 100th consecutive day of no local coronavirus transmissions. The claim is misleading; the video shows Ardern visiting the temple on August 6, 2020, three days before the country hit its 100-day milestone; on August 11, New Zealand recorded four new locally transmitted COVID-19 infections after 102 consecutive days of no community infections. 602. This photo was taken in China almost ten years before the novel coronavirus pandemic A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows Japanese officials paying tribute to frontline workers during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photo shows a group of workers in China in 2011. 601. Hoax circulates online that vaccines have caused deaths in the Philippines Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared thousands of times in August 2020 claim that five people in the Philippine city of Tarlac died after receiving vaccine shots. The claim is false; the Tarlac City government and the Philippine Department of Health said the claim was “fake”; the World Health Organization (WHO) said the polio vaccine that was administered across the Philippines in August 2020 was safe. 600. Comments on coronavirus measures falsely attributed to Fox News host Tucker Carlson Social media posts shared thousands of times attribute comments criticizing coronavirus measures to Fox News host Tucker Carlson. But a Fox spokeswoman said Carlson did not say or post them, and they have also been credited to multiple other people by name as well as to an anonymous author. 599. False claim circulates online in the Philippines that Canada is ‘free’ of the novel coronavirus Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared thousands of times in August 2020 claim that Canada is “free” of COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; as of August 9, 2020, the Canadian government reported it had 6,742 active COVID-19 cases; on August 6, the country's top public health official urged Canadians to \"learn to live with the virus\". 598. No evidence flu vaccines make children more vulnerable to coronavirus infections Social media posts claim children vaccinated against the flu are at a significantly higher risk of contracting other respiratory infections, including coronaviruses. This is false; large studies in British Columbia and the US found no evidence that the influenza vaccine increases the risk of contracting a coronavirus, and health officials throughout North America recommend the flu vaccine for children during the COVID-19 pandemic. 597. Discredited scientific paper behind false claims on COVID-5G link Social media posts say that 5G technology creates coronavirus in human cells, but the false claim originated from a discredited paper later retracted by a scientific journal. The claims are not based on scientific evidence, experts say, and the paper was withdrawn after its publisher found “manipulation of the peer review” process. 596. Hoax circulates online that Fauci ‘knew’ about effective coronavirus treatments in 2005 Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and on various websites claim that US top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci “has known for 15 years” that chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are effective treatments for coronaviruses, citing a 2005 academic paper. The claims are false; one of the authors of the 2005 study said the findings were based on laboratory tests for SARS-CoV, not clinical trials; the study was published by the Virology Journal, which belongs to a for-profit publisher and is not associated with Fauci or the US National Institutes of Health; as of August 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) says there is \"no proof that hydroxychloroquine or any other drug can cure or prevent COVID-19\". 595. False claim circulates on Facebook that 'viruses do not harm or kill' people Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim “viruses do not harm or kill [people]” and that any “harm and death” caused by a virus can be attributed to \"the overreaction of a weakened and dysfunctional immune system\". The claim is false; viruses can kill people and a dysfunctional immune system does not cause death, experts say. 594. Tips on safe sex during COVID-19 pandemic misrepresented in Canadian Facebook post Facebook posts claimed that British Columbia’s top health officer warned about the risks of asbestos poisoning from boards used as barriers against COVID-19 transmission during sex. This is false; health authorities in the Pacific province did include “glory holes” in online virus-prevention tips, but they did not mention asbestos. That warning was satire shared out of context, its author told AFP. 593. False claim circulates online that the United States is testing a COVID-19 vaccine on Ukrainian soldiers Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter claim that four Ukrainian soldiers died after participating in American COVID-19 vaccine trials in the northeastern Ukrainian city of Kharkiv. The claim, published in several languages across different posts, was attributed to a police spokesperson in the self-proclaimed Lugansk People's Republic. The claim is false; Ukraine military and Kharkiv medical officials said the posts were “fake news”. 592. Members of Congress did not receive quarantine exemption for John Lewis’s funeral Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim Washington’s mayor exempted members of Congress from a 14-day quarantine after they traveled to the funeral of civil rights icon John Lewis in Georgia, which the city considers a “high-risk” state for the coronavirus. But this is misleading, as there was no special exemption; rather, government activity is considered an essential service and the US Capitol is not covered by the mayor’s order, her office said. 591. These photos are not of a large protest against COVId-19 restrictions in Germany A photo collage has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim the images were taken during a protest against coronavirus restrictions in Germany in August 2020. The claim is false; all four photos have circulated in reports about Black Lives Matter protests across Germany in June 2020. 590. This photo does not show a massive protest against COVID-19 restrictions in Germany A photo has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows a protest against coronavirus restrictions in the German capital of Berlin in August 2020. The claim is false; the photo, which has circulated online since at least 2018, shows a street parade in Switzerland before the COVID-19 pandemic. 589. Misleading claim circulates online comparing severity of COVID-19 with swine flu Multiple Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times claim the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19, has infected far fewer people than the H1N1 virus, or swine flu, but “media hysteria” has prompted an overblown response. The claim is misleading; in April 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) said that COVID-19 is “10 times more deadly than swine flu”; health experts say COVID-19 has a higher death rate than swine flu, which could in turn put more pressure on healthcare systems. A post shared thousands of times on Facebook claims the novel coronavirus does not affect people who are very fit or thin. This is false; the pandemic has shown that nobody is immune to COVID-19, and experts called the claim \"dangerous.\" 587. Social media posts misquote face mask advice from international health authorities and academics A claim has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook, Instagram and other websites in July 2020 that top medical experts from the World Health Organization (WHO), US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and The New England Journal of Medicine have warned against wearing face masks because they can cause “severe health issues”. The claim is false; the health authorities did not issue the purported statement, and in fact advocate universal mask-wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic. 586. Wearing a face mask does not put you at risk of developing pleurisy, health experts say Multiple posts shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter claim that a woman contracted pleurisy, a lung inflammation condition, after wearing a face mask for an extended period of time. According to the posts, the unidentified woman caught the disease because she was breathing in carbon dioxide and her own bacteria. The claims are false; pulmonologists say wearing a face mask does not put you at risk of developing pleurisy, nor does it deprive users of adequate oxygen or cause a surge in carbon dioxide levels. 585. Misleading claim spreads online that New Zealand has authorised troops to enter homes to enforce COVID-19 quarantine A video shows a candidate in the upcoming New Zealand elections claiming that the country's prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, authorised the military to enter private residences in order to enforce COVID-19 quarantine measures. It has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook in July 2020. The claim is misleading; in response to the posts, the New Zealand Defence Force, the Ministry of Health and legal experts said the military had not been given the purported powers. 584. Hoax posts offer hazard pay to US pandemic workers Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is offering hazard pay compensation to individuals who worked during the novel coronavirus pandemic. But the posts lead to a hoax website with a picture of an ape, and economic relief payments are overseen by the US Treasury Department, not FEMA, and are not tied to hazardous work. 583. Experts say corpses infected with COVID-19 do not get more infectious over time A post shared more than a thousand times on Facebook claims that a corpse of a COVID-19 positive person is 100 times more “toxic” 72 hours after death -- and that because undertakers are not burying bodies within this prescribed period, funerals have become hotspots for further infections. The claim is false; according to experts, corpses do not get more infectious over time and the rise in infections after funerals is a result of mourners infecting one another. 582. Holy communion has not been banned in Toronto Articles shared hundreds of times on Facebook in multiple countries claim that holy communion has been banned in Toronto as part of the Canadian city’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. These claims are false, according to Toronto Public Health, Ontario’s Health Ministry and the Catholic and Greek Orthodox Archdioceses of Toronto. 581. Misleading claim circulates that the Philippines has cancelled school classes until 2021 due to COVID-19 Multiple Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times claim that Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte announced in his recent national address there would be “no classes for all in 2020-2021”. The claim is misleading; in his July 27, 2020, address, Duterte banned face-to-face teaching until a COVID-19 vaccine is created, but called for the implementation of online learning as a temporary measure. 580. This video does not show an assault at a McDonald's restaurant in Singapore A video of a man attacking a cashier at a McDonald’s restaurant has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it happened in Singapore. The claim is false; the video shows an assault at a McDonald’s restaurant in Hong Kong. 579. Wearing a face mask does not compromise your immune system, health experts say Facebook and Twitter posts shared tens of thousands of times claim that wearing a face mask compromises a person's immune system. The claim is misleading; wearing a face mask does not negatively impact the immune system, according to health experts. As of July 2020, international health authorities and governments around the world recommended wearing face masks as part of efforts to curb the spread of COVID-19. 578. US social media users still mischaracterize Canada’s COVID-19 aid A text outlining Canada’s alleged response to the coronavirus pandemic with lengthy school shutdowns and universal relief payments was shared thousands of times in the US. The claims are misleading; schools are expected to reopen in September, only individuals directly affected by COVID-19 are eligible for financial aid, mortgage relief is granted by banks on a case-by-case basis, and rent is still due. 577. Rodrigo Duterte says there is not yet a vaccine for COVID-19 in this video, not that there is one already A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple YouTube and Facebook posts that claim it shows an announcement from Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte about a successful COVID-19 vaccine. The claim is false; the video shows Duterte stating that a successful vaccine had not yet been created for COVID-19, during a government press conference aired on July 21, 2020. 576. Trump spreads video of doctor who falsely claims hydroxychloroquine cures COVID-19 US President Donald Trump used Twitter to spread footage of a doctor who claims a combination of medicines including hydroxychloroquine will cure COVID-19. But there is currently no cure for the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, and the false information the video contains has left social media companies scrambling to remove it. 575. Aardvark logo on COVID testing trucks mistaken for an Egyptian god of death A series of photos shared tens of thousands of times claims that mobile testing facilities for COVID-19 carry a depiction of the Egyptian “god of death” Anubis as their logo. This is false; the logo features an aardvark according to the company that runs the testing facilities. 574. False claims circulate that global COVID-19 fatalities have surpassed 1.6 million A Facebook post that made an exaggerated claim in May 2020 about the global death toll from the novel coronavirus has been amplified across the world, especially on social media accounts posting religious content. The most recent versions of the post claim that more than 1.6 million people have died from COVID-19, but this is false; the real number of deaths counted is currently less than half of that. 573. Hoax circulates that the WHO has approved Indian student's ginger juice 'COVID-19 remedy' Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter claim that the World Health Organization (WHO) has approved an Indian student's ginger juice “home remedy” for COVID-19. The claim is false; the WHO's spokesperson for India said the posts were “fake news”; as of July 28, 2020, the WHO states “there are no medicines that have been shown to prevent or cure [COVID-19]”. 572. Misleading claim circulates about WHO's advice on COVID-19 transmission from cats and dogs Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has issued a statement that cats and dogs do not “carry” COVID-19. The claim is misleading; a WHO spokesperson told AFP they have published no such statement; in July 2020, experts said there was “little evidence” that animals can transmit the virus to humans, but there was some evidence of human-to-animal transmission. 571. This photo claiming to show supporters of a Philippine television network circulated online in February 2020, weeks before the government imposed COVID-19 restrictions A photo has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows supporters of ABS-CBN, the largest television network in the Philippines, gathering in violation of the country's COVID-19 restrictions. The posts were shared after the government refused to renew ABS-CBN's operating licence. The claim is false; the photo has circulated online since February 2020, weeks before the government imposed COVID-19 restrictions and made mask-wearing mandatory in public. 570. False list of 'home treatments' for COVID-19 circulates online A list of purported treatments for COVID-19 at its “different stages” has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts. The posts recommend that people with breathing problems should use an oxygen cylinder and monitor their oxygen levels before going to a hospital. The claims, however, are false; health experts have said there is no scientific evidence to suggest the list of purported treatments are effective; they also advised people with breathing difficulties due to suspected COVID-19 to seek immediate medical help. 569. Flawed experiments exaggerate risk from CO2 concentration in masks A video shared online aimed to prove that face masks are dangerous to children by showing that toxic levels of CO2 concentrate inside a mask. This is misleading; experts dismissed the experiment as faulty science whose data is the opposite of what should be expected, and said there are no serious health effects to wearing a mask. 568. Face masks do not cause fungal lung infections if handled correctly, health experts say Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram claim that face masks can cause fungal lung infections. The claim is misleading; wearing face masks will not cause fungal lung infections or harm human health if they are handled correctly, an epidemiologist said; the World Health Organization (WHO) states wearing face masks for long periods is safe providing wearers regularly change or wash their masks if they become wet or soiled. 567. There is no evidence that budesonide asthma inhalers can cure COVID-19, experts say Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook claim that budesonide, a steroid used in asthma inhalers, can \"cure\" COVID-19. The claim is misleading; as of July 2020, health experts say there is no scientific evidence that budesonide can cure or treat COVID-19; the Philippine health department dismissed the claim as \"fake news\" and warned the steroid should only be used with a doctor’s prescription. 566. This footage has circulated in reports about unattended bodies at a hospital in south India in 2013, and does not show Covid-19 victims A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows COVID-19 victims at a hospital in the south Indian city of Hyderabad. The claim is misleading; the footage was published in reports about unclaimed bodies at a Hyderabad hospital in 2013, more than six years before the novel coronavirus pandemic. 565. No ban to end the use of face masks in Tanzania An article claiming that Tanzania has banned the wearing of face masks to guard against the new coronavirus because they “caused anxiety among Tanzanians” has re-emerged in South Africa after first circulating online in May 2020. According to the piece, which has received thousands of interactions on Facebook, the order was issued by Tanzanian President John Pombe Magufuli. However, this claim is false; no such order was issued, and a government spokesperson has urged citizens to observe guidelines issued by experts to safeguard against COVID-19. 564. This video shows Amitabh Bachchan praising healthcare workers two months before he tested positive for COVID-19, not afterwards A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, YouTube and Twitter posts alongside a claim it shows Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan expressing gratitude to healthcare workers at a Mumbai hospital in July 2020 after he was hospitalised for COVID-19. The claim is misleading; Bachchan recorded the video in April 2020, more than two months before he tested positive for COVID-19. 563. False social media posts purport to share coronavirus guidelines from Sri Lankan hospital An image has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and WhatsApp alongside a false claim it shows a list of COVID-19 preventive measures issued by Sri Lanka's Infectious Diseases Hospital (IDH). 562. Fake pharmaceutical ad urges viewers to ‘take the shot’ Facebook posts shared more than 1,000 times appear to show a billboard advertisement from US pharmaceutical giant Merck encouraging viewers to take a novel coronavirus vaccine. This is false; there is no vaccine yet, a company spokesman said the advertisement is not legitimate, and a reverse image search shows the picture was created using clip art and a stock photo of a blank billboard. 561. A video of Tanzania's leader celebrating was taken years before the novel coronavirus emerged A video showing Tanzanian President John Pombe Magufuli in a celebratory mood has been viewed more than 200,000 times on social media alongside claims that he was marking the country's eradication of COVID-19. The claim is false: an online search reveals that the clip was filmed in 2016, years before the novel coronavirus pandemic began. 560. This photo shows South Korea during the COVID-19 pandemic, not new cases of bubonic plague in China A photo of four people wearing protective clothing on a street has been shared hundreds of times alongside a claim it shows Chinese authorities responding to new cases of bubonic plague detected in Inner Mongolia in July 2020. The image has been shared in a misleading context; it is actually an AFP photo that shows soldiers spraying disinfectant in South Korea during the coronavirus pandemic; the other three images in the post do not directly relate to the recently detected cases of bubonic plague. 559. This video does not show Thailand's King Maha Vajiralongkorn chanting an Islamic invocation to get rid of coronavirus A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows Thailand's King Maha Vajiralongkorn chanting an Islamic invocation to get rid of coronavirus. The claim is false; the video has previously circulated in reports about the Thai king presiding over a celebration of the Prophet Muhammad's birthday in Bangkok in April 2019, months before the first coronavirus case was reported in Thailand. 558. Health experts say COVID-19 swab tests are safe and do not damage the blood-brain barrier as claimed An illustration has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Instagram posts which claim it shows that nasal swab tests for COVID-19 can harm the blood brain-barrier, a semipermeable membrane separating blood from other fluids in the brain. The claim is misleading; experts say COVID-19 swab tests are not placed near the blood-brain barrier and do not pose a risk to human health. 557. This image was created using only photos of healthcare workers who died of coronavirus in Mexico, not worldwide A photo mosaic has been shared repeatedly in multiple Sinhala-language Facebook posts alongside a claim it was created using photos of “all doctors and nurses” who have died of COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the image was produced by a Mexico-based newspaper to honour 198 healthcare workers who died in Mexico after being infected with COVID-19. 556. Misleading claim spreads online about detection of bubonic plague in China Multiple posts shared thousands of times claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has said a case of bubonic plague detected in China in early July 2020 is likely to trigger a \"severe epidemic\". The posts also claim that the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has said bubonic plague can be spread through cough droplets. The claims are misleading; the WHO has said the bubonic plague case is not high-risk and is “being well managed”; the CDC states bubonic plague is usually caused by flea bites. 555. Post falsely claims that image shows a family who died after eating food served on virus-contaminated banana leaf An image has been shared thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim that it shows a family who died after eating food served on virus-contaminated banana leaf. The claim is false; similar photos of the same group of people circulated in Indian media articles about a family who were reported to have taken their own lives in India in 2017. 554. This 1998 photo shows young polio patients in Sierra Leone, not the aftermath of vaccine trials on Africans A purported image of children with limb deformities has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts published in 2020 alongside a claim it shows the aftermath of vaccine trials on Africans. The claim is false; the photo, taken in 1998 in the West African country Sierra Leone, actually shows unvaccinated children who contracted polio. 553. Nokia latest to be hit by Facebook scam claiming phone giveaway for students during the pandemic Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim Nokia is handing out phones to help students during the pandemic. However, the company said it has nothing to do with the scheme. Dozens of scam pages promising free phones have sprung up in recent weeks, a common ploy to boost follower numbers. 552. This Pakistani doctor was wounded by a police officer, not the family of a heart patient who died after being misdiagnosed with COVID-19 Two photos have been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook with a claim they show a Pakistani doctor who was attacked by the family of a heart patient who died after being misdiagnosed with COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the doctor was wounded at a Karachi hospital by a police officer after he was denied sleeping medications, according to police and the hospital. 551. Fake police bulletin about 'face mask scam' circulates worldwide A purported \"police bulletin\" warning of a new burglary scam has been shared thousands of times by Facebook users. 550. False claim circulates online that China is no longer hospitalising COVID-19 patients Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times in June 2020 claim that people in China have stopped going to hospitals for COVID-19 treatment and instead \"kill the virus with heat\" through \"steam inhalation\"; \"hot gargles\" and \"hot tea\". 549. Mask misinformation spreads in the US as COVID-19 cases spike Social media posts shared thousands of times in the United States contain multiple false or misleading claims about face masks used to stop the spread of COVID-19, including that they violate federal standards for oxygen supply, cloth masks “do not filter anything” and trap carbon dioxide, surgical masks spread germs, and N95 masks expel unfiltered air. 548. This is not a genuine photo of a baby girl who died after contracting COVID-19 A blog post has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a video of a baby who died after being infected with the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; the blog post in fact shows a photo that has circulated online since 2014 in reports about a man who killed his wife and children in New York City. 547. Misleading claim circulates about the accuracy of COVID-19 tests in Australia A purported screenshot of an Australian Department of Health webpage has been shared repeatedly on Facebook alongside a claim it is evidence that COVID-19 tests “cannot distinguish covid from a cold or measles or ebola”. The claim is misleading; Australian health authorities told AFP the image contains “selectively chosen information taken out of context”, and clarified that tests designed for SARS-CoV-2, the new coronavirus that causes the disease COVID-19, would not detect any other kinds of pathogens. 546. List of unsubstantiated COVID-19 treatments circulates online A photo of a list of purported symptoms and treatments for the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19, has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. The purported remedies include a daily dose of vitamins; exposure to sunlight; and a diet of alkaline foods. The claims are false; as of June 29, 2020, experts say there is no known cure for COVID-19; AFP has previously debunked hoax claims about the purported coronavirus symptoms and remedies. 545. These are not photos of throats of coronavirus patients Two photos which show human throats have been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts warning about the seriousness of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The photos have been shared in a misleading context; both images have circulated online before the COVID-19 pandemic; health experts have clarified that only a small percentage of COVID-19 patients are likely to develop the most severe symptoms. 544. Disgraced US researcher makes latest false claims about vaccine safety A short portion of an interview given by discredited researcher Judy Mikovits, in which she claims that a vaccine for COVID-19 will be deadly, warns against immunization, and advocates for a five-year moratorium to test all vaccines, has been watched tens of thousands of times on YouTube and Facebook. The claims are false; vaccine candidates go through three phases of clinical trials, are carefully monitored for adverse effects, and multiple doctors told AFP vaccines are safe. 543. This is not a video of a protest in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic Aerial footage of a large procession of people has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook alongside claims that the video shows protests in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic The claim is false; the video has circulated in media reports about people in Iran attending a funeral procession for military leader Qasem Soleimani in January 2020. 542. This is not a video of a Brazilian politician furious over nonexistent COVI-19 patients A widely shared video claims to show Brazilian lawmaker Filippe Poubel erupt in anger as he breaks into a field hospital that had claimed to have 5,000 novel coronavirus patients and finds it empty. In reality, the clip depicts the politician expressing his displeasure over a delay in opening a new COVID-19 hospital. 541. Scientists warn against 'bogus' COVID-19 removal cards South Sudan's president and senior ministers have appeared in public in recent weeks wearing so-called “virus removal cards”, clip-on tags marketed as prevention against infectious diseases. AFP Fact Check found the items for sale online in various countries, including Lebanon, Malaysia and the Philippines. However, scientists warn the cards, which have been banned in the US and elsewhere, do not prevent COVID-19. 540. Hoax circulates about a supposed plan by Bill Gates to 'microchip the vaccine' Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim that Bill Gates’ “ultimate goal” is to “microchip the [COVID-19] vaccine” to create “virtual IDs”. The posts also claim the billionaire philanthropist was in New Zealand in May and June 2020 “to test and trial the COVID-19 vaccine”. Both claims are false; a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation spokesperson dismissed the purported link between Gates and microchips; as of June 24, New Zealand authorities say there is no record of Gates visiting the country in 2020. 539. Scams of phones being given out for pandemic education circulate in Nigeria Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook in Nigeria claim to be giving out smartphones to help students attend online classes during the novel coronavirus pandemic. However, this is one of a growing number of scams aimed at increasing followers of social media pages and accounts. 538. This is not a photo of a baby who contracted COVID-19 after heart surgery The image of an intubated baby with a large chest scar has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook, with claims that the infant had recently survived heart surgery before testing positive for the novel coronavirus. This is misleading: the pictured baby had heart surgery in 2012 and the now seven-year-old child does not have COVID-19, his parents say. 537. CDC does not add flue and pneumonia deaths to COVID-19 toll A Facebook post shared thousands of times claims the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention lied about the number of deaths caused by COVID-19 by combining the count with pneumonia and influenza fatalities. This is false; the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) only records those who died from COVID-19 in its toll for the disease. 536. Map used to make misleading comparison of COVID-19 spread in US, Canada A post shared thousands of times on Facebook claims to show a map comparing the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States and Canada. This claim is misleading according to the map’s creators because it is comparing cumulative cases between countries with very different populations and population densities. 535. Hoax circulates about 'Latin translation' of COVID-19 Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter claim COVID-19 means “see a sheep surrender” in Latin. The claim is false; Latin language experts dismissed the claim as “nonsense”; the World Health Organization (WHO) states COVID-19 refers to “coronavirus disease 2019”. 534. This video does not show a COVID-19 nurse raped and murdered A video that appears to show a woman being attacked has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple YouTube posts and on various websites alongside a claim the footage shows a COVID-19 frontline nurse who was raped and stabbed to death. The claim is false; the footage was in fact taken from a sexual harassment awareness campaign video in India that circulated online years before the coronavirus pandemic. 533. Israel has not reported zero deaths from COVId-19 due to baking soda remedy Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter since March 2020 claim that Israel has reported zero deaths from the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The posts also claim Israeli citizens have protected themselves from COVID-19 by drinking a remedy of hot water, lemon and baking soda, which purportedly “kills” the virus. Both claims are false; as of June 21 the World Health Organization (WHO) states Israel has reported 305 deaths from COVID-19; health experts say there is no evidence the baking soda concoction can cure or prevent COVID-19 infections. 532. This is not a genuine prescription issued by a Delhi hospital doctor for a COVID-19 patient A photo of a handwritten letter which shows an Indian hospital's letterhead has been shared in multiple Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp posts alongside a claim that it is a genuine prescription issued by a doctor at the hospital for a COVID-19 patient. The claim is misleading; the hospital denied that the prescription was issued by one of their doctors and said the signature was forged. 531. This video does not show an overflow of coronavirus patients at a hospital in Pakistan A video showing people in hospital beds on a street has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows coronavirus patients who were moved outside a hospital in Pakistan because of an overflow of patients. The claim is false; the video in fact shows patients who were evacuated from a hospital in the Pakistani city of Lahore after a fire broke out. 530. This video shows a Berlin mosque broadcasting a call to prayer during the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows an Islamic call to prayer in Berlin after black clouds appeared in the sky. The posts claim the call was heard despite there being “no mosque” in the area. The claim is false; the video shows a call to prayer that was broadcast by a mosque in Berlin; the call was staged as a nearby church rang its bell in April 2020 as a sign of unity during the coronavirus pandemic. 529. Rwandan government rejects claim leader Paul Kagame opposed WHO over virus tonic Articles shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter claim Rwandan President Paul Kagame censured the World Health Organization (WHO) for rejecting a herbal tonic touted by the Madagascan government as a cure for COVID-19. However, a presidential spokesperson dismissed the claim as “fake news”. No evidence was found to show Kagame made the comments. In fact, he has said his government is avoiding untested remedies. 528. Fresh false claims about COVID-10 vaccine and 5G technology spread online in the Philippines Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times by Filipino Facebook users make several false claims about a future vaccine for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. The posts also make claims about a link between a potential vaccine and the rollout of 5G technology. The claims are all false, according to health experts. 527. Hoax circulates that India's capital region will be placed under new four-week lockdown A claim that the entire Indian capital region including New Delhi will be placed under a “complete lockdown” for four weeks beginning June 18 has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. The claim is false; as of June 19 no fresh lockdown has been announced in India, and government officials have said that no such plan was under consideration. 526. Nobel winner Denis Mukwege rejects 'fake patients' quote circulating online Viral posts circulating in Africa claim Nobel Peace Prize winner Denis Mukwege resigned from the leadership of two COVID-19 task forces in DR Congo because he was told to manipulate patient numbers. The claim is false; Mukwege's resignation statement cited frustration at how the crisis was being managed, but nothing about fake patients. He has rejected the quotes attributed to him in the viral posts. 525. Not all of these photos show life during the 1918 flu pandemic Facebook posts claiming to show vintage photographs taken during the Spanish flu pandemic more than 100 years ago have been shared thousands of times in Africa, Asia and the United States. While most of the images do depict life in various parts of the world during the pandemic, some are unrelated to the event and either were taken years earlier or later. 524. This is not a photo of South Africa's president flouting virus laws at a birthday party in 2020; the images are from events long before the COVID-19 epidemic A meme posted on Facebook claims South Africa’s president and ruling party politicians recently celebrated a high-profile birthday and flouted lockdown rules in the process. However, the images were taken in previous years. A secondary claim that COVID-19 is a bacteria -- and that this therefore would explain the lack of masks in the pictures -- has been refuted by experts. 523. Meme misleads about danger of long-term mask use A meme shared thousands of times on Facebook claims people can suffer from reduced oxygen to their blood and brain, possibly leading to death, if they wear a disposable mask for too long. This is misleading; only a marginal decrease in oxygen saturation can sometimes be measured in people wearing a disposable mask, and several experts agree there is no evidence of long-term effects from breathing through a mask. 522. South Sudan leaders have not flown abroad for COVID-19 treatment South Sudan President Salva Kiir and his first deputy Riek Machar recently became targets of tit-for-tat claims on Facebook alleging they had flown to foreign countries for COVID-19 treatment. For four days, rumours about the two men -- bitter rivals since the 2013 civil war -- flew thick and fast on social media. Allegations that they were abroad (and even dead in the case of Kiir) were finally put to bed with television appearances from their respective homes in the capital, Juba. 521. False claim circulates that Android users in Australia have been automatically signed up to COVIDSafe app Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook state Android users in Australia have been automatically signed up to COVIDSafe, the government's COVID-19 contact tracing app, through an application programming interface (API) operated by Google. The claim is false; a cybersecurity expert said the API is “not an app”, and that the use of it is optional; the Australian government said the COVIDSafe app is available for voluntary download and cannot operate without being downloaded. 520. As US faces COVID-19 spike, outdated mask information spreads online A Facebook post shared more than 25,000 times says face masks should only be worn by medical professionals or people who have become ill during the coronavirus pandemic. This is misleading; the World Health Organization guidance cited in the post is out of date, and US health authorities have long recommended that the general public wear masks. 519. Misinformation spreads online about reimposing a strict COVID-19 lockdown in Metro Manila A purported government resolution has been shared in multiple Facebook posts in June 2020 claiming that the Philippine government has approved a motion to reimpose strict lockdown measures in Metro Manila, Cebu and Laguna. The claim is misleading and has been branded by the government as “fake news”; on June 15, authorities announced Metro Manila and Laguna would remain under its current, loosened lockdown restrictions until at least the end of June. 518. This video shows Dr. Anthony Fauci emphasizing the importance of clinical trials for a COVID-19 vaccine, not claiming that 'vaccines make you worse' A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows US infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci admitting vaccines are “toxic” and can “make you worse” during a press conference about the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; in the video, Fauci explains the importance of clinical trials to ensure potential vaccines against COVID-19 are effective. AFP has previously debunked multiple claims that vaccines are harmful. 517. This is not a photo of the 1918-1920 influenza pandemic A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it was taken during the “Spanish flu” pandemic between 1918 and 1920. The claim is misleading; the photo has circulated in reports about fashion in 1913, about five years before the 1918 influenza pandemic; a spokesman for German photo agency Süddeutsche Zeitung Photo told AFP the photo shows “nose veil” fashion in 1913 after the Balkan war. 516. This video does not show police in India beating a man to death for violating COVID-19 lockdown; the footage has circulated in reports about police assaulting an intoxicated man in an inciden unrelated to the novel coronavirus A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows police in India beating a man to death after he violated a nationwide coronavirus lockdown by \"venturing out for food\". The claim is false; the video has circulated in reports about police beating an intoxicated man in India’s Madhya Pradesh state in an incident unrelated to the ongoing lockdown; police said two officers had been suspended over the incident for \"assaulting\" a man. 515. Misleading claim made about Indonesian governor being lauded for his handling of COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows that Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan received an international award for “the best governor” in handling the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is misleading; the clip shows the governor taking part in a global online summit with other city leaders from around the world about responses to the COVID-19 crisis. 514. Video of nurse giving misleading advice about face masks spreads on social media A video of a nurse shared thousands of times on Facebook during the coronavirus pandemic warns the public against continuously wearing face masks. Her claims that wearing a face mask could harm the body are misleading, according to medical experts. 513. Nigerian government did not say schools would reopen on July 13 An article circulating on Facebook and Twitter claims that Nigerian schools will reopen on July 13, 2020, according to a government official. However, the claim is false; the author of the report admitted it was incorrect and Nigerian authorities have dismissed the claim. 512. Coronavirus testing is not an excuse to implant Gates-funded microchips Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim the coronavirus pandemic is a cover for a Gates Foundation-funded effort to implant microchips when patients’ noses or throats are swabbed during COVID-19 testing. This is false; the pandemic is real, the foundation denied the claim, and experts say there is a medical reason for the way swabs are used when testing for the disease. 511. France has not announced a ban on Africans travelling to Europe if they refuse 'the European vaccine' for COVID-19 Facebook posts circulating in Africa claim France has announced a ban on Africans travelling to Europe if they refuse “the European vaccine” for COVID-19. However, France’s foreign ministry rejected the claims and AFP Fact Check found no trace of such an announcement. 510. Misleading image used to claim vaccines are dangerous An image shared on social media claims vaccines are dangerous because they contain potassium chloride, the chemical used to stop the heart in lethal injections. This is misleading; it is a salt that is necessary for organs to function properly, and medical experts say the minimal amount used in vaccines will not harm recipients. 509. Italy's health ministry rejects online 'hoax' about virus origin Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that the novel coronavirus disease is caused by bacteria and can be cured with household painkillers. The posts also claim that Italian doctors found a cure for COVID-19. Both claims are false; Italy's health ministry told AFP Fact Check that the posts were “a hoax”. 508. Empty body bags were used in protests and not part of 'fake' pandemic plot Facebook posts shared thousands of times accuse authorities of lining the streets with empty body bags in a bid to fool people about the “fake” novel coronavirus pandemic. But the claim is false: the photo was taken at a US protest against the government’s handling of the novel coronavirus crisis. 507. List of unproven COVID-19 treatments debunks by health experts A message shared on WhatsApp and Facebook purportedly by a recovering COVID-19 patient in Britain makes several claims on ways people can prevent or treat the novel coronavirus. However, experts and health agencies have refuted most of the claims. 506. This video does not show migrant workers stopped at Delhi-Uttar Pradesh border during the COVID-19 lockdown Footage of a large crowd has been shared in multiple Facebook posts claiming to show migrant workers who were stopped at the Delhi-Uttar Pradesh state border during India's nationwide COVID-19 lockdown in May 2020. However, the claim is false; the video has circulated online since at least October 2019 and corresponds with local news reports about an Indian Army recruitment drive in Faizabad, Uttar Pradesh. 505. Woman in viral video makes misleading claims about face masks A viral video shared on multiple social media platforms shows a woman outside a US store making several misleading claims about the use of face masks including that they do not protect from COVID-19 and that their use makes you sick. Research backed by leading academic institutions and international health bodies recommends they be used along with other measures to help limit the spread of the novel coronavirus. 504. This video does not show conditions in a COVID-19 hospital ward in Delhi A video purporting to show several dead bodies lying beside coronavirus patients in a hospital ward has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it was filmed in the Indian capital of Delhi. The claim is misleading; the footage in fact shows the King Edward Memorial Hospital in Mumbai; it has circulated in several reports about the hospital’s COVID-19 ward. A Facebook post claiming that the Ugandan government is offering grants to local businesses in an effort to cushion its citizens against the effects of COVID-19 has been shared hundreds of times. The claim is false; the Facebook post appears on a page impersonating Uganda’s finance ministry. The ministry has flatly denied partnering with any organisation for purposes of offering grants to Ugandan entrepreneurs in the ongoing pandemic. 502. Myth circulates online that Italy has discovered that COVID-19 is a bacteria, curable by paracetamol Mulitple Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim the Italian health ministry has discovered COVID-19 is caused by bacteria. The posts go on to claim the health ministry discovered COVID-19 is exacerbated by 5G technology and can be cured using painkillers and antibiotics. The claims are false; the Italian health ministry said the posts were “a hoax”; the claims have also been widely refuted by international experts, who have found COVID-19 is caused by the novel coronavirus. 501. This is not a photo of a Pakistani official violating social distancing rules in May 2020 A photo of a Pakistani provincial chief minister has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts in May 2020 alongside a claim that it shows him violating social distancing rules during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photo was taken in 2018 during a procession on Ashura, a Muslim holy day. 500. Lesotho has not created a COVID-19 herbal remedy (as of June 4) Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that people in Lesotho are \"immune\" to COVID-19 because the country apparently created a remedy for the disease. The claim is false; a health ministry spokesman denied the southern African state had endorsed such a treatment while the head of the company that makes the tonic featured in the posts said it has not been tested to treat COVID-19. 499. Nigeria did not give cash donations to all its citizens An article shared more than 14,000 times on Facebook claims the Nigerian government gave N20,000 ($52) to “everyone” across the country’s 36 states. This is false; the article in question shares a true story but uses an unrelated and misleading headline. Nigeria has a social investment programme to help the poor and handed out cash and food during the lockdown, but not to all citizens. 498. Video of fake 5G technology spreads on social media A video has been shared thousands of times on social media, claiming that circuit boards with “COV-19” inscribed on them are being fitted to 5G towers. The claim is false; Virgin Media, the company that distributes these boards, and an independent expert confirmed that the equipment is an aged satellite TV component unrelated to 5G technology. 497. Misleading social media posts claim adverse health effects of face masks Posts shared thousands of times on social media list a number of adverse health effects linked to wearing face masks. Some of these claims are false, while others are misleading, public health experts tell AFP. 496. This is not a photo of a daughter of the late Sri Lankan politician violating quarantine to attend a funeral A photo from the funeral of a recently deceased Sri Lankan politician, Arumugam Thondaman, has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts. The posts claim the image shows one of Thondaman’s daughters violated Sri Lanka's mandatory coronavirus quarantine policy for travelers by attending the ceremony shortly after returning to the country from overseas. The claim is false; the image shows Thondaman’s other daughter, who resides in Sri Lanka and did not travel from abroad to attend the funeral. 495. This is not a video of an Italian church that lost many of its congregants to COVID-19 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows an empty church in Italy after almost all of its congregants died from the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video shows a church in the US state of Mississippi during an online Easter service in April 2020. 494. This is not a video of Chinese citizens converting to Islam due to COVID-19, it shows an Eid-al-Fitr prayer in northwest China in 2015 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows Chinese citizens converting to Islam as a result of the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage actually shows an Eid-al-Fitr prayer in the Chinese city of Xining in 2015, years before the pandemic. 493. Conspiracy theories circulate about 5G 'microchip implants' Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that 5G mobile phones will work off microchips secretly implanted under the skin by vaccination for COVID-19. However, the posts combine various conspiracy theorists previously debunked by AFP Fact Check and experts reject any link between 5G technology and microchips. 492. Hoax circulates online that Taiwanese doctors have discovered COVID-19 as a 'combination of SARS and AIDS' Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim doctors from the National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) in Taipei have found that COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, is a combination of AIDS and SARS. The claim is false; according to a spokesperson from the hospital, the statement was not authored by its doctors; as of May 20, 2020, advisories from global health organisations have not characterised COVID-19 as a disease that is AIDS and SARS combined. Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube claim that salt is an effective remedy against the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; health experts have said there is no evidence that salt can treat the novel coronavirus disease; as of May 2020, the WHO says there is no remedy for COVID-19. Facebook and Instagram posts shared thousands of times claim that vaccines directly violate the Nuremberg Code, a set of research ethics principles for human experimentation established after World War II. This claim is false; medical ethics and legal experts said the principles, named after the Nuremberg trials, are compatible with vaccination. 489. Coronavirus 'survival rates' remain unknown, experts say Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter claim that seven countries, including the United States, Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom, have \"survival rates\" of more than 99.9 percent for people who contract the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; as of May 2020, several medical experts said global COVID-19 survival rates remain unknown for various reasons. 488. This picture does not show overgrown shrubs at a Malaysian theme park during the novel coronavirus lockdown An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter and Facebook which claim it shows overgrown shrubs at a theme park in Malaysia during a coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the image shows an abandoned theme park in Japan; it has circulated online since at least May 2019. 487. This photo does not show a victim of a deadly insect 'pandemic' during the novel coronavirus outbreak A photo of a person with several puncture wounds on their arm has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim China and Iran were hit by a deadly insect “pandemic\" during the coronavirus crisis. The claim is false; this photo has circulated in reports about a series of hornet attacks in China in 2013 -- almost seven years before the novel coronavirus was first detected. 486. Misinformation circulates about Japan’s plan to subsidise tourism after coronavirus lockdown is lifted Multiple online articles and social media posts published in May 2020 claim the Japanese government is set to subsidise trips for foreign tourists visiting the country by up to half of the cost after it lifts its coronavirus lockdown. The claim is misleading; on May 27, 2020, the Japanese government clarified the plan will only apply to Japanese residents making domestic travel, adding the details of the policy are still being finalised. 485. No evidence robbers are using chemical-laced face masks on victims in South Africa Facebook posts shared hundreds of times in South Africa claim that criminals posing as government officials are going around to people’s homes and distributing face masks that are laced with chemicals to knock them out and rob them. However, local police -- like their counterparts elsewhere in the world -- dismissed the claim as a myth. 484. US President Donald Trump did not offer Madagascar $2.5 million to developt its COVID-19 herbal remedy Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim US President Donald Trump approved a $2.5 million fund for Madagascar to mass-produce a herbal remedy touted by the island’s president as a cure for COVID-19. The claim is false; there is no evidence Trump made any such statement, and while the United States did give Madagascar $2.5 million to tackle the outbreak, government information on the fund’s use does not include producing a remedy. 483. Italian politician spreads false claims about Bill Gates in parliament speeches A video of Italian politician Sara Cunial blasting Bill Gates as a “vaccine criminal” in speeches to parliament has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube. But her statements are riddled with misinformation. AFP Fact Check debunks some of the claims. 482. Misleading claim circulates about coronavirus contact tracing app in New Zealand Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared thousands of times in May 2020 claim anyone in New Zealand who refuses to use a coronavirus contact tracing app has been banned from entering shops during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is misleading; as of May 27, the app named in the posts is not a contact tracing app and is not being used by New Zealand's government as part of its coronavirus strategy; to date, the government's only coronavirus contact tracing app is voluntary for businesses and the public; shops in New Zealand are also not required to record consumer information for contact tracing purposes. 481. This is not a photo of buses arranged by an Indian opposition party to transport migrant workers during the COVID-19 lockdown A photo of a queue of buses in India has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim they were organised by a leading opposition politician to transport migrant workers who were left stranded after a nationwide coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the photo has circulated in reports since February 2019 about a Hindu festival. 480. Madagascan president denies Putin ordered herbal drink touted as coronavirus remedy A Facebook post shared thousands of times claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered Covid-Organics, a herbal drink touted by Madagascan President Andry Rajoelina as a cure for COVID-19. The post claims that Putin urged Africans “not to follow” the World Health Organization (WHO), which has warned against untested traditional medicine. However, AFP Fact Check found no official reports from the Kremlin of any order and the Madagascan presidency denied the claims. 479. Madagascan president has not called on African states to quit WHO Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim that Madagascar’s President Andry Rajoelina called on African nations to leave the World Health Organization (WHO). Although the leader has criticised the agency for warning against a herbal remedy he recommends to treat COVID-19, AFP Fact Check found no public record of him making such a statement. The Madagascan presidency has also rejected the claim. 478. Misleading claim circulates online that China and Japan have re-entered nationwide coronavirus lockdowns in May 2020 Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim China and Japan have re-entered a strict coronavirus lockdown in mid-May 2020 following a “second wave” of the virus. The posts were shared as a \"breaking news\" alert on May 16. The claim is misleading; as of May 22, Japan has begun easing lockdown restrictions; on May 18, China put one city in Jilin Province under total lockdown but it has relaxed restrictions in other parts of the country. 477. This is not a real image of Bill Gates in handcuffs, it's a doctored photo of a 2014 mobster arrest Multiple posts shared with a picture of a hand-cuffed Bill Gates being led away by FBI agents allege the US billionaire has been arrested for biological terrorism. This is false; the image is doctored and actually shows the 2015 arrest of New York mobster Vincent Asaro. The report was first published by a satirical website but was reproduced elsewhere as real news. 476. UN falsely accused of demanding Ecuador ‘legalize’ abortions to get COVID-19 aid An article claims that a nearly $50 million United Nations humanitarian aid package to Ecuador is conditional on the South American country legalizing abortions. This is false; the UN said there was no such condition, and abortion is already allowed under limited circumstances. 475. This is not a genuine news report stating that US President Trump has tested positive for the coronavirus -- the footage has been edited and the original said that one of the president's valets had tested positive A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows that US President Donald Trump tested positive for the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video has been edited from a Fox News report about one of Trump’s valets testing positive for COVID-19 published on May 7, 2020. 474. This is not a video of an Italian boy who lost his mother because of COVID-19; the child speaks in Spanish and the footage has circulated since before the first coronavirus death was reported in Italy A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube which claim it shows an Italian boy looking up at the night sky calling out for his mother who died from the novel coronavirus. However, the claim is false; the boy speaks Spanish in the video; the footage has circulated online before Italy recorded its first COVID-19 death in February 2020. 473. Hoax list of 'COVID-19 safety guidelines' circulates in India A list of purported COVID-19 safety guidelines has been shared in multiple Facebook and Instagram posts that claim it was issued by the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR), India’s leading research group on the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the ICMR said it did not issue the purported advisory; an online search found the list was not included on ICMR's website or in guidelines from India's health ministry. 472. Hoax government notice circulates in the Philippines about the civil service exam A photo of a purported notice announcing that people who were unable to take the Philippine government’s civil service exam due to the COVID-19 pandemic will automatically receive a passing mark has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts. The claim is false; the Philippine Civil Service Commission (CSC) denied issuing the notice, and an online search found no such announcement about automatically passing delayed test takers. 471. Hoax circulates about new 'COVID-19 vaccine law' in Western Australia Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claim the Australian state of Western Australia has recently passed a “COVID-19 Emergency Powers Act” that authorises forcible medical examination and vaccination in schools. The claim is misleading; a spokesperson from Western Australia’s Department of Health told AFP no such law has been passed during the pandemic; as of May 2020, the state has no COVID-19 vaccine programme. 470. This video does not show frogs for sale in China after coronavirus lockdown was lifted A video showing hundreds of frogs being sold from the back of a truck has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it was taken in China after the country lifted its coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; this clip actually shows frogs being sold in Thailand. 469. Post falsely claims there were no US flu deaths during COVID-19 crisis A Facebook post shared 10,000 times claims no Americans died from the flu in 2020, suggesting that the national count of COVID-19 fatalities is exaggerated. This is false. Data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that more than 7,500 Americans are estimated to have died this year from influenza during the novel coronavirus. 468. Gates Foundation targeted with misleading claims about India polio vaccine campaign Social media posts and online articles shared tens of thousands of times claim that the foundation of billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates tested a polio vaccine in India that left at least 490,000 children paralyzed. The claim is misleading; official statistics show only a tiny number of cases in which the oral polio vaccine directly resulted in Indian children contracting the disease. 467. This video shows an annual Hindu ritual and has nothing to do with coronavirus A video viewed thousands of times on Facebook posts claims to show Indians throwing statues of their gods into a river after they allegedly failed to protect them from the new coronavirus. The claim is false; the clip dates back to at least September 2015, years before the COVID-19 pandemic. It shows a ritual during the closure of a religious festival dedicated to the Hindu god Ganesh. 466. Freediver's video about face masks contains misleading claims, experts say A video shared more than 10,000 times on Facebook features a freediving champion who claims that masks don't offer protection from the novel coronavirus and that the moisture created by breathing into a mask actually offers a fertile environment for the virus. However, experts told AFP that the video makes several misleading assumptions. 465. Misinformation circulates about babies contracting Kawasaki disease during the coronavirus pandemic Two photos have been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim that Kawasaki disease is spreading among babies during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is misleading; one of the photos has previously circulated in reports about a skin blister caused by a different disease; health authorities are still investigating cases of a Kawasaki-like condition observed in some children with COVID-19, and maintain that children remain “minimally affected” by the virus overall. 464. Hoax circulates that Australian $10 notes feature images of coronavirus and Bill Gates Photos of Australian $10 banknotes have been shared multiple times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that the note features images representing coronavirus and the billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates. The claim is false; the Reserve Bank of Australia said the images on the notes instead show a tree native to Australia and Australian writer Mary Gilmore. 463. This is not a photo of Ramadan gift bags in India during the COVID-19 pandemic, it dates from at least 2015 A photo has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claims to show gift bags distributed to Muslims during the holy month of Ramadan by India’s Telangana state government during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false, this photo has circulated online since at least 2015; Telangana’s chief minister has announced it will not distribute Ramadan gifts this year due to the COVID-19 outbreak. 462. Nigeria imposed a curfew to slow the spread of COVID-19, not to build 5G masts, it has not yet set up 5G networks A post shared hundreds of times on Facebook claims that the Nigerian presidency imposed a curfew to allow Chinese companies to build 5G masts. This is false; the curfew is aimed at slowing the spread of the novel coronavirus. Authorities say 5G licences have not been issued to any firms in Nigeria -- Chinese or otherwise. 461. This is not a video of crows flocking to the US during the coronavirus pandemic, it shows a swarm in Texas in 2016 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in May 2020 alongside a claim it shows crows “coming to Texas” after “attacking Wuhan, China”. The posts were shared as countries worldwide continue to fight the spread of the novel coronavirus, which was first detected in Wuhan in December 2019. The claim is false; the video shows black birds swarming the US state of Texas in December 2016; the audio of the video in some of the posts has been manipulated. 460. This photo does not show a packed plane in Indonesia during the coronavirus pandemic A photo showing rows of passengers wearing face masks and shields on board a plane has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it was taken in Indonesia during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photo shows Indian nationals who returned home on a government-chartered flight from Singapore during the pandemic. 459. Website falsely claims mask-wearing is mandatory in Canada during COVID-19 Articles claim that not wearing a mask in Canada during the novel coronavirus pandemic can lead to a Can$3,000 fine or jail time. This is false. Masks are required aboard airplanes and by certain stores, but AFP did not find any Canadian jurisdiction where wearing them on the street is mandatory. 458. This list claiming to show viral outbreak originating in China from 1950 to 2019 is misleading Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook purport to show a list of notable viral outbreaks between 1950 and 2019 which “originated in China”. The claim is misleading; some of the viral diseases listed in the posts were first reported elsewhere in the world. 457. Fake 'roadmap' for India's plans to relax coronavirus lockdown circulates online Multiple Facebook posts have shared a purported roadmap for the Indian government's plans to ease a nationwide coronavirus lockdown alongside a claim that it shows an official government announcement. The claim is false; India’s official Press Information Bureau said the government had not release any such plan and labelled the posts “fake news”; the dates included in the purported roadmap corresponded with the Irish government's \"roadmap for reopening society and business\" during the coronavirus pandemic. 456. Misleading article warns against face masks during COVID-19 pandemic An article that has been widely shared on social media warns healthy people against wearing face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic, citing alleged risks. But experts say masks can help curb the spread of the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, and that the article contains multiple false or misleading claims. 455. US Vice President Mike Pence did not deliver empty boxes to hospital during the coronavirus crisis A video has been viewed millions of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Weibo and Twitter alongside a claim it shows US Vice President Mike Pence delivering empty boxes to a hospital for a publicity stunt during the coronavirus crisis. The claim gained traction online after the the clip was aired on the US television show Jimmy Kimmel Live!, hosted by comedian Jimmy Kimmel. The claim is false; the clip has been edited from a longer video which shows that Pence made comments about delivering \"empty\" boxes as a joke; Kimmel issued an apology about the misleading video broadcast on his show. 454. Bill Gates did not say that a COVID-19 vaccine could kill almost one million people An article circulating on Facebook claims that Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates said a COVID-19 vaccine could kill almost one million people, citing an interview he gave. This is false; Gates was talking about vaccine safety and the potential for side effects, and gave a hypothetical figure to illustrate the number of people who could possibly be affected by them worldwide. 453. Misleading claims about face masks circulate social media A post on Facebook criticizes the effectiveness of face masks in protecting the wearer from COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. This is misleading; US health authorities recommend they be worn to stop the spread of the disease, not to prevent the wearer from contracting it. 452. This photo does not show bodies of euthanised COVID-19 patients -- it is a 2015 image of a deadly hajj stampede in Saudi Arabia A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows bodies of elderly coronavirus patients who were euthanised by their governments as a “practical” response to the pandemic. The claim is false; the photo actually shows bodies of victims in a hajj stampede in 2015; the claim about governments euthanising COVID-19 patients is an old hoax previously debunked by AFP. 451. This videos does not show sloth bears roaming a tea estate in Sri Lanka during the coronavirus curfew; it has circulated before the pandemic A video of three sloth bears has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it was captured in Sri Lanka during a curfew implemented due to the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the clip has circulated in reports about sloth bears in south India since November 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic; a Sri Lankan wildlife activist told AFP it would be \"highly unlikely\" to see sloth bears in the Sri Lankan town which was cited in the misleading social media posts. 450. Misleading claim circulates that Thailand tops global index for COVID-19 reponse and has lowest number of coronavirus cases Multiple Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times claim that Thailand has “ranked no. 1 in the COVID-19 fight category” based on an international health security index. The posts add Thailand has the \"lowest number of infected cases at present\". The claims, however, are misleading; the index cited in the posts, the Global Health Security (GHS) Index, was published months before the COVID-19 pandemic; Thailand also does not have the lowest number of COVID-19 infections in Asia or worldwide, according to multiple international authorities. 449. Experts dismiss purported doctor's 'ridiculous' claim that ingesting semen could cure COVID-19 A video has been viewed more than 100,000 times in multiple posts on YouTube, Facebook and Twitter in which a purported Philippine doctor claims ingesting semen could cure a patient infected with the novel coronavirus, citing a 2016 scientific study. The claim is false; the authors of the 2016 study told AFP the claim was \"ridiculous\" and their findings have “nothing to do with COVID-19”; as of May 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) has said there is no cure for COVID-19. 448. Children did not die from a COVId-19 vaccine in Guinea -- the video misrepresents a news report from March 2019 A YouTube video shared thousands of times claims that two children died from a novel coronavirus vaccine in Guinea. The claim is false; the video misrepresents a news report on children who fell ill in March 2019 after taking anti-parasite drugs. 447. This video does not show a 5G mast in flames in the Italian city of La Spezia A video has been viewed more than 100,000 times in multiple Facebook posts that claim to show a 5G mast burning in the Italian city of La Spezia. The claim is misleading; the video in fact shows a transmission tower in La Spezia with only 3G and 4G antenna; as of May 13, 2020, 5G has not been rolled out in the northwestern Italian city. 446. Myth circulates online that prolonged use of face masks can cause hypercapnia Multiple Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts shared hundreds of times claim that wearing a face mask for an extended period of time could cause hypercapnia, a condition caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide in the blood. The claim is misleading; health experts in Thailand have said that as of May 2020, there is no evidence that wearing a mask for a long period can cause hypercapnia. 445. This video does not show social distancing failure on an Air India flight during the coronavirus pandemic A video of a row between passengers and cabin crew on board a plane has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts which claim it was filmed on an Air India flight. The posts claim the the video shows the airline failed to enforce social distancing measures during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; Pakistan International Airlines said the video was taken aboard one of its flights in April 2020; the video has previously circulated in reports about a Pakistan International Airlines flight. 444. This clip has been edited -- the original video shows Rahul Gandhi making a clear statement A video clip of a leading opposition politician in India has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts alongside a claim that it shows him making a confusing remark about India’s system for classifying regional COVID-19 infections levels. The claim is false; the clip has been edited; the original video shows lawmaker Rahul Gandhi, the former president of the Indian National Congress (INC) political party, making a clear statement about the need for local control regarding COVID-19 classifications. 443. This 2019 photo has been doctored to include a COVID-19 reference A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows a placard with a message congratulating Sri Lankan leaders for \"eradicating\" the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the photo has been doctored to include a COVID-19 reference; the original photo of a political placard was taken by AFP in November 2019 following President Gotabaya Rajapaksa’s election victory. 442. These videos show victims of a gas leak at a chemical plant in India in May 2020, not victims of COVID-19 Three videos have been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim they show people who died after contracting the novel coronavirus in India. The claim is false; the videos show the victims of a major gas leak at a chemical plant in India in May 2020. 441. With Holocaust comparison, misleading Facebook post claims Bill Gates seeks 'digital tattoos' A post shared more than 160,000 times on Facebook during the novel coronavirus pandemic says Bill Gates wants “digital tattoos” to check who has been tested, and asks if it would be “like holocaust victims have.” This is misleading. Gates has spoken of the need for “digital certificates” for vaccination and testing but there is no evidence he has been in favor of a visible mark, like a tattoo. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation also said the claim is false. 440. Ghana leader falsely claims his country fronts Africa's COVID-19 testing Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Addo claimed in a speech that his country had administered more COVID-19 tests per million people than any other country in Africa. However, the claim is false; AFP has found from available statistics that Ghana comes behind South Africa and at least two other African countries. 439. Misinformation circulates about antiviral medicine remdesivir Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claim the antiviral medicine remdesivir has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a treatment for the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is misleading; as of May 12, 2020, the FDA has only authorised the emergency use of remdesivir, an experimental drug, in treating COVID-19 patients in hospitals; as of May 12, 2020, there is no FDA-approved product available to treat COVID-19. 438. This 2017 photo shows food waste in Australia -- it is unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic An image of a truck dumping fresh tomatoes onto an empty field has been shared thousands of times in multiple Sinhala-language Facebook posts which suggest it shows a scene in Sri Lanka. The posts claim it illustrates the government’s failure to help farmers to sell their produce during a coronavirus lockdown. The claim is misleading; the photo has circulated in 2017 news reports about food waste in Australia. 437. This video does not show shoppers in Pakistan fleeing police after flouting coronavirus lockdown -- it has circulated in reports since at least 2015 A video of people climbing down a building has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and WhatsApp alongside a claim it shows shoppers attempting to flee a shop after police discovered it had flouted Pakistan’s coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the footage has circulated online since at least 2015 in reports about a police raid on a brothel in Pakistan. 436. ‘Plandemic’ video peddles falsehoods about COVID-19 “Plandemic” -- a slickly-edited, 26-minute interview with a discredited researcher -- has been widely shared on social media. But the video, which YouTube and Facebook are working to remove for violating content standards, contains multiple false or misleading claims, including about the novel coronavirus, experts say. 435. This photo shows a Pakistani chief minister at iftar in Pakistan in 2018, not flouting COVID-19 lockdown measures in 2020 A photo of a Pakistani chief minister has been shared thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows him flouting Pakistan’s coronavirus lockdown measures at iftar, a daily evening meal enjoyed by Muslims during the holy month of Ramadan. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows Chief Minister Murad Ali Shah at iftar in 2018. 434. US health authorities have not cut reported COVID-19 death toll Posts on social media claim the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has revised down its death toll for COVID-19. This is false; the CDC says it has not cut its statistics on fatalities from the disease caused by the novel coronavirus, and that its websites include two sets of figures -- one lower than the other -- based on different sources. 433. Misleading claim circulates that flu vaccines make people more vulnerable to infections An image purportedly showing an article about flu vaccination has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter posts alongside a claim that flu vaccines can make people more vulnerable to infections. The posts, shared in May 2020 during the ongoing coronavirus pandemic, add that those who receive flu shots are “the first to die in an actual global pandemic”. The claim is misleading; the image in the misleading posts relates to a now-deleted article on a US-based non-commercial health site; epidemiologists and global health authorities say flu vaccinations make people's immune systems stronger, not weaker; as of May 2020, there is no evidence that people who are immunised against the flu are more vulnerable to COVID-19. 432. This video has circulated online since at least 2017 -- two years before the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter in May 2020 alongside claims that it shows an intoxicated police officer in India after the government allowed liquor shops to reopen during the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. This claim is misleading; the video has circulated in media reports about a drunk police officer since at least June 2017. 431. This is not a photo of a lone cleaner at Islam's holiest shrine; the image has been doctored and the original has circulated in reports about a Saudi policeman An image of a person sitting near Islam's holiest shrine, the Kaaba in Saudi Arabia, has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and on online blogs. It was shared alongside a claim it shows a lone cleaner who was the only person permitted to sit around the Kaaba during the coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the photo has been doctored to remove two people standing near the Kaaba; the original image has circulated in media reports about a Saudi policeman praying at the Islamic shrine. 430. This photo of parrots on sacks of grain has circulated online since at least 2014 -- years before the COVID-19 pandemic A photo showing scores of green parrots sitting on sacks of grain has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it was taken during a nationwide coronavirus lockdown in India. The claim is false; the photo has circulated online since at least March 2014. 429. This graphic about a 'COVID-19 lockdown extension' in the Philippines has been doctored A graphic purportedly shows a news bulletin about an alleged extension of a COVID-19 lockdown in the Philippines until May 30, 2020, has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts claiming to reference a government announcement. The claim is false; the date on the graphic has been digitally altered; the Phillipine news organisation that published the original graphic condemned the doctored image as “fake news”; as of May 10, the Philippine government has not announced any further COVID-19 lockdown extensions after May 15. 428. This video shows a street in Dubai, not Saudi Arabia, after authorities eased coronavirus lockdown measures A video of a street parade has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok and YouTube alongside a claim it shows people celebrating the end of a coronavirus lockdown in Saudi Arabia. The claim is false; the video was filmed in Dubai; the footage corresponds with media reports about residents celebrating on the streets after Dubai authorities eased 24-hour quarantine measures in two districts. 427. This photo shows a 'die in' protest by environmental activists in Germany, not Ecuador during the COVID-19 pandemic A photo showing dozens of people lying on the ground has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows the situation in Ecuador during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows an environmental protest outside a train station in Germany. 426. Hoax circulates that ‘not a single vegetarian has contracted COVID-19 according to the WHO' Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared hundreds of times claim the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that no vegetarian has contracted the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the WHO denied issuing the report; as of May 2020, health experts have said there is no scientific evidence to suggest that a vegetarian diet prevents infection from COVID-19. 425. A flu shot will not make you test positive for COVID-19 Posts on social media claim that people who have been vaccinated against the flu in the last 10 years will test positive for COVID-19. This is false; experts say the novel coronavirus that causes the disease is unrelated to the flu, and that data on approved COVID-19 tests does not support the claim. 424. This photo has circulated in 2018 reports about Muslims offering Ramadan prayers in north India, it does not show violations of COVID-19 lockdown A photo of hundreds of people praying together has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows Muslims in south India flouting the nation’s COVID-19 lockdown to offer night-time prayers. The claim is false; the photo was published by a photography agency in 2018 and shows Muslims in north India praying at night during the holy month of Ramadan. 423. Misinformation on US flu shot ingredients resurfaces during pandemic A widely-circulated image claims to reveal the ingredients contained in this year’s flu shots. The alleged ingredients include mercury, antifreeze, phenol, animal blood, animal viruses, and formaldehyde. Trace amounts of formaldehyde are present in flu vaccines authorized in the US this year, and the mercury-based product thimerosal is present in some of them. The photo’s list of ingredients is misleading and mostly inaccurate. 422. This video shows a hospital in India, not Pakistan and the facility said they do not treat COVID-19 patients A video of a woman claiming that pneumonia, HIV, and cardiovascular patients are being treated together in a hospital’s COVID-19 isolation ward has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. The footage includes superimposed text that claims the hospital is the Abbasi Shaheed Hospital, a state-run facility in the Pakistani city of Karachi. The claim is false; the video in fact shows a hospital in the Indian city of Mumbai; Abbasi Shaheed Hospital also refuted the claim and said that they do not admit COVID-19 patients in general. 421. Doctored photo is latest disinformation directed at Bill Gates amid the COVID-19 pandemic Social media users have shared a photo that claims to show a “Center for Global Human Population Reduction” affiliated with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The image, however, has been manipulated. The stone signage it captures is the foundation’s Discovery Center in Seattle, which is not home to a depopulation effort, nor are the Microsoft co-founder and his wife behind any such initiative. 420. This fabricated headline was added to a screenshot of a CNN interview A photo shared hundreds of times on Facebook claims to show the American cable news channel CNN describing cases of COVID-19 in Nigeria as “false”, accusing the government of making them up to embezzle public funds. This is false: The image, taken from a CNN interview of New York's mayor, has been doctored and the false headline added to it. 419. Footage of bodies at New York funeral home circulates with misleading claim in India A video has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows corpses in body bags at an apartment that is home to a New York-based Islamic group. The posts claim the victims died in the apartment after contracting the novel coronavirus because they ignored social distancing rules. The claims are misleading; the footage in fact shows body bags at an Islamic funeral home in New York during the coronavirus pandemic; a spokesperson for the mortuary told AFP that the deceased were people of many faiths. 418. These photos do not show improved air quality in Sri Lanka during the COVID-19 curfew, they are of the Philippine capital Manila Three photos have been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim they show improved air quality in the Sri Lankan capital of Colombo during a nationwide curfew implemented due to the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photos actually show the skyline of the Philippine capital Manila. 417. This video shows a gathering at a mosque in Maharashtra before India announced a nationwide COVID-19 lockdown A video of a group of men leaving a mosque has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter published in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows Muslims who gathered to pray in the Indian state of Gujarat in defiance of a nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is misleading; the video has circulated in reports about a mosque gathering in the Indian state of Maharashtra one day before India announced a national lockdown. 416. This video of Boris Johnson has circulated in media reports since August 2018 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram alongside a claim it shows UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson offering cups of tea to journalists after recovering from an illness. The posts were shared shortly after Johnson returned to work following hospital treatment for COVID-19. The claim in the social media posts is false; this video has circulated in media reports since August 2018, more than one year before the coronavirus pandemic and before Johnson became prime minister. 415. Misleading mask graphic claims to show exact chance of COVID-19 spread Graphics shared thousands of times on social media claim to show the exact probability of COVID-19 carriers spreading the disease if they or another person wears a mask. The claim is misleading; experts say that while masks do decrease the risk, there is no reliable information on the specific chance of transmission. 414. This bill for medical services in Singapore was unrelated to COVID-19 treatment A photo of a bill for more than SGD $180,000 (USD $128,000) from a Singapore hospital has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim the invoice was given to a coronavirus patient after treatment for the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; Singapore General Hospital (SGH) said the bill was for medical services unrelated to COVID-19; the photo was also taken from a fundraising campaign webpage for a woman who was described as suffering from illnesses unrelated to COVID-19. 413. This video shows a police drill in India during the coronavirus pandemic, it does not show police detaining people for failing to wear face masks A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows police in India detaining people in a van carrying a COVID-19 patient after they failed to wear face masks outside. The claim is misleading; a spokesperson for India’s Tiruppur Police told AFP the video was staged for a police drill during the coronavirus pandemic; the video has previously circulated in media reports about a police drill in Tiruppur district. 412. This video has circulated since 2016 in reports about a noise complaint at a Mumbai mosque, it does not show a scene during the COVID-19 lockdown A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows a Muslim politician in India urging a police officer to open a mosque in order to allow people to pray during the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; the video has actually circulated online since at least 2016 in reports about a noise complaint at a Mumbai mosque. 411. Hoax report circulates about University of Oxford coronavirus vaccine trial A report circulating in Sri Lanka claims that a COVID-19 vaccine trial at the University of Oxford in England has been \"successful\". The purported news article, which has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, states 72 out of 100 COVID-19 patients recovered from the virus after receiving the vaccine. The claim is false; as of May 4, 2020, researchers said the trial was ongoing and only included people who have never tested positive for COVID-19; the purported report was published on a blog site named \"CNN Lanka\", which has no relationship to the US-based media channel CNN. 410. Residents in the US state of Pennsylvania are advised, but not required, to take COVID-19 precautions A Facebook post shared more than 29,000 times claims people in Pennsylvania who do not wear a face mask in public during the novel coronavirus pandemic risk a $500 fine and up to six months in jail. This is false; authorities in the US state recommend wearing face masks as a precaution, but say they will not penalize those who do not. 409. Trump makes false claims about COVID-19 testing President Donald Trump has falsely claimed that the United States conducted more testing for COVID-19 than all other countries combined, and suggested that the administration of his predecessor Barack Obama left behind “bad, broken tests.” 408. Canadian Muslims falsely accused of breaking COVID-19 distancing rules during Ramadan Facebook posts accuse the Muslim community in Canada’s Calgary of breaking COVID-19 social distancing rules during Ramadan, using a photo of a crowded Islamic center as proof. This is false; the photo was taken during the Eid al-Fitr holiday in August 2019, and mosques in Calgary are closed. 407. The video shows an interfaith prayer in Italy in remembrance of COVID-19 victims, not a Koran recitation A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows a Koran recitation in Italy as part of the government’s effort to fight the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is misleading; the footage shows an interreligious gathering held by the Diocese of Carpi in northern Italy to remember COVID-19 victims. 406. This rendition of the Indian national anthem was produced in August 2017 to mark India’s 71st Independence Day, not to thank the country for supplying hydroxychloroquine A video of young adults singing the Indian national anthem has been shared on Facebook and Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic alongside claims that it shows American students performing to thank India for supplying the US with hydroxychloroquine, a malaria drug that has been involved in clinical trials for potential COVID-19 treatment. The claim is false; this rendition of the Indian national anthem was produced in August 2017 to mark India’s 71st Independence Day. 405. These are test kits made in South Korea, not a 'cure' for COVID-19 Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook claim that the United States has found a cure for the novel coronavirus. This is false; the pictures being shared are of rapid test kits made in South Korea, while the hunt for a cure continues. 404. Guinea has not ordered the arrest of all Chinese nationals A video of a man rebuking foreigners has been viewed thousands of times on social media alongside a claim that the Guinean government has ordered the arrest of all Chinese nationals in the country while awaiting the safe return of Guineans from China. However, the video was actually recorded last year before the pandemic, and the Guinean government has not issued any such order. 403. This may not be the best time to visit a hair salon – but there is no proof they have caused almost half of coronavirus deaths Posts shared hundreds of times on WhatsApp and Facebook claim that hair salons are responsible for almost 50 percent of all coronavirus deaths. There is no evidence to support the claim, which has been ascribed to a non-existent US health chief. 402. This photo has circulated in reports since 2013 about Muslims praying on a Sydney street An image has been shared on Facebook in April 2020 alongside a claim that it shows Muslims praying on a street in the Australian city of Sydney. The image was shared as the city's residents continued to face stay-at-home orders during the novel coronavirus pandemic. Comments from some Facebook users on the misleading post indicated they believed the photo was taken during the lockdown restrictions, when in fact the photograph has circulated in reports since 2013 about people praying on a Sydney street during Ramadan. The same image has previously circulated with a misleading claim that it shows people praying on a street in the US. 401. WHO warns against self-medicating for COVID-19 with aspirin, lemon juice and honey 'remedy' Multiple Facebook posts claim that aspirin, lemon juice and honey have been combined to make a \"home remedy\" for COVID-19 in Italy. The claim is misleading; the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned against self-medicating for COVID-19, saying there is no current medicine that can effectively treat the disease; official guidance released by the Italian Ministry of Health about the coronavirus does not mention the purported home remedy. 400. This photo has circulated in reports since 2013 about Muslims praying on a Sydney street, it does not show prayer during the COVID-19 lockdown An image has been shared on Facebook in April 2020 alongside a claim that it shows Muslims praying on a street in the Australian city of Sydney. The image was shared as the city's residents continued to face stay-at-home orders during the novel coronavirus pandemic. Comments from some Facebook users on the misleading post indicated they believed the photo was taken during the lockdown restrictions, when in fact the photograph has circulated in reports since 2013 about people praying on a Sydney street during Ramadan. The same image has previously circulated with a misleading claim that it shows people praying on a street in the US. 399. This photo shows a nurse in India treating a man who sustained a leg injury, not one apologising to a Muslim man after accusing Muslims of spreading COVID-19 A photo has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows a nurse apologising to a Muslim man after she blamed the Muslim community for spreading COVID-19 in India. The posts claim the nurse was forced to apologise by a local politician. The claim is false; the nurse, the politician and local police all said the photo in fact shows a man receiving first aid after sustaining a laceration to his leg; additional photos and footage also show the man’s injury. 398. These photos have circulated online since at least 2015 – years before the COVID-19 pandemic An image has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit alongside claims that it shows trucks carrying COVID-19 relief that were set on fire by rebels of the New People’s Army (NPA), the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines. However, the image has been shared in a misleading context; it has circulated online since at least 2015 – years before the COVID-19 pandemic – in posts about supply trucks targeted by NPA rebels. 397. Eating papaya salad does not prevent COVID-19 infection, health experts say A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube which claims that eating papaya salad can help to prevent infection from the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; as of April 2020, health experts have said there is no evidence that papaya salad can prevent people from catching the virus; the World Health Organization (WHO) maintains that wearing masks, social distancing and washing hands regularly are the most effective methods of preventing infection. 396. Footage of axe attack in Pakistan circulates as sectarian hoax in India after COVID-19 lockdown A graphic video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows two Islamist extremists killing a Hindu man in the Indian state of Rajasthan during India’s COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; police in Pakistan and several media outlets report that the attack took place in Pakistan’s Punjab province in March 2020; people can be heard speaking in Punjabi in the video. 395. Hoax text message circulated online about Australia's coronavirus contact-tracing app An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook which claim it shows a government text message about a new coronavirus contact-tracing app in Australia. The claim is false; Australian authorities said the purported text message was a hoax; the Australian Federal Police said it had launched an investigation. 394. Nobel laureate Tasuku Honjo refutes 'false' quote attributed to him about the novel coronavirus Multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and on various websites have shared a purported quote about the novel coronavirus from Japanese physician Tasuku Honjo, the 2018 winner of the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. The posts, shared thousands of times, quote Dr Honjo as stating that the virus is “not natural” and was “manufactured in China”, as well as stating he previously worked at a laboratory in Chinese city of Wuhan for four years. The claim is misleading; Dr Honjo said he never made the purported comments, dismissing the posts as “misinformation”; his biography on the Kyoto University website shows he has never held a position at a laboratory in China. 393. These photos show victims of a deadly heatwave in 2015 that killed hundreds in Pakistan, not of COVID-19 victims Three photos showing dozens of body bags have been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook which claim they show the bodies of COVID-19 victims in Pakistan. The claim is false; the photos in fact show covered corpses in Pakistan after a severe heatwave in 2015 that left hundreds dead. 392. This video shows the Philippine National Police conducting a training exercise, not shooting a man dead at a COVID-19 checkpoint A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows police shooting a man dead at a COVID-19 checkpoint in the Philippines. The claim is false; the Philippine National Police said that the video shows a “training drill”; a closer analysis of the footage shows the man moving several times shortly after the sound of a gunshot rings out. 391. Viral videos of Africans attacked in China were filmed years ago Videos showing black people being attacked by Asian people have been shared thousands of times online in recent weeks. Although Africans living in China have reported discrimination linked to the coronavirus pandemic, AFP Fact Check found that various widely-shared clips were filmed years ago and have nothing to do with the virus. 390. The story of a NY funeral home employee accidentally being cremated during the COVID-19 pandemic was originally published on a satirical website A claim that an overworked employee at a funeral home in New York City was accidentally cremated while taking a nap during the COVID-19 crisis has been shared repeatedly on blog sites, Facebook and Twitter. The claim is false; the claim originated from a satirical website; as of April 28, 2020, there were no credible reports that the story was based on a genuine incident; the photo used in some of the misleading social media and blog posts was taken from an unrelated media report. 389. Posts misrepresent eligibility for US COVID-19 stimulus payments Social media posts claim that US citizens married to immigrants are not eligible for relief payments available to many Americans under the stimulus package aimed at countering the economic crisis sparked by the COVID-19 pandemic. This is misleading; the restriction only applies to citizens who file their taxes jointly with a spouse who does not have a valid Social Security number. 388. Britain’s first coronavirus vaccine volunteer has not died after trial jab An online report shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter claims that one of Britain’s first volunteers to be injected with a trial coronavirus vaccine has died. However, the claim is false, originating from a website with a history of spreading misinformation. The volunteer, herself, has dismissed the report, which was also denied by UK health officials and the scientists behind the trial. 387. False claim circulates that Pakistani plane transported Sri Lankan students home after COVID-19 lockdown A claim that Sri Lankan students were flown home by Pakistan after they were stranded during the county’s COVID-19 lockdown has been shared on Facebook and WhatsApp. The claim is false; a group of Sri Lankan students in Pakistan were flown home to Sri Lanka on a SriLankan Airlines flight on April 21, 2020. 386. This photo has circulated in reports about a market in Myanmar during the COVID-19 pandemic An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows vendors observing social distancing guidance at a market in eastern Sri Lanka during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photo has circulated online in reports about a market in Myanmar. 385. This photo shows Australia’s Bondi Beach in 2013, not one in South Africa during the COVID-19 lockdown A photograph circulating on Facebook purports to be a screenshot from a TV news report showing a crowded beach in South Africa during the lockdown. The claim is false; the image has been doctored and actually shows Australia’s Bondi beach in 2013. 384. Fake hiring phone numbers shared online in US as unemployment surges With the novel coronavirus sending the US economy into freefall, posts that list phone numbers for job seekers to call and find work have been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Instagram. But the numbers do not reach hiring hotlines as claimed and the companies mentioned recommend looking for job openings on their official websites. 383. Myth circulates online that COVID-19 symptoms progress in three distinct stages Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim patients infected with the novel coronavirus will experience respiratory symptoms that progress in severity in three distinct stages. The posts also prescribe purported home remedies for the disease, including eating garlic and gargling saltwater and vinegar. The claims are misleading; health experts have said COVID-19 symptoms vary from person-to-person; the purported coronavirus treatments listed in the posts have previously been debunked by AFP. 382. This video does not show US printing banknotes during the coronavirus pandemic -- it's from a television show that first aired in 1991 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter and Weibo which claim it shows US banknotes being printed during the novel coronavirus pandemic in 2020. The video has been shared in a misleading context; the clip was first broadcast in 1991 as part of a US television show, more than two decades before the COVID-19 pandemic. 381. Misleading claim circulates online about Wuhan's coronavirus death toll after lockdown eased A post has been shared repeatedly on Facebook by Sri Lankan Facebook users that claims 1,290 people died from coronavirus in the Chinese city of Wuhan after the city's lockdown was lifted on April 8, 2020. The posts claim that Sri Lanka should avoid lifting its own lockdown restrictions due to an upcoming election in order to avoid a similar spike in deaths. The claim is misleading; Chinese officials added 1,290 fatalities to Wuhan's coronavirus death toll after the city lifted restrictions on April 8, but said these were COVID-19 cases that were missed during the earlier lockdown. 380. Trump's idea to treat COVID-19 with disinfectant could cause deaths US President Donald Trump has suggested studying the injection of disinfectant as a COVID-19 treatment. Medical experts and makers of the home cleaning product swiftly advised against it, pointing out that the chemicals cannot be absorbed by humans and warning that any ingestion could be fatal. 379. There is no evidence that eating alkaline foods can prevent or cure COVID-19 A post has been shared multiple times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube that claims consuming foods with a pH level above the pH level of the novel coronavirus could cure or prevent infection from the COVID-19 disease. This claim is false; health experts say there is no evidence to support the claim; as of April 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) says there is no “cure” for COVID-19 and it “does not have sufficient data that an alkaline diet can protect specifically against COVID-19”. 378. This video shows landmarks across China, but not Wuhan before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video featuring aerial shots of futuristic skyscrapers, giant bridges and other landmarks has been shared thousands of times on Facebook with claims that it shows Wuhan, the central Chinese city where the novel coronavirus pandemic emerged in December 2019. However, AFP found the video is a compilation of shots from various Chinese cities but not Wuhan. 377. This video shows FBI agents seizing masks from alleged price gouger, not contaminated masks A video with thousands of shares and more than 1.5 million views on Facebook claims to show FBI agents seizing masks infected with the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the clip shows a raid on the home of a man in New York arrested for allegedly coughing on FBI agents while claiming to have COVID-19 and lying to them about hoarding and selling medical supplies. 376. Coronavirus pandemic triggers wave of Islamic-themed myths on social media The spread of the novel coronavirus has triggered a torrent of misinformation on social media globally. Myths circulated online include crackpot cures for COVID-19 and conspiracy theories about its alleged origins. In the Islamic world, fact checkers have also observed a trend for social media posts containing false religious-themed claims about the virus. As of April 2020, AFP has debunked scores of misleading posts on this topic. 375. No evidence that 5G radiation is harmful to human health, experts say A graphic purporting to detail health risks due to 5G-induced radiation has been published on various websites and shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter. The image was shared as other hoaxes circulated claiming that COVID-19 is linked to the global rollout of 5G networks. The claim is misleading; radiation experts and health authorities maintain there is no evidence to suggest that the radiation emitted from 5G is harmful to human health. 374. This photo does not show Muslims praying on rooftops in India during the COVID-19 lockdown A photo of dozens of men praying on neighbouring rooftops has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows Muslim worshippers in India praying together in defiance of the country’s COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows people praying in Dubai. 373. This photo has circulated in reports about Bangladeshi migrant workers in Malaysia A photo has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows labourers stranded in the western Indian state of Gujarat during a nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; this photo has circulated online since November 2019, months before India imposed its lockdown; it has circulated in reports about Bangladeshi migrants at an immigration office in Malaysia. 372. Posts target parents with misleading COVID-19 hospital visit rules Facebook posts claim children infected with the novel coronavirus will be taken to hospitals unaccompanied, and that parents will not be allowed to visit. This is misleading; many hospitals have prohibited visitors during the COVID-19 pandemic, but across Canada medical facilities have exceptions allowing a parent or guardian to be with pediatric patients. 371. This footage shows people praying in Brazil -- not Italy -- during the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook in April 2020 which claim it shows people praying on a street in Italy during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage in fact shows people praying outside a church in Brazil during the COVID-19 crisis. 370. This is not a video of doctors trying on faultry gowns made in China; it's of French-made medical gowns that were damaged in storage A video of hospital workers in France putting on tattered protective gowns has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that the garments were made in China. The claim is false; the hospital authority in the French city of Marseille said the protective gear in the video was produced in France and became damaged due to improper storage. 369. This photo does not show Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte carrying out duties A photo has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte carrying out presidential duties during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; this photo has circulated in news reports since 2017 about the president’s visit to Marawi, a war-torn city in the country’s south that was then besieged by militants. 368. This graphic with a purported quote from a top administration official in the Philippines has been doctored A graphic with a purported quote from former Philippine presidential spokesperson Salvador Panelo has been shared in multiple Facebook posts. The graphic, which appears to have been published by Philippine news outlet Inquirer.net, claims that Panelo said the poor are to blame for being unable to protect themselves from the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this claim is false; the graphic was doctored to include the quote and was disowned by the Inquirer, which called on social media users not to share \"manipulated\" images. 367. This video does not show a Muslim man spitting on police after a scuffle at an Indian coronavirus quarantine center. It has circulated in reports weeks before the incident A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows a Muslim man spitting at Indian police officers after being detained over scuffles at a coronavirus quarantine centre in April 2020. The claim is misleading; the video has circulated in reports since at least February 2020, weeks before the incident at the coronavirus quarantine centre; local police told AFP the video shows an incident in February 2020 and is unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic. 366. This video does not show protesters in Italy chanting \"Allahu Akbar\" during the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed more than one million times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and TikTok which claim it shows people in Italy chanting “Allahu Akbar” and seeking “help from Allah” during the coronavirus pandemic . The claim is false: the video was taken in the German city of Hamburg; it corresponds with reports about a January 2020 protest over the persecution of Uighur Muslims in China. 365. South Africa’s education department says the 2020 school year can still be saved Social media posts shared in South Africa claim that children in grades 1 to 11 will be promoted after the school year was cancelled because of the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claims are false and started circulating after an education expert called for an end to the academic year, an idea rejected by the Department of Basic Education. 364. Online coronavirus scams spread in Nigeria amid lockdowns African countries including Nigeria are experiencing an increase in the number of fraudulent activities on social media as internet fraudsters embark on scamming sprees amid the coronavirus pandemic. AFP Fact Check has rounded up some of the most popular online claims fabricated to exploit unsuspecting internet users in the continent. 363. This video shows FBI agents raiding a private home, not a synagogue A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) raiding a synagogue that was used to hoard face masks and other medical equipment. The claim is misleading; the raid took place at a private home in New York City, not a synagogue. 362. False advice on refusing vaccines circulates during COVID-19 pandemic in the US, Canada and Australia Facebook posts shared in at least three countries as scientists work to develop a COVID-19 vaccine claim to offer a legal way to refuse vaccination. The claims are false; immunization is not compulsory in most Australian states and Canadian provinces, while exemptions can be obtained in the United States as well as Canada’s Ontario and New Brunswick. 361. This picture shows the work of a make-up artist, not an infected hand A photograph shared thousands of times on Facebook purports to show the blister-covered hand of a patient suffering from a new disease. The gruesome picture is in fact the creation of a make-up artist and medical experts told AFP the claim was “nonsense”. 360. 5G deal between UK and Chinese tech company Huawei has not been cancelled Multiple posts on social media in Nigeria claim that the United Kingdom terminated a deal with Chinese tech company Huawei after receiving contaminated coronavirus test kits. This is false; the UK has made no such move while the tainted test kits came from Luxembourg. 359. This video shows monkeys swimming in a pool in India, not Pakistan, during the COVID-19 lockdown A video of monkeys swimming in a pool has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it was filmed was shot in the Pakistani capital during a COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; the video actually shows monkeys enjoying a swim at a hotel in India during the COVID-19 lockdown. 358. This is not a video of deer on a beach during the COVID-19 pandemic A video of a deer running along a beach has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it was filmed on a beach in Spain during the COVID-19 lockdown. Other posts claimed the clip was filmed in Sri Lanka or India during COVID-19 lockdowns in April 2020. The claims are false; the video has circulated online since at least 2015 in reports about a scene captured by a French filmmaker in France. 357. Misleading coronavirus information falsely attributed to Johns Hopkins Social media posts attribute a list of points about the novel coronavirus to Johns Hopkins, a leading source of information on the virus. But the US university’s medical program said it is not the source of the claims, and while some are accurate, experts say others contain false or misleading information. 356. Trump did not post this tweet about H1N1 pandemic in 2009 Posts shared more than 2,000 times on social media appear to show a 2009 tweet from Donald Trump criticizing then-president Barack Obama’s handling of the H1N1 pandemic and placing “ALL responsibility” on presidents in a crisis. This is false; the fabricated tweet has more characters than was allowed in 2009 and it does not appear in Twitter archives. 355. Children with COVID-19 in the US do not have to be hospitalized alone Facebook posts claim a child who is infected with the novel coronavirus will be taken to a hospital unaccompanied. This is misleading; many hospitals have prohibited visitors during the COVID-19 pandemic, but even facilities in heavily-affected states have exceptions allowing a parent or caregiver to be with pediatric patients. 354. Hoax circulates that viral outbreaks are linked to new telecommunication technologies A hoax claim has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter that certain viral outbreaks in the last 100 years aligned with the introduction of new telecommunications technologies. The posts suggest that the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is linked to the rollout of 5G mobile phone technology. The claim is false; health authorities and technology experts maintain telecommunication technologies have no relationship with the creation or spread of viruses. 353. Burundi did not receive COVID-19 vaccines from China; a vaccine does not yet exist for the disease (as of April 21) A post shared on Facebook and WhatsApp claims that China has sent COVID-19 vaccines to Burundi. The claim is false; China did donate medical supplies to the eastern African nation, but not vaccines, which do not exist yet for the disease. 352. Albanian news anchors did not go 'topless' during the COVId-19 crisis. The broadcast aired years before the pandemic A video of two Albanian female news anchors wearing revealing jackets on-air has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Twitter alongside a claim that they dressed promiscuously in a bid to persuade people to stay indoors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; the footage first aired on an Albanian TV channel years before the COVID-19 pandemic. 351. The World Bank did not praise Tanzania’s anti-coronavirus policies Articles claiming the World Bank has applauded Tanzania’s anti-coronavirus policies have been widely shared, with one attracting thousands of interactions on Facebook. The publications claim the East African country was singled out for praise in a report for implementing “unique policies” in the fight against the novel coronavirus. But the report does not include any such mention and the World Bank has denied specifically highlighting Tanzania’s COVID-19 response. 350. This photo was taken from the US television series \"The Walking Dead\" -- it is not an image of elderly COVID-19 victims euthanised by the government A photo purporting to show a man walking through scores of corpses has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows that countries with high COVID-19 death tolls are euthanising elderly patients. The claim is false; the photo was taken from the US television horror series The Walking Dead; as of April 2020, there were no credible reports that governments were euthanising COVID-19 patients during the pandemic. 349. Misinformation about fines in Singapore circulated online before face masks made mandatory in public Multiple posts have been shared on Facebook in early April 2020 claiming that Singapore introduced fines of up to SGD$150 for anyone not wearing a face mask outdoors during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is misleading; on April 14, 2020, the Singaporean government announced fines of up to SGD$1,000 for those not wearing a mask outside during the pandemic; face masks had not been made mandatory in public and no fines were imposed in Singapore at the time the misleading claim was circulating online. 348. This late pharmacist's husband and local Indian authorities said her death was not the result of pandemic-related violence A photo of a woman lying in a hospital bed with medical equipment attached to her body has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside claims that the woman was a doctor who died after being beaten by a Muslim mob while trying to administer novel coronavirus tests. The claim is false; the late woman's husband and local police told AFP the woman's death was not the result of pandemic-related violence. 347. Philippine regulators have not approved an 'immunity booster' supplement for COVID-19 An advertisement promoting a vitamin supplement that purportedly boosts immunity against COVID-19 has been shared in multiple Facebook posts. The advert includes a stamp that appears to show the product was approved by the Philippine Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, the claim is false; the FDA said the product is unregistered and warned the public against “deceptive marketing” related to COVID-19, and the regulatory agency ordered the product’s manufacturers to halt “misleading advertisements” or face sanctions. 346. Kenya governor quotes non-existent WHO research to defend alcohol donations A video of Nairobi governor Mike Sonko claiming the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends drinking alcohol to help prevent the new coronavirus is circulating online. The claim is false; the WHO has, in fact, warned the public against excessive alcohol consumption during the pandemic. 345. Misleading claim circulates on social media that pet owners should avoid touching animals after using hand sanitiser Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times in April 2020 claim pet owners should avoid touching their animals after using hand sanitiser because it contains toxic chemicals. The posts were shared as people around the world took steps to minimise the spread of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim in the posts is misleading; experts told AFP that hand sanitiser is safe to use around pets and only large amounts of it could be potentially toxic to animals. 344. This photo does not show throat infected with novel coronavirus A photo shared thousands of times on Facebook claims to show the throat of a novel coronavirus patient. The claim is false; the image has circulated online since May of 2018, long before the COVID-19 pandemic. 343. False claim circulates online that image shows starving Indian family who committed suicide during COVID-19 lockdown An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows the bodies of an Indian family who committed suicide after running out of food during the nationwide COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; the photo has circulated online since June 2019 in reports about a murder-suicide in India’s Karnataka state, months before COVID-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. A post shared thousands of times on Facebook during the COVID-19 pandemic says disposable surgical masks should be worn “colored side out” if a person is sick. The claim is false; surgical masks are not reversible, a major US manufacturer of the products says. 341. A video of an Italian woman who committed suicide after contracting COVID-19? The footage is from an Algerian TV drama A video has been viewed hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows an Italian woman who committed suicide after contracting COVID-19. The claim is false; the video is a scene that was filmed for an Algerian TV drama, produced months before the COVID-19 pandemic. 340. 'Riot' at a Malaysian customs office after Singapore's COVID-19 travel ban? The footage was shot in December 2019 A video has been viewed thousands of times on Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows Malaysian nationals storming a customs office in the Malaysian state of Johor after Singapore closed its borders in an effort to curb the growing COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; Malaysian immigration authorities said the video was taken during an annual safety drill in December 2019; the video corresponded with photos of the drill published in December 2019 by police and local officials. 339. Myth spreads online that Australian supermarkets have banned Chinese nationals during COVID-19 pandemic A video that shows an argument between shoppers at an Australian department store has been viewed tens of thousands of times in Facebook and Twitter posts alongside a claim that Chinese nationals have been banned from supermarkets in Australia. The claim is false; major Australian supermarket chains told AFP there was no policy that bans Chinese people from their stores as of April 2020; the video in the misleading posts has circulated in media reports about a dispute in an Australian supermarket over baby formula. 338. Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, is not alone in saying that the hydroxychloroquine drug has not been proven as treatment for COVID-19 Social media posts shared tens of thousands of times claim White House adviser Dr. Anthony Fauci stands alone in insisting hydroxychloroquine’s effectiveness against COVID-19 is unproven, while Italy, France, Spain and Brazil say it “works.” This is false; health authorities in these countries say data on this treatment is “preliminary” and “not yet conclusive.” 337. A video of Nigerians scrambling for food during the coronavirus lockdown? The footage was taken months before the pandemic A video shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram purports to show hundreds of Nigerians scrambling for food amid a lockdown prompted by the novel coronavirus. However, the footage has been circulating on social media since at least March 2019, months before the start of the pandemic. 336. Fake phone helplines in US provide offers of phone sex instead of tracking stimulus payments Thousands of Facebook users in the United States are sharing 1-800 numbers that are supposed to help track stimulus payments promised by the federal government under a novel coronavirus economic aid package. The phone numbers, however, are not government hotlines, but were instead first shared as April Fools’ jokes, and greet callers with offers of phone sex. Social media posts recommend tonic water and zinc as a cure for a novel coronavirus infection, as the drink contains quinine, whose synthetic relative hydroxychloroquine is on trial as a COVID-19 treatment. The claim is false; quinine in tonic water is too diluted to have any effect, and there are no drugs proven to cure the disease. 334. A photo of COVID-19 victims? No, the image shows victims of the 2004 tsunami in Thailand A photo has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows bodies of those killed by COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the image is actually an Associated Press photo which shows victims of the December 26, 2004 tsunami in Thailand. The disaster, which became known as the Boxing Day tsunami, devastated more than a dozen countries. 333. Video of a Koran recitation at the US Senate during the COVID-19 pandemic? The footage is from an interfaith prayer service at a church in 2017 A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube in March and April 2020 alongside a claim it shows a Koran recitation during a US Senate meeting attended by President Donald Trump during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; the video actually shows Trump attending an interfaith prayer service at a church after his presidential inauguration in January 2017. 332. A photo of food parcels for Rwanda during the COVID-19 crisis? The image was taken before the pandemic A widely shared picture purports to show food earmarked for distribution to families in Rwanda ahead of a coronavirus lockdown. This is false; the image has been circulating online since at least May 2019. Former World Bank chief Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala was among those who fell for the hoax, sharing the photo with her 1.1 million Twitter followers. 331. A video showing Muslims praying on the street in the US during the COVID-19 pandemic? The footage is from a protest in New York City in 2017 A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows Muslims in the US praying on a street during the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage has circulated online since February 2017; it corresponds with other footage in reports about a February 2017 protest in New York City against President Donald Trump’s Muslim travel ban. 330. This video does not show a temple that Indian authorities turned into a COVID-19 quarantine center, it's a lodging facility A video has been shared in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows a temple in India that was turned into a COVID-19 quarantine centre by the state government. The claim is false; the footage in fact shows a lodging facility, which is adjacent to a temple, that was repurposed as a COVID-19 quarantine centre during the pandemic. 329. A video of a freight train carrying aid during the COVID-19 lockdown in India? The footage has circulated since at least 2009 -- more than a decade before the pandemic A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in posts on Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube that claim it shows a freight train carrying essential commodities for those in COVID-19 lockdown in India. This claim is false; the video has circulated online since at least November 2009 and actually shows a regular goods train service in India. 328. A photo of an Italian COVId-19 victim holding her baby for the last time? The image has circulated in reports about an infant awaiting a marrow transplant in 1985 A photo has been shared thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows an Italian mother holding her baby for the last time after becoming terminally ill with COVID-19. The claim is false; the photo has circulated in reports about a child who was awaiting a marrow transplant in 1985 in the US. 327. A video of Brazilians participating in a COVID-19 vigil after Indian PM called for 'solidarity?' The footage predates Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s call for COVID-19 vigils A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows Brazilians participating in a candlelit vigil after India's Prime Minister called for people to hold \"solidarity\" vigils on April 3, 2020 during the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; the video was published online in reports about an event in Brazil before Modi’s calls for solidarity. 326. These images show delivery of China’s medical supplies in Ghana, not Nigeria Multiple posts shared with pictures of an aircraft delivering supplies claim to show the delivery of coronavirus vaccines from China to a Nigerian airport. This is false; the images were taken in Accra, Ghana, and show Chinese aid deliveries of medical supplies to 18 African countries -- including Nigeria. 325. Video showing a fight between Kenyans and Chinese in Wuhan, China? The footage was filmed in New York After the African Union expressed concerns about discrimination against Africans in Guangzhou, a video started circulating on Facebook and Twitter that purports to show a Kenyan couple involved in a fist fight with a Chinese couple in Wuhan. This claim is false: The video was in fact filmed in the Bronx district of New York in front of an Asian restaurant. 324. This graphic with a purported quote from Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has been doctored A graphic attributed to the state-run Philippine News Agency (PNA) that features a purported quote from Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook. The graphic claims that Duterte said the government has completed distributing cash assistance to those affected by the novel coronavirus pandemic. But the graphic has been doctored; it has been manipulated to include the purported Duterte quote and has been disowned by the PNA. 323. White House holds 'blessing ceremony' for Trump during the COVID-19 pandemic? The video shows President Trump with a US pastor at a White House event in September 2017 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts which claim it shows the secretary of Pope Francis holding a “blessing ceremony” for US President Trump at the White House during the COVID-19 pandemic. This claim is false; the video was first published online in September 2017 and shows Trump at the White House with Robert Jeffress, the pastor of the First Baptist Dallas Church and a member of the president’s evangelical advisory board. 322. This video has circulated in reports about Pakistani police and security forces conducting a training drill at a quarantine centre A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows Pakistani security forces apprehending three men after they escaped from a COVID-19 quarantine centre. The claim is misleading; the footage has circulated in reports about a joint training exercise by Pakistani security forces and police outside a COVID-19 quarantine facility. 321. Nigeria’s ex-vice president didn't promise to pay citizens to stay home during virus outbreak An article shared thousands of times in multiple social media posts in Nigeria claims former vice president Atiku Abubakar pledged to pay 10,000 naira ($27) to every Nigerian to help them through the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; Abubakar's spokesman rejected it as \"fake news\" and the story originated from a website with a history of spreading misinformation. 320. No scientific evidence that neem leaves can 'cure’ COVID-19 and its symptoms, doctors say A claim that neem leaves can cure the novel coronavirus and relieve its symptoms has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts. The claim is false; Malaysia’s Ministry of Health and medical experts say there is no scientific evidence to support the claim. International health authorities also say there is no cure for COVID-19 as of April 2020. 319. Philippine authorities warn anti-viral injection has not yet been approved for treating COVID-19 Multiple Facebook posts claim an anti-viral injection that was being developed in the Philippines in April 2020 is a cure for COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the Philippine Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said the purported treatment has not been licensed and warned against its use until it is “proven safe and effective” by regulators; the World Health Organization (WHO) has said there is no \"cure\" for COVID-19 as of April 2020. 318. US Democrats did vote for legislation to combat the novel coronavirus crisis Posts on social media claim that no Democrats voted for the “the stimulus package to help American families” during the novel coronavirus crisis. This is misleading; Democrats overwhelmingly backed two bills aimed at countering the virus and its fallout, and while senators from the party blocked an initial proposal for the third, they voted unanimously for a later version. 317. South Sudan's chief justice and his family tested negative for COVID-19 (as of April 15) A WhatsApp message circulating in South Sudan claims the chief justice’s son is critically ill with COVID-19. However, the health ministry said the senior official and his family tested negative for the disease, and his daughter told AFP he doesn’t have a son going by the name quoted in social media posts. 316. New hoax circulates online that India has outlawed social media posts about COVID-19 A claim has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook, WhatsApp and Twitter posts that the Indian government has outlawed social media posts about the novel coronavirus pandemic through a piece of national legislation called the Disaster Management Act. The claim is false; Indian officials said the posts were “misleading and false”; AFP found two of the purported sections of the law cited in the misleading posts do not exist under the act and the other does not mention a social media ban related to COVID-19 content. 315. Hoax circulates online that an old Indian textbook lists treatments for COVID-19 A photo has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that an Indian textbook published more than three decades ago lists possible treatments for COVID-19 patients. The claim is misleading; the textbook refers to coronavirus as a family of viruses, not the new strain detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan in late 2019. As of April 15, 2020 the World Health Organization (WHO) says no specific medicine has been discovered which will treat or prevent COVID-19. 314. Sri Lankan health authorities said COVID-19 survivor sought shelter at a relative's home after consulting with them A claim that a COVID-19 survivor in Sri Lanka violated an official home quarantine order has been shared widely on Facebook. The claim is misleading; multiple government health officials and the patient himself told AFP that he sought shelter at his sister’s residence, as agreed with health officials, because he was locked out of his own home. 313. A video of a family of five devastated by COVID-19? No, the footage uses stock images A video advertisement on Facebook encourages people to buy face masks for protection, as the novel coronavirus takes a deadly toll worldwide. The clip is misleading; it claims to show a family devastated by infection, as well as the doctor who invented the mask it is trying to sell, but the images are stock footage. 312. Video of panic buying in Malaysia during the COVID-19 pandemic? This video has circulated online in reports about Black Friday shopping in Brazil in November 2019 A video of people storming into a store has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim the video shows people panic buying in Malaysia during the country’s novel coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; this video has circulated online in reports about shoppers on Black Friday, an annual day of sales, at a store in Brazil in November 2019, weeks before the novel coronavirus was first detected in China. 311. Newspaper claims Indian Muslim leader donated to Indian PM's COVID-19 relief fund? This image of a newspaper front page has been doctored A purported image of a daily newspaper in Northern Ireland has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows a front page story about an Indian Muslim leader donating to the Indian Prime Minister’s novel coronavirus relief fund. The claim is false; the image has been doctored to include the fabricated story; there are no credible media reports that the Muslim leader cited in the misleading posts made any donation to the fund. 310. COVID pandemic: misinformation spreads in Thailand about police powers to fine people who fail to wear face masks in public A claim was shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and Line Messenger in March 2020 that police in Thailand could issue fines to anyone who does not wear a face mask in public during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; Thai legal experts told AFP there was no law in the country that allowed police to fine people for not wearing face masks as of March 2020; Thai police issued several statements calling the claims “fake news”. 309. This video shows Afghan nationals leaving Pakistan during a temporary opening of the border A video of hundreds of people crossing a border has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows people from Afghanistan entering Pakistan without being tested for the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video in fact shows Afghan nationals leaving Pakistan after the border was temporarily opened in early April in order to allow Afghans to return home. 308. Musicians reciting God's names during the COVID-19 outbreak in New Zealand? This video shows a choir concert in Turkey in 2011 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows musicians from various religious backgrounds reciting the names of God in Islam during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video shows a choir singing at a concert in Turkey in 2011. 307. Video showing Muslim men licking crockery during the COVID-19 pandemic? This 2018 video shows Bohra Muslims practicing dining etiquette in Mumbai A video has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows Muslims spreading the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, by smearing saliva on plates and utensils in the Indian city of Delhi. This claim is false; the video actually shows Bohra Muslims practicing their zero-waste dining etiquette in Mumbai, India in 2018. 306. These photos circulated online before the Philippines imposed a lockdown on its main island Three photos have been shared in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim they show an anti-government protest in the Philippines staged during a lockdown implemented to contain the spread of the coronavirus. The claim is false; the photos circulated online at least one month before the Philippine government imposed a lockdown on its main island due to the coronavirus pandemic. 305. Misinformation circulates online about Malaysia's coronavirus relief package for its citizens A claim has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook that Malaysia has started distributing monthly compensation of 8,000 Thai baht (245 USD) to its citizens and has waived their electricity bills as part of a six-month relief package during the novel coronavirus crisis. The claim is misleading; as of April 2020, Malaysia’s coronavirus relief measures provided one-off payments as part of a means-tested financial assistance package; the measures included subsidised electricity bills for six months but did not waive them altogether. 304. False ‘facts’ on USPS finances resurface on Facebook amid dispute over funding through the novel coronavirus crisis A dispute between Congress and the Trump administration over funding to help the United States Postal Service (USPS) through the novel coronavirus led tens of thousands of people to share an old Facebook post claiming that the agency is not losing money and has no debt. This is false; the USPS had a net loss of $8.8 billion in 2019, and its total liabilities exceed $97 billion, according to official disclosures. 303. A video showing Italian doctors who contracted COVID-19 while treating patients? No, the footage shows a scene from a Mexican television drama A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows two Italian doctors who contracted novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19, while treating patients. The claim is false; the footage was taken from the 2010 Mexican television programme “Triunfo del Amor”. 302. A video of a detector dog assaulted during a COVID-19 patrol? No, the footage was online at least a year before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in posts on Facebook, YouTube, Douyin and Weibo purporting to show a detector dog after it was assaulted during a security check amid the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The video has been shared in a misleading context; it has circulated online since December 2018, at least a year before the novel coronavirus was first reported in the Chinese city of Wuhan. 301. Photo shows Mexico’s president, not Joe Biden, kissing child Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim a photo shows Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden kissing a child, criticizing him for doing so. This is false; the man pictured is Mexico’s President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador. 300. Video of a satanic creature atop an Italian church? No, the footage shows computer-generated imagery superimposed on a cathedral in Nicaragua A video purportedly shows a winged creature atop the dome of a structure has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows “the image of a devil” on the roof of a church in Italy. This claim is false; the \"creature\" is a computer-generated image superimposed on footage of the Cathedral of Granada in Nicaragua. 299. A video showing a gay party in Italy ahead of the COVID-19 outbreak? No, the footage shows a carnival in Brazil in 2018 Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts shared thousands of times show a video of crowds at a music event. Comments say the footage shows the “last gay conference” in Italy before the coronavirus outbreak. The clip is actually from a carnival in Brazil in February 2018, two years before Italy’s first confirmed COVID-19 case. 298. Beijing and Shanghai have not been untouched by COVID-19 A claim that the novel coronavirus was never detected in the major Chinese cities of Beijing and Shanghai has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. The claim is false; both Beijing and Shanghai, China’s two most populous cities, have reported confirmed COVID-19 cases and deaths since January 2020. 297. A photo of Italian medics who died of COVID-19? No, the image is from the US medical TV drama \"Grey's Anatomy\" A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows doctors and nurses in Italy who died from COVID-19. The claim is false; the photo is in fact a still from the American medical television series Grey's Anatomy. 296. The World Health Organization (WHO) did not issue this 'protocol' for COVID-19 lockdown A post has been shared multiple times on Facebook, WhatsApp and Twitter by India-based users alongside a claim that the World Health Organization (WHO) has issued guidelines on COVID-19 lockdown. This claim is false; both the WHO and Indian officials clarified that the \"protocol\" is fake. 295. A photo of a Nigerian actress serving punishment for partying during the coronavirus lockdown? The image is of a waste management officer that's been circulating since 2018 A photograph has been shared hundreds of times in Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts with claims that it shows Nigerian movie star Funke Akindele Bello picking up waste in the street as a punishment for throwing a party during the COVID-19 lockdown. The claim is false; the photo was first published online long before the pandemic and shows a waste management officer. 294. South Africa leader did not ask foreigners to leave the country due to COVID-19 Dozens of posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook and WhatsApp claim that South African President Cyril Ramaphosa told foreigners to leave the country to minimise the spread of the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; he has made no such announcement and the Department of Home Affairs refuted the claim. 293. How to spot COVID-19 misinformation on WhatsApp AFP has debunked multiple claims shared millions of times on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram since the outbreak of the novel coronavirus disease in December 2019. But with over 65 billion messages sent worldwide every day, WhatsApp, one of the biggest platforms for sharing misinformation in Africa, remains a challenge. AFP fact checkers explain how you can spot false COVID-19 claims on WhatsApp. 292. A video of spooky drone deployed in Australia to enforce the COVID-19 lockdown? The footage has circulated online since at least 2016 about a prank in Brazil A video of a ghost-like drone scaring people off the street has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Weibo alongside a claim that the footage shows a drone being used to enforce social distancing during the novel coronavirus pandemic in the Australian city of Brisbane. The claim is false; the video was published online in 2016 in a post about a prank in São Paulo, Brazil. 291. Nigeria did not spend 1 billion naira on a COVID-19 text message awareness campaign A screenshot of a web publication has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram that claim the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control said it spent a billion naira ($2.78 million) on COVID-19 text message awareness campaign. However, this is false; the claim stemmed from a fabricated tweet, and was denied by Nigeria’s health authorities. 290. Senegalese children did not die from a coronavirus vaccine (which does not yet exist) A Facebook post shared thousands of times claims seven children died in Senegal after being given a COVID-19 vaccine. This is false; scientists are still working to find a vaccine and Senegal’s health ministry told AFP the incident never happened. The video in the post actually shows people gathering after they heard rumours that a door-to-door salesman was vaccinating locals. 289. Police officer beating in Indian temple after trying to enforce the COVID-19 lockdown? No, the footage was uploaded to an Indian wrestling-themed YouTube channel in June 2019 A video purports to show a police officer being beaten has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that the assault at a temple in India was sparked by the officer's attempt to enforce a nationwide novel coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the footage was taken from a video of a staged fight that was uploaded to a wrestling-themed YouTube channel in June 2019. 288. Philippine hospital has not found correlation between grocery shopping and COVID-19 among its novel coronavirus patients (as of April 10). A claim that data from a hospital in the Philippines shows a correlation between grocery shopping and COVID-19 has been shared more than 1,000 times on Facebook and Twitter. This is misleading; the hospital refuted the claim, saying \"no such observed trend\" had been found among its COVID-19 patients. 287. Video showing bodies of COVID-19 victims who committed suicide in the US? The footage first appeared in 2014 reports about migrants who drowned off the Libyan coast A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Weibo and Twitter that claim it shows people who committed suicide in the US after getting COVID-19. The claim is false; the video was published in 2014 news reports about a group of migrants who died after a boat sank off the coast of Libya. 286. Non-profit hospital in Pakistan refutes misleading claim it charged patients for COVID-19 tests A claim that a charitable hospital in Pakistan charged patients for novel coronavirus tests has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. But the claim is misleading; the hospital, which was founded by Prime Minister Imran Khan, denied charging a fee, saying in a statement that eligible patients have been receiving free tests; the health minister of Punjab also denied the claim. 285. Video of soldiers beating Nigerians for flouting COVID-19 lockdown? No, old footage of police offiers in Ghana A video showing law enforcement officers beating civilians is being shared on Facebook and WhatsApp in Nigeria, with claims that it shows Nigerian soldiers beating citizens while enforcing the COVID-19 lockdown in the country. This is false; the video is old and shows police officers carrying out a beating in Ghana. 284. No, Britain’s Queen Elizabeth did not mention the Philippines in her speech on the novel coronavirus A graphic has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it contains a quote from Britain’s Queen Elizabeth in which she praises Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte for his efforts to curb the novel coronavirus pandemic. The posts allege that the Queen made the remarks during her televised speech on April 6, 2020. However, the claim is false; Duterte was not mentioned in the Queen’s address and the image has been doctored from another graphic that contains a genuine quote by the Queen. 283. This is not a photo of two nurses treating COVID-19 patients in Italy A photo of a couple locked in an intimate embrace with their face masks lowered has been shared in Facebook posts that claim they were nurses who were treating COVID-19 patients in an Italian hospital. This is false, the photo was taken by an Associated Press photographer at Barcelona’s airport. 282. UAE Sultan bin Muhammad Al-Qasimi did not ban the burial of COVID-19 victims in Sharjah in April 2020 A claim has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter in Sri Lanka that the ruler of Sharjah, one of the seven emirates of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), banned burials of people who died after contracting the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the UAE Embassy in Sri Lanka refuted the claim and said Sharjah ruler's Sultan bin Muhammad Al-Qasimi only said that novel coronavirus vicitms should not be buried in one specific location in Sharjah. 281. French doctor did not urge Africans to avoid a “Bill Gates vaccine” A post shared hundreds of times on Facebook claims that Didier Raoult, a French specialist in infectious diseases, is urging Africans “not to take Bill Gates vaccine” against coronavirus as it contains “poison”. This is false: the institute which Raoult directs denied he ever made these claims; moreover, no vaccine yet exists against coronavirus. 280. Hoax circulates online that people wearing shoes indoors triggered hike in COVID-19 cases in Italy A post has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and on messaging app Line that claims Italy suffered a spike in novel coronavirus infections as a direct result of Italian citizens wearing shoes in their homes. The claim is misleading; health experts told AFP that wearing shoes indoors cannot directly cause COVID-19 infections; doctors recommend adopting thorough personal hygeine routines to lower the risk of COVID-19 infection. 279. A video of a 'first Islamic call to prayer in Spain in 500 years' during the coronavirus pandemic? The footage was filmed in Azerbaijan in November 2019 and there has been no ban on the Islamic call to prayer in Spain in recent times A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, YouTube and Twitter posts alongside a claim it shows the Islamic call to prayer being heard in Spain during the COVID-19 epidemic for the first time in 500 years. The claim is false; the video was filmed in Azerbaijan in November 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic; there has been no ban on the Islamic call to prayer in Spain in recent times. 278. Video shows Indian activist being arrested after buying alcohol during the COVID-19 lockdown? No, the footage circulated about Trupti Desai's arrest in September, 2019 A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter in April 2020 alongside a claim it shows the arrest of Indian activist Trupti Desai after she attempted to buy alcohol during a government-imposed lockdown triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic. The claim is false; this video has circulated in reports about Desai's arrest during a protest against the sale of alcohol in Maharashtra state in September 2019; the reports circulated months before the novel coronavirus was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. 277. These 10 tips for preventing COVID-19 contain false information Social media posts shared thousands of times advocate 10 methods to prevent a novel coronavirus infection, citing recommendations allegedly stemming from autopsies on COVID-19 victims, including in China, where the virus first emerged. The advice is misleading; experts say the list includes half-truths and outright falsehoods. 276. This Sri Lankan spice manufacturer said it has used the logo since 2007, years before the political party was established A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows that packets of spice included in Sri Lankan government ration kits during the COVID-19 lockdown were branded with a local political party's logo. The posts allege that the photo is evidence vulnerable people are being exploited during the pandemic for political gain. The claim is misleading; both the manufacturer and retailer told AFP that it has used the logo on its packaging since at least 2007; the logo is not identical to the cited political party’s electoral symbol, which the party adopted in 2016. 275. A photo taken in 2016 of tank in Toronto resurfaces amid COVID-19 outbreak As a special task force assembled earlier this month to help in the handling of the COVID-19 outbreak, a photo of a tank on Toronto’s Dundas Square surfaced on social media. However, the photo was taken in 2016 during a festival and no tanks were used to move troops throughout the Greater Toronto Area, army representatives told AFP. 274. Photo of coffins of coronavirus victims in Italy? This photo has circulated in reports about the coffins of earthquake victims in Italy in 2009 A photo has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows coffins of coronavirus victims in Italy. The claim is false; the photo has circulated in media reports since 2009 about the coffins of earthquake victims in the Italian city of L’Aquila. 273. Video of Spanish police transferring people to quarantine centers? This video was shot in Azerbaijan in October 2019 during an anti-government protest A video viewed thousands of times in Nigeria and shared in multiple Facebook posts claims to show police in Spain rounding up people aged 50 and above to transfer them to quarantine centers amid the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage was circulating months before the outbreak and actually shows police in Azerbaijan detaining anti-government protesters in the capital Baku. 272. This video was edited to make it look like South Africa’s leader announced an 81-day lockdown Video posts viewed thousands of times purport to show South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa announcing an alleged 81-day lockdown. But the video has been edited to change the context of an earlier speech he made during a national news broadcast. The TV channel which aired the original segment has refuted the doctored video and there have been no official announcements from the presidency to extend the ongoing 21-day lockdown set to end on April 16, 2020. 271. Misleading claim circulates that Muslims ignored COVID-19 curfew at Sri Lankan mosque A claim has been shared on Facebook and several Sri Lankan news websites that Muslims at a mosque in Sri Lanka reacted violently after authorities told them their gathering was in violation of the country's novel coronavirus curfew. The claim is misleading; police and public health officials said that locals were in fact asked to gather at the mosque to receive tests to detect COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. The scuffle that occurred at the event was sparked over fears that the testing site would make the village more susceptible to infections, they said. 270. Nigerian health authority denounces fake social media accounts Social media accounts purporting to represent the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control have proliferated since February, when Africa's most populous country recorded its first case of COVID-19. AFP Fact Check rounds up some of the most popular fake accounts. 269. A photo of a boy who died of COVID-19 in the UK? This photo has circulated in reports about an Irish teenager who died in 2017 A photo of a young boy has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and various websites alongside a claim that it shows a 13-year-old who died after contracting the novel coronavirus in the UK in 2020. The claim is false; the photograph has circulated in reports since 2017 about a teenager who died in Ireland. 268. Gates Foundation urges netizens to stop sharing fake 'Bill Gates coronavirus letter' An \"open letter” purportedly written by US billionaire philanthropist Bill Gates about the novel coronavirus pandemic has been shared in English and Chinese on Facebook, Twitter and various websites. The Chinese-language posts state the letter was translated from its original publication in British newspaper The Sun. But the letter is fake; Gates’ philanthropic organisation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, clarified on Weibo that the letter presents “false information” and urged netizens to stop sharing it. The Sun has reportedly removed the letter from its website. 267. There is no evidence that COVID-19 is transmitted through fruits and vegetables Multiple posts shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter claim that a Hong Kong medical lab has warned the novel coronavirus can remain viable on fruits and vegetables for 12 hours, therefore people should \"avoid salads\" over fears of contracting COVID-19. The claim is false; the Centre for Food Safety in Hong Kong said there is no evidence to suggest that the virus is transmitted through food produce; the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) have also separately said there is \"no evidence\" that COVID-19 has been transmitted through food. 266. Hoax circulates online that funerals for COVID-19 victims are banned in Pakistan A purported notice issued by the Pakistan Red Crescent and Pakistan’s Health Department on COVID-19 isolation rules has been shared thousands of times on Facebook. The advisory claims that families of those killed while in isolation will not be able to hold funerals or burials for them. The claim is false; the Pakistan Red Crescent denied issuing such a statement, and Pakistan’s health authority does allow funerals for those killed by the novel coronavirus. 265. Video of looting during the novel coronavirus lockdown in the UK? The footage shows riots in London in 2011, nine years before the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows people rioting and looting shops in England during the coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the video has circulated online since August 2011 about riots in the British capital of London. 264. Video of Italians praying outside together during the pandemic? This video actually shows worshippers in Peru in 2019 A video of dozens of people praying outdoors has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim it shows Italians praying during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage in fact shows a prayer event in Peru in December 2019, weeks before Italy reported its first case of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. 263. Misinformation circulates online about COVID-19 cases and lockdown measures in Asia Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times in April 2020 purport to compare novel coronavirus lockdown measures in countries including South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. The posts claim the virus is now \"gone\" in South Korea because residents stayed at home for three weeks and that the epidemic has been “controlled” in Japan. The posts also claim that by contrast, people in the Philippines have taken a careless aproach to the virus. The claims are misleading; official data shows South Korea continued to face new cases of COVID-19 in April 2020; officials in Japan said COVID-19 cases were rapidly increasing in the same month. 262. The CEOs of these companies did not all step down during novel coronavirus crisis A post shared thousands of times on Facebook lists companies whose chief executive officers have allegedly stepped down during the novel coronavirus crisis. This is misleading; some of the 19 CEOs remain in their positions, while the announcements that others were leaving came before the virus emerged in late 2019. 261. No, these videos do not show recent looting in South Africa A couple of videos shared this month on Facebook purportedly show recent lootings in shops in South Africa, while the country undergoes a 21-day lockdown to minimise the spread of the novel coronavirus. However, both videos show footage of earlier looting incidents and were already circulating online last year. 260. South African hospital group rejects claim that lab found COVID-19 on fresh produce Posts shared on Facebook and WhatsApp claim a South African hospital found that traces of the novel coronavirus had survived on the surface of fresh food items for 12 hours during lab tests. The claim is false and was dismissed by the hospital’s owners Netcare, which denies even having a laboratory at the facility in question. 259. Video of corpses in body bags strewn across the floor of a New York hospital? The footage was shot in Ecuador, not New York A video purportedly showing COVID-19 victims in body bags strewn across the floor of a New York hospital was shared several thousand times in multiple languages on social media. The claim is false; the key footage was shot in Ecuador, not Manhattan, and a US healthcare spokeswoman said the allegations amounted to “abhorrent misinformation.” 258. This poem was written in 2020 specifically about the COVID-19 pandemic, it's not 19th century verse about self-isolation. A poem about people self-isolating at home has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter in April 2020 alongside a claim that it was written in the 19th century and reprinted during the 1918 Spanish flu pandemic. The posts, published as the world continued to endure the spread of the novel coronavirus, claim the poem is evidence that \"history repeats itself\". The claim is false; the poem was first published online in March 2020 by a retired teacher in the US during the novel coronavirus pandemic. 257. Photo of pastor being beaten for defying coronavirus laws in Nigeria? This is an AFP photo shot in 2006 during an unrelated incident. An image has been shared multiple times on Facebook in Liberia in support of a claim that pastors were beaten for defying government restrictions on religious gatherings amid the novel coronavirus outbreak. Although a police crackdown on churches took place, the use of the picture in this context is false as it was shot years ago at an unrelated event. 256. Sanskrit teacher reciting verses on Spanish radio during the pandemic? No, the footage was recorded in London in November 2019. A video of a woman reciting Sanskrit verses has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that she was delivering sacred verses on a Spanish radio station during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video was recorded by a London-based Sanskrit teacher who published the footage on her official social media accounts in November 2019, weeks before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 255. These photos have circulated online since at least March 2019, before the COVID-19 pandemic Two photos showing notes scattered on a street have been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and YouTube alongside a claim they were taken in Italy during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The posts claim Italians have thrown money out of their homes in a symbolic gesture to highlight that money is futile during the pandemic. The claim is false; the photos have circulated online since at least March 2019 in reports about two separate incidents in Venezuela. 254. Hoax circulates in India that government has banned coronavirus-related posts on social media A claim that India’s Ministry of Home Affairs has made it a “punishable offence” for citizens to publish posts on social media about the novel coronavirus has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. The claim is false; India’s official Press Information Bureau said it had made no such law; an online search for the purported government minister who issued the alleged ban yielded no results. 253. This CNN broadcast has been doctored, Nigerian leader did not test positive for coronavirus An image of a purported CNN broadcast shared thousands of times in multiple social media posts claims Nigeria's President Muhammadu Buhari and his chief of staff Abba Kyari tested positive for the novel coronavirus. But while Kyari has indeed tested positive for the virus, there is no evidence to support the claim that Buhari was infected with COVID-19. The picture of the alleged broadcast was fabricated using another screenshot of a CNN show. 252. A Sri Lankan doctor develops COVID-19 test kits in Australia?The doctor interviewed in this report did not say he was involved in the development of COVID-19 test kits. A video has been viewed thousands of times in Facebook posts alongside a claim it shows a Sri Lankan doctor who invented a rapid test kit for the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; the doctor seen in the video was being interviewed by an Australian television channel to discuss the benefits of rapid COVID-19 testing; the doctor told AFP he was not involved in the development of testing kits. 251. Italians singing Chinese song to thank China for COVID-19 aid? This video shows a Belarusian band singing a Chinese song before the COVID-19 outbreak. A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows Italian nationals expressing their gratitude to China for providing aid during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video shows a Belarusian band singing a Chinese song several months before COVID-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. 250. Video of police detaining people during the novel coronavirus lockdown in Spain? No, this video has circulated in reports about an anti-government protest in Azerbaijan in 2019. A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube in March 2020 alongside a claim that it shows police in Spain detaining people during a lockdown due to the coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video has circulated in reports about an anti-government protest in Azerbaijan in October 2019. 249. No, this orangutan is not washing his hands during the COVID-19 pandemic, the footage has circulated since at least November 2019. A video of an orangutan washing its hands has been viewed millions of times in Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts which claim the animal was imitating its zookeepers during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video of the orangutan has circulated in reports since at least November 2019, weeks before COVID-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. 248. A video of Chinese people toppling 5G towers over coronavirus fears? No, footage of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong in August 2019. A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Instagram and YouTube posts which claim it shows people in China toppling a 5G tower because of fears that they cause the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video shows pro-democracy protesters toppling a smart lamppost in Hong Kong in August 2019, several months before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 247. Experts dismiss claims that 5G wireless technology created the novel coronavirus Numerous conspiracy theories shared on and off social media claim that 5G mobile networks are the cause of the novel coronavirus pandemic. This is false; experts told AFP that 5G is based on radio frequency and that this does not create viruses. 246. This video has circulated in reports about people who died during the Hajj pilgrim to Saudi Arabia's Grand Mosque in August 2019 A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows bodies being removed from a hospital in Iran during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video has circulated in reports since at least August 2019 about a funeral procession for pilgrims who died during the annual Islamic pilgrimage to Saudi Arabia's Grand Mosque. 245. Extinction Rebellion said it did not issue this poster about the coronavirus An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows a poster issued by activist group Extinction Rebellion that states “Corona is the cure, humans are the disease”. The claim is false; Extinction Rebellion said that the image was published by an unaffiliated Twitter account and that the poster’s message in “no way” represents the global environmental movement’s “principles and values”. 244. New misinformation circulates online in Asia about creation of vaccine and drug for COVID-19 Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter in March 2020 claim a new vaccine and a new drug have been developed to prevent and treat the novel coronavirus. The posts claim the developments were made by scientists in Japan and the Philippines respectively. The claims are misleading; the Japanese government announced in late March 2020 that Japanese scientists were testing a new drug, not a vaccine, to treat COVID-19; the Philippine Food and Drug Administration warned the other drug cited in the misleading posts was \"unregistered\" and not safe. 243. This photo shows trucks branded with the image of the current Sri Lankan Prime Minister that were used in 2014 A photo of a fleet of blue lorries bearing the image of Sri Lankan Prime Minister Mahinda Rajapaksa has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that the lorries were distributing food during the novel coronavirus curfew. The claim is misleading; the photo in fact shows lorries that were used in a political initiative in 2014, more than five years before the coronavirus pandemic. Rajapaksa’s office also denied the claim, saying that authorities are pursuing legal action against those spreading the “false information”. 242. Singaporean authorities refute hoax about 'spot fines' for people violating social distancing orders A post has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook which claim that Singapore has started enforcing spot fines for people who flout certain social distancing regulations during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the Singaporean government agency overseeing the enforcement of the social distancing order refuted the claim; there is no mention of spot fines for offenders in the recently announced government regulations. 241. Misleading posts claim ventilators are ‘stuck’ in New York warehouse Facebook posts featuring a photo of ventilators in the US state of New York claim the devices are “stuck in a warehouse.” This is misleading; New York is stockpiling supplies because of the novel coronavirus pandemic, but emergency response staff say those in the photo were sent to hospitals within 24 hours of their receipt. 240. Ethiopia has not approved traditional medicine to treat COVID-19 An article shared hundreds of times on Facebook claims that the Ethiopian government has approved a traditional medicine treatment for COVID-19 after successful clinical trials on animals and humans. However, the Ministry of Health denied the claims and Capital Ethiopia, which published the story, has corrected its Facebook post. 239. Facebook posts falsely claim the US arrested a Chinese scientist who “created” coronavirus Facebook posts shared thousands of times feature a video of US officials talking to reporters, with captions claiming they are announcing the arrest of a Chinese scientist who “created” the new coronavirus. However, the footage has nothing to do with COVID-19 and scientists have refuted allegations the virus was deliberately created. 238. This video shows donations for victims of a deadly earthquake that hit eastern Turkey in January 2020 A video of food packets deposited on a street has been viewed millions of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows food donations for people in Turkey during a novel coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the video shows donations for victims of a deadly earthquake that struck eastern Turkey in January 2020, almost two months before Turkey recorded its first case of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. 237. WHO did not warn against eating cabbage during the COVID-19 pandemic Multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has warned against eating cabbage during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the WHO said it did not issue any such advisory against consuming cabbage; the US-based Centre of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says there is \"no evidence to support transmission of COVID-19 associated with food\". 236. A photo of two Italian doctors who died of COVID-19? No, this photo has circulated in reports about a couple at an airport in Barcelona in March 2020 A photo of a man and woman embracing has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows two Italian doctors who died of a novel coronavirus, COVID-19, after contracting the disease from the patients they treated. The claim is false; this is an Associated Press photo of a couple kissing at an airport in Barcelona, Spain. 235. ‘It’s a myth’: South Australian health authorities dismiss rumour about an ice rink-turned-morgue for COVID-19 victims A claim that 500 body bags were delivered to an ice skating rink outside the Australian city of Adelaide has been shared widely on Facebook during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; South Australian health authorities said the claim is a “myth” and a spokesperson for the local ice rink said “the rumour is completely false”. 234. Australian health authorities dismiss hoax claim about 'rescue packs' for vulnerable patients Multiple Facebook and Twitter posts shared thousands of times by Australian social media users claim that people with pre-existing respiratory conditions will be given a “rescue pack” of medication from their general practitioners during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; Australia’s Department of Health dismissed the rumour as “misinformation”, adding that patients will not receive “rescue packs” from their doctors unless previously prescribed. 233. Calling this number will not get you food aid in the US Posts shared thousands of times on Facebook claim to provide an emergency food stamp hotline. This is false; the phone number is not for the US Department of Agriculture, which is responsible for food stamps, and instead is a disconnected number formerly belonging to rapper Mike Jones. 232. Patients outside hospitals in Italy? No, these photos show the aftermath of a powerful earthquake in Croatia Six photos of people sitting in wheelchairs and lying in hospital beds outside on a street have been shared hundreds of times on Facebook, Twitter and online forums alongside a claim they show scenes in Italy during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the photos actually show the aftermath of a strong earthquake that hit the Croatian capital of Zagreb in March 2020. 231. Sri Lankan authorities say medical facilities at this hospital will remain open to all COVID-19 patients A photo of a Sri Lankan military hospital has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that it has been reserved exclusively for the use of \"VIPs\" who test positive for COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; Sri Lankan military and hospital authorities told AFP that the military hospital and the country's other medical facilities are being prepared for all COVID-19 patients. 230. Photos of vaping illness patients used to make false COVID-19 claim Posts shared more than 20,000 times on Facebook feature a photo of a crying child and two others showing a woman and a man in hospital beds, claiming that the boy’s parents are infected with the novel coronavirus. This is false, the pictures do not depict a family and circulated online prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. 229. Hemingway phrase misrepresented as Trump and Biden statement on COVID-19 death toll Facebook posts shared tens of thousands of times claim that US President Donald Trump or presidential candidate Joe Biden referred to the novel coronavirus virus pandemic as a time when “people are dying that have never died before.” This is false; there is no record of either man saying this, and letters from Ernest Hemingway show the phrase can be traced to the famed US author. 228. Health authorities warn of false COVID-19 prevention tips online Facebook posts shared thousands of times recommend various practices to prevent COVID-19, including gargling salt water, drinking tea and avoiding ice cream. Health experts told AFP there is no evidence to support these claims and say washing your hands regularly is the best way to stay healthy. 227. False claim circulates online that China and Japan are 'free' of COVID-19 A post has been shared multiple times on Facebook in March 2020 that claims China and Japan are “free” of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; data from the World Health Organization (WHO) shows new cases continue to be reported in both countries. 226. Misinformation spreads in Thailand about police powers to fine people who fail to wear face masks in public A claim that police in Thailand can issue fines to anyone who does not wear a face mask in public during the novel coronavirus pandemic has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and Line Messenger. The claim is false; Thai legal experts told AFP there is no law in the country that allows police to fine people for not wearing face masks; Thai police issued several statements calling the claims “fake news”. 225. Chinese Muslims in mass prayer despite coronavirus crisis? No, this video has circulated online since at least 2011 -- years before the COVID-19 pandemic A video has been viewed hundreds of times in multiple social media posts alongside a claim it shows Chinese Muslims performing a communal Friday prayer in a mosque despite the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video has circulated in reports about Muslims performing a mass prayer at a mosque in the western Chinese city of Xining in 2011, nine years before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 224. False claims on patents fuel novel coronavirus conspiracy theories online Posts on social media claim there is a US patent on the novel coronavirus and a European one for a vaccine, citing specific patent numbers. This is false; the US number relates to an application about a different coronavirus, and the European number is for a patent aimed at a disease that afflicts poultry. 223. Myth circulates online that 'new' hantavirus disease has emerged in China A claim has circulated in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube that a \"new virus\" named hantavirus has emerged in China in March 2020. The posts were viewed hundreds of thousands of times as the world battled the spread of the novel coronavirus, which causes the disease COVID-19. The claim is false; scientists say hantavirus is not a new virus and was first detected during the Korean War in the 1950s; the US-based Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says the virus has almost exclusively been found to pass from rodents to humans, rather than from person to person. 222. These images show vegetables being donated in Sri Lanka in 2019, months before the COVID-19 pandemic Seven photos have been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter, alongside a claim that they show vegetables donated to disadvantaged people during a curfew prompted by the novel coronavirus pandemic in Sri Lanka. The photos have been shared in a misleading context; they actually show vegetables being donated at an event in southern Sri Lanka in August 2019, more than eight months before the curfew was implemented. 221. Singapore General Hospital said its car park would be temporarily used to test suspected COVID-19 patients A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that it shows a hospital car park in Singapore which will be converted into wards during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is misleading; the hospital clarified its car park would temporarily be used to test patients suspected to have been infected with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, but it would not be converted into “wards”. 220. Bodies of COVID-19 victims being dumped into a ditch in Italy? No, this clip is a scene from the 2007 US television series Pandemic A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook which claim it shows bodies of novel coronavirus victims being thrown into a ditch in Italy. The claim is false; the footage was taken from the 2007 US television programme Pandemic. 219. China sent medical supplies, not doctors, to help Malaysia combat the COVID-19 pandemic A photo of a group of people holding a banner that bears the Chinese and Malaysian flags has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows Chinese doctors arriving in Malaysia to combat the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the photo actually shows medical supplies donated by China that were delivered to a hospital in Malaysia. 218. Dozens die after a congregation drinks Dettol to prevent coronavirus? Police dismiss claims as a hoax Multiple articles widely shared on Facebook claim that 59 church members died after drinking household disinfectant which their pastor said would prevent coronavirus infections. The claims, although based on an old story, are false -- South African police denied any current investigations on their part. 217. Hoax circulates on social media that Australian supermarket worker has tested positive for COVID-19 in New South Wales suburb A claim that a trolley collector at a supermarket in the Australian state of New South Wales tested positive for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, in March 2020 has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook. The claim is false; the shopping centre where the supermarket is located said that it had no confirmed COVID-19 cases in March 2020; local health officials in New South Wales also did not report any confirmed cases in the suburb cited in the misleading Facebook posts in the final days of March. 216. This photo shows people participating in an art project in Germany, not bodies of COVID-19 victims on the streets of Italy A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows the bodies of people who died in Italy after they became infected with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the photo actually shows people participating in a 2014 art project in the German city of Frankfurt. 215. This video has circulated in media reports about an incident in Thailand (not of man smearing sweat on lift buttons in Hong Kong) A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a man wiping his sweat on the buttons of a lift in a residential block in Hong Kong. The claim is false; the footage has circulated in media reports about an incident in Thailand. 214. Spanish politician misidentified in posts saying soccer players should find novel coronavirus cure Posts on social media claim that a “Spanish biological researcher” called on international soccer stars Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi to find a cure for COVID-19 since they earn much more money than scientists. However, the accompanying photo shows a Spanish politician speaking in April 2018, well before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 213. Buckingham Palace did not say the Queen tested positive for coronavirus Multiple news reports circulating in Nigeria claim that Buckingham Palace has announced Britain’s Queen Elizabeth tested positive for COVID-19. Although the Queen’s eldest son was diagnosed with the disease, the Palace said the monarch herself is “in good health”. 212. Thailand’s emergency decree to combat COVID-19 did not include a curfew in March 2020 A claim has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter that an emergency decree issued in Thailand due to the novel coronavirus pandemic included a strict curfew. The claim is false; the emergency decree declared on March 25, 2020 by Thailand’s prime minister did not include a curfew. 211. This video shows police arresting a knife-wielding man in Brazil A video of police arresting a man has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim it shows police in Italy detaining a man who flouted a national lockdown during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the footage in fact shows police arresting a knife-wielding man in the Brazilian city of Sao Paulo. 210. World Health Organization refutes misleading claim it increased Thailand's 'pandemic level' for COVID-19 A screenshot of a World Health Organization (WHO) webpage has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and messaging app Line alongside a claim it shows international health authorities raised Thailand’s pandemic stage to a \"level 4\" during the novel coronavirus crisis. The claim is false; the screenshot in fact shows a WHO document that categorised Thailand as \"level 4\" in terms of \"preparedness and response readiness\" for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19; the Thai government has its own classification system for domestic pandemics, the highest of which is “phase 3\". 209. Health experts warn against mixing rum, bleach and fabric softener to make 'hand sanitiser' A video has been have been viewed thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim it shows how to make a hand sanitiser that is effective in protecting against the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The video appears to show someone mixing rum, bleach and fabric softener in a bottle before rubbing the solution on their hands. The claim is false; health experts warn that such homemade hand sanitisers can be harmful to a person's health. 208. No evidence drinking tea can cure or relieve symptoms of COVID-19, doctors say A post shared repeatedly on WhatsApp and Facebook claims a Chinese doctor has discovered that drinking tea is effective in curing and relieving symptoms of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; health experts say there is insufficient scientific evidence to show that drinking tea is effective in preventing or curing COVID-19 infections; as of March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) has said there is no cure for COVID-19. 207. Singapore’s Ministry of Health says it did not issue these COVID-19 'guidelines' A post has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter with a claim it is an official advisory issued by Singapore’s Ministry of Health about the first symptoms of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; a spokesperson for the Singaporean health body told AFP it had not issued the purported advisory. 206. The audio in this Associated Press footage of Saddam Hussein has been doctored A video of former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram alongside a claim it shows him stating the US threatened to spread the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, in Iraq during a meeting in the 1990s. The claim is false; the video's audio has been doctored; the original Associated Press archive footage does not include any reference to COVID-19. 205. Reopening date for South Africa’s schools has not been announced Multiple posts on social media claim that schools in South Africa will reopen months from now in September, as a result of the increase in COVID-19 cases. The claims are false; the Department of Basic Education has not made any such announcement and refuted the claims. 204. Nigeria is not paying citizens for staying at home amidst coronavirus pandemic A web publication shared hundreds of times on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp in Nigeria claims the government will pay each citizen 8,500 naira ($23.60) monthly to encourage Nigerians to stay at home in a bid to slow down the spread of the novel coronavirus. But the claim is false; officials have dismissed the claim, and the author of the viral publication admitted it was incorrect. 203. Australia's Department of Health did not issue a warning that 'using petrol pumps can spread COVID-19' A purported warning from Australian hospitals has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook that using petrol pumps can enable the spread of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; Australia’s Department of Health said it did not issue the purported advisory; scientists say the virus is unlikely to survive on petrol pumps outside as sunlight and lack of moisture generally kill it; motorists are advised to regularly wash their hands to avoid infection. 202. This video has circulated online about a prank staged in Brazil in 2019 A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows a drone launching fireworks at people who breached a curfew in Malaysia during a nationwide coronavirus lockdown. The claim is false; the video's audio has been manipulated to include a man speaking in Malaysian; the original clip actually shows a prank that was staged by a Brazilian influencer in Brazil in July 2019. 201. Articles spread Tim Hortons closure hoax in Canada Two articles claiming that iconic coffee chain Tim Hortons will close all Canada franchises on March 30, 2020 because of the novel coronavirus were shared more than 150,000 times on Facebook. This is false; though locations are closed to dining-in, drive-throughs remain open, a spokeswoman for the chain told AFP. 200. These photos show the coffins of victims of a boat disaster in 2013 Photographs shared hundreds of times online purport to show the coffins of Italian victims of the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the pictures date back to October 2013 when hundreds drowned in a boat tragedy in the Mediterranean. 199. Experts say eating garlic does not prevent COVID-19 -- and onions are no cure either Multiple videos seen tens of thousands of times on Facebook claim garlic and onions can prevent and cure infection from novel coronavirus. This is false; the World Health Organization says garlic cannot prevent or treat COVID-19. 198. This footage of looting was filmed years before the pandemic Footage purportedly showing a looting spree in Mexico prompted by panic over the novel coronavirus was aired on multiple Facebook live streams and viewed by tens of thousands of people during the week of March 23, 2020. Posts sharing the streams claimed that the chaotic scene was happening in real-time. The claim is false; the streams showed old footage from a 2017 looting incident in Mexico that was being played on a loop. 197. False claim circulates online that certain countries in Asia are using helicopters to spray 'COVID-19 disinfectant' Purported advisories urging residents to stay indoors while national air force helicopters spray disinfectant over homes to kill off the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, have been circulated online in Sri Lanka and the Philippines. The warning messages have been shared thousands of times on Facebook and WhatsApp. But the claim is false; both the Sri Lankan and Philippine governments said their air forces were not involved in any such operations. 196. This video has circulated online more than one year before COVID-19 was first detected A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows a shaman curing a novel coronavirus patient in Malaysia. The claim is false; the video has circulated online in posts about a hospital in Indonesia since at least October 2018, more than one year before COVID-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. 195. This video shows police officers arresting protesters in Hong Kong in August 2019 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube which claim it shows Chinese police arresting people infected with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the video shows police arresting pro-democracy protesters at a subway station in Hong Kong in August 2019. 194. Wet wipes not recommended for use as DIY coronavirus protection masks A post shared more than 165,000 times on Facebook includes a video of a woman turning a baby wipe into a face mask to “protect against coronavirus.” The company that sells the wipes says they should not be used in this way, and health experts also recommend caution. 193. Inhaling steam will not treat or cure novel coronavirus infection A video viewed more than 2.4 million times on Facebook urges people to inhale steam to “kill” the novel coronavirus. But experts say that doing so will not treat or cure the viral infection, and could in fact be harmful. 192. This video has circulated online since at least 2013 and shows people receiving Bibles A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows the Koran being distributed to people in China after it lifted a \"ban\" on the Islamic holy text following the outbreak of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the video has circulated online since at least 2013 in reports about people receiving copies of the Bible in China. 191. US social media users mischaracterize Canada’s COVID-19 aid package As the US government moved to approve a $2 trillion stimulus package to address the impact of the novel coronavirus outbreak, a short block of text outlining Canada’s alleged response to the outbreak flourished on social media. The claims about school closings and economic support are misleading; no province has officially closed schools through the end of the year, only individuals directly impacted by COVID-19 are eligible for financial aid, and mortgage relief is granted by banks on a case by case basis. 190. This meme does not show fully-stocked shelves during swine flu pandemic A meme shared on Facebook and Twitter claims to show an image of fully stocked shelves of toilet paper, purportedly during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak, above another of barren shelves during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The post is misleading; the image of the stocked shelves is a screenshot from US news footage shot this year, not in 2009. 189. US President Donald Trump did not announce a coronavirus vaccine was 'ready' A video of US President Donald Trump and a top US pharmaceutical executive speaking at a press conference has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts alongside a claim that it shows them announcing a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, was \"ready\" to be administered. The claim is false; neither Trump nor the pharmaceutical executive make any reference to a vaccine being \"ready\" for distribution; as of March 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) states there is not yet a vaccine for COVID-19. 188. This video shows two separate incidents involving different women in supermarkets A video has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook which claim it shows a woman who was detained by police in Australia after she tested positive for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, and was filmed spitting at a supermarket in a Sydney suburb. The claim is misleading; the video has been created from two clips of separate incidents involving different women; police in Australia said the first clip shows a woman who was questioned and released after a disturbance at a store in a Sydney suburb; the Australian supermarket chain cited in the misleading posts said the second clip was not filmed in its stores. 187. This photo shows a COVID-19 test kit developed by a South Korean company An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim that it shows a medicine created by US scientists that can cure the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the photo in fact shows a COVID-19 test kit developed by a South Korean company; as of March 2020, international health experts have said there is no \"cure\" or vaccine for COVID-19. 186. The Philippine health department said it did not issue this 'checklist' for COVID-19 symptoms A purported checklist for symptoms of novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it was issued by the Philippine Department of Health. The claim is false; the Philippine health body said it did not issue the chart. 185. This photo was taken in South Africa in 2016 -- it is unrelated to the coronavirus pandemic A screenshot of a purported news broadcast showing a lion in the street and reporting that Russia has deployed hundreds of lions to maintain order during the novel coronavirus lockdown has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter. The claim is false; the photo used in the image was taken in Johannesburg, South Africa in 2016; Russia has also not announced any major coronavirus lockdown. 184. Photo of ‘COVID-19’ rail tanker is not genuine A Facebook post shared tens of thousands of times purportedly shows a rail freight tanker with “COVID-19” stamped on one side. The image has circulated globally but it is false, the tanker operating company said. And Railinc, a corporation that manages an industry-wide database, said there is no such mark as “COVID.” 183. An old photo of Buhari from before the pandemic was doctored to add face masks A photo circulating on Facebook in Nigeria appears to show President Muhammadu Buhari shaking hands with the nation’s Code of Conduct Bureau Chairman Mohammed Isa while both men are wearing face masks — a seeming flouting of precautions during the novel coronavirus pandemic. This is not what happened. The image was doctored using an old photo, taken long before the pandemic. 182. The Philippines’ social security agency said this report about a COVID-19 benefit payment was 'fake news' A purported news report has been shared on multiple Facebook pages which claims that Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte approved the release of P20,000 (USD $400) to all recipients of the Philippines’ Social Security System (SSS) to help them through the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the SSS said the report was “fake news\"; the website that published the claim is also not a reputable news source. 181. Hoax circulates that UK hospital has issued special advice to staff to prevent COVID-19 infection A lengthy text post has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook which purportedly contains advice on how to prevent infection from the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The post claims the advice was issued by a UK hospital to its medical staff. The claim is false; the hospital named in the misleading Facebook posts denied issuing the guidelines; the posts also contained several false claims previously debunked by AFP Fact Check. 180. This video has circulated since 2015 in reports about an aerosol explosion in Saudi Arabia A video of a fire erupting inside a vehicle has been viewed hundreds of times on Facebook, Twitter and on messaging app Line in March 2020 alongside a claim it shows an explosion that was sparked by an alcohol-based disinfectant used during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video has circulated in media reports about a car explosion in Saudi Arabia since at least 2015, almost five years before the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. 179. This Pakistani bank said no employees had tested positive for COVID-19 and its branches remained open A screenshot of a purported internal email disclosing that a bank in the Pakistani city of Rawalpindi was closed after an employee tested positive for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has been shared on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. The claim is false; the bank said in a statement that “no employee at any” branch had tested positive for COVID-19, and that all branches remained “open and fully operative.” 178. Indian authorities refute 'fake' claim about food markets closing in Chennai during COVID-19 lockdown A claim that all fruit and vegetable markets in the Indian city of Chennai and across the state of Tamil Nadu have been ordered to close in an effort to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, WhatsApp and Twitter. The claim is false; Chennai’s municipal authority called the social media posts “fake”, and Tamil Nadu’s chief minister said that stores selling “essential items” such as groceries are allowed to operate as normal despite a nationwide lockdown. 177. This video has circulated in media reports about a man on a subway train in Brussels A video has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows a US soldier spreading the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, by wiping his saliva on a subway train handrail in the Chinese city of Wuhan in October 2019. The claim is false; the video circulated in reports in March 2020 about an incident on a subway in Belgium; the Belgian transport body said the man in the video had been arrested over the incident. 176. Nigerian TV screenshot of '472 confirmed cases' refers to Lassa fever — not COVID-19 A screenshot of a Nigerian television station showing a breakdown of \"472 confirmed cases\" has been shared on Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp alongside claims it shows novel coronavirus cases across the country. But the image is being shared out of context: It shows figures for Lassa fever, not coronavirus. 175. Video shows Zimbabwe police beating opposition members, not churchgoers defying virus rules A video shared thousands of times on Facebook claims to show police in Zimbabwe beating churchgoers because their place of worship refused to close to prevent the spread of COVID-19. The claims are false; the video was filmed before the virus outbreak. It shows opposition supporters being dispersed after gathering to hear their leader. 174. Ugandan and Kenyan authorities reject claims that they told landlords to stop rent collection Posts circulating on social media claim that Ugandan and Kenyan authorities have instructed landlords to stop collecting rent due to the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the countries have issued public guidance amid the pandemic, but there has been no official communication on rent payments and government officials dismissed the reports. 173. Viral WhatsApp voice note in Nigeria makes misleading claims about COVID-19 fatalities projections A viral WhatsApp voice note in Nigeria claims that the coronavirus could kill up to 45 million Nigerians. This is misleading, as data from the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Nigeria Centre for Disease Control (NCDC) shows. The message makes several other false claims, which we debunk here. 172. Viral video misidentifies COVID-19 patient as Canadian PM’s wife A video allegedly showing Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s wife in a hospital bed urging people to stay home to avoid ending up seriously ill with the novel coronavirus has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter. The woman in the video is not Sophie Trudeau, but a British waitress who has been infected with COVID-19. 171. Indian health authorities refute myth that juiced vegetables can cure COVID-19 A post has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Whatsapp which claims a regional government in India has recommended that the juice of bitter gourd, a vegetable often used in traditional medicine, is an effective treatment for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; Indian authorities dismissed the claim, calling it “absolutely false”; health experts said there is no evidence the vegetable is an effective remedy for COVID-19. 170. Experts refute misleading claim that bathing in hot water can prevent COVID-19 A post shared repeatedly on Facebook claims that taking a hot bath is an effective remedy against the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is misleading; health experts say there is no scientific evidence that bathing in hot water can prevent people from catching the virus; the World Health Organisation (WHO) warned that bathing or showering in very hot water can be “harmful”. 169. This photo shows coffins for dead migrants after a boat capsized off the coast of Italy in 2013 A photo of a room lined with coffins has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows Italian nationals killed during the novel coronavirus pandemic in 2020. The claim is false; the photo actually shows coffins for a group of dead migrants at an Italian airport in October 2013 after their boat sank off the coast of Italy. 168. Australian health authorities refute hoax about 'free home checks' for suspected COVID-19 cases A purported emergency notice from Australian authorities has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. It states people can receive free home visits from doctors during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; Australian health authorities denied issuing the notice, adding the hoax had prompted “unnecessary phone calls” that had overwhelmed public health units. 167. Police dismiss false claim that Australian factory hoarded COVID-19 supplies to export to China A post has been shared tens of thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter which claims that a factory in the Australian city of Melbourne has been hoarding essential supplies including baby formula, toilet paper and hand sanitiser for export to China during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; police said the accusation was \"false\". The company cited in the misleading posts also refuted the claim. 166. Health experts refute misleading 'timeline' of COVID-19 symptoms An infographic has been shared thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim it shows a nine-day timeline of the symptoms of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. This infographic is misleading; it was not distributed by an official health authority and health experts say COVID-19 symptoms vary in duration and severity. 165. Misleading COVID-19 flyer falsely linked to US Veterans Affairs hospital A flyer said to offer official advice about the novel coronavirus from a Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system in the US state of Oregon is being shared on Facebook. The flyer is fake, it was not issued by the Roseburg VA and health experts told AFP the advice it contains is misleading. 164. US biotech company says its COVID-19 vaccine is in the development phase A television news report about a US biotech company has been viewed thousands of times on Facebook alongside a claim that the company successfully created a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, within \"three hours\". The claim is misleading; the US biotech company said the vaccine still requires human testing and will not be made available until at least the end of 2020. 163. This video shows a security exercise simulating a hostage-taking at Dakar airport A video purporting to show panic-stricken travellers infected with the novel coronavirus at an airport in Senegal has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook. However, these images are actually taken from a security exercise simulating a hostage-taking at Dakar airport in November 2019. 162. Gargling warm salt water or vinegar does not prevent coronavirus infection, health experts say A graphic has been shared thousands of times on Facebook which claims that gargling warm water with salt or vinegar can eliminate the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; international health authorities and experts do not list gargling as an effective remedy or prevention method for COVID-19. 161. This graphic with a purported quote from Philippine Vice President Leni Robredo has been doctored A graphic has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it contains a quote from Philippine Vice President Leni Robredo that bats are the \"enemy\" in the novel coronavirus pandemic. The graphic is attributed to Inquirer.net, a Philippine media outlet. The claim is false; the graphic has been doctored from an earlier Inquirer.net post in which Robredo was quoted about confusion surrounding the government’s response to the coronavirus outbreak. 160. This video has been doctored -- it does not feature the voice of Chinese businessman Jack Ma A video viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook and YouTube purports to show billionaire businessman Jack Ma praising China’s response to the outbreak of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. But the video has been doctored; the original video shows Jack Ma at a meeting of former Alibaba employees in 2018, at least one year before COVID-19 was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan; the voiceover in the clip has been taken from another clip which shows a different man speaking. 159. Indian authorities refute 'fake' advisory which claimed disinfectant would be sprayed across India to tackle COVID-19 A purported advisory has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp posts that claims a disinfectant will be sprayed into the air overnight in India in an effort to kill the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The posts urge residents to remain indoors during the spraying. The claim is false; Indian authorities said the advisory was \"fake\" and that no such measure had been announced. 158. This image has circulated in reports about China testing a potential COVID-19 vaccine that has not been approved by health authorities An image has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that it shows China administering the \"world's first new coronavirus vaccine\" after the global outbreak of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the photos in this image have circulated in reports about China testing a potential COVID-19 vaccine. 157. These photos have circulated since 2011 in reports about the Indian yoga guru being hospitalised after a nine-day fast Two photos have been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter alongside a claim that they show Indian yoga guru Swami Ramdev being admitted to hospital after drinking cow urine in an effort to protect himself against COVID-19, the disease caused by the novel coronavirus. This claim is false; these photos were taken in 2011 and show the guru receiving treatment at a hospital after fasting for nine days. 156. There is no evidence to support the claim that Ghana’s President Akufo-Addo tested positive for the novel coronavirus A story that has been shared thousands of times in social media posts claims Ghana’s president and a senior minister had tested positive for COVID-19. But the claim is false; there is no evidence to support the allegation and Ghana’s information minister has dismissed it. 155. Scientists in Israel are still working on developing a vaccine for COVID-19 An image shared thousands of times on Facebook purports to be evidence that Israel has developed a vaccine for the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; the image used to illustrate a vial of the new drug is originally a stock picture while the MIGAL Research Institute in Israel, despite having a head start, continues to work on a vaccine for COVID-19. 154. UNHCR condemns fake notice which claimed refugees in Malaysia are resisting COVID-19 tests A claim that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) stated “migrants and illegals” in Malaysia were resisting test for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, over fears of arrest has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook. The claim is false; UNHCR officials in Malaysia said the alleged statement is fake and condemned the erroneous claim for stoking “unnecessary fear and distrust”. 153. This photo does not show the pilot who tested positive after visiting a cricket game in Sri Lanka A photo has been shared in multiple Facebook posts that claim it shows a SriLankan Airlines pilot who tested positive for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the local health authority told AFP the pilot is not pictured in the photo; the man wrongly identified in the posts denied the claim. 152. WhatsApp message falsely links BC mall to COVID-19 outbreak A message shared on WhatsApp and Facebook claims that 15 coronavirus cases were linked to Burnaby’s Metrotown mall, in the western Canadian province of British Columbia. This is false; provincial health officials and the mall administrator told AFP that no cases are connected to the mall to date. 151. Misleading report claims UV light, chlorine and high temperatures can kill COVID-19 A report which includes a list of \"seven evil things\" that the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, is “afraid of' has been shared repeatedly on Facebook and Twitter. The list includes UV light, chlorine and high temperatures. The claim is misleading; health experts say such practices are only effective when applied properly and can even be harmful if used incorrectly. 150. The Indian government said there is no free mask scheme in place -- the claim was published on a fraudulent website A claim that Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has instituted a government scheme to distribute free face masks in an effort to curb the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. The posts link to a website that requests users to input personal information to submit an order for the masks. However, the claim is false; the Indian government said there is no such scheme in place and the linked website is not an official government site. 149. 'Red soap, white handkerchiefs': experts refute misleading coronavirus prevention 'tips' A list of purported preventive measures for individuals to take against COVID-19 has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook. The posts claim the guidelines were revealed by a \"Chinese doctor\" and helped China to contain the spread of the novel coronavirus. But the recommended practices are misleading; health experts told AFP there is no scientific basis for many of the claims, which include using red-coloured soap and white handkerchiefs, as well as obtaining specific light bulbs. 148. This video was made by a UK public hospital trust in 2010 about infections in hospitals A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it was produced by the Canadian health authority to illustrate how the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, is transmitted between people. The claim is false; the video was produced by a regional hospital trust within the UK’s public healthcare system, the National Health Service (NHS), in May 2010 about how infections spread in hospitals. 147. Hot air from saunas, hair dryers won’t prevent or treat COVID-19 A video viewed hundreds of thousands of times claims that breathing in hot air from a hair dryer or in a sauna can prevent or cure COVID-19. This is false; an expert in coronaviruses said these methods would not be effective, while a cell biologist said there is no evidence the virus can be treated via heat. 146. False posts claim COVID-19 existed before 2019, use animal vaccines as proof Facebook posts claim that the novel coronavirus is not a new disease, showing photos of vials of coronavirus vaccines for animals as evidence. This is false; coronaviruses affecting cattle or canines differ from the new virus strain affecting humans, for which no vaccine exists. 145. This video has circulated online since November 2019 -- weeks before the COVID-19 outbreak A video of shoppers panic buying and fighting has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, YouTube and various media sites alongside a claim it shows panic buying in the United States during the novel coronavirus pandemic. But the video has been shared in a misleading context; it has circulated online since November 2019, weeks before the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. 144. South African health authorities urge public not to share hotline graphics with false information Graphics displaying Department of Health logos with the COVID-19 hotline number for South Africa have been shared thousands of times on social media. While the toll-free number is correct, the information that follows is false, according to health authorities. 143. Health experts warn using water in an ablution ritual alone cannot kill the novel coronavirus Multiple media reports and social media posts claim that water used in an Islamic ablution ritual can kill the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; health experts warn that water alone cannot kill the virus and recommend that people wash their hands with soap and water for effective protection. 142. Manufacturers say 'free baby formula' offer is a hoax, after coronavirus sparks panic buying Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times in March 2020 claim that consumers can claim a free case of baby formula if they call the relevant manufacturer. The posts were shared after the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the spread of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, had become a pandemic, prompting panic buying in some countries. The claim is false; several manufacturers told AFP that the post is a hoax; the leading industry association noted that official guidelines forbid the donation of formula to the public. 141. This video was filmed in 2011, nearly a decade before the novel coronavirus outbreak Footage of a large crowd rushing into an ALDI supermarket has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside claims that the video shows panic buyers storming the supermarket during the novel coronavirus pandemic. The claim is false; the video was in fact filmed in Germany in 2011, nearly a decade before the coronavirus pandemic broke out. 140. Misinformation circulates online that Australia has announced a nationwide 'shut down' A message shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts claims the Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison was set to implement a nationwide \"shut down\" from March 18, 2020 in an effort to curb the spread of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the Australian Prime Minister’s Office refuted the details of the post; Australia's government told its citizens on March 18 not to travel abroad and warned those already overseas to come home but said it did not order a \"lockdown\"; AFP found the wording of the misleading posts was identical to Malaysia’s announcement of a nationwide lockdown. 139. Hoax claim circulates online that Israel has no COVID-19 cases after it developed a 'cure' Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter claim Israel has no confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, as it has already developed a \"cure\". The claim is false; official World Health Organization (WHO) data and Israeli media reports state at least 298 people have been confirmed to have contracted the disease as of March 16; Israel has implemented travel restrictions and closed businesses in response to the spread of COVID-19. Various countries have been working develop a vaccine for COVID-19 and WHO guidance currently states there is no \"cure\" for the virus to date. 138. The video has circulated in media reports about coronavirus deaths in Iran A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows dozens of corpses inside body bags in Italy after the oubreak of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The video has been shared in a misleading context; it has previously circulated in media reports about people who died after contracting COVID-19 in Iran; a man recording the video can be heard stating that he is inside a mortuary in the Iranian city of Qom. 137. This video has been doctored -- scientists have not found bananas prevent coronavirus infection A video has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube which claim it shows a genuine news report about Australian researchers discovering bananas can help prevent infection by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the video has been doctored from a news report by the Australian television channel ABC to include references to bananas; the scientist cited in the report told AFP the claim is untrue. 136. The Philippine Department of Health says it did not issue this advisory Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook and Twitter claim Israel has no confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, as it has already developed a \"cure\". The claim is false; official World Health Organization (WHO) data and Israeli media reports state at least 298 people have been confirmed to have contracted the disease as of March 16; Israel has implemented travel restrictions and closed businesses in response to the spread of COVID-19. Various countries have been working develop a vaccine for COVID-19 and WHO guidance currently states there is no \"cure\" for the virus to date. 135. Smoking could increase your risk of developing severe coronavirus illness, WHO says Multiple Facebook posts claim the World Health Organization (WHO) has said smoking prevents people from getting infected with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the WHO says smoking does not protect a person from COVID-19 infection and warns it can actually cause health conditions that increase the risk of severe coronavirus illness. 134. Hoax report circulates that Cristiano Ronaldo will convert his hotels into coronavirus hospitals A claim that footballer Cristiano Ronaldo plans to turn his hotels in Portugal into hospitals for people infected by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has been shared tens of thousands of times in multiple languages on various social media platforms. The claim is false; a spokesperson for the hotels said the claim was “inaccurate”; Ronaldo has also not mentioned any such plan on his social media platforms. 133. Health experts refute claim that ancient medicinal herbs are an effective coronavirus remedy A photo of a prescription for an ancient herbal drink has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and WhatsApp alongside a claim that it is an effective remedy for the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The prescription was purportedly written and shared by an Ayurveda doctor in Sri Lanka. The claim is misleading; medical experts advise against using herbal remedies to treat the coronavirus, and urge those experiencing symptoms to seek professional medical assistance. 132. Health experts say comparing death tolls of an emerging epidemic with longstanding diseases risks underplaying COVID-19 A chart has been shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit alongside a claim it shows the seriousness of the novel coronavirus epidemic has been exaggerated when its death toll is compared to other diseases. But health experts say the graphic is misleading and risks underplaying the danger of the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, which is a new disease with a fast-rising mortality rate. 131. This photo has circulated online since 2017 -- over two years before the novel coronavirus outbreak A photo purportedly showing a well-stocked vegan food shelf while other food items are cleared out amid a round of panic buying during the novel coronavirus epidemic has been shared thousands of times on Facebook and Twitter. This is false; this photo has circulated online since September 2017 in reports about panic buying after Hurricane Harvey made landfall in the US. 130. These photos have circulated online since 2015 and show empty shelves at US supermarkets Three photos have been repeatedly shared in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim they show empty supermarket shelves in Sri Lanka after panic buying sparked by the novel coronavirus pandemic. The photos have been used in a misleading context; they have circulated online since at least 2015 and actually show supermarkets in the US. 129. Sri Lankan officials refute false claim that the novel coronavirus has been discovered in poultry Several photos have been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim they show poultry in Sri Lanka that was infected by the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; Sri Lankan authorities said the coronavirus has not been discovered in poultry; the photos were taken from various unrelated reports online and show chickens sickened with other diseases. 128. Doctors refute misleading online claim that consuming boiled ginger can cure novel coronavirus infections Multiple posts on Facebook shared tens of thousands of times during the ongoing novel coronavirus epidemic in February 2020 claim ginger can “cure” coronavirus infections if it is boiled and consumed on an empty stomach. The claim is misleading; health experts say there is no scientific evidence boiled ginger can definitively relieve people of the viral infection, and the World Health Organisation (WHO) advised those showing symptoms to seek immediate medical help, instead of testing home remedies. 127. Health experts dismiss false claim that COVID-19 fits a pattern of viral outbreaks every 100 years An infographic has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows that the 2020 novel coronavirus pandemic fits a pattern of viral outbreaks that occur every 100 years. The claim is false; the infographic contains inaccurate information about historical viral outbreaks and ignores other epidemics that do not fit the assumed pattern; health experts told AFP that while certain viruses are seasonal in nature, there is no basis for the claim that viral outbreaks occur once every century. 126. The last day South African schools will be open is Wednesday, March 18; they will be closed thereafter A notice widely shared on WhatsApp claims that all schools in South Africa would close on Monday, March 16, 2020. This is false: The last day of school will be Wednesday, March 18, and schools will be closed thereafter, as announced by South Africa’s Department of Basic Education. 125. False COVID-19 hotline number shared on Facebook in Ontario A notice shared more than 15,000 times on Facebook advises Ontario residents to call 811 to arrange a home visit by medical specialists if they are showing novel coronavirus symptoms. This is false; 811 is not an official public health hotline in Ontario, and the provincial ministry of health is not organizing home visits, a spokeswoman told AFP. 124. Consuming silver particles will not prevent or treat novel coronavirus Posts circulating on Facebook claim that colloidal silver -- silver particles in liquid -- can prevent or treat the novel coronavirus. This is false; US regulators say it is not safe for use against any disease. 123. The incident happened in another part of South Africa long before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video shared hundreds of times on Facebook purports to show monkeys stealing food from a hospital in South Africa's capital Pretoria, pondering the country's readiness to fight the novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the video was taken before the COVID-19 crisis in a different part of the country. 122. Costco is not recalling bath tissue due to novel coronavirus contamination A recall notice supposedly issued by retailer Costco for bath tissue contaminated by the novel coronavirus has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook in Canada. The notice is not authentic, according to a statement from the wholesaler, and the brand of bath tissue in question is not listed on official recall websites. 121. Employer did not hide advice to skip work on COVID-19 poster Posts claiming an employer covered up part of a poster on novel coronavirus prevention that advised sick employees to stay home have been shared more than 5,000 times on Facebook. This is false; the recommendation that was covered up advises people to avoid large gatherings and does not mention staying home when sick. 120. This doctored image contains a 2015 photo of Tom Hanks and the ball in the movie 'Cast Away' A photo of Hollywood actor Tom Hanks holding a volleyball has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and Instagram posts alongside it shows him in quarantine at a hospital in Australia after contracting the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The posts further claim hospital staff gifted Hanks the ball as a tribute to his character Chuck Noland in the 2000 film 'Cast Away', who \"befriends\" a volleyball. The claim is false; the image has been doctored using a 2015 photograph of Hanks and a stock photo of a hospital ward; the doctored photo emerged on a satirical website. 119. Philippine Department of Health refutes hoax warning about visiting shopping malls and hotels during coronavirus epidemic A purported Philippine government advisory has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it lists shopping malls and hotels in the Philippines that the Department of Health advises against visiting during the novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is misleading; the Philippine Department of Health said the purported advisory is \"fake”. 118. This video has circulated online since 2017 about a hotel demolition in China’s Jiangsu province A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in March 2020 which claim it shows a hotel collapsing in the Chinese city of Quanzhou after it was used as a coronavirus quarantine facility. The claim is false; the video has circulated online since at least April 2017 about a hotel demolition in China’s Jiangsu province. 117. False claims that drinking water with lemon can prevent COVID-19 circulate online A text shared thousands of times on Facebook in various countries claims that drinking warm water with lemon protects against the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; experts told AFP that there’s no proof this is effective in preventing the disease and that practising good hygiene is the best way to stay healthy. 116. Picture of the novel coronavirus? No, this is a magnified photo of a weevil Multiple Facebook posts have shared a photo alongside a claim that it shows coronavirus magnified 2,600 times. The claim is false; the image is a magnified photo of a weevil. 115. This video has previously circulated in reports about a free vegetable giveaway in Wuhan A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter and Facebook alongside a claim it shows residents queuing for death certificates in Wuhan, the Chinese city at the centre of the ongoing novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is misleading; the footage has previously circulated in reports about Wuhan residents gathering to collect free vegetables. 114. There have been no deaths from the novel coronavirus in South Africa (as of March 12, 2020) An article shared thousands of times on Facebook claims that a family of three died from the new coronavirus at a hospital in South Africa’s Mpumalanga province. The claim is false; there have been no deaths from the novel coronavirus in South Africa as of March 12, 2020. When the misleading article was published, there were zero confirmed cases in the province; as of March 12, there was one. 113. Fake US hospital letter says alcohol reduces COVID-19 risks A Facebook post shared 25,000 times features an image of a letter purportedly from a US hospital recommending people drink alcohol to help reduce the risks of novel coronavirus infection. This is false; Saint Luke’s Hospital in Kansas City did not issue the letter, according to its staff. 112. World Health Organization refutes viral claims that holding your breath can test for COVID-19 Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that holding your breath for more than 10 seconds is an effective test for the novel coronavirus, and that drinking water regularly can prevent the disease. The claims are false; the World Health Organization and other experts said there was no evidence to support these claims. 111. Donating blood in US does not get you a novel coronavirus test Twitter users are claiming that people can get a novel coronavirus test by donating blood. This is false; the two organizations responsible for collecting the vast majority of the blood supply in the United States said they are not testing for COVID-19. 110. This report is a hoax -- the video was filmed one year before the novel coronavirus outbreak An online report has been shared in repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and YouTube which purports to show Philippine authorities confiscating fake cigarettes that were spreading the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the video in the report actually shows the Philippines customs bureau seizing fake cigarettes in May 2018, more than one year before the coronavirus outbreak; the site that published the report is not a reputable news site. 109. This false claim about a brothel quarantined in Europe originated on a satirical website A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Weibo, Twitter and Facebook alongside a claim it shows a brothel in Europe where 86 people were quarantined due to the novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim circulated in posts in English, German, Spanish and Portuguese. The claim is false; it originated on a satirical website based in Spain; the image in the posts shows a nightclub in the coastal Spanish city of Marbella. 108. These sheep videos were published online before Mongolia announced the donation to China Two videos of large flocks of sheep have been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in late February 2020 alongside a claim they show 30,000 sheep that Mongolia donated to China during the novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is misleading; both videos circulated online before Mongolia announced the donation on February 27, 2020. On February 28, 2020, Chinese officials said the two countries were still in the process of discussing logistics of the donation. 107. There is no known cure for the novel coronavirus and the patient has not yet been officially cleared (as of March 11) An article shared thousands of times claims that a South African patient infected with COVID-19 was cured. This is misleading: there is currently no known cure for the disease and resultantly any infected patient’s return to health should be described as a recovery. Moreover, the patient in question has not yet been officially cleared. 106. World Health Organization refutes misleading claim that volcanic ash can kill coronavirus Multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube claim ash produced by a volcano eruption in the Philippines in January 2020 can prevent the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The posts claim the volcano eruption helps to explain why the Philippines is “not that much affected” by COVID-19. The claim is misleading; the World Health Organization (WHO) told AFP there is no evidence that volcanic ash can destroy COVID-19, adding that it poses significant health hazards. 105. Indonesia refutes 'hoax' report that it gave citizens free air tickets to return home after coronavirus outbreak Multiple Facebook posts claim the Indonesian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) has provided 1,000 free tickets for Indonesian nationals abroad to return home following the novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is false; the ministry dismissed the social media posts as a “hoax”; the photos shared in the posts have circulated online before the outbreak of the novel coronavirus. 104. UNICEF officials refute false claim that agency released coronavirus prevention guidelines An advisory about the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and WhatsApp alongside a claim that it was released by the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). The claim is false; UNICEF said that the agency did not release the information; significant parts of the message are contrary to health experts’ advice about the coronavirus. 103. These 14 claims on COVID-19 are viral, but misleading Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim to offer expert advice on the novel coronavirus, including symptoms, prevention and how it spreads. This is misleading; experts and health agencies say there is not enough research on the virus to make these specific claims. 102. Chloroquine has not been approved as a treatment for COVID-19 (as of March 9) A WhatsApp voice message circulating in Nigeria claims that anti-malaria drug chloroquine phosphate is a cure for COVID-19. This is misleading: while a study found the molecule showed “apparent efficacy” in treating the disease, trials are still ongoing. Experts also warned against taking the drug without prescription. British officials have opened a probe into an illegal website selling the drug, following AFP's investigation. 101. Health experts say drinking water every 15 minutes does not prevent coronavirus infection Multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter shared hundreds of times in the Philippines claim that doctors in Japan advise people to drink water every 15 minutes in order to prevent being infected by the novel coronavirus, COVD-19. The claim is misleading; the World Health Organization (WHO) says drinking water does not prevent novel coronavirus infection; Japan has not issued a health advisory listing drinking water as a prevention method for COVID-19. 100. These notes contain multiple inaccuracies about the novel coronavirus -- the Thai doctor named as the source denied writing them Three photos of handwritten notes about the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, have been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim that they were written by a Thai doctor. The claim is misleading; the notes contain several inaccuracies about COVID-19; the Thai doctor named in the posts as the source of the notes denied writing them. 99. This report is not from a genuine news site -- the Vatican said the pope was suffering from a cold A report has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit in February 2020 which claims the Vatican disclosed that Pope Francis had been infected with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is false; the Vatican said Pope Francis recently fell ill with a common cold; the site that published the misleading claim is not a reputable media organisation. 98. Israeli scientists have not developed a COVID-19 vaccine -- they were still working to develop one in February 2020 Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times in Sri Lanka claim that Israeli scientists have developed a vaccine against the novel coronavirus, COVID-19. The claim is misleading; Israel’s MIGAL Research Institute said in a press release in February 2020 that it was still working to develop a vaccine for COVID-19; the image of a vial labelled \"coronavirus vaccine\" in the misleading Facebook posts was taken from a stock photo website. 97. No, all international arrivals were not cancelled at an airport in Karachi in February 2020 An image of a terminal display screen showing a list of flights cancelled at an airport in the Pakistani city of Karachi has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp alongside a claim that all international arrivals were halted in February 2020 during the novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is false; Pakistan’s Civil Aviation Authority confirmed that international arrivals were not cancelled in February 2020. The photo in the misleading posts corresponds with another image from the airport which has circulated in reports about flights being suspended at the airport in March 2019. 96. An image from The Simpsons was digitally altered to make it look like it predicted the novel coronavirus A series of screenshots from The Simpsons have been circulating online alongside claims that the TV show predicted the novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the montage features shots from two different episodes, one of which has been digitally altered to include the words “corona virus”. 95. Coronavirus hoax spreads online after Rush Limbaugh broadcast Conservative US radio host Rush Limbaugh compared the novel coronavirus to “a common cold,\" prompting debate over the virus’ lethality. This is misleading; the strain discovered in late 2019 differs from and is more deadly than the human coronaviruses that can cause a cold, health experts say. 94. US disease experts did not issue novel coronavirus-related facial hair guide US media reports say the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued facial hair recommendations for novel coronavirus prevention, citing an infographic. This is misleading; the graphic about facial hair and respirator use is more than two years old and is unrelated to the recent deadly outbreak. 93. Sri Lankan authorities say only two suspected coronavirus patients were hospitalised, and both later tested negative Multiple Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that four patients infected with the novel coronavirus have been admitted to a hospital in Sri Lanka. The claim is misleading; local health authorities told AFP only two suspected patients were admitted, and stressed they have tested negative for COVID-19. 92. This photo has circulated in reports since 2014, after one of Iran's vice presidents was injured in a traffic accident A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and Weibo posts published in February 2020 which claim it shows Iranian senior officials visiting the country’s vice president after she contracted the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; this photo has circulated in reports since at least 2014 about one of Iran’s vice presidents, Masoumeh Ebtekar, after she was injured in a traffic accident at least five years before the outbreak of COVID-19 in the Chinese city of Wuhan; the Iranian Embassy in China also clarified the context of the photo in a post on its official Weibo account. 91. The story originated from a parody account; no driver is threatening to spread COVID-19 across Nigeria Multiple posts shared thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp claim that a Nigerian taximan who picked up an Italian visitor infected with the novel coronavirus, in turn, contracted the disease and went on the run, demanding N100 million ($275,000) from the government. This is false; the story originated from a parody account and has been denied by the man pictured in the claim and government officials. 90. Health experts refute new misleading claims about coronavirus prevention in Sri Lanka A lengthy post promoting several precautionary measures which will purportedly protect people from the novel coronavirus has been shared tens of thousands of times by multiple Sri Lankan Facebook users. But health experts have refuted many of the claims, including one that sunlight can kill the virus, saying they are false or misleading; Sri Lankan health authorities have urged the public to refrain from sharing misleading information in order to curb the coronavirus “info-demic.” 89. The video shows a police drill in China during the novel coronavirus epidemic A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts which claim it shows a suspected coronavirus case in China being detained by officials after he failed a body temperature test and attempted to force his way through a blockade. The video has been shared in a misleading context; it shows a police drill at a toll gate in China's Henan province during the novel coronavirus epidemic. 88. ‘Coronavirus protection’ masks hawked in misleading video ad on Facebook A video advertisement on Facebook encourages people to buy face masks to protect against the novel coronavirus. The ad is misleading; US government health authorities do not recommend the general public wear masks for that purpose, and the video uses footage of a doctor who is speaking about unrelated topics to claim medical professionals approve of the product. 87. Russia’s Ministry of Health refutes misleading online claim that it stated COVID-19 is man-made Multiple articles and social media posts viewed tens of thousands of times claim the Russian Ministry of Health confirmed in a document that the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, is man-made. The claim is misleading; the Russian Ministry of Health said it did not make such a statement; the document cited in the misleading posts states COVID-19 is a “recombinant virus” which can form naturally. 86. This photo has circulated in an online fundraising page for a man with a lung condition unrelated to the novel coronavirus A photo of a man ill in hospital has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a video of a man eating a bat in a restaurant. The posts claim the man in the image was hospitalised after eating a bat following the outbreak of the novel coronavirus in the Chinese city of Wuhan. The photo and video have been shared in a misleading context; the photo has previously circulated in an online fundraising page for an Indonesian man hospitalised for a lung disease unrelated to the coronavirus epidemic; the video has circulated in separate reports about tourists sampling fruit bats in a restaurant on the island of Palau in Micronesia. 85. International health advisories contradict false claim that a runny nose is not a coronavirus symptom A screenshot of a social media post claiming a runny nose and sputum secretion are not symptoms of novel coronavirus has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter. These claims are false; various health advisories on the coronavirus issued by health authorities worldwide, including those in China where the epidemic emerged, have listed both as possible symptoms of the viral disease. 84. This video shows a parade in Italy during an annual art carnival A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside claims that the footage shows a parade in France that was organised to celebrate China’s efforts to combat the deadly novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the video was in fact filmed in Italy during an annual art carnival in February 2020. 83. Health experts say there is no evidence vitamin D is effective in preventing novel coronavirus infection Multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts claim vitamin D can help reduce the risk of novel coronavirus infection. The claim is misleading; health experts told AFP there is insufficient science to definitively say vitamin D can protect from the viral epidemic. 82. This is a 2017 photo of Cambodia's Prime Minister after he was hospitalised for an unrelated health condition A photo of Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, and on Line Messenger alongside a claim he was hospitalised after contracting the novel coronavirus. The claim is false; the photo was taken in 2017 when the Prime Minister was being treated for an unrelated health condition at a Singaporean hospital -- at least two years before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 81. Experts in India refute misleading claim that China-made Holi festival goods are infected with coronavirus A claim that Chinese goods imported for the Holi festival in India should be avoided because they are infected with the novel coronavirus has been shared multiple times on Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. The claim is misleading; the World Health Organization (WHO) told AFP that the virus does not last long on inanimate surfaces, so it is unlikely imported goods would remain infectious; the Toy Association of India told AFP the virus would not survive on a shipment of Holi festival items as the journey from China generally takes at least two weeks. 80. This video shows Chinese medical scientist Zhong Nanshan visiting a hospital in 2016 A video of Zhong Nanshan, a top Chinese medical scientist, meeting with a hospital patient has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows him greeting a doctor in the Chinese city of Wuhan who soon after died of coronavirus in February 2020. The claim is false; the footage has actually been taken from a Chinese television programme that shows Zhong visiting a hospital ward in 2016. 79. This image shows a scene from the trailer for 2011 disaster movie Contagion A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Chinese-language posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim it shows a mass burial ground for “virus victims”. The posts were published after the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, spread to dozens of countries after it was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. The claim is false; the image is a screenshot taken from the trailer of the 2011 movie Contagion. 78. These images have previously circulated in reports about an elderly Chinese couple who had unrelated health problems Two images that show an elderly man and woman holding hands across parallel hospital beds have been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts which claim they are an elderly Chinese couple who were infected with the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; the images have previously circulated in reports which stated they were an elderly Chinese couple suffering from health problems unrelated to the novel coronavirus. 77. Indian health authority refutes hoax report of coronavirus case in Uttar Pradesh district A claim that a man infected with an acute case of novel coronavirus has been admitted to a hospital in a town in Uttar Pradesh, India has been shared multiple times on Facebook and Twitter. This claim is false; the district’s health authority said there are no confirmed novel coronavirus patients in the area. 76. This video has circulated in media reports since at least October 2019 -- months before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter that claim its shows shoppers scrambling to enter a supermarket in China after the novel coronavirus outbreak in the Chinese city of Wuhan. The claim is false; the video has circulated in media reports since at least October 2019, two months before the viral outbreak was first reported. 75. The video shows an Islamic conversion in Saudi Arabia in May 2019 – months before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim it shows Chinese people converting to Islam because the novel coronavirus epidemic does not affect Muslims. The claim is false: the video shows people converting to Islam in Saudi Arabia in May 2019, more than half year away before the novel coronavirus outbreak began in Wuhan, China in late 2019. 74. This video circulated online weeks before the novel coronavirus was first reported A video has been shared on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube alongside claims that it shows scores of people from China “escaping to” Vietnam in order to avoid the deadly coronavirus, which broke out in China’s Hubei province in December 2019. The claim is false; the same footage circulated online weeks before the coronavirus outbreak. 73. Anti-malaria drug has proven effective in treating coronavirus but has not cured 12,552 patients A report in Nigeria claims that anti-malaria drug chloroquine has cured 12,552 novel coronavirus patients. This is misleading; the China National Center for Biotechnology Development confirmed the drug has “a certain curative effect on the novel coronavirus”, but did not say it cured 12,552 patients. The drug has only been used in clinical trials with “over 100 patients”. 72. This map is a forecast based on past data, not real-time satellite readings A map has been shared tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube which claim it shows elevated sulphur dioxide levels in Wuhan, the Chinese city at the epicentre of the novel coronavirus epidemic. The posts, published in multiple languages, claim the high levels of the gas could be evidence of mass cremation in and around the city. The claim is false; NASA, whose data was used to create the map, told AFP the imagery was created based on forecast figures of man-made sulphur dioxide emissions and volcano gas, not real-time satellite recordings. 71. No cases of the novel coronavirus have been confirmed in Zimbabwe as of February 20, 2020 Articles shared hundreds of times on Facebook claim that Zimbabwe has confirmed its first case of the novel coronavirus. The reports are misleading; no confirmed cases have been recorded as of February 20, 2020. A suspected patient was admitted to hospital but tested negative for the virus. 70. This video has circulated online since at least March 2019 – months before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video of a rainbow forming in the wake of a truck spraying moisture over a street has been viewed tens of thousands of times on Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that the footage shows a truck disinfecting a street in China in an effort to contain the novel coronavirus. This claim is false; the video, which shows a truck spraying in China's Sichuan province for dust control purposes, has circulated online since at least March 2019, months before the viral outbreak. 69. This video was filmed before the novel coronavirus outbreak A video shared hundreds of times on social media purports to show people running from a Chinese man who collapsed in Mauritania. The claim is false; the footage was shared online months before the start of the novel coronavirus epidemic. 68. Sri Lankan health experts stress there is no evidence that cannabis boosts immunity against the novel coronavirus A YouTube video of a doctor discussing the health benefits of cannabis has been viewed thousands of times among Sri Lankan Facebook users alongside a claim that cannabis can boost a person's immunity to the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; medical experts have emphasised there is no evidence to suggest that cannabis improves immunity against the virus and have urged the public to follow official government health guidelines. 67. Pakistan’s Ministry of Health refutes claim that novel coronavirus was found in chickens Photos of diseased chicken have been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook posts which claim the deadly novel coronavirus has been found in chickens in Pakistan. The claim is false; Pakistan’s Ministry of Health, National Institute of Health and the Pakistan Poultry Association told AFP there is “no evidence” novel coronavirus has been found in poultry. The photos are also being shared out of context as they show chickens sickened with an unrelated disease. 66. Australian officials dismiss hoax report of coronavirus exposure at doctor's surgery in New South Wales town A claim that a doctor’s office in a New South Wales town was visited by people who had been exposed to the novel coronavirus has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook. The claim is misleading; health officials stated that the only confirmed coronavirus cases in the Australian state were in Sydney, not the regional areas. 65. The World Health Organization has said there is not yet a vaccine for the novel coronavirus Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times claim Israel has sent a vaccine to “cure” novel coronavirus patients in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the epicentre of the global outbreak. The posts claim the vaccine has \"cured 479 patients so far\". The claim is false; as of February 14, no vaccine for novel coronavirus has been developed – the World Health Organisation (WHO) has said there is “no specific medicine” to “prevent or treat” the viral infection, but is “helping to coordinate efforts to develop medicines with a range of partners”; the photos in the misleading posts also do not support the claim. 64. The Philippine Bureau of Immigration says it did not issue this 'coronavirus escapee' warning Multiple Facebook posts have shared a purported government announcement that calls for the arrest of a Chinese national from the city of Wuhan who allegedly escaped quarantine at an airport in the Philippines after the novel coronavirus outbreak. The posts have been shared hundreds of times. The claim is false; the Philippine Bureau of Immigration denied issuing the advisory and called it “a hoax”. 63. These photos show a private firm distributing face masks in Manila Two photos have been shared in multiple posts on Facebook which claim the Philippine government is giving out free face masks to the public following the novel coronavirus outbreak. These photos have been used in a misleading context; they show a private firm distributing free face masks to locals in Manila’s Chinatown, and while the Philippine government did once provide masks free of charge, it has since issued a statement discouraging its use. 62. This staged car crash was filmed for a 2018 movie in China’s Heilongjiang province A video of a car smashing into police vehicles has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Weibo alongside a claim that the incident happened at a police roadblock in Wuhan, the Chinese city at the epicentre of the global novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the footage shows a staged car crash in China’s Heilongjiang province that was filmed for a Chinese movie released in 2018. 61. This video shows people sleeping rough in the Chinese city of Shenzhen A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter and Facebook which claim it shows dead bodies on the streets in the Chinese city of Wuhan after the novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the video shows people sleeping rough hundreds of miles away in Shenzhen, a southern Chinese city that has implemented an entry-and-exit permit system during the novel coronavirus outbreak. 60. This map shows flight paths worldwide -- it does not show the movement of Wuhan residents A map has been published in multiple news articles and social media posts alongside a claim it shows the forecasted global spread of novel coronavirus based on the movements of residents from the Chinese city of Wuhan. The map has been shared in a misleading context; it actually shows a route map of flight paths around the world. 59. Australian couple quarantined onboard Diamond Princess cruise reveal wine drone delivery story was 'just a prank' Multiple news articles and social media posts published in February 2020 claimed that an Australian couple who were quarantined on a cruise ship off the coast of Japan due to the novel coronavirus outbreak had wine delivered to them by a drone. The claim is false; the couple later told an Australian radio station that their social media posts about the wine delivery were a \"prank\". 58. There are no known deaths or confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus in Nigeria as of February 18, 2020 An article shared in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter claims Lagos has seen nine confirmed novel coronavirus cases, including four deaths. But the claim is false; health officials told AFP there were no confirmed coronavirus deaths or cases in the country as of February 18, 2020. The story was fabricated from recent reports on a Lassa Fever outbreak in central Nigeria. 57. Thai doctors say their treatment helped a coronavirus patient recover, but it was not a 'cure' Multiple social media posts and media reports shared hundreds of times in February 2020 claim Thailand has cured a COVID-19 patient within 48 hours using a cocktail of an anti-HIV drug and an antiviral drug used for treating influenza. The claim is misleading; Thai doctors say the cocktail of drugs did greatly improve the condition of the patient over 48 hours but did not cure them of the viral infection; the World Health Organisation (WHO) said there is “no specific medicine” to prevent or treat novel coronavirus as of February 14, 2020. 56. Indian health authorities dismiss hoax report of novel coronavirus case in east Indian state. A post has been shared multiple times on Facebook that claims a doctor in Purnea, a district in the east Indian state of Bihar, has identified a novel coronavirus patient. This claim is false; the local health authority said that there are no confirmed novel coronavirus patients in the area as of February 14, 2020. The doctor named in the misleading Facebook post also called the claim “baseless and false.\" 55. This video shows tower blocks in Shanghai, not Wuhan – and the clip has been edited to include the audio A video has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple posts on Twitter and YouTube which claim it shows quarantined Wuhan residents greeting each other from their apartment blocks during the novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the video shows tower blocks in the Chinese city of Shanghai; the audio in the clip directly corresponds with audio from a scene in the 1988 film Coming to America. 54. The video shows an Eid prayer in China in June 2019 -- months before the coronavirus outbreak A video has been viewed millions of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows non-Muslim Chinese people performing a Friday prayer after the outbreak of the novel coronavirus in December 2019. The claim is false; the video actually shows an Eid prayer in Yiwu, a Chinese city that attracts many Muslim traders from overseas, in June 2019, several months before the novel coronavirus outbreak. 53. No confirmed cases of the novel coronavirus have been recorded in Ethiopia (as of February 17, 2020) Several posts alleging the novel coronavirus has been found in Ethiopia are circulating on Facebook. However, the claims are misleading; as of February 17, 2020, there were no confirmed cases in the country, and Ethiopia’s health authorities said that 17 suspected cases all tested negative. 52. Wuhan fire officials say this video shows an apartment fire sparked by a discarded cigarette A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube alongside a claim that it shows an apartment fire that erupted in the Chinese city of Wuhan after concerned residents used alcohol disinfectant against the novel coronavirus. The video has been shared in a misleading context; Wuhan fire officials said the fire was sparked accidentally by a discarded cigarette and refuted the claim that alcohol disinfectant was the cause. 51. This video shows humanitarian aid flown from Kenya to China after coronavirus outbreak A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Youtube which claim it shows a plane in Melbourne, Australia carrying a shipment of medical supplies collected by the Chinese diaspora to be delivered to Guangzhou, China. This video has been shared in a misleading context; it actually shows a plane in Nairobi, Kenya carrying aid for Guangzhou. 50. This video shows crows in the Chinese city of Xining -- 1,000 miles from Wuhan A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube published in February 2020 alongside a claim that it shows a murder of crows in the sky over the Chinese city of Wuhan following the novel coronavirus outbreak. The video has been shared in a misleading context; it shows scores of crows in the Chinese city of Xining, more than 1,000 miles northwest of Wuhan. 49. World Health Organization says COVID-19 means ‘coronavirus disease 2019’ – not 'China outbreak virus' Claims that COVID-19, a name the World Health Organization (WHO) created for the deadly novel coronavirus that broke out in China, stands for “China Outbreak Virus in December 19” have been viewed hundreds of times in various Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Reddit and Weibo posts. The claim is false; the WHO confirmed COVID-19 is an abbreviation of “coronavirus disease 2019” and said that geographical locations are not included when naming diseases to avoid stigmatisation. 48. This video shows a blast in Tianjin, China, in 2015 -- before the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan A video of a large explosion has been viewed hundreds of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and Vimeo posts alongside a claim that it shows a blast in January 2020 in the Chinese city of Wuhan, the epicentre of an ongoing novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is false; the video shows a deadly explosion in Tianjin, a port city in northeast China, in August 2015. 47. Novel coronavirus: misinformation circulates online about US Postal Service operations for mail bound for China and Hong Kong Multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Weibo claim that the United States Postal Service (USPS) has stated it will no longer accept items destined for China and Hong Kong following a global novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim was repeated in several languages and by some Hong Kong media organisations. The claim is misleading; USPS told AFP on February 12 it would continue to accept items bound for China and Hong Kong but was temporarily unable to offer time guarantees on those shipments; it clarified that it will temporarily halt its transit service that ships mail from other countries to China and Hong Kong. 46. Black people aren’t more resistant to novel coronavirus Facebook posts shared thousands of times claim that a Cameroonian man living in China was cured of the novel coronavirus “because he has black skin”. Although a Cameroonian student was successfully treated for the illness, a doctor from a research centre specialised in the novel coronavirus told AFP there is “no scientific evidence” to suggest black people have a better chance of fighting the virus. 45. Philippine authorities did not issue this warning after the novel coronavirus outbreak An image has been shared repeatedly in multiple posts on Facebook and Twitter which claim the Philippines has issued an order mandating a compulsory quarantine for all travellers returning from 23 countries, in an effort to curb the growing novel coronavirus epidemic. The claim is false; the Philippines government said the image is a hoax; as of February 10, Philippine health officials said only visitors from China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan would be subjected to quarantine. 45. Hoax report claims China sought Supreme Court approval to euthanise 20,000 coronavirus patients An article claiming the Chinese government has sought Supreme Court approval to authorise the killing of more than 20,000 novel coronavirus patients in an effort to curb the growing epidemic has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and Reddit. The claim is false; the article was published on a site that has regularly produced hoax reports, and China has made no such announcement. 44. Indian officials say novel coronavirus has not been found in poultry A claim that novel coronavirus has been discovered in chicken raised for meat in Mumbai, India has been shared hundreds of times in multiple Facebook and Twitter posts. The claim is false; the Indian government’s Poultry Development Organization told AFP it was “absolutely wrong” and there is “no evidence” that novel coronavirus has been detected in poultry. 43. This chart is old -- it has since been updated to accurately show a much lower H1N1 fatality rate A chart purporting to show that the 2009 H1N1 flu pandemic was far more deadly than the ongoing novel coronavirus outbreak has been shared in multiple social media posts. However, the claim is misleading; the posts show an early version of a virus comparison chart that has since been corrected by its publisher to accurately show a lower H1N1 fatality rate. 42. Medical doctors challenge claim that Chinese herbal remedy 'inhibits' novel coronavirus after Chinese media reports praised it Media reports in China claimed the traditional Chinese medicine Shuang Huang Lian could be effective in “inhibiting” the novel coronavirus. A similar claim has been viewed hundreds of millions of times in multiple Weibo, WeChat and Facebook posts. The posts were shared after a global outbreak of a new strain of the novel coronavirus broke out in the Chinese city of Wuhan in December 2019. The claim in the posts is misleading; medical doctors said the medicine has not been tested in clinical trials to prove its efficacy against the novel coronavirus; as of February 2020, the World Health Organisation has said there is no medicine to “prevent or treat the virus\". 41. This photo was published online in 2018, two years before the deadly coronavirus outbreak A screenshot of a Facebook post that claims Hong Kong police are misappropriating face masks for personal use and that includes a photo of face masks has been shared thousands of times in dozens of posts on Facebook and Twitter. However, the photo is being used misleading context; it has circulated online since at least 2018, two years before the deadly coronavirus outbreak began. Police also denied that officers were misusing masks. 40. Thai health experts say there is no evidence the 'green chiretta' herb can prevent the novel coronavirus An article published by a Thai media site claims that a herb cultivated in southeast Asia, andrographis paniculata or “green chiretta”, can prevent and relieve symptoms of the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading; Thai health experts said there is no scientific evidence that the herb can boost immunity or relieve the symptoms of the novel coronavirus. 39. This photo was circulated as a hoax -- the New South Wales health authority said it is unrelated to the novel coronavirus in Australia An image has been shared repeatedly in multiple Facebook posts published in January 2020 which claim it shows a confirmed case of the novel coronavirus in a suburb of Sydney, Australia. The claim is false; in response to the photo, the New South Wales health authority told AFP on February 6, 2020 there had been no confirmed case of the novel coronavirus in the cited suburb. 37. Lysol product labels are not evidence of a novel coronavirus conspiracy Social media users claim that because Lysol products are labeled as being effective against “human coronavirus,” the novel coronavirus first reported in China’s Wuhan is not new. This is misleading; they are a family of viruses, and Lysol’s manufacturer said it has not tested its products against the new strain. 37. This viral video shows a high-school initiation in South Africa A video shared thousands of times in several languages purports to show coronavirus patients in China. The claim is false; the people in the footage are South African students taking part in a high-school initiation. 36. This woman's family said there is no evidence she died after contracting the novel coronavirus A video has been viewed thousands of times in a Facebook post published in January 2020 that claims it shows a woman fainting after contracting the novel coronavirus that caused a global pandemic in 2020. The claim is misleading; the woman's family told AFP there is no evidence she died from the coronavirus; the hospital authorities have said they are cotinuing to investigate the cause of her death; Malaysian authorities have said 14 people have contracted the novel coronavirus but none have died as of February 7, 2020. 35. Thai Department of Health denies authorising face mask infographic after novel coronavirus outbreak An infographic describing different types of sanitary face masks and their effectiveness against germs and air pollutants has been shared hundreds of times on Facebook. The graphic claims that the Thai Department of Health is its source of information. The claim is false; the Department of Health told AFP that the image was created and distributed without its consent. 34. This video shows workmen uncovering a bat-infested roof in the US state of Florida in 2011 A video showing scores of bats nesting under tiles of a roof has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook that it shows the cause of the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in China. The claim is false; the video has circulated online since at least July 2011 and actually shows repairs being made to the roof of a bat-infested house in the city of Miami in the United States. 33. This video shows Chinese President Xi Jinping visiting a mosque in China in 2016 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, shared alongside a claim that it shows China’s leader praying at a mosque following the novel coronavirus outbreak. This claim is false; this video has circulated since at least 2016 in media reports about Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to a mosque in northwest China. 32. Dettol’s manufacturer denied it tested its products on the novel strain of coronavirus An image of a Dettol label that touts the disinfectant's ability to kill the \"coronavirus\" has been shared tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook posts alongside a claim that the product’s maker may have been aware of the novel coronavirus before it broke out in China in December 2019. The claim is misleading; the cleaning product’s reference to “coronavirus” denotes its effectiveness in protecting people from a general group of viruses, including the common cold; Dettol’s manufacturer said it has not tested its products against the novel coronavirus. 31. This photo shows the Egyptian doctor who discovered MERS coronavirus but he did not invent a vaccine A photo of an Egyptian doctor has been published in a news report that states he invented a coronavirus vaccine. The report was published after a new strain of coronavirus broke out in the Chinese city of Wuhan, infecting more than 28,000 people as of early February 2020. The claim in the report is misleading; Dr Ali Mohamed Zaki of Egypt identified a new strain of coronavirus that caused Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and he did not invent a vaccine for it. 30. The Indian Health Ministry said it did not issue this 'emergency warning' via text message A lengthy text post has been shared repeatedly on Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp alongside a claim that it is an official message issued by India's Ministry of Health after the oubreak of a new strain of novel coronavirus in India. The claim is false; the Indian government’s Press Information Bureau said it did not issue the purported emergency warning message. 29. This photo was taken during Li Keqiang’s visit to quake-stricken Sichuan in 2013 A photo of Chinese Premier Li Keqiang eating in a tent has been viewed thousands of times on Weibo, WeChat and Twitter in February 2020 alongside a claim that it shows him dining in the central Chinese city of Wuhan during the ongoing novel coronavirus outbreak. The claim is false; the photo was taken during Li’s visit to Sichuan following a deadly earthquake in 2013. 28. False novel coronavirus warnings circulating in Alberta Canadian Facebook posts claim the novel coronavirus has reached the western province of Alberta, with confirmed cases in Edmonton and Calgary. This is false; provincial health officials said there are no confirmed cases within their jurisdiction. 27. Philippine health experts dismiss misleading online claim that tinospora crispa plants can treat novel coronavirus A video has been viewed more than one million times in multiple posts on Facebook, YouTube and Twitter alongside a claim that the sap of tinospora crispa plants can serve as an “antibiotic” against the novel coronavirus when used as an eye drop. The claim is misleading; Philippine health experts told AFP that the plant sap could not be used to treat viruses, including the novel coronavirus, and warned against inserting it into the eyes; the World Health Organisation also warns that antibiotics cannot be used to treat viruses. 26. This video shows a former Malaysian prime minister praying in a Beijing mosque in 2004 A video has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts published in 2020 with a claim that it shows the \"Chinese prime minister\" praying inside a mosque after the outbreak of a new strain of novel coronavirus in China. The claim is false; the video actually shows Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Malaysian Prime Minister at that time, attending a Friday prayer at a Beijing mosque when he visited China in 2004. 25. Indian health experts say there is no evidence of link between novel coronavirus transmission and specific food items A video showing larva being removed from a patient's lip has been viewed thousands of times in multiple Facebook, Twitter and YouTube posts alongside a claim that the novel coronavirus can be spread through “a worm” found in certain food and drinks. The video has been shared in a misleading context; it has circulated in reports since at least October 2019 about a parasite being removed from a person's lip, more than two months before the new strain of novel coronavirus broke out in the Chinese city of Wuhan. Indian health officials have said there is no evidence that specific food items can cause transmission of the novel coronavirus. 24. Health experts refute false claims that drinking boiled garlic water cures novel coronavirus Claims that the novel coronavirus can be cured overnight if sufferers drink freshly boiled garlic water have been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. The posts were shared after a new strain of novel coronavirus broke out in the Chinese city of Wuhan and subsequently spread to more than 20 other countries. The claim is false; medical experts told AFP there was no evidence to support the theory about drinking garlic water; international health organisations do not recommend the remedy and have said there is no specific antiviral treatment for the new strain of the novel coronavirus. 23. Health authorities did not say drinking water will prevent coronavirus Facebook posts shared thousands of times in various countries claim that drinking water can prevent coronavirus. Many posts present the information as “health bulletins” from the officials in Canada or the Philippines. 22. Not only is the source of the virus unknown, but the dead cells inside rhino horn also are incapable of keeping it alive Multiple posts shared hundreds of times on Facebook claim the novel coronavirus comes from the use of rhino horn. The claim is false because not only is the source of the crisis in China still unknown, but the dead tissue that rhino horn consists of also cannot sustain a virus, which needs living cells to replicate. 21. Sri Lankan health experts refute misleading online claim that country has eradicated novel coronavirus An image has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Facebook that claim Sri Lanka has become the world’s first country to completely eradicate the novel coronavirus, after its one confirmed coronavirus patient made a full recovery. The claim is misleading; Sri Lankan health experts say the patient's recovery is insufficient evidence that the country has eradicated the virus, as the “possibility for other infected patients” remains; they also urged the public to continue following government recommendations for prevention. 20. This photo has circulated in reports about a Japanese medical team travelling to China in 2008 A photo of healthcare personnel has been shared thousands of times in multiple social media posts alongside claims that the photo shows a team of one thousand Japanese medical professionals going to provide aid in Wuhan, the epicenter of the new coronavirus outbreak in China. This claim is false; the photo in fact shows a Japanese medical team traveling to Chengdu, China following an earthquake in 2008. The Japanese embassy in Manila also told AFP that reports of a Japanese medical team being sent to Wuhan are \"not true.\" 19. Novel coronavirus: health experts warn against steaming face masks for reuse after misinformation on Chinese social media A video of a purported doctor advising people to steam disposable surgical face masks in order to reuse them has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times in multiple Chinese-language posts on Facebook, Weibo and Youku in January 2020. The posts were shared as China announced more than 20,000 people have been infected with a new strain of novel coronavirus, killing at least 425 people. The claim in the posts is misleading; health experts advise against steaming surgical masks, as it can damage them; they also warn against reusing masks as harmful bacteria and viruses can remain on their surface. 18. Chinese authorities have not recorded 300,000 confirmed novel coronavirus cases; there is no precise figure available for overall infections (as of February 4, 2020) A story that has been shared in multiple posts on Facebook in Nigeria claims that more than 300,000 Chinese people have been infected with the novel coronavirus. The claim is misleading: Chinese health authorities have recorded just over 20,400 confirmed cases as of February 4, 2020, and experts say that there is currently no precise figure available for overall infections. 17. This video was made by a student for a college project -- it does not show a trained doctor A video purporting to show a doctor comparing blood samples taken from a person infected with the new strain of coronavirus to that of a healthy person has been viewed hundreds of thousands of times online. This claim is false; the video creator told AFP that he is not a doctor but a college student who made the video for a project on how videos go viral on the internet. 16. Health experts in Sri Lanka refute claims of herbal cure for novel coronavirus In the days following Sri Lanka's first confirmed case of the novel coronavirus, an article was shared hundreds of times on Facebook claiming that asafoetida, a plant often used in traditional Indian medicine, can prevent all coronavirus infection. This claim is misleading; health experts in Sri Lanka say there is no evidence asafoetida or other herbal medicine can definitively protect people from infection. 15. Australian health officials dismiss hoax report about new novel coronavirus case outside Sydney A purported screenshot of a local Australian media report which states an 18-year-old man living just outside Sydney has tested positive for the novel coronavirus has been shared more than one hundred times in multiple posts on Facebook. The claim is false; the local media organisation, 7News, said it did not publish the purported report; the New South Wales health authority said the report was a hoax. 14. This is a 2014 photo of people participating in an art project in Frankfurt, Germany A photo of people lying down on the ground has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook alongside a claim it shows people who died from the new coronavirus in China. The claim is false; the image shows people participating in an art project in 2014 to remember the victims of the Nazi's Katzbach concentration camp in Frankfurt. 13. Chinese ‘spies’ did not steal deadly coronavirus from Canada Websites and social media users claim that the new coronavirus discovered in the city of Wuhan may have been created in Canada and stolen by Chinese spies. This is false; Canadian health and federal police officials say it has no factual basis. 12. Novel coronavirus: Pakistani officials deny they issued warning over dangers of eating goat meat An image has been shared thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook claiming Punjab province in Pakistan issued a warning against eating goat meat for 60 days following a coronavirus outbreak in the livestock. The claim is false; the Punjab Food Authority issued a statement denying such warnings had been issued, and a spokesperson at the Pakistan’s National Institute of Health told AFP there was no evidence that the novel coronavirus was spreading among livestock in the country. 11. Singapore denies it closed a subway station after novel coronavirus discovery A Facebook post claims Singapore closed a subway station in January 2020 after discovering a case of novel coronavirus. The claim is false; Singapore’s Ministry of Health and Ministry of Transport denied that any part of its mass rapid transit (MRT) network had been shut down for disinfection. 10. Novel coronavirus: Australia refutes claims that a travel warning was issued for Queensland suburbs A purported screenshot of a warning from health authorities in the Australian state of Queensland for the novel coronavirus has circulated on Facebook alongside a claim that the government issued an advisory against travel to the Chinese city of Wuhan, where the epidemic erupted, and several Queensland suburbs with a large Chinese population. The claim is false; this is a doctored image; Queensland Health told AFP there had been no relevant warning issued against specific suburbs as of January 29, 2020. 9. Novel coronavirus: Australian authorities refute hoax about 'contaminated' foods and locations Multiple Facebook posts shared hundreds of times purport to show a list of foods and locations in Sydney, Australia which have been contaminated by a new strain of coronavirus that originated in the Chinese city of Wuhan. The claim is false; the local Australian health authority told AFP the locations listed pose no risk to visitors, and the foods named do not appear in the New South Wales food authority’s list of recalls and advisories. 8. Philippine health chief dismisses 'ridiculous' hoax that novel coronavirus is a type of rabies Multiple misleading Facebook posts shared thousands of times in the Philippines claim the novel coronavirus strain is “a type of rabies”. The Philippine Health Secretary refuted the claim as “close to ridiculous”; experts say the viruses are innately different. 7. Sri Lankan authorities say this man suffered from a condition unrelated to novel coronavirus Two videos have been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple Facebook and YouTube posts that claim they show a man who collapsed in Sri Lanka after becoming infected with the novel coronavirus. The video has been shared in a misleading context; the Sri Lankan government said the man in the video was suffering from a medical condition unrelated to the novel coronavirus; the office building where the man collapsed also issued a statement clarifying that he had been suffering from \"fatigue\". 6. China coronavirus: health experts refute misinformation about how to wear face masks Misinformation about the correct way to wear disposable face masks has spread on Facebook and WhatsApp following the global outbreak of a new strain of coronavirus. The posts were shared hundreds of times by Facebook users based in Sri Lanka and the Philippines. 5. This photo is a stock image of a building that has circulated online since at least January 2019 A photo has been shared hundreds of times in multiple posts on Twitter and Facebook alongside a claim that it shows a hospital in Wuhan, China that was constructed in just 16 hours following the outbreak of a new strain of coronavirus. The photo has been shared in a misleading context; it is a stock image of the hospital that has circulated online since at least January 2019; AFP visited the construction site of a new hospital in Wuhan on January 27, 2020 and found it was still in the very early stages of development. 4. Doctors have not projected 11 million people quarantined in Wuhan, China, will die from coronavirus A Facebook post shared thousands of times among Sri Lankan Facebook users claims doctors have expressed fears that the entire population of the Chinese city of Wuhan will die following the global outbreak of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV). The claim is false; Chinese authorities have not projected that 11 million people quarantined in Wuhan in January 2020 will die; the US Centres of Disease Control and Prevention has stated there is no vaccine for human coronavirus but most people will recover on their own. 3. No, this video shows a market selling wild animals in Indonesia’s Sulawesi island A video has been viewed tens of thousands of times in multiple posts on Facebook that claim it shows a market in the Chinese city of Wuhan, where a new coronavirus strain emerged. The claim is false; the video shows a market in Indonesia’s Sulawesi island. 2. The coronavirus plaguing China was not created by a US government agency Facebook posts claim that the coronavirus spreading in China was created by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2015, offering a real patent as proof. This is false; the CDC did register a patent, but in an effort to combat a different strain than the one that caused the outbreak that started in the city of Wuhan. 1. Saline solution kills China coronavirus? Experts refute online rumor Multiple posts on Weibo, Twitter and Facebook shared in January 2020 claim that a top Chinese respiratory expert has told people to rinse their mouths with salt water solution to prevent infection from a new virus outbreak. The posts were published after a new coronavirus strain was discovered in the central Chinese city of Wuhan, infecting hundreds of people. The claim is false; the expert's team said saline would not \"kill\" the new virus and urged people not to believe or share medically-inaccurate online rumours; the World Health Organization told AFP there was no evidence that saline solution would protect against infection from the new coronavirus."
            },
            {
                "answer": "How long does the coronavirus survive on fresh produce?",
                "question": "How long can traces of the novel coronavirus survive on the surface of fresh food items according to lab tests?",
                "url": "https://www.taste.com.au/food-news/long-does-coronavirus-survive-different-surfaces-including-fruit-vegetables/jyozys8r",
                "scraped_text": "In the wake of coronavirus, we’ve all been a lot more conscious of the germs in our house – where they live, how long they survive for and how often we should be cleaning everything. Here’s a handy guide to follow, based on research from the World Health Organisation and researchers from The University of Queensland. According to a detailed study published in The Conversation this week, coronavirus can survive on certain surfaces from anywhere between three to 72 hours, though it “rapidly degrades” in strength over time. How long it survives also depends on temperature, humidity and what the surface is made of. The coronavirus can survive for 3 hours in airborne droplets, when we sneeze or cough. This is how the coronavirus is mainly transmitted. The coronavirus can survive for 72 hours on non-porous, hard and shiny surfaces, like kitchen benches, counter tops, glass, stainless steel, plastic, your phone, play equipment, public transport handles etc. The coronavirus can survive for 24 hours on porous, more flexible surfaces like clothing, cardboard, paper, fabric etc. How long does the coronavirus survive on fresh produce? The exact amount of time that coronavirus can survive on fresh produce is unknown. But some scientists are estimating that it can last around 24 hours – 72 hours. If the person packing your fruit and vegetables was contaminated with the virus, it could be passed on to whoever touches it next. Make sure you buy fruit and vegetables that can be washed, and wash them thoroughly with water before eating. You can wash with mild soapy water if you like, but there is little evidence that this makes a lot of difference. Washing hard surfaces like kitchen benches with soap will kill the virus, but on fruit, which is a more porous surface, it is harder to prove. But there’s no harm in it – just make sure it is mild soapy water and all residue is washed off before eating. According to the World Health Organisation, the best way to avoid catching the coronavirus is to assume everything you touch is contaminated. Clean your house thoroughly, and avoid touching objects outside that could bring the virus inside. If you touch anything, wash your hands or use hand sanitiser. Don’t touch your face; avoid rubbing or touching your lips or mouth in particular when outside. Stay alert, keep calm and stay sanitised. - A science-backed recipe for homemade hand sanitiser - Why handwashing is so important in preventing coronavirus"
            },
            {
                "answer": "However, virus titer measurements had revealed that the coronavirus can survive on a given surface for several hours/days.",
                "question": "How long can the novel coronavirus survive on surfaces according to lab tests conducted in South Africa?",
                "url": "https://pubs.aip.org/aip/pof/article/33/2/021701/1032169/Why-coronavirus-survives-longer-on-impermeable",
                "scraped_text": "Previous studies reported that the drying time of a respiratory droplet on an impermeable surface along with a residual film left on it is correlated with the coronavirus survival time. Notably, earlier virus titer measurements revealed that the survival time is surprisingly less on porous surfaces such as paper and cloth than that on impermeable surfaces. Previous studies could not capture this distinct aspect of the porous media. We demonstrate how the mass loss of a respiratory droplet and the evaporation mechanism of a thin liquid film are modified for the porous media, which leads to a faster decay of the coronavirus on such media. While diffusion-limited evaporation governs the mass loss from the bulk droplet for the impermeable surface, a much faster capillary imbibition process dominates the mass loss for the porous material. After the bulk droplet vanishes, a thin liquid film remaining on the exposed solid area serves as a medium for the virus survival. However, the thin film evaporates much faster on porous surfaces than on impermeable surfaces. The aforesaid faster film evaporation is attributed to droplet spreading due to the capillary action between the contact line and fibers present on the porous surface and the modified effective wetted area due to the voids of porous materials, which leads to an enhanced disjoining pressure within the film, thereby accelerating the film evaporation. Therefore, the porous materials are less susceptible to virus survival. The findings have been compared with the previous virus titer measurements. Infectious disease such as COVID-19, caused by SARS-CoV-2 (referred to as coronavirus hereafter), is transmitted through respiratory droplets.1–4 Apart from airborne infection spread,5,6 the virus-laden droplets also form fomite upon falling on a surface,7–9 which serves as a source for infection spread. Therefore, the use of face mask and sanitization of surfaces of daily use have been recommended by the WHO.10 It is, therefore, important to understand the mechanism of virus survival on different surfaces. Previous investigations looked into the survival on different surfaces by depositing a 5 µl virus-laden droplet (dose ∼7 · 8 log unit of TCID50 per ml) and monitoring the decay in the titer value with time.11,12 On the other hand, since the droplet serves as a medium for virus survival, the infectivity of the virus is connected to an extent to the droplet lifetime, which led to research on droplet evaporation on different surfaces and the factors affecting it.13–15 For instance, the decay in the infectivity of 19 different viruses upon drying of virus-laden droplets on glass slides under given ambient temperature and humidity conditions was experimentally studied.13 The importance of evaporation dynamics in studying the transmission probability, and the survival of enveloped viruses such as coronavirus, was also recognized recently by Mittal et al.,6 as evaporation has a paramount important role in the eventual fate of a droplet. Additionally, Chaudhuri et al.4 and Bhardwaj and Agrawal16 examined the correlation between the drying time and the growth of infection for the cases of droplets suspended in air and deposited on a surface, respectively. Identifying evaporation as one of the major contributing factors to the virus survival, recent studies have disclosed that the nature of the underlying surface and the ambient conditions (temperature and humidity) play a significant role in determining the droplet drying time and thereby dictating the vulnerability of different surfaces and environmental condition regarding the risk of infection spread.16,17 Tailoring wettability can serve as a tool to reduce the risk of infection.18 Bhardwaj and Agrawal16,17 adapted a model approach to study the evaporation of a sessile droplet and a residual thin film on solid surfaces. They established that by considering a surrogate droplet of pure water (without considering the presence of virus and the associated shear stress, and biological solutes contained in saliva/mucus droplets), the model could yield a reasonable qualitative explanation and a comparative understanding of coronavirus survival on different surfaces under different environmental conditions. The associated risk factors of COVID-19 spread were also assessed with reasonable fidelity. Particularly, it was shown that at a later stage, the drying time scale of the residual thin film is correlated with the decay time scale of the virus titer values.17 Therefore, understanding droplet and residual thin film evaporation is important in the context of virus survival. While the previous studies16,17 successfully demonstrated the evaporation rate on flat surfaces, a tie between the drying time and the virus survival found from the titer measurements was established; knowledge on virus survival on porous surfaces, e.g., paper and cloth, has not been disseminated yet. Porosity has been found to be a major factor in determining the inactivation rates of influenza-type viruses.14 The importance further arises from the fact that the investigations by measuring virus titer11,12 had revealed that porous materials such as wood, cloth, and paper are significantly less favorable for virus survival, i.e., the survival time of the coronavirus on these surfaces is surprisingly less as compared to impermeable surfaces, such as glass, stainless steel, and plastic. Therefore, the goal of the present work is to shed light on the reason behind the significantly less virus survival time on porous surfaces as compared to impermeable surfaces by raising the following question: What is the influence of porosity in modifying the evaporation mechanism on porous materials? In order to reach the research goal, first, experiments on droplet evaporation on both porous and non-porous surfaces were performed by employing 1 μl pure aqueous droplets to gain insights into how differently a droplet interacts with porous vs impermeable surfaces. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the problem considered. The distinction of the present work lies in the fact that in contrast to the case of flat, impermeable surfaces, porous surfaces exhibit a strong capillary imbibition effect that plays a key role in determining the decay of droplet volume with time as the process of imbibition is significantly faster than that of evaporation; this sets the initial condition for the later stage when a thin liquid film is left on the solid parts of the surface after the evaporation of the bulk droplet. Second, at the later stage, Bhardwaj and Agrawal17 showed that the disjoining pressure-driven evaporation of the residual thin film is much slower, implying the drying time scale closer to that of virus titer decay. However, their study was limited to impermeable surfaces. The mechanism of evaporation of the residual thin film for the case of porous geometry is still unknown, which is the subject of investigation of the present work. The earlier model has been extended herein to gain insights into the modified evaporation mass flux profile on porous geometry. Briefly, the present work discloses a distinct aspect of liquid mass loss from porous surfaces—imbibition followed by drying of a residual thin film with a modified evaporative mass flux profile. The findings demonstrate reasonably well the reason behind the less survival of the coronavirus on porous surfaces found in the titer measurements. The insights gained from the present study are of fundamental importance as well as useful to demonstrate the extent of the safety of different objects of daily use, thereby raising public awareness. The drying of 1 μl droplets of pure water placed on impermeable and porous surfaces was recorded using a high-resolution camera, and optical microscopy was employed to characterize the porous surfaces. The materials used in the present experiments have been carefully chosen to enable the authors to feasibly compare the findings with the previous virus titer measurements. While plane glass, stainless steel, and plastic were used as the impermeable surfaces, paper and cloth were chosen for porous materials. The detailed experimental procedure, data acquisition, and data analysis along with the sample preparation and cleaning procedure, and the surface characterization are provided in Sec. S1 of the supplementary material. In this Letter, we define the “virus survival time” as the time duration in which the virus titer decayed to an undetectable value in the previously reported measurements.11,12 This time scale has been used herein for comparison with the present findings. First, the experimental results on the evaporation of the aqueous droplet on smooth surfaces are presented. A droplet is gently deposited on the surface under investigation, and the initial time (t = 0) is set when contact between the droplet and the substrate surface is established, and subsequently, the droplet assumes an equilibrium spherical cap shape. Figure 2 (Multimedia view) depicts a representative result of the temporal evolution of droplet geometry as it evaporates on a glass substrate. Similar experiments were performed by using plastic and stainless steel as substrates, and the results are shown in Fig. S3 of the supplementary material. While on glass and plastic, the evaporation occurs mostly in the constant contact area mode, in the case of stainless steel, the dynamics of the triple-phase contact line is initially in the constant contact area mode, and a mixed-mode comprising both constant contact area and constant contact angle is observed at the later stages of evaporation. These observations are consistent with the previous observations.19,20 It is well understood that the principle governing mechanism of droplet mass loss from a solid, impermeable surface is the diffusion-limited evaporation.21 The bulk droplet lifetimes on glass, plastic, and stainless steel are about 800 s, 1400 s, and 1600 s, respectively. It is well documented from both experiments and the diffusion-limited model19,21 that the droplet lifetime is primarily governed by the wettability, which is consistent with the present observations; the drying time increases with reducing wettability (larger contact angle)—from glass to stainless steel. From the virus titer measurements,12 the virus survival times on these surfaces were found to be 4 days, 7 days, and 7 days, respectively. In this way, the ratio of virus survival time in titer experiments (glass:plastic:stainless steel = 4:7:7) agrees qualitatively with the present experiments (glass:plastic:stainless steel = 4:7:8). The correlation between the droplet evaporation rate and the virus survival time on different surfaces is thus realized, which was earlier envisioned by a diffusion-limited evaporation model.16 However, virus titer measurements had revealed that the coronavirus can survive on a given surface for several hours/days. This fact was reasoned by a model involving the disjoining (film) pressure-driven slower evaporation of a thin liquid film left behind the evaporated droplet.17 Further details of thin film evaporation dynamics and its modification for porous media will be discussed later in this Letter. Second, how differently a droplet interacts with a porous surface as compared to impermeable surface is investigated. Figure 3 (Multimedia view) shows both qualitatively and quantitatively the temporal variation of droplet geometry on porous surfaces under investigation. The general features of droplet behavior are as follows. The droplet is first deposited on the substrate surface and initially assumes a spherical cap shape. Thereafter, it spreads over the surface, which is attributed to the adhesion between the horizontally oriented fibers and the liquid near the contact line region.22 The contact angle decays to almost zero, which is caused by both spreading and liquid imbibition through the pores.23,24 Thereafter, a patch of liquid appears, which is visible from the top. The wetted patch, retaining its area, subsequently decays and eventually disappears after a certain time. The consequence of the spreading and imbibition will be discussed later in this Letter. As depicted in Figs. 3(a) and 3(b) (Multimedia view), on paper, the spreading starts and the contact angle decays to an undetectable value in initial ∼25 s. The continuous decrease in the contact angle (θ) is shown quantitatively in Fig. 3(d-i). For cloth, this initial stage occurs in a much shorter duration (∼2.5 s). The data can be well fitted with an exponential decay [θ = θ0 exp(−t/t*)] with the corresponding characteristic time t* = 8.47 s and 0.815 s for paper and cloth respectively. At the later stage, the liquid is hidden within the fibrous surface, making the side visualization impossible. However, top views show that a liquid patch appears, which subsequently gets fainted [cf. Fig. 3(b) (Multimedia view)], keeping the wetted area the same, and is eventually disappeared at t ∼ 155 s for paper. On cloth, the wetted patch forms earlier [cf. Fig. 3(c) (Multimedia view)]. Interestingly, the wetted patch lasts much longer on cloth (∼300 s) as compared to that on paper (∼155 s). A comparative study of temporal droplet spreading on paper vs cloth is presented in Fig. 3(d-ii). The wetted diameter is normalized to its initial value, and the time is normalized to the respective t* obtained from Fig. 3(d-i). The data are plotted until the time the wetted patch remained detectable by using the camera. It is interestingly noted that the spreading is much larger on paper than that on cloth, while the disappearance time of the wetted patch is much shorter on paper than cloth. Both the data in Fig. 3(d-ii) can be well fitted by the following relation: y = A + b(1 − exp(−x/p)). The values of the fitted parameters θ0, t*, A, b, and p are listed in Table S1 of the supplementary material. A porous media is characterized by porosity φ, which is the ratio between the void volume (Vvoid) and the total volume (Vtot) of the media. The characteristic distinction of porous media over flat surfaces lies in the fact that capillary imbibition plays a dominant role in draining the liquid out from the top surface. It is assumed for simplicity that the porous structure is filled vertically, i.e., there is no radial flow within the porous material, and that filling at a particular radius starts when the contact line reaches that radius. In real systems, the radial flow will occur; however, its effects are small for isotropic pore structures, as over the lifetime of the drop, the radius of contact between the drop and the substrate is large compared with the penetration distance.25 Assuming the porous medium to be an array of cylindrical capillary tubes, the penetration length (l) in a single pore of the liquid plug at a generic time (t) is given by Washburn’s equation,26 where rp, γ, μ, and θ are the pore radius, liquid surface tension, liquid viscosity, and the intrinsic contact angle of the material of the porous medium, respectively. Hence, the volume drained by a single pore at time t is If δ is the area fraction of the pores and R is the instantaneous radius of the wetted area, the number of wetted pores is . Hence, the total volume drained (Vd) by the wetted pores at t [by virtue of Eq. (2)] is Equation (3) shows that the Vd scales as and is also dependent on pore size (rp), pore surface area fraction (δ), and the intrinsic wettability of the material involved. It shows that for the materials with larger wettability (smaller θ), more imbibition occurs, which is consistent with the previous studies,23,24 wherein the authors reported that for a wettable porous media (θ = 30°, 45° considered therein), the imbibition takes place continuously until the top surface is completely dry. This is consistent with the present experimental observations; a continuous drainage is observed until the upper surface is left completely dry. Furthermore, Fig. 4(a) shows that the temporal decay of droplet volume exhibits a linear nature for glass,19,21 while for paper, the trend is non-linear and much faster than glass. Hence, for porous media, the droplet mass loss is mainly governed by imbibition, as opposed to impermeable media, where the diffusion-limited evaporation dominates the mass loss. To further address this issue, the drained volume [Vd(t)] is plotted against the square root of time () for the experimental data of paper in Fig. 4(b). Since the droplet remains in a spherical cap shape, throughout the spreading time, the instantaneous volume of the droplet [V(t)] is related to the instantaneous droplet radius [R(t)], the instantaneous droplet height [H(t)], and the instantaneous contact angle [θ(t)] as follows: Given that V0 is the initial droplet volume, Vd(t) can be determined as Figure 4(b) shows that the variation of Vd(t) and can be well fitted by a straight line with an adjusted R-square value of ∼0.99, depicting that the present measurements are, in principle, governed by Eq. (3). Therefore, it is concluded that at the initial stage, liquid imbibition plays a dominant role in the loss of droplet volume. This is in contrast to the case of flat impermeable surfaces, where diffusion-limited evaporation dominates the mass loss of the droplet. It is also seen that liquid imbibition is a much faster process as compared to evaporation. After the drainage of liquid by the capillary imbibition process, a thin liquid film remains on the solid parts of the porous media. Third, we explain the mechanism of thin liquid film evaporation from porous media and its connection to the survival of the coronavirus. However, at first, the evaporation behavior of a thin liquid film and the corresponding governing equations on flat surfaces will be presented. Thereafter, the attention will be shifted to the evaporation of the thin liquid film on porous surfaces, and the modification of the associated governing equations will be explained. This systematic approach would be helpful to understand the contrast between the mechanisms of thin film evaporation on impermeable and porous surfaces, thereby demonstrating the virus survival time on them. The time variation of thickness (h) of the evaporating thin film on a smooth solid surface is given by17 where ρL is the liquid density (=1000 kg/m3 for water) and the evaporation mass flux J is given by where AH, γ, and R are the Hamaker constant of interaction between liquid–vapor and solid–liquid interfaces, the surface tension of the liquid (0.072 N/m for water), and wetted radius, respectively. In Eq. (7), (=461.5 J/kg K) is the specific gas constant for water vapor, ρV (=0.023 kg/m3) is the density of water vapor at ambient, and Tamb (=298 K) is the ambient temperature. Using the values of , ρV, and Tamb, the prefactor outside the parentheses of Eq. (7) can be calculated as a = 2.47 × 10−11 SI units. The first term within the parentheses of Eq. (7) represents the disjoining pressure P(h) within the film. Note that since P(h) is a representative of the solid–liquid interfacial energy, the liquid thin film would evaporate slower on surfaces having a lower surface free energy (higher contact angle). In the present experiments (cf. Fig. 2), the contact angles of water droplets on glass, plastic, and stainless steel were found to be ∼39°, 86°, and 90°, respectively, which indicates that the surface energy is decreased progressively from glass to stainless steel. This implication is consistent with the film evaporation rate17 as well as the survival of the coronavirus observed in the titer measurements11,12 on surfaces with varying wettability. The second term within the parentheses of Eq. (7) is the Laplace pressure term. It was previously shown17 that the Laplace pressure is one order of magnitude less than the disjoining pressure and therefore can be ignored in Eq. (7). Furthermore, a detailed demonstration of the negligible contribution of the Laplace pressure term to Eqs. (6) and (7) is provided in Fig. S4 of the supplementary material. Hence, neglecting the Laplace pressure term in Eq. (7) and then integrating Eq. (6) with respect to time (t) give h as a function of t as follows: Figure 5 shows the variation of h with t for glass, wherein the initial film thickness (h0) has been taken as 400 nm. This value has been used in our previous study on impermeable surfaces, and a good agreement between the decrease in film volume and virus titer was found.17 Here, AH = −1.3 × 10−20 J (cf. Sec. S2 v of the supplementary material). Figure 5 depicts that the exact solution of the governing equation [Eq. (8)] returns a film lifetime of ∼104 h. This time scale is consistent with the virus survival time on glass (∼4 days = 96 h) found in titer measurements. Thus, the correlation between the virus survival time and the film lifetime is realized with reasonable fidelity. Why the coronavirus survives for a less duration on porous media? As mentioned earlier, the virus titer measurements have revealed a significantly less survival time on porous media (∼2 days on cloth and just ∼3 h on paper12). The previous model17 developed for an impermeable surface is not appropriate to explain the survival time on the porous surface. It is, therefore, important to carry out a close investigation on the modified mechanism of thin film evaporation on porous surfaces and to understand how the decay of the virus is accelerated in the case of porous surfaces. The wettability would modify J in a similar fashion for both porous and impermeable surfaces, as it is dictated by AH (surface energy) in Eq. (7). Hence, the key factor that differentiates a porous material from an impermeable one is the geometry. Therefore, to look into the effect of modified geometry, an energy argument similar to that of Wenzel27 is considered herein. The equilibrium between the different interfacial energies, namely, the liquid–vapor (γLV), solid–vapor (γSV), and solid–liquid (γSL) interfacial energies in terms of contact angle (θ), is given by the classical Young’s equation,27 where ESL is the energy required to form a unit area of the solid–liquid interface.28 In the case of rough surfaces, the Wenzel argument states that as the liquid front advances against the solid surface, each solid–vapor interface is replaced by an equal amount of solid–liquid interface (cf. Fig. S5 of the supplementary material), and ESL is enhanced by the surface area factor (ra), which is the ratio between the actual area of the rough surface and the projected area.27,28 This argument can be extended for the case of thin film as follows. For the case of a film covered surface (cf. Fig. S5 of the supplementary material), the modified surface energy (γSV′) reads as29 where is the excess energy of the film, which is the derivative of the disjoining (film) pressure [P(h) = AH/6πh3]. Hence, for the case of rough surfaces, [or P(h)] would be enhanced by a factor of ra, by virtue of the enhancement of the term [ESL′ = (γSV′ − γSL)] by the factor of ra (cf. Fig. S5 of the supplementary material). The same argument is hereby extended to porous media as discussed below. For the case of porous media, let us assume that the energy enhancement factor due to the modified surface exposure area is ϕ, which stems from two distinct physical features of the porous media, as observed in the experiment [cf. Fig. 3 (Multimedia view)]. First, the droplet spreads over the surface, which is attributed to the capillary action between the fibers and the droplet edge. Since the fibers are oriented horizontally, adhesion between the solid and the liquid causes the droplet edge to traverse through the pathways of the fibers.22 Hence, if ϕ1 is assumed to be the energy enhancement due to spreading, then , where R2 is the final wetted radius after complete spread and R1 is the initial wetted radius before spreading, i.e., when the droplet rests on the surface and assumes an equilibrium spherical cap shape. From the experiments, ϕ1 = 25 and 4 for paper and cloth, respectively. The second contribution to ϕ is stemmed from the void areas present on a porous surface, which is assumed to be ϕ2. In order to calculate ϕ2, a specific geometry similar to that of Fig. 1 in Ref. 30 is considered herein, as this is the typical geometrical feature for woven fabrics [cf. Fig. S2(a) of the supplementary material].31 A typical geometry considered in the present calculations is shown in the inset of Fig. 1. Let us assume that the fabrics are having a square cross section of area, x × x, and they are woven such that the voids among them are cubes (cf. the inset in Fig. 1). If the pitch of the fibers, i.e., center to center distance between two consecutive fibers is p, the edge of the void cube is happened to be p − x. A unit cell of the fabric with cubic volume p3 consists of both solid (fiber) and void. The solid volume contained within the cell can be estimated using geometry and is expressed as follows: where r = x/p. The area of the top surface of the cube is Atotal = p2. The wetted area contained within the top face of the cube is expressed as Thus, r is a varying parameter from which φ and the corresponding ϕ2 can be computed. Figure 6(a) shows the variation of φ and ϕ2 with respect to r, while Fig. 6(b) depicts the variation of ϕ2 with respect to φ. It is noticed that the limiting conditions (ϕ2 → 1 as r or φ → 0 and ϕ2 → 0 as r or φ → 1) are satisfied by the calculations. The porosity values as indicated in Fig. 6(b) have been taken from Refs. 30–33. In the present analysis, ϕ2 has been chosen from the corresponding φ values in Fig. 6(b). The effective energy enhancement factor, ϕ, thus becomes ϕ = ϕ1ϕ2. Therefore, for porous surfaces, the modified J profile is expressed as follows: Jmod = ϕJ by virtue of the enhancement of P(h) by ϕ, and the governing equation (6) for the evaporating thin liquid film is modified as Equation (15) can be integrated in the same way as was performed to derive Eq. (8) from Eqs. (6) and (7) for obtaining h as a function of t. Figures 7(a) and 7(b) show h vs t curves for cloth and paper, respectively. AH = −9.8 × 10−21 J [cf. Sec. S2 v of the supplementary material]. From Fig. 7(a), the thin film lifetime is found to be ∼60 h on cloth, which is in reasonable agreement with the coronavirus survival time found from the titer measurements on cloth (∼2 days = 48 h). From Fig. 7(b), the thin film lifetime is found to be ∼5 h on paper, while the coronavirus survival time found from the titer measurements was ∼3 h. Hence, it may be concluded that the present analysis could capture the virus survival time on cloth with reasonable accuracy, while for paper, it is reasonably consistent with the extent of order of magnitude. Therefore, the present model explains the essential physics behind the less virus survival time on the porous surfaces. The quantitative discrepancy found for the case of paper may be attributed to the fact that the specific geometry considered herein to calculate the solid area fraction on porous surfaces (cf. Fig. 1, inset) is closest to that of woven cloths [cf. Fig. S2(a) of the supplementary material].30,31 For paper, the surface is more irregular, and the geometry is different from that of cloth [cf. Fig. S2(b) of the supplementary material].32,33 Therefore, because of the specific geometry consideration, the outputs of the present analysis are closest to the virus survival time of cloth, while for paper, a qualitative agreement is obtained. Hence, it can be asserted that the combined information gained from Fig. 7 essentially demonstrates why coronavirus was found to survive surprisingly less on porous surfaces, as compared to flat solid surfaces; it is the fiber-droplet capillary action-driven droplet spreading and the exposed solid area modification due to the voids, which causes an enhanced film pressure within the thin liquid film, thereby accelerating the film evaporation. Some limitations of the present analysis can be addressed in the future. Pure water has been considered herein, while saliva/mucus respiratory droplets containing biological solutes may exhibit a non-Newtonian behavior and different surface tensions and viscosities, which may influence the drying time. However, as outlined previously,17 the uncertainty due to the aforesaid approximation is not significant (∼25%), and the analysis can explain the virus survival qualitatively and comparatively with a reasonable fidelity, highlighted earlier in the Introduction. Furthermore, modifications in the initial contact angle and AH should be accounted for while dealing with a pre-wetted surface,29 which is beyond the scope of the present work. Finally, the relevance of the present results in the context of the spread of COVID-19 via fomite is discussed. The usage of cardboard (a porous material) boxes is common by the e-commerce companies, and the present analysis indicates that a less survival duration on porous surfaces implies a reduced risk in a warehouse or package sorting centers. A much less survival on the paper further indicates significantly reduced risk in a classroom, particularly relevant information to the policymakers while considering the re-opening of schools during the pandemic. Similarly, the risks associated with the spread in a garment factory and cloth outlets in shopping malls are much less, as previously thought. We emphasize that the present study focuses on the fomite route of transmission; the airborne transmission should be further properly accounted for to assess the total risk of COVID-19 spread in the above-mentioned examples. In conclusion, one of the contributing reasons behind the less survival time of coronavirus on porous surfaces as compared to that on impermeable surfaces has been deciphered herein by analyzing the respiratory droplet evaporation mechanism. While for impermeable surfaces, the diffusion-limited evaporation dominates the mass loss from the bulk droplet, for porous materials, the capillary imbibition dominates the process. The latter is a much faster process than the former. After the bulk droplet vanishes, a thin liquid film remains over the exposed solid area, which serves as a medium for virus survival, and its evaporation rate is mainly controlled by the disjoining pressure. However, the thin film evaporates much faster on porous surfaces than on impermeable surfaces. The faster film evaporation rate on the former is attributed to increased disjoining pressure, triggered by an enhanced capillary-driven droplet spreading and the exposed area modification due to the voids. See the supplementary material for a detailed experimental procedure, supporting results, schematics, and calculations. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB), Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi, India (Grant No. EMR/2016/006326). S.C. thanks Mr. Gaurav Upadhyay for useful discussion and technical assistance. The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."
            },
            {
                "answer": "How long can coronavirus survive on surface? It's 28 days, says new study",
                "question": "How long can the novel coronavirus survive on the surface of fresh food items according to recent studies?",
                "url": "https://www.indiatoday.in/science/story/how-long-can-coronavirus-survive-on-surface-28-days-new-study-1730651-2020-10-12",
                "scraped_text": "How long can coronavirus survive on surface? It's 28 days, says new study A new study reveals that Covid-19 or SARS-Cov-2 that causes the novel coronavirus infection can remain infectious for up to 28 days -- longer than expected -- when kept in a very controlled environment. Researchers have said that Covid-19 (SARS-Cov-2) that causes the novel coronavirus infection, can survive for 28 days on smooth surfaces such as stainless steel, phone screens, glass, plastic and banknotes. Contrary to previous research that suggested Covid-19 can survive for three to seven days on smooth surfaces, the recent study by researchers at Australian agency CSIRO says that the virus can remain infectious for up to 28 days -- longer than the flu virus-- when kept in the dark at room temperature (degrees Celsius [68 Fahrenheit]). This research paper was published in the journal Virology Journal on October 7. According to the study, at 20 degrees Celsius, infectious Covid-19 or SARS-CoV-2 virus was still detectable after 28 days \"post inoculation, for all non-porous surfaces\" tested during the experiment -- glass, polymer note, stainless steel, vinyl and paper notes. \"With initial viral loads broadly equivalent to the highest titres excreted by infectious patients, viable virus was isolated for up to 28 days at 20 degrees Celsius from common surfaces such as glass, stainless steel and both paper and polymer banknotes,\" it said. In its conclusion, the paper said: \"These findings demonstrate SARS-CoV-2 can remain infectious for significantly longer time periods than generally considered possible. These results could be used to inform improved risk mitigation procedures to prevent the fomite spread of Covid-19.\" ALSO READ | Where does coronavirus come from? Strange theory suggests from space By comparison, Influenza A virus has been found to survive on surfaces for 17 days. It also revealed that the virus survived longer on smooth surfaces than on complex surfaces such as cotton, and longer on paper banknotes than on plastic banknotes. The experiment was conducted in a very controlled environment -- in a \"high containment laboratory (Biosafety level 4)\" at the Australian Centre for Disease Preparedness -- in the dark, to remove the impact of ultraviolet (UV) light. It involved drying virus in an artificial mucus on a range of surfaces at concentrations similar to samples from Covid-19 patients and then recovering the virus over a month. So, to prevent the contagion, the study's lead researcher Shane Riddell said that is important to wipe surfaces that may be in contact with the coronavirus and wash and sanitize hands regularly. Reuters quoted Shane Riddell as saying: \"It really reinforces the importance of washing hands and sanitising where possible and certainly wiping down surfaces that may be in contact with the virus.\" DIFFERENCES AND SIMILARITIES WITH THE LANCET STUDY A study published in the journal The Lancet in May revealed that when kept at room temperature, \"No infectious virus could be detected from treated smooth surfaces on day 4 [glass and banknote] or day 7 [stainless steel and plastic].\" For the surfaces which aren't smooth, the study said: \"No infectious virus could be recovered from printing and tissue papers after a 3-hour incubation, whereas no infectious virus could be detected from treated wood and cloth on day 2\". For the case of surgical masks, the study showed that \"a detectable level of the infectious virus could still be present on the outer layer of a surgical mask on day 7 [~0·1 per cent of the original inoculum]\". ALSO READ | Confusion, stroke, memory loss: How coronavirus affects brain This Lancet was conducted under the following conditions: a droplet of virus culture (~7·8 log unit of TCID50 per mL) was poured on a surface and left at room temperature (22 degrees Celsius) with a relative humidity of around 65 per cent. Even as the two studies differ on the number days for which Covid-19 or SARS-CoV-2 virus remains infectious, both showed that Covid-19 or SARS-CoV-2 was more stable on smooth surfaces. Both these studies have proposed that the virus cannot survive longer when the temperature is increased. At 20 degrees Celsius, the virus survives for 28 days. When the temperature is raised to 30 degrees Celsius, the survival rate drops to 7 days and at 40 degrees, it is plunged down to just 24 hours -- revealed the study conducted by Australian researchers said. \"Infectious virus survived less than 24 hours at 40 degrees Celsius on some surfaces,\" the research paper in the Virology Journal said. While the Lancet study said that the virus stopped being infectious within just 5 minutes when the temperature was increased to 70 degrees Celsius. \"With the incubation temperature increased to 70 degrees Celsius, the time for virus inactivation was reduced to 5 mins,\" it said. \"The virus is highly stable at 4 degrees Celsius,\" the Lancet study said. Referring to the upcoming southern hemisphere summer, Riddell said: \"So heading into summer, that’s certainly going to be an important factor that the virus won’t last as long in the warmer temperatures.\""
            },
            {
                "answer": "The exact amount of time that coronavirus can survive on fresh produce is unknown. But some scientists are estimating that it can last around 24 hours – 72 hours.",
                "question": "What is the estimated duration that the novel coronavirus can survive on fresh produce according to scientists?",
                "url": "https://www.taste.com.au/food-news/long-does-coronavirus-survive-different-surfaces-including-fruit-vegetables/jyozys8r",
                "scraped_text": "In the wake of coronavirus, we’ve all been a lot more conscious of the germs in our house – where they live, how long they survive for and how often we should be cleaning everything. Here’s a handy guide to follow, based on research from the World Health Organisation and researchers from The University of Queensland. According to a detailed study published in The Conversation this week, coronavirus can survive on certain surfaces from anywhere between three to 72 hours, though it “rapidly degrades” in strength over time. How long it survives also depends on temperature, humidity and what the surface is made of. The coronavirus can survive for 3 hours in airborne droplets, when we sneeze or cough. This is how the coronavirus is mainly transmitted. The coronavirus can survive for 72 hours on non-porous, hard and shiny surfaces, like kitchen benches, counter tops, glass, stainless steel, plastic, your phone, play equipment, public transport handles etc. The coronavirus can survive for 24 hours on porous, more flexible surfaces like clothing, cardboard, paper, fabric etc. How long does the coronavirus survive on fresh produce? The exact amount of time that coronavirus can survive on fresh produce is unknown. But some scientists are estimating that it can last around 24 hours – 72 hours. If the person packing your fruit and vegetables was contaminated with the virus, it could be passed on to whoever touches it next. Make sure you buy fruit and vegetables that can be washed, and wash them thoroughly with water before eating. You can wash with mild soapy water if you like, but there is little evidence that this makes a lot of difference. Washing hard surfaces like kitchen benches with soap will kill the virus, but on fruit, which is a more porous surface, it is harder to prove. But there’s no harm in it – just make sure it is mild soapy water and all residue is washed off before eating. According to the World Health Organisation, the best way to avoid catching the coronavirus is to assume everything you touch is contaminated. Clean your house thoroughly, and avoid touching objects outside that could bring the virus inside. If you touch anything, wash your hands or use hand sanitiser. Don’t touch your face; avoid rubbing or touching your lips or mouth in particular when outside. Stay alert, keep calm and stay sanitised. - A science-backed recipe for homemade hand sanitiser - Why handwashing is so important in preventing coronavirus"
            },
            {
                "answer": "As scientists scramble to understand more about the novel coronavirus, a new government-funded experiment shows that the virus can survive on surfaces such as plastic and stainless steel for up to three days.",
                "question": "What does the government-funded experiment reveal about the survival of the novel coronavirus on surfaces?",
                "url": "https://abcnews.go.com/Health/covid19-days-surfaces-experiment-findings/story?id=69569397",
                "scraped_text": "COVID-19 can last a few days on surfaces, according to new experiment findings Findings emphasize the importance of sanitizing cellphones and surfaces. As scientists scramble to understand more about the novel coronavirus, a new government-funded experiment shows that the virus can survive on surfaces such as plastic and stainless steel for up to three days. Though preliminary, the experiment emphasizes the importance of diligently sanitizing cellphones, plastic and metal surfaces regularly to prevent the spread of SARS-COVID-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. The study has not yet gone through the normal scientific peer review process, but outside experts nevertheless say it offers important new clues about the infectiousness of coronavirus. The experiment was led by researchers from Princeton, UCLA and the National Institutes of Health. The researchers involved set out to learn how long the virus can survive when sprayed on different surfaces and in the air. - How it started and how to protect yourself: Coronavirus explained - What to do if you have symptoms: Coronavirus symptoms - Tracking the spread in the US and Worldwide: Coronavirus map They found that the virus can survive up to three days on plastic and stainless steel, and up to 24 hours on cardboard, and up to four hours on copper surfaces. In a second part of the experiment, the researchers used a spray can-like device to spritz the virus into the air and discovered that the virus can survive suspended in a fine mist for up to three hours, though longer times were not tested. But the findings do not mean the virus is \"airborne,\" according to one of the primary authors of the paper, Dylan Morris, a Ph.D candidate at Princeton. Morris cautioned that these aerosol findings must be interpreted carefully, since they may not apply to real-life settings, like on the train or in the office because the conditions created in the laboratory are not necessarily identical to conditions that would be created when someone coughs or sneezes. That’s because when someone coughs or sneezes, most of the droplets are heavy enough that they quickly fall to the ground. However, Morris said the findings might be relevant in health care settings -- particularly for medical professionals caring for patients with COVID-19. Certain medical procedures , such as bronchoscopy and ventilation, can kick up a fine mist of viral particles similar to the conditions simulated during the experiment. More research is needed to fully understand how long the virus can survive in the air under normal conditions. However, the research does strongly suggest that frequent and vigorous sanitizing of hard surfaces like phones, handles and doorknobs will go a long way in preventing the spread of the virus. Dr. William Schaffner, an infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University who was not involved in the research, called this an \"important study\" which \"demonstrates further how contagious this virus is.\" Dr. Seema Yasmin, who specializes in epidemics at Stanford University, cautioned that more research is needed. \"Even finding the virus surviving on a surface doesn't speak to its infectiousness,” she said. The study was performed in a petri dish, not in the human body, she noted. \"This is an area of rapid research, and I expect more studies to be coming through the pipeline,\" Morris noted. Vinayak Kumar, MD, MBA is an Internal Medicine Resident at Mayo Clinic and is a contributor to the ABC NEWS Medical Unit. Sony Salzman is a journalist for the ABC NEWS Medical Unit."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The coronavirus can survive for 72 hours on non-porous, hard and shiny surfaces, like kitchen benches, counter tops, glass, stainless steel, plastic, your phone, play equipment, public transport handles etc.",
                "question": "How long can the coronavirus survive on non-porous surfaces according to lab tests?",
                "url": "https://www.taste.com.au/food-news/long-does-coronavirus-survive-different-surfaces-including-fruit-vegetables/jyozys8r",
                "scraped_text": "In the wake of coronavirus, we’ve all been a lot more conscious of the germs in our house – where they live, how long they survive for and how often we should be cleaning everything. Here’s a handy guide to follow, based on research from the World Health Organisation and researchers from The University of Queensland. According to a detailed study published in The Conversation this week, coronavirus can survive on certain surfaces from anywhere between three to 72 hours, though it “rapidly degrades” in strength over time. How long it survives also depends on temperature, humidity and what the surface is made of. The coronavirus can survive for 3 hours in airborne droplets, when we sneeze or cough. This is how the coronavirus is mainly transmitted. The coronavirus can survive for 72 hours on non-porous, hard and shiny surfaces, like kitchen benches, counter tops, glass, stainless steel, plastic, your phone, play equipment, public transport handles etc. The coronavirus can survive for 24 hours on porous, more flexible surfaces like clothing, cardboard, paper, fabric etc. How long does the coronavirus survive on fresh produce? The exact amount of time that coronavirus can survive on fresh produce is unknown. But some scientists are estimating that it can last around 24 hours – 72 hours. If the person packing your fruit and vegetables was contaminated with the virus, it could be passed on to whoever touches it next. Make sure you buy fruit and vegetables that can be washed, and wash them thoroughly with water before eating. You can wash with mild soapy water if you like, but there is little evidence that this makes a lot of difference. Washing hard surfaces like kitchen benches with soap will kill the virus, but on fruit, which is a more porous surface, it is harder to prove. But there’s no harm in it – just make sure it is mild soapy water and all residue is washed off before eating. According to the World Health Organisation, the best way to avoid catching the coronavirus is to assume everything you touch is contaminated. Clean your house thoroughly, and avoid touching objects outside that could bring the virus inside. If you touch anything, wash your hands or use hand sanitiser. Don’t touch your face; avoid rubbing or touching your lips or mouth in particular when outside. Stay alert, keep calm and stay sanitised. - A science-backed recipe for homemade hand sanitiser - Why handwashing is so important in preventing coronavirus"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Scientists in Australia have discovered that the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 can survive on solid common surfaces for as long as 28 days.",
                "question": "What is the duration for which the coronavirus can survive on solid surfaces according to research?",
                "url": "https://www.voanews.com/a/covid-19-pandemic_virus-causes-covid-19-can-survive-month-common-surfaces-study-finds/6197008.html",
                "scraped_text": "Scientists in Australia have discovered that the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 can survive on solid common surfaces for as long as 28 days. In a study published Monday in Virology Journal, researchers at CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization), Australia’s national science agency, found the SARS-COV-2 virus was “extremely robust,” surviving on smooth surfaces at 20 degrees Celsius, compared to the flu virus, which lasts for 17 days in the same circumstances. The scientists at CSIRO also found the SARS-COV-2 virus stopped being infectious after about 24 hours at 40 degrees Celsius. The scientists at CSIRO found the novel coronavirus can survive on such common surfaces as paper banknotes, glass and stainless steel. In Britain, Prime Minister Boris Johnson is set to unveil a new coronavirus alert system for the country during a speech in Parliament Monday. Instead of a blanket nationwide lockdown, the government’s new system designates areas as medium, high and very high risk. Under the first tier, areas with relatively low infection rates will have limited restrictions on restaurants and bars, with the restrictions gradually tightening up to the third tier, when restaurants and bars will be forced to close. The new system is being implemented as Britain reaches what a spokesman for Prime Minister Johnson described as “a critical juncture.” The nation is experiencing a dramatic surge of new COVID-19 cases, especially in the northern cities of Liverpool, Merseyside, Manchester and Newcastle. Britain has 42,825 COVID-19 deaths, one of the highest numbers in Europe, including 65 on Sunday. More than 37.4 million people around the world have been diagnosed with the novel coronavirus, including 1,075,942 deaths, according to Johns Hopkins University’s coronavirus tracking project. India officially topped 7 million total COVID-19 infections on Sunday, second only to the United States, which has 7.7 million confirmed cases. India’s health ministry also reported 918 new COVID-19 deaths, bringing the country’s total fatality rate to 108,334. Health authorities in the eastern Chinese coastal city of Qingdao will test all nine million of its citizens after reporting nine new coronavirus cases on Sunday, all of them linked to a hospital that treats infected travelers from overseas. The new cases include four confirmed infections and five asymptomatic cases, making them the first recorded locally transmitted asymptomatic infections in China since September 24, according to Bloomberg news service."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Studies suggest that coronaviruses (including preliminary information on the COVID-19 virus) may persist on surfaces for a few hours or up to several days.",
                "question": "What does research indicate about the survival time of coronaviruses on surfaces?",
                "url": "https://www.gov.za/coronavirus/faq",
                "scraped_text": "Symptoms include ANY of the following respiratory symptoms: cough, sore throat, shortness of breath, anosmia (loss of sense of smell), dysgeusia (alteration of the sense of taste) with or without other symptoms (which may include fever, weakness, myalgia, or diarrhoea) The severity of illness can range from people who are infected without any illness (asymptomatic infection) to mild respiratory illness, to severe illness requiring admission to hospital or death. The majority of patients (approximately 80%) will have mild respiratory illness. (Source: NICD) The virus is very susceptible to common anti-bacterial cleaning agents such as bleach, and alcohol-based cleaners (60% volume). Regularly and thoroughly clean your hands with an alcohol-based hand rub or wash them with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. Maintain at least 1 metre distance between yourself and anyone who is coughing or sneezing. Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth with unclean hands. Self-isolation is a way to keep yourself from possibly infecting others if you think you might be infected. It involves limiting contact with public places, relatives, friends, colleagues, and public transport. The symptoms of COVID-19 include cough, sore throat, shortness of breath or fever. However, these are also symptoms of the flu. The National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD) recommends that you should only get tested if you display symptoms plus: - Been in contact with a confirmed COVID-19 person; - Worked in or been to a healthcare facility treating people with Covid-19; - Have a severe case of pneumonia with an unknown cause. However, one should consult your medical practitioner immediately if you display symptoms. If you think you might have contracted the virus, you can call the NICD helpline (0800 029 999) and you will be advised on possible testing facilities. However, testing is not routinely done unless testing is indicated by a health professional therefore one would need to be assessed by your medical practitioner in order to qualify for testing. As from 21 February 2022 the following guidelines have been issued: People with asymptomatic COVID-19 infection do not need to isolate. However they should be advised to: - Wear a mask whenever interacting with people, for the next 5 days from the date of the test - Avoid social gatherings (3 or more people) for 5 days from date of test - Avoid being with others socially in indoor spaces, for 5 days from date of test - Specifically avoid socially interacting with the elderly (>60 years) and anyone with co-morbidities (diabetes, lung disease, heart disease, kidney disease, cancer, uncontrolled HIV, immunocompromised), for 5 days from date of test. Those with symptomatic COVID infection who have mild disease (they do not require hospitalisation for COVID pnuemonia) should isolate for 7 days from the date of start of symptoms. There is no need for testing prior to de-isolation. If your condition worsens, please seek medical help as soon as possible. Please keep in contact with your health care provider telephonically to monitor your progress. Your healthcare provider will assess you in terms of your current coronavirus illness and your other risk factors for more severe illness (i.e. older age, serious underlying medical conditions such as diabetes mellitus, heart disease, lung disease and immunosuppression, etc.). If you were asked to isolate at home, your healthcare provider has assessed that you have a mild illness that can be managed at home, you have no/few risk factors for severe illness and your home environment is suitable for isolation. However, some people with coronavirus disease may worsen at home and need admission to hospital. It is very important that you carefully monitor your symptoms throughout your illness and look out for emergency warning signs. Emergency warning signs include: trouble breathing, chest pain or pressure in your chest that does not go away, coughing up blood, becoming confused, severe sleepiness, blue lips or face. If you have any warning signs, you or a member of your household should call your nearest hospital or emergency services immediately and notify them that you have confirmed coronavirus disease. Public sector testing is free of charge. Private laboratories such as Lancet, Ampath and Pathcare can also test for SARS-CoV-2. Enquiry should be with the respective laboratory for their costing of the test. If going via a private lab, it is advisable to check with your medical aid to ascertain if they will cover the costs for the test. There is no specific treatment available for SARS-CoV-2. Treatment is supportive (e.g. providing oxygen for patients with shortness of breath or managing a fever). Antibiotics do not treat viral infections. However, antibiotics may be required if a secondary bacterial infection develops. Which hospitals will treat COVID-19 infected patients? The following hospitals have also been identified as centres for isolation and treatment of people infected with Coronavirus: - Charlotte Maxeke Hospital, Steve Biko Hospital and Tembisa Hospitals in Gauteng; Anyone who is sick or displaying symptoms should not go to school or work. If you have been in close contact with a confirmed COVID-19 case, you should self-isolate for 14 days from the date of close contact. If you are concerned, contact your medical practitioner for further advice. What is the plan of the Department of Basic Education, what should we do as teachers? Protocols have been developed and distributed to provinces and districts in the country. However, it is especially important to encourage children and staff to take every day preventative actions to prevent the spread of respiratory illnesses. This includes staying at home when sick, washing hands with soap and water or using an alcohol based hand sanitiser with at least 60% alcohol and cleaning frequently touched surfaces. If children do become ill, they should be strictly isolated at home. In situations where the child or staff member becomes sick at school, they should be separated from healthy students and staff until sick students and staff can be sent home. What is the difference between Rapid Antigen and PCR tests for Covid-19? PCR is gold standard for COVID-19 testing. Molecular method that that detects genetic material from the virus and is very accurate but results take about 24 hours. Antigen tests are cheaper and give a result in about 15 minutes but are less accurate. Why is the government accepting only PRC test results for people entering SA? Why did the government stop recording/capturing the antigen tests on daily statistics? We didn't stop capturing antigen tests on daily statistics. Antigen tests have been reported since the antigen testing was added. These are additional tests where there was a delay in capture of the antigen test results or new tests were used and the test codes had not been added to the system. Why did the government suddenly decide to include an antigen test on the statistics report? As above. Antigen tests have always been reported, these are retrospective tests that had not been previously reported onto the national line list. (a) by a licensed premises for off-site consumption is only permitted from 10H00 to 18H00, from Mondays to Thursdays, excluding Fridays, Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays, and (b) by a licensed premises for on-site consumption is permitted until 20H00. (2) The provisions of subregulation (1)(a) do not apply to duty-free shops at international airports which are permitted to operate in accordance with their operating license. (3) The consumption of liquor in public places, except in licensed on-site consumption premises, is not permitted. (4) Registered wineries, wine farms, micro-breweries and micro-distilleries may continue to operate in offering wine-tastings and other brew-tastings, and the selling of wine and other brews to the public for off-site and on-site consumption is permitted until 20HOO and further subject to strict adherence to social distancing measures and health protocols. The wearing of a face mask remains mandatory for every person when in a public place, excluding a child under the age of six years. You do not have to wear a face mask if you are undertaking vigorous exercise in a public place, provided that the you maintain a distance of at least one and a half metres from any other person. You must also practice physical and social distancing. Physical distancing means keeping a physical distance of at least 1.5 metres from all people you interact with, specifically when out in public, this keeps you safe from respiratory droplets. While social distancing means not interacting with people outside of your household unless necessary. Wash your hands often with soap and water for at least 20 seconds. If soap and water are not available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitizer (at least 70% alcohol). The sale, dispensing and distribution of alcohol is prohibited, for both onsite and offsite consumption – this prohibition will ease the pressure that is placed on hospital services by alcohol-related emergency incidents. The transportation of alcohol is prohibited, except where alcohol is required for industries producing hand sanitizers, disinfectants, soap, alcohol for industrial use and household cleaning products. The Adjusted Alert Level 4 regulations allow for most economic activity to continue, you are permitted to go to work if you are unable to work remotely; retail stores will remain open; factories, mines, farms and other businesses are permitted to continue operating. What will happen if I don’t obey the regulations of Level 4? Any person who incites, instigates, commands, or procures any other person to commit any offence in terms of these Regulations, commits an offence and is, on conviction, liable to a fine or imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months or to both such fine and imprisonment. Can I report anyone who is disobeying Level 4 regulations? You can call your local police or law enforcement agencies to report any Alert Level 4 transgressions. The declaration allows governments to activate preparedness plans and undertake emergency procedures to protect the public, such as travel and trade restrictions. Generally, the WHO will declare a pandemic when there is sustained community outbreaks on different continents. What is the difference between an outbreak, epidemic and pandemic? An outbreak is a sudden rise in cases of a disease in a particular place. An epidemic is a large outbreak. Does a pandemic reflect the severity of a disease? A pandemic has nothing to do with how serious an illness is. It just means a disease is spreading widely and at an alarming rate.[/collapsed] The Coronaviruses is spread from person-to-person through respiratory droplets. Currently there is no evidence to support transmission of COVID-19 associated with food. Before preparing or eating food it is important to always rinse the food with water and wash your hands with soap and water for 20 seconds for general food safety. Can I get the virus through handling or receiving packages or products? It is possible that one may touch the SARS-CoV-2 virus while handling packages contaminated by the virus however, one may only contract the virus or be affected by it when the virus comes into contact with your mucosal membranes (mouth, tongue or nose) thus entering your body. This is not the main means of transmission. Inhaling respiratory droplets is the main way the virus spreads. The virus does not survive well on surfaces, therefore there is a lower risk of it spreading from products or packages that are shipped or delivered over a period of time. The SARS-CoV-2 virus does not survive well in warmer climates. It is therefore expected to thrive in the colder winter seasons. Those at higher risk of contracting the virus include the elderly and individuals with chronic conditions or a compromised immune system. Chronic conditions include high blood pressure, diabetes, cancer and lung disease amongst others. What should I do if I am at higher risk of getting the virus? If you are at higher risk of getting the virus, you should take everyday precautions to keep space between yourself and others. When you go out, try to avoid unnecessary contact, non-essential travel and exposure to others who are sick. Wash your hands often, avoid crowds and if there is an outbreak in your community, consider staying home and limiting contact to essential people. No. According to the WHO, there is no evidence that companion animals or pets such as cats and dogs have been infected or could spread the virus that causes COVID-19. However, it is good practice to wash your hands after being around animals. It is not certain how long the virus that causes COVID-19 survives on surfaces, but it seems to behave like other coronaviruses. Studies suggest that coronaviruses (including preliminary information on the COVID-19 virus) may persist on surfaces for a few hours or up to several days. This may vary under different conditions (e.g. type of surface, temperature or humidity of the environment). If you think a surface may be infected, clean it with simple disinfectant to kill the virus and protect yourself and others. Clean your hands with an alcohol-based hand rub or wash them with soap and water. What should I do if I have recently returned from a country with widespread transmission of the virus? Self-monitor for any symptom onset such as fever, cough, sore throat or difficulty breathing. If any should arise, seek medical attention. Otherwise practice adequate hygiene and be aware of possible asymptomatic transmission. What role can I play in the fight against the virus? Be aware of fake news reporting, ensuring credible resources from the WHO, CDC or NICD are only shared. Speak out against negative behaviours and negative social media statements stereotyping various individuals. Ensure personal hygiene and good health practices such as cough and sneeze etiquette. Get the recent flu vaccine to ensure your immune system is at optimal capacity. Express your appreciation to healthcare workers who are on the frontline taking care of patients and helping make sure this disease does not spread further. What are the emergency water provisions in response to the COVID-19? The Department of Water and Sanitation will provide emergency water in rural areas, informal settlements and public areas. The Department will increase the provision of water and sanitation in high-density public areas, informal settlements and rural areas. The Department will also ensure that rural areas and informal settlements are provided with water tanks and standpipes, to increase access to water for residents. Water tanks and sanitizers will also be provided in public spaces including taxi ranks, train and bus stations, and other areas where people congregate. What are NSFAS preventative measures against the spread of Covid-19 Coronavirus virus? The National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) will be implementing safety and precautionary measures to combat Covid-19 epidemic as per national government directive by the South African President, Cyril Ramaphosa, on Sunday March 15, 2020. A follow-up briefing was held by various Department’s Ministers, including the Minister of Higher Education, Science and Technology Dr Blade Nzimande outlining the impact, holistic measures and approach in support of the national plan. NSFAS has developed preventative measures to lower the risk of spreading the virus. NSFAS is cognisant of the fact that students may be concerned that the current pandemic will affect the allocation of their funding. We can firmly confirm that NSFAS is implementing measures to ensure that payments and processing of applications is not affected. We will continue to focus on ensuring business continuity and adequate support for our stakeholders who require assistance during this time. As from Tuesday 17 March 2020 NSFAS staff members will be segmented into priority groups to lower human interaction at the NSFAS Wynberg (Cape Town) Head office, 50% of staff members will be required to report to the office and limit contact amongst each other. Although the NSFAS Contact Centre will be reducing the number of staff members the interaction on alternative platforms will be greatly strengthened. Clients, students and applicants are encouraged to engage NSFAS on the online platforms prior to attempt to call the Contact Centre. The above strategy enables the organisation to continue the allocation of alrfunding, protect staff members and their families, as well as the students. The following alternative communication channels will be available from 08h30 to 17h00, Monday to Friday. For the foreseeable future, NSFAS will also limit local travel for all NSFAS employees. Government and business stakeholders will preferably be contacted using alternative channels of engagement as and when required. We will continue to communicate with the public through our online platforms to provide the latest funding progress updates. In accordance with the pronouncement by the President on 15 March 2020, schools were closed from 18 March 2020 and started re-opening from 1 June 2020. As announced by Presidenty Cyril Ramaphosa on 23 July public schools will be closed from 27 July to 24 August except for: The School calendar has information of opening of schools. We are going to lose 10 school days as a result of the school closures. To compensate for lost days the June holidays will be cut short by a week. Once opened schools will be encouraged to extend tuition hours. Which schools are affected by the President’s directive? This directive is binding on all schools; public ordinary schools, independent schools and private. A number of steps are being taken to ensure that education is not compromised. Each province, district, circuit and school must have a practical and comprehensive catch-up plan to be implemented. Schools have been urged to give learners work they can do at home with the supervision of parents. Schools are also encouraged to give learners workbooks and worksheets to be used to keep learners active on curriculum based initiatives. Parents must play their part in the education of their children. The school enrichment programmes will also be affected by the arrangements. The Department of Basic Education will this week provide guidelines on how the school enrichment programmes are going to be managed because we want to ensure that those in matric in particular are not disadvantaged. What measures are in place to protect the most vulnerable groups, including children, youth, women, older persons and persons with disabilities? All Social Development, NDA offices and SASSA pay points remain operational during this period. All facilities are adhering to Occupation Health and Safety guidelines and to ensure that basic protective measures against the virus. Are resources available to assist poor households affected by COVID-19? In line with President Ramaphosa’s declaration, the Disaster Relief Fund has been activated to provide immediate assistance to affected individuals and families. An amount of R96 million is available from the Fund. How will this affect the payment of social grants? The South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) is exploring various options to ensure that pay points, including the South African Post Office (SAPO), implement precautionary measures. This will assist in minimizing and mitigating the spread of the virus as these facilities become overcrowded during pay days. One of the proposals SASSA is currently considering is the staggering of payment dates to avoid gathering of large numbers of people at South African Post Offices. This is in line with the disaster management plan regulations. What support is in place for affected families and individuals? All social service professionals will provide psychosocial care and support services to affected individual and their families. This includes trauma counselling, integration and re-unification of persons who have been isolated/quarantined to mitigate stigmatisation. How are Early Childhood Development Centres (ECD) affected? ECD centres will close on 18 March 2020. Parents/caregivers are advised to make alternative care arrangements during this period. There is a suspension, until further notice, of all external visits to Child and Youth Care Centres, drug rehabilitation and treatment centres, shelters and old age centres What is the role of the non-profit sector in preventing spread of COVID-19? These are critical stakeholders in the provision of social services. They must continue playing their part by disseminating correct information to members of the public. Does the long term wearing of masks have any negative impact on one’s health? Prolonged use of any face mask has not been shown to cause carbon dioxide toxicity or lack of adequate oxygen in healthy people. Healthcare workers routinely wear masks for prolonged periods while performing their duties. Cloth masks provide an additional layer of protection by reducing the number of microorganisms that a person releases into the air. Mass mask wearing will ensure that fewer potential viral droplets are released into the air. Wearing amask reduces the risk that someone will be exposed to the virus. The human remains of a person who has died from coronavirus are considered contagious and should be kept only in designated mortuaries. Under no circumstances shall the human remains be directly handled, whether for aesthetic, hygiene preparations, cultural or religious reasons. Human remains shall be placed in transparent leak proof double body bags and sealed. A third non-transparent and unsealed bag must be added when the body is moved. The third bag should have handles and an appropriate BIOHAZARD warning tag written \"Hazard Group 4 Pathogens\" before being transported to mortuary. No one is allowed to exhume a body for any reason unless they have permission from the relevant authorities to do so. If someone wants to exhume a body for any reason it must be done with permission to ensure everyone’s safety Myth: Lockdown measures deprive people of their freedoms and are in keeping with an authoritarian regime. The current measures are temporary and have been enacted to protect our nation and her people. Our freedoms will never be at risk and are protected by the Constitution, Bill of Rights and our commitment to the rule of law and democracy and freedom. Myth: Vaccines are unsafe and normal safety protocols have been circumvented to fast track their authorisation for use. The fast development and approval of vaccines is a great human feat worthy of celebration. It this has been possible because we have learnt over many decades how to make and test vaccines and we were able to take those lessons and challenge ourselves to produce a vaccine much quicker. No step in the development, testing or ratification of the COVID-19 vaccines has been skipped. The world was able to develop vaccines fast because scientists and governments around the world collaborated in a manner that has never been achieved before and pooled resources and information to ensure that everyone can contribute to the knowledge. This allowed us to move much quicker than we have done before. The socio-economic devastation the virus is causing is what has motivated developers to move with urgency without compromising on quality standards. Vaccines work by stimulating the body the same way the virus would if someone were infected. That means when you receive the vaccine the body then recognises that it looks like the coronavirus and then it releases certain chemicals that start a chain reaction to make immune cells that can fight the real virus. Some people think that because some of the vaccines are made using RNA technology that means the RNA will interact with the DNA - that is not how it works. The technology is simply the way the vaccine is made - not what it will do to the body. Myth: Vaccines contain a form of microchip that will be used to track and control an individual. There is no vaccine \"microchip\" and there is no evidence to support claims that such a move is planned. Receiving a vaccine will not allow people to be tracked and personal information would not be entered into a database. Myth: Big business is pushing vaccines to improve profits. The COVID-19 crisis has caused massive upheaval across the globe and no nation has been spared. A vaccine represents the best hope to save lives and to restore our way of life; many governments have therefore entered into direct talks with vaccine makers to ensure a timeous supply of vaccines. Myth: Government is complicit with big business in pushing vaccines despite the risks. Government is committed to saving lives and livelihoods. The fastest way to return to our way of life is through ensuring that the majority of the population is protected from the virus. Vaccines are the simplest and most effective way to do this. Myth: 5G networks cause the coronavirus through radiation emissions. The World Health Organisation has made it clear that viruses cannot travel on radio waves/mobile networks. It is also a fact that COVID-19 is spreading in many countries that do not have 5G mobile networks. COVID-19 is spread through respiratory droplets when an infected person coughs, sneezes or speaks. People can also be infected by touching a contaminated surface and then their eyes, mouth or nose. Myth: The Vaccines have the mark of the Beast – 666. Vaccines are made to save lives and are made by technology. They have no connection with any religious organisations and cannot be infused with spirits, demons or other abstract ingredients. There is no conspiracy to possess, bewitch or control anybody. Myth: Bill Gates is pushing vaccines to control the world. Bill Gates, through his foundation with his wife The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation have joined thousands of other organisations worldwide to help combat COVID-19. As government we are always careful to work together with organisations and people that share our ideals and aspirations for South African people. Our sovereignty and our people will never be compromised even as we work together with various entities all over the world. Myth: Vaccines are a way for our former oppressors to oppress us again. The devastation of colonialisation and apartheid is still very much alive in the consciousness of our leaders and our people - government would never allow a situation where any country or nation would be allowed to oppress our people through any means. Scientists and governments all over the world, including our own, have contributed to the knowledge that has led to the development of the vaccines. It has not just been the work of Western and rich countries but a global collaboration. Vaccines are a way of liberating all of us from the socioeconomic devastation of COVID-19, which we have all suffered globally."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Studies suggest that coronaviruses (which includes the COVID-19 virus) may be able to survive on surfaces for a few hours or up to several days.",
                "question": "How long can coronaviruses survive on surfaces according to studies?",
                "url": "https://www.health.nsw.gov.au/Infectious/factsheets/Pages/domestic-cleaning.aspx",
                "scraped_text": "Hygiene advice for people living in residential buildingsCleaning surfaces at home to help stop Studies suggest that coronaviruses (which includes the COVID-19 virus) may be able to survive on surfaces for a few hours or up to several days. Coronaviruses on surfaces can be killed through cleaning and disinfection. While cleaning is important, the risk of transmission from a contaminated surface is much lower compared to having close contact with a COVID-19 case. Regularly clean these surfaces with a household detergent, followed by disinfectant. Alternatively, you can use detergent/disinfectant wipes as long as you scrub the surface hard: For general surfaces, using a household detergent solution/wipes for cleaning is adequate: Detergents help remove germs, dirt, and impurities from surfaces. By removing them it lowers their numbers and the risk of spreading infection. Disinfectants are chemical solutions that are designed to ‘kill’, but not remove, viruses and bacteria. Disinfectants do not necessarily clean dirty surfaces or remove germs, but by killing germs on a surface after cleaning, it can further lower the risk of spreading infection. For hard, non-porous surfaces, a diluted household bleach solution can be used in a ratio of four teaspoons of bleach per one litre of water. Importantly, never mix household bleach with ammonia or any other cleaner. You need to check the product is not past its expiration date, which makes it ineffective. You must also ensure good ventilation of the area during and after application. People living in residential buildings should take care when moving through common areas to reduce the risk of COVID-19: In addition to cleaning your home, good personal hygiene can help stop the spread of COVID-19: Remember, when washing your hands all you need is water and a detergent (surfactant) such as a bar of soap, body wash or shampoo. It doesn’t need to be expensive, or ‘antibacterial’. The key to handwashing is to wash often and wash well, for at least 20 seconds. Alcohol-based hand sanitiser is dangerous if ingested, particularly for children. If you have been asked to self-isolate for 14 days, follow the guidance on how to self-isolate. This includes information on hygiene, cleaning and remaining separated from people living in your home."
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Refuted"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 3,
        "claim": "Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!”",
                "question": "Is Pfizer managed by BlackRock?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "\"GlaxoSmithKline* is (accidentally) managed by the financial division of Black Rock, which *(accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA*.\"",
                "question": "Is Pfizer managed by BlackRock finances?",
                "url": "https://www.verificat.cat/en/gsk-does-not-own-pfizer-and-or-the-wuhan-biological-laboratory/",
                "scraped_text": "GSK does not own Pfizer and or the Wuhan biological laboratory You have sent us an Instagram message with these and other misleading and false relation. You have sent us an Instagram message claiming that “the Wuhan biological laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline [GSK], which owns Pfizer”. It also affirms that such a laboratory has been funded by the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci. These relations are MISLEADING and FALSE. The pharmaceutical company GSK does not own the Wuhan virology laboratory, nor does it own Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. There is also no evidence that Anthony Fauci has individually funded these facilities, although the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), under which his department falls, has funded an organisation that in turn has invested in a coronavirus research project being conducted in Wuhan, among other centres. “The Wuhan biological laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer (which makes the vaccine against the virus that was initiated (accidentally) at the Wuhan Biological Laboratory and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine.\" The message that circulates on Instagram contains basic errors, such as there exists a center known as the Wuhan Biological Laboratory in Wuhan. In any case, if the message made reference to the laboratory where coronaviruses are investigated in Wuhan, it would be the Wuhan Institute of Virology Institute (WIV). It is a center that has been subject of several unsubstantiated theories since the pandemic began. The laboratory is controlled by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) of the Chinese government. To date, there is no known relationship between this center and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a UK-based pharmaceutical company which, among other things, is involved in the development of a covid-19 vaccine that has not yet been approved in any country. The relationship between GSK and the institute is non-existent, as has already been explained by verification agencies such as Reuters or Snopes. The lab also does not appear in the list of activities of GSK in China. The relationship between Pfizer and GSK is also fictitious, beyond the creation of a joint venture to produce over-the-counter drugs in 2018, as they point out in a press release in August 2019 . However, this does not mean that GSK owns Pfizer, which, in fact, is a publicly traded company whose major shareholders do not include Pfizer. Concerning the funding of the laboratory, there is no evidence that Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the USA, has donated to the facility in any particular way. It is true that the National Institutes of Health (NIH), of which the center Fauci directs is a part, transferred $3.4 million to the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance Inc. to fund a project to understand the emergence of coronaviruses in bats, the NIH confirmed to Reuters. This money went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but also to East China Normal University (Shanghai), the Institute of Pathogen Biology (Beijing) and Duke-NUS Medical School (Singapore). Neither the Open Society Foundations, nor AXA nor Winterthur The message also claims that “GlaxoSmithKline is administered by the finance division of BlackRock, which administers the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which is managed by the French AXA”. This is FALSE: neither GlaxoSmithKline is managed by BlackRock, nor does this investment fund control the Open Foundation Company, a foundation that does not exist. The foundation owned by billionaire George Soros is called the Open Society Foundations. \"GlaxoSmithKline* is (accidentally) managed by the financial division of Black Rock, which *(accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA*.\" The BlackRock organisation is a fund manager that can be both from the government and individual savers. According to the instagram post, BlackRock manages GSK. While it is true that BlackRock owns 7,5% of GSK shares, according to the financial research website Fintel, it does not manage the pharmaceutical company. What is false is that BlackRock manages Open Society Foundations (OSF), an organisation focused on funding projects from benefic organisations. There is no link between Open Society Foundations and BlackRock, although there is a link between the latter and Soros: the tycoon is chairman of an investment fund, called Soros Fund Management, which in the past did hold shares in BlackRock. They were subsequently sold in 2020 (in 2021 they do not appear on the list of holdings either). The alleged connection between the Open Society Foundations and \"French AXA\" that the message talks about is also false. There is no evidence of a link between the two organisations, but there is a link between the Soros Fund Management and AXA, albeit through AXA Equitable Holdings, which is a US-based company that partially owns the French company AXA. According to Fintel, the tycoon's foundation owns more than 450,000 shares. Finally, the message claims that Soros owns the German insurance company Winterthur and that this company built the laboratory in Wuhan. “Soros (accidentally) owns the German enterprise Winterthur, which (accidentally) built the laboratory in Wuhan* and was bought by the German company Allianz.\" Winterthur was bought in 2006, not by Allianz, but by the insurer AXA. Nor is it true that Soros owns Allianz, although he is a shareholder, through Soros Fund Management, in AXA Equitable Holdings, which is a US-based company partly owned by the French company AXA. The part of the message that is true is the one linking Vanguard – the world's largest mutual fund manager – to BlackRock, as this organisation is one of its largest shareholders. Vanguard is also one of the largest shareholders of the world's largest financial institutions, such as Citigroup or JPMorgan."
            },
            {
                "answer": "(the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, by chance, is managed by Black Rock finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!\"",
                "question": "What company manages the finances of Pfizer and the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation)?",
                "url": "https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/does-glaxo-own-the-wuhan-lab/",
                "scraped_text": "In November 2020, as news broke that a vaccination for COVID-19 was being prepared for distribution, a rumor started circulating on social media that the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline owned a laboratory in Wuhan, China -- the Wuhan Institute of Virology -- where conspiracy theorists falsely maintain the COVID-19 pandemic originated. This rumor, which reads like a game of six-degrees of separation, attempts to trace a line from GlaxoSmithKline, to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, to the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, to billionaire philanthropist and frequent right-wing boogeyman George Soros, and, in some iterations of this rumor, to Microsoft CEO Bill Gates. Here's one version of the rumor that was posted to Twitter: This tweet reads: \"The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by cnance [sic], owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, by chance, is managed by Black Rock finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!\" This nonsensical game of connect the dots starts with a false assertion. The pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline does not own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Wuhan Institute of Virology — a research lab in China that has been the center of conspiracy theories since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic — is operated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and is funded, in large part, by the Chinese government. It is not owned by GlaxoSmithKline or any other private company. \"Over the past 40 years, half of its income has come directly from central-government investment; the rest has been from competitive funding or technology transfer. CAS could not develop without the funding and support of the central government.\" It's also false to say that GlaxoSmithKline owns the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. While these two companies share some common interests — in 2018, they announced a joint venture that combined their consumer health businesses — they remain two distinct companies. Pfizer Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline PLC plan to combine their consumer health-care units and eventually spin off the joint venture, creating the world’s largest seller of drugstore staples like Advil and Sensodyne toothpaste. The deal, announced Wednesday, will free up both companies to concentrate on prescription medicines, which tend to be more profitable if also higher risk. The joint venture represents an unexpected conclusion to a yearlong process by Pfizer to shed its consumer business, as it and other pharmaceutical companies focus on higher-margin prescription drugs. While Glaxo has shared that focus, the British drugmaker had remained committed to its consumer business, which its chief executive led before her promotion to the top job last year. This joint venture, however, did not involve one company buying the other. This rumor appears to have been created with the intent of stirring up confusion and skepticism over the COVID-19 vaccine by connecting pharmaceutical companies to a laboratory in Wuhan, China . GlaxoSmithKline, however, does not own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Furthermore, claims that COVID-19 was \"manufactured,\" or that it \"escaped from\" this Chinese lab, are nothing more than baseless conspiracy theories."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Both companies are managed by BlackRock, a George Soros-owned company. The author also mentions Bill Gates, who, according to her, is the main shareholder of Pfizer.",
                "question": "Is Pfizer managed by BlackRock, and does George Soros have any association with these companies?",
                "url": "https://mythdetector.ge/en/who-does-wuhan-institute-of-virology-belong-to-and-is-it-connected-to-george-soros-and-bill-gates/",
                "scraped_text": "On December 12, 2020, a Facebook user Nona Bakuradze published a post about alleged financial connections between several international companies, George Soros, and Bill Gates. The author claimed that a Wuhan-based pharmaceutical company is owned by Glaxo, which is also the owner of Pfizer. Both companies are managed by BlackRock, a George Soros-owned company. The author also mentions Bill Gates, who, according to her, is the main shareholder of Pfizer. The author supposes that the aforementioned actors are connected to “Wuhan lab” (Wuhan Institute of Virology) and the dissemination of the coronavirus. Another post, published on December 15 by a co-founder of the Union of Orthodox Parents, Avtandil Ungiadze, mentions alleged financial connections between the Wuhan lab and Anthony Fauci, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The post claims that the coronavirus pandemic was planned years ago. According to Ungiadze, in 2015, Anthony Fauci gifted USD 3.7 million to the Wuhan lab, which “was tasked with creating the coronavirus”. The disseminated posts are disinformative: 1) None of the listed companies own the Wuhan Institute of Virology – it is managed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences. 2) Glaxo, BlackRock, and Bill Gates are all partners, but not owners of Pfizer. 3) The claim that Fauci allegedly gave a grant to the Wuhan lab in 2015 is disinformative. EcoHealth Alliance did indeed get a grant to study families of coronaviruses and the Wuhan Institute of Virology was one of the partners, but this fact is manipulated. The primary source of Nona Bakuradze’s post is an Italian text, published on November 12 in Italian, which has been circulating on various social media platforms in Spanish and English. Several fact-checking platforms verified the claim. Nona Bakuradze’s text is a direct translation of the post, disseminated in Spanish and English. No private company owns the Wuhan Institute of Virology Wuhan Institute of Virology has been targeted by numerous conspiracy theories since the start of the coronavirus pandemic. Nona Bakuradze’s post tries to connect the Institute to specific companies or individuals via various privately-owned companies. However, in reality, no private company owns the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Institute is managed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences and its main donor is the Government of China. Wuhan Institute of Virology was established in 1960s. In 1980-1990s, the Institute made a series of important progresses in terms of researching and classifying insect, animal, and molecular viruses. It is noteworthy that the Institute played an important role in studying SARS, a coronavirus which was discovered in 2003. The Institute plays a crucial role in studying dangerous pathogens and therefore, research centers from different countries cooperate with it. Glaxo, BlackRock, George Soros, or Bill Gates are not the owners of the pharmaceutical company Pfizer Due to common interests, the companies listed in Bakuradze’s post do cooperate in various forms, however none of the companies, listed by her, own Pfizer – the manufacturer of one of the first coronavirus vaccines. In 2018, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline initiated a partnership with regards to consumer healthcare that lasted until 2019. On August 1, 2019, Pfizer stated about the termination of the given program. However, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline have merged neither during the course of the program, nor after its end. They both remain independent pharmaceutical companies. As for the relations between Pfizer and BlackRock, the latter does indeed own 7.7% of Pfizer’s shares, but the claim that it is the main shareholder of the company is false. BlackRock is a leading international foundation in the field of managing financial resources which cooperates with numerous companies and has thousands of investors, including George Soros. However, connecting Soros with Pfizer through the foundation is manipulative. There is no evidence of Soros in any way participating in the management of Pfizer. The claim that Bill Gates is the main shareholder of Pfizer is also false. In fact, Gates does cooperate with Pfizer, but not through his technological company Microsoft, but through Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The Foundation funded Pfizer on several occasions to ensure the manufacturing and availability of medicaments. After the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak, the Foundation has been actively cooperatingwith Pfizer and other manufacturers of vaccines. Despite the partnership, neither Bill Gates himself, nor his Foundation own any shares of Pfizer. In 2015, Anthony Fauci did issue a USD 3.7 million grant to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but not to “create the coronavirus” Daily Mail was first to disseminate the manipulation about the alleged financial ties between Fauci and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in April 2020. Later, the President of the United States, Donald Trump, and a Republican Rep. Matt Gaetz voiced it too. In fact, the CDC allocated the USD 3.4 million grant in the beginning of 2014 to a US-founded international non-commercial organization EcoHealth Alliance to study the possible spread of coronaviruses from bats to humans. EcoHealth, in turn, allocated USD 600,000 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which was one of the project participants, for research purposes. This does not mean that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was working on creating the new coronavirus with this grant. The coronaviruses have been around for many years. Their main hosts are precisely bats and various rodents. In 2003, one of the coronaviruses gave rise to the SARS epidemy. The source of SARS was bats and the Wuhan Institute of Virology played a significant role in its research. Therefore, the Institute has studied various coronaviruses for years, so the accusation that it created the coronavirus is false. Disinformation about the prophecies of the pandemic Apart from the “Wuhan lab”, Avtandil Ungiadze reiterates another, earlier disinformation as well. Ungiadze claims that pandemic-related simulations and predictions of healthcare specialists confirm that the coronavirus pandemic was a planned scenario. He cites Anthony Fauci’s 2017 statement, according to which a global pandemic during Trump’s first term was inevitable. In fact, Fauci did not mention either COVID-19 or any specific dates in his statement – it referred to a general assessment of the existing risks. To find out more, read an article by Myth Detector: “Seven Myths about COVID-19 on Obieqtivi and Ilioni TV Channels” The post comes with a video of an opening ceremony of the 2012 London Summer Olympics, which, according to the author, included a scene depicting the coronavirus pandemic. In fact, the part of the video of the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games was devoted to the National Health Service of the United Kingdom which has been serving the population for free since the World War II. Read more about it in an article by Myth Detector: “What Links “Исцели Себя Сам” to 2012 London Olympics and Coronavirus?” As of December 17, 2020, the post by Nino Bakuradze had 80 shares. Nona Agdgomelashvili, another Facebook user, has shared the post in three public groups: „კორონა მაფია“ (Corona mafia), „ანტი-მასონობა. „ანტიქრისტეს“ ახალი მსოფლიო წესრიგი (NWO); ანტი-ეკუმენიზმი“ (Anti-masonry. New World Order (NWO) of the “Antichrist”; Anti-ecumenism), „საერთო სახალხო მოძრაობა ქართველი ერის გადარჩენისთვის!“ (United popular movement to save Georgian nation!). Nina Marji has published an identical text as well. The post by Avtandil Ungiadze has 68 shares. News Front has published the text in the post with a title “How Was All that Is Happening Now, Planned!”. The article has been written in the framework of Facebook’s fact-checking program. You can read more about the restrictions that Facebook may impose based on this article via this link. You can find information about appealing or editing our assessment via this link. Read detailed instructions for editing the article."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Les publications Facebook affirment ensuite que le laboratoire Pfizer \"est lié aux finances de BlackRock\", qui \"par coïncidence gère les finances\" du réseau de fondations Open Society Foundations créé par l'Américain George Soros, qui \"est par coïncidence proche\" de la société d'assurances française AXA et de la société suisse Winterthur \"qui a construit ce laboratoire\".",
                "question": "Is Pfizer linked to BlackRock finances and the Open Society Foundations?",
                "url": "https://factuel.afp.com/cette-cascade-de-liens-supposes-entre-le-laboratoire-de-wuhan-et-des-geants-pharmaceutiques-gates-ou",
                "scraped_text": "Cette cascade de liens supposés entre le laboratoire de Wuhan et des géants pharmaceutiques, Gates ou Soros est Des publications partagées plusieurs milliers de fois sur Facebook depuis mi-novembre prétendent mettre en lumière les connexions entre le laboratoire P4 de Wuhan, d'où serait sorti le Covid, le laboratoire Pfizer, l’industriel GlaxoSmithKline, les milliardaires Bill Gates et George Soros et des sociétés d'assurances. Mais elles contiennent plusieurs fausses informations: l'Institut de virologie de Wuhan, que rien ne permet de relier à l’origine de l’épidémie, n'a rien à voir avec GSK, entreprise qui ne possède pas l'Américain Pfizer. \"Le laboratoire biologique chinois de Wuhan appartient en fait à Glaxo, qui par coïncidence possède Pfizer (vaccin Covid-19), qui par coïncidence est lié aux finances de Black Rock (Larry Flynt), qui par coïncidence gère les finances de la Open Foundation Society (Soros)\"... Cette publication ironique, partagée près de 1.000 fois depuis le 24 novembre sur Facebook, relie le laboratoire de Wuhan à des entreprises pharmaceutiques, aux milliardaires George Soros et Bill Gates et vise à prouver que la pandémie de coronavirus était planifiée. Cette publication est accompagnée d'une photo de la visite de l'ancien Premier ministre français Bernard Cazeneuve au laboratoire de Wuhan le 23 février 2017. Le laboratoire de Wuhan a été conçu avec l'aide de sociétés françaises dans le cadre d'un accord franco-chinois, comme l'expliquait Bernard Cazeneuve dans son discours tenu à l'occasion de cette visite. Cette publication circule également en néerlandais, en allemand, en slovaque ou encore en espagnol. La première publication sur Facebook retrouvée par l'AFP date du 12 novembre et a été partagée en italien. Elle attribue ce texte à un certain \"Giuseppe Renda\". Une recherche sur Google avec ce nom mène au profil Linkedin d'un employé de Pfizer en Italie. L'AFP a cherché à contacter Giuseppe Renda mais n'avait pas reçu de réponse à la date de publication de cet article. Cette publication évoque \"le laboratoire biologique\" de Wuhan qui appartiendrait au géant de l'industrie pharmaceutique GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). De nombreuses théories affirment que le Sars-Cov-2 a été créé dans le laboratoire P4 de Wuhan et s'en serait échappé. Donald Trump lui-même a déclaré en avril qu'il \"avait la preuve\" que la pandémie était originaire dudit institut, mais n'a jamais présenté cette preuve. Or rien ne prouve cette allégation, comme l'a déjà expliqué l'AFP. L'AFP n'a trouvé aucun lien entre l'Institut de virologie de Wuhan (WIV), où se trouve ce laboratoire, et la société GlaxoSmithKline. Selon cet article de la revue scientifique Nature de 2017, qui présente les activités du laboratoire P4 du WIV, sa création a été approuvée en 2003 par l'Académie chinoise des sciences (CAS) et construit avec l'aide de la France dans le cadre d'un accord de coopération sur la prévention et le contrôle des nouvelles maladies infectieuses. Ce communiqué de presse de la CAS indique également que le WIV P4 a été inauguré en 2015 par la Commission nationale de la santé et du planning familial de la République populaire de Chine et l'Académie chinoise des sciences. Il a été financé par la Commission nationale pour la réforme et le développement (NDRC) et \"conçu par la France et la Chine\". Le site web du WIV ne contient aucune mention d'une quelconque participation d'une entreprise étrangère. Il dépend de la CAS, qui dépend du gouvernement chinois. Le site de GSK en Chine ne mentionne pas non plus une quelconque participation à la WIV. Il indique que GSK est implanté en Chine dans les villes de Shanghai, Pékin et Tianjin. L'AFP a contacté l'Académie chinoise des sciences, mais n'avait pas reçu de réponse au moment de la publication de cet article \"Glaxo, qui par coïncidence possède Pfizer (vaccin Covid-19)\", poursuit la publication. Le groupe pharmaceutique américain Pfizer a développé le vaccin contre le Covid-19 actuellement utilisé au Royaume-Uni. Selon CNN Business, Pfizer est majoritairement contrôlé par The Vanguard Group, qui possède une participation de 7,67% dans le laboratoire américain. La multinationale américaine BlackRock, mentionnée dans cette publication, fait également partie de ses actionnaires. Mais la société Glaxo ne figure pas dans la liste des actionnaires de Pfizer. Contacté par l'AFP, un porte-parole de Pfizer a confirmé que l'affirmation selon laquelle GSK est propriétaire de la société pharmaceutique n'est \"pas correcte\". \"Pfizer n'appartient PAS à Glaxo! Pfizer est une société cotée à la bourse de New-York\", a déclaré la porte-parole Dervila Keane En décembre 2018, GSK et Pfizer ont annoncé la fusion de leurs activités de médicament sans ordonnance au sein d'une entreprise commune (\"joint-venture\"), créant ainsi en 2019 GSK Consumer Healthcare, une alliance pour la commercialisation de produits tels que le Voltaren, le Panadol et l'Advil. Il ne s'agissait toutefois pas d'une opération de rachat d’une entreprise par une autre. Dans le secteur pharmaceutique, les deux entreprises restent concurrentes. Confusions dans les liens entre BlackRock, AXA, Winterthur et Allianz Les publications Facebook affirment ensuite que le laboratoire Pfizer \"est lié aux finances de BlackRock\", qui \"par coïncidence gère les finances\" du réseau de fondations Open Society Foundations créé par l'Américain George Soros, qui \"est par coïncidence proche\" de la société d'assurances française AXA et de la société suisse Winterthur \"qui a construit ce laboratoire\". L'homme d'affaires et philanthrope George Soros, il fait régulièrement l'objet de fausses informations, vérifiées par l'AFP. Entre autres, il a été faussement présenté comme ayant été arrêté en Suisse puis plus tard à Philadelphie pour ingérence électorale après la présidentielle américaine et il aurait déclaré vouloir \"faire tomber les Etats-Unis en finançant des groupes de haine noirs\". Certaines publications mentionnent par ailleurs \"Larry Flynt\", le désignant comme le propriétaire du gestionnaire d'actifs BlackRock. Elles confondent Larry Flynt, fondateur et patron du magazine pornographique américain Hustler, et Larry Fink, ancien trader et PDG de BlackRock. BlackRock est le premier gestionnaire d'actifs au monde, et à ce titre possède des participations dans des milliers d'entreprises, dont Pfizer. Il compte également des milliers d'investisseurs, dont le magnat George Soros, parmi ses nombreux portefeuilles. Le site des Open Society Foundations ne fait cependant aucune mention de la compagnie d'assurances française Axa, à l'exception d'un document dans lequel sont évoquées, à titre d'exemple, des poursuites engagées par Axa contre des particuliers coupables de fausses déclarations d'assurance. Quant à Winterthur, la compagnie d'assurances suisse a été rachetée par Axa en 2006. L'AFP n'a trouvé aucune trace d'une construction d'un laboratoire à Wuhan par le groupe. Selon ces publications, le laboratoire P4 de Wuhan aurait également été \"acheté accidentellement\" par l'assureur Allianz. Ce qui n'a pas de sens puisque, plus haut, les mêmes publications affirment que le laboratoire appartient à Glaxo. Allianz indique sur son site qu'elle possède des bureaux à Pékin, à Shanghai et à Guangzhou, mais pas à Wuhan. L'entreprise ne mentionne pas non plus la présence d'un laboratoire en Chine. Bill Gates n'est pas un grand actionnaire de Pfizer Le message relie également BlackRock à Bill Gates, qui n'est pas nommé mais désigné comme \"un actionnaire de Pfizer\", \"un grand actionnaire de Microsoft et Gates\", \"actuellement le premier parrain de l'OMS\". Comme George Soros, Bill Gates est la cible de nombreuses fausses informations depuis le début de la pandémie de Covid-19. Le laboratoire Pfizer a en effet reçu de l'argent du Fonds d'investissement stratégique de la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates. La fondation a investi dans la société pharmaceutique pour élargir l'accès à Sayana, un contraceptif injectable, aux pays en développement, explique-t-elle sur son site. Elle a également annoncé en septembre 2020 qu'elle collaborerait avec plusieurs des entreprises travaillant au développement d'un vaccin Covid-19. Cependant, la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates ne compte pas parmi les principaux actionnaires de Pfizer. La Fondation Bill & Melinda Gates est bien l'un des plus grands contributeurs de l'OMS, contribuant à hauteur de 11,65% du budget de l'Organisation Mondiale de la Santé. Elle se situe juste derrière le gouvernement allemand, qui fournit 12,18% du budget. En conclusion, rien ne prouve que Wuhan WIV soit la propriété de la société GlaxoSmithKline, et il n'est pas vrai non plus que la société possède Pfizer. Il n'y a pas non plus de trace de l'implication des compagnies d'assurances Winterthur et AXA dans le WIV. En revanche, le gestionnaire de fonds BlackRock, qui détient une partie des actions de Pfizer, a George Soros comme investisseur, ainsi que de nombreuses autres fortunes mondiales. En outre, Bill et Melinda Gates ont investi dans Pfizer pour le développement de projets spécifiques mais ne sont pas des actionnaires importants."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The post also brings investment firm BlackRock into the fold, claiming it \"manages\" both Pfizer and the \"Open Foundation Company,\" referring to, albeit misnaming, billionaire George Soros' Open Society Foundations.",
                "question": "What is the relationship between BlackRock and Pfizer?",
                "url": "https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/12/30/fact-check-wuhan-lab-vaccine-research-affiliates-not-linked/4086363001/",
                "scraped_text": "Fact check: False connections drawn between Wuhan lab, vaccine research affiliates The claim: A series of links exists between Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies, figures central to development of COVID-19 vaccine As COVID-19 vaccines begin to roll out, some have questioned their safety and efficacy. Going further, a post on social media claims that the vaccines can be tied to a suspicious lineup of invested parties. A Facebook post claims that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research center in the Chinese city where the coronavirus emerged, can be linked to a number of individuals and pharmaceutical companies involved in researching the COVID-19 vaccine. Conspiracy theorists have claimed, without evidence, that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was manufactured there. The post, which has been shared over 1,100 times, claims that the lab in Wuhan is owned by pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which supposedly owns Pfizer, the first drug company to receive emergency authorization for a COVID-19 vaccine. The purported connections further spiral, eventually suggesting the involvement of billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The post's creator did not respond to USA TODAY's request for comment. More: Fact check: What's true and what's false about the COVID-19 vaccine The claim starts to fall apart in its first sentence. The post alleges that the \"Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan,\" likely the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is owned by GlaxoSmithKline. It then tumbles into a series of claims about ownership and financing based on that original relationship — which doesn't exist. The full name of the institute, which studies viral diseases, is Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, according to its website. It's controlled by China's State Council, one of the country's main government bodies. In a 2019 open letter to the science journal Nature, a CAS representative wrote that the academy has never achieved financial independence from China. Half of its income comes directly from the government, and the rest comes from \"competitive funding or technology transfer,\" according to the letter. \"CAS is not run independently of government ... The establishment and development of CAS have been entirely based on the wisdom and support of the central government,\" the letter reads. Fact check: Post of Maryland lab photo misidentifies visitor, makes false Moderna claim Without the original tie linking the Wuhan lab to Glaxo, the claim's intended revelation is rendered meaningless. Still, there are a number of other misrepresentations in the post worth noting. Firstly, British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline doesn't own Pfizer. Pfizer was incorporated in New Jersey in 1900, originally dividing its $2 million of authorized capital into 20,000 shares as a privately held company, its website says. But in 1942, the pharmaceutical company offered 240,000 shares of new common stock to the public; now the company has roughly 69% public ownership. Fact check: Bell's palsy among COVID-19 trial participants likely unrelated to Pfizer vaccine GSK and Pfizer embarked on a joint venture in 2018, aiming to combine their consumer health care units to allow each company to focus on prescription medicines. But that venture doesn't involve merging or swapping ownership. The post also brings investment firm BlackRock into the fold, claiming it \"manages\" both Pfizer and the \"Open Foundation Company,\" referring to, albeit misnaming, billionaire George Soros' Open Society Foundations. Soros often plays the central role in baseless conspiracy theories, most recently surrounding the pandemic and vaccination against COVID-19. A search of both Soros' Open Society Foundation's and BlackRock's websites found no indication the two are tied. BlackRock does hold about 414.7 million shares in Pfizer, reporting in February that it held 7.7% ownership in the pharmaceutical company. Fact check: Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO both plan to take COVID-19 vaccine The Vanguard Group, however, is Pfizer's largest shareholder, and the post claims its ties to both BlackRock and Microsoft, which Bill Gates co-founded in 1975, are nefarious. Like Soros, Gates is also commonly pulled into unfounded conspiracy theories about the pandemic. It's true that Vanguard holds shares in BlackRock, Pfizer and Microsoft. But two decades after Gates' departure from the company as its CEO, his ties to Microsoft are loose. Gates holds just 1.36% of shares in Microsoft, CNBC reported in March, shortly after Gates left the company's board. Fact check: Improper use of COVID-19 test gives false positive for Coca-Cola We rate the claim that a series of links exist between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies and figures central to development of a COVID-19 vaccine as FALSE because it was not supported by our research. The primary claim, which sets off the series of links, that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is owned by GlaxoSmithKline is false. That renders the following purported connections meaningless, and many of them are false independently, as well. - Wuhan Institute of Virology, retrieved Dec. 30, About WIV - China State Council, Aug. 28, 2014, State Council Organization Chart - Nature, Oct. 22, 2019, The Chinese Academy of Sciences responds: we are with the government and with the people - Nasdaq, Pfizer Inc. Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - Wall Street Journal, Dec. 19, 2018, Pfizer, Glaxo to Create Over-the-Counter Drug Giant - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"blackrock\" site:https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"open society foundation\" site:https://www.blackrock.com - Nasdaq, Microsoft Corporation Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Dec. 31, 2019, Pfizer SC 136/A - CNBC, March 13, Bill Gates leaves Microsoft board Thank you for supporting our journalism. You can subscribe to our print edition, ad-free app, or electronic newspaper replica here. Our fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic).",
                "question": "What company is claimed to manage the finances of the Open Foundation Company?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Claim 5 – GlaxoSmithKline and Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) are managed by Black Rock finances",
                "question": "What other companies are managed by Black Rock finances?",
                "url": "https://srilanka.factcrescendo.com/english/a-false-message-claims-there-is-a-coronavirus-conspiracy-between-glaxosmithkline-and-wuhan-lab/",
                "scraped_text": "A viral message propagates a false conspiracy theory suggesting a nexus between Wuhan lab and major global pharmaceutical companies that caused in the Covid-19 pandemic. The message ultimately puts forward a convoluted claim that the coronavirus was created in China with the help of vaccine makers with the intension to make profits. Fact Crescendo received many fact-check requests about this message on our WhatsApp Factline. We will fact-check all the claims made in this message one by one. Claim 1 – Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline The official name of this biological laboratory is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It was established in 1958. It is a largely state-funded lab, which is under the control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), a part of the Government of China. In a letter published in Nature magazine in 2019, it is mentioned that “CAS has never sought or achieved financial autonomy. Over the past 40 years, half of its income has come directly from central-government investment. CAS could not develop without the funding and support of the central government.” This clarifies that a private foreign company like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) does not own or control Wuhan Lab. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is a British pharmaceutical company. Pfizer is an American multinational pharmaceutical corporation. Pfizer is 69% owned by institutional shareholders. Among them, The Vanguard Group owns the highest shares (7.67%). CNN Money has published the list of top 10 owners of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline does not feature on the list of Pfizer shareholders. In 2018, Pfizer and GSK entered into a joint venture to create a premier global consumer healthcare company. However, that partnership ended in 2019. The statement of closure of the partnership states, “GSK intends to separate the joint venture as an independent company via a demerger of its equity interest to its shareholders.” They don’t own or control each other in any way or means. They are separate and independent companies. Hence, the claim of GlaxoSmithKline owning Pfizer is false. Claim 3 – Coronavirus was started in the biological laboratory in Wuhan Last year, a group of 27 prominent public health scientists have released a statement denying the conspiracy theories about the origin of coronavirus. “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” reads the statement published in the Lancet. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” it further adds. Even U.S. intelligence agencies and scientists have not found any evidence to support these rumors. Claim – 4 The biological laboratory in Wuhan was funded by Dr. Fauci Dr. Anthony Fauci is the Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). It is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an agency of the US health department. According to a report, NIH had approved a grant of $3.4 million in 2014 to the US company EcoHealth Alliance to study the risk of the future emergence of coronaviruses from bats. Wuhan Institute of Virology was a collaborator on this project. Because of this, EcoHealth distributed $600,000 of that grant to Wuhan lab. Thus, it is misleading to suggest Dr. Fauci funded Wuhan lab. Claim 5 – GlaxoSmithKline and Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) are managed by Black Rock finances BlackRock is an American multinational investment management corporation. It has investments and shares in various companies all over the world. According to Reuters’ data, BlackRock owns 7.5% shares of GSK. Since GSK has 1553 institutional owners and shareholders, it is not accurate to claim GSK is managed by BlackRock. Billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Foundations have been a target of conspiracy theorists since the emergence of coronavirus. Open Society Foundation is the world’s largest private funder of charities and NGOs. There is no evidence available of any possible connection between BlackRock and Soros’ Open Society Foundations. AXA is a French insurance company. It is the world’s largest insurance company. Reuters says, there is no evidence of a connection between Open Society Foundations and AXA. Although, Soros Fund Management owns around 450,000 shares of AXA Equitable Holdings. It is a US-based company partially owned by French AXA. Claim 7 – Soros owns the German company Winterthur Winterthur is a Swiss insurance company. It was not Soros but French AXA owns Winterthur group. AXA had acquired Winterthur in 2006. Claim 8 – Winterthur built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan As mentioned above, Winterthur is a general insurance company. It is not in the construction business. Also, the Wuhan lab was started and operated by the Government of China. Vanguard Group is a US-based investment company. It really does own shares in BlackRock. It is, in fact, a top shareholder of BlackRock with a 7.53% stake. In addition to that, Vanguard is a major shareholder in Pfizer and Microsoft too. Claim 10 – Black Rock is a major shareholder of Microsoft, the property of Bill Gates According to CNN Money data, BlackRock owns a 4.56% stake in Microsoft, making it the second largest shareholder behind the Vanguard group (7.71%). It is not accurate to claim Microsoft as Bill Gates’ property. He had stepped down from the board of the company in 2020. Though Gates had co-founded the company, he only owns 1.36% of shares. According to Investopedia, the top three individual insider shareholders of Microsoft are CEO Satya Nadella, Bradford L. Smith and Jean-Philippe Courtois. Bill Gates and his philanthropic venture Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation do not have any share in Pfizer. Although, the foundation has granted funds to Pfizer to support the development of a Group B streptococcus (GBS) vaccine for developing country access in 2016. Claim 12 – Bill Gates is currently the first sponsor of WHO Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second-largest funder of the World Health Organization. The foundation provided 10.8 % of the WHO’s funds in 2018-19. Thus, it can be concluded that the message is loaded with unverified and baseless claims and false links. We urge our readers not to fall for such rumors and conspiracy theories. Title:Coronavirus Conspiracy: No Connection between GlaxoSmithKline and Wuhan LabFact Check By: Fact Crescendo Team"
            },
            {
                "answer": "“GlaxoSmithKline is (accidentally) managed by the finance division of Black Rock, which (accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA !”",
                "question": "Is GlaxoSmithKline managed by the finance division of Black Rock?",
                "url": "https://www.techarp.com/internet/gsk-covid-19-wuhan-facts/",
                "scraped_text": "Did GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) accidentally make COVID-19 in their Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory? Find out what this new viral claim (pun intended!) is all about, and what the FACTS really are! Claim : GSK “Accidentally” Made COVID-19 In Wuhan Lab! The British multinational pharmaceutical company, GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) is the new COVID-19 villain in town! People are sharing the viral message below about GSK “accidentally” creating COVID-19 on WhatsApp, and promoting them on TikTok : This viral message claims to expose their dastardly links to many of the world’s most evil people – Dr. Anthony Fauci, George Soros and of course, Bill Gates! Check out the viral message below, and read on to find out what the FACTS really are! The masks begin to fall off ! “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!” (the one who makes the vaccine against the virus which (accidentally) started at the Wuhan Biological Lab and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine ! “GlaxoSmithKline is (accidentally) managed by the finance division of Black Rock, which (accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA !” Soros (accidentally) owns the German company Winterthur, which (accidentally) built a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz, which (coincidentally) has Vanguard as a shareholder, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Black Rock, which (coincidentally) controls central banks and manages about a third of global investment capital. “Black Rock” is also (coincidentally) a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, owned by Bill Gates, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which – remember ? sells a miracle vaccine) and (coincidentally) is now the first sponsor of the WHO ! Now you understand how a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the WHOLE PLANET !”” 50 Cent Army “Accidentally” Wrote Fake Story On GSK Making COVID-19? This looks suspiciously like another attempt by China’s 50 Cent Army to divert attention from the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic was a result of a lab leak. Needless to say, this is completely FAKE NEWS, with a plot so convoluted that people won’t bother checking, and will just accept as true. The truth is – EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE is a lie! It is as if the writer was paid by the lie… Interesting! Here are the FACTS! Share them out, so we don’t become the “useful idiots” they think we are! GSK is a pharmaceutical company. They conduct research into, and manufacture, drugs and vaccines. There is no reason for them to operate, much less own, a Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory like the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Almost all BSL-4 facilities are operated by governments or universities, because of the high costs and strict regulations. The two private BSL-4 labs that we know of are operated by the Merial Animal Health in Pirbright, England and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute in Texas, USA. Fact #2 : GSK Does Not Own Wuhan Institute of Virology Most research institutes with BSL-4 laboratories are government-owned and -operated. The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is no different. It is owned and administered by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), which reports to the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. That is why you can see the acronym CAS behind the name Wuhan Institute of Virology emblazoned on the institute’s facade (see picture below). Fact #3 : Wuhan Institute of Virology Was Established In 1956 The WIV was actually established back in 1956 as the Wuhan Microbiology Laboratory, under CAS. It was later renamed as the South China Institute of Microbiology in 1961, the Wuhan Microbiology Institute in 1962, and the Microbiology Institute of Hubei Province in 1970. It finally adopted its current name – the Wuhan Institute of Virology – in June 1978. For context – China did not initiate their economic reforms – the Opening of China – until December 1978. And the privatisation of state-owned industry did not happen until the late 1980s and 1990s. So even history shows that it is IMPOSSIBLE for GSK to own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. GSK and Pfizer are both publicly-listed multinational pharmaceutical companies, which means that they are both owned by their shareholders, not any one particular conglomerate. In any case, the claim that GSK owns Pfizer is ludicrous because GSK is much smaller than Pfizer! With a market capitalisation of about US$95 billion, GSK is much smaller than Pfizer which has a market capitalisation of over US$215 billion! In fact, GSK is only the tenth largest pharmaceutical company, while Pfizer is the largest pharmaceutical company in the world. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) gave the Wuhan Institute of Virology a grant through the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance. The EcoHealth grant partially funded WIV’s research into bat specimens collected from caves in China, to study their potential for infecting humans. This funding was given in the aftermath of the 2002-2004 SARS epidemic, which originated from bats. However, the grant does not involve gain-of-function research by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. BlackRock is the world’s largest asset management company, and they own about 7.5% of GSK shares (as of 29 January 2021). However, BlackRock does not manage GSK, which has its own board (helmed by Jonathan Symonds) and its own management team (helmed by CEO Emma Walmsley). Fact #7 : BlackRock Does Not Manage Open Foundation Company First of all, there is no such thing as the Open Foundation Company. The fake news creator is probably referring to the Open Society Foundations, which was founded by George Soros. Secondly, the Open Society Foundations is completely owned by George Soros, and is currently the world’s largest PRIVATE funder of charities and NGOs. The Open Society Foundations is most certainly NOT managed by BlackRock. It is illogical to make this claim because managing OSF does not allow BlackRock to make a profit for their clients. Fact #8 : Open Society Foundations Does Not Manage AXA AXA is a publicly-listed French multinational insurance company, obviously with their own management team. There is simply no logic (never mind evidence!) in claiming that a private grantmaking group is managing a public-listed company. Fact #10 : Winterthur Was A Swiss Insurance Company First of all, Winterthur is not a German company, as the fake news creator claimed. Winterthur is a Swiss company. Secondly, Winterthur is an insurance company, and thus has no business building laboratories anywhere in the world, much less the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s laboratories. Winterthur was purchased by AXA in 2006, and is today known as AXA Switzerland. It was never owned by George Soros. Fact #12 : Vanguard Is An Investment Management Group The Vanguard Group is a private investment management company, that manages funds provided by their customers. Therefore, it is no surprise that they own shares in Allianz, as well as BlackRock. They basically buy into any company that meets their criteria for profit or indexing. Fact #13 : BlackRock Does Not Control Central Banks Central banks are national institutions that are controlled by their respective governments, with different regulatory powers and structures. There is simply no evidence that even a mega asset management company like Black Rock can control a single central bank, much less central banks all over the world. In fact, BlackRock was hired by the US Federal Reserve in 2020 to help them manage commercial mortgage-backed securities. In other words, they were working under the control of a central bank, not the other way around! Fact #14 : BlackRock Does Not Manage ⅓ Of Global Capital It is true that BlackRock manages A LOT of money globally – US$9 trillion, as of 19 April 2021. However, that is only 9.5% of the global equity market, which grew to US$95 trillion in 2019. No matter how you slice and dice it, BlackRock does not manage ⅓ of the global market capital. Microsoft has been a public-listed company since 1986, so its shareholders are the owners, not Bill Gates. Bill Gates himself ceased to be its largest individual shareholder since 2014. When he stepped down from the Microsoft board in 2020, he only owned 1.3% of Microsoft shares! It is no surprise that Bill Gates is a Pfizer shareholder. Pfizer is a public-listed company, which means ANYONE can purchase Pfizer shares and become a Pfizer shareholder! The World Health Organisation is a United Nations agency, established on 7 April 1948, and funded by UN member countries. Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card! Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL) Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school. He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world. - Is COVID-19 Vaccine Useless Against Delta Variant? - Why You Should NEVER Wear Gloves At Gas / Petrol Station! - Dr. Pierre Kory Gets COVID-19, Despite Taking Ivermectin! - Here’s How Antivaxxers Create Fake News Using VAERS! - Is Pfizer Making Copy Of Ivermectin To Treat COVID-19? - Did Pfizer Buy Up All Production Facilities For Ivermectin? - Did Bill Gates Call For Withdrawal Of COVID-19 Vaccines? If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund."
            },
            {
                "answer": "“Black Rock” is also (coincidentally) a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, owned by Bill Gates, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which – remember ?",
                "question": "What financial connections exist between Pfizer and BlackRock in relation to major shareholders?",
                "url": "https://www.techarp.com/internet/gsk-covid-19-wuhan-facts/",
                "scraped_text": "Did GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) accidentally make COVID-19 in their Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory? Find out what this new viral claim (pun intended!) is all about, and what the FACTS really are! Claim : GSK “Accidentally” Made COVID-19 In Wuhan Lab! The British multinational pharmaceutical company, GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) is the new COVID-19 villain in town! People are sharing the viral message below about GSK “accidentally” creating COVID-19 on WhatsApp, and promoting them on TikTok : This viral message claims to expose their dastardly links to many of the world’s most evil people – Dr. Anthony Fauci, George Soros and of course, Bill Gates! Check out the viral message below, and read on to find out what the FACTS really are! The masks begin to fall off ! “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!” (the one who makes the vaccine against the virus which (accidentally) started at the Wuhan Biological Lab and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine ! “GlaxoSmithKline is (accidentally) managed by the finance division of Black Rock, which (accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA !” Soros (accidentally) owns the German company Winterthur, which (accidentally) built a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz, which (coincidentally) has Vanguard as a shareholder, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Black Rock, which (coincidentally) controls central banks and manages about a third of global investment capital. “Black Rock” is also (coincidentally) a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, owned by Bill Gates, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which – remember ? sells a miracle vaccine) and (coincidentally) is now the first sponsor of the WHO ! Now you understand how a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the WHOLE PLANET !”” 50 Cent Army “Accidentally” Wrote Fake Story On GSK Making COVID-19? This looks suspiciously like another attempt by China’s 50 Cent Army to divert attention from the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic was a result of a lab leak. Needless to say, this is completely FAKE NEWS, with a plot so convoluted that people won’t bother checking, and will just accept as true. The truth is – EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE is a lie! It is as if the writer was paid by the lie… Interesting! Here are the FACTS! Share them out, so we don’t become the “useful idiots” they think we are! GSK is a pharmaceutical company. They conduct research into, and manufacture, drugs and vaccines. There is no reason for them to operate, much less own, a Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory like the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Almost all BSL-4 facilities are operated by governments or universities, because of the high costs and strict regulations. The two private BSL-4 labs that we know of are operated by the Merial Animal Health in Pirbright, England and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute in Texas, USA. Fact #2 : GSK Does Not Own Wuhan Institute of Virology Most research institutes with BSL-4 laboratories are government-owned and -operated. The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is no different. It is owned and administered by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), which reports to the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. That is why you can see the acronym CAS behind the name Wuhan Institute of Virology emblazoned on the institute’s facade (see picture below). Fact #3 : Wuhan Institute of Virology Was Established In 1956 The WIV was actually established back in 1956 as the Wuhan Microbiology Laboratory, under CAS. It was later renamed as the South China Institute of Microbiology in 1961, the Wuhan Microbiology Institute in 1962, and the Microbiology Institute of Hubei Province in 1970. It finally adopted its current name – the Wuhan Institute of Virology – in June 1978. For context – China did not initiate their economic reforms – the Opening of China – until December 1978. And the privatisation of state-owned industry did not happen until the late 1980s and 1990s. So even history shows that it is IMPOSSIBLE for GSK to own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. GSK and Pfizer are both publicly-listed multinational pharmaceutical companies, which means that they are both owned by their shareholders, not any one particular conglomerate. In any case, the claim that GSK owns Pfizer is ludicrous because GSK is much smaller than Pfizer! With a market capitalisation of about US$95 billion, GSK is much smaller than Pfizer which has a market capitalisation of over US$215 billion! In fact, GSK is only the tenth largest pharmaceutical company, while Pfizer is the largest pharmaceutical company in the world. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) gave the Wuhan Institute of Virology a grant through the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance. The EcoHealth grant partially funded WIV’s research into bat specimens collected from caves in China, to study their potential for infecting humans. This funding was given in the aftermath of the 2002-2004 SARS epidemic, which originated from bats. However, the grant does not involve gain-of-function research by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. BlackRock is the world’s largest asset management company, and they own about 7.5% of GSK shares (as of 29 January 2021). However, BlackRock does not manage GSK, which has its own board (helmed by Jonathan Symonds) and its own management team (helmed by CEO Emma Walmsley). Fact #7 : BlackRock Does Not Manage Open Foundation Company First of all, there is no such thing as the Open Foundation Company. The fake news creator is probably referring to the Open Society Foundations, which was founded by George Soros. Secondly, the Open Society Foundations is completely owned by George Soros, and is currently the world’s largest PRIVATE funder of charities and NGOs. The Open Society Foundations is most certainly NOT managed by BlackRock. It is illogical to make this claim because managing OSF does not allow BlackRock to make a profit for their clients. Fact #8 : Open Society Foundations Does Not Manage AXA AXA is a publicly-listed French multinational insurance company, obviously with their own management team. There is simply no logic (never mind evidence!) in claiming that a private grantmaking group is managing a public-listed company. Fact #10 : Winterthur Was A Swiss Insurance Company First of all, Winterthur is not a German company, as the fake news creator claimed. Winterthur is a Swiss company. Secondly, Winterthur is an insurance company, and thus has no business building laboratories anywhere in the world, much less the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s laboratories. Winterthur was purchased by AXA in 2006, and is today known as AXA Switzerland. It was never owned by George Soros. Fact #12 : Vanguard Is An Investment Management Group The Vanguard Group is a private investment management company, that manages funds provided by their customers. Therefore, it is no surprise that they own shares in Allianz, as well as BlackRock. They basically buy into any company that meets their criteria for profit or indexing. Fact #13 : BlackRock Does Not Control Central Banks Central banks are national institutions that are controlled by their respective governments, with different regulatory powers and structures. There is simply no evidence that even a mega asset management company like Black Rock can control a single central bank, much less central banks all over the world. In fact, BlackRock was hired by the US Federal Reserve in 2020 to help them manage commercial mortgage-backed securities. In other words, they were working under the control of a central bank, not the other way around! Fact #14 : BlackRock Does Not Manage ⅓ Of Global Capital It is true that BlackRock manages A LOT of money globally – US$9 trillion, as of 19 April 2021. However, that is only 9.5% of the global equity market, which grew to US$95 trillion in 2019. No matter how you slice and dice it, BlackRock does not manage ⅓ of the global market capital. Microsoft has been a public-listed company since 1986, so its shareholders are the owners, not Bill Gates. Bill Gates himself ceased to be its largest individual shareholder since 2014. When he stepped down from the Microsoft board in 2020, he only owned 1.3% of Microsoft shares! It is no surprise that Bill Gates is a Pfizer shareholder. Pfizer is a public-listed company, which means ANYONE can purchase Pfizer shares and become a Pfizer shareholder! The World Health Organisation is a United Nations agency, established on 7 April 1948, and funded by UN member countries. Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card! Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL) Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school. He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world. - Is COVID-19 Vaccine Useless Against Delta Variant? - Why You Should NEVER Wear Gloves At Gas / Petrol Station! - Dr. Pierre Kory Gets COVID-19, Despite Taking Ivermectin! - Here’s How Antivaxxers Create Fake News Using VAERS! - Is Pfizer Making Copy Of Ivermectin To Treat COVID-19? - Did Pfizer Buy Up All Production Facilities For Ivermectin? - Did Bill Gates Call For Withdrawal Of COVID-19 Vaccines? If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund."
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Refuted"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 4,
        "claim": "The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "“The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads.",
                "question": "Is the claim that the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo verified?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by chance, owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!)",
                "question": "Is the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan owned by Glaxo?",
                "url": "https://www.boatos.org/english/wuhan-lab-is-owned-of-glaxo-pfizer-soros-gates.html",
                "scraped_text": "Rumor – Facts list shows that the Wuhan Laboratory is owned by Glaxo, Pfizer, has connections with foreign companies and receives money from George Soros and Bill Gates. In more than ten months of the pandemic, conspiracy theories related to the new coronavirus have not been lacking. Even without, at least for the time being, knowing who was responsible (if any) for the emergence of the virus, many people are ready to “point out their fingers”. In one of these stories, a text makes correlations between the biological laboratory in Wuhan (China), pharmaceutical companies (such as Pfizer, responsible for one of the vaccines against Covid-19) and names like George Soros and Bill Gates. The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by chance, owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, incidentally, is administered by the Black Rock’s finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION), which, by chance, meets the French AXA! Vídeo: é falso que EUA vai acabar com Dólar em papel em 2024 Coincidentally, he owns the German company Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! Accidentally purchased by the German Allianz. Which, incidentally, has Vanguard as a shareholder. Who is a shareholder of Black Rock. It controls central banks and manages about ONE-THIRD of global investment capital. Who, incidentally, is one of the main shareholders of MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! If it is not clear enough why a bat came in and grabbed the SNAKE and the ENTIRE PLANET became infected, I can continue! But please DON’T MASSIVELY DISTRIBUTE my post! And don’t even let me continue! Because I’m just a “CONSPIRATOR spreading fake news!” Wuhan’s laboratory is owned of Glaxo, Pfizer and receives money from Soros and Gates? As you can see, the end of the message has the following excerpt: “I am just a conspirator spreading false news”. This is true because the correlations in question are not real. For you to understand, let’s divide the fakes by topics: Fake # 1: Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo It is not true that Wuhan’s laboratory is owned by the company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). The Wuhan Institute of Virology is actually run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which, for its part, is from the government of China. It is not true that GSK owns Pfizer. As this AFP denial in Spanish (which, in turn, cites CNN Money) points out , Pfizer is commanded by the Vaguard Group and GSK does not appear among the group’s shareholders. Fake # 3: Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION) Which, incidentally, meets the French AXA! George Soros’ foundation does not own the French company AXA (an insurance company). AFP itself pointed out that the company is not listed among beneficiaries of the Open Society Foundations. Fake # 4: Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! The purpose of the link between Soros and AXA is on the premise that Winterthur (which belongs to AXA) was responsible for building the Wuhan laboratory. Again, the correlation is wrong. As we said before, the Wuhan Institute of Virology has no foreign participation in the administration. 5) MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! Finally, the old story that tries to link Gates to Pfizer. We already mentioned here on Boatos.org that the owner of Microsoft is not a “shareholder” in Pfizer. Although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated money to the company, they are not as shareholders. It is also not true that Gates is the main sponsor of WHO. According to the World Health Organization website, the largest donor by the end of the third quarter of 2020 was the government of Germany. In short: although the conspiracy theory has spread widely on the internet, most of the correlations it presents are false. In other words: if this is the explanation of the origin of Covid-19, it is better to look for another one. This is an english version from this text. If you would like to read in portuguese, click here."
            },
            {
                "answer": "“The Wuhan biological laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer (which makes the vaccine against the virus that was initiated (accidentally) at the Wuhan Biological Laboratory and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine.\"",
                "question": "Is the Wuhan biological laboratory owned by GlaxoSmithKline?",
                "url": "https://www.verificat.cat/en/gsk-does-not-own-pfizer-and-or-the-wuhan-biological-laboratory/",
                "scraped_text": "GSK does not own Pfizer and or the Wuhan biological laboratory You have sent us an Instagram message with these and other misleading and false relation. You have sent us an Instagram message claiming that “the Wuhan biological laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline [GSK], which owns Pfizer”. It also affirms that such a laboratory has been funded by the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci. These relations are MISLEADING and FALSE. The pharmaceutical company GSK does not own the Wuhan virology laboratory, nor does it own Pfizer Pharmaceuticals. There is also no evidence that Anthony Fauci has individually funded these facilities, although the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), under which his department falls, has funded an organisation that in turn has invested in a coronavirus research project being conducted in Wuhan, among other centres. “The Wuhan biological laboratory is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer (which makes the vaccine against the virus that was initiated (accidentally) at the Wuhan Biological Laboratory and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine.\" The message that circulates on Instagram contains basic errors, such as there exists a center known as the Wuhan Biological Laboratory in Wuhan. In any case, if the message made reference to the laboratory where coronaviruses are investigated in Wuhan, it would be the Wuhan Institute of Virology Institute (WIV). It is a center that has been subject of several unsubstantiated theories since the pandemic began. The laboratory is controlled by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) of the Chinese government. To date, there is no known relationship between this center and GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a UK-based pharmaceutical company which, among other things, is involved in the development of a covid-19 vaccine that has not yet been approved in any country. The relationship between GSK and the institute is non-existent, as has already been explained by verification agencies such as Reuters or Snopes. The lab also does not appear in the list of activities of GSK in China. The relationship between Pfizer and GSK is also fictitious, beyond the creation of a joint venture to produce over-the-counter drugs in 2018, as they point out in a press release in August 2019 . However, this does not mean that GSK owns Pfizer, which, in fact, is a publicly traded company whose major shareholders do not include Pfizer. Concerning the funding of the laboratory, there is no evidence that Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the USA, has donated to the facility in any particular way. It is true that the National Institutes of Health (NIH), of which the center Fauci directs is a part, transferred $3.4 million to the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance Inc. to fund a project to understand the emergence of coronaviruses in bats, the NIH confirmed to Reuters. This money went to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but also to East China Normal University (Shanghai), the Institute of Pathogen Biology (Beijing) and Duke-NUS Medical School (Singapore). Neither the Open Society Foundations, nor AXA nor Winterthur The message also claims that “GlaxoSmithKline is administered by the finance division of BlackRock, which administers the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which is managed by the French AXA”. This is FALSE: neither GlaxoSmithKline is managed by BlackRock, nor does this investment fund control the Open Foundation Company, a foundation that does not exist. The foundation owned by billionaire George Soros is called the Open Society Foundations. \"GlaxoSmithKline* is (accidentally) managed by the financial division of Black Rock, which *(accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA*.\" The BlackRock organisation is a fund manager that can be both from the government and individual savers. According to the instagram post, BlackRock manages GSK. While it is true that BlackRock owns 7,5% of GSK shares, according to the financial research website Fintel, it does not manage the pharmaceutical company. What is false is that BlackRock manages Open Society Foundations (OSF), an organisation focused on funding projects from benefic organisations. There is no link between Open Society Foundations and BlackRock, although there is a link between the latter and Soros: the tycoon is chairman of an investment fund, called Soros Fund Management, which in the past did hold shares in BlackRock. They were subsequently sold in 2020 (in 2021 they do not appear on the list of holdings either). The alleged connection between the Open Society Foundations and \"French AXA\" that the message talks about is also false. There is no evidence of a link between the two organisations, but there is a link between the Soros Fund Management and AXA, albeit through AXA Equitable Holdings, which is a US-based company that partially owns the French company AXA. According to Fintel, the tycoon's foundation owns more than 450,000 shares. Finally, the message claims that Soros owns the German insurance company Winterthur and that this company built the laboratory in Wuhan. “Soros (accidentally) owns the German enterprise Winterthur, which (accidentally) built the laboratory in Wuhan* and was bought by the German company Allianz.\" Winterthur was bought in 2006, not by Allianz, but by the insurer AXA. Nor is it true that Soros owns Allianz, although he is a shareholder, through Soros Fund Management, in AXA Equitable Holdings, which is a US-based company partly owned by the French company AXA. The part of the message that is true is the one linking Vanguard – the world's largest mutual fund manager – to BlackRock, as this organisation is one of its largest shareholders. Vanguard is also one of the largest shareholders of the world's largest financial institutions, such as Citigroup or JPMorgan."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Rumor – Facts list shows that the Wuhan Laboratory is owned by Glaxo, Pfizer, has connections with foreign companies and receives money from George Soros and Bill Gates.",
                "question": "Is the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan owned by Glaxo?",
                "url": "https://www.boatos.org/english/wuhan-lab-is-owned-of-glaxo-pfizer-soros-gates.html",
                "scraped_text": "Rumor – Facts list shows that the Wuhan Laboratory is owned by Glaxo, Pfizer, has connections with foreign companies and receives money from George Soros and Bill Gates. In more than ten months of the pandemic, conspiracy theories related to the new coronavirus have not been lacking. Even without, at least for the time being, knowing who was responsible (if any) for the emergence of the virus, many people are ready to “point out their fingers”. In one of these stories, a text makes correlations between the biological laboratory in Wuhan (China), pharmaceutical companies (such as Pfizer, responsible for one of the vaccines against Covid-19) and names like George Soros and Bill Gates. The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by chance, owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, incidentally, is administered by the Black Rock’s finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION), which, by chance, meets the French AXA! Vídeo: é falso que EUA vai acabar com Dólar em papel em 2024 Coincidentally, he owns the German company Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! Accidentally purchased by the German Allianz. Which, incidentally, has Vanguard as a shareholder. Who is a shareholder of Black Rock. It controls central banks and manages about ONE-THIRD of global investment capital. Who, incidentally, is one of the main shareholders of MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! If it is not clear enough why a bat came in and grabbed the SNAKE and the ENTIRE PLANET became infected, I can continue! But please DON’T MASSIVELY DISTRIBUTE my post! And don’t even let me continue! Because I’m just a “CONSPIRATOR spreading fake news!” Wuhan’s laboratory is owned of Glaxo, Pfizer and receives money from Soros and Gates? As you can see, the end of the message has the following excerpt: “I am just a conspirator spreading false news”. This is true because the correlations in question are not real. For you to understand, let’s divide the fakes by topics: Fake # 1: Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo It is not true that Wuhan’s laboratory is owned by the company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). The Wuhan Institute of Virology is actually run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which, for its part, is from the government of China. It is not true that GSK owns Pfizer. As this AFP denial in Spanish (which, in turn, cites CNN Money) points out , Pfizer is commanded by the Vaguard Group and GSK does not appear among the group’s shareholders. Fake # 3: Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION) Which, incidentally, meets the French AXA! George Soros’ foundation does not own the French company AXA (an insurance company). AFP itself pointed out that the company is not listed among beneficiaries of the Open Society Foundations. Fake # 4: Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! The purpose of the link between Soros and AXA is on the premise that Winterthur (which belongs to AXA) was responsible for building the Wuhan laboratory. Again, the correlation is wrong. As we said before, the Wuhan Institute of Virology has no foreign participation in the administration. 5) MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! Finally, the old story that tries to link Gates to Pfizer. We already mentioned here on Boatos.org that the owner of Microsoft is not a “shareholder” in Pfizer. Although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated money to the company, they are not as shareholders. It is also not true that Gates is the main sponsor of WHO. According to the World Health Organization website, the largest donor by the end of the third quarter of 2020 was the government of Germany. In short: although the conspiracy theory has spread widely on the internet, most of the correlations it presents are false. In other words: if this is the explanation of the origin of Covid-19, it is better to look for another one. This is an english version from this text. If you would like to read in portuguese, click here."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The post, which has been shared over 1,100 times, claims that the lab in Wuhan is owned by pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which supposedly owns Pfizer, the first drug company to receive emergency authorization for a COVID-19 vaccine.",
                "question": "Is the Wuhan biological laboratory owned by GlaxoSmithKline, and does that company own Pfizer?",
                "url": "https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/12/30/fact-check-wuhan-lab-vaccine-research-affiliates-not-linked/4086363001/",
                "scraped_text": "Fact check: False connections drawn between Wuhan lab, vaccine research affiliates The claim: A series of links exists between Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies, figures central to development of COVID-19 vaccine As COVID-19 vaccines begin to roll out, some have questioned their safety and efficacy. Going further, a post on social media claims that the vaccines can be tied to a suspicious lineup of invested parties. A Facebook post claims that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research center in the Chinese city where the coronavirus emerged, can be linked to a number of individuals and pharmaceutical companies involved in researching the COVID-19 vaccine. Conspiracy theorists have claimed, without evidence, that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was manufactured there. The post, which has been shared over 1,100 times, claims that the lab in Wuhan is owned by pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which supposedly owns Pfizer, the first drug company to receive emergency authorization for a COVID-19 vaccine. The purported connections further spiral, eventually suggesting the involvement of billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The post's creator did not respond to USA TODAY's request for comment. More: Fact check: What's true and what's false about the COVID-19 vaccine The claim starts to fall apart in its first sentence. The post alleges that the \"Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan,\" likely the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is owned by GlaxoSmithKline. It then tumbles into a series of claims about ownership and financing based on that original relationship — which doesn't exist. The full name of the institute, which studies viral diseases, is Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, according to its website. It's controlled by China's State Council, one of the country's main government bodies. In a 2019 open letter to the science journal Nature, a CAS representative wrote that the academy has never achieved financial independence from China. Half of its income comes directly from the government, and the rest comes from \"competitive funding or technology transfer,\" according to the letter. \"CAS is not run independently of government ... The establishment and development of CAS have been entirely based on the wisdom and support of the central government,\" the letter reads. Fact check: Post of Maryland lab photo misidentifies visitor, makes false Moderna claim Without the original tie linking the Wuhan lab to Glaxo, the claim's intended revelation is rendered meaningless. Still, there are a number of other misrepresentations in the post worth noting. Firstly, British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline doesn't own Pfizer. Pfizer was incorporated in New Jersey in 1900, originally dividing its $2 million of authorized capital into 20,000 shares as a privately held company, its website says. But in 1942, the pharmaceutical company offered 240,000 shares of new common stock to the public; now the company has roughly 69% public ownership. Fact check: Bell's palsy among COVID-19 trial participants likely unrelated to Pfizer vaccine GSK and Pfizer embarked on a joint venture in 2018, aiming to combine their consumer health care units to allow each company to focus on prescription medicines. But that venture doesn't involve merging or swapping ownership. The post also brings investment firm BlackRock into the fold, claiming it \"manages\" both Pfizer and the \"Open Foundation Company,\" referring to, albeit misnaming, billionaire George Soros' Open Society Foundations. Soros often plays the central role in baseless conspiracy theories, most recently surrounding the pandemic and vaccination against COVID-19. A search of both Soros' Open Society Foundation's and BlackRock's websites found no indication the two are tied. BlackRock does hold about 414.7 million shares in Pfizer, reporting in February that it held 7.7% ownership in the pharmaceutical company. Fact check: Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO both plan to take COVID-19 vaccine The Vanguard Group, however, is Pfizer's largest shareholder, and the post claims its ties to both BlackRock and Microsoft, which Bill Gates co-founded in 1975, are nefarious. Like Soros, Gates is also commonly pulled into unfounded conspiracy theories about the pandemic. It's true that Vanguard holds shares in BlackRock, Pfizer and Microsoft. But two decades after Gates' departure from the company as its CEO, his ties to Microsoft are loose. Gates holds just 1.36% of shares in Microsoft, CNBC reported in March, shortly after Gates left the company's board. Fact check: Improper use of COVID-19 test gives false positive for Coca-Cola We rate the claim that a series of links exist between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies and figures central to development of a COVID-19 vaccine as FALSE because it was not supported by our research. The primary claim, which sets off the series of links, that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is owned by GlaxoSmithKline is false. That renders the following purported connections meaningless, and many of them are false independently, as well. - Wuhan Institute of Virology, retrieved Dec. 30, About WIV - China State Council, Aug. 28, 2014, State Council Organization Chart - Nature, Oct. 22, 2019, The Chinese Academy of Sciences responds: we are with the government and with the people - Nasdaq, Pfizer Inc. Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - Wall Street Journal, Dec. 19, 2018, Pfizer, Glaxo to Create Over-the-Counter Drug Giant - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"blackrock\" site:https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"open society foundation\" site:https://www.blackrock.com - Nasdaq, Microsoft Corporation Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Dec. 31, 2019, Pfizer SC 136/A - CNBC, March 13, Bill Gates leaves Microsoft board Thank you for supporting our journalism. You can subscribe to our print edition, ad-free app, or electronic newspaper replica here. Our fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook."
            },
            {
                "answer": "This tweet reads: \"The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by cnance [sic], owns Pfizer!",
                "question": "What is the ownership status of the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan according to the claim?",
                "url": "https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/does-glaxo-own-the-wuhan-lab/",
                "scraped_text": "In November 2020, as news broke that a vaccination for COVID-19 was being prepared for distribution, a rumor started circulating on social media that the pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline owned a laboratory in Wuhan, China -- the Wuhan Institute of Virology -- where conspiracy theorists falsely maintain the COVID-19 pandemic originated. This rumor, which reads like a game of six-degrees of separation, attempts to trace a line from GlaxoSmithKline, to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, to the pharmaceutical company Pfizer, to billionaire philanthropist and frequent right-wing boogeyman George Soros, and, in some iterations of this rumor, to Microsoft CEO Bill Gates. Here's one version of the rumor that was posted to Twitter: This tweet reads: \"The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by cnance [sic], owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, by chance, is managed by Black Rock finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!\" This nonsensical game of connect the dots starts with a false assertion. The pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline does not own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The Wuhan Institute of Virology — a research lab in China that has been the center of conspiracy theories since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic — is operated by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and is funded, in large part, by the Chinese government. It is not owned by GlaxoSmithKline or any other private company. \"Over the past 40 years, half of its income has come directly from central-government investment; the rest has been from competitive funding or technology transfer. CAS could not develop without the funding and support of the central government.\" It's also false to say that GlaxoSmithKline owns the pharmaceutical company Pfizer. While these two companies share some common interests — in 2018, they announced a joint venture that combined their consumer health businesses — they remain two distinct companies. Pfizer Inc. and GlaxoSmithKline PLC plan to combine their consumer health-care units and eventually spin off the joint venture, creating the world’s largest seller of drugstore staples like Advil and Sensodyne toothpaste. The deal, announced Wednesday, will free up both companies to concentrate on prescription medicines, which tend to be more profitable if also higher risk. The joint venture represents an unexpected conclusion to a yearlong process by Pfizer to shed its consumer business, as it and other pharmaceutical companies focus on higher-margin prescription drugs. While Glaxo has shared that focus, the British drugmaker had remained committed to its consumer business, which its chief executive led before her promotion to the top job last year. This joint venture, however, did not involve one company buying the other. This rumor appears to have been created with the intent of stirring up confusion and skepticism over the COVID-19 vaccine by connecting pharmaceutical companies to a laboratory in Wuhan, China . GlaxoSmithKline, however, does not own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Furthermore, claims that COVID-19 was \"manufactured,\" or that it \"escaped from\" this Chinese lab, are nothing more than baseless conspiracy theories."
            },
            {
                "answer": "And so the cookie starts to crumble... Daylight killers... The masks begin to fall off! \"The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxosmithkline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!\"",
                "question": "Is the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan owned by GlaxoSmithKline?",
                "url": "https://www.linkedin.com/posts/williamhgates_virologist-ruth-bishop-pioneered-the-research-activity-6774782349759537152-8-EH",
                "scraped_text": "Virologist Ruth Bishop pioneered the research that led to the discovery of rotavirus. Her legacy continues both as a role model for other researchers and in the millions of children’s lives that have been saved because of her heroic work: http://gatesnot.es/2PJXaTs Melinda and Bill Gates ! Super People in The World ! And so the cookie starts to crumble... Daylight killers... The masks begin to fall off! \"The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxosmithkline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!\" (the one who makes the vaccine against the virus which was (accidentally) started at the Wuhan Biological Lab and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine! \"GlaxoSmithKline is (accidentally) managed by the finance division of Black Rock, which (accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA! \"Soros (accidentally) owns the German company Winterthur, which (accidentally) built a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz, which (coincidentally) has Vanguard as a shareholder, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Black Rock,\" which (coincidentally) controls central banks and manages about a third of global investment capital. \"Black Rock\" is also (coincidentally) a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, owned by Bill Gates, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which - remember? Sells a miracle vaccine) and (coincidentally) is now the first sponsor of the 'WHO! Now you understand how a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the WHOLE PLANET! Great work by Ruth Bishop, Lot of Respect and salute جهد مشكور لهذه العالمة التي انقذت اطفال العالم فلها كامل التقدير والاحترام such an amazing job, Thank you so much Ruth Love you Jakub Am a operator Excavator or other machine at Working in a mining company Bua cement group PLC2y Hi am kufre form Nigeria sir I would like you to give me a helping hand so as to move my skills ahead from this country Nigeria I will be very happy to hear from you sir"
            },
            {
                "answer": "The masks begin to fall off ! “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!”",
                "question": "What is the ownership structure of the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan and its relation to GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer?",
                "url": "https://www.techarp.com/internet/gsk-covid-19-wuhan-facts/",
                "scraped_text": "Did GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) accidentally make COVID-19 in their Wuhan Institute of Virology laboratory? Find out what this new viral claim (pun intended!) is all about, and what the FACTS really are! Claim : GSK “Accidentally” Made COVID-19 In Wuhan Lab! The British multinational pharmaceutical company, GSK (GlaxoSmithKline) is the new COVID-19 villain in town! People are sharing the viral message below about GSK “accidentally” creating COVID-19 on WhatsApp, and promoting them on TikTok : This viral message claims to expose their dastardly links to many of the world’s most evil people – Dr. Anthony Fauci, George Soros and of course, Bill Gates! Check out the viral message below, and read on to find out what the FACTS really are! The masks begin to fall off ! “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which (accidentally) owns Pfizer!” (the one who makes the vaccine against the virus which (accidentally) started at the Wuhan Biological Lab and which was (accidentally) funded by Dr. Fauci, who (accidentally) promotes the vaccine ! “GlaxoSmithKline is (accidentally) managed by the finance division of Black Rock, which (accidentally) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation), which (accidentally) manages the French AXA !” Soros (accidentally) owns the German company Winterthur, which (accidentally) built a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz, which (coincidentally) has Vanguard as a shareholder, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Black Rock, which (coincidentally) controls central banks and manages about a third of global investment capital. “Black Rock” is also (coincidentally) a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, owned by Bill Gates, who (coincidentally) is a shareholder of Pfizer (which – remember ? sells a miracle vaccine) and (coincidentally) is now the first sponsor of the WHO ! Now you understand how a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the WHOLE PLANET !”” 50 Cent Army “Accidentally” Wrote Fake Story On GSK Making COVID-19? This looks suspiciously like another attempt by China’s 50 Cent Army to divert attention from the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic was a result of a lab leak. Needless to say, this is completely FAKE NEWS, with a plot so convoluted that people won’t bother checking, and will just accept as true. The truth is – EVERY SINGLE SENTENCE is a lie! It is as if the writer was paid by the lie… Interesting! Here are the FACTS! Share them out, so we don’t become the “useful idiots” they think we are! GSK is a pharmaceutical company. They conduct research into, and manufacture, drugs and vaccines. There is no reason for them to operate, much less own, a Biosafety Level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory like the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Almost all BSL-4 facilities are operated by governments or universities, because of the high costs and strict regulations. The two private BSL-4 labs that we know of are operated by the Merial Animal Health in Pirbright, England and the Texas Biomedical Research Institute in Texas, USA. Fact #2 : GSK Does Not Own Wuhan Institute of Virology Most research institutes with BSL-4 laboratories are government-owned and -operated. The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) is no different. It is owned and administered by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), which reports to the State Council of the People’s Republic of China. That is why you can see the acronym CAS behind the name Wuhan Institute of Virology emblazoned on the institute’s facade (see picture below). Fact #3 : Wuhan Institute of Virology Was Established In 1956 The WIV was actually established back in 1956 as the Wuhan Microbiology Laboratory, under CAS. It was later renamed as the South China Institute of Microbiology in 1961, the Wuhan Microbiology Institute in 1962, and the Microbiology Institute of Hubei Province in 1970. It finally adopted its current name – the Wuhan Institute of Virology – in June 1978. For context – China did not initiate their economic reforms – the Opening of China – until December 1978. And the privatisation of state-owned industry did not happen until the late 1980s and 1990s. So even history shows that it is IMPOSSIBLE for GSK to own the Wuhan Institute of Virology. GSK and Pfizer are both publicly-listed multinational pharmaceutical companies, which means that they are both owned by their shareholders, not any one particular conglomerate. In any case, the claim that GSK owns Pfizer is ludicrous because GSK is much smaller than Pfizer! With a market capitalisation of about US$95 billion, GSK is much smaller than Pfizer which has a market capitalisation of over US$215 billion! In fact, GSK is only the tenth largest pharmaceutical company, while Pfizer is the largest pharmaceutical company in the world. The US National Institutes of Health (NIH) gave the Wuhan Institute of Virology a grant through the non-profit EcoHealth Alliance. The EcoHealth grant partially funded WIV’s research into bat specimens collected from caves in China, to study their potential for infecting humans. This funding was given in the aftermath of the 2002-2004 SARS epidemic, which originated from bats. However, the grant does not involve gain-of-function research by the Wuhan Institute of Virology. BlackRock is the world’s largest asset management company, and they own about 7.5% of GSK shares (as of 29 January 2021). However, BlackRock does not manage GSK, which has its own board (helmed by Jonathan Symonds) and its own management team (helmed by CEO Emma Walmsley). Fact #7 : BlackRock Does Not Manage Open Foundation Company First of all, there is no such thing as the Open Foundation Company. The fake news creator is probably referring to the Open Society Foundations, which was founded by George Soros. Secondly, the Open Society Foundations is completely owned by George Soros, and is currently the world’s largest PRIVATE funder of charities and NGOs. The Open Society Foundations is most certainly NOT managed by BlackRock. It is illogical to make this claim because managing OSF does not allow BlackRock to make a profit for their clients. Fact #8 : Open Society Foundations Does Not Manage AXA AXA is a publicly-listed French multinational insurance company, obviously with their own management team. There is simply no logic (never mind evidence!) in claiming that a private grantmaking group is managing a public-listed company. Fact #10 : Winterthur Was A Swiss Insurance Company First of all, Winterthur is not a German company, as the fake news creator claimed. Winterthur is a Swiss company. Secondly, Winterthur is an insurance company, and thus has no business building laboratories anywhere in the world, much less the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s laboratories. Winterthur was purchased by AXA in 2006, and is today known as AXA Switzerland. It was never owned by George Soros. Fact #12 : Vanguard Is An Investment Management Group The Vanguard Group is a private investment management company, that manages funds provided by their customers. Therefore, it is no surprise that they own shares in Allianz, as well as BlackRock. They basically buy into any company that meets their criteria for profit or indexing. Fact #13 : BlackRock Does Not Control Central Banks Central banks are national institutions that are controlled by their respective governments, with different regulatory powers and structures. There is simply no evidence that even a mega asset management company like Black Rock can control a single central bank, much less central banks all over the world. In fact, BlackRock was hired by the US Federal Reserve in 2020 to help them manage commercial mortgage-backed securities. In other words, they were working under the control of a central bank, not the other way around! Fact #14 : BlackRock Does Not Manage ⅓ Of Global Capital It is true that BlackRock manages A LOT of money globally – US$9 trillion, as of 19 April 2021. However, that is only 9.5% of the global equity market, which grew to US$95 trillion in 2019. No matter how you slice and dice it, BlackRock does not manage ⅓ of the global market capital. Microsoft has been a public-listed company since 1986, so its shareholders are the owners, not Bill Gates. Bill Gates himself ceased to be its largest individual shareholder since 2014. When he stepped down from the Microsoft board in 2020, he only owned 1.3% of Microsoft shares! It is no surprise that Bill Gates is a Pfizer shareholder. Pfizer is a public-listed company, which means ANYONE can purchase Pfizer shares and become a Pfizer shareholder! The World Health Organisation is a United Nations agency, established on 7 April 1948, and funded by UN member countries. Support my work through a bank transfer / PayPal / credit card! Bank Transfer : CIMB 7064555917 (Swift Code : CIBBMYKL) Dr. Adrian Wong has been writing about tech and science since 1997, even publishing a book with Prentice Hall called Breaking Through The BIOS Barrier (ISBN 978-0131455368) while in medical school. He continues to devote countless hours every day writing about tech, medicine and science, in his pursuit of facts in a post-truth world. - Is COVID-19 Vaccine Useless Against Delta Variant? - Why You Should NEVER Wear Gloves At Gas / Petrol Station! - Dr. Pierre Kory Gets COVID-19, Despite Taking Ivermectin! - Here’s How Antivaxxers Create Fake News Using VAERS! - Is Pfizer Making Copy Of Ivermectin To Treat COVID-19? - Did Pfizer Buy Up All Production Facilities For Ivermectin? - Did Bill Gates Call For Withdrawal Of COVID-19 Vaccines? If you like our work, you can help support us by visiting our sponsors, participating in the Tech ARP Forums, or even donating to our fund."
            },
            {
                "answer": "SHARE FAR AND WIDE The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxosmithkline who ( by coincidence) owns Pfizer!",
                "question": "Is the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan owned by GlaxoSmithKline, which also owns Pfizer?",
                "url": "http://fergusfalls-chiropratic.com/helpfullinks",
                "scraped_text": "Covid Chronicles Movie: Click here ONLY if you Want the truth Free Health Evaluation Tool at Advanced Medicine Nobel Prize Winning Virologist Video Frontline Doctors https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/therapies/antiviral-therapy/table--characteristics-of-antiviral-agents/ https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/tables/table-2e/ https://covid19criticalcare.com/ivermectin-in-covid-19/how-to-get-ivermectin/ SHARE FAR AND WIDE The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxosmithkline who ( by coincidence) owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine for the virus that ( by coincidence) started in the biological laboratory in Wuhan, which ( by coincidence) was funded by Dr. Fauci who is ( by coincidence) promoting the vaccine!) GlaxoSmithKline ( by coincidence) is managed by Black Rock finances who ( by coincidence) manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) which ( by coincidence) serves the French AXA! By coincidence Soros owns the German company Winterthur which ( by coincidence) built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan and was bought by the German Allianz which ( by coincidence) has Vanguard as a shareholder which ( by coincidence) is a shareholder of Black Rock, which ( by coincidence) controls the central banks and manages about one third of the global investment capital. Black Rock ( by coincidence) is also a major shareholder of MICROSOFT, the property of Bill Gates, who ( by coincidence) is a shareholder of Pfizer (selling the miracle Vaccine) and ( by coincidence) is currently the first sponsor of WHO ?.."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Claim 1 – Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline",
                "question": "Is the Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan owned by GlaxoSmithKline?",
                "url": "https://srilanka.factcrescendo.com/english/a-false-message-claims-there-is-a-coronavirus-conspiracy-between-glaxosmithkline-and-wuhan-lab/",
                "scraped_text": "A viral message propagates a false conspiracy theory suggesting a nexus between Wuhan lab and major global pharmaceutical companies that caused in the Covid-19 pandemic. The message ultimately puts forward a convoluted claim that the coronavirus was created in China with the help of vaccine makers with the intension to make profits. Fact Crescendo received many fact-check requests about this message on our WhatsApp Factline. We will fact-check all the claims made in this message one by one. Claim 1 – Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline The official name of this biological laboratory is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It was established in 1958. It is a largely state-funded lab, which is under the control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), a part of the Government of China. In a letter published in Nature magazine in 2019, it is mentioned that “CAS has never sought or achieved financial autonomy. Over the past 40 years, half of its income has come directly from central-government investment. CAS could not develop without the funding and support of the central government.” This clarifies that a private foreign company like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) does not own or control Wuhan Lab. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is a British pharmaceutical company. Pfizer is an American multinational pharmaceutical corporation. Pfizer is 69% owned by institutional shareholders. Among them, The Vanguard Group owns the highest shares (7.67%). CNN Money has published the list of top 10 owners of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline does not feature on the list of Pfizer shareholders. In 2018, Pfizer and GSK entered into a joint venture to create a premier global consumer healthcare company. However, that partnership ended in 2019. The statement of closure of the partnership states, “GSK intends to separate the joint venture as an independent company via a demerger of its equity interest to its shareholders.” They don’t own or control each other in any way or means. They are separate and independent companies. Hence, the claim of GlaxoSmithKline owning Pfizer is false. Claim 3 – Coronavirus was started in the biological laboratory in Wuhan Last year, a group of 27 prominent public health scientists have released a statement denying the conspiracy theories about the origin of coronavirus. “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” reads the statement published in the Lancet. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” it further adds. Even U.S. intelligence agencies and scientists have not found any evidence to support these rumors. Claim – 4 The biological laboratory in Wuhan was funded by Dr. Fauci Dr. Anthony Fauci is the Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). It is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an agency of the US health department. According to a report, NIH had approved a grant of $3.4 million in 2014 to the US company EcoHealth Alliance to study the risk of the future emergence of coronaviruses from bats. Wuhan Institute of Virology was a collaborator on this project. Because of this, EcoHealth distributed $600,000 of that grant to Wuhan lab. Thus, it is misleading to suggest Dr. Fauci funded Wuhan lab. Claim 5 – GlaxoSmithKline and Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) are managed by Black Rock finances BlackRock is an American multinational investment management corporation. It has investments and shares in various companies all over the world. According to Reuters’ data, BlackRock owns 7.5% shares of GSK. Since GSK has 1553 institutional owners and shareholders, it is not accurate to claim GSK is managed by BlackRock. Billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Foundations have been a target of conspiracy theorists since the emergence of coronavirus. Open Society Foundation is the world’s largest private funder of charities and NGOs. There is no evidence available of any possible connection between BlackRock and Soros’ Open Society Foundations. AXA is a French insurance company. It is the world’s largest insurance company. Reuters says, there is no evidence of a connection between Open Society Foundations and AXA. Although, Soros Fund Management owns around 450,000 shares of AXA Equitable Holdings. It is a US-based company partially owned by French AXA. Claim 7 – Soros owns the German company Winterthur Winterthur is a Swiss insurance company. It was not Soros but French AXA owns Winterthur group. AXA had acquired Winterthur in 2006. Claim 8 – Winterthur built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan As mentioned above, Winterthur is a general insurance company. It is not in the construction business. Also, the Wuhan lab was started and operated by the Government of China. Vanguard Group is a US-based investment company. It really does own shares in BlackRock. It is, in fact, a top shareholder of BlackRock with a 7.53% stake. In addition to that, Vanguard is a major shareholder in Pfizer and Microsoft too. Claim 10 – Black Rock is a major shareholder of Microsoft, the property of Bill Gates According to CNN Money data, BlackRock owns a 4.56% stake in Microsoft, making it the second largest shareholder behind the Vanguard group (7.71%). It is not accurate to claim Microsoft as Bill Gates’ property. He had stepped down from the board of the company in 2020. Though Gates had co-founded the company, he only owns 1.36% of shares. According to Investopedia, the top three individual insider shareholders of Microsoft are CEO Satya Nadella, Bradford L. Smith and Jean-Philippe Courtois. Bill Gates and his philanthropic venture Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation do not have any share in Pfizer. Although, the foundation has granted funds to Pfizer to support the development of a Group B streptococcus (GBS) vaccine for developing country access in 2016. Claim 12 – Bill Gates is currently the first sponsor of WHO Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second-largest funder of the World Health Organization. The foundation provided 10.8 % of the WHO’s funds in 2018-19. Thus, it can be concluded that the message is loaded with unverified and baseless claims and false links. We urge our readers not to fall for such rumors and conspiracy theories. Title:Coronavirus Conspiracy: No Connection between GlaxoSmithKline and Wuhan LabFact Check By: Fact Crescendo Team"
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Refuted"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 5,
        "claim": "Vanguard is a \"shareholder of BlackRock... which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of Microsoft The property of Bill Gates, who owns Pfizer (the company that sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO.",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "5) MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a shareholder of BlackRock, which is a major shareholder of Microsoft, while Bill Gates owns Pfizer?",
                "url": "https://www.boatos.org/english/wuhan-lab-is-owned-of-glaxo-pfizer-soros-gates.html",
                "scraped_text": "Rumor – Facts list shows that the Wuhan Laboratory is owned by Glaxo, Pfizer, has connections with foreign companies and receives money from George Soros and Bill Gates. In more than ten months of the pandemic, conspiracy theories related to the new coronavirus have not been lacking. Even without, at least for the time being, knowing who was responsible (if any) for the emergence of the virus, many people are ready to “point out their fingers”. In one of these stories, a text makes correlations between the biological laboratory in Wuhan (China), pharmaceutical companies (such as Pfizer, responsible for one of the vaccines against Covid-19) and names like George Soros and Bill Gates. The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by chance, owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, incidentally, is administered by the Black Rock’s finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION), which, by chance, meets the French AXA! Vídeo: é falso que EUA vai acabar com Dólar em papel em 2024 Coincidentally, he owns the German company Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! Accidentally purchased by the German Allianz. Which, incidentally, has Vanguard as a shareholder. Who is a shareholder of Black Rock. It controls central banks and manages about ONE-THIRD of global investment capital. Who, incidentally, is one of the main shareholders of MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! If it is not clear enough why a bat came in and grabbed the SNAKE and the ENTIRE PLANET became infected, I can continue! But please DON’T MASSIVELY DISTRIBUTE my post! And don’t even let me continue! Because I’m just a “CONSPIRATOR spreading fake news!” Wuhan’s laboratory is owned of Glaxo, Pfizer and receives money from Soros and Gates? As you can see, the end of the message has the following excerpt: “I am just a conspirator spreading false news”. This is true because the correlations in question are not real. For you to understand, let’s divide the fakes by topics: Fake # 1: Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo It is not true that Wuhan’s laboratory is owned by the company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). The Wuhan Institute of Virology is actually run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which, for its part, is from the government of China. It is not true that GSK owns Pfizer. As this AFP denial in Spanish (which, in turn, cites CNN Money) points out , Pfizer is commanded by the Vaguard Group and GSK does not appear among the group’s shareholders. Fake # 3: Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION) Which, incidentally, meets the French AXA! George Soros’ foundation does not own the French company AXA (an insurance company). AFP itself pointed out that the company is not listed among beneficiaries of the Open Society Foundations. Fake # 4: Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! The purpose of the link between Soros and AXA is on the premise that Winterthur (which belongs to AXA) was responsible for building the Wuhan laboratory. Again, the correlation is wrong. As we said before, the Wuhan Institute of Virology has no foreign participation in the administration. 5) MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! Finally, the old story that tries to link Gates to Pfizer. We already mentioned here on Boatos.org that the owner of Microsoft is not a “shareholder” in Pfizer. Although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated money to the company, they are not as shareholders. It is also not true that Gates is the main sponsor of WHO. According to the World Health Organization website, the largest donor by the end of the third quarter of 2020 was the government of Germany. In short: although the conspiracy theory has spread widely on the internet, most of the correlations it presents are false. In other words: if this is the explanation of the origin of Covid-19, it is better to look for another one. This is an english version from this text. If you would like to read in portuguese, click here."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Who, incidentally, is one of the main shareholders of MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a shareholder of BlackRock, which is a major shareholder of Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://www.boatos.org/english/wuhan-lab-is-owned-of-glaxo-pfizer-soros-gates.html",
                "scraped_text": "Rumor – Facts list shows that the Wuhan Laboratory is owned by Glaxo, Pfizer, has connections with foreign companies and receives money from George Soros and Bill Gates. In more than ten months of the pandemic, conspiracy theories related to the new coronavirus have not been lacking. Even without, at least for the time being, knowing who was responsible (if any) for the emergence of the virus, many people are ready to “point out their fingers”. In one of these stories, a text makes correlations between the biological laboratory in Wuhan (China), pharmaceutical companies (such as Pfizer, responsible for one of the vaccines against Covid-19) and names like George Soros and Bill Gates. The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo! Who, by chance, owns Pfizer! (the one who produces the vaccine!) Which, incidentally, is administered by the Black Rock’s finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION), which, by chance, meets the French AXA! Vídeo: é falso que EUA vai acabar com Dólar em papel em 2024 Coincidentally, he owns the German company Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! Accidentally purchased by the German Allianz. Which, incidentally, has Vanguard as a shareholder. Who is a shareholder of Black Rock. It controls central banks and manages about ONE-THIRD of global investment capital. Who, incidentally, is one of the main shareholders of MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! If it is not clear enough why a bat came in and grabbed the SNAKE and the ENTIRE PLANET became infected, I can continue! But please DON’T MASSIVELY DISTRIBUTE my post! And don’t even let me continue! Because I’m just a “CONSPIRATOR spreading fake news!” Wuhan’s laboratory is owned of Glaxo, Pfizer and receives money from Soros and Gates? As you can see, the end of the message has the following excerpt: “I am just a conspirator spreading false news”. This is true because the correlations in question are not real. For you to understand, let’s divide the fakes by topics: Fake # 1: Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo It is not true that Wuhan’s laboratory is owned by the company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK). The Wuhan Institute of Virology is actually run by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, which, for its part, is from the government of China. It is not true that GSK owns Pfizer. As this AFP denial in Spanish (which, in turn, cites CNN Money) points out , Pfizer is commanded by the Vaguard Group and GSK does not appear among the group’s shareholders. Fake # 3: Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION) Which, incidentally, meets the French AXA! George Soros’ foundation does not own the French company AXA (an insurance company). AFP itself pointed out that the company is not listed among beneficiaries of the Open Society Foundations. Fake # 4: Winterthur. Who, by chance, built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan! The purpose of the link between Soros and AXA is on the premise that Winterthur (which belongs to AXA) was responsible for building the Wuhan laboratory. Again, the correlation is wrong. As we said before, the Wuhan Institute of Virology has no foreign participation in the administration. 5) MICROSOFT Owned by BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder in PFIZER (which sells the miracle VACCINE) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!! Finally, the old story that tries to link Gates to Pfizer. We already mentioned here on Boatos.org that the owner of Microsoft is not a “shareholder” in Pfizer. Although the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation donated money to the company, they are not as shareholders. It is also not true that Gates is the main sponsor of WHO. According to the World Health Organization website, the largest donor by the end of the third quarter of 2020 was the government of Germany. In short: although the conspiracy theory has spread widely on the internet, most of the correlations it presents are false. In other words: if this is the explanation of the origin of Covid-19, it is better to look for another one. This is an english version from this text. If you would like to read in portuguese, click here."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The Vanguard Group, however, is Pfizer's largest shareholder, and the post claims its ties to both BlackRock and Microsoft, which Bill Gates co-founded in 1975, are nefarious.",
                "question": "What is Vanguard's relationship to Pfizer, BlackRock, and Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/12/30/fact-check-wuhan-lab-vaccine-research-affiliates-not-linked/4086363001/",
                "scraped_text": "Fact check: False connections drawn between Wuhan lab, vaccine research affiliates The claim: A series of links exists between Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies, figures central to development of COVID-19 vaccine As COVID-19 vaccines begin to roll out, some have questioned their safety and efficacy. Going further, a post on social media claims that the vaccines can be tied to a suspicious lineup of invested parties. A Facebook post claims that the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a research center in the Chinese city where the coronavirus emerged, can be linked to a number of individuals and pharmaceutical companies involved in researching the COVID-19 vaccine. Conspiracy theorists have claimed, without evidence, that the novel coronavirus that causes COVID-19 was manufactured there. The post, which has been shared over 1,100 times, claims that the lab in Wuhan is owned by pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which supposedly owns Pfizer, the first drug company to receive emergency authorization for a COVID-19 vaccine. The purported connections further spiral, eventually suggesting the involvement of billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The post's creator did not respond to USA TODAY's request for comment. More: Fact check: What's true and what's false about the COVID-19 vaccine The claim starts to fall apart in its first sentence. The post alleges that the \"Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan,\" likely the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is owned by GlaxoSmithKline. It then tumbles into a series of claims about ownership and financing based on that original relationship — which doesn't exist. The full name of the institute, which studies viral diseases, is Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, according to its website. It's controlled by China's State Council, one of the country's main government bodies. In a 2019 open letter to the science journal Nature, a CAS representative wrote that the academy has never achieved financial independence from China. Half of its income comes directly from the government, and the rest comes from \"competitive funding or technology transfer,\" according to the letter. \"CAS is not run independently of government ... The establishment and development of CAS have been entirely based on the wisdom and support of the central government,\" the letter reads. Fact check: Post of Maryland lab photo misidentifies visitor, makes false Moderna claim Without the original tie linking the Wuhan lab to Glaxo, the claim's intended revelation is rendered meaningless. Still, there are a number of other misrepresentations in the post worth noting. Firstly, British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline doesn't own Pfizer. Pfizer was incorporated in New Jersey in 1900, originally dividing its $2 million of authorized capital into 20,000 shares as a privately held company, its website says. But in 1942, the pharmaceutical company offered 240,000 shares of new common stock to the public; now the company has roughly 69% public ownership. Fact check: Bell's palsy among COVID-19 trial participants likely unrelated to Pfizer vaccine GSK and Pfizer embarked on a joint venture in 2018, aiming to combine their consumer health care units to allow each company to focus on prescription medicines. But that venture doesn't involve merging or swapping ownership. The post also brings investment firm BlackRock into the fold, claiming it \"manages\" both Pfizer and the \"Open Foundation Company,\" referring to, albeit misnaming, billionaire George Soros' Open Society Foundations. Soros often plays the central role in baseless conspiracy theories, most recently surrounding the pandemic and vaccination against COVID-19. A search of both Soros' Open Society Foundation's and BlackRock's websites found no indication the two are tied. BlackRock does hold about 414.7 million shares in Pfizer, reporting in February that it held 7.7% ownership in the pharmaceutical company. Fact check: Bill Gates, Pfizer CEO both plan to take COVID-19 vaccine The Vanguard Group, however, is Pfizer's largest shareholder, and the post claims its ties to both BlackRock and Microsoft, which Bill Gates co-founded in 1975, are nefarious. Like Soros, Gates is also commonly pulled into unfounded conspiracy theories about the pandemic. It's true that Vanguard holds shares in BlackRock, Pfizer and Microsoft. But two decades after Gates' departure from the company as its CEO, his ties to Microsoft are loose. Gates holds just 1.36% of shares in Microsoft, CNBC reported in March, shortly after Gates left the company's board. Fact check: Improper use of COVID-19 test gives false positive for Coca-Cola We rate the claim that a series of links exist between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and companies and figures central to development of a COVID-19 vaccine as FALSE because it was not supported by our research. The primary claim, which sets off the series of links, that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is owned by GlaxoSmithKline is false. That renders the following purported connections meaningless, and many of them are false independently, as well. - Wuhan Institute of Virology, retrieved Dec. 30, About WIV - China State Council, Aug. 28, 2014, State Council Organization Chart - Nature, Oct. 22, 2019, The Chinese Academy of Sciences responds: we are with the government and with the people - Nasdaq, Pfizer Inc. Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - Wall Street Journal, Dec. 19, 2018, Pfizer, Glaxo to Create Over-the-Counter Drug Giant - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"blackrock\" site:https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org - Google search, retrieved Dec. 30, \"open society foundation\" site:https://www.blackrock.com - Nasdaq, Microsoft Corporation Common Stock Institutional Holdings (archived version) - U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Dec. 31, 2019, Pfizer SC 136/A - CNBC, March 13, Bill Gates leaves Microsoft board Thank you for supporting our journalism. You can subscribe to our print edition, ad-free app, or electronic newspaper replica here. Our fact check work is supported in part by a grant from Facebook."
            },
            {
                "answer": "In addition to that, Vanguard is a major shareholder in Pfizer and Microsoft too.",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a shareholder of Pfizer and Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://srilanka.factcrescendo.com/english/a-false-message-claims-there-is-a-coronavirus-conspiracy-between-glaxosmithkline-and-wuhan-lab/",
                "scraped_text": "A viral message propagates a false conspiracy theory suggesting a nexus between Wuhan lab and major global pharmaceutical companies that caused in the Covid-19 pandemic. The message ultimately puts forward a convoluted claim that the coronavirus was created in China with the help of vaccine makers with the intension to make profits. Fact Crescendo received many fact-check requests about this message on our WhatsApp Factline. We will fact-check all the claims made in this message one by one. Claim 1 – Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by GlaxoSmithKline The official name of this biological laboratory is the Wuhan Institute of Virology. It was established in 1958. It is a largely state-funded lab, which is under the control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), a part of the Government of China. In a letter published in Nature magazine in 2019, it is mentioned that “CAS has never sought or achieved financial autonomy. Over the past 40 years, half of its income has come directly from central-government investment. CAS could not develop without the funding and support of the central government.” This clarifies that a private foreign company like GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) does not own or control Wuhan Lab. GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) is a British pharmaceutical company. Pfizer is an American multinational pharmaceutical corporation. Pfizer is 69% owned by institutional shareholders. Among them, The Vanguard Group owns the highest shares (7.67%). CNN Money has published the list of top 10 owners of Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline does not feature on the list of Pfizer shareholders. In 2018, Pfizer and GSK entered into a joint venture to create a premier global consumer healthcare company. However, that partnership ended in 2019. The statement of closure of the partnership states, “GSK intends to separate the joint venture as an independent company via a demerger of its equity interest to its shareholders.” They don’t own or control each other in any way or means. They are separate and independent companies. Hence, the claim of GlaxoSmithKline owning Pfizer is false. Claim 3 – Coronavirus was started in the biological laboratory in Wuhan Last year, a group of 27 prominent public health scientists have released a statement denying the conspiracy theories about the origin of coronavirus. “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin,” reads the statement published in the Lancet. “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration in the fight against this virus,” it further adds. Even U.S. intelligence agencies and scientists have not found any evidence to support these rumors. Claim – 4 The biological laboratory in Wuhan was funded by Dr. Fauci Dr. Anthony Fauci is the Director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). It is part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), an agency of the US health department. According to a report, NIH had approved a grant of $3.4 million in 2014 to the US company EcoHealth Alliance to study the risk of the future emergence of coronaviruses from bats. Wuhan Institute of Virology was a collaborator on this project. Because of this, EcoHealth distributed $600,000 of that grant to Wuhan lab. Thus, it is misleading to suggest Dr. Fauci funded Wuhan lab. Claim 5 – GlaxoSmithKline and Open Foundation Company (Soros Foundation) are managed by Black Rock finances BlackRock is an American multinational investment management corporation. It has investments and shares in various companies all over the world. According to Reuters’ data, BlackRock owns 7.5% shares of GSK. Since GSK has 1553 institutional owners and shareholders, it is not accurate to claim GSK is managed by BlackRock. Billionaire George Soros and his Open Society Foundations have been a target of conspiracy theorists since the emergence of coronavirus. Open Society Foundation is the world’s largest private funder of charities and NGOs. There is no evidence available of any possible connection between BlackRock and Soros’ Open Society Foundations. AXA is a French insurance company. It is the world’s largest insurance company. Reuters says, there is no evidence of a connection between Open Society Foundations and AXA. Although, Soros Fund Management owns around 450,000 shares of AXA Equitable Holdings. It is a US-based company partially owned by French AXA. Claim 7 – Soros owns the German company Winterthur Winterthur is a Swiss insurance company. It was not Soros but French AXA owns Winterthur group. AXA had acquired Winterthur in 2006. Claim 8 – Winterthur built the Chinese laboratory in Wuhan As mentioned above, Winterthur is a general insurance company. It is not in the construction business. Also, the Wuhan lab was started and operated by the Government of China. Vanguard Group is a US-based investment company. It really does own shares in BlackRock. It is, in fact, a top shareholder of BlackRock with a 7.53% stake. In addition to that, Vanguard is a major shareholder in Pfizer and Microsoft too. Claim 10 – Black Rock is a major shareholder of Microsoft, the property of Bill Gates According to CNN Money data, BlackRock owns a 4.56% stake in Microsoft, making it the second largest shareholder behind the Vanguard group (7.71%). It is not accurate to claim Microsoft as Bill Gates’ property. He had stepped down from the board of the company in 2020. Though Gates had co-founded the company, he only owns 1.36% of shares. According to Investopedia, the top three individual insider shareholders of Microsoft are CEO Satya Nadella, Bradford L. Smith and Jean-Philippe Courtois. Bill Gates and his philanthropic venture Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation do not have any share in Pfizer. Although, the foundation has granted funds to Pfizer to support the development of a Group B streptococcus (GBS) vaccine for developing country access in 2016. Claim 12 – Bill Gates is currently the first sponsor of WHO Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation is the second-largest funder of the World Health Organization. The foundation provided 10.8 % of the WHO’s funds in 2018-19. Thus, it can be concluded that the message is loaded with unverified and baseless claims and false links. We urge our readers not to fall for such rumors and conspiracy theories. Title:Coronavirus Conspiracy: No Connection between GlaxoSmithKline and Wuhan LabFact Check By: Fact Crescendo Team"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list.",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a major shareholder in Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The biggest shareholder is Vanguard. But now he gets murky. Vanguard is a private company and we cannot see who the shareholders are.",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a shareholder of BlackRock and Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://groups.google.com/g/themeritocracy/c/Ij-bCrLKm24",
                "scraped_text": "Monopoly: An overview of the Great Reset – Follow the Money If you’ve been wondering how the world economy has been hijacked and humanity has been kidnapped by a completely bogus narrative, look no further than this video by Dutch creator, Covid Lie. What she uncovers is that the stock of the world’s largest corporations are owned by the same institutional investors. They all own each other. This means that “competing” brands, like Coke and Pepsi aren’t really competitors, at all, since their stock is owned by exactly the same investment companies, investment funds, insurance companies, banks and in some cases, governments. This is the case, across all industries. As she says: “The smaller investors are owned by larger investors. Those are owned by even bigger investors. The visible top of this pyramid shows only two companies whose names we have often seen…They are Vanguard and BlackRock. The power of these two companies is beyond your imagination. Not only do they own a large part of the stocks of nearly all big companies but also the stocks of the investors in those companies. A Bloomberg report states that both these companies in the year 2028, together will have investments in the amount of 20 trillion dollars. Bloomberg calls BlackRock “The fourth branch of government”, because it’s the only private agency that closely works with the central banks. BlackRock lends money to the central bank but it’s also the advisor. It also develops the software the central bank uses. Many BlackRock employees were in the White House with Bush and Obama. Its CEO. Larry Fink can count on a warm welcome from leaders and politicians. Not so strange, if you know that he is the frontman of the ruling company but Larry Fink does not pull the strings himself. BlackRock, itself is also owned by shareholders. Who are those shareholders? We come to a strange conclusion. The biggest shareholder is Vanguard. But now he gets murky. Vanguard is a private company and we cannot see who the shareholders are. The elite who own Vanguard apparently do not like being in the spotlight but of course they cannot hide from who is willing to dig. Reports from Oxfam and Bloomberg say that 1% of the world, together owns more money than the other 99%. Even worse, Oxfam says that 82% of all earned money in 2017 went to this 1%. In other words, these two investment companies, Vanguard and BlackRock hold a monopoly in all industries in the world and they, in turn are owned by the richest families in the world, some of whom are royalty and who have been very rich since before the Industrial Revolution. Why doesn’t everybody know this? Why aren’t there movies and documentaries about this? Why isn’t it in the news? Because 90% of the international media is owned by nine media conglomerates. Covid Lie asks, “Who sponsors the organization and press agencies that produce our news? With Project Syndicate, we see the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Open Society Foundation and the European Journalism Centre. The organizations that bring the news get paid by non-profit organizations, of the same elite that also owns the entire media but also a part of taxpayers money is used to pay them.” Or, as George Carlin said, “It’s a small club and you ain’t in it.” So when Lynn Forester de Rothschild wants the United States to be a one-party country (like China) and doesn’t want voter ID laws passed in the US, so that more election fraud can be perpetrated to achieve that end,what does she do? She holds a conference call with the world’s top 100 CEOs and tells them to publicly decry as “Jim Crow” Georgia’s passing of an anti-corruption law and she orders her dutiful CEOs to boycott the State of Georgia, like we saw with Coca-Cola and Major League Baseball and even Hollywood star, Will Smith. In this conference call, we see shades of the Great Reset, Agenda 2030, the New World Order. And it is clear that the “pandemic” was orchestrated in order to bring this about. This video does an incredible job of explaining how it is all being done. As you are watching millions fall into poverty because of the corona measures of the past year, even if the greatest economic crisis in history has not affected you yet, it will only be a matter of time until the rippling effects will hit you, as well This is not fear-mongering but it’s a harsh reality. I also think we might mitigate the damage and may even do better, provided we are informed correctly about our situation. This is why I would like to show you a few facts you can easily check facts that are of crucial importance. Less than a handful of big corporations dominate every aspect of our lives. That may seem exaggerated but from the breakfast we eat to the mattress we sleep on and everything we wear and consume in between is largely dependent on these corporations. Those are huge investment companies that determine the course of money flow. They are the main characters of the play that we are witnessing. I know your time is valuable, so I summarize the most important data. Let’s take Pepsico as an example. It is the parent company of many soda companies and snack companies. The so-called competitive brands are from factories from a few corporations who monopolize the entire industry. In the packaged food industry, there are a few big companies, like Unilever, the Coca-Cola Company, Mondelez and Nestlé. In the picture, you see that most brands in the food industry belong to one of these corporations. The big companies are on the stock market and have the big shareholders in the board of directors. On sources like Yahoo Finance, we can see detailed company info, such as who the biggest shareholders actually are. Let’s take Pepsico again, as an example. We see about 72% of stock is owned by no less than 3,155 institutional investors. These are investment companies, investment funds, insurance companies, banks and in some cases, governments. Who are the biggest institutional investors of Pepsico? As you can see, only 10 of the investors own together nearly one third of the stock. The top 10 of investors together amount to a value of $59 billion dollars but out of those ten, only three own more stock than the other seven. Let’s remember them and look up who owns the most stocks of the Coca-Cola Company, the biggest competitor of Pepsi. The biggest lump of stock is again owned by institutional investors. Let’s look at the top 10 and start at the bottom six of them. Four of these institutional investors we also saw at the bottom six of Pepsico. These are Northern Trust, JPMorgan-Chase, Geode Capital Management and Wellington Management. Now, let’s look at the four biggest stock owners. They are BlackRock, Vanguard and State Street. These are the world’s biggest investment firms, so Pepsico and Coca-Cola are not competitors, at all. The other big companies that own a myriad of brand names, like Unilever, Mondelez and Nestlé are from the same small group of investors. But it’s not only in the food industry that their names come up. Let’s find out on Wikipedia, which are the biggest tech companies. Facebook is the owner of Whatsapp and Instagram. Together with Twitter, they form the most popular social media platforms. Alphabet is the parent of all Google companies, like YouTube and Gmail but they are also the biggest investor in Android, one of the two operating systems for nearly all smartphones and tablets. The other operating system is Apple’s IOS. If we add Microsoft, we see four companies making the software for nearly all computers, tablets and smartphones in the world. Let’s see who are the biggest shareholders of these companies. Take Facebook: we see that 80% of the stock is owned by institutional investors. These are the same names that came up in the food industry; the same investors are in the top three. Next, is Twitter. It forms with Facebook and Instagram the top three. Surprisingly, this company is in the hands of the same investors, as well. We see them again, with Apple and even with their biggest competitor, Microsoft. Also, if we look at other big companies in the tech industry that develop and make our computers, TVs, phones and home appliances, we see the same big investors, that together own the majority of the stock. It’s true for all industries. I’m not exaggerating. One last example, let’s book a holiday on a computer or smartphone. We search for a flight to a sunny country on Skyscanner or Expedia. Both are from the same small group of investors. We fly with one of the many airlines. Many of which are in the hands of the same investors and of governments, as is the case with Air France, KLM. The plane we board is, in most cases a Boeing or an Airbus, also owned by the same names. We book through Booking.com or AirBnB and when we arrive we go out for dinner and place a comment on Tripadvisor. The same big investors show up in every aspect of our trip and their power is even bigger, because of the kerosene is from their oil companies or refineries. The steel from which the plane is made comes from their mining companies. This small group of investment firms and funds and banks are namely also the biggest investors in the industry that dig for raw materials. Wikipedia shows that the biggest mining companies have the same big investors that we see everywhere. Also, the big agricultural businesses, on which the entire food industry depends; they own Bayer, the parent company of Monsanto, the biggest seed producer in the world but they are also the shareholders of the big textile industry. And even many popular fashion brands who make the clothing out of the cotton are owned by the same investors. Whether we look at the world’s biggest solar panel companies or oil refineries, the stocks are in the hands of the same companies. They own the tobacco companies that produce all the popular tobacco brands but they also own all big pharmaceutical companies and the scientific institutions that produce medicine. They own the companies that produce our metals and also the entire car, plane and weapons industry, where a great deal of the metals and raw materials are used. The own the companies that build our electronics, they own the big warehouses and online markets and even the means of payments we use to buy their products. To make this video as short as possible, I only showed you the tip of the iceberg. If you decide to research this with the sources I just showed you, then you will see that most popular insurance companies, banks, construction companies, telephone companies restaurant chains and cosmetics are owned by the same institutional investors we have just seen. These institutional investors are mainly investment firms banks and insurance companies. In turn, they, themselves are owned by shareholders and the most surprising thing is that they own each other’s stocks Together, they form an immense network comparable to a pyramid. The smaller investors are owned by larger investors. Those are owned by even bigger investors. The visible top of this pyramid shows only two companies whose names we have often seen by now. They are Vanguard and BlackRock. The power of these two companies is beyond your imagination. Not only do they own a large part of the stocks of nearly all big companies but also the stocks of the investors in those companies. A Bloomberg report states that both these companies in the year 2028, together will have investments in the amount of 20 trillion dollars. Bloomberg calls BlackRock “The fourth branch of government”, because it’s the only private agency that closely works with the central banks. BlackRock lends money to the central bank but it’s also the advisor. It also develops the software the central bank uses. Many BlackRock employees were in the White House with Bush and Obama. Its CEO, Larry Fink can count on a warm welcome from leaders and politicians. Not so strange, if you know that he is the front man of the ruling company. But Larry Fink does not pull the strings, himself. BlackRock, itself is also owned by shareholders. Who are those shareholders? We come to a strange conclusion. The biggest shareholder is Vanguard. But now he gets murky. Vanguard is a private company and we cannot see who the shareholders are. The elite who own Vanguard apparently do not like being in the spotlight but of course they cannot hide from who is willing to dig. Reports from Oxfam and Bloomberg say that 1% of the world, together owns more money than the other 99%. Even worse, Oxfam says that 82% of all earned money in 2017 went to this 1%. Forbes, the most famous business magazine says that in March 2020, there were 2,095 billionaires in the world. This means that Vanguard is owned by the richest families in the world. If we research their history, we see that they have always been the wealthiest. Some of them, even before the start of the Industrial Revolution, because their history is so interesting and extensive, I will make a sequel. For now, I just want to say that these families of whom many are in royalty are the founders of our banking system and of every industry in the world, these families have never lost power but due to an increasing population, they had to hide behind firms, like Vanguard, which the stockholders are the private funds and non-profits of these families. NGOs AND FOUNDATIONS AND THEIR OWNERSHIP OF BIG PHARMA To clarify the picture, I have to explain briefly what non-profits actually are. These appear to be the link between companies, politics and media. This conceals the conflicts of interests a bit. Non-profits, also called “foundations” are dependent on donations they do not have to disclose who their donors are they can invest the money in the way they see fit and do not pay taxes as long as the profits are invested again in new projects. In this way, non-profits keep hundreds of billions of dollars among themselves according to the Australian government, non-profits are an ideal way of financing terrorists and of massive money-laundering. The foundations and funds of the families that are the richest stay in the background as much as possible. For issues that get much attention, the foundation of philanthropists are used that are lower in rank but very rich. I want to keep it short, so I will show you the three most important ones that connect all industries in the world. They are the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Open Society Foundation of the controversial multi-billionaire, Soros and the Clinton Foundation. I will give you a very short introduction to show you their power. According to the website of the World Economic Forum, the Gates Foundation is the biggest sponsor of the WHO. That was after Donald Trump quit USA financial support to the WHO in 2020. So the Gates Foundation is one of the most influential entities in everything that concerns our health. The Gates Foundation works closely with the biggest pharma companies, among which are Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Biontech and Bayer. And we have just seen who their biggest shareholders are. Bill Gates was not a poor computer nerd who miraculously became very rich. He’s from a philanthropist’s family that works for the absolute elite. His Microsoft is owned by Vanguard, BlackRock and Berkshire Hathaway. But the Gates Foundation, after BlackRock and Vanguard is the biggest shareholder in Berkshire Hathaway. We would need hours if we wanted to uncover everything in which Gates, the Open Society Foundation of Soros and the Clinton Foundation are involved. They form a bridge to the current situation, so I had to introduce them. We need to start the next topic with a question. Someone like me, who never makes videos can, with an old laptop objectively show that only two companies hold a monopoly in all industries in the world. My question is, why is this never talked about in the media? We can choose daily between all sorts of documentaries and TV programs but none of them cover this subject. Is it not interesting enough or are there other interests at play? Wikipedia, again gives us the answer. They say that about 90% of the international media is owned by nine media conglomerates. Whether we take the monopolist Netflix and Amazon Prime or enormous concerns that own many daughter companies, like Time-Warner, the Walt Disney Company, Comcast, Fox Corporation, Bertelsmann and Viacom, CBS, we see that the same names own stocks. These corporations not only make all the programs, movies and documentaries but also own the channels on which those are broadcast. So, not only the industries but also the information is owned by the elite. I will show you briefly how this works in the Netherlands. To start with, all the Dutch mainstream media are owned by three companies. The first one is De PersGroep [DPG Media], the parent company of the following brands (. Apart from the many newspapers and magazines, they also own Sanoma, the parent company of some of the big commercial Dutch channels. Many media outlets from abroad, like VTM are also owned by the De PersGroep. The second one is Mediahuis, one of Europe’s biggest media concerns. In the Netherlands, Mediahuis owns the following brands. Until 2017, also Sky Radio and Radio Veronica were owned by Mediahuis, as were Radio 538 and radio 10. And then there is Bertelsmann, which is one of the 9 biggest media firms. This company owns RTL, that owns 45 television stations and 32 radio stations in 11 countries. But Bertelsmann is also co-owner of the world’s biggest book publisher, Penguin Random House. The stocks of these companies are owned by private funds of three families. Those are the Belgian Van Thillo family, the Belgian Leysen family and the German Bertelsmann-Mohn family. All three families sided with the Nazis in the War. According to Wikipedia, for this reason, the Telegraaf, the Leysen newspaper was temporarily forbidden in the Netherlands after the war. To complete this overview, look at where the news comes from. The daily news of all these media outlets the diverse news media do not produce news. They use information and footage from the press agencies, .ANP and Reuters. These agencies are not independent. .ANP is owned by Talpa, John de Mol. Thomson-Reuters is owned by the powerful Canadian Thomson family. The most important journalists and editors working for these agencies are members of a journalism agency, like the European Journalism Centre. These are one of the biggest European sponsors of media-related projects. They educate journalists, publish study books, provide training spaces and press agencies and work closely together with the big corporations, Google and Facebook. For journalistic analysis and views, the big media use Project Syndicate. This is the most powerful organization in the field. Project Syndicate and organizations like I mentioned are together with the press agencies. The link between all worldwide media outlets when news anchors reap from their autocues [teleprompters], chances are that the text stems from one of these organizations. That is the reason that worldwide media shows synchronicity in their reporting. And look at the European journalism center, itself. Again, the Gates Foundation and the Open Society Foundation. They are also heavily-sponsored by Facebook, Google, the Ministry of Education and Science and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Who sponsors the organization and press agencies that produce our news? With Project Syndicate, we see the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the Open Society Foundation and the European Journalism Centre. The organizations that bring the news get paid by non-profit organizations, of the same elite that also owns the entire media but also a part of taxpayers money is used to pay them. In Belgium, there are protests regularly, since Mediahuis and De Persgroep receive millions of euros from the government, while many are abroad… Well, this was a lot to chew on and I tried to make it as short as I could. I only used examples that I thought were necessary to create a clear overview. This helps to better understand our current situation, that can shed new light on past events There will be enough time to dive into the past, but now let’s talk about today but my goal is to inform you about the danger we are in now. The elite governs every aspect of our lives, also, the information we get and they depend on a coordination, cooperation to connect all industries in the world to serve their interests. This is done through the World Economic Forum, among others, a very important organization. Every year in Davos, the CEOs of big corporations meet national leaders, politicians and other influential parties, like UNICEF and Greenpeace. On the supervisory board of the WEF is former Vice President, Al Gore, our own minister, Sigrid Kaag, Feike Sijbesma, Chairman of the Royal Dutch State Mines and the Commissioner of the Dutch bank, Christine Lagarde, the Chairwoman of the European Central Bank. Also, politician, Ferdinand Grapperhaus’ son works for the WEF. Wikipedia says that the annual fee for members is 35,000 euros “but over half of our budget comes from partners who pay the cost for politicians who otherwise could not afford membership.” According to critics, the WEF is for rich businesses to do business with other businesses or with politicians. For most members, the WEF would support personal gain instead of being a means to solve the world’s problems. Why would there be many world problems if the industry leaders, bankers and politicians from 1971 onwards have gathered every year to solve the world’s problems? Isn’t it illogical, that after 50 years of meetings between environmentalists and the CEOs of the most polluting companies, nature is gradually doing worse, not better; that those critics are right, it’s clear, when we look at the main partners that together make up more than half of the budget of the WEF. Because these are BlackRock, the Open Society foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and many big companies, from which Vanguard and BlackRock own the stocks. Chairman and founder of the WEF is Klaus Schwab, a Swiss professor and businessman. In his book, The Great Reset, he writes about the plans of his organization. The coronavirus is, according to him a great “opportunity” to reset our societies. He calls it “Build Back Better”. The slogan is now on the lips of all Globalist politicians in the world. Our old society must switch to a new one, says Schwab. The people own nothing but work for the state to have their primary needs met. The WEF says it’s necessary for the consumption society the elite forced upon us is not sustainable anymore. Schwab says in his book that we will never return to the old normal and the WEF published a video recently to make clear that by 2030, we will own nothing but we will be happy. You probably heard of the New World Order. The media wants us to believe that this is a conspiracy theory, yet it has been talked about by leaders for decades. Not just George Bush Senior, Bill Clinton and Nelson Mandela but also world-famous philanthropists, like Cecil Rhodes, David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger and even George Soros. The UN presented in 2015 their controversial Agenda 2030. It is almost identical to the Great Reset of Klaus Schwab. The UN wants to make sure, as does Schwab that in 2030, poverty, hunger, pollution and disease no longer plague the Earth. Sounds nice but wait till you read the small print. The plan is that Agenda 2030 will be paid by us, the citizens. Just like they ask of us now to give away our rights for public health, they will ask us to give away our wealth to battle poverty. These are no conspiracy theories. It is on their official website. It comes down to this: The UN wants taxes from Western countries to be split by the mega corporations of the elite to create a brand new society. The new infrastructure, because fossil fuels are gone in 2030. For this project, the UN says we need a world government, namely the UN, itself. The UN agrees with Schwab that a pandemic is a golden chance to accelerate the implementation of Agenda 2030. It is worrisome that the WEF and the UN openly admit that pandemics and other catastrophes can be used to reshape society. We must not think lightly about this and do thorough research."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT",
                "question": "What is Vanguard's relationship with BlackRock and Microsoft?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!”",
                "question": "Is Bill Gates a shareholder of Pfizer?",
                "url": "https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/glaxosmithkline-falsely-linked-to-wuhan-lab-pfizer-in-covid-19-contrivance/",
                "scraped_text": "A social media post claims to reveal a series of links between pharmaceutical companies involved in COVID-19 vaccine research, global investment groups and billionaire philanthropists George Soros and Bill Gates. The Facebook post from December 3 features a photo collage of world leaders and prominent figures, including UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, top US infectious diseases expert Dr Anthony Fauci and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews alongside text which reads, “They are the virus.” The post’s caption claims a connection between the Chinese laboratory at the centre of COVID-19 conspiracy theories, pharmaceutical companies Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKlein, and Mr Soros and Mr Gates. “The Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan is owned by Glaxo. Who, by chance, owns Pfizer (the one who produces the vaccine!),” the post reads. It claims Pfizer is “managed by Black Rock (sic) finances. Who, by chance, manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (SOROS FOUNDATION)!” The post also links investment giants BlackRock and Vanguard Group to the two billionaires, claiming Vanguard is a “shareholder of Black Rock … which, incidentally, is a major shareholder of MICROSOFT The property of BILL GATES, who happens to be a shareholder of PFIZER (which sells the miracle vaccine) and is currently the first sponsor of WHO !!!” At the time of writing, the post had been shared by more than 630 times and attracted more than 21,000 views and 200 reactions. The same text has been posted by several other Facebook accounts, including in Australia by former TV chef Pete Evans, as well as here and here. While the post suggests a web of links between pharmaceutical giants involved in COVID-19 vaccine development, investment firms and billionaires Bill Gates and George Soros, the purported conspiracy falls down at the first hurdle. The post’s claim the “Chinese biological laboratory in Wuhan” is owned by GlaxoSmithKlein (GSK) is not true, nor does the British pharmaceutical firm own US rival Pfizer. The Wuhan Institute of Virology was the focus of conspiracy theories early in the pandemic, when it was suggested without evidence that COVID-19 was man-made and had escaped the laboratory. The institute, which studies emerging and major viral diseases, falls under the umbrella and control of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), according to its website. The CAS is in turn controlled by China’s State Council, the country’s main administrative government body. The CAS has historically received half of its income directly from the Chinese government, while the remainder came from competitive funding or technology transfer, according to a 2019 letter from a CAS representative to the science journal Nature. GSK’s website states that it only operates two facilities in China – a pharmaceuticals business and a consumer healthcare business, both based in Shanghai. GSK and Pfizer have been involved in the development of COVID-19 vaccines. Pfizer’s partnership with German firm BioNTech produced the first publicly administered COVID-19 vaccine in the Western world following its regulatory approval in the UK. The two firms are publicly traded companies listed on the New York Stock Exchange – however the claim that Pfizer is owned by GSK is incorrect. Pfizer was nearly 69 per cent owned by institutional shareholders such as investment firms as of 10 December. The pharma companies did, however, announce a joint venture in August 2019 to create the world’s largest over-the-counter drugs business. Pfizer said the combined business will operate under the name GSK Consumer Healthcare and that Pfizer would own a 32 per cent stake in the joint venture and GSK 68 per cent. As one of Pfizer’s largest institutional shareholders, BlackRock owns 414,768,435 shares in the company, equating to around 10.8 per cent of total shares. However, BlackRock isn’t Pfizer’s largest shareholder, with the title belonging to the Vanguard Group, which owns around 11.7 per cent of the pharma firm. Vanguard is also the largest institutional shareholder in Microsoft, the company co-founded by tech billionaire Bill Gates, with BlackRock again second in the list. However, Microsoft is not the “property” of Mr Gates, as claimed, who only owned around 1.3 per cent of its shares before he stepped down from the company’s board in March. In 2014 he was surpassed by former CEO Steve Ballmer as the software company’s largest individual shareholder. The post also claims BlackRock manages the finances of George Soros’ “Open Foundation Company” (sic). AAP FactCheck found no evidence to link Soros’ philanthropic organisation, the Open Society Foundation, to BlackRock on the outfits’ websites. However, George Soros’s investment company, Soros Fund Management, previously held a small number of shares in BlackRock before offloading them in March 2020. After US President Donald Trump withdrew the US from the World Health Organization, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation became the largest voluntary contributor to the body. The foundation has also invested in Pfizer to expand access to the pharmaceutical company’s injectable contraceptive, which it says would give women in developing countries an affordable birth-control option. There is no elaborate web of corporate ownership that ties an infectious diseases laboratory in China to major pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, giant investment funds and billionaires George Soros and Bill Gates. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is not owned by British pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline, which does not own rival Pfizer. Bill Gates’s foundation has shares in Pfizer and is the World Health Organization’s largest contributor, however the post’s attempts to tie Mr Gates and billionaire George Soros to investment groups BlackRock and Vanguard are also false or misleading. * AAP FactCheck is an accredited member of the International Fact-Checking Network. To keep up with our latest fact checks, follow us on Facebook and Twitter. All information, text and images included on the AAP Websites is for personal use only and may not be re-written, copied, re-sold or re-distributed, framed, linked, shared onto social media or otherwise used whether for compensation of any kind or not, unless you have the prior written permission of AAP. For more information, please refer to our standard terms and conditions."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Vanguard is a shareholder of Black Rock. Black Rock controls central banks and manages about a third of the global investment capital.",
                "question": "Is Vanguard a shareholder of BlackRock?",
                "url": "https://www.linkedin.com/posts/wana-brands_mike-mejer-from-a-mejer-journey-spoke-with-activity-6833156669028081664-t69Q?trk=public_profile_like_view",
                "scraped_text": "Mike Mejer from A Mejer Journey spoke with Wana's VP of Innovation, Mike Hennesy, about R&D and how to successfully think outside the box as a cannabis brand. LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Select Accept to consent or Reject to decline non-essential cookies for this use. You can update your choices at any time in your settings. Mike Mejer from A Mejer Journey spoke with Wana's VP of Innovation, Mike Hennesy, about R&D and how to successfully think outside the box as a cannabis brand. Hiring American Growers to Train International Growers2y And Wana supports Vaccines. Are you aware GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) the big pharma company in the USA, owns the Chinese Bio lab in Wuhan? Look further. GSK also owns Pfizer. Yes, this is the same company who made the vaccine. Fauci helped The GSK lab get the funding it needed to operate. GSK is managed by the fiancé division of Black Rock. Black Rock manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros-owned). Open source manages the French AXA. Soros owns the German Company Winterthur, who built the Chinese lab in Wuhan. Winterthur built the Chinese Lab in Wuhan. The lab was bought by the German Allianz, which has Vanguard as a shareholder. Vanguard is a shareholder of Black Rock. Black Rock controls central banks and manages about a third of the global investment capital. Black Rock is also a major shareholder of Microsoft! Owned by Bill Gates, the exact same person telling all of us we need to be vaccinated. Bill Gates is a major shareholder in Pfizer. Pfizer is now the FIRST SPONSOR of the WHO! Now do you understand why a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the whole planet. I just cant understand why my FAVORITE brand of cannabis products is supporting them?"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Bill Gates is a major shareholder in Pfizer. Pfizer is now the FIRST SPONSOR of the WHO! Now do you understand why a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the whole planet.",
                "question": "Is Bill Gates a major shareholder in Pfizer, and is Pfizer the first sponsor of the WHO?",
                "url": "https://www.linkedin.com/posts/wana-brands_mike-mejer-from-a-mejer-journey-spoke-with-activity-6833156669028081664-t69Q?trk=public_profile_like_view",
                "scraped_text": "Mike Mejer from A Mejer Journey spoke with Wana's VP of Innovation, Mike Hennesy, about R&D and how to successfully think outside the box as a cannabis brand. LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Select Accept to consent or Reject to decline non-essential cookies for this use. You can update your choices at any time in your settings. Mike Mejer from A Mejer Journey spoke with Wana's VP of Innovation, Mike Hennesy, about R&D and how to successfully think outside the box as a cannabis brand. Hiring American Growers to Train International Growers2y And Wana supports Vaccines. Are you aware GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) the big pharma company in the USA, owns the Chinese Bio lab in Wuhan? Look further. GSK also owns Pfizer. Yes, this is the same company who made the vaccine. Fauci helped The GSK lab get the funding it needed to operate. GSK is managed by the fiancé division of Black Rock. Black Rock manages the finances of the Open Foundation Company (Soros-owned). Open source manages the French AXA. Soros owns the German Company Winterthur, who built the Chinese lab in Wuhan. Winterthur built the Chinese Lab in Wuhan. The lab was bought by the German Allianz, which has Vanguard as a shareholder. Vanguard is a shareholder of Black Rock. Black Rock controls central banks and manages about a third of the global investment capital. Black Rock is also a major shareholder of Microsoft! Owned by Bill Gates, the exact same person telling all of us we need to be vaccinated. Bill Gates is a major shareholder in Pfizer. Pfizer is now the FIRST SPONSOR of the WHO! Now do you understand why a dead bat sold in a wet market in China has infected the whole planet. I just cant understand why my FAVORITE brand of cannabis products is supporting them?"
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Refuted"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 6,
        "claim": "The Trump administration built the greatest economy in the history of the world.",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "\"This is the greatest economy in the history of our country.\"",
                "question": "What did the Trump administration claim about the state of the economy during their tenure?",
                "url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/03/trumps-campaign-claims-about-his-economic-record-just-dont-add-up.html",
                "scraped_text": "To hear President Donald Trump tell it, the U.S. economy is experiencing an economic boom unlike any period in its history under his leadership. A closer look at the numbers, though, show that claim is questionable. With just days left before a critical midterm election, Trump has been barnstorming the country in a series of rallies reminiscent of his 2016 presidential campaign. This time around, he is touting his record on the economy, claiming to have created more jobs and expanded economic growth at a pace that not seen by any of his predecessors in the White House. \"Nobody has ever been president that has the greatest economy in the history of our country,\" Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday. \"This is the greatest economy in the history of our country.\" Trump touted the latest sign of economic strength in Friday's employment report, which showed a net gain of 250,000 new jobs in October, and wage gains of 3.1 percent from a year ago. That boost in wages was the best since April 2009, when the U.S. was emerging from the Great Recession. By any measure, those are good numbers. However, they're hardly the \"greatest\" in U.S. history. A better way to compare Trump's record is to compare the overall gains in the economy since he took office with those of his predecessors, during the same period in their presidencies. When viewed in that light, Trump's record on most of those measures is decidedly average. Below are four data points that suggest Trump's claims just don't add up."
            },
            {
                "answer": "President Donald Trump has plenty of room to brag about the American economy. Calling it the “greatest” on record may be a stretch.",
                "question": "What evidence exists to support or contradict the claim that the Trump administration built the greatest economy in history?",
                "url": "https://fortune.com/2018/06/07/trump-eisenhower-greatest-economy-history-america/",
                "scraped_text": "President Donald Trump has plenty of room to brag about the American economy. Calling it the “greatest” on record may be a stretch. “In many ways this is the greatest economy in the HISTORY of America and the best time EVER to look for a job!” he tweeted Monday afternoon. Speaking in the White House Rose Garden on Wednesday, he repeated that this is the “strongest economy we’ve ever had.” Indeed, the economy has made major progress since the Great Recession ended in 2009, and that improvement has continued — and even strengthened by some metrics — during Trump’s 16 months in office. Jobless rates among minorities are at or near record lows, openings are at an all-time high and there are more positions available than there are unemployed. Yet wage growth is moderate, productivity remains tepid and expansion has averaged 2.4% on a year-over-year basis since Trump took office, well below the 4.4% of the 1950s and 1960s. “If you want to go back to the golden years, I suggest you go back to a year like 1955,” said Robert Gordon, a Northwestern University economist and author of the book The Rise and Fall of American Growth. Dwight D. Eisenhower was president that year. The post-World War II period, up until 1972, “brought sustained increases in the standard of living that are completely different from what we have today.” For starters, labeling a single economic era as the greatest in history is subjective because there’s no agreed-upon metric. Judging solely by gross domestic product, perhaps the simplest way to gauge a nation’s progress, the decades that followed World War II were the hottest in American history. Pent-up consumer demand, a housing boom and a vibrant manufacturing sector all melded into the economy’s Golden Age. By the GDP yardstick, the current pace of the expansion pales in comparison. That said, Trump seems to be focusing on the labor market, which continues to flex its muscle. There are more job openings than unemployed workers for the first time ever, though that figure comes from data that only stretches back to 2000. A longer-run estimate suggests that the ratio of jobless to opportunities is at its lowest in almost five decades. Unemployment rates are also at or near the lowest on record for black, Asian and Hispanic workers — a fact Trump has highlighted. Still, the overall jobless rate — 3.8% in May — has been lower in the past, dipping below 3% during the 1950s. The time it takes unemployed people to find work also remains elevated. And while wage growth has slowly picked up, past expansions have seen much bigger gains. That’s true even after accounting for today’s modest inflation. “If you’re a new data scientist, or Ph.D. economist, yeah, it’s a great time to look for a job,” Lawrence Katz, a Harvard University economics professor who served as the Labor Department chief economist during the Clinton administration, said when asked if this is the best time to look for work. “If you’re a janitor, a construction worker in some places — No.” Katz noted that in the late 1960s and late 1990s, wage growth was booming for such everyday employees. And in the 1960s, jobs put workers on a path toward benefits and economic security in the longer run — more of a rarity today, in a world where unions and pension plans are few and far between. Michael Bordo, an economics professor at Rutgers University and an authority on monetary history, agrees with Katz on that timing. The best economic period judging by unemployment was the 1960s, he said. In terms of economic growth, it was the 1960s and the 1990s. As for the Golden Age, “we’re not going to get that back,” Bordo said. While new technologies could help to boost growth higher, the postwar boom’s special conditions are impossible to replicate. It’s more realistic, he said, to shoot for growth that mirrors the 1980s and 1990s. Northwestern’s Gordon is also doubtful that a return to the “greatest” economy is within reach. “In terms of everyday life, a smartphone doesn’t compare with the liberation of women that was made possible by the invention of home appliances,” he said. The White House economic team appears to be cognizant of America’s tempered prospects — and optimistic within those more-limited parameters. “Virtually every economist” said 3% growth couldn’t be achieved, and “we are now moving into 3% zone — that is a huge achievement,” Larry Kudlow, Trump’s top economic adviser, told reporters Wednesday when challenged on the president’s assertion that the economy is the best ever. Progress on boosting growth “in my judgment, is only just beginning,” he said."
            },
            {
                "answer": "TRUMP: “We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world.”",
                "question": "What did former President Trump claim about the U.S. economy during his administration?",
                "url": "https://apnews.com/article/ap-fact-check-donald-trump-capitol-siege-global-trade-islamic-state-group-141ba07941e00e96b252314133888df6",
                "scraped_text": "President Trump is seen on a network monitor after his pre-recorded farewell speech was released, inside the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. The moon rises over the West Wing of the White House, on President Donald Trump’s last day in office, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. The Marine guard at the entrance signifies the president is in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) President Trump is seen on a network monitor after his pre-recorded farewell speech was released, inside the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. President Trump is seen on a network monitor after his pre-recorded farewell speech was released, inside the Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. The moon rises over the West Wing of the White House, on President Donald Trump’s last day in office, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. The Marine guard at the entrance signifies the president is in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) The moon rises over the West Wing of the White House, on President Donald Trump’s last day in office, Tuesday, Jan. 19, 2021, in Washington. The Marine guard at the entrance signifies the president is in the Oval Office. (AP Photo/Gerald Herbert) On his way out, President Donald Trump claimed credit for things he didn’t do and twisted his record on jobs, taxes, the pandemic and much more. Falsehoods suffused his farewell remarks to the country. As well, in noting Americans were “horrified” by the storming of the Capitol this month, he brushed past the encouragement he had given to the mob in advance and his praise of the attackers as “very special” people while they were still ransacking the seat of power. TRUMP: “Another administration would have taken three, four, five, maybe even up to 10 years to develop a vaccine. THE FACTS: Actually, the administration didn’t develop any vaccines. Pharmaceutical companies did. And one of the two U.S. companies that have come out with vaccines now in use did not take development money from the government. Trump’s contention that a vaccine would have taken years under a different administration stretches credulity. COVID-19 vaccines were indeed remarkably fast, but other countries have been developing them, too. A vaccine for the coronavirus is not a singular achievement of the United States, much less the Trump administration. U.S. drugmaker Pfizer developed its vaccine in partnership with Germany’s BioNTech, eschewing federal money for development, though benefitting from an advance commitment from Washington to buy large quantities if the vaccine succeeded. A vaccine by Moderna, from the U.S., is also in widespread use. But Britain’s AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine is being administered in several countries and vaccines from China and Russia are also in limited use. More than a dozen potential vaccines are in late stages of testing worldwide. THE FACTS: No, he did not get the Choice program passed. President Barack Obama did. Trump expanded it. The program allows veterans to get medical care outside the Veterans Affairs system under certain conditions. Trump has tried to take credit for Obama’s achievement scores of times. TRUMP: “We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history.” THE FACTS: His tax cuts are not close to the biggest in U.S. history. It’s a $1.5 trillion tax cut over 10 years. As a share of the total economy, a tax cut of that size ranks 12th, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. President Ronald Reagan’s 1981 cut is the biggest, followed by the 1945 rollback of taxes that financed World War II. Post-Reagan tax cuts also stand among the historically significant: President George W. Bush’s cuts in the early 2000s and Obama’s renewal of them a decade later. TRUMP: “We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world.” THE FACTS: No, the numbers show it wasn’t the greatest in U.S. history. And he is the first president since Herbert Hoover in the Depression to leave office with fewer jobs than when he started. Did the U.S. have the most jobs on record before the pandemic? Sure, the population had grown. The 3.5% unemployment rate before the recession was at a half-century low, but the percentage of people working or searching for jobs was still below a 2000 peak. Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Romer looked at Trump’s economic growth record. Growth under Trump averaged 2.48% annually before the pandemic, only slightly better than the 2.41% gains achieved during Obama’s second term. By contrast, the economic expansion that began in 1982 during Reagan’s presidency averaged 4.2% a year. TRUMP: “We reignited America’s job creation and achieved record-low unemployment for African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, women — almost everyone. THE FACTS: Not an ignition. Job creation actually slowed in 2017, Trump’s first year in office, to about 2 million, compared with nearly 2.5 million in 2016, Obama’s last year in office. The low unemployment rates refer to a pre-pandemic economy that is no more. The pandemic has cost the U.S. economy 10 million jobs and has made Trump the first president since Herbert Hoover to oversee a net loss of jobs. The U.S. has about 2.8 million fewer jobs now than when Trump was inaugurated, and lost 140,000 just in December. And the job losses have fallen disproportionately on Black Americans, Hispanics and women. TRUMP: “We rebuilt the American manufacturing base, opened up thousands of new factories, and brought back the beautiful phrase Made in the USA.” THE FACTS: That’s a stretch. There are now 60,000 fewer manufacturing jobs in the U.S. than when Trump took office. Despite gains before the pandemic, the manufacturing base had not exactly been “rebuilt.” Before the coronavirus, nearly 500,000 manufacturing jobs were added under Trump, somewhat better than the nearly 400,000 gained during Obama’s second term. Still, even before the pandemic, the U.S. had 4.3 million fewer factory jobs than it did in 2001, the year China joined the World Trade Organization and a flood of cheaper imports from that country entered the U.S. TRUMP: “All Americans were horrified by the assault on our Capitol. Political violence is an attack on everything we cherish as Americans. THE FACTS: That may sum up the reaction of most Americans but it ignores his own part in stirring the anger of his supporters before they staged the violent melee. For months, Trump falsely claimed the November election was stolen, then invited supporters to Washington and sent them off to the Capitol with the exhortation to “fight like hell.” With the uprising still under way and the velocity of the attack apparent from video and reports from the scene, Trump released a video telling them “to go home now” while repeating “this was a fraudulent election” and adding: “We love you. The House impeached Trump, accusing him of inciting an insurrection. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, a Trump political ally for four years, said Tuesday the Trump supporters were “fed lies” and ”provoked by the president and other powerful people.” TRUMP: “We imposed historic and monumental tariffs on China. ... Our trade relationship was rapidly changing, billions and billions of dollars were pouring into the U.S., but the virus forced us to go in a different direction.” THE FACTS: That’s a familiar assertion, false to the core. It’s false to suggest the U.S. never collected tariffs on Chinese goods before he took action. Tariffs on Chinese goods are simply higher in some cases than they were before. It’s also wrong to suggest that the tariffs are being paid by China. Tariff money coming into the government’s coffers is mainly from U.S. businesses and consumers, not from China. Tariffs are primarily if not entirely a tax paid domestically. THE FACTS: His suggestion of a 100% defeat is misleading as the Islamic State group still poses a threat. IS was defeated in Iraq in 2017, then lost the last of its land holdings in Syria in March 2019, marking the end of the extremists’ self-declared caliphate. Still, extremist sleeper cells have continued to launch attacks in Iraq and Syria in recent weeks and are believed to be responsible for targeted killings against local officials and members of the Syrian Democratic Forces. The continued attacks are a sign that the militant group is taking advantage of governments otherwise focused on the pandemic and the ensuing slide into economic chaos. The virus is compounding longtime concerns among security and U.N. experts that the group will stage a comeback. Associated Press writers Josh Boak, Robert Burns and Lolita C. Baldor contributed to this report. EDITOR’S NOTE — A look at the veracity of claims by political figures. Find AP Fact Checks at http://apnews.com/APFactCheck Follow @APFactCheck on Twitter: https://twitter.com/APFactCheck"
            },
            {
                "answer": "\"Nobody has ever been president that has the greatest economy in the history of our country,\" Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday.",
                "question": "What did President Trump say about the economy during his administration?",
                "url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/03/trumps-campaign-claims-about-his-economic-record-just-dont-add-up.html",
                "scraped_text": "To hear President Donald Trump tell it, the U.S. economy is experiencing an economic boom unlike any period in its history under his leadership. A closer look at the numbers, though, show that claim is questionable. With just days left before a critical midterm election, Trump has been barnstorming the country in a series of rallies reminiscent of his 2016 presidential campaign. This time around, he is touting his record on the economy, claiming to have created more jobs and expanded economic growth at a pace that not seen by any of his predecessors in the White House. \"Nobody has ever been president that has the greatest economy in the history of our country,\" Trump told reporters at the White House Thursday. \"This is the greatest economy in the history of our country.\" Trump touted the latest sign of economic strength in Friday's employment report, which showed a net gain of 250,000 new jobs in October, and wage gains of 3.1 percent from a year ago. That boost in wages was the best since April 2009, when the U.S. was emerging from the Great Recession. By any measure, those are good numbers. However, they're hardly the \"greatest\" in U.S. history. A better way to compare Trump's record is to compare the overall gains in the economy since he took office with those of his predecessors, during the same period in their presidencies. When viewed in that light, Trump's record on most of those measures is decidedly average. Below are four data points that suggest Trump's claims just don't add up."
            },
            {
                "answer": "\"We have the best economy we've ever had, we have the best jobs numbers in 51 years, the best unemployment numbers that we've had in a half a century,\" Trump added.",
                "question": "What specific economic indicators did the Trump administration use to support the claim of building the greatest economy in history?",
                "url": "https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html",
                "scraped_text": "- The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September, while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%. - The unemployment rate for Asian Americans was 2.5% in September. The jobless rate for adult women came in at 3.1%. There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the workforce, Friday's Labor Department job report showed. The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September, while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%. The Hispanic women unemployment rate was 3.8% in September and the Black adult women jobless rate was 4.6%. \"The best numbers that we've ever had: African American, Hispanic American, Asian American, Women, everything. We have the best numbers that we've had in many, many, many decades, \" President Donald Trump told reporters on Friday. The unemployment rate for Asian Americans was 2.5% in September. The jobless rate for adult women came in at 3.1%. Another bright-spot of the report was the overall unemployment rate. The jobless rate dropped 0.2 percentage points to 3.5%, its lowest reading in 50 years. Nonfarm payrolls rose by just 136,000 in September, below economists' expectations of 145,000, according to Dow Jones. \"We have the best economy we've ever had, we have the best jobs numbers in 51 years, the best unemployment numbers that we've had in a half a century,\" Trump added. Wages rose just 2.9% for the year, the lowest increase since July 2018."
            },
            {
                "answer": "Trump, Jan. 19: We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world.",
                "question": "What did Trump claim about the economy during his administration?",
                "url": "https://www.factcheck.org/2021/01/factchecking-trumps-farewell-remarks/",
                "scraped_text": "In a video farewell address on Jan. 19 and in remarks at Joint Base Andrews before leaving for Florida on Jan. 20, outgoing President Donald Trump distorted the facts on the economy, his tax cuts, veterans, the military, drug prices and more. Trump, Jan. 19: We also built the greatest economy in the history of the world. In his farewell speech, Trump pointed to the stock market — as he often does — as a measure of the nation’s economic success. But economists generally measure a nation’s health by the growth of its real (inflation-adjusted) gross domestic product. The U.S. rate of growth was 2.3% in 2017, 3.0% in 2018 and 2.2% in 2019, according to revised figures from the Bureau of Economic Analysis. Over the last 39 years — dating to Ronald Reagan’s presidency — the nation’s real economic growth has exceeded Trump’s peak year of 3.0% 17 times, including most recently under then-President Barack Obama in 2015. Trump, Jan. 19: When the virus took its brutal toll on the world’s economy, we launched the fastest economic recovery our country has ever seen. We passed nearly $4 trillion in economic relief, saved or supported over 50 million jobs, and slashed the unemployment rate in half. These are numbers that our country has never seen before. Trump is spinning the facts when he speaks of saving jobs, spurring the “fastest economic recovery” and cutting the unemployment rate in half. The unemployment rate peaked at 14.8% in April, when the economy was largely shutdown because of COVID-19. But even at 6.7% — which is where it stood last month — the unemployment rate is well above the historical norm of 5.6% since 1948, as we wrote in “What President Biden Inherits.” There also is no independent evidence that the economic relief provided by Congress and Trump have “saved or supported over 50 million jobs.” The Trump administration claimed the Paycheck Protection Program, which was created by legislation approved in March, saved 51 million jobs. However, in December, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that the “PPP was projected to save 106 million job-weeks in 2020 (a job-week is one week of work for an average worker whose job had been lost due to the pandemic).” Saving a “job-week” is very different than saving a job. Also, in a survey of economists, Reuters found that the PPP saved “only a fraction of 51 million – ranging between one million and 14 million.” A July 22, 2020, paper co-authored by economists at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Department of Economics and the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, using data from the payroll processing firm ADP, estimated that the PPP through the first week of June had “an aggregate employment effect of about 2.31 million workers.” As of December, the number of Americans employed was 9.8 million below the pre-recession peak in February, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Trump, Jan. 19: We also unlocked our energy resources and became the world’s number one producer of oil and natural gas by far. Trump takes undue credit for the U.S. becoming the world’s top producer of oil and natural gas. Before he took office, the U.S. was already the world’s top producer of total natural gas (since 2009) and petroleum hydrocarbons (since 2013). “Total petroleum production is made up of several different types of liquid fuels, including crude oil and lease condensate, tight oil, extra-heavy oil, and bitumen,” according to the Energy Information Administration. The U.S. did become the number one producer of crude oil in 2018, but as we have reported that was long expected to happen. The International Energy Agency’s 2012 energy outlook, for example, predicted that the U.S. would become the largest crude oil producer by 2020, primarily because of “profound” advances in hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, technology. Trump, Jan. 19: We passed the largest package of tax cuts and reforms in American history. It was perhaps fitting that Trump included this false claim in both farewell speeches — in his speech at Joint Base Andrews, Trump added that the tax cuts were the largest in history “by far.” It is one of his most frequent exaggerations. By the Washington Post’s count, it was the 295th time Trump has said it. As we have written — and written and written and written — there were more expensive tax laws in terms of percentage of gross domestic product and inflation-adjusted dollars than the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act championed by Trump. The Trump cuts will reduce tax revenues by nearly $1.5 trillion over 10 years, which still ranks it eighth or fourth place, as measured by a percentage of GDP or in inflation-adjusted dollars, respectively. The largest tax cut in history, as a percentage of GDP, came under President Ronald Reagan in 1981, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget. Trump, Jan. 20: And our beautiful vets, they were very badly treated before we came along. And, as you know, we get them great service, and we pick up the bill, and they can go out, and they can see a doctor if they have to wait long periods of time. We got it so that we can, sadly, get rid of people that don’t treat our vets properly. We had — we didn’t have any of those rights before when I came on. As he has done many times before, Trump exaggerated his accomplishments for veterans, wrongly saying the U.S. “didn’t have any of those rights” he mentioned before his tenure. He described the Veterans Choice Program, which allows veterans to get care from eligible non-Veterans Affairs health care providers if they face travel burdens or can’t get timely appointments at the VA. That program was created by the 2014 bipartisan Veterans Access, Choice, and Accountability Act, signed by then-President Barack Obama. Trump continued the program and expanded it by signing the bipartisan VA MISSION Act in 2018, which called for consolidating Veterans Choice and other private-care options into a new Veterans Community Care Program. As for his claim about getting “rid of people that don’t treat our vets properly,” Trump signed legislation in his first year in office to make it easier for the VA secretary to fire employees — the bipartisan Department of Veterans Affairs Accountability and Whistleblower Protection Act. But it’s not true that the VA couldn’t fire people before. As we’ve written, going back to 2006, the VA fired more than 2,000 employees each year before Trump was inaugurated, according to data the agency reported to the Office of Personnel Management. Trump, Jan. 20: We just got 75 million votes. And that’s a record, in the history of … sitting presidents. That’s an all-time record by a lot, by many millions, in the history of sitting presidents. This is true — or nearly so; he got 74.2 million popular votes. But his opponent, Joe Biden, got nearly 81.3 million votes. That’s a 4.5 percentage point advantage for Biden in the popular vote. Of course, elections are won not through popular vote totals but by Electoral College votes. By that measure, Biden won 306-232, the same margin by which Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in 2016. In his speech at the “Save America” rally on Jan. 6, which immediately preceded an attack on the Capitol by his supporters, Trump cited his vote total to make the case that the election was “stolen.” “Almost 75 million people voted for our campaign, the most of any incumbent president by far in the history of our country, 12 million more people than four years ago,” Trump said. “I was told by the real pollsters … if I went from 63 million, which we had four years ago to 66 million, there was no chance of losing. Well, we didn’t go to 66. We went to 75 million and they say we lost. We didn’t lose.” Trump’s loss was possible because, despite Trump’s vote total increase from 2016, voter turnout was the highest in 120 years. And as we have written repeatedly, contrary to Trump’s claims, there has been no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Trump, Jan. 19: We … stood up to big pharma in so many ways, but especially in our effort to get favored nations clauses added, which will give us the lowest prescription drug prices anywhere in the world. Late in his first term, Trump signed several executive orders on drug prices, but, as we explained, it remains to be seen how the orders will be implemented and whether they will result in large price reductions. As for Trump’s reference to “favored nations,” that updated executive order, signed Sept. 13, hasn’t had any impact. It called on the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to test payment models to tie Medicare drug prices to the lowest price among comparable countries that are members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. On Nov. 27, HHS’ Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued an interim final rule to launch a seven-year model, slated to begin on Jan. 1, to test the idea with Medicare Part B drugs, which are those administered by doctors, such as intravenous or injectible drugs. But a month later, U.S. District Judge Catherine C. Blake issued an injunction blocking CMS from launching the model. The lawsuit was filed by health care provider and drug manufacturing groups, including the Association of Community Cancer Centers and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. Blake wrote in her order that the plaintiffs “have demonstrated they are likely to prevail on the merits” of the case, which argues CMS skipped over legal requirements in federal rule-making procedures. “The court is not unsympathetic to CMS’s desire to test a new model to rein in Medicare Part B drug costs,” Blake wrote. “But an agency may not dispense with notice and comment procedures merely because it wishes to implement what it sees as a beneficial regulation immediately.” Trump, Jan. 19: And perhaps most importantly of all, with nearly $3 trillion, we fully rebuilt the American military, all made in the USA. Trump’s figure is the total for defense budgets from 2017 to 2020, not the amount spent on U.S.-made military equipment, as he suggested and has often claimed. As we’ve explained, the Defense Department budgets passed under Trump have totaled $2.9 trillion. That’s larger, in inflation-adjusted dollars, than the $2.7 trillion budgeted in the last four years under Obama, but the budgets in Obama’s first four years were nearly $3.3 trillion. Over the summer, Trump described the defense budgets under his term as an investment of “$2.5 trillion in all of the greatest equipment in the world.” But the cost of purchasing new military equipment was 20% of Trump’s 2017-2020 budgets. Trump, Jan. 19: We restored American strength at home and American leadership abroad. The world respects us again. We’re not aware of a survey that measures “respect,” but a 13-nation Pew Research Center survey from September found that U.S. favorability ratings in the vast majority of those countries were down significantly from 2016, the last year before Trump was inaugurated. In fact, Pew noted: “In several countries, the share of the public with a favorable view of the U.S. is as low as it has been at any point since the Center began polling on this topic nearly two decades ago.” The countries with record-low percentages of their residents with a favorable opinion of the U.S. in 2020 were Japan (41%), the United Kingdom (41%), Canada (35%), Australia (33%), Sweden (33%), France (31%) and the Netherlands (30%). In addition to those seven nations — which all saw declines of 20 percentage points or more compared with 2016 — U.S. favorability was also down 27 points in Italy (45%), down 31 points in Germany (26%) and down 19 points in Spain (40%). As for the other three countries with residents who were polled: U.S. favorability in South Korea was 59% in 2020, the lowest rating of Trump’s presidency and down 25 points from 2015 — the last year for data in that country before Trump took office. And in Denmark and Belgium, respectively, 34% and 24% of residents had a favorable view of the U.S. in 2020, the first year for ratings in either country. Trump, Jan. 19: I am especially proud to be the first president in decades who has started no new wars. As our fact-checking colleagues at the Washington Post wrote, this claim, resting on the idea that Jimmy Carter was the last president who didn’t start a new war, is “highly debatable.” Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. armed rebels and launched airstrikes in Syria against the Islamic State. But the Islamic State grew out of the Iraq War, which began under President George W. Bush. Obama also authorized drone strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. Trump ordered an airstrike in Iraq that killed Iranian military commander Qasem Soleimani. But the administration’s national security adviser, Robert O’Brien, told reporters that was authorized under a 2002 resolution giving the president the authority to take actions against “the continuing threat posed by Iraq.” Editor’s note: FactCheck.org does not accept advertising. We rely on grants and individual donations from people like you. Please consider a donation. Credit card donations may be made through our “Donate” page. If you prefer to give by check, send to: FactCheck.org, Annenberg Public Policy Center, 202 S. 36th St., Philadelphia, PA 19104."
            },
            {
                "answer": "- ^ \"Donald Trump is assembling the richest administration in modern American history\". The Washington Post.",
                "question": "What is the economic performance of the Trump administration compared to previous administrations?",
                "url": "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabinet_of_Donald_Trump",
                "scraped_text": "Donald Trump assumed office as president of the United States on January 20, 2017, and his term ended on January 20, 2021. The president has the authority to nominate members of his Cabinet to the United States Senate for confirmation under the Appointments Clause of the United States Constitution. Before confirmation and during congressional hearings a high-level career member of an executive department heads this pre-confirmed cabinet on an acting basis. The Cabinet's creation was part of the transition of power following the 2016 United States presidential election. This article documents the confirmation process for any successful or unsuccessful Cabinet nominees of the Trump administration. They are listed in order of creation of the Cabinet position (also used as the basis for the United States presidential line of succession). All members of the Cabinet of the United States require the advice and consent of the United States Senate following appointment by the president before taking office. The vice presidency is exceptional in that the position requires election to office pursuant to the United States Constitution. Although some are afforded cabinet-level rank, non-cabinet members within the Executive Office of the President, such as White House Chief of Staff, National Security Advisor, and White House Press Secretary, do not hold constitutionally created positions and most do not require Senate confirmation for appointment. The following were the final members of Donald Trump's Cabinet on January 20, 2021. For other high-level positions, see the list of Donald Trump political appointments. Individual elected to office, and does not serve at the pleasure of the president of the United States (all other cabinet members do) Individual took office with no Senate consent needed Due to Trump's lack of prior government or military experience, and his political positions,[84] much interest was expressed in the media over his cabinet nominations, as they were believed to show how he intended to govern. Trump's proposed cabinet was characterized by the media as being very conservative. It was described as a \"conservative dream team\" by Politico,[85] \"the most conservative cabinet [in United States history]\" by Newsweek,[86] and \"one of the most consistently conservative domestic policy teams in modern history\" by the Los Angeles Times.[87] The Hill described Trump's potential cabinet as \"an unorthodox team\" popular with conservatives, that more establishment Republicans such as John McCain or Mitt Romney likely would not have chosen.[88] CNN agreed, calling the proposed cabinet \"a conservative dream team of domestic Cabinet appointments. \"[89] On the other hand, The Wall Street Journal stated that \"it's nearly impossible to identify a clear ideological bent in the incoming president's\" cabinet nominations.[90] The Wall Street Journal also stated that Trump's nominations signaled a pro-deregulation administration policy.[91] Several of his cabinet nominees politically opposed the federal departments they were selected to lead.[92] In terms of total personal wealth, Trump's cabinet was the wealthiest in modern American history.[93] The cabinet was largely made up of nominees who had business experience but minimal or no experience in the government when compared to the administrations of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama.[94] The Pew Research Center also noted that Trump's cabinet was one of the most business-heavy in American history: \"A third of the department heads in the Trump administration (33%) were people whose prior experience had been entirely in the public sector. Only three other U.S. Presidents are in the same range: William McKinley (three out of eight Cabinet positions, or 37.5%), Ronald Reagan (four out of 13 positions, or 31%), and Dwight Eisenhower (three out of 10 positions, or 30%).\"[95] There were no economists in President Trump's cabinet.[96] There were also significantly fewer lawyers in Trump's cabinet compared to previous presidents' cabinets.[97] Despite being nominated promptly during the transition period, most cabinet members were unable to take office on Inauguration Day because of delays in the formal confirmation process. By February 8, 2017, President Trump had fewer cabinet nominees confirmed than any prior president two weeks into his mandate, except George Washington.[98][99] Part of the lateness was ascribed to opposition by Senate Democrats and part to delays in submitting background-check paperwork.[100] The final initial Cabinet member to take office, Robert Lighthizer, took office as U.S. Trade Representative on May 11, 2017, more than four months after his nomination.[101] Choosing members of the presidential Cabinet (and other high-level positions) is a complicated process, and began before the November 2016 general election results were known. In the case of the Trump 2016 campaign, his former rival for the Republican nomination Chris Christie was appointed to lead the transition team in May 2016, shortly after Ted Cruz and John Kasich suspended their campaigns (thus making Trump the presumptive nominee of the party). In addition to various other responsibilities, the transition team is responsible for making preliminary lists of potential executive branch appointees—at least for the several dozen high-level positions if not for the several thousand lower-level positions—and doing some early vetting work on those people. The transition team also hires policy experts (more than a hundred in the case of the Trump transition team by October 2016), using primarily federal funds and federal office space, to help plan how a then-hypothetical Trump administration would implement their policy-goals via the various federal agencies and departments. After the election in November 2016, when the ticket formed by Trump and Pence defeated the Clinton and Kaine ticket as well as various third party opponents, the transition team was quickly reshuffled and expanded; Mike Pence was given the lead role (over Chris Christie), and several additional top-level transition personnel were added to the transition effort, most of them from the now-finished campaign effort. During the remainder of 2016, the team continued finding and vetting potential nominees for the various positions, as the Electoral College process was ongoing (including recounts in some states where the winning margin was relatively tiny) and before the presidential inauguration in January 2017. President-elect Trump announced his first post-election Cabinet nominee, Jeff Sessions for the role of United States Attorney General, on November 18, 2016. (Trump had earlier announced Mike Pence as his pick for vice-presidential running mate in July 2016, which was shortly thereafter confirmed by the delegates to the Republican National Convention when they officially nominated first Trump and then Pence.) Although most positions were simultaneously under consideration by the transition team, the official announcement of offers, and the public acceptance of the offers, usually happens gradually as slots are filled (Richard Nixon being the exception). |The Postmaster General position was quasi-privatized in 1971. |Two new Cabinet positions: Energy in 1977, Education in 1979. |Failed attempt to abolish the federal Department of Education. |The VA was established in 1989. The four earliest nominees were continuations of the Reagan Cabinet. |The DHS was established in 2003. Announcements of appointees were delayed by the Florida recount. |Slightly differing figures are given in some sources.[102][105][106][104] For purposes of historical comparison, this chart includes only Cabinet roles, and not the cabinet-level positions. However, note that the number of Cabinet positions has varied from administration to administration: under Nixon there were twelve such roles in 1968, whereas under Trump in 2016 there are fifteen. After Election Day, media outlets reported on persons described by various sources as possible appointments to senior positions in the incoming Trump presidency. The number of people which have received media attention as potential cabinet appointees is higher than in most previous presidential elections, partly because the Trump '16 campaign staff (and associated PACs) was significantly smaller and less expensive,[107] thus there are not as many people already expected to receive specific roles in the upcoming Trump administration. In particular, \"Trump ha[d] a smaller policy brain trust [policy group] than a new president normally carries\"[108] because as an anti-establishment candidate who began his campaign by largely self-funding his way to the Republican Party nomination,[109] unlike most previous presidential winners \"Trump does not have the traditional cadre of Washington insiders and donors to build out his Cabinet. \"[110] An additional factor that tends to make the field of potential nominees especially broad, is that unlike most presidential transition teams who select politicians as their appointees, the Trump transition team \"has started with a mandate to hire from the private sector [as opposed to the governmental sector] whenever possible.\"[110] The vice president is the only cabinet member to be elected to the position and who does not serve at the pleasure of the president. There were dozens of potential running mates for Trump who received media speculation. Trump's eventual pick of Governor Mike Pence of Indiana was officially announced on July 16, 2016, and confirmed by acclamation via parliamentary procedure amongst delegates to the 2016 Republican National Convention on July 19, 2016. The following cabinet positions are listed in order of their creation (also used as the basis for the United States presidential line of succession). The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Foreign Relations committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Before Tillerson was sworn in, Tom Shannon served as the acting secretary from January 20 until February 1, 2017. On December 12, 2016, Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil, was officially selected to be the Secretary of State.[111] Tillerson was first recommended to Trump for the secretary of state role by Condoleezza Rice, during her meeting with Trump in late November.[112] Rice's recommendation of Tillerson to Trump was backed up by Robert Gates three days later.[112] Tillerson's confirmation hearing with the Foreign Relations committee was held on January 11, 2017. During the hearing, Tillerson voiced support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership and opposed a Muslim immigration ban that has been proposed by Donald Trump in the past.[113] Tillerson was approved by the Foreign Relations committee on January 23, 2017, by a vote of 11–10.[114] On Wednesday, February 1, Tillerson was confirmed by the senate 56–43.[115] John J. Sullivan served as acting secretary from April 1, 2018, until April 26, 2018. On March 13, 2018, Trump dismissed Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State, and announced his nomination of CIA Director Mike Pompeo to the office.[116] Pompeo was confirmed by the Senate on April 26 in a 57–42 vote and was sworn in later that day.[117][118][119] He served until the end of Trump's term, on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Finance committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Adam Szubin served as acting secretary from January 20 until February 13, 2017. Trump announced the selection of investment banker Steve Mnuchin as Secretary of the Treasury on November 30, 2016.[120] The New York Times noted that Mnuchin's selection was surprising, since Trump had attacked the banking industry and Goldman Sachs during the campaign. Mnuchin is the third Goldman alumnus to serve as treasury secretary.[121] During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Finance Committee on January 19, 2017, Mnuchin was criticized by Democrats due to the foreclosure practices at his company OneWest.[122] Mnuchin also failed to disclose, in required disclosure documents, $95 million of real estate he owned, and his role as director of Dune Capital International, an investment fund in a tax haven. Mnuchin described the omissions as mistakes made amid a mountain of bureaucracy.[123] Democrats of the Finance Committee boycotted the vote of Mnuchin and many other nominees in response to Trump's controversial immigration executive order. On February 1, 2017, Republicans suspended committee rules to send the nomination to the Senate floor on a vote of 11–0.[124][123] Mnuchin was confirmed by the full Senate 53–47 on February 13, 2017. The vote fell along party lines with exception of Senator Joe Manchin as the sole Democratic vote for Mnuchin.[125][126] He served until the end of Trump's term, on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Armed Services committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Trump informally announced the selection of General Jim Mattis as Secretary of Defense on December 1, 2016.[127] (The Trump Transition Team formally announced the selection on December 6, 2016.[128]) As with most cabinet roles, the Secretary-designate of Defense undergoes hearings before the appropriate committee of the United States Senate, followed by a confirmation-vote. In the case of Mattis, there was an additional step needed as he had retired from the military three years ago, since statute section 903(a) of the NDAA demands a minimum of seven years as a civilian for Pentagon appointees, therefore Mattis needed a waiver to be allowed to become Secretary of Defense.[129] During his hearing, Mattis agreed with the assessment that debt was the greatest threat to national security. He placed Russia first among the \"principal threats\" facing the United States and called Iran \"the primary source of turmoil\" for unrest in the Middle East. In contrast with Trump's campaign promises, Mattis advocated for maintaining NATO and keeping the Iran Nuclear Deal. He urged for a clear cybersecurity doctrine to be implemented.[130][131][132] On January 12, 2017, the Senate Armed Services Committee voted, 24–3, to grant the waiver. The full Senate voted, 81–17, to pass the waiver three hours later. After the Trump transition team canceled a meeting between Mattis and the House Armed Services Committee, the waiver narrowly passed the committee by a vote of 34–28. The House voted, 268–151, to grant the waiver.[133] The Senate Armed Services Committee approved Mattis's confirmation on January 18, 2017, by a 26–1 margin, and sent the nomination to the full Senate for consideration.[134] One of Donald Trump's first acts as president was the approval of Mattis's waiver to become Secretary of Defense. After being confirmed by the Senate on the evening of January 20, 2017, by a vote of 98–1, Mattis was sworn in by Vice President Pence on the same evening.[135] On December 20, 2018, Secretary Mattis announced his intention to resign at the end of February 2019.[136][137] President Trump moved the departure date up to January 1, 2019.[138][139] Upon the end of Secretary Mattis's tenure on January 1, Patrick M. Shanahan, the Deputy Secretary of Defense, became acting Secretary until June 23, 2019. Five months later, in May, the White House announced its intent to nominate Shanahan to serve as Secretary of Defense on a permanent basis;[140] by June, Shanahan withdrew, citing family issues.[141] With Shanahan's withdrawal, President Trump named Mark Esper, the Secretary of the Army, as his replacement as acting secretary.[141] Once Esper was officially nominated on July 15, he stepped down in accordance with the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998; Richard V. Spencer, the Secretary of the Navy, then became acting secretary.[142] Esper was confirmed by the Senate, 90–8, on July 23, 2019; he was sworn in that day.[143] On November 9, 2020, Esper was removed from his position, and replaced with Christopher C. Miller.[144] Christopher C. Miller served as acting Secretary from November 9, 2020, to the end of Trump's term. The nomination of an Attorney General-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Judiciary committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Sally Yates served as acting attorney general from January 20, 2017, until her firing on January 30 of that same year. On January 30, 2017, Trump appointed Dana Boente, the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, to serve as acting Attorney General until Jeff Sessions' Senate confirmation.[145] Boente had replaced Sally Yates who was fired by Trump for ordering the Justice Department to not defend Trump's Executive Order 13769 which restricted entry to the United States.[146] Yates claimed that, \"At present, I am not convinced that the defense of the executive order is consistent with these responsibilities [of the Department of Justice], nor am I convinced that the executive order is lawful\".[147][148] Boente served until the confirmation of Jeff Sessions on February 9, 2017. Trump's selection of Senator Jeff Sessions from Alabama was officially announced on November 18, 2016. Members of the Democratic party in the Senate had stated their intention to oppose Sessions; that said, successfully defeating the nomination of Sessions would have required peeling away the votes of at least two or three Republican members of the Senate body.[125] Republican members of the Judiciary Committee spoke favorably towards Sessions,[149] as Sessions had been a former member of the Judiciary Committee while serving as senator. Although Democratic party senators, including Elizabeth Warren, criticized Sessions, at least one Democratic Senator, Joe Manchin of West Virginia, stated he would vote to confirm Sessions.[149] Historically, there has never been a sitting senator appointed to cabinet position who was denied that post during the confirmation process.[149] The confirmation process for Trump's nominee Senator Jeff Sessions was described as \"strikingly contentious\" by The New York Times;[150] as Senator Mitch McConnell invoked Rule XIX to silence Senator Elizabeth Warren for the rest of the consideration of the nomination. While explaining his use of the rule, McConnell said, \"She [Warren] was warned. She was given an explanation. Nevertheless, she persisted. \"[151] The last three words, \"Nevertheless, she persisted\" were appropriated by feminist and liberals as a rally cry in favor of women's rights. McConnell interrupted Warren as she had read a letter by Coretta Scott King opposing Sessions' nomination to a federal judgeship along with several statements which were made by Senator Ted Kennedy in 1986 during Senate hearings on Sessions' nomination. Afterwards, Warren live-streamed herself reading the letter, critical of Sessions, that Coretta Scott King had written to Senator Strom Thurmond in 1986.[152] On February 8, Sessions was confirmed as United States Attorney General by a vote of 52–47, with all the Republican senators and Democratic Senator Joe Manchin voting in favor of Sessions' confirmation and all other senators voting against Sessions' confirmation. Sessions' confirmation ended a nomination battle which was described by The New York Times as \"bitter and racially charged\".[153] On November 7, 2018 – the day after the 2018 midterm elections – Jeff Sessions resigned as Attorney General at the president's request.[154][155][156] With the resignation of Sessions on November 7, 2018, Trump appointed Sessions' chief of staff Matthew Whitaker to serve as acting attorney general.[157] Multiple legal challenges to Whitaker's appointment were filed.[158] All were dismissed. William Barr, a former U.S. Attorney General in the George H. W. Bush administration, was nominated to reprise his former role as the permanent replacement for Sessions. He was confirmed by the Senate in February 2019 by a 54–45 vote.[159] Barr announced that he would resign as attorney general on December 14, 2020, which came into effect on December 23, 2020.[160] Jeffrey A. Rosen became the acting Attorney General following the resignation of Barr on December 23, 2020. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Energy and Natural Resources committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Kevin Haugrud served as the acting Secretary of the Interior from January 20 until March 1, 2017. Congressman Ryan Zinke was announced as the nominee for Secretary of the Interior on December 15, 2016.[161] His nomination was approved by a 16–6 vote from the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on January 31, 2017.[162] Zinke was confirmed on March 1, 2017, by a vote of 68–31, becoming the first Navy SEAL to occupy a Cabinet position.[163][164] Zinke resigned as Secretary of the Interior on January 2, 2019. Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt became Acting Secretary of the Interior.[165] David Bernhardt served as acting secretary from January 2 until April 11, 2019, when he was sworn in. On February 4, 2019, President Donald Trump announced his intention to nominate Interior Deputy Secretary and current Acting Secretary Bernhardt to be the next United States Secretary of the Interior. Bernhardt was confirmed on April 11, 2019, with a 56–41 vote. He served until the end of Trump's term. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Mike Young served as acting secretary from January 20 until April 25, 2017. On January 18, 2017, Sonny Perdue, former governor of Georgia, was selected to be the Secretary of Agriculture.[166] On April 24, 2017, Perdue was confirmed by the Senate in an 87–11 vote. He served until the end of the Trump administration, on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. President Trump left this position vacant until Ross was sworn in. Trump's selection of CEO Wilbur Ross from Florida (formerly of New York) was officially announced on November 30, 2016. Confirmation hearings were originally scheduled for January 12, but were postponed because the Commerce Committee had not yet received the ethics agreement from the Office of Government Ethics and the Department of Commerce.[167] On February 27, 2017, he was confirmed by the United States Senate in a 72–27 vote. He assumed office on February 28, 2017,[27] and left office at the end of the Trump administration. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Edward C. Hugler served as acting secretary from January 20 until April 28, 2017. On December 8, 2016, Andy Puzder, then CEO of CKE Restaurants, was officially selected to be the Secretary of Labor. The Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee (HELP) delayed Puzder's hearing five times due to missing paperwork from the Office of Government Ethics.[168] It was revealed that before the nomination Puzder employed a housekeeper who was not authorized to work in the U.S. Puzder failed to pay employer taxes. Puzder fired the housekeeper and amended his taxes only after his nomination.[169] Prior cabinet nominations from the Bush and Clinton administrations with undocumented housekeepers have had to withdraw their nominations. On February 8, 2017, the Office of Government Ethics submitted Puzder's ethics paperwork to Congress.[170] It was also revealed Puzder's ex-wife Lisa Fierstein appeared in disguise on Oprah Winfrey's talk show in the 1980s. In the interview, she alleged Puzder beat her. She later recanted. Fierstein sent a letter to Congress shortly after his nomination stating, \"Andy is not and was not abusive or violent.\" Complying with the HELP committee, the Oprah Winfrey Network produced tapes from the interview for members of the committee to view.[171] Four Republican Senators from the HELP committee – Susan Collins, Tim Scott, Johnny Isakson, and Lisa Murkowski – expressed doubt over Puzder's nomination.[169] On February 15, a day before his scheduled hearing, Puzder released a statement to the Associated Press officially withdrawing his nomination.[172] On February 16, 2017, Alex Acosta, dean of the Florida International University College of Law and former Justice Department attorney, was officially selected to be the Secretary of Labor.[173] On April 27, 2017, Acosta was confirmed by the Senate in a 60–38 vote. Acosta announced his resignation on July 12, 2019, following widespread criticism of his handling of the prosecution of and subsequent plea deal with Jeffrey Epstein when serving as U.S. District Attorney in Florida. His deputy, Patrick Pizzella, became acting secretary.[174] Patrick Pizzella served as acting secretary from July 20 until September 30, 2019. On July 18, 2019, President Trump announced his intent to nominate Eugene Scalia, the former Solicitor of Labor and the son of Antonin Scalia, to be Secretary of Labor;[175] Almost exactly a month later, on September 26, Scalia was confirmed by the Senate in a 53–44 vote.[177] He was sworn in four days later.[178] He served until January 20, 2021, the start of the next administration. Although historically the nominee also holds meetings with the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee, officially the nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the United States Senate Committee on Finance, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Norris Cochran served as acting secretary from January 20 until February 10, 2017. Trump's selection of Representative Tom Price from Georgia was officially announced on November 28, 2016.[179][180][181] Price was confirmed by the Senate on February 10, 2017, in a 52–47 vote along party lines, with all Republicans voting in favor and all Democrats voting against.[182] Price resigned on September 29, 2017, amid reports that he had expended more than $1 million of department funds for his own travel on private charter jets and military aircraft.[183] Price is the shortest-serving confirmed Secretary of Health and Human Services, with a tenure of just 231 days.[184] Don J. Wright served as acting secretary from September 29, 2017, until his resignation on October 10, 2017. Eric Hargan served as acting secretary from October 10, 2017, until January 29, 2018. On November 13, 2017, President Trump announced via Twitter that Alex Azar was his nominee to be the next HHS Secretary.[185] Azar was the former deputy secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under George W. Bush (2005–2007)[186] and president of Lilly USA, LLC, the largest affiliate of global biopharmaceutical leader Eli Lilly and Company from 2012 to 2017. Azar was confirmed by 53–43 vote on January 24, 2018. He took office on January 29, 2018,[187][188] and left office on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Craig Clemmensen served as acting secretary from January 20 until March 2, 2017. On December 5, 2016, President-elect Donald Trump announced that he would nominate Ben Carson to the position of Secretary of Housing and Urban Development.[189] During confirmation hearings, Carson was held under close scrutiny for his lack of relevant experience, and because he has been one of the most hostile critics of HUD's role in enforcing anti-discrimination laws.[190] On January 24, 2017, the Senate Banking Committee voted unanimously to approve the nomination, sending it to the Senate floor for a complete vote.[191] On March 2, 2017, Carson was confirmed by the United States Senate in a 58–41 vote.[192] He served until the end of the Trump administration, on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Michael Huerta served as acting secretary from January 20 until January 31, 2017. On November 29, 2016, it was reported that President-elect Trump had selected former United States Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao of Kentucky as his Secretary of Transportation.[193][194] On January 31, Chao was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 93–6.[am] On January 7, 2021, Chao announced her resignation effective January 11, due to the January 6 U.S. Capitol attack.[195] With the resignation of Chao, her deputy, Steven G. Bradbury became acting Secretary on January 11, 2021, and served for the final days of the administration. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Energy and Natural Resources committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Grace Bochenek served as acting secretary from January 20 until March 2, 2017. On December 13, 2016, Rick Perry, former Governor of Texas, was selected to be the Secretary of Energy.[196] During a previous presidential campaign, Perry said he intended to abolish the department.[197] His nomination was approved by a 16–7 vote from the United States Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources on January 31, 2017.[198] On March 2, 2017, Perry was confirmed by the United States Senate in a 62–37 vote.[199] On October 17, 2019, Rick Perry informed President Trump that he planned to resign by the end of the year. On October 18, 2019, Trump nominated the Deputy Secretary of Energy, Dan Brouillette, to replace him; Perry left in early December.[200] Dan Brouillette, the Deputy Secretary, served as acting secretary from December 2 until December 4, 2019. He was confirmed by the Senate by a 70–15 vote, on December 2, 2019.[200] He left his position on January 20, 2021. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Phil Rosenfelt served as acting secretary from January 20 until February 7, 2017. Trump's selection of former RNC member Betsy DeVos from Michigan was officially announced on November 23, 2016. Originally scheduled for January 11, but was postponed because the Office of Government Ethics had not completed its review of DeVos' financial holdings and potential conflicts of interest.[201] On January 20, the Office of Government Ethics completed their ethics report on DeVos, three days after her hearing with the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions was held. Senate Democrats requested a second hearing for DeVos after the ethics report was released, but committee chair Senator Lamar Alexander denied it. DeVos repeatedly said she would divest from 102 companies within ninety days if confirmed.[202][203][204] On February 7, 2017, the full senate voted 51–50 – with Vice President Pence casting the tie-breaking vote – to confirm DeVos, with Pence becoming the first vice president to cast the tie-breaking vote for a cabinet nominee [205][206] ever. DeVos resigned on January 7, 2021, due to the 2021 storming of the United States Capitol,[207] effective the next day. Deputy Secretary Mick Zais succeeded DeVos in an acting capacity on January 8, 2021, and served for the final days of the administration. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Veterans Affairs committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Robert Snyder served as acting secretary from January 20 until February 14, 2017. On January 11, 2017, David Shulkin, the Under Secretary of Veterans Affairs for Health under President Barack Obama, was selected to be the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.[208] He was later confirmed by the Senate by a 100 to 0 vote. In February 2018, the VA inspector general issued a report criticizing Shulkin for misusing department funds to pay for his and his wife's personal travel.[209] Robert Wilkie served as acting secretary from March 28 until May 29, 2018. Peter O'Rourke served as acting secretary from May 29 until July 30, 2018. Trump initially said he would replace Shulkin with Ronny Jackson, his White House personal physician.[211] Senators expressed skepticism of the nomination due to Jackson's lack of management experience.[212] Current and former employees on the White House Medical Unit accused Jackson of creating a hostile work environment, excessively drinking on the job, and improperly dispensing medication.[213] Trump defended Jackson as \"one of the finest people that I have met\", but hinted that Jackson might withdraw from being considered for the position.[214] Jackson withdrew his nomination on April 26.[215] The President nominated Former Defense Undersecretary and VA Acting Secretary Robert Wilkie on May 18, 2018, to replace Shulkin. Wilkie was confirmed by the Senate on July 23, 2018, with an 86–9 vote. He served until the end of Trump's term. The nomination of a Secretary-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs committee, then presented to the full Senate for a vote. On December 7, 2016, John F. Kelly, retired four-star Marine general, was selected to be the Secretary of Homeland Security.[216] He was confirmed by the Senate with a vote of 88–11 and sworn in on the evening of January 20. Kelly's term ended on July 28, 2017, following his appointment as White House Chief of Staff.[217] Elaine Duke served as acting secretary from July 31 until December 6, 2017. On October 11, 2017, multiple sources reported Trump's interest in nominating Kirstjen Nielsen as Secretary of Homeland Security.[218] She had served as Principal Deputy White House Chief of Staff to Chief of Staff John F. Kelly.[219][220] On December 5, 2017, the Senate confirmed her nomination, by a 62–37 vote.[221] She took office the next day. On April 7, 2019, Nielsen resigned, with effect on April 11.[222] [223] Kevin McAleenan served as acting secretary from April 11 until November 13, 2019, when he resigned. Chad Wolf served as acting secretary from November 13, 2019, until he resigned on January 11, 2021. Pete Gaynor, Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, succeeded Wolf in an acting capacity on January 12, 2021.[224] Cabinet-level officials have positions that are considered to be of Cabinet level, but which are not part of the Cabinet. Which exact positions are considered part of the presidential cabinet, can vary with the president. The CIA and FEMA were cabinet-level agencies under Bill Clinton, but not George W. Bush. The head of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (aka the drug czar) was a cabinet-level position under both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, but not under Barack Obama. (Not to be confused with the head of the DEA, who has remained in the org chart underneath the cabinet position held by the Attorney General.) Designation of an agency as being cabinet-level requires[citation needed] that Congress enact legislation, although executive orders unilaterally created by the president can be used to create many other types of position inside the executive branch.[citation needed] Members of the cabinet proper, as well as cabinet-level officials, meet with the president in a room adjacent to the Oval Office. The White House Chief of Staff has traditionally been the highest-ranking employee of the White House. The responsibilities of the chief of staff are both managerial and advisory over the president's official business. The chief of staff is appointed by and serves at the pleasure of the president; it does not require Senate confirmation. Trump's selection of former RNC chair Reince Priebus from Wisconsin was officially announced on November 13, 2016. This role does not require Senate confirmation. The appointment of Steve Bannon as Chief Strategist was announced simultaneously. Although that strategy-role is not a Cabinet-level position in the statutory sense, in an \"unusual arrangement\"[225] Priebus and Bannon were envisioned by the Trump transition team as being equal partners, and were announced simultaneously.[226][227] With Priebus accepting a role within the administration, Ronna Romney McDaniel was elected to replace Priebus in his former role as RNC chair. On July 28, 2017, Trump announced his Secretary for Homeland Security, John Kelly, would serve as his chief of staff.[229] On December 8, 2018, Trump announced that Kelly would be leaving as chief of staff.[230] OMB Director Mick Mulvaney concurrently served as acting White House Chief of Staff from January 2, 2019, until March 31, 2020. Mark Meadows replaced Mick Mulvaney on March 31, 2020.[231] The nomination of a Director-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the United States Senate Committee on Finance then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Maria Pagan served in this position from January 20 until March 2, 2017. Stephen Vaughn served in this position from March 2 until May 15, 2017. On January 3, 2017, Robert Lighthizer, a former Deputy United States Trade Representative under President Ronald Reagan, was selected to be the United States Trade Representative.[232] Due to Lighthizer's prior representation of foreign governments with a trade dispute with the United States, he will first need to obtain a special waiver to bypass the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The waiver would need to pass Congress and have the President's signature to assume the position. Congress waived the ban for Charlene Barshefsky, President Clinton's choice for Trade Representative in 1997.[233][234] Lighthizer was confirmed as U.S. Trade Representative on May 11, 2017, by a margin of 82–14.[235][236] Mike Dempsey served in this position from January 20 until March 15, 2017. On January 7, 2017, Dan Coats, former senator of Indiana, was officially selected to be the Director of National Intelligence.[237] On March 15, 2017, Coats was confirmed by the Senate by a vote of 85–12.[238] On August 15, 2019, Coats resigned from his position as Director of National Intelligence. Joseph Maguire took over as acting director on August 16, 2019. He resigned on February 21, 2020. Richard Grenell took office as acting director on February 21, 2020, and resigned to take a position in the 2020 Trump Campaign. Former Congressman John Ratcliffe was confirmed and assumed the position May 26, 2020. Like all ambassadorships and all official Cabinet positions, the nominee for this ambassador to the U.N. requires confirmation by the Senate. The nomination of an Ambassador-designate to the United Nations is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Michele J. Sison served in this position from January 20 until January 27, 2017. Trump officially announced Governor Nikki Haley from South Carolina as his selection for this role on November 23, 2016. She was confirmed on January 24, 2017, and subsequently resigned as South Carolina governor. Haley supported Marco Rubio in the Republican primaries and caucuses, but later endorsed Trump as the presumptive Republican nominee.[239] Haley's lieutenant governor, Henry McMaster, who was an early supporter of Trump, was also under consideration for a role in the Trump administration, but since he did not accept such a role, he succeeded to the governorship of South Carolina upon Haley's resignation.[240] On October 9, 2018, Haley announced that she was resigning her position as Ambassador effective at the end of 2018.[241][242] Jonathan Cohen served in this position from June 8 until November 17, 2019. On December 7, 2018, Trump nominated Heather Nauert for UN Ambassador.[243] Nauert withdrew her nomination on February 22, 2019. On February 22, 2019, Ambassador Kelly Craft was nominated by President Donald Trump to replace Nikki Haley, who had resigned two months prior, as his envoy to the United Nations.[244] Heather Nauert, reportedly the first choice, had withdrawn herself from consideration. Craft was confirmed on July 31, 2019. Director of the Office of Management and Budget[edit] The nomination of a Director-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and Budget Committee then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Mark Sandy served in this position from January 20 until February 16, 2017. On December 13, 2016, Mick Mulvaney, U.S. Representative for South Carolina's 5th congressional district, was selected to be the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.[245] In his statement to the Senate Budget Committee, Mulvaney admitted that he had failed to pay $15,000 in payroll taxes from 2000 to 2004 for a nanny he had hired to care for his triplets. Mulvaney said he did not pay the taxes because he viewed the woman as a babysitter rather than as a household employee. After filling out a questionnaire from the Trump transition team, he realized the lapse and began the process of paying back taxes and fees. Senate Democrats noted that Republicans had previously insisted that past Democratic nominees' failure to pay taxes for their household employees was disqualifying, including former Health and Human Services nominee Tom Daschle in 2009.[246][247] Budget Chairman Senator Mike Enzi (R-Wyoming) noted on the Senate floor, \"According to Senate records from President Jimmy Carter to President Obama, the longest it has ever taken to approve a first budget director for a new president was one week – one week. \"[248] On February 16, 2017, the Senate confirmed Mulvaney, 51–49.[249] Russell Vought has served in this position since January 2, 2019. On February 8, 2017, President Trump outlined the 24 members of the Cabinet with the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency being newly included.[250] The nomination of a Director-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the United States Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Meroe Park served in this position from January 20 until January 23, 2017. On November 18, 2016, Mike Pompeo, the Representative of Kansas's 4th congressional district, was officially selected to be the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.[251] He was confirmed by the United States Senate on January 23, 2017, with a vote of 66–32.[252] Pompeo was opposed by 30 Democratic Senators while the sole Republican vote against him came from Rand Paul. He was sworn in on the same night by Vice President Mike Pence. On March 13, 2018, Pompeo was named as secretary designate of the State Department following the dismissal of Rex Tillerson. Gina Haspel served in this position from April 26, 2018, until May 21 when she was sworn in. On March 13, 2018, President Trump announced via Twitter that he would nominate Gina Haspel to be the CIA director.[253] On May 17, Haspel was confirmed by the Senate in a 54–45 vote, officially giving her the post, and making her the first full-time female CIA director. Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency[edit] The nomination of an Administrator-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the Environment and Public Works Committee,[254] then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Catherine McCabe served in this position from January 20 until February 17, 2017. On December 7, 2016, Scott Pruitt, Attorney General of Oklahoma was selected to be the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.[255][256] In response to the nomination, Pruitt said, \"I intend to run this agency in a way that fosters both responsible protection of the environment and freedom for American businesses.\"[257] During his January 18 confirmation hearing, Pruitt's testimony openly acknowledged climate change. Pruitt declared the EPA has a \"very important role\" in regulating carbon dioxide emissions. Pruitt has sued the Environmental Protection Agency as the Attorney General of Oklahoma on more than a dozen occasions. When pressed by Senator Ed Markey on whether he would recuse himself from ongoing lawsuits, Pruitt \"would not commit to recusing himself from all the cases he had brought. \"[258][259] Pruitt deflected questioning from Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on the issue of whether human activity is largely responsible for climate change. Stating, \"I believe the ability to measure, with precision, the degree of human activity's impact on the climate is subject to more debate on whether the climate is changing or whether human activity contributes to it.\"[260] Pruitt declined to comment on whether California could set its own emission standards and said he would review the policy.[261] Amid 15 federal investigations of his conduct ranging from criminal record destruction to corrupt allocation of funds and abuse of power, Pruitt announced he would resign from office on July 6, 2018, leaving Andrew R. Wheeler as the acting head of the agency.[262][263][264] Andrew R. Wheeler served in this position from July 9, 2018, until February 28, 2019, when he was sworn in. On November 16, 2018, President Trump nominated Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler to the position full-time. Wheeler was confirmed by the senate on February 28, 2019, with a 52–47 vote. Administrator of the Small Business Administration[edit] The nomination of an Administrator-designate is reviewed during hearings held by the members of the United States Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship and then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Joseph Loddo served in this position from January 20 until February 14, 2017. On December 7, 2016, Linda McMahon, former CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment Inc. and Senate nominee, was selected to be the head of the Small Business Administration.[265][266] McMahon was confirmed by a Senate vote of 81–19 on February 14, 2017. McMahon earned approval votes from Senators Richard Blumenthal and Chris Murphy from Connecticut, who had both defeated McMahon in their respective Senate races. Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho), chairman of the Senate Committee on Small Businesses and Entrepreneurship, said, \"Mrs. McMahon made it very clear that she has the experience, understanding and instincts necessary to bolster America's small business community and advocate for much-needed regulatory reforms. Chris Pilkerton served in this position from April 13, 2019, until January 14, 2020. On April 4, 2019 President Trump nominated Treasurer of the United States Jovita Carranza to the Small Business Administration, replacing Linda McMahon.[268] Carranza was confirmed by a vote of 88–5 in the Senate on January 7, 2020.[269] Removal of the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers[edit] On February 8, 2017, President Trump outlined the 24 members of the Cabinet, excluding the Council of Economic Advisers chairman position.[250] In addition to the chairman, the council had two other members, also appointed by the president, as well as a staff of economists, researchers, and statisticians. Historically, appointees to chair the council have held Ph.D.s in economics, and the role of the group is to provide advice in the form of economic analysis with respect to policy, as distinct from shaping economic policy per se.[270][271] Trump released a list of his campaign's official economic advisers in August 2016,[272][273] which simultaneously was anti-establishment[274] and therefore leant on those with governmental experience,[275] yet at the same time aimed to include some members of business and finance.[272] Many of the listed names received media attention as potential appointees to the Council of Economic Advisers, or in other Trump administration roles. Although removed from the Cabinet, the chair-designate, must be reviewed during hearings held by the members of the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and then presented to the full Senate for a vote. Various other Trump administration appointees are directly involved with economic matters, for example, former director of the National Economic Council Gary Cohn, former National Trade Council director Peter Navarro, SEC chairman Jay Clayton, OMB director Mick Mulvaney, Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin, Commerce secretary Wilbur Ross, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and former SBA administrator Linda McMahon. On May 16, 2017, Trump nominated Dr. Kevin Hassett to be chair of the council. He took office on September 13, 2017. - List of Trump administration dismissals and resignations - ^ Congressional hearings, CEO Rex Tillerson, Sec. State. - ^ Congressional hearings, Dir. CIA Mike Pompeo, Sec. State. - ^ Congressional hearings, Steven Mnuchin, Sec. Treasury. - ^ Congressional hearings, Gen. James Mattis, Sec. Def. - ^ Congressional hearings, Dr. Mark Esper, Sec. Def. - ^ Congressional hearings, Sen. Jeff Sessions, AttyGen. - ^ Congressional hearings, William Barr, AttyGen. - ^ Congressional hearings, Rep. Ryan Zinke, Sec. Interior. - ^ Congressional hearings, David Bernhardt, Sec. Interior. - ^ Congressional hearings, Gov. Sonny Perdue, Sec. Ag. - ^ Congressional hearings, CEO Wilbur Ross, Sec. Commerce. - ^ Congressional hearings, Alex Acosta, Sec. Labor. - ^ Congressional hearings, Eugene Scalia, Sec. Labor. - ^ Congressional hearings, Rep. Tom Price Sec. HHS (HELP) (Finance). - ^ Congressional hearings, Alex Azar Sec. HHS (HELP) (Finance). - ^ Congressional hearings, Dr. Ben Carson, Sec. HUD. - ^ Congressional hearings, Sec. Elaine Chao, Sec.USDOT. - ^ Congressional hearings, Gov. Rick Perry, Sec. Energy. - ^ Congressional hearings, Dan R. Brouillette, Sec. Energy. - ^ Congressional hearings, Betsy DeVos, Sec. Edu. - ^ Congressional hearings, Dr. David Shulkin, Sec. VA. - ^ Congressional hearings, Robert Wilkie, Sec. VA. - ^ Congressional hearings, Gen. John F. Kelly, Sec. Homeland. - ^ Congressional hearings, Kirstjen Nielsen, Sec. Homeland. - ^ Congressional hearings, Chad Wolf, Sec. Homeland. - ^ Congressional hearings, Robert Lighthizer, U.S. Trade Rep. - ^ Congressional hearings, Rep. John Ratcliffe, DNI. - ^ Congressional hearings, Rep. Mike Pompeo, Dir. CIA. - ^ Congressional hearings, Gina Haspel, Dir. CIA. - ^ Congressional hearings, Okla. AttyGen. Scott Pruitt, EPA Admin. - ^ Congressional hearings, Andrew R. Wheeler, EPA Admin. - ^ Congressional hearings, Linda McMahon, SBA Admin. - ^ Congressional hearings, Jovita Carranza, SBA Admin. - ^ Congressional hearings, Rep. Mick Mulvaney, Dir. OMB (Budget) (HSGAC). - ^ Congressional hearings, Russell Vought, Dir. OMB (Budget) (HSGAC). - ^ Congressional hearings, Gov. Nikki Haley, U.N. Ambassador. - ^ Congressional hearings, Ambassador Kelly Craft, U.N. Ambassador. - ^ Her husband, Senator Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), voted \"present\" due to the conflict of interest.[citation needed] - ^ \"President Donald J. Trump Announces His Cabinet\". whitehouse.gov. February 8, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ \"Chart: The Status Of Trump Administration's Key Members\". National Public Radio. February 2, 2017. - ^ Bycoffe, Aaron (February 17, 2017). \"Tracking Congress In The Age Of Trump\". FiveThirtyEight. Archived from the original on February 21, 2017. - ^ \"US Senate panels approve Carson, Ross, Chao, Haley\". United States Senate. CNBC. January 31, 2017. Archived from the original on January 26, 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN25\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 1, 2017. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. - ^ \"Senate committee paves way for Pompeo to become top U.S. diplomat – media\". Archived from the original on April 25, 2018. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN1761\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. - ^ a b Edelman, Adam (February 2017). \"Senate panels vote to advance Trump's Treasury, HHS, Justice nominees\". New York Daily News. Archived from the original on February 1, 2017. Retrieved February 2, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on February 14, 2017. Retrieved February 14, 2017. - ^ \"Senate Armed Services panel recommends Mattis to be defense secretary\". POLITICO. Archived from the original on February 4, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN29\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. January 20, 2017. Archived from the original on August 1, 2017. - ^ \"Shanahan withdraws as Trump's defense pick as domestic incidents resurface\". CNN. June 18, 2019. Archived from the original on August 4, 2019. Retrieved July 31, 2019. - ^ \"Senate committee approves Esper and Milley to lead Pentagon, teeing up final vote\". Defense News. Archived from the original on July 19, 2019. Retrieved July 18, 2019. - ^ \"Roll Call Vote 116th Congress – 1st Session\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. July 23, 2019. Archived from the original on July 23, 2019. Retrieved July 23, 2019. - ^ Lichtblau, Eric (February 1, 2017). \"Jeff Sessions Approved as Attorney General by Senate Committee\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved February 3, 2017. - ^ Ortiz, Erik (January 31, 2017). \"Attorney General Nominee Jeff Sessions Faces Senate Committee Vote Amid DOJ Turmoil\". NBC. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. Retrieved January 31, 2017. Reilly, Ryan J. (January 31, 2017). \"Democrats Delay Jeff Sessions' Confirmation After Donald Trump Fires Acting Attorney General\". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN30\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 8, 2017. Archived from the original on February 10, 2017. - ^ \"Senate panel votes to advance nomination of William Barr, Trump's pick to be the next attorney general\". CNN. February 7, 2019. Archived from the original on February 8, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN17\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 14, 2019. Archived from the original on March 27, 2019. - ^ a b Fram, Alan. \"Democrats Force Delays in Votes on 3 Cabinet Nominees\". ABC News. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on March 2, 2017. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ \"Senate committee endorses Bernhardt to head Interior Department\". PBS. April 4, 2019. Archived from the original on April 5, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on April 12, 2019. Retrieved April 12, 2019. - ^ \"Perdue Clears Senate Agriculture Committee\". POLITICO. Archived from the original on March 30, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on July 9, 2018. Retrieved April 25, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate panel advances Ross, Chao nominations on voice vote\". Reuters. January 24, 2017. Archived from the original on February 1, 2017. - ^ a b \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on March 11, 2017. Retrieved February 28, 2017. - ^ O'Keefe, Ed; Marte, Jonnelle (February 15, 2017). \"Andrew Puzder withdraws labor nomination, throwing White House into more turmoil\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on August 3, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017. Kellman, Laurie; Lucey, Catherine (February 15, 2017). \"Puzder withdraws nomination to be Trump's labor secretary\". Associated Press. Archived from the original on February 15, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017. - ^ \"Acosta, Trump's choice for Labor, advances to full Senate\". Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Archived from the original on March 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN88\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. April 27, 2017. Archived from the original on April 29, 2017. - ^ \"Senate Panel Advances Trump Labor Pick Scalia\". The Hill. Archived from the original on September 24, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN1099\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. September 26, 2019. Archived from the original on September 27, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN33\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 10, 2017. Archived from the original on February 11, 2017. - ^ \"Results of Executive Session to Consider Favorably Reporting the Nomination of The Honorable Alex Michael Azar II, of Indiana, to be Secretary of Health and Human Services to Consider Favorably Reporting the Nomination of Kevin K. McAleenan, of Hawaii, to be Commissioner of United States Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland Security, and Revisions to Subcommittee Assignments\" (PDF). finance.senate.gov. January 17, 2018. Archived (PDF) from the original on September 18, 2018. Retrieved January 18, 2018. - ^ \"US Senate Roll Call Vote PN1371\". senate.gov. U.S. Senate. January 24, 2018. Archived from the original on January 25, 2018. - ^ \"Ben Carson, HUD secretary nominee, passes Senate panel\". The Washington Times. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. - ^ \"US Senate Roll Call Vote PN34\". senate.gov. U.S. Senate. March 2, 2017. Archived from the original on July 5, 2018. - ^ \"Commerce committee gives Chao the nod\". POLITICO. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN 35\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. January 31, 2017. Archived from the original on June 29, 2018. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN36\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. March 2, 2017. Archived from the original on March 3, 2017. - ^ Siegel, Josh (November 19, 2019). \"Senate panel approves Trump energy nominees Dan Brouillette and James Danly\". Washington Examiner. Archived from the original on December 3, 2019. Retrieved December 3, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN1268\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. December 2, 2019. Archived from the original on December 3, 2019. - ^ Brown, Emma. \"Senate panel votes in favor of Betsy DeVos, Trump's education secretary pick\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN37\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 7, 2017. Archived from the original on February 8, 2017. - ^ \"Senate committee votes 15–0 to advance Trump's VA secretary nominee\". February 7, 2017. Archived from the original on March 29, 2018. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN39\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 13, 2017. Archived from the original on February 14, 2017. - ^ Shear, Michael D.; Fandos, Nicholas; Fink, Sheri (April 26, 2018). \"White House Withdraws Jackson Nomination for V.A. Chief Amid Criticism\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. Retrieved April 26, 2018. - ^ \"Robert Wilkie, Trump's pick for Veterans Affairs secretary, clears key Senate hurdle\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on July 10, 2018. Retrieved July 11, 2018. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress – 2nd Session\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on July 24, 2018. - ^ Kopan, Tal. \"Senate confirms Trump's first two Cabinet members\". CNN. Archived from the original on October 5, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress – 1st Session\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on January 22, 2017. - ^ \"Senate committee votes in favor of Kirstjen Nielsen to lead DHS\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on November 15, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress – 1st Session\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on December 6, 2017. - ^ \"Committee gives first approval to Trump's pick for DHS secretary\". The Washington Times. Archived from the original on September 30, 2020. - ^ \"Lighthizer unanimously approved by Senate panel\". thehill.com. April 25, 2017. Archived from the original on April 28, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate Roll Call Vote PN42\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. May 11, 2017. Archived from the original on May 14, 2017. - ^ \"Senate committee approves Trump intelligence nominee Coats\". Reuters. March 9, 2017. Archived from the original on March 16, 2017. - ^ \"US Senate Roll Call Vote 89 Session 115\". www.senate.gov. March 15, 2017. Archived from the original on March 16, 2017. - ^ Mangan, Dan (August 2, 2019). \"Trump says John Ratcliffe withdraws intelligence chief bid\". CNBC. Archived from the original on August 11, 2019. Retrieved August 13, 2019. - ^ Mary Clare Jalonick (May 19, 2020). \"Committee approves Ratcliffe for intelligence committee, sends to full Senate\". The Detroit News. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. Retrieved August 4, 2020. - ^ \"US Senate Roll Call Vote 101 Session 116\". www.senate.gov. May 21, 2020. Retrieved August 4, 2020. - ^ \"PN43 – Nomination of Mike Pompeo for Central Intelligence Agency, 115th Congress (2017–2018)\". www.congress.gov. January 23, 2017. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on February 11, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ \"Senate Panel Approves Gina Haspel As CIA Chief; Confirmation Appears Likely\". NPR. Archived from the original on May 16, 2018. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on May 18, 2018. Retrieved May 18, 2018. - ^ Dennis, Brady; Mooney, Chris (February 2, 2017). \"Senate Republicans suspend committee rules to approve Scott Pruitt, Trump's EPA nominee\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved February 2, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN44\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 17, 2017. Archived from the original on February 18, 2017. - ^ \"Nomination of acting EPA head Wheeler moves to full Senate vote\". PBS. February 5, 2019. Archived from the original on February 17, 2019. - ^ \"Senate confirms Andrew Wheeler as EPA administrator along mostly party-line vote\". Archived from the original on March 1, 2019. - ^ \"Linda McMahon Pins Down Senate Panel Vote for Small Business Administration Post\". Stamford, CT Patch. January 31, 2017. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved February 2, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN48\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 14, 2017. Archived from the original on December 6, 2017. - ^ \"Senate panel advances Trump's nominee to lead Small Business Administration\". December 18, 2019. Archived from the original on December 19, 2019. Retrieved December 21, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN1039\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. January 7, 2020. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ Lane, Sylvan (February 2, 2017). \"Trump's budget chief pick approved by Senate committees\". The Hill. Archived from the original on February 7, 2017. Retrieved February 7, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN54\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. February 16, 2017. Archived from the original on February 17, 2017. - ^ Krawzak, Paul M. (June 10, 2020). \"Trump budget nominee gets first Senate committee nod\". Roll Call. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. Retrieved August 4, 2020. - ^ Krawzak, Paul M. (June 11, 2020). \"Trump OMB nominee OK'd by Budget panel, ready for floor vote\". Roll Call. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. Retrieved August 4, 2020. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN1726\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. July 20, 2020. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ Barrett, Ted. \"Nikki Haley easily confirmed as UN ambassador\". CNN. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote PN50\". www.senate.gov. United States Senate. January 24, 2017. Archived from the original on January 27, 2017. - ^ Kosinski, Michelle; Browne, Ryan (February 16, 2019). \"Heather Nauert withdraws from consideration as UN ambassador\". CNN. Archived from the original on February 17, 2019. Retrieved February 16, 2019. - ^ \"Trump's nominee to be United Nations ambassador, Kelly Knight Craft, poised for confirmation\". USA Today. July 25, 2019. Archived from the original on July 25, 2019. Retrieved July 25, 2019. - ^ \"Kelly Knight Craft confirmed as next ambassador to United Nations\". July 31, 2019. Archived from the original on July 31, 2019. - ^ Timm, Jane C. (November 28, 2016). \"141 stances on 23 issues Donald Trump took during his White House bid\". NBC News. Archived from the original on July 6, 2016. Retrieved December 19, 2016. - ^ Restuccia, Andrew; Cook, Nancy; Woellert, Lorraine (November 30, 2016). \"Trump's Conservative Dream Team\". Politico. Archived from the original on November 30, 2016. Retrieved November 30, 2016. - ^ Cooper, Matthew (December 9, 2016). \"Donald Trump Is Building the Most Conservative Presidential Cabinet In U.S. History\". Newsweek. Archived from the original on December 9, 2016. Retrieved December 10, 2016. - ^ Bierman, Noah; Halper, Evan (December 15, 2016). \"Trump's Cabinet Picks are Among the Most Conservative in History. What that Means for His Campaign Promises\". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on December 15, 2016. - ^ Stanage, Niall (December 15, 2016). \"Trump's Unorthodox Cabinet\". The Hill. Archived from the original on December 16, 2016. - ^ Collinson, Stephen (December 20, 2016). \"Donald Trump's Cabinet a Boon for Conservatives\". CNN. Archived from the original on December 28, 2016. - ^ Seib, Gerald (December 5, 2016). \"Donald Trump Shuffles the Ideological Deck\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on December 5, 2016. Retrieved December 5, 2016. - ^ Timiraos, Nick; Tangel, Andrew (December 8, 2016). \"Donald Trump's Cabinet Selections Signal Deregulation Moves Are Coming\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on December 9, 2016. Retrieved December 10, 2016. - ^ Bump, Philip (December 13, 2016). \"Trump's Cabinet Picks Are Often in Direct Conflict With the Agencies they May Lead\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 14, 2016. Retrieved December 15, 2016. - ^ \"Donald Trump is assembling the richest administration in modern American history\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 1, 2016. Retrieved December 19, 2016. - ^ Kurtzleben, Danielle (December 28, 2016). \"How The Donald Trump Cabinet Stacks Up, In 3 Charts\". NPR. Archived from the original on December 28, 2016. Retrieved December 28, 2016. - ^ DeSilver, Drew (January 19, 2017). \"Trump's Cabinet will be one of most business-heavy in U.S. history\". Pew Research Center. Archived from the original on January 19, 2017. Retrieved January 19, 2017. - ^ Cox, Jeff (February 10, 2017). \"Something missing from Trump's Cabinet: Economists\". CNBC. Archived from the original on February 10, 2017. - ^ Palazzolo, Joe (March 2, 2017). \"In Short Supply in Donald Trump's Cabinet: Lawyers\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on March 3, 2017. Retrieved March 3, 2017. - ^ Singman, Brooke (February 8, 2017). \"Trump Facing Historic Delays in Confirmation Push\". Fox News. Archived from the original on December 12, 2017. Retrieved February 8, 2017. - ^ Schoen, John W. (February 24, 2017). \"No President has Ever Waited This Long to Get a Cabinet Approved\". CNBC. Archived from the original on February 26, 2017. Retrieved February 27, 2017. - ^ Zurcher, Anthony (February 9, 2017). \"Reality check: Is Donald Trump's cabinet facing historic obstruction?\". BBC News Online. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ Needham, Vicki (May 11, 2017). \"Senate confirms Trump's chief trade negotiator\". The Hill. Archived from the original on May 13, 2017. - ^ a b Fox News Research [@FoxNewsResearch] (November 16, 2016). \"Since 1968, George HW Bush is the only president-elect to announce cabinet nominations within the first week after ...\" (Tweet). - ^ Yeip, Randy (February 7, 2017). \"How Donald Trump's Cabinet Nominations Compare with Previous Presidents'\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on February 7, 2017. Retrieved February 7, 2017. - ^ a b McMinn, Sean; Braun, Aryn. \"How Long Will Trump Take to Build His Cabinet?\". Media.cq.com. Retrieved December 12, 2016. - ^ \"Calm down, folks: Donald Trump has plenty of time to name his Cabinet\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 2, 2016. - ^ \"The Obama Cabinet: Confirmations & Nominations\". NPR. January 22, 2009. Archived from the original on February 23, 2017. - ^ \"Trump's campaign dwarfed by Clinton's\". politico.com. May 21, 2016. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. - ^ Seib, Gerald F. (November 9, 2016). \"Donald Trump's 'Deplorables' Rise Up to Reshape America\". Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on January 20, 2017. Retrieved March 5, 2017. - ^ \"Forgiving Campaign Loans, Trump Fulfills His Pledge to Self-Fund Primary\". nbcnews.com. July 21, 2016. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. Retrieved November 28, 2016. - ^ a b \"Meet Trump's Cabinet-in-waiting\". politico.com. November 9, 2016. Archived from the original on November 9, 2016. - ^ \"Trump Picks Rex Tillerson, Exxon C.E.O., as Secretary of State\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 4, 2017. - ^ a b ExxonMobil CEO Tillerson emerging as frontrunner for secretary of state Archived January 26, 2017, at the Wayback Machine By Henry C. Jackson, Josh Dawsey and Eliana Johnson, Politico, 12/09/16 - ^ Taylor, Jessica (January 11, 2017). \"5 Top Moments From Rex Tillerson's Hearing To Be Secretary Of State\". NPR.org. Archived from the original on January 22, 2017. Retrieved January 23, 2017. - ^ Gaouette, Nicole (January 23, 2017). \"Senate committee approves Tillerson for secretary of state\". CNN. Archived from the original on January 25, 2017. Retrieved January 23, 2017. - ^ \"Rex Tillerson Is Confirmed as Secretary of State\". The New York Times. February 1, 2017. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. - ^ \"Trump sacks Rex Tillerson as state secretary\". BBC News. March 13, 2018. Archived from the original on June 15, 2018. - ^ \"Senate confirms Mike Pompeo as Trump's next secretary of state\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ Harris, Gardiner; Kaplan, Thomas (April 26, 2018). \"Mike Pompeo, Confirmed as Secretary of State, Plans to Quickly Head to Europe\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. Retrieved April 26, 2018. - ^ \"Mike Pompeo confirmed as secretary of state\". CBS News. Archived from the original on April 27, 2018. - ^ \"President-Elect Donald J. Trump to Nominate Steven Mnuchin as Secretary of the Treasury, Wilbur Ross as Secretary of Commerce and Todd Ricketts as Deputy Secretary of Commerce\". Greatagain.gov. November 30, 2016. Archived from the original on September 5, 2017. Retrieved December 11, 2016. - ^ Appelbaum, Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Binyamin; Haberman, Maggie (November 29, 2016). \"Trump Taps Hollywood's Mnuchin for Treasury and Dines With Romney\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on April 6, 2019. Retrieved February 14, 2017. {{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ Isidore, Chris (January 19, 2017). \"Trump Treasury pick: 'I have been maligned'\". CNN Money. Archived from the original on April 28, 2019. - ^ a b Rappeport, Alan (January 19, 2017). \"Steven Mnuchin, Treasury Nominee, Failed to Disclose $100 Million in Assets\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 30, 2019. Retrieved February 14, 2017. - ^ Lee, M. J. (February 1, 2017). \"Republicans suspend committee rules, advance Mnuchin, Price nominations\". CNN. Archived from the original on February 1, 2017. Retrieved February 2, 2017. - ^ a b Arkin, James (December 2, 2016). \"Democrats Spoil for Fight on Trump Cabinet Picks\". RealClearPolitics. Archived from the original on December 3, 2016. Retrieved December 7, 2016. - ^ Rappeport, Alan (February 13, 2017). \"Steven Mnuchin Is Confirmed as Treasury Secretary\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on March 24, 2019. Retrieved February 14, 2017. - ^ Byrnes, Jesse (December 1, 2016). \"Trump announces Mattis as Defense pick\". Archived from the original on December 4, 2016. - ^ \"President-Elect Donald J. Trump Intends to Nominate General James Mattis as Secretary of the United States Department of Defense\". greatagain.gov. December 6, 2016. Archived from the original on December 12, 2016. Retrieved December 7, 2016. - ^ Wright, David. \"Top contender for defense secretary faces legislative hurdle\". CNN. Archived from the original on December 3, 2016. - ^ Ryan, Missy; Lamothe, Dan. \"Placing Russia first among threats, Defense nominee warns of Kremlin attempts to 'break' NATO\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on June 16, 2017. Retrieved May 31, 2017. - ^ \"James Mattis' confirmation hearing for defense secretary – live blog\". Archived from the original on April 15, 2017. - ^ \"The 5 biggest takeaways from Gen. James Mattis' confirmation hearing\". Business Insider. Archived from the original on May 31, 2017. - ^ \"Mattis waiver narrowly passes House panel after full Senate approval\". Politico. January 12, 2017. Archived from the original on January 15, 2017. Retrieved January 15, 2017. - ^ Kheel, Rebecca (January 18, 2017). \"Senate panel approves Mattis for Defense secretary\". TheHill. Archived from the original on January 19, 2017. Retrieved January 18, 2017. - ^ Caldwell, Leigh Ann (January 20, 2017). \"Trump's Defense and Homeland Security Picks Sworn-in\". NBC News. Archived from the original on June 13, 2018. Retrieved October 11, 2018. - ^ \"Mattis quits, says his views aren't 'aligned' with Trump's\". CNN. December 20, 2018. Archived from the original on December 21, 2018. - ^ Sonne, Paul; Dawsey, Josh; Ryan, Missy (December 20, 2018). \"Mattis resigns after clash with Trump over troop withdrawal from Syria and Afghanistan\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 21, 2018. - ^ Cooper, Helene (December 23, 2018). \"Trump, Angry Over Mattis's Rebuke, Removes Him 2 Months Early\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 23, 2018. Retrieved December 23, 2018. - ^ Haberman, Maggie (January 2, 2019). \"Trump Says Mattis Resignation Was 'Essentially' a Firing, Escalating His New Front Against Military Critics\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 2, 2019. Retrieved January 3, 2019. - ^ Cooper, Helene; Gibbons-Neff, Thomas (May 9, 2019). \"Trump to Nominate Patrick Shanahan as Pentagon Chief\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on September 15, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ a b Shear, Michael D.; Cooper, Helene (June 18, 2019). \"Shanahan Withdraws as Defense Secretary Nominee, and Mark Esper Is Named Acting Pentagon Chief\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on September 23, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Sonne, Paul; Lamothe, Dan (July 15, 2019). \"Pentagon installs third acting defense secretary this year, as Trump formally nominates Esper\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Youssef, Nancy A. (July 23, 2019). \"Mark Esper Sworn In as Defense Secretary\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on September 30, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Cooper, Helene; Schmitt, Eric (November 9, 2020). \"Trump Fires Mark Esper as Defense Secretary\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on November 9, 2020. Retrieved November 9, 2020. - ^ \"Trump fires acting Attorney General who defied him on immigration\". Chicago News. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. - ^ Smith, David; Jacobs, Ben; Ackerman, Spencer (January 31, 2017). \"Sally Yates fired by Trump after acting US attorney general defied travel ban – White House says Obama appointee 'betrayed' justice department with letter instructing officials not to enforce president's executive order\". The Guardian. Washington and New York, USA. Archived from the original on April 14, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2017. - ^ Apuzzo, Mark Landler, Matt; Lichtblau, Eric (January 30, 2017). \"Trump Fires Acting Attorney General\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 7, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2017. {{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - ^ \"Acting Attorney General declares Justice Department won't defend Trump's immigration order\". Washington Post. January 30, 2017. Archived from the original on April 11, 2019. Retrieved February 8, 2017. - ^ a b c Lesniewski, Niels; Bowman, Bridget (November 21, 2016). \"Senate Democrats Can't Stop Sessions, So How Much Will They Fight?\". Rollcall.com. Archived from the original on December 20, 2016. Retrieved December 12, 2016. - ^ Emmarie Huetteman; Matt Flegenheimer; Julie Hirschfeld Davis (February 8, 2017), \"Fireworks Before a Final Vote on Jeff Sessions\", The New York Times, First 100 Days Briefing, archived from the original on July 11, 2018, retrieved February 8, 2017 - ^ 'Nevertheless, she persisted' becomes new battle cry after McConnell silences Elizabeth Warren, retrieved August 7, 2023 - ^ Paul Kane; Ed O'Keefe (February 8, 2017), Republicans vote to rebuke Elizabeth Warren, saying she impugned Sessions's character, archived from the original on April 11, 2019, retrieved February 8, 2017 - ^ Lichtblau, Eric; Flegenheimer, Matt (February 8, 2017), \"Jeff Sessions Confirmed as Attorney General, Capping Bitter Battle\", The New York Times, archived from the original on April 7, 2020, retrieved February 8, 2017 - ^ \"Jeff Sessions resigns as attorney general\". CBS News. November 7, 2018. Archived from the original on November 7, 2018. - ^ \"Attorney General Jeff Sessions resigns at Trump's request\". Washington Post. November 7, 2018. Archived from the original on November 18, 2018. - ^ \"Sessions resignation letter – AP Staff upload\". www.documentcloud.org. November 7, 2018. Archived from the original on November 7, 2018. - ^ \"Trump fires Jeff Sessions, names Matthew Whitaker as interim attorney general\". USA Today. Archived from the original on November 7, 2018. - ^ Lynch, Sarah N. (December 16, 2018). \"After outcry over appointment, Trump's top law enforcer treading lightly\". Reuters. Archived from the original on December 19, 2018. Retrieved December 28, 2018. - ^ Shortell, David (February 14, 2019). \"William Barr confirmed as attorney general\". CNN. Archived from the original on April 8, 2019. - ^ \"William Barr: US attorney general to leave post by Christmas\". BBC News. December 15, 2020. Archived from the original on December 16, 2020. - ^ \"President-Elect Donald J. Trump Intends to Nominate U.S. Congressman Ryan Zinke as Secretary of the Interior\". greatagain.gov. December 15, 2016. Archived from the original on December 17, 2016. Retrieved December 15, 2016. - ^ Fears, Darryl (January 31, 2017). \"Ryan Zinke is one step closer to becoming interior secretary\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 22, 2017. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ Steele, Jeanette. \"Zinke marks 1st Navy SEAL for Cabinet slot\". sandiegouniontribune.com. Archived from the original on February 14, 2017. - ^ Killough, Ashley; Barrett, Ted (March 1, 2017). \"Senate approves Trump's nominee for Interior\". CNN. Archived from the original on March 2, 2017. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ Knickmeyer, Ellen; Brown, Matthew; Press, Jonathan Lemire | The Associated (December 15, 2018). \"Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke resigning, cites \"vicious\" attacks\". The Denver Post. Archived from the original on January 1, 2019. Retrieved January 14, 2019. - ^ \"Trump to announce Sonny Perdue for Agriculture\". Politico. January 18, 2017. Archived from the original on January 19, 2017. - ^ \"Commerce Postpones Confirmation Hearing for Secretary of Commerce\". U.S. Senate Committee On Commerce, Science, & Transportation. Archived from the original on January 13, 2017. Retrieved January 12, 2017. - ^ Horowitz, Julia (January 31, 2017). \"Why Andrew Puzder's confirmation hearing was delayed for a fourth time\". CNNMoney. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017. - ^ a b \"4 GOP Senators on the Fence Over Puzder for Labor Secretary\". The Associated Press. February 13, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate panel receives ethics filings for Labor nominee Puzder\". Reuters. February 8, 2017. Archived from the original on February 16, 2017. - ^ \"Can Trump's Labor nominee survive?\". POLITICO. Archived from the original on February 16, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017. - ^ \"AP Politics on Twitter\". Twitter. Archived from the original on February 18, 2017. Retrieved February 15, 2017. - ^ Baker, Peter (February 16, 2017). \"R. Alexander Acosta, Law School Dean, Is Trump's New Pick for Labor\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on April 14, 2019. Retrieved February 16, 2017. - ^ Scheiber, Noam; Thrush, Glenn (July 16, 2019). \"Trump's New Top Labor Official Is Expected to Advance an Anti-Labor Agenda\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on October 13, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Lucey, Catherine; Andrews, Natalie (July 18, 2019). \"Trump to Nominate Eugene Scalia to Serve as Labor Secretary\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on September 30, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Zhao, Christina (August 27, 2019). \"Trump officially nominates former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's son Eugene for Labor Secretary\". Newsweek. Archived from the original on October 2, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Scheiber, Noam (September 26, 2019). \"Eugene Scalia Confirmed by Senate as Labor Secretary\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on September 30, 2019. Retrieved September 30, 2019. - ^ Uria, Daniel (September 30, 2019). \"Gene Scalia sworn in as labor secretary\". UPI. Archived from the original on September 30, 2019. - ^ Pear, Robert (November 28, 2016). \"Tom Price, Obamacare Critic, Is Trump's Choice for Health Secretary\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. Retrieved November 29, 2016. - ^ Neel, Joe (November 28, 2016). \"Trump Chooses Rep. Tom Price, An Obamacare Foe, To Run HHS\". NPR. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. Retrieved November 29, 2016. - ^ \"Trump announces selection of Tom Price for Health secretary\". The Hill. November 28, 2016. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. - ^ Pear, Robert; Kaplan, Thomas (February 10, 2017). \"Tom Price Is Confirmed as Health Secretary\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 17, 2017. Retrieved February 18, 2017. - ^ Liptak, Kevin; Green, Miranda. \"Price out as HHS secretary after private plane scandal\". CNN. Archived from the original on November 5, 2017. - ^ \"Trump Announces Eric Hargan as Acting HHS Secretary\". KTLA. October 10, 2017. Archived from the original on October 11, 2017. - ^ \"Trump Chooses Alex Azar for Health and Human Services Secretary\". The New York Times. November 13, 2017. Archived from the original on November 13, 2017. Retrieved November 13, 2017. - ^ \"PN430 – Nomination of Alex Azar II for Department of Health and Human Services, 109th Congress (2005–2006)\". www.congress.gov. July 22, 2005. Archived from the original on August 11, 2017. Retrieved August 10, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 115th Congress – 2nd Session\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on January 25, 2018. - ^ Pear, Robert (January 24, 2018). \"Senate Confirms Trump Nominee Alex Azar as Health Secretary\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 24, 2018. Retrieved January 24, 2018. - ^ Viebek, Elise (December 5, 2016). \"Trump nominated Carson to lead U.S. housing, urban policy\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 5, 2016. Retrieved December 5, 2016. - ^ \"What Ben Carson's confirmation may mean for America's poor\". March 1, 2017. Archived from the original on March 2, 2017. - ^ Warmbrodt, Zachary (January 24, 2017). \"Banking Committee approves Ben Carson nomination\". Politico. Archived from the original on January 24, 2017. Retrieved January 25, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on July 5, 2018. Retrieved March 2, 2017. - ^ Restuccia, Andrew (November 29, 2016). \"Elaine Chao expected to be Trump's Transportation secretary\". Politico. Archived from the original on November 29, 2016. Retrieved November 29, 2016. - ^ W. Peters, Jeremy; Haberman, Maggie (November 29, 2016). \"Trump Picks Elaine Chao for Transportation Secretary\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 16, 2018. Retrieved November 29, 2016. - ^ Collins, Kaitlan; Diamond, Jeremy; Liptak, Kevin; Bennett, Kate (January 7, 2021). \"Second Cabinet member announces resignation over Trump's response to riot\". CNN. Archived from the original on January 8, 2021. Retrieved January 7, 2021. - ^ Davenport, Coral (December 13, 2016). \"Rick Perry, Ex-Governor of Texas, Is Trump's Pick as Energy Secretary\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 1, 2017. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ \"Will Rick Perry Promote Science at the Department of Energy?\". The Atlantic. December 14, 2016. Archived from the original on February 5, 2017. - ^ Wolfgang, Ben (January 31, 2017). \"Rick Perry, Ryan Zinke clear Senate committee with bipartisan support\". The Washington Times. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved January 31, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on March 3, 2017. Retrieved March 2, 2017. - ^ a b Friedman, Lisa (December 2, 2019). \"Senate Confirms Dan Brouillette to Lead Energy Department\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on December 3, 2019. Retrieved December 3, 2019. - ^ \"Senate postpones confirmation hearing for Betsy DeVos, Trump's education pick\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 10, 2017. Retrieved January 11, 2017. - ^ \"After ethics review, Senate postpones committee vote for Betsy DeVos\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 23, 2017. - ^ \"Democrats request another hearing for DeVos, Trump's education pick, before confirmation vote\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 24, 2017. Retrieved January 24, 2017. - ^ Merica, Dan. \"Dems won't get a second hearing for DeVos\". CNN. Archived from the original on January 24, 2017. - ^ \"DeVos Confirmed as Education Secretary, Pence Casts Historic Tie-Breaking Vote\". Fox News. February 7, 2017. Archived from the original on February 8, 2017. Retrieved February 8, 2017. - ^ Strafford, Michael; Emma, Caitlin; Heffling, Kimberly (February 7, 2017). \"Senate confirms DeVos as secretary of education\". Politico. Archived from the original on February 7, 2017. Retrieved February 8, 2017. - ^ Mangan, Dan (January 8, 2021). \"Education Secretary Betsy DeVos resigns over Capitol riot, blames Trump rhetoric\". - ^ Domonoske, Camila (January 11, 2017). \"Trump Announces David Shulkin As Pick For Secretary Of Veterans Affairs\". NPR. Archived from the original on January 11, 2017. Retrieved January 11, 2017. - ^ Summers, Juana (March 5, 2018). \"White House still reviewing IG report on VA secretary\". CNN. Archived from the original on December 28, 2018. - ^ Cloud, David S. (March 28, 2018). \"Embattled Veterans Affairs Secretary David Shulkin fired in latest White House shake-up\". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on December 28, 2018. Retrieved December 28, 2018. - ^ Fandos, Nicholas; Haberman, Maggie (March 28, 2018). \"Veterans Affairs Secretary Is Latest to Go as Trump Shakes Up Cabinet\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. Retrieved April 26, 2018. - ^ Kim, Seung Min (April 1, 2018). \"Senate Republicans express concerns about Trump's choice to lead Veterans Affairs\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. Retrieved April 26, 2018. - ^ Kim, Seung Min; Rein, Lisa; Dawsey, Josh (April 23, 2018). \"Senate to postpone confirmation hearing for Ronny Jackson to head Veterans Affairs, White House officials told\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on July 10, 2018. Retrieved April 23, 2018. - ^ Fandos, Nicholas; Shear, Michael D. (April 24, 2018). \"After Trump Hints V.A. Nominee Might Drop Out, an Aggressive Show of Support\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 25, 2018. Retrieved April 25, 2018. - ^ Foran, Clare; Summers, Juana; Diamond, Jeremy. \"Ronny Jackson withdraws as VA secretary nominee\". CNN. Archived from the original on April 26, 2018. Retrieved April 26, 2018. - ^ \"John Kelly, Retired Marine General, Is Trump's Choice to Lead Homeland Security\". The New York Times. December 7, 2016. Archived from the original on December 27, 2016. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ Quinn, Melissa. \"Trump names John Kelly new White House chief of staff\". Washington Examiner. Archived from the original on July 29, 2017. - ^ \"Trump expected to name Kirstjen Nielsen as new Homeland Secretary\". NPR. October 11, 2017. Archived from the original on October 11, 2017. - ^ \"Donald Trump expected to tap Kirstjen Nielsen to lead Department of Homeland Security\". The Washington Post. October 11, 2017. Archived from the original on October 11, 2017. Retrieved October 11, 2017. - ^ \"Donald Trump expected to name Kirstjen Nielsen as Homeland Secretary\". CNN. October 11, 2017. Archived from the original on October 11, 2017. - ^ Washington Post Staff (December 5, 2017). \"Senate confirms Kirstjen Nielsen to head Department of Homeland Security, installing a close ally of John F. Kelly\". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on June 23, 2020. Retrieved December 5, 2017. - ^ Faulders, Katherine (April 8, 2019). \"Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen resigns\". ABC News. Archived from the original on April 11, 2019. Retrieved April 11, 2019. - ^ Hackman, Michelle (November 13, 2019). \"Chad Wolf Takes Over as Acting DHS Secretary\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on November 13, 2019. Retrieved November 13, 2019. - ^ Alvarez, Priscilla; Sands, Geneva (January 12, 2021). \"Sudden change to Homeland Security leadership raises new worries at the worst possible time\". CNN. Archived from the original on January 12, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2021. - ^ Acosta, Jim; Bash, Dana; Kopan, Tal (November 13, 2016). \"Trump picks Priebus as White House chief of staff, Bannon as top adviser\". CNN. Archived from the original on November 30, 2016. Retrieved December 1, 2016. - ^ Isenstadt, Alex; Caputo, Marc (November 13, 2016). \"Trump names Priebus and Bannon as top aides\". Politico. Archived from the original on December 2, 2016. Retrieved December 1, 2016. - ^ Kwong, Matt (November 15, 2016). \"Priebus, Bannon 'equal partners' from clashing conservative worlds\". CBC. Archived from the original on December 2, 2016. Retrieved December 1, 2016. - ^ Baker, Peter; Haberman, Maggie (July 28, 2017). \"Reince Priebus Pushed Out After Rocky Tenure as Trump Chief of Staff\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on July 29, 2017. Retrieved July 28, 2017. - ^ Trump, Donald J. [@realDonaldTrump] (July 28, 2017). \"I am pleased to inform you that I have just named General/Secretary John F Kelly as White House Chief of Staff. He is a Great American ...\" (Tweet). Archived from the original on July 28, 2017. Retrieved July 28, 2017 – via Twitter. - ^ \"John Kelly is out as White House chief of staff, Trump announces\". December 8, 2018. Archived from the original on December 9, 2018. - ^ \"Trump replaces Mick Mulvaney with Mark Meadows as chief of staff\". CNN. March 7, 2020. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ \"Robert Lighthizer Is Named U.S. Trade Representative\". The Wall Street Journal. January 3, 2017. Archived from the original on January 3, 2017. Retrieved January 3, 2017. - ^ \"Trump Trade Nominee Lighthizer Needs Waiver Over Work for China and Brazil\". Bloomberg.com. February 15, 2017. Archived from the original on March 10, 2017. Retrieved March 12, 2017. - ^ \"Morning Trade: Lighthizer ally named general counsel, acting USTR\". The Agenda. Archived from the original on March 13, 2017. - ^ Mayeda, Andrew (May 11, 2017). \"Lighthizer Approval as Trade Rep Paves Way for Nafta Talks\". Bloomberg Politics. Archived from the original on May 12, 2017. Retrieved May 11, 2017. - ^ \"Biographies of Key Officials | United States Trade Representative\". ustr.gov. Archived from the original on March 30, 2017. - ^ \"Trump intends to pick Sen. Dan Coats as director of national intelligence\". NBC News. Archived from the original on February 9, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on March 16, 2017. Retrieved March 15, 2017. - ^ \"Nikki Haley voting for Donald Trump\". October 27, 2016. Archived from the original on November 17, 2016. - ^ \"Haley, McMaster reportedly being considered for posts in Trump administration\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 1, 2016. Retrieved December 1, 2016. - ^ Haberman, Maggie; Landler, Mark; Wong, Edward (October 9, 2018). \"Nikki Haley Resigned as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 9, 2018. Retrieved October 9, 2018. - ^ \"Nikki Haley resigning as Trump's United Nations ambassador\". Chicago Tribune. October 9, 2018. Archived from the original on October 9, 2018. - ^ Rampton, Roberta; Heavey, Susan; Nomiyama, Chizu (December 7, 2018). \"Trump says he will name State Department spokeswoman as U.S. ambassador to U.N.\" Reuters. Reuters. Archived from the original on December 17, 2018. Retrieved December 17, 2018. - ^ \"Trump picks envoy to Canada Kelly Craft for U.N. Ambassador | Reuters\". Reuters. Reuters. Archived from the original on February 23, 2019. - ^ \"Trump picks US Rep. Mulvaney to head White House budget office\" Archived December 21, 2016, at the Wayback Machine, Reuters via CNBC, December 16, 2016. - ^ Steinhauer, Jennifer (January 18, 2017). \"Trump Budget Nominee Did Not Pay Taxes for Employee\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 17, 2017. Retrieved February 17, 2017. - ^ Weyl, Ben; Griffiths, Brent (January 24, 2017). \"Mulvaney defends nanny tax lapse, tangles with Democrats on budget\". Politico. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved February 17, 2017. - ^ \"Senate confirms Mulvaney to head Office of Management and Budget\". POLITICO. Archived from the original on February 16, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". www.senate.gov. Archived from the original on February 17, 2017. Retrieved February 17, 2017. - ^ a b \"President Donald J. Trump Announces His Cabinet\". whitehouse.gov. February 8, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017 – via National Archives. - ^ The Transition Team (December 7, 2016). \"President-Elect Trump Selects Attorney General, National Security Advisor and CIA Director\". GreatAgain. Archived from the original on February 8, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Vote\". Archived from the original on February 11, 2017. Retrieved February 9, 2017. - ^ \"Gina Haspel named by Trump to be CIA director, replacing Pompeo, who will replace Tillerson at State\". The Washington Post. Associated Press. March 13, 2018. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on March 13, 2018. - ^ Bernstein, Lenny (May 16, 2013). \"Senate committee approves Obama's nomination of Gina McCarthy to head EPA\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on June 10, 2016. Retrieved December 7, 2016. - ^ \"Trump to pick foe of Obama climate agenda to run EPA – source\". Reuters. December 7, 2016. Archived from the original on August 1, 2017. - ^ Davenport, Coral; Lipton, Eric (December 7, 2016). \"Donald Trump Picks Scott Pruitt, Climate Change Denialist, to Lead E.P.A.\" The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 1, 2017. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ Jackson, David. \"Scott Pruitt, Trump's pick to head the EPA, has sued the EPA\". USA Today. Archived from the original on August 19, 2017. - ^ Davenport, Coral (January 18, 2017). \"Scott Pruitt, Testifying to Lead E.P.A., Criticizes Environmental Rules\". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved January 30, 2017. - ^ \"EPA Nominee Scott Pruitt Acknowledges Existence Of Climate Change\". NPR.org. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. - ^ \"Bernie Sanders to Scott Pruitt: 'Why is the climate changing?'\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on January 29, 2017. - ^ \"EPA nominee Scott Pruitt won't say if he would recuse himself from his own lawsuits against the agency\". Washington Post. Archived from the original on February 2, 2017. Retrieved January 30, 2017. - ^ Diamond, Jeremy; Watkins, Eli; Summers, Juana. \"EPA chief Scott Pruitt resigns amid ethics scandals\". CNN. Archived from the original on July 5, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2018. - ^ \"Scott Pruitt's full resignation letter to President Trump\". Fox News. July 5, 2018. Archived from the original on July 5, 2018. - ^ Wolfson, Sam. \"The ethics scandals that eventually forced Scott Pruitt to resign\". The Guardian. Archived from the original on July 6, 2018. - ^ Bhattarai, Abha (December 7, 2016). \"Trump taps wrestling executive to lead Small Business Administration\". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 24, 2017. Retrieved December 7, 2016. - ^ Pazniokas, Mark; Radelat, Ana (December 7, 2016). \"Linda McMahon is Trump pick for Small Business Administration\". The Connecticut Mirror. Archived from the original on December 7, 2016. Retrieved December 7, 2016. - ^ Freking, Kevin. \"Former wrestling executive Linda McMahon confirmed to lead SBA\". chicagotribune.com. Archived from the original on February 16, 2017. Retrieved February 14, 2017. - ^ \"Trump names Jovita Carranza, U.S. treasurer, to head SBA\". Archived from the original on April 5, 2019. - ^ \"U.S. Senate: Roll Call Votes 116th Congress – 2nd Session\". Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ \"Trump eyeing Larry Kudlow for economic adviser\". Washington Examiner. Archived from the original on December 14, 2020. - ^ \"A Quick Guide To Who's Doing What In The President's Economic Team\". Business Insider. Archived from the original on December 21, 2016. - ^ a b \"Trump's Economic Team: Bankers and Billionaires (and All Men)\". The New York Times. August 6, 2016. Archived from the original on December 6, 2016. Retrieved March 1, 2017. - ^ \"Trump brings women on to his economic council\". Politico. August 11, 2016. Archived from the original on November 16, 2016. - ^ Sorkin, Andrew Ross (August 8, 2016). \"Donald Trump's Economic Team Is Far From Typical\". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 8, 2016. Retrieved December 20, 2016. - ^ Timiraos, Nick (October 13, 2016). \"Some of Donald Trump's Economic Team Diverge From Candidate\". The Wall Street Journal. Archived from the original on March 19, 2017. Retrieved March 5, 2017."
            },
            {
                "answer": "WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are enjoying the best economy “EVER,” says President Donald Trump, with trademark hyperbole.",
                "question": "What did President Donald Trump say about the state of the American economy during his administration?",
                "url": "https://apnews.com/article/north-america-donald-trump-ap-top-news-unemployment-politics-c246ed8d88f44687a23e4460f458d77e",
                "scraped_text": "AP FACT CHECK: Trump says economy best ‘EVER.’ It’s not. WASHINGTON (AP) — Americans are enjoying the best economy “EVER,” says President Donald Trump, with trademark hyperbole. Trump’s tendency to take good economic news and wildly exaggerate it is on display in tweets self-celebrating 500 days in office. His boast of record achievements on the economy and jobs ignores the Roaring Twenties, the war-time boom in the 1940s, the 1990s expansion and other times when unemployment was lower than now, economic growth was higher than now, or brisk productivity made the U.S. the world’s economic powerhouse. TRUMP: “This is my 500th. Day in Office and we have accomplished a lot - many believe more than any President in his first 500 days. Massive Tax & Regulation Cuts, Military & Vets, Lower Crime & Illegal Immigration, Stronger Borders, Judgeships, Best Economy & Jobs EVER, and much more.” THE FACTS: Although he is crowing first and foremost about the 3.8 percent unemployment rate in May, plenty of economic challenges remain: Inequality is a problem, housing costs are jumping, many baby boomers lack sufficient retirement savings and student debt is restricting the choices of recent college graduates. Overall economic growth has yet to show it can sustain growth in excess of 3 percent as Trump has promised. Economists generally describe the U.S. economy as healthy for the moment, but they’re naturally cautious about claiming that it’s without weaknesses. An economy this large and diverse has a way of thwarting any hubris. What looks phenomenal at one moment can be the source of a downfall later. The happy days of the 1920s gave way to the Great Depression, the tech boom led to a burst bubble and the surge in home ownership in the mid-2000s led to a devastating crash. The job market is certainly strong, with unemployment at an 18-year low. If it drops another tenth of a point, it’ll be the lowest since 1969. Yet the jobless rate was at or below 4 percent for four straight years back then, from 1966 through 1969, and wages were rising more quickly. The cost of items such as college and health care was much lower then. As for growth, in the 1990s boom, still the longest on record, the U.S. economy expanded at an average annual pace of 4.3 percent for five years, from 1996 through 2000. In the 1980s, growth averaged 4.6 percent annually from 1983 through 1987. While the economy has picked up from 2016, its best showing since Trump took office was 3.2 percent in last year’s third quarter. And in the late 1990s, a greater proportion of Americans had jobs than they do now. In May, 79.2 percent of people in their prime working years — aged 25 through 54 — were working. That’s down from a record high of 81.9 percent in April 2000, or about 3.4 million fewer people with jobs. The unemployment rate has fallen as far as it has partly because many Americans have given up looking for work. In the 2016 campaign, Trump used to cite that trend as evidence that the unemployment rate under President Barack Obama was a “hoax.” The lowest unemployment rate since World War II was reached in 1953, when it averaged 2.9 percent, almost a full point lower than today. Associated Press writer Cal Woodward contributed to this report. Follow @APFactCheck on Twitter: https://twitter.com/APFactCheck"
            },
            {
                "answer": "The Trump Administration inherited an economy in much stronger ",
                "question": "Did the Trump administration inherit a strong economy?",
                "url": "https://www.congress.gov/115/crpt/hrpt22/CRPT-115hrpt22.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "FEBRUARY 28, 2017. — Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the  [Created pursuant to Sec. 5 (a) of Public Law 304, 79th Congress]  Pursuant to the requirements of the Employment Act of 1946, as  amended, I hereby transmit the 2017 Joint Economic Report. The  analyses and conclusions of this Report are to assist the several  Committees of the Congress and its Members as they deal with  economic issues and legislation pertaining thereto.  Chairman’s Views .................................................................... 1  No Resurgence from the Recession ................................................2  Constrained Potential ....................................................................5  The Obama Administration’s Perspective ......................................6  What Ails the Economy? ................................................................7  Raising our Economic Potential ....................................................8  Long-term Productivity and Long-term Growth ............................8  Untapped Export Potential.............................................................9  Conclusion ............................................................................................10 Chapter 1: Assessing the Economic Recovery ....................... 11  A Lackluster, Uneven, and Slow Recovery .........................................11  Slow Recovery ..............................................................................12  Uneven Recovery ..........................................................................15  Four Continued Structural Challenges: Productivity, Inequality,  Participation, and Sustainability ...........................................................20  Fiscal Sustainability .....................................................................20  Labor Force Participation ...........................................................22  Inequality......................................................................................23  Productivity ..................................................................................26  Conclusion ............................................................................................27 Recommendations ........................................................................29  Chapter 2: Macroeconomic Outlook ...................................... 31  Near-Term Outlook .................................................................... 31  Potential GDP ..............................................................................32  The Labor Market ........................................................................33  Investment ....................................................................................36  Productivity ..................................................................................38  Output ...........................................................................................40 Monetary Policy ...........................................................................42  Long-Term Outlook .............................................................................44  Federal Borrowing and Mandatory Spending .............................44  A Distressing Legacy ....................................................................48  A Sustainable Way Forward ........................................................49  Conclusion ............................................................................................50 Recommendations ........................................................................51  Chapter 3: Addressing Inequality in the Context of Mobility .................................................................................................... 52 Mobility Matters More .........................................................................52  Focus on Moving Americans Out of Poverty ...............................53  Returning to Opportunity in Reward of Work ..............................54  The Importance of Two-Parent Households ................................57  Redistribution and Taxes ..............................................................59  Health Insurance Coverage and Work Incentives ........................64  ARRA and Economic Growth .......................................................66  The Obama Administration’s Record on Inequality and  Mobility ........................................................................................67  Conclusion ............................................................................................70 Chapter 4: Confronting Health Care Challenges .................. 71  The Flawed Legacy of the Affordable Care Act ..................................71  A Failed Rollout and New Federal Command to Purchase  Insurance ......................................................................................71  Subdued Enrollment and Missing Millennials .............................73  Insurers Leaving the Marketplace ................................................77  The Obamacare CO-OP Implosion ..............................................78  Rising Rates ..................................................................................80  “If You Like Your Insurance…” ...................................................83  Employer-Sponsored Insurance under the ACA ..........................83  “I will not raise taxes on the middle class…”..............................85  Addressing the Costs of Health Care ...........................................87  Solutions for Consumer-Driven Health Care .......................................89  A Better Way ................................................................................90  Consumer-Directed Health Care .................................................90  Price Transparency in Health Care .............................................91  Health Insurance Portability ........................................................91  Purchasing Coverage across State Lines .....................................92  Expanding Opportunities for Pooling ..........................................93  Protecting Employee Wellness Programs ....................................93  Protecting Flexibility for Employers to Self-Insure .....................94  Medical Liability Reform .............................................................94  Pre-Existing Condition Coverage and Other Reforms .................95  Continuous Coverage Protections ...............................................95  One-Time Open Enrollment .........................................................96  Fixing Age Rating Bands..............................................................96  Grants for State Innovation ..........................................................96  Robust High-Risk Pools ...............................................................97  The Need for Medicaid Reform ....................................................97  Fixing Obamacare’s Medicaid Trap ............................................98  More Medicaid Choices for States ...............................................99  Promoting Innovation in Health Care .......................................100  Preserving and Protecting Medicare .........................................100  Repeal IPAB ...............................................................................101  The Status Quo is Unsustainable ...............................................101  Strengthening Medicare Advantage ...........................................101  Merging Medicare Parts A and B and Other Reforms ...............102  Protect Flexibility in Doctor-Patient Relationships ...................102  Information Sharing in Medicare: Medicare Compare .............103  Greater Choice and Competition through a Premium Support  Option .........................................................................................103  Conclusion ..........................................................................................103 Recommendations ......................................................................104  Policy Lessons on Higher Education..................................................105  America’s College Promise ........................................................106  Financial Markets and Student Loans .......................................107  Rising Tuition .............................................................................109  Flexible Repayment ....................................................................111  The President’s Recovery ...........................................................113  Challenges for those from Disadvantaged Backgrounds ...........114  Income Inequality and the Incentives .........................................116  Moving Forward ........................................................................117  Improving PreK-12 Education ...........................................................119  Conclusion ..........................................................................................120 Recommendations ......................................................................120  Chapter 6: Strengthening the Financial and Regulatory  Introduction ........................................................................................122 Too Big to Fail ...........................................................................123  The Financial Stability Oversight Council .................................125  The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau .............................126  The Securities and Exchange Commission .................................127  Unintended Consequences: Small and Community Banks .........127  Financial Innovation ..................................................................130  General Regulatory Oversight ...................................................133  Conclusion ..........................................................................................136 Recommendations ......................................................................136  Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.…………….....….138  Introduction ........................................................................................138 Efficient Global Resource Allocation .........................................139  Opportunities for U.S. Industry ..................................................141  “All-of-the-Above” Strategy ......................................................142  Economies and Diseconomies of Scale ......................................143  Adaptation ..................................................................................144  U.S. Leadership ..........................................................................145  Conclusion ..........................................................................................147 Recommendations ......................................................................147  Chapter 8: The Missing Chapter on Tax Reform…………149  The Connection between Tax Reform and Economic Growth...........149  A Lost Opportunity for Pro-Growth Reform ..............................150  The Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the Developed World ........151  International Tax Systems ..........................................................153  Passthrough Businesses and the Individual Tax Rate ................155  Double Taxation of Savings and Investment ..............................157  Cost Recovery and Investment ...................................................161  Should Death Be a Taxable Event? ............................................163  The Cost of Unnecessary Complexity .........................................165  Conclusion ..........................................................................................167 Recommendations ......................................................................167  Minority Views of Ranking Member Martin Heinrich.......200  Introduction: Progress Made Under the Obama Economy and the  Challenges Ahead ...............................................................................206  The Challenge of and Imperative for Reducing Inequality ................210  Inequality is an Impediment to Overall Economic Prosperity ...210  The Scale and Causes of Rising Inequality in the United States 212  Progress Tackling Runaway Inequality under the Obama  Administration ............................................................................215  Why President Trump’s and Congressional Republicans’ Policies  Will Escalate Inequality .............................................................216       TAX REFORM .........................................................................216       DEREGULATION. ....................................................................218       WORKER PROTECTIONS .........................................................219       THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT ...............................................220  Conclusion ..................................................................................221 The Road Ahead for Americans’ Health Care System .......................222  Before the 2010 Affordable Care Act .........................................222  Tabulating the Benefits from Health Reform .............................224       INDIVIDUAL MARKETPLACE..................................................224       PRIVATE INSURANCE REFORMS ............................................225       EXPANDED MEDICAID COVERAGE ........................................225       MEDICARE COST SAVINGS FOR SENIORS AND TAXPAYERS ..226       EMPLOYER-BASED COVERAGE ..............................................227       TAMING HEALTH CARE COSTS .............................................227  Republicans’ Plan to Reverse Progress .....................................228  Issues in Higher Education Quality, Affordability, and  Accessibility .......................................................................................231         Labor Market Benefits of Education ..........................................234  Macroeconomic Benefits ............................................................235  The Public Role in Higher Education ........................................236  What is Needed to Improve Student Access and Benefits from  Higher Education .......................................................................238       AFFORDABILITY ....................................................................238       ACCOUNTABILITY. ................................................................241  EDUCATION. ...............................................................................242  Conclusion ..................................................................................243 Economic Risks of and Opportunities of Climate Change .................244  Hidden and Explicit Pollution Subsidies Distort Business and  Consumer Choices .....................................................................245  Risks of Reversing Progress .......................................................248  Missing Opportunities to Lead a New Energy Revolution .........252  Conclusion ..................................................................................254 FEBRUARY 28, 2017. – Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the  Report of the Joint Economic Committee on the 2017 Economic Report of the  The Obama Administration’s final Economic Report of the  President and the Annual Report of the Council of Economic  Advisers (Report) continues the pattern of previous reports that  have misdiagnosed the reasons for our slow economic recovery  and advocated misguided policies as a response.  These policies  have led to a steady decline in America’s economic potential.  The  Joint Economic Committee (JEC) Majority offers a different  vision that will unleash our economy’s capacity to grow, produce,  create jobs, boost wages, and compete in the 21st century.   The economy never surged back from the last recession despite  the Obama Administration’s repeated promises. Since the  beginning, the Administration predicted again and again that its  policies would accelerate economic and job growth. As each year  passed without a growth surge, it postponed the projected timing  and tempered its outlook but did not give up on predicting a surge  until its final forecast in 2016. That forecast projected virtually flat  annual growth of real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for the next  ten years, far below the postwar average of 3.2 percent (the straight  A low unemployment rate does not mean that if more jobs were  available there would not be workers to fill them, nor does a long  string of job gains by itself imply anything about potential  employment or hours worked. The lower line of Figure 2,  representing employment gains in proportion to population size  since the end of the last recession captures how weak the jobs  recovery is that the Trump Administration is inheriting from the  Obama Administration and that many people who could work do  not have a job (see Chapter 2 for a detailed discussion). In contrast,  the upper line in Figure 2 shows the proportional employment  gains during the Reagan recovery from the country’s previous  Source: “Economics One,” a blog by John B. Taylor, “Economic  The Committee Majority has documented the large shortfall in  jobs and GDP through the recovery, most comprehensively in its  JEC Response to the Obama Administration’s 2014 Report. The  GDP gap relative to the average of other postwar recoveries was  $1.5 trillion at the time. The JEC Response of 2016 reported a gap  of $1.98 trillion in 2009 dollars (see Figure 3),1 but this recovery  has taken so long that ongoing comparisons to the past lose some  meaning because prior recoveries had growth surges that ebbed as  With each disappointing year of the Obama Administration, its  excuses continued: the recession was worse than expected, its  financial origins held back the recovery, other countries were  recovering too slowly, the population is aging, and secular  stagnation has set in. But the excuses did not raise anything new  or unforeseen. For example, in January 2009, the incoming  Administration released its first projection of a vigorous rebound  resulting from its stimulus package when the unemployment rate  was 7.8 percent and rising rapidly, and it was obvious at the time  that a severe financial crisis had just occurred.2 The impending  retirement of baby boomers also was no surprise. Additionally,  economic recoveries usually are slower in other major countries  than in the United States, and “secular stagnation” is merely a label  applied to speculative theories of why an economy may fail to  From the outset, the Obama Administration overestimated and  The failure to surge back has left the economy below its potential  output. CBO has repeatedly delayed the projected return of the  economy to potential even as it has repeatedly lowered its estimate  of what that potential output could be (see Figure 4).5   Slack in the economy is also the reason why seven-and-a-half  years after the recession ended the Federal Reserve (Fed) is still  holding the Federal funds rate close to zero and maintains an  enormous balance sheet nearly four times the pre-crisis size. This  extraordinary monetary policy risks asset bubbles among other  distorting effects, and several Federal Open Market Committee  (FOMC) members have wanted to retreat from it for a long time.  The Fed vice chair had signaled four rate increases in 2016, but  due to economic weakness, there was only one 0.25 percentage  point increase implemented at the end of the year.6  The lackluster recovery and the diminished economic potential  have real consequences. Only 5.5 million more people are  gainfully employed compared with the pre-recession peak in  November 2007, while the U.S. working age population has  increased by 21 million since then. The ranks of the long-term  unemployed swelled, millions of working age people no longer  even bother to look for work, and many people are working part- Among the long-term consequences are slow wage growth and  heightened fiscal pressures from accumulating public debt.  Large  and expanding debt is driven by growing mandatory spending  programs and Federal revenues that are lower than they could be  The Report recognizes the importance of economic growth for  employment and income when it credits the American Recovery  and Reinvestment Act with mitigating the recession’s job loss (p.  152), but post-recession it praises expanded government benefits  and increased taxes on high earners for reducing inequality (pp.  First, the problem is not inequality, but persistent poverty that  government handouts cannot solve.  Artificially raising the income  of struggling Americans with government transfers does not lead  them to self-sufficient, middle-income status, and lowering the  income of top earners does not help low-income families.  For the  Report to represent the latter as an accomplishment is peculiar to  say the least.  In fact, since most of the top earners are small  business owners, reducing the income they could use to create and  expand jobs or pay higher wages destroys opportunities for low- The number of people below the poverty line rose steeply during  the recession and only declined somewhat in the last two years. It  remains above 40 million people, a higher level than in more than  half a century. Throughout the weak recovery, unemployment  rates among minorities have been much higher than the average  rate, particularly among African Americans. The Report claims  the Administration’s policies raised average household incomes  and lessened inequality but does not mention the dire conditions  faced by many who cannot find employment. Faster economic  growth and job creation are critical to the welfare of those in  greatest need and are far more important for their long-term  prospects than any government program. (See Chapter 3 for  initiatives to help move Americans out of poverty.)  Second, government transfers should not be central to the  economy and the society; they should provide a safety net and  have a structure that does not interfere with private incentives to  create and make the most of economic opportunities.  To increase Americans’ standard of living, the most urgent need  is to accelerate economic growth and raise it back to its full  The U.S. economic growth potential has been repeatedly  downgraded because the government has continually tightened  and added policy constraints on the private sector. With every new  regulatory burden on production or permit delay to break ground  on a new project, every increase in cost from a government- mandated benefit, and every tax increase (or failure to address  international tax disadvantages), business is forced to curtail how  much it invests, produces, hires, and raises wages, leading to fewer  jobs and a smaller supply of U.S. goods and services.   Similarly,  with every government transfer payment or benefit, the supply of  labor shifts to the left as well. These constraints have ratcheted  output ever further below potential. This is what explains Figure  Our most pressing problem from a macroeconomic perspective is  slow economic growth and a growing Federal debt burden. The  solution to slow growth is lifting the artificial constraints and  disincentives imposed by government on the private market  economy—this can be done through tax and regulatory reform.  The solution to the Federal debt problem is faster economic  growth and holding Federal spending to a lower, relatively stable,  share of the economy, which requires containing mandatory  spending programs that are on an unsustainable path. If we take  steps to limit mandatory spending growth and grow the economy,  we can head off market worries that the debt will hamstring the  government and crowd out private sector spending.  Borrowing should not be a way to avoid making necessary  choices. Every administration has its priorities. Those of the  Obama Administration were different from those of the one before  it and those of the Trump Administration again are different. But  a policy debate must take place within the limits of a budget.   The previous Administration has left much less fiscal space as  publicly held debt has more than doubled in size relative to the  economy. Cutting waste is one important part of managing  spending and deficits but another crucial part is to make credible  progress on deescalating future spending commitments that cast a  shadow over current spending requirements and future U.S.  creditworthiness. That will help to keep financial markets calm  and create room to deal with any national emergencies that may  arise. (See Chapter 2 for analysis and some specific  Of course, we must position our financial, tax, health care, and  educational systems for long-term stability, and with the right  incentives to increase productivity and serve our citizens well.   (Chapters 4, 5, 6 and 8 offer technical discussions.) The United  States has attained success, at times even excellence, in some  aspects of all these areas, and provided positive examples that  other countries emulated.  The U.S. model that achieved good  results always relied on the private market economy and the  resourcefulness of the American people before involving the  government too heavily.  We must return to that approach to be  This also applies to being good stewards of the environment and  the global climate.  We must explore ways to make the biggest  possible difference in preserving the earth while playing to our  economic and technological strengths. Many areas around the  world live in poor economic and environmental conditions and  some are giving rise to increasing greenhouse gas emissions.  Economic development and technological advancement can be the  answer to all three problems, and the United States can help  The last Administration executed its environmental policy with  mandates and constraints on the domestic economy and turned  away from various resources and technologies.  It made no  concerted effort to direct American commercial know-how to  major sources of pollution and greenhouse emissions outside our  borders.  Trade and foreign investment can bring home earnings  to the United States and create good manufacturing jobs, while  producing equipment and American fuels for export, if the  investment is focused and conditioned appropriately. We should  explore opportunities for increasing U.S. exports of domestic  resources and technical equipment to locations where they could  do much to raise incomes and living standards, improve  environmental conditions, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions  by commercially beneficial deals. (Chapter 7 provides further  The last Administration has left a legacy of severe economic  challenges in multiple areas that we now must address after losing  nearly a decade to meet them. Chapter 1 provides an overview of  these challenges. Notwithstanding the degree of difficulty and the  shortness of time, we should be optimistic that the American  economy can rise to the occasion once the government gets out of  the way and allows it to reach its full potential.  The following chapters respond to corresponding chapters in the  Economic Report of the President; they conclude with specific  policy recommendations. The final Response chapter addresses  tax reform, a subject the 2017 Economic Report of the President  1 Report of the Joint Economic Committee of the United States on the 2016  Economic Report of the President, March 1, 2016, p. 35.  2 “The Job Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan,” by  Christina Romer and Jared Bernstein, released January 10, 2009. Dr. Romer  was President Obama’s first CEA chair and Dr. Bernstein was Vice President  Biden’s first chief economist and economic advisor.  3 Former National Economic Council Director Larry Summers has invoked the  concept after leaving the Obama White House. Conceived initially in the  Great Depression, the postwar economic boom proved it wrong.  4 President Obama did finally admit that there were fewer “shovel ready”  5 Interestingly, Larry Summers, the Obama Administration’s former National  Economic Council’s director has drawn attention to the CBO’s progressive  6 Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer Speaks with CNBC’s Steve  http://www.cnbc.com/2016/01/06/cnbc-exclusive-cnbc-transcript-federal- reserve-vice-chairman-stanley-fischer-speaks-with-cnbcs-steve-liesman-on- ! The 2017 Economic Report of the President claims “great  strides that the Nation has made in building a stronger  ! However, after a slow, still incomplete economic recovery  Administration’s own growth projections fall short of  o Any problems with Obama Administration policies;  o The severity of challenges left behind to reconstitute  ! A radical change in economic policy is required to return  Over the last eight years, the United States experienced a  lackluster economic recovery from a severe recession.  For all of  the emphasis that the 2017 Economic Report of the President and  the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA)  (ERP, or Report) places upon the Obama Administration’s efforts  to combat the effects of the recession, much less economic  The Report notes that, as of the third quarter of 2016, “the U.S.  economy was 11.5 percent larger than at its peak before the  crisis,”2 however, that represents only a meager average annual  growth of 1.25 percent, less than half the 3.4 percent average  annual real GDP growth during the prior 50 years.3  While  recovery periods have lengthened over the last half century, the  last recovery—still not complete after more than seven years—is  so long that the Committee Majority views the cumulative Federal  fiscal and regulatory policies of the Obama Administration as the  main cause.  As discussed in the following chapters of this  Response, there are strong indications the economy could grow  In its January 2017 Budget and Economic Outlook, CBO projected  that nonfarm payroll growth will continue to slow over the 2022- 2027 period, adding only 65,000 jobs per month on average (see  Figure 1-1),4 which is down significantly from CBO’s January  2016 projection of approximately 75,000 jobs added per month  While related to slower population growth, the United States  actually has a relatively more favorable population trajectory than  other developed economies due in part to anticipated growth in  immigration.5  While population increases and the labor force  participation rate have been slowing, growth-oriented policies can  still brighten the economic outlook for the United States.   Since the beginning of the recovery, real after-tax income per  person grew only 1.4 percent annually on average, and real median  household income only began growing again in 2015 after years  of decline and stagnation following its previous 2007 peak.  It still  remains below the 2007 level and the previous record peak in  1999.6  A 2016 study from Pew Charitable Trusts found that the  overall U.S. growth rate in inflation-adjusted personal income  from the final quarter of 2007 through the final quarter of 2015 is  1.6 percent, with rather uneven growth when looking at each state.   Growth ranged from 5.1 percent in North Dakota and 3.0 percent  in Texas to 0.2 percent in Nevada and 0.6 percent in Illinois.7  The Report prefers to highlight hourly wage growth over previous  recoveries in its Figure 1-3 to demonstrate the relatively strong  growth in hourly wages over the current recovery.  Real wage  growth picked up in pace, including real median household  income growth setting a record pace from 2014 to 2015.8   However, the quicker pace late in the recovery obscures an  unusually sluggish growth period in the aftermath of the 2007-09  recession.  As discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of this Response,  average income growth in this recovery is about half the rate of  Moreover, focusing on growth in hourly wages can obscure other  factors that affect household income, including reduced weekly  hours worked or involuntary part-time employment.  As shown in  Figure 1-2 below, as a rudimentary measure of total hours worked  adjusted for growth in the number of households, the average  household is working less hours on an annual basis than before the  As discussed in greater length in Chapter 2 of this Response, other  measures show sluggish, and at times, divergent negative trends  compared to the data that the Report prefers to highlight,  particularly when compared with previous recovery periods.  The  Report even acknowledges that the U-6 alternative unemployment  measure, which comprises a broader definition of unemployment,  remains elevated, nearly eight years after the recession.9  The Report glosses over the relative unevenness of the recovery,  whether geographically or generationally measured.  In  geographic measures, a 2016 study from the Economic Innovation  Group found that over 50.4 million Americans live in “distressed  communities,” which are zip codes where, on average, over 55  percent of the population is not working and more than a quarter  From a generational perspective, recent evidence shows that the  recovery has been uneven between millennials and baby boomers  as well.  While millennials age 16-to-24 years old and 25-to-34  years old have not seen their employment as a share of their  population rise very much since its recent nadir shortly after the  recession, baby boomers age 55-to-64 years old have seen their  employment-to-population ratio rise close to their previous record  peak of 62.8 percent in March 2008, which occurred in the middle  of the recession.11  Part of these trends can be explained by  millennials attaining more education and launching their careers  later, as well as by baby boomers delaying retirement in favor of  work or because they are unable to retire comfortably in today’s  current low interest rate environment.  Beneath the national  aggregate numbers other factors that impede employment  expansion and reentry into the workforce at the local level may  The Committee Majority’s view is that Obama Administration  policies failed to engage effectively with the market economy.   The prevailing philosophy was that markets often fail and that the  government must actively correct market failures once they occur  and impose market controls to prevent new ones from occurring.   The policies built on this philosophy ignore decades of  countervailing economic research prompted by the strong belief in  government’s ability to correct market imperfections in the years  after World War II.  Dismal productivity increases and stagflation  in the 1970s resulted from the economic regulation of individual  industries and efforts to “fine tune” the macroeconomy.  The  Carter Administration was actually the first to deregulate several  industries.  The Reagan Administration subsequently relieved  more of the economy of government controls leading to a long  period of strong economic performance and muted business cycles  The CEA shows no introspection in this regard.  There is no  “lessons learned” section in the Report that could be useful to  policymakers.  Instead, the Report repeats claims of success for  major policies designed by the last Administration and the  Democratic Congress early in President Obama’s first term  without acknowledging how controversial their impacts have  been: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA); the  Affordable Care Act (ACA, or Obamacare); the Administration- supported Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act  (Dodd-Frank), climate and environmental policy that had a false  start with the failed American Clean Energy and Security Act of  2009 (ACES, or Waxman-Markey) bill but was advanced by  While no one expects the CEA to be critical of the Administration  that employs it, Economic Reports of the President issued by the  Obama Administration have tended toward the genre of  infomercials—full of praise for Administration policies without  comparative evaluation of alternative policy approaches or  For example, the Report repeats the claims that ARRA “saved or  created 6 million job-years through 2012 and raised the level of  GDP by between 2 and 2.5 percent in FY 2010 and part of FY  2011,”12 even though one cannot know whether a given job would  have been “saved” or “created” without ARRA.  The same models  used to predict ARRA’s beneficial effects were later used to  support estimates of what would have been forgone without it.   This point had been made long ago, including by the JEC at  measuring jobs saved as a result of ARRA, let alone  created, is quite difficult if not impossible. So the  in order to estimate ARRA’s effects on output and  employment for the quarterly reports to determine  ARRA failed to deliver the reductions in unemployment promised  initially and obviously did not stimulate a vigorous recovery, but  Similarly, the ACA has been covered in controversy and  undeniably produced results much different from what the Obama  Administration promised, as enumerated in Chapter 4 of the  Response.  But plain facts and widespread dissatisfaction  notwithstanding, the Report concedes nothing.  It devotes a more  than 100-page chapter to praising Obama Administration health  The Report discusses at length the 2008 financial crisis and  measures taken to mitigate it, but fails to address the Federal  Government’s large role in the financial sector and in setting  monetary conditions. Before the crisis, the Federal Government  already oversaw the financial industry in myriad ways through  multiple agencies, and it is heavily involved in housing finance.   Yet there is no discussion of how oversight agencies missed  problems and why they would not miss them again, of government  policy that promotes homeownership and bank lending to lower  income groups, or of the government-sponsored enterprises  Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  Neither is there any discussion of  the exceedingly low interest rates kept in place by the Federal  Reserve for a long time prior to the crisis.  It is as though the CEA  wrote the Report in a bubble insulated from the debates that have  The Response makes the case that instead of ending “too big to  fail,” Dodd-Frank imposed greater regulations on the U.S.  financial system without regard for constitutionality or analysis of  the law’s regulatory impact on the economy.  This regulatory  burden has fallen heavily on smaller financial institutions, while  leaving government-sponsored enterprises virtually untouched.  The Report’s treatment of higher education finance is similarly  detached from the problems on many people’s mind.  How does  easy credit from the government affect college tuitions, how are  students going to pay off large debts, and does the sheer size of  student debt in the aggregate, which is approaching $2 trillion,  threaten the stability of the financial system? What is the risk of a  public debt crisis if the Federal Government resorts to largescale  On the subject of climate change the CEA’s Reports for years have  ventured far into the subject of climate science, as does the 2017  Report, even though that is neither the CEA’s mission nor its  expertise, while the costs of the last Administration’s chosen  policies and the relative merits of different approaches to climate  change received next to no attention.  Economics is all about  tradeoffs and choosing the best ones.  Here is another intensely  debated subject with major implications for the economy that the  CEA treated as though only its preferred perspective were  relevant.  The related subject of energy sources received similar  treatment.  In the current Report nuclear energy is not discussed at  all even though it accounts for 20 percent of power generation in  the United States and emits no greenhouse gases whatsoever.  If  the last Administration disfavored nuclear energy, the CEA should  at least have explained why if it was going to take up the subject  Taxes should collect enough revenue to fund core government  functions with the least disruption to taxpayers and the economy.   In reality, the government also uses taxes to redistribute income as  well and the debate over whether and to what extent it should use  the tax system for this purpose likely will continue indefinitely.  A  good focus for the CEA would have been to identify aspects of the  tax structure that could be reformed to reduce or eliminate the most  disruptive effects on the economy with the smallest loss of revenue  to the government in the near term (faster economic growth will  increase revenue in the long term) and the least effect on the last  Administration’s redistributive objectives.  Instead, the CEA touts  Obama Administration efforts to mitigate income inequality and  goes as far as to suggest that raising taxes on high-income earners  In its 2014 Report, the CEA included a chapter entitled  “Evaluation as a Tool for Improving Federal Programs.”14  If the  CEA had abided by the principles laid out in that chapter, its  Reports would have been far more useful.  Ironically, it even failed  to do so for its discussion of the ACA in the very same 2014  FOUR CONTINUED STRUCTURAL CHALLENGES: PRODUCTIVITY,  Chapter 1 of the Report has a separate section with the above title16  and discusses each challenge in the order shown.  The Response  will briefly address these challenges but in a different order.   The Report discusses the importance of “economic sustainability”  in the context of shoring up automatic stabilizers like  unemployment insurance, and also in terms of climate change.17   But an important component of economic sustainability is fiscal  sustainability for which the Obama Administration showed little  concern.  For eight years the White House put forth little effort to  reduce the rising level of Federal debt.  Apart from tables listed in  the appendices, the term “Federal debt” is only mentioned twice  in the Report, and only within the context of the statutory limit and  student debt, rather than with a focus on fiscal sustainability.  The Report argues, “it is possible to combine short-run fiscal  expansion with medium- and long-run fiscal consolidation to  maintain fiscal discipline” as demonstrated by the Obama  Administration.18  Given the enormous growth in debt over the last  As in previous years, the Report points out that, as a share of GDP,  the Federal budget deficit fell by two-thirds since 2009, and that  in fiscal year 2016, the Federal budget deficit matched its average  of the last four decades.19  However, this ignores the fact that gross  Federal debt roughly doubled over the course of the Obama  Administration, from $10.6 trillion to nearly $20 trillion,20 in part  due to the Federal Government’s response to the recession.  In  2009, deficits rose as high as 9.8 percent of GDP, or $1.4 trillion,  before falling to an estimated 3.3 percent in 2016.21  Furthermore,  in leaving the Federal Government’s massive spending trajectory  unaddressed, CBO—in the wake of the Obama Administration’s  departure—has projected debt held by the public will rise above  91 percent of GDP just outside of the ten-year budget window and  surpass the World War II-era record of 106 percent by 2035.   Gross Federal debt, which includes intragovernmental transfers, is  projected to remain elevated at 106 percent of GDP over most of  the 2017-2027 budget window.  CBO remarks in its Long-Term  Budget Outlook that the timing of policy changes to maintain the  current level of publicly held debt as a share of GDP, or to reduce  it to its 50-year average, significantly affects the size of policy  changes necessary to achieve fiscal sustainability:  put Federal debt on a sustainable path—regardless  face trade-offs. Reducing the deficit sooner would  policies lawmakers would adopt. ...waiting several  years to reduce Federal spending or increase taxes  Some economists have argued over the past year that the United  States is facing a secular stagnation problem,23 in which excessive  savings acts as a drag on demand, and that overcoming it requires  fiscal stimulus akin to the kind initially levied against the worst  effects of the recession.  However, as CBO noted in its analysis of  ARRA, the law’s long-term costs are projected to reduce GDP by  0.2 percent after 2016 as a result of increased government debt, as  each dollar of additional debt crowds out approximately one-third  of a dollar in private domestic capital.24  When questioned on the  ability to strike a balance between economic growth initiatives and  deficit spending in the context of the longer-term fiscal outlook,  Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen noted in her testimony before  are longer term fiscal challenges, that the debt-to- GDP ratio at this point looks likely to rise as the  ratio at around 77 percent, there is not a lot of  fiscal space should a shock to the economy occur,  an adverse shock that did require fiscal stimulus.25  The Report discusses labor force participation only briefly.  The  CEA recommends strengthening the “connective tissue” in U.S.  labor markets, suggesting improvements in unemployment  insurance, tax credits for low-income workers, workplace  flexibility, and raising the minimum wage (of all things).26  The decades-long low in U.S. labor force participation is a major  problem holding back economic growth and it relates to weak  post-recession business investment, which actually declined in  2016.  Chapter 2 of the Response provides an analysis of the  untapped growth potential that could be realized if policy  constraints on the use of capital and labor were lifted.   Unfortunately, pro-growth tax and regulatory reforms were no  more a focus of the Report than controlling mandatory spending  Much in line with last year’s Report, the 2017 Report argues that  the United States has the highest levels of income inequality, and  has seen the fastest increase in that metric among the G-7  economies.  However, as stated in the Response last year, this  omits the effect of allowing passthrough businesses to file under  the top individual tax rate from 50 percent to 28  was much higher.  In fact, the data show a growing  share of U.S. business income has been taxed on a  passthrough basis... meaning that a firm’s business  income is attributed to the owner(s) and taxed as  the process of teasing out income inequality from  This is discussed in further detail in Chapter 3 of this Response.  Further, the Report suggests that a “more progressive fiscal  system” which redistributes to low- and moderate-income  households and particularly children, can improve future earning  and education outcomes.28  However, the United States has one of  the most progressive tax systems in the world, suggesting that at  least on the tax side of the fiscal system, the United States is highly  progressive compared to other systems.29  Yet does that  redistribution lead to better education and earnings outcomes for  lower income households?  It appears unlikely based on 2006 data,  which was analyzed by CBO in 2013.  On the spending side of the  U.S. fiscal system, in yet another revelation of the heavy emphasis  in Federal spending placed on mandatory retirement and health  care programs, elderly childless homes received 57 percent of  transfer payments despite making up only 15 percent of the U.S.  population.30  Rather than focus on the real problem—“growth in  spending for programs focused on the elderly population (such as  Social Security and Medicare), in which benefits are not limited to  low-income households”31—the Report wants to further burden  already overburdened American taxpayers with policies that will  Given the ongoing, unaddressed trajectories of these mandatory  programs since the 2013 CBO analysis, even if one were to accept  the Obama Administration’s suspect premise that Federal  redistribution to low-income households leads to better earnings  and education outcomes, it is unlikely that the Obama  Administration achieved virtually any gains along those lines  through fiscal progressivity, simply because lower income  households are largely not the focus of redistribution.   Furthermore, some redistributive efforts, like minimum wage  increases, are often poorly targeted as well, as most minimum  wage earners are not among the working poor.32  Redistributive  programs in the United States intended to alleviate poverty and  broader inequality, are increasingly poorly targeted, expensive  relative to the intended outcome, and can often create ceilings as  well as floors for recipients looking to improve their well-being.    While it can be argued that redistributive spending programs do  indeed ameliorate some of the hardships of living in poverty or  near-poverty, the connection to better education and earnings  outcomes is less clear and dependent upon the program.  The  research cited in the Report focuses on early childhood education,  Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), food stamp programs, Moving  to Opportunity programs, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance  for Needy Families (TANF); but despite claiming “[t]hese six  examples show that programs have large and real long-term  benefits,”33 not all redistributive spending programs can boast  success.34  Chapter 3 of this Response shows there is plenty of  room for reform of these kinds of programs to align program and  beneficiary incentives, correctly measure the desired outcomes of  moving families sustainably off these programs, and target  programs only to the most vulnerable populations.  Generally, there is another element in inequality discussions and  redistributive efforts that would lead the casual reader to believe  that, absent a government mandate, most Americans do not share  their hard-earned resources with one another.  As Jeffrey Miron  noted in his discussion of rethinking redistribution:  evidence of daily life in America, however, shows  institutions operate soup kitchens; the Boy Scouts  $300 billion to charity, a figure made all the more  billion hours of work — much of it in efforts aimed  According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), from  September 2014 to September 2015 (the latest data available),  nearly one-quarter of the civilian noninstitutional population age  16 and older, or about 62.6 million people, volunteered through or  for an organization, and spent a median 52 hours on  volunteering.36  As noted in the JEC Majority staff analysis, “The  Reward of Work, Incentives, and Upward Mobility”:  Ultimately, the capabilities of the government, at  the Federal level and to certain extents at the state  and local levels, are relatively rigid, immobile, and  uniform in the handling of every case. While that  effective means to move individuals out of poverty  The Report mixes productivity factors, including skill-biased  technological change, a slowdown in higher educational  attainment, and globalization, with greater inequality.  It also  claims that “economic rents” (profits resulting from limited  market competition) can exacerbate inequality if they are  increasingly captured by capital or high earners.38  The previous  2016 Report argued that policymakers should reduce the ability of  people or corporations to seek rents through the influence of  regulatory lobbying.  However, Nobel laureate economist Milton  Friedman described the problem as an “iron triangle” connecting  interest groups, bureaucracies, and politicians that is by no means  one directional and virtually always fails consumers.  Ultimately,  any reform to reduce rent-seeking behavior must limit the entity  with the power to confer rents, namely the government.  Last  year’s Response discussed this subject in greater depth.39  The factors identified here certainly are relevant to economic  productivity overall and of different groups which affects their  relative earnings power and thus income inequality among them.   But a much clearer way of approaching the subject of productivity  is, first, to focus on private investment particularly in equipment  as that affects workers’ ability to produce more directly.  The U.S.  economy is not receiving enough of this kind of investment.  Next,  the question is how to accelerate technological progress to  combine labor and capital in ways that are more productive.  That  takes longer and is a less pressing matter, though ultimately more  important.  One should approach the question of increasing  technology capabilities as well from the perspective of relative  returns on alternative investments.  The Report neither focuses on  the immediate challenge of encouraging more capital investment  nor of what makes for the most important ways of raising long- The Report claims, “promoting inclusive, sustainable growth will  remain the key objective in the years ahead...by acting decisively  and by choosing the right policies.”40  However, rather than being  an agent of change, the decisive actions taken by the Obama  Administration were firmly in the well-worn, status quo direction  of government expansion.  The policies chosen more often proved  to be the wrong ones, based on the presumption that government  knows best, be it in providing health care, in redistributing hard- earned resources, in attempting to protect consumers from  businesses, and in picking winners and losers.  Furthermore, over  the last eight years, divisiveness often thwarted even the policies  that most policymakers could agree upon, and exacerbated  tensions in times of severe disagreement.  The Obama  Administration departed amidst rising polarization across  geographical and political lines among the American people.   Today, the stakes for America, and the promise it holds for its  citizens to achieve their own versions of the American Dream,  could not be higher.  The Obama Administration depicted a  hopeful, inclusive, strong and sustainable future.  However, that  appears to be a vast departure from the experience of the past eight  years, which were fraught with expanding government initiatives  and post-crisis reactionary policies that reduce bold innovation  and entrepreneurial risk-taking in the name of safety and stability  Many Americans still feel that they have not witnessed  improvement in their material well-being.  Now, many are  beginning to wonder if their children will surpass their own  parents’ standard of living, as previous generations have.  Nearly  eight years since the beginning of one of the most lackluster  recoveries in modern history, the median American family has  foregone tens of thousands of dollars of income relative to the  average post-1960 recovery because of slow growth.41 Millions of  prime-age Americans are out of the workforce or underemployed.   Broader unemployment measures remain elevated compared to  historical levels, reflecting the remaining scars from the recession.   Healthcare premiums have risen steeply this year.42  Effective tax  rates remain among the most burdensome in the developed world,  and regulations have grown at a record pace.43  The Obama  Administration tied for second place for record debt-to-GDP  increases on an annual basis with the FDR and Truman  Administrations during the World War II period, behind only the  Lincoln Administration due to expenditures on the Civil War.44    The massive stimulus spending programs that the Administration  ushered in since 2008 have largely failed to deliver the boost that  was once promised.  Instead, we have been left with a larger base  of Federal spending obligations in a slow-growth economic  environment.  The growth of the Federal Government in size and  scope, accumulating over previous decades as well as over the  course of the current recovery, with a crushing upward debt  trajectory in the coming decades, is oppressing private enterprise  and innovation with an ever broadening scope of government  functions, misaligned incentives, and burdensome and byzantine  regulations.  Without long-term fiscal sustainability and a Federal  Government tasked only with functions exclusive and appropriate  for its purview, the slow growth economic environment would  The Committee Majority hopes that in the 115th Congress it will  have a willing partner in the Trump Administration to bring about  the changes necessary to ensure America remains a place of  unquestionable liberty and bountiful opportunity:  \" Provide comprehensive tax reform with a streamlined, pro- \" Cut unnecessary regulatory costs imposed on businesses  \" Improve patient-centered and affordable health care efforts  \" Support free trade and enforce trade laws in a timely,  \" Return power to the states by reducing Federal intrusions  in higher education and state-specific infrastructure  ! The Report estimates moderate output growth and a  ! However, CBO’s current estimate of real potential GDP  for 2017 is $2.1 trillion lower than its estimate from ten  ! Growth-inhibiting policies imposed during the Obama  unsustainable mandatory spending trajectory that crowds  out other spending and pushes the debt-to-GDP ratio ever  ! Pro-growth tax, spending, deficit, and regulatory reform  can help restore fiscal sustainability and accelerate  The Report broadly estimates that the economy is closing the  output gap—the difference between what the economy could  produce and what it is actually producing.  However, key  determinants of long-run economic growth—labor, investment,  and productivity—indicate the presence of a growing untapped  potential, which the Committee Majority believes results from  policy constraints.  Certainly, appropriate fiscal and regulatory  reforms would allow the economy to grow faster in both the short  CBO defines potential GDP as “the maximum sustainable amount  of real (inflation-adjusted) output that the economy can  produce.”46  Since 2007, CBO has consistently revised estimates  of potential GDP downward.  The most recent CBO estimate47 of  real potential GDP in 2017 is 11 percent lower, or $2.1 trillion (in  2009 dollars) lower, than its 2007 projection for 2017.  The Report focuses on how the output gap is shrinking.  However,  earlier expectations of potential GDP were much higher than  estimates that are more recent.  Figure 2-1 summarizes the  difference between the Report and CBO’s 2007 estimates of  potential real GDP.48  In the Committee Majority’s view, the  reason is Obama Administration policies have restrained  economic growth and left untapped an increasing production  potential.  The Response uses CBO’s 2007 estimates of potential  real GDP as a reference for what the economy’s full potential  The Committee Majority regards CBO’s progressive downward  revisions of its potential GDP estimates each year for the last ten  years as reflecting the progressive growth-inhibiting policy  constraints imposed on the economy by the last Administration.   Potential GDP is a stable, long-term concept and would not change  from year to year, absent a major unforeseen event, such as a new  war, unless the government changes how the economy is permitted  In February 2014, CBO released a report49 analyzing the  differences between its 2007 and 2014 estimates of 2017 real  potential GDP.50  Between 2007 and 2014, this estimate had been  revised downward by 7.3 percent.  In other words, the economy’s  estimated ability to produce goods and services in 2017 had been  revised down by $1.4 trillion in constant dollar terms.51  CBO’s estimates of potential real GDP depend primarily on  projections of labor force growth, capital accumulation, and  productivity growth.  The report attributes 40 percent of the  downward revision of potential GDP to lower workforce growth,  33 percent to reduced capital intensity, and 19 percent to  productivity.52  The next three sections analyze these three key  determinants of economic growth and provide evidence of  CBO’s estimates of labor force size in a fully recovered economy  have fallen by 1.5 million since 2007, from 162.3 million to 160.8  million, as shown in Figure 2-2.  The drop in CBO’s labor force  estimate of 1.5 million accounts for 40 percent of the untapped  It is conceivable that an aging population is retiring from the  workforce faster than initially anticipated; however, labor force  participation rates across age groups indicate that only workers  under the age of fifty-five have lower labor force participation  rates than the averages of the prior expansion (Figure 2-3).   Comparing the 2007 BLS forecast of the prime-age labor force  participation rate for 2016 of 83.6 percent with the current rate of  81.5 percent (see Figure 2-4) implies that over 2.6 million  potential workers between the ages of 25 and 54 remain on the  economy’s sidelines (more than the 1.5 million derived from CBO  data).  Neither the baby boomer generation reaching retirement  age, nor increased numbers of young people going to school or  college full time—who are mostly 16-to-24 years old—can  The duration of unemployment remains elevated (Figure 2-5).   During the previous expansion,53 the mean and median duration of  unemployment averaged 125 and 64 days, respectively, whereas  at this point in the expansion, the mean and median duration were  176 and 71 days, respectively.54  The higher mean unemployment  duration implies that a large number of workers remains on the  margins of the workforce, which means that there is room for the  economy to grow more if these workers find employment.   The Report states the “labor market continued to improve in 2016,  with many measures of labor-market performance having  recovered to, or near to, their pre-recession levels,”55 and notes  that the improvement “was apparent in the continued decline in  the unemployment rate.”56  The unemployment rate approaching  full employment used to imply that the output gap was closing and  actual GDP was returning to potential.  However, the reliability of  the unemployment rate as an indicator of economic performance  has greatly diminished.  The headline unemployment rate57 only  accounts for individuals who have actively sought work in the last  four weeks.  It does not measure how many individuals are  The average share of private investment-to-GDP during the post- 1960 expansion period was 17.8 percent.  During the current  expansion, it has averaged only 15.5 percent (see Figure 2-6).  Investment drives capital accumulation, which in turn helps drive  output and income growth.  The data presented in Figure 2-7  shows capital intensity from 1980 to 2015.  Capital intensity  measures the ratio of capital—machines, tools, and equipment  used to produce goods and services—relative to the number of  hours worked by individuals.  During the previous expansion, it  averaged 2.4 percent growth per year—that is to say, investment  in new capital was increasing relative to the workforce.  In the  current expansion, this measure has averaged -0.3 percent.  There  is not enough investment in new capital to offset the growth of the  According to CBO estimates, lackluster business investment  accounts for 33 percent of America’s untapped potential.59  Workforce growth and capital accumulation can help produce  economic growth, but eventually, diminishing returns set in.  Even  if both factors are increased and total output continues to grow, per  capita output cannot increase unless people discover ways to use  capital and labor more productively.  Each year, BLS produces its  statistics of multifactor productivity.  This measures what  economists often call the stock of technological knowledge.  The  Report’s general focus is on labor productivity, which measures  the ratio of output to labor input.  The Committee Majority prefers  multifactor productivity because it measures how well we are  learning new ways of producing goods and services with a similar  In its most recent annual report, BLS reported that multifactor  productivity for the private nonfarm business sector grew 0.2  percent in 2015.60  Between 1996 and 2005, multifactor  productivity increased at an average of 1.6 percent per year.   However, in the last decade for which data is available (2006- 2015), multifactor productivity has grown by only 0.4 percent on  During expansion periods between 1980 and 2007, multifactor  productivity growth averaged 1.3 percent annually as seen in  Figure 2-8.  From 2010 to 2015 it averaged only 0.8 percent per  year.  The year 2010 is an outlier; if excluded, the average from  The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development  (OECD) data for multifactor productivity in the ten wealthiest  member nations indicate that some developed nations are doing at  least as well, if not better, in this respect than before the 2007-2009  In Figure 2-9, the left-side bar for each nation shows the average  multifactor productivity growth during the four years preceding  the financial crisis, while the right-side bar shows the average  multifactor productivity in the most recent four years.  The nations  are ordered from left to right based on which nation had the largest  absolute decrease in multifactor productivity growth in the  aftermath of the most recent recession.  The United States  experienced the third largest drop.  By comparison, Germany  experienced only a slight decrease.  Notably, Ireland, Canada, and  Australia saw increases in their multifactor productivity growth.   Therefore, the Committee Majority believes that it is possible to  get productivity growth going again, and based on CBO estimates,  regain as much as 19 percent61 of America’s untapped potential.  As shown in Figure 2-10, in 2016, economic activity decelerated  as measured by real gross domestic product (real GDP)—the  inflation-adjusted value of all final goods and services produced  In 2014 and 2015, real GDP increased 2.4 and 2.6 percent,  respectively, and then slowed 1.6 percent in 2016,62 falling well  short of projections.  In early 2016, the Office of Management and  Budget (OMB) forecast real GDP growth of 2.6 percent for  calendar year 2016,63 and CBO and the Wall Street Journal’s  December 2015 Economic Survey64 each anticipated 2.5 percent  In 2016, for the first time during the recovery, lower investment  was a drag on economic growth, as shown in Figure 2-11.   Business investment in equipment used in the production of other  goods and services as well as business investment in inventories  Since the Federal Reserve is an independent agency, the CEA does  not discuss monetary policy at length but confines itself essentially  to giving a status report.  The most pertinent observation is that the  central bank kept the Federal funds rate near zero through 2016  despite having signaled four increases at the beginning of the year.  Only in December did it raise the Federal funds rate and only by a  quarter point.  In the seventh year since the recession had ended,  the economic recovery remained so fragile that the Federal  Reserve refrained from moving toward normalizing interest rates.  To mitigate recessions, the Federal Reserve lowers the interest  cost of borrowing for consumers and businesses with the aim of  supporting spending and investment, which in turn support the  demand for workers.  As the economy recovers and closes the  output gap, the Federal Reserve must gradually withdraw  monetary accommodation to avoid inflation and asset price  Traditionally, the unemployment rate was a more reliable  indicator of the output gap and more help in guiding monetary  policy.66  However, that was when the labor force participation  rate was not shrinking.  Now the Federal Reserve calibrates its  policies based on what it believes potential employment and  potential output might be, and that introduces it into doing more  than merely mitigating a cyclical downturn or supporting an  ensuing cyclical recovery.  It is now drawn into a grey area of also  offsetting other forces and hindrances acting on the market  economy, for which monetary policy tools are not ideally suited,  if at all.  Monetary policy cannot remove constraints on market  function and boost the economy’s potential.  That requires  appropriate fiscal and regulatory reforms that motivate  Since the Obama Administration is not directly responsible for  monetary policy and the Report discusses the topic only briefly,  this Response also will not go into greater depth.  Suffice it to say  that the extremely low interest rate policy, to which the Federal  Reserve has adhered to for so long, is not a sign of good economic  The CEA invokes long-term trends ostensibly outside the Obama  Administration’s control to excuse the slowness of the recovery.   But the most plausible, straightforward explanation for the weak  recovery is that from the beginning, many of the Obama  Administration’s policies have stood in the way of normalization.   Significant amounts of capital and labor have been sitting on the  sidelines that could expand the economy if they were put to use.   Removing the obstacles to these sources of economic growth will  The United States has an extraordinary capacity to borrow,67  because it is the largest free market economy in the world, which  traditionally has offered ample opportunities for entrepreneurship,  innovation, investment, and employment, leading to faster growth  than other advanced economies.  Further, the U.S. dollar is the  But the United States has been borrowing at a voracious pace;  policy constraints have hemmed in the market economy; and U.S.  economic growth has slowed to a crawl.  Last year, business  investment declined.  Millions of individuals age 16 and above  remain outside the labor market, and the percentage of that  population employed has not been below 60 percent in decades.  On top of that, the Federal Government currently faces obligations  to pay retirement income (Social Security) and for health care  services (Medicare, Medicaid, and ACA premium subsidies)  under parameters that become fiscally and indeed economically  unworkable (see Figure 2-13).  The economy cannot support them.   Investors who lend the government money know this, but expect  The programs are fixable.  The beneficiaries are American  nationals, not foreign nationals.  The Federal Government can  change program parameters in ways that continue to assist  Americans in their retirement and help them with medical  expenses, while adjusting these programs in ways that make their  costs manageable.  There is bipartisan agreement that Social  Security can be reformed relatively easily.  At a JEC hearing in the  114th Congress on the Federal debt, Alice M. Rivlin, a former CBO  director, and witness for the Committee Minority stated:  Personally, I think we need to do everything, but if I  had to do one thing up front and get it out of the way,  it would be Social Security. It's not hard. It's not  It is important to recognize that the current leading Social Security  reform proposals would affect individuals who still have time to  adapt to changing program parameters while exempting those  already in or near retirement.  However, the more that time passes,  the greater the challenge to keep program changes modest.  Reforming the health care sector proves more difficult, and  Chapter 4 of this Response discusses the subject at greater length.   The highly inefficient institutional settings created by government  for health insurance and health care markets lead, in part, to  escalating health care costs.  What the government creates within  our borders, the government can correct and one must expect that  the political process will make course corrections that avert  However, while the Federal Government’s creditors have been  patient with respect to the mandatory spending problem, it is  unclear when unease will rise at seeing no progress toward a  resolution.  Where are they to look for reassurance?  Certainly not  at the current rate of U.S. economic growth.  Increasing the GDP  growth rate is important; it will help allay concern over the size of  existing Federal debt.  However, any realistic acceleration of  growth can only buy some time.  A glance at the Figure 2-13  makes clear that GDP growth alone cannot solve the entire  problem.  Even if the government puts the money to productive  uses, borrowing more money, even when interest rates are low,  cannot grow the economy enough to contain the rise of the debt- For the United States to maintain its extraordinary borrowing  capacity, there must be visible progress toward containing its  Rising interest on the debt compounds the urgency of spending  containment.  Net interest expense is a growing share of the  Federal budget, and in CBO’s baseline scenario, overtakes  nondefense spending in 2025 and defense spending in 2027 (see  Figure 2-14).69  If nothing changes, the United States would spend  Figure 2-15 shows by how much Federal interest expense would  increase if the interest rates CBO assumes for its forecast were one  percentage point higher.  If future interest rates were to shift up by  one percentage point from what CBO assumes, the Treasury  would owe in excess of $1.6 trillion more in net interest expense  over the next ten years.  Much Treasury debt is issued for relatively  short terms and must be rolled over continuously, which exposes  The looming obligations from mandatory spending and interest  expense have been pressuring ongoing Federal spending priorities  already, even those that are well-established and important right  now, such as national defense.  The Coalition for Fiscal and  National Security71 has warned that the long-term debt is the single  greatest threat to our national security, explaining that:  The warning resonates particularly in the context of another  possible crisis, economic or military, that would put further stress  During past Federal debt ceiling debates, the Obama  Administration seemed to presume that the country’s economic  strength supports boundless Federal borrowing and argued that  U.S. creditors show no sign of concern over America’s economic  ability to repay them.  Warnings that the debt-to-GDP ratio  approached levels that marked economic slowdowns in other  countries were contested, but the Obama Administration offered  no “caution zone” of its own for the debt ratio.  The need to raise  the debt ceiling was the only lever available to the opposition at  the time to slow deficit spending, and the resulting budget  sequestration in 2013 represented some progress.  However, the  Obama Administration took no steps to address the skyrocketing  future mandatory spending expenditures that will force the  government to borrow ever more (Figure 2-13).  Both the  mandatory spending problem and the larger debt are significant  parts of the Obama Administration’s economic legacy, with which  Releasing the economy from the artificial policy constraints that  the Obama Administration imposed on the potential rate of output  would allow an acceleration of the GDP growth rate in short order,  as discussed earlier in this chapter, in addition to taking steps that  push out and bend down the mandatory spending curve.  The more  progress that is made in both of these respects, the less the current  debt-to-GDP ratio may concern investors and creditors because, if  they see progress, the U.S. economy’s inherent strengths will  continue to reassure them.  While current long-term interest rates  remain relatively low, there also may be an opportunity to lessen  future interest rate risk somewhat by rolling some maturing debt  Managing the two challenges that require immediate attention— the artificial constraints on the economy’s potential and the  burning fuse to a spending-driven debt explosion—should not  distract from planting the seeds for higher long-term economic  potential, increased workforce participation, and increased real  GDP growth.  Normalized monetary policy; financial reform;  greater emphasis on education and training as an investment over  consumption; inner city and rural area economic rejuvenation;  more effective and efficient health care; climate and environment  policy that draws on, rather than chokes, our economic strengths;  and much more should be on the agenda.  There is much to do.  Much of the current commentary on the economic policies of the  new Administration and Congress uses the fact that the  unemployment rate is below five percent (taken to mean close to  full employment) to suggest that the economy has recovered.  The  implication would be that production and output cannot increase  very much, unless there is a leap in total factor productivity.  The  CEA also suggests this and advocates policies that further its  preferred technologies or are mixed with social objectives it  favors,73 to raise the otherwise supposedly inevitable “new  normal” of meager growth rates resulting from demographic and  other forces outside the Obama Administration’s responsibility  But low unemployment only means a small excess labor supply at  current wage rates.  The low employment-to-population ratio of  less than 60 percent reveals that many more people could be  working.  We also know that the rate of business investment is not  back to normal and could be much higher.  Finally, we know that  CBO lowered its estimate of potential GDP each year since the  recession.  Hence, we know that labor and capital are available,  and if policy takes the right course to attract them back into the  \" Start mandatory spending reform (particularly Social  CHAPTER 3: ADDRESSING INEQUALITY IN THE CONTEXT OF  ! In Chapter 3 of the Report, the Obama Administration  conflates reductions in income inequality with equal  opportunity to succeed, begging the question as to whether  its use as a sole measure of a policy’s success is correct at  ! The Report’s approach to the subject of income inequality  excludes alternate measures of it and, critically, the subject  of economic mobility, which limits the discussion of how  ! While the Federal Government has an important role in  assisting individuals and families in need, real long-term  progress must start with strategies that foster individual  The Report reminds us that President Obama named inequality as  the “defining challenge of our time.”74  However, it conflates  reductions in income inequality with ensuring “that all Americans  have the opportunity to succeed.”75  By arguing this throughout  the chapter, the Obama Administration revealed a belief that it’s  possible to essentially compress the top and bottom of the income  distribution without considering incentives and risk-taking  behaviors, stages of life and the economic mobility that attends it,  geographic differences, and many other important factors that  might lead naturally to income inequality.  Meanwhile, the Report  ignores the need to lift people out of long-term poverty.  An alternate approach to move people out of poverty is found in  Chairman Pat Tiberi’s Investing in Opportunity Act, which would  encourage investors to help revitalize economically distressed  communities that lack investment and business growth.  State  governors would designate these areas as “Opportunity Zones.”76    Another example is former Congressman—now Senator—Todd  Young’s Social Impact Partnerships to Pay for Results Act, which  passed the House in the 114th Congress.  The Chairman is  sponsoring this measure in the 115th Congress.  This legislation  would request proposals from state and local governments for  social impact partnerships that produce measurable social benefits,  including high school graduation and employment for younger  Also, Vice Chairman Mike Lee’s Welfare Reform and Upward  Mobility Act would support 1996-style modifications to  Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and TANF,  as well as housing programs to engage states with disadvantaged  Americans and help them rejoin the workforce.  Generally, states  should play a much larger role in creating a smarter system.  They  are in a better position than the Federal Government to assess their  residents’ needs, and should therefore be afforded greater  flexibility and responsibility in funding and administering welfare  Speaker Paul Ryan’s “Better Way” (Better Way) Poverty,  Opportunity, and Upward Mobility Task Force notes that the  measure of success for most aid programs has customarily relied  on the amount of government money spent and the number of  people receiving those funds.77  Metrics for these programs rarely  delve further to determine how long individuals are on the  programs, how frequently they use the programs, or generally any  other indication that individuals leaving the programs become  successfully self-sufficient.  The misuse of metrics is apparent in  the Report as well.  For example, though 15 percent of Americans  live in poverty, as the Report explains,78 the metric itself fails to  include alternative forms of income and non-cash benefits that  exist to alleviate poverty.  To that end, Vice Chairman Mike Lee  introduced The Poverty Measurement Improvement Act in the  114th Congress—a bill that would authorize the Census Bureau to  conduct a new survey of income and Federal means-tested benefits  in an effort to measure the extent and success of Federal benefits  in reducing poverty and improving material well-being.  The Obama Administration’s laser-like focus on income  inequality begets the question as to whether its use as a sole  measure of a policy’s success is correct at all.  As mentioned in  last year’s response, the 1990s was a period of high and rising  income inequality, when income was increasingly concentrated  within the top one percent;79 however, the 1990s boasted much  stronger economic growth, and all incomes were rising relatively  quickly across the distribution scale, albeit at different rates.80  As mentioned in last year’s Response, “it remains more important  than ever to remove barriers to opportunity and continue every  effort to improve economic mobility.”81  In JEC Majority  analyses, discussions of equality of opportunity for upward  mobility do not focus on the “equal likelihood” that a person from  the bottom quintile has equal chance to reach the top, as  economists and scholars often use the term.  Rather, JEC Majority  analysis matches closely what Foundation for Research and Equal  Opportunity scholar Scott Winship has termed “equal access” to  achieve upward mobility.82  Last year’s Response noted:  immobility, they are not solely to blame for unequal  “equality of outcomes” not only fails to account for  As noted in the JEC Majority staff analysis, “The Reward of Work,  Incentives, and Upward Mobility,” an unfortunate confluence of  policies cumulatively chip away at work incentives, or the  monetary rewards that one receives for work.84 Over the last half  century, many programs created with the intent to improve the  well-being of the most vulnerable populations often effectively  hinder upward economic mobility by diminishing work incentives.   These policy developments have occurred in the tax code,  spending provisions, and through regulations.  This combination  of unintended negative policy effects cumulatively erode what  University of Chicago professor of economics Casey Mulligan  terms the financial “reward of work.”85  It is important to aim for  reforms that would reduce labor market distortions that have  accumulated not only since the “War on Poverty,” but since the  most recent recession as well.  As shown in Figure 3-1 below, the  once-declining poverty rate has remained relatively stable since  For those below the poverty threshold, a number of government  policies undermine virtually any incremental work effort.  This is  known as the “poverty trap,” the interaction between taxes and the  phase-outs of social welfare benefits as income rises, imposing a  high effective marginal tax on additional earnings.  As noted in the  JEC Majority analysis on the reward of work, “Americans  struggling with economic immobility are not liabilities, but  government programs often inadvertently treat them as such by  making it less advantageous for people to find and keep  employment.”86  The analysis further notes that the consequences  of remaining trapped have large costs as well—the longer an  individual is out of work, the greater the difficulty to obtain  For those living above the poverty line, many policies effectively  punish working additional hours or days, or working near certain  income thresholds with steep eligibility changes, such as the ACA  exchange subsidies.  Discouraging additional work could prevent  better opportunities to advance one’s income, benefits, skills,  experiences, and career—and move out of poverty, reducing  income inequality.  Altogether, government regulations, taxes, and  spending policies can cumulatively reduce the reward of work and  work opportunities, eroding many Americans’ relationship with  entirely certain how much demographic forces will  government policies has regrettably created a path  this, in light of the dire fiscal circumstances the  United States faces in the not-too-distant future,  policymakers should turn to every structural policy  reform at their disposal to unshackle the greater  As noted in earlier research from economist Raj Chetty and his  coauthors, economic mobility is higher in locations with greater  concentrations of two-parent households, better elementary  schools and high schools, and more civic activity and community  membership.88  However, family structure has changed over time,  and remains an important social factor in children’s opportunities  for upward mobility.89  In fact, the Brookings Institution’s Isabel  Sawhill notes that gaps in family structure and parenting styles are  creating “very unequal starts” for American children, affecting  income inequality and potentially slowing economic mobility for  those on the low end of the economic ladder.90  Sawhill goes on to  say that “family formation is a new fault line in the American class  structure.”91  Though a number of factors have led to the current  trends in family structures and the rise of single-parent  households, marriage penalties in the tax code present a clear  opportunity for Federal policy reform.  Marriage penalties affect  mostly two-earner couples, and furthermore, the penalties are  regressive, comprising a larger share of income among the lowest  income earners.  Additionally, data suggest that neutral treatment  of marriage in the tax code could promote marriage among low- In light of the substantial and growing evidence demonstrating the  positive impact stable and healthy marriage has on children,  particularly from low-income families, at a minimum it is  important that public policy not discourage marriage.  Yet, many  public policies beyond the tax code can create a financial  disincentive for low-income, single parents to marry.  Research  has found that the structure of Federal welfare programs includes  a marriage penalty where “many low-income couples with  children face substantial penalties for marrying that can amount to  almost one-third of their total household income.”93  Urban  Institute fellow Eugene Steuerle noted in an earlier analysis, “In  aggregate, couples today face hundreds of billions of dollars in  increased taxes or reduced benefits if they marry.  Cohabitating or  not getting married has become the tax shelter of the poor.”94  This  can occur on the tax side and the spending side of fiscal policy— in the former, affecting the value of and eligibility for the Earned  Income Tax Credit and increased tax liability from moving from  single to filing jointly, while affecting benefits received in the  The Administration boldly states that tax changes enacted since  2009 have boosted after-tax income received by the bottom 99  percent of families by more than tax changes of any previous  Administration since 1960.95  Figure 3-15 of the Report attempts  to show “the change in the share of after-tax income accruing to  the bottom 99 percent of families that is attributable to changes in  tax policy for Presidential Administrations since 1960.”  However,  as the Report points out, CEA holds the income distribution  constant from a 2006 sample of taxpayers and non-filers.    While the Report argues that this isolates “the impact of changes  in policy from other sources of variation in tax rates,” it ultimately  fails to show actual tax policy effects from prior Administrations  and their respective populations occupying the bottom 99 percent  because it is essentially holding taxpayer behavior and  demography constant over time regardless of tax structure and  economic environment.  This is particularly egregious in the post- 1986 tax reform world, in which a significant amount of pass- through business income accrues in the top 1 percent because the  reform reduced the top individual rate below the top corporate rate  and created additional incentives to switch from a C corporation  Figure 3-15 of the Report shows essentially what would have  occurred if the taxpayers and non-filers of 2006 were magically  transported back in time to a period coinciding with each  previous Administration, and how these 2006 filers’ and non- filers’ after-tax incomes would have changed in each scenario,  rather than actually extrapolating the tax effects on the income  shares of the bottom 99 percent of Administrations past.  Using a “fixed income distribution” for analyzing past tax  policy changes (“backcasting”) is misleading.  It parallels an  issue associated with the 2013 Report on Figure 3-1, which  purported to show that average tax rates for the top 1 percent  and top 0.1 percent in 1960 were between 40 percent and over  50 percent, compared with a 2013 average tax rate of roughly  30 percent.  The apparent intention was to show how relatively  low tax rates were in 2013 compared to the past.  However, the  figure did not actually show tax rates for taxpayers in 1960, but  what rates would have been if taxpayers in 2005 were also  transported back in time to 1960.  The 2013 Report used 2005  income levels and deflated them back to 1960.  However, this  holds taxpayer behavior and demography constant, even  though evidence shows that individuals will not earn and report  as much income at marginal rates that high.97  According to  JEC Majority staff calculations, using actual income reported  by taxpayers in 1960, the average tax rate at the top 1 percent  and top 0.1 percent in 1960 were 21 percent and 25 percent,  As the Tax Foundation reports of their own “Taxes and  Growth” model used to analyze the effects of past tax policy  changes, though its equations and methodologies may be the  Box 3-1 (Continued): If Taxpayers Had a Time Machine...  same used for current proposals, the Tax Foundation is careful  to avoid the same pitfalls that the Obama Administration has  ...we ran the model using economic and taxpayer data  from the year in which each bill was enacted, to account  for the different economic and demographic climates in  which each tax change occurred. For instance, the  businesses and more married households than today’s  It would be worthwhile to remember that policy changes do not  occur in a vacuum, and isolating effects of a particular policy  remains quite difficult, even with the best models at one’s  The Report implies that reducing the income of the top 1 percent  to redistribute to the bottom 99 percent was a lauded goal of the  Obama Administration: “Changes in tax policy... will boost after- tax incomes in the bottom quintile by 2 percent in 2017 and reduce  after-tax incomes for the top 0.1 percent by 9 percent relative to  what incomes would have been under 2008 policies.”99  The text  suggests that the income in America is a fixed pie, from which the  slices may be redistributed, but the Report’s own argument in  Chapter 5 for the pursuit of higher education to improve well- being runs counter to this representation.  Investing time and  money in post-secondary education enables one to rise higher in  the income distribution and presumably increases the pie.  Without  government forcibly redistributing income from one group of  Americans to another, policies that encourage and reward self- motivation and employment bring about upward mobility and  economic mobility, not income inequality, remains  The current U.S. individual income tax system is complex and  harms households and small businesses.  Though the top statutory  individual income tax rate is 39.6 percent, as noted in Chapters 4  and 8 of the Response, in combination with taxes in the ACA, the  top rate paid by small businesses that file under the individual  income tax is now 44.6 percent, including the surtax on investment  income and additional tax penalties.  This does not include state  income taxes that are as high as 13.3 percent (California).101   While Americans rely on small businesses to provide a large share  of new jobs, high marginal tax rates reduce resources that could  be used to create jobs.  Furthermore, the U.S. corporate tax rate is  the highest in the developed world, making it difficult for  American businesses to compete on a global scale, create  Elsewhere in Box 3-4 of Chapter 3, the Report discusses  alternative actions to “Make the Economy Work for All American  [sic]” including the President’s proposal to raise the minimum  wage.102  However, CBO previously projected that a proposed  Federal minimum wage increase to $10.10 per hour could amount  to an employment reduction of as many as one million workers  compared to projected employment without the increase.103  Yet,  as mentioned in the JEC Majority analysis on the reward of work,  increasing the minimum wage has another unintentional effect:  may actually prefer to work fewer hours in order to  prevent the loss of Federal benefits by going over  a “benefits cliff” as their incomes rise. Sometimes  make one marginal financial step forward feel like  per hour would result in a benefit loss of nearly  As economist Casey Mulligan testified at a JEC hearing on the  employment effects of the ACA and explained in previous writing,  when it comes to the sacrifice of work, many of the programs  intended to help people get back on their feet have inadvertently  made work more costly as Americans strive to improve the  livelihoods of themselves and their families.  He noted: “Another  way of putting it is that taking away benefits has the same effect  as a direct tax, so lower-income workers are discouraged from  climbing the income ladder by working harder, logging extra  hours, taking a promotion or investing in their future earnings  through job training or education.”105  As highlighted in the JEC  analysis on reward of work, it is a mistake to assume that  individuals do not consider the combined effects of taxes and  benefits.  Mulligan points to anecdotal evidence of potential  workers estimating the change in their net benefits based on taking  a job, and ultimately choosing not to work.  Mulligan estimates  that these effects were responsible for roughly half the drop in  The Report further argues that the ACA improved families’ well- being because it purportedly “increased access to care, financial  security, and health.”107  The Report reiterates that, in addition to  the expansion of Medicaid, families benefit from reduced  inequality through access to coverage from the ACA on the health  insurance marketplace.108  However, these claims should be  considered in the larger context of the ACA’s negative effects  upon employment and hours worked, which could mitigate much  The ACA imposes new taxes on individual income that reduce the  incentives to work, save, and invest, thereby reducing  employment.  Wages and self-employment income over $200,000  (single) or $250,000 (married) are now subject to an additional 0.9  percent Medicare payroll tax.  Investment income, such as rent,  interest, dividends, and capital gains, for this same group of  earners is subject to an additional 3.8 percent tax.  As of 2013, this  threshold for additional taxes captures not just the top 1 percent,  but a share of earners in the top quintile that are part of the bottom  99 percent as well.109  In a 2014 study, economist Casey Mulligan  estimated that in response to the law, labor markets would reduce  weekly employment per person by roughly 3 percent, the  equivalent 4 million full-time workers.110  In recent data on  aggregate work hours per person, Mulligan shows that work hours  per person increased significantly at the end of Emergency  Unemployment Assistance but then slowed significantly as the  new tax on employers was partly phased in and turned slightly  negative once the full tax on employers was in effect (see Figure  As noted in the 2016 Response, on the employer side, compliance  with the ACA means that many businesses will have fewer  resources to expand and offer employment opportunities.  Small-  and medium-sized employers with 50 or more full-time equivalent  employees are mandated to offer health insurance coverage or face  a substantial tax, prorated monthly, per each full-time employee  over the first 30 employees.  The tax is indexed each calendar year  to the growth in insurance premiums, and in 2016 the annual tax  rose to $2,160 per full-time employee beyond the first 30.  The  employer mandate creates an incentive for employers to hire fewer  full-time employees and shift some existing full-time employees  The Report devotes the bulk of its income inequality analysis to  three areas: economic growth, health insurance coverage, and the  tax code.  The Obama Administration argues that the policy  response to the 2007-09 recession directly reduced income  inequality via progressive tax and spending policies in the form of  tax cuts and unemployment insurance extensions.113  The Obama Administration has argued in the current and past  editions of the Report that ARRA helped to restore economic  growth and reduce earnings inequality.  Yet, as mentioned in  Chapter 1 of the Response, the pace of real GDP growth over the  course of the current recovery still remains roughly half the pace  As Harvard economist Larry Summers testified in 2008 before the  JEC, “a stimulus program should be timely, targeted and  temporary.”115  In terms of timeliness, previous JEC Majority staff  analysis notes that 10 percent of ARRA funds were still being  spent through 2013.116  ARRA temporarily expanded benefits in  the SNAP;117 relatedly, the number of caseloads remained  elevated above 2010 levels through 2016.118  ARRA’s expansion  of SNAP did not expire until November 2013, and the emergency  extension of unemployment benefits did not expire until January  2014, nearly five years after ARRA was enacted.  In some cases,  such as for TANF, ARRA funding will not expire until the end of  In terms of targeting the stimulus, a Mercatus Center analysis from  2011 found that roughly half of the workers hired by businesses  receiving ARRA funds were hired directly from other firms  instead of from the intended pool of jobless workers, revealing an  important lesson on the difficulty of implementing targeted  stimulus programs: “even in a weak economy, organizations hired  the employed about as often as the unemployed.”120  The  aforementioned JEC analysis concludes that while it could be  argued that some individual programs may have achieved  Summers’ Keynesian stimulus standards, ARRA as a whole failed  to meet the standards set in place by the Obama Administration.121  The Obama Administration’s Record on Inequality and Mobility  While painting a picture of the disparities that exist between the  lowest quintile and the top 1 percent, the Obama Administration  fails to prove the problem with the disparity.  It is likely that a  growing number of retirees occupy the lowest income quintile,  even though they may have sizable wealth in the form of cash  savings and a paid-off house, for example.  Many small  businesses—known as passthrough businesses—occupy the top 1  percent because they pay individual income tax rates rather than  corporate rates.  Unlike C corporations, passthrough businesses  generally are not taxed, but rather their owners are taxed as if the  income was earned directly by them; the income “passes through”  to the owners’ tax returns.122  The most common types of  passthrough businesses include sole proprietorships, partnerships,  limited liability companies, and S corporations.  Research shows  that, as of 2011, roughly two-thirds of pass-through business  income accrued in the top 1 percent.123  Furthermore, passthrough  business income drove nearly half the rise in income of the top 1  Boasting of an average tax increase of more than $500,000 on  those projected to have incomes of greater than $8 million in 2017,  the Report seems to suggest that the top 1 percent and top 0.1  percent of the income distribution is solely occupied by “the most  fortunate Americans”125 and not by businesses as well, using  additional terms including “highest-income families” or  “[f]amilies in the top 0.1 percent.”126 As explained in Chapter 8,  raising taxes on businesses that pay through the individual income  tax system ultimately leaves these businesses with fewer resources  The Report points to the works of Chetty and his coauthors to  demonstrate that the “defining challenge” does indeed extend  beyond income inequality to intergenerational mobility, or how  well one’s progeny does compared to his or her parents, but the  data highlighted in the Report focus on mobility for those born into  the bottom income quintile to the top income quintile, which  misses much of the mobility that occurs to and from the quintiles  Furthermore, Chetty’s work suggests that the United States sees  worse mobility rates than other developed countries.  In recent  research, Winship noted that mobility rate comparisons between  the United States and other countries are actually similar when  ensuring that the mobility measures used match across countries,  rather than comparing measures that appear more like apples to  oranges, such as the comparison of parental family income in the  United States with paternal earnings of other countries.127  The Report indicates that income, wealth and consumption  inequality have risen sharply over recent decades, demonstrating  that change in its Table 3-1, which compares values from 1980 to  the “most recent available” for each metric.  The choice of 1980  (and values from 1980-82) as a basis for comparison is not good,  because the economy was in recession that year for seven months.  Another sharp and relatively deep recession followed from July  1981 to November 1982.  The Report itself points out that income  inequality decreases during a recession when based on more  comprehensive income measures.128  Comparing data from a  recession to that of more recent data that is close to mid-business  cycle makes it more difficult to discern business cycle influences  on the distribution and relationships of income, wealth,  consumption and wage measurements.  Investment income  inequality measured in 1980 may appear narrower due to the  recession and earnings inequality consequently may appear wider.   Furthermore, though all three measurements are useful to  determine a snapshot of economic well-being at any given point  in time, omitting more detailed mobility measures excludes the  dynamics that take place over time, significantly affecting  policymakers’ perceptions of the state of Americans’ well-being  over the course of their lives.  As noted in last year’s Response:  important factor (in many cases, young adults have  negative net worth as they pay off student loans,  lifetime to live off of in retirement), in addition to  of other factors associated with the valuation of  Mobility still matters very much.  Recent research reconfirms that  absolute mobility rates for adults who were poor as children is still  high, very likely above 90 percent, and although overall absolute  mobility rates may have slowed down somewhat, most people  continue to do better than their parents at the same age.130  The most straightforward policy solutions involve putting a  greater emphasis on letting people earn.  Potential solutions span  the breadth of tax, spending, and regulatory policies.  Specifically, the Committee Majority recommends that the new  \" Remove or at least lessen the disincentives to work found  \" Encourage or at least do not discourage two-parent  households by the structure of taxes and support programs;   \" Remove or at least lessen the disincentives of the tax code  \" Stop relying on Keynesian stimulus to engender economic  Administration’s defense of its signature law, the  ! The ACA has failed to make health care more affordable  and accessible.  It has left patients with fewer choices and  ! The Better Way health reform plan offers a framework for  including: more choices, lower costs, more effective  A Failed Rollout and New Federal Command to Purchase  The ACA was an attempt by the Obama Administration to make  health insurance more affordable and prevalent through a top- down design reliant on a complex web of regulations, taxes, and  incentives.  However, the shrinking individual marketplaces, one  of the pillars of the ACA, shows the failure of this government- Obamacare directed the establishment of a Federal health  insurance marketplace for states that elected not to create their  own exchange.  Individuals without employer-sponsored  insurance or coverage by a Government program—but with  incomes too high to qualify for Medicaid—are required to  purchase government-approved insurance either through the  ACA-established marketplace exchanges, or otherwise through  the individual market.  Those who choose insurance through  Federal or State exchanges with incomes between 133 percent and  400 percent of the poverty line are eligible for Federal premium  subsidies, which are sent directly to the insurer they select.131    In order to enforce the requirement that Americans have insurance  that meets ACA requirements, the ACA created a tax on uninsured  Americans known as the individual mandate that becomes more  severe over time.  The tax is now the higher of 2.5 percent of  household income (capped at the national average price of a  Bronze plan on the exchange) or $695 per adult and $347.50 per  The rollout of Obamacare was error-prone from the start.  While  the idea of an online health insurance marketplace was hardly  innovative (for example, eHealthinsurance.com had operated  since 1998),133 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services  (CMS) utterly botched the rollout of the Healthcare.gov website.   The project was plagued from the outset with conflicting  government directives and cost overruns.  A Government  Accountability Office (GAO) report found CMS incurred “cost  increases, schedule slips, and delayed system functionality…   From September 2011 to February 2014, [Federal marketplace]  obligations increased from $56 million to more than $209 million.   Similarly, data hub obligations increased from $30 million to  As if the growing costs were not bad enough, the website  repeatedly crashed upon going live to the public.135  Even after  months of troubleshooting,136 Healthcare.gov continued to  experience crashes.137   In March 2016, GAO released another  report on Healthcare.gov’s several ongoing weaknesses in security  that could place sensitive information of enrollees at risk of  Privately funded insurance is based on sharing among a large  group of policyholders the cost of adverse events that have an  equal chance, as far as an insurance company can ascertain, of  befalling any one of them and that is less than a certainty.   Policyholders in such a group who choose the same coverage will  pay the same premium.  In the case of health insurance, that means  policyholders who have the same risk of incurring medical costs  and filing claims for cost reimbursement within a similar range are  The ACA prohibits insurers from refusing to cover enrollees based  on medical history or preexisting conditions.139   The ACA also  narrowed the age-rating ratio band to 3:1 nationwide,140   essentially meaning that older patients could not be charged more  than three times what younger people paid for their policy.  Prior  to Obamacare, the most common ratio was 5:1.  These  requirements detach the premiums insurers can charge from the  differential risks of and reimbursements paid to different groups  of policyholders.  Furthermore, the requirement to provide  coverage, while well-intentioned, motivates consumers to avoid  paying premiums while healthy and wait until they become ill  before they purchase insurance, which raises the probability to  insurers of having to reimburse them to 100 percent.  This is the problem of adverse selection: an increasing percentage  of people who buy insurance need medical care and file insurance  claims, which raises the cost of insuring the pool and drives up  premiums.  Young and healthy people who as a group face low  risk and low medical expenses are charged premiums that exceed  the value of insurance to them and cause them not to buy it.  This  development increasingly constricts the private insurance model  built on cost sharing among large groups of policyholders with  similar risk and reimbursement profiles.  Obamacare relied on the  individual mandate and associated taxes to combat adverse  selection,141 but these measures and the program’s design were not  The technology magazine WIRED pointed out how technology  failures added to the problem of adverse selection:  Healthcare economists both inside the Obama Administration143  and outside it144 projected that the insurance exchanges would  need roughly 40 percent of their enrollees to be young adults  between the ages of 18-34 years of age.  In reality, only about 28  percent of exchange enrollees were in this essential age bracket,  and that percentage has changed little in the following years.145  Without these younger people sharing the cost of care for the  older, sicker population, insurers are forced to increase the price  of insurance or leave the marketplaces entirely.   A 2016 report from BlueCross BlueShield found that its enrollees  in ACA plans tended to be sicker overall and had expenses 22  percent higher than enrollees in its employer-sponsored plans.146   The Obama Administration suggested this should not be a surprise  since the ACA mandated everyone regardless of health status have  access to health insurance.147  However, Obamacare was expressly  written with incentives and punishments intended to keep these  premium costs down and enrollment numbers of healthy people  up.  The Obama Administration’s complex web of Federal policy  Enrollment of younger and healthier individuals is not the only  lagging projection.  Total enrollment in the Obamacare exchanges  has also underperformed expectations.  In 2010, the chief actuary  of CMS predicted that in 2014, the first year of marketplaces  implementation, 16.9 million people would enroll.148  CBO made  more conservative estimates in 2010 with a prediction of eight  million exchange enrollees.149  The actual effectuated enrollment,  measuring those who both selected a plan and paid their premium,  fell far short of the rosy CMS projection.  Only 6.9 million people  Actual, effectuated enrollment continues to underperform in the  ACA individual marketplaces.  CMS projected that in 2015 18.6  million people would be enrolled, 24.8 million would be enrolled  by 2016, and 29.8 million would be enrolled by 2017.  Even the  more conservative CBO projections, which varied depending on  the year, as recently as January 2015 predicted that 2015  enrollment would be 12 million people, 2016 would see 21 million  people enrolled, and 25 million people would be enrolled by  2017.151  Actual enrollment in the first quarter of each year was  well below expectations with 10.2 million in 2015152 and 11.1  The 2017 numbers are not shaping up to be much better.   According to the most recent report from CMS, 11.5 million  people selected a 2017 marketplace plan as of December 24,  2016.154  The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)  predicted that 13.8 million people will select a plan by the end of  open enrollment on January 31, 2017.155  On average about 13  percent of open enrollees will not be effectuated by paying the first  month’s premium by the end of the first quarter.  Assuming that  the Obama Administration will finally accurately predict  enrollment, and the usual drop-off between enrollment and  effectuation occurs, then only 11.9 million people will remain  enrolled by the end of the first quarter.  Additionally, CBO  continues to downgrade projections on ACA marketplace  enrollment and projects just ten million people on average will be  enrolled in the marketplace through 2017, less than occurred in  Failing to meet enrollment targets has consequences far beyond  embarrassing the ACA’s proponents.  A larger risk pool helps to  ensure costs such as premiums and deductibles stay low for the  people who enroll in these plans.  Insurance companies must raise  rates in order to pay for the increased costs of caring for a smaller  risk pool with sicker enrollees.  Failing to meet expectations has  very real, very expensive consequences on a population the ACA  A common Obama Administration claim was that if customers  shopped around on the ACA marketplaces, they could lower their  premium costs.157  While it is true that more competition tends to  drive down costs, this method of controlling costs works more  effectively in markets where consumers have an actual choice.   Unfortunately, that is not the case in many states.  From 2016 to  2017, the number of counties nationwide with only one insurer  offering insurance on the exchange increased from 225 to 1,021.   Five states will have just one insurer in their marketplace in 2017,  up from one in 2016.158  As the chart below illustrates (Figure 4- 2), the number of counties with only two insurance choices also  increased significantly.  In total, roughly seven in ten counties now  have only one or two insurers in their exchanges, which is hardly  Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber understood that competition  helps lower premiums,159  and the Obama Administration as  recently 2016 stated, “Increased numbers of issuers in a market  means more competition.  More competition tends to put  downward pressure on premiums.”160  In a report from 2015, HHS  found that counties with three or more insurance choices had ACA  benchmark plan premiums that were nine percent lower than  counties with just one or two providers.161  As insurers continue to  leave the ACA marketplaces, more Americans will face higher  Unsurprisingly, the Report contains no discussion of the ACA’s  Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans (CO-OPs).  Insurers  participating in CO-OPs were given $2.4 billion in Federal support  to create plans that were ultimately incapable of being sustained.   The Obama Administration originally provided funding for 24  CO-OPs, one of which failed before open enrollment even began,  leaving 23 CO-OPs across 25 states.  The likelihood of CO-OP  failure was clear from the beginning; even initial HHS estimates  predicted about one-third of all loans would not be repaid,  amounting to roughly $792 million not including forgone  interest.162  Yet, the Obama Administration never established  criteria to determine whether a CO-OP was viable or  sustainable,163 further increasing the risk to the Federal  Government.  As a result of the flawed design, 21 of the CO-OPs  reported net losses in 2014.164  Another was forcibly taken over by  the Iowa State Insurance Commissioner because of financial  As of 2017, only five of the 23 CO-OPs have not failed, and many  of the survivors are suffering financially.166  The cost of these  failing CO-OPs will be borne by the taxpayers, based upon the  Obama Administration’s initial assumptions.  Worse than the  original HHS estimates that one-third of the CO-OP loans would  not be repaid,167 the total taxpayer loss as of 2017 approaches $1.9  Examining the experience in Ohio, the CO-OP InHealth Mutual  recorded a loss of $80 million in 2015, including a $32 million  cushion for expected losses in 2016.169  Upon entering the  exchanges, InHealth experienced tripling enrollment and an  almost sevenfold increase in revenue.  But the influx in new  enrollees and revenue was not enough to keep the insurer  operating.  By May 2016, InHealth faced the choice of raising  premiums by at least 60 percent in 2017 or shutting down to  prevent further losses.  The insurer had completely used its capital  cushion from 2015 and almost all of the $113 million loaned to it  from the Federal Government.170  InHealth became another CO- OP casualty of Obamacare and forced 22,000 Ohioans to scramble  to find a new insurer within 60 days or go without health  In Utah, Arches Health Plan applied to raise its 2016 insurance  prices by an average of 43 percent.  Even with such drastic rate  increases, Arches failed in October 2015.  Its failure sent 66,000  consumers searching to find new insurers.  Those 31,000 Utahans  who bought Arches on the exchanges were faced with a familiar  problem under Obamacare: approximately two-thirds of Utah  counties only had one insurer on the exchange.172  Doctors and  hospitals also suffered from the collapse of Arches.  By the middle  of 2016, Arches still had not paid over $30 million to hospitals  throughout Utah.173  It remains to be seen how much of the over  $89 million Federal loan given to Arches will be repaid.174  In  many ways, InHealth and Arches exemplify a common problem  with the ACA: Americans facing a loss of their plans are forced  into making more expensive choices, while taxpayers are liable for  The degree to which premiums increase can vary depending on the  condition of the insurance markets in a particular state.  Between  2014 and 2015, average marketplace premiums increased  modestly.175  However, premiums for 2017 plans have skyrocketed  in both the exchanges and elsewhere in the individual market.  In  an analysis of individual market plans, weighted by the number of  people covered by each plan, the Committee Majority found that  the national average premium faced by consumers increased by  over 25 percent.176  On the exchanges, the price of the benchmark  silver plans increased by an average of 22 percent nationwide.   Among other reasons, missing healthy enrollees and lack of  competition are causing the premiums for insurance in ACA plans  Aside from the harm inflicted by rising premiums, deductibles and  other out-of-pocket costs are also increasing.  In 2016, bronze- level plans had deductibles over $5,700 and silver plan deductibles  climbed to $3,100.177  High deductibles make using the health  insurance that consumers are forced to buy even more expensive  to use.  Numerous media reports describing how consumers cannot  afford to use their ACA health insurance should not be  For many, one of the most infuriating effects of the ACA was the  damage it did to the existing health insurance landscape.   Repeatedly, President Obama and his Administration pledged that  if people liked their doctor, they could keep their doctor and if they  liked their health insurance plan, they could keep their plan.180  In  practice, however, this proved to be untrue.  Fact checkers from  various media outlets rated the President’s claims as “false,”181 or  a “pants on fire”182 lie.  Politifact called President Obama’s much- Obamacare required all health insurance plans to meet Federally  mandated minimum standards, including requiring them to cover  types of care an individual may not want or need.184  After the  ACA’s enactment, millions of people who were enrolled in health  plans received notices that their plan would no longer be  offered.185  By some estimates, roughly four million Americans  lost their health insurance despite the President’s promises.186   While some plans could be grandfathered and allowed to continue,  these plans must have existed on March 23, 2010, covered a  particular person as of that date, and not have changed  substantially since then.187   These caveats made it difficult for  plans to qualify for or maintain grandfathered status, thus  rendering the original promise functionally moot.  Employer-sponsored health insurance (ESI) plans cover half of the  non-elderly population in the United States.188 As a result,  government tinkering with ESI affects a large number of  Americans across the nation.  Given this, proposed changes to the  The Obama Administration attempted to take credit for the  relatively slow premium increases in the employer-sponsored  insurance market.189  But there are several problems with this  claim.  The first is that the trend of smaller growth in premiums  predates the Obama Administration, and evidence suggests  broader economic trends slowed the growth of health care  spending.  Second, President Obama promised repeatedly that his  Administration would significantly decrease costs for the average  The Report stated, “The average premium for employer-based  family coverage was nearly $3,600 lower in 2016 than it would  have been if nominal premium growth since 2010 had matched the  average rate recorded over the 2000 through 2010 period.”191  This  overview ignores that the “slowdown” in premium growth actually  began in 2005.  According to CBO, “private insurance premiums  grew more slowly from 2005 to 2013 (4.5 percent per year, on  average) than they did from 2000 to 2005 (9 percent per year).”  +192  This slower growth found by CBO is in line with average  growth rates seen in the first years of the ACA, but it is a trend that  predates both the ACA and the Obama Administration.   Premiums may have increased more slowly than in the prior  decade, but employees are taking on a larger share of those  premiums.  According to a Kaiser Family Foundation survey,  employees with single coverage were expected to cover roughly  14 percent of their premiums in 1999, but 18 percent by 2016.  For  family coverage, employees were expected to cover 27 percent of  their premiums in 1999, but by 2016 this increased to 30  percent.193  To make matters worse, premiums have increased  faster than wages.194  Employee pay raises are outstripped by  In summary, the last Administration claimed that premiums would  decrease for the typical American family, but premiums have  increased.  The Report claimed that the ACA has lowered the rate  of increasing premiums, but broader structural trends contributed  significantly to slower growth in health care spending and  premiums.  CEA named a section of the Report “Higher Wages,  Lower Premiums, and Lower Out-of-Pocket Costs for Workers.”  However, wages have increased more slowly than premiums and  workers shoulder a greater share of plan costs.195   Despite President Obama’s pledge not to raise taxes on those  making less than $200,000 ($250,000 if filing jointly) per year,196  several new taxes among the over $1 trillion in Obamacare tax  increases hit Americans with incomes far below that threshold.197   The Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) confirmed that many  ACA taxes affect lower-income taxpayers, either directly by  increasing their tax burden or indirectly through higher consumer  prices arising from taxes on insurance and health care products.   Significantly, JCT found that one tax alone—the tax increase on  people with high medical expenses—will hurt more low- and  middle-income Americans in 2017 than will be helped with  While JCT and CBO have not provided detailed estimates of each  of the taxes in recent years, the House Ways and Means  Committee compiled information contained in Figure 4-5 based  on 2012 projections.  Provisions in bold represent taxes affecting  the middle class.  Figure 4-5 also illustrates how the size of the  total tax increase nearly doubled from 2010 estimates as more  Additionally, other taxes aimed at higher-income individuals may  diminish job opportunities for lower-income Americans by  increasing business tax burdens.  As mentioned in Chapter 8 of  this Response, the ACA’s 3.8 percent investment income tax  contributed to the top tax rate on small businesses rising from 35  percent when President Obama took office to 44.6 percent  The Report claimed that the ACA has been responsible for slowing  costs in the American health care system by fundamentally  altering the cost structure.200 It is true that measurements from  2011 to 2013 showed unusually low growth in health care  spending, partially due to low growth in the economy as a whole.   However, health care spending growth had been on a long-run  downward trajectory before the Obama Administration, casting  doubt on the claimed positive impact of the ACA.  Health care  economists from Johns Hopkins and the University of Southern  California found that at “…least 70 percent of the recent  slowdown in health care spending can likely be explained by long  term patterns…the Great Recession’s effect on reduced real per  capita income and subsequent effect on reduced health care  spending, as about 41 percent of the recent slowdown can be  explained by these reductions in income.” 201  Since health care  spending grew more slowly in the last recession, it follows that  spending growth would continue to be slow a few years into the  Further, spending returned to its previous course in 2014 and 2015.   National Health Expenditures (NHE) grew 5.3 percent in 2014  (the first year of the ACA exchanges) and 5.8 percent in 2015, with  CMS predicting average annual NHE growth of 5.8 percent per  year from 2015 to 2025.203 From 2001 to 2005, NHE grew by an  average of 8.1 percent per year; from 2006 to 2010 by 5.1 percent,  and from 2011 to 2015 by 4.3 percent.204 The projected 5.8 percent  increase per year from 2015 to 2025 represents a steeper trend than  the expenditure growth seen from 2006 to 2010 prior to  Obamacare passage.  CMS projects that health care expenditure  growth will continue to outpace GDP growth by 1.3 percentage  points per year through 2025, with NHE increasing to more than a  fifth of GDP by 2025, up from 17.5 percent in 2014.205   Additionally, the Obama Administration’s CMS found that part of  the recent and future expected acceleration in health spending is  due to the ACA.206  The chart below shows the sharp uptick in  costs per person in recent years as the ACA became fully  Further, the Obama Administration’s CMS attributed some  slowdown in spending growth to “trends such as increasing cost- sharing in private health insurance plans and various Medicare  payment update provisions.”207 As noted previously, unaffordable  deductibles discourage Americans from seeking care.  As discussed later in this chapter, consumer-driven health care is  a much better method of controlling costs, since it both provides  patients a means of affording cost-sharing and empowers them to  make wise decisions about how their health care dollars are spent.   Improvements in efficiency driven by market forces is beneficial  for patients and the system as a whole, but making health care so  unaffordable that patients cannot access the care they need should  not be an acceptable method of cost containment.  Unfortunately,  the ACA’s poor design has caused skyrocketing premiums for  plans with increasingly unaffordable deductibles.  In light of Obamacare’s failure to fix the health care system  through onerous regulation and mandates, the Committee Majority  recommends moving in a more productive direction.  To that end,  the Better Way: Health Care208 blueprint provides a useful  framework for replacing the ACA.  The Better Way’s health  proposals are structured around a number of major principles and  policies that aim to maintain access to coverage, improve  portability and consumer control, and contain health care costs.  One of the most unfortunate features of Obamacare was that it  placed the Federal Government in the center of managing health  care for many Americans.  Rather than one-size-fits-all  prescriptions from Washington, the Better Way proposes  improved consumer involvement through the expansion of Health  Savings Accounts (HSAs) tied to High-Deductible Health Plans  (HDHPs).  This combination protects consumers from unexpected  catastrophic health care expenses while allowing patients  themselves to manage day-to-day health care expenses using funds  in tax-favored accounts.  This provides greater patient control over  health care decisions, allowing consumers to understand the costs  of care and make their own decisions about when and where to  The Kaiser Family Foundation has estimated that 29 percent of  covered workers who obtain insurance from their employer are  enrolled in HDHP/HSA or HDHP/Health Reimbursement  Arrangement (HRA)210 plans, compared to only 4 percent in 2006.   However, this popular type of health insurance was treated  unfavorably by the ACA.  The Better Way would roll back undue  restrictions imposed by the ACA and also make several reforms,  including allowing spouses to make catch-up contributions to a  joint HSA account, allowing qualified medical expenses from 60  days prior to the start of coverage to be reimbursed from an HSA,  setting the contribution limit for HSAs equal to the combined  deductible and out-of-pocket expense limit of the associated  HDHP, and expanding access to HSAs to groups such as those  covered by TRICARE and the Indian Health Service.  The Better  Way provides consumers the flexibility to choose the plan,  whether HDHP/HSAs or another option, that best meets their  One serious flaw in the American health care market is a lack of  price transparency.  Patients and consumers are not able to  comparison-shop effectively for coverage and care if cost levels  are opaque and only become apparent once care has been received.   This information asymmetry leads to higher prices for consumers  and an inefficient health care market.  Thus, a critical aspect of  reforming the system must be requiring price transparency, which  will bring down prices by allowing consumers to make informed  decisions about their health care purchases and injecting  competitive pressures into the health care sector that lower costs.   This approach is particularly important when paired with  consumer-direct health care options such as increasingly popular  Another major issue confronting the American health care system  is the lack of portable health insurance.  For millions of  Americans, access to affordable insurance means finding work  with an employer who offers coverage and staying with that  employer to maintain it.  The Better Way envisions a future in  which Americans can transition easily from employer-based group  coverage to individual plans without major disruptions in their  health care.  The cornerstone of this plan is a universal refundable  tax credit, adjusted for age and inflation, for those who do not have  access to care through their employer, Medicare, or Medicaid.   This credit would facilitate access to private insurance, allowing  consumers to select a plan with coverage that is right for them  rather than approved by Washington bureaucrats.  This will fill the  coverage gaps left by Obamacare, eliminate the work  disincentives in Obamacare’s core structure,212 and free workers  from being locked into a job to maintain insurance.  A secondary  benefit is that the tax credit structure will help control premium  costs.  While Obamacare subsidies automatically increase payouts  to insurers when insurers raise rates, the Better Way premium tax  credit is tied to broader measures of inflation that will require  insurance companies to compete and control costs for  In the current health care system, consumers are confined to  purchasing health plans licensed in their state of residence.  This  restriction reduces competition and can drive up insurance prices.   In contrast, Better Way reforms allow individuals to purchase  plans licensed in other states, thereby increasing competition and  consumer choice while driving down prices.  Additionally,  expanding the health insurance markets across state lines opens up  new opportunities with interstate pooling compacts.214  In 2015, a National Federation of Independent Businesses survey  identified cost as the single largest obstacle small businesses face  in offering health insurance to their employees.215 While  Obamacare has failed to address this barrier, the Better Way  proposes a different path that allows small business to band  together (pool) to offer small business health plans, also called  association health plans (AHPs).  This would allow small  businesses and voluntary organizations to join in offering health  coverage at lower prices through improved bargaining power and  more diverse risk pools.  The Better Way would prohibit plans  from selecting only the healthiest individuals and prevent plans  from charging more to those who are sick in excess of state  Similarly, the Better Way would allow individuals to band together  into individual health pools (IHPs).  Like AHPs, IHPs allow  individuals to leverage more market power to drive down costs.   IHP enrollees would have the same protections against undue  discrimination as those in AHPs and would see the same  Many employers support programs that reward employees for  taking steps to improve their health, such as participation in  smoking cessation and weight loss programs.  Unfortunately, the  Obama Administration took a different view with increasing  regulatory burdens and legal challenges that undermines the  ability of insurers to promote these mutually beneficial programs  for employees.  The Better Way guarantees that employers may  offer wellness programs that include financial rewards or  surcharges, so long as those programs do not exceed limits  imposed under current statutes.  Additionally, it provides legal  protections for these programs, while ensuring that voluntary  collection of medical information from an employee’s family  Nondiscrimination Act.  Taken together, these steps would allow  employers to offer wellness programs without fear of costly  Protecting Flexibility for Employers to Self-Insure  Many companies in the United States choose to provide health  insurance directly to their employees rather than contracting with  a third-party insurer.  This allows companies to design a structure  that is best for their workforce.  However, they also assume the  financial risk involved in paying for claims directly.  For this  reason, many companies with self-insurance arrangements  purchase stop-loss insurance to protect against extreme,  unexpectedly high claims or expenses.  This is a necessary part of  making self-insurance flexible and affordable.219  Unfortunately, rather than encouraging these tools, the Obama  Administration has tried to block employers from self-insuring  through costly regulation and has threatened to define these stop- loss insurance policies as “group health insurance,” subjecting  these intentionally narrow policies to Federal regulatory burdens  and limits on their use.  Instead of undermining an effective and  flexible insurance arrangement because it doesn’t conform to one- size-fits-all Washington mandates, the Better Way protects  employers’ ability to both self-insure and to purchase stop-loss  Washington’s failure to enact medical liability reform has had  negative repercussions for many Americans.  The system has  imposed enormous unnecessary costs both on physicians and  patients.  Estimates show that reforming medical liability would  save the nation’s health care system $300 billion in costs each  year.221 California and Texas, among other states, have made  progress in medical liability reform.  In the states without reform,  injured patients receive only 46 cents of every dollar awarded; the  rest is lost to attorneys and administrative fees.222 The reforms  proposed in the Better Way cap non-economic damages at  reasonable levels while ensuring that wronged patients are able to  recover all economic damages and that these damages will not be  diverted to excessive contingency fees.  The plan will also work  with the states to develop innovative ways to reduce frivolous  lawsuits and defensive medicine, while improving accountability  and encouraging professionalism in the medical community.  Pre-Existing Condition Coverage and Other Reforms  The Better Way plan would prohibit insurers from turning away or  limiting coverage on the basis of a pre-existing condition.  The  plan also allows dependents to stay on their parents’ plan through  age 26 and prohibits insurers from imposing lifetime limits on  coverage.  In addition, the framework bars insurers from  cancelling or refusing to renew coverage to any American simply  The Better Way expands protections for Americans that maintain  continuous health insurance coverage—already a successful  feature of the employer-based market—to apply to the individual  insurance market.  Under the blueprint, any American who  maintains continuous coverage cannot be charged more than  standard rates when they change insurers due to a qualifying life  event.  This ensures that insurance is portable, and no longer ties  an individual to a particular employer or insurance plan.224  The Better Way will provide a one-time open enrollment period to  allow previously uninsured Americans to purchase coverage  regardless of their health or age as if they had previously been  insured.  This would allow patients to take advantage of the new  continuous coverage protections.  Individuals could choose to  forego enrollment without penalty, but doing so would forfeit the  continuous coverage protections, which could lead to higher  Prior to the ACA, most states used a 5:1 age rating ratio under  which the standard premium of an older individual’s plan could be  no more than five times that of a younger person’s standard  premium.  However, the ACA mandated a universal 3:1 age rating  ratio, which in practice has proved unrealistic and has led to an  insurer market bereft of younger and healthier Americans.  The  Better Way returns the default age rating ratio to the proven 5:1  standard, but allows individual states the flexibility to adjust it at  their discretion to better suit the conditions of their markets and  States have long been laboratories of government policy, testing  new and innovative approaches to solve problems within their  communities.  The Better Way invests at least $25 billion in  performance-based, sliding-scale State Innovation Grants to  reward states that find effective ways to make health care more  State-based high-risk pools provide financial assistance to high- risk individuals who are priced out of traditional insurance  markets.  The Better Way allocates at least $25 billion in Federal  funding for high-risk pool programs, which the Federal  Government would operate in partnership with the states.228  Medicaid is a crucial safety net for our nation’s most vulnerable  patients.  It currently covers almost 72 million Americans, with  estimates approaching 98 million who could be covered by the  program at some point in a given year.229  Largely because of the  expansion under the ACA, Medicaid spending has increased  dramatically and is expected to double over the next decade.230  The GAO has designated Medicaid as a program with a high risk  for fraud and abuse because of its “size, growth, diversity of  programs, and concerns about the adequacy of fiscal oversight.”231  As Medicaid struggles to contain these issues, it also faces issues  with excessive red tape and major lapses in oversight that led to  continuing payments to banned providers and millions of dollars  Additionally, the ACA changes to Medicaid detract from the core  mission of the program by providing a higher rate of Federal  matching funds for able-bodied adults with household incomes  above the poverty line than it does for those who are disabled,  elderly, or living in poverty.  This creates a perverse budgetary  incentive for states with financial challenges to cut services for the  more vulnerable traditional Medicaid population.233  These new issues combine with older, longer-standing flaws and  perverse incentives to cause a drag on the entire Medicaid system.   The Better Way plans to bring Medicaid into the 21st century by  providing Medicaid recipients and states with more choices and  Obamacare expanded eligibility for Medicaid to individuals with  incomes up to 138 percent of the poverty level.234  At the same  time, it prohibited those eligible for Medicaid from receiving  insurance subsidies in the exchanges.  In the states that did not  expand Medicaid income eligibility to 138 percent, ACA  guidelines required individuals to earn at least 100 percent of the  poverty level to qualify for a premium subsidy.  That left two and  a half million low-income Americans below 100 percent of the  poverty level with a dilemma: in spite of Obamacare’s command  that they have insurance, they earned too much to qualify for  traditional Medicaid and too little to get help affording a private  plan.235  Essentially, Obamacare left them with no meaningful  Others in the Medicaid system discovered that they could not  obtain necessary care.  A report from the HHS Office of Inspector  General examined the most prevalent type of Medicaid structure  We found that slightly more than half of providers  could not offer appointments to enrollees. Notably,  35 percent could not be found at the location listed  location but said that they were not participating  providers were less likely to offer an appointment  A Kaiser Family Foundation survey found similar results with 67  percent of primary care physicians refusing to accept new  Medicaid patients, compared with 94 percent who accept new  patients with private insurance.237  A study by the nonpartisan  (MACPAC) observed that over a third of “Medicaid enrollees  report greater difficulty obtaining care from specialists.”238   Clearly, patients with private insurance have an advantage in  accessing care.  Further, while those newly covered through  Medicaid are accessing more care than those without insurance,  no data suggest their health outcomes are better now thanks to the  Unlike the ACA, which provides only a one-size-fits-all choice for  low-income Americans—and in some cases no choice at all—the  Better Way would allow those eligible for Medicaid to leave that  system and use the premium tax credit to purchase a higher-quality  Under the current system, states must ask the Federal Government  for waivers—which are not always granted—if they seek to adjust  Medicaid requirements to better suit the needs of their  population.241 The Better Way provides states more authority to  design Medicaid to fit the needs of their state, including allowing  them to expand coverage.  It will also provide transition relief in  the states that have already expanded coverage.  States could  choose a more traditional approach by receiving a per capita  allotment based on the history of Medicaid spending in that state,  or a block grant that would allow more flexibility and innovation  in serving the Medicaid population.  Under either option, states  would be required to fulfill the Medicaid purpose of serving the  The 21st Century Cures Act, which was passed by Congress and  signed by President Obama on December 13, 2016,243 was a  bipartisan effort to accomplish a variety of health objectives.  In  particular, the legislation reduces regulatory barriers to analyzing  health data, modernizes the process for clinical trials, provides  incentives and funding for research into curing new diseases, and  seeks to unleash the power of precision medicine and other new  technologies to improve health care in the United States.   Enactment of this legislation was a major step forward, and the  Better Way seeks to build on it by reforming restrictions on  electronic health records in order to spur innovation and  technology-driven improvements in care while protecting patient  privacy.  These records would be portable for consumers, freeing  patients from paperwork burdens each time they see a new  provider and preventing medical errors that occur because of  Medicare currently serves 57 million older Americans and people  with disabilities.  However, the program faces a number of critical  challenges in the 21st century that render it unsustainable in the  longer term due to both its expected spending growth and complex  structure.  Obamacare’s treatment of Medicare has been described  in the Better Way as “raid and ration.”  First, the ACA instituted  cuts to the Medicare program that now amount to $800 billion.   Rather than using program savings to ensure the long-term  sustainability of the program for beneficiaries, the ACA diverted  those funds to finance other Obamacare programs.  Another  unpopular feature of the ACA established the unelected  Independent Payment Advisory Board, which some fear will lead  to rationed care for beneficiaries, as described next.  The Better  Way instead focuses on a three-step approach to make Medicare  sustainable for current and future beneficiaries: repealing the most  damaging Obamacare provisions, adopting bipartisan reforms to  make the program sustainable and offer greater choice to  beneficiaries, and placing Medicare on a sound long-term path.245  The Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB) is a 15- member panel of bureaucrats created by Obamacare with the task  of reducing Medicare spending if it exceeds certain targets.   However, the panel is prohibited from changing beneficiary cost- sharing eligibility or benefit levels; as a result, rationing care is the  only legal option available to it.  It is also empowered with  significant rulemaking powers that can only be reversed with an  overwhelming vote in both chambers of Congress.  The Better  Way provides a more humane way to contain costs through  market-driven competition and structural reform.246  CBO’s January 2017 baseline projects that, under current law, the  Medicare Hospital Insurance (HI) trust fund will be exhausted in  2025, a full year earlier than its March 2016 projections had  anticipated.247 That same year, total spending on Medicare will  exceed any offsetting receipts by more than a trillion dollars,  worsening as more time passes.  The current course will not  Medicare Advantage (MA), originally established in 2003, is a  voluntary program within Medicare that allows seniors to seek  benefits from a Medicare-approved private health plan.  Today,  nearly 32 percent of Medicare recipients choose Medicare  Advantage, and CBO projects this will increase to nearly 41  percent in 2027.248 However, the ACA made a number of negative  changes to MA, including limiting the ability of seniors to switch  plans in response to unexpected changes, capping quality bonuses  in a way that undermines plan incentives to provide a high-quality  product, and cutting the program’s funding by $150 billion.249 The  Better Way would repeal the caps on quality bonuses, restore  flexibility for seniors to adapt to unexpected plan changes, and  limit the ability of the executive branch to arbitrarily cut MA  Since Medicare’s creation in 1965, the private insurance system  has transformed, but Medicare has not kept pace with the  changes.251 The old-style structure of Medicare features a  confusing array of copays and deductibles for different programs  and a fee for service (FFS) structure that rewards cost rather than  quality.  At the same time, three separate assistance programs are  designed to help low-income beneficiaries with Part B premiums.   The Better Way would consolidate the assistance programs into  one simplified program, and also merge Medicare Part A  (covering hospital related services) and Part B (covering physician  and outpatient services) into a single program with a combined  deductible, a single annual out of pocket maximum, and uniform  Protect Flexibility in Doctor-Patient Relationships  The Better Way recognizes that, despite the many diverse and  important actors in the health care sector, the most important factor  is the relationship between patients and their doctor.  However,  this relationship has been strained by numerous onerous  regulations and requirements that have been forced on physicians  in the last decade.  The Better Way seeks to reduce these  regulations and elevate the doctor-patient relationship back to the  Information Sharing in Medicare: Medicare Compare  The Better Way proposes a Medicare Compare system that  empowers seniors to easily compare traditional Fee-for-Service  Medicare to available Medicare Advantage plans on a number of  Greater Choice and Competition through a Premium Support  Beginning in 2024, the Better Way would offer Medicare  beneficiaries a choice of remaining in traditional Medicare or  selecting a private plan.  Private plans would compete on a  Medicare Exchange modeled on the successful Federal Employee  Health Benefit (FEHB) exchange program.  Beneficiaries could  choose the specific plan that best suits their needs, with a support  payment subsidizing the cost sent directly to the insurer.  The  competitive structure proven successful by the Medicare Part D  prescription drug program would be a check on premium  increases.  Ultimately, premium support would ensure that the  Medicare program remains affordable by embracing a market- driven approach to providing care as a check on waste while  combating skyrocketing premiums.  It would also provide seniors  a choice as to which plan best suits their needs and preferences,  preserving the positive aspects of traditional Medicare while  ensuring the program will continue to serve future generations.255  On the metrics of providing affordable and accessible care for  patients and controlling health care costs, the Committee Majority  believes the Obamacare experiment has proved to be a failure.  We  urge the new Congress and Administration to pursue patient- centered reforms such as those in the Better Way in order to fix  Specifically, the JEC Majority recommends that Congress  \" Providing patients with more control and choice over the  health insurance they choose, including through enhanced  HSAs, purchases across state lines, pooling arrangements  for purchasing power, or another option they select;  \" Promoting portability of insurance with the assistance of a  tax credit with protections for patients with pre-existing  \" Relieving Americans from burdensome ACA taxes;   \" Empowering states with more authority to design a  Medicaid program that best suits the needs of their  \" Rescuing Medicare from impending bankruptcy and  providing seniors with more choices in order to preserve  this important program for current and future beneficiaries.   would carry the financial burden of policy proposals like  America’s College Promise, discussed in the Report.  ! The problem is not insufficient credit for students to attend  college, but that credit is too easily available, motivating  ! When the economy is weak, jobs are scarce including for  ! Pouring billions of additional taxpayer dollars into failing  PreK-12 schools is not benefitting children or taxpayers.  The Report states that, on average, individuals with a higher level  of education earn more money, are more likely to be in the labor  force, and are less likely to be unemployed.  It presents predictable  data on earnings, labor force participation, and unemployment for  various levels of educational attainment.  Furthermore, the Obama  Administration argues that, since there are benefits to the  individual and the nation and so-called “market failures” in higher  education financing, an economic rationale exists for Federal  support of higher education.  None of this is surprising.  However, the arguments for strong Federal involvement expose a  differences, overlook the root cause of the challenges, and fail to  demonstrate the necessity for a Federal monopoly of student loans.   Additionally, as distressing as it is to say this, recent policies by  the Obama Administration stand to reduce the benefits associated  with higher educational attainment, making it more difficult for  Americans to justify spending time and money attending college.  The Report states that it is “…committed to ensuring all students,  regardless of their background, have access to a college education  that prepares them for success in the workplace and life.”256   Arguably, this has already been achieved in America with  community colleges and need-based financial aid.  Community  colleges are located in all 50 states, have no entrance requirement  beyond high school completion, and Pell grants are available to  cover costs for low-income individuals.257  If students wish to  pursue education beyond an associate’s degree, they can seek the  advice of the community college’s guidance counselor and  admission personnel at four-year state and private colleges and  universities.  While many problems do exist in America’s  education system, affordable access to an associate’s degree is not  However, the Obama Administration believes more money should  be redistributed from working Americans to college students.   President Obama argued that community college should be “free”  to everyone—including high-income students and families—and  in 2015 he unveiled America’s College Promise (ACP), “…two  years of community college free for hard-working students.”258   The problems with ACP are threefold.  First, nothing is free  because costs are always borne by someone; second, potential  beneficiaries of the program tend to be higher earners who are  capable of taking financial responsibility for their education; and  third, beneficiaries of the program would no longer have skin in  the game—money of their own invested—and, consequently,  there is no financial cost to the student for academic failure.    For decades, Federal aid has been available so students with  financial need can attain education beyond a high school  diploma.259  These grants are available to undergraduate students  attending two- and four-year colleges and universities.  The state  and Federally funded ACP would apply exclusively to community  colleges and simply shift the financial burden of college from the  student to taxpayers.  The beneficiaries of the taxpayer-funded  program are students whose family earnings are too high to qualify  The implications of the program are that students from families  with high income could attend community college at the  taxpayer’s expense.  Some of these students would be low- performing students, and if they fail to complete the program,  there are minimal costs to the student.  Others will be high- performing students—those who would have attended either  community college or a four-year college at their own expense.   These students would now be able to earn an associate’s degree at  the taxpayer’s expense.  ACP would do nothing to increase  accessibility to college for low-income Americans and should not  The Report discusses the challenges that students face in acquiring  student loans.  However, the analysis reveals a lack of  understanding of financial market behavior that leads to a  misdiagnosis of the issues.  The result is a government-run system  where students have few choices, and all of the risk falls onto  The Report states that private markets—presumably banks and  other financial intermediaries—are often unwilling to provide  loans because there is no collateral in the event of default,  additionally claiming that this is a market failure.260  This assertion  is incorrect.  Private markets are willing to provide loans, so long  as lenders receive a rate of return that is consistent with the level  of risk.  In other words, the rate of return that lenders require on  any investment is based on the characteristics of that investment.   One of the most important characteristics is the level of default  risk—the risk of not receiving payment of principal or interest.   The greater the risk, the higher the required rate of return.  Lending  money to a college student, with no collateral and no assurance  that the student will graduate and have sufficient earnings to repay  the loan, is extremely risky.  However, investors are willing to take  that risk if the rate of return is appropriate for that risk.  If Federal  regulations set the rate of return too low, private lenders will avoid  Additionally, the Report refers to banks’ risk aversion as a market  failure.  However, risk-averse lending is the market functioning  efficiently through financial institutions acting responsibly with  depositors’ money.  Alternatively, when government mandates are  imposed on financial markets, the markets cease operating  efficiently.  For example, the financial crisis of 2008-2009 largely  resulted from government-sponsored enterprises (GSE) Fannie  Mae and Freddie Mac encouraging private institutions to act  irresponsibly with depositors’ money.261  GSEs, in an effort to  meet Federally mandated homeownership goals, encouraged  private institutions to issue low-interest, high-risk, subprime  mortgages by agreeing to purchase those loans once issued.262   This led to the housing bubble, subsequent price collapse, and  recession.263  In the context of student loans, banks’ risk- aversion—requiring a higher rate of return for lending to  students—protects depositors’ money.  This contrasts with the  GSEs’ pursuit of homeownership goals, which resulted in large- scale defaults, bank failures, and a taxpayer-funded Federal  bailout.  Chapter 6 of this Response discusses the financial crisis  In 2010, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act was  signed into law, removing private financial intermediaries from  the student loan process.  This created a true market failure—a  Federal monopoly for student loans.  Today, there are nearly $1.3  trillion in outstanding high-risk student loans provided by  taxpayers—double the amount in 2008 (Figure 5-1).264  CBO  projects an additional $1.4 trillion student loan debt from 2013 to  2023.265  This debt earns a very low rate of return or zero, in the  case of subsidized student loans.266  These fall well below the rate  appropriate for the risk and put taxpayer money in jeopardy.  A  better student loan program would be locally managed and include  The Report focuses on a number of issues but overlooks the root  cause of the college education financing problem, which stems  from rising tuition and fees.  For decades, the cost of attending  college has risen far faster than other prices.  In the 114th Congress,  Mitchell E. Daniels, President of Purdue University, testified  before the Committee that tuition prices have increased by “… 225  percent over the last 30 years, after inflation.”267  The root cause of runaway college costs is not that there is too  little credit available to college students; but rather, that credit is  too easily available.  The availability of subsidized-credit to nearly  all college students allows colleges and universities to easily  increase their tuition (Figure 5-2).  This phenomenon was  famously presented in a 1987 New York Times op-ed titled, “Our  Greedy Colleges,” by William Bennett, then-Secretary of  Education.268  In the article he stated, “If anything, increases in  financial aid in recent years have enabled colleges and universities  blithely to raise their tuitions, confident that Federal loan subsidies  Since 1987, there has been a number of studies to test the “Bennett  Hypothesis.”269  A 2016 study by the Federal Reserve Bank of  New York found that for every dollar of subsidized student loan  received by the college, the tuition increased by 60 cents, and for  every Pell grant dollar received, tuition increased by 40 cents.270   A better policy would require colleges and universities to share the  risk associated with student loans, incentivizing the accurate  identification of students who are likely to succeed in college  Historically, most student loans had to be repaid in equal monthly  installments over ten years.  Graduates were required to meet their  loan obligations to taxpayers irrespective of their income level.   However, in 1987, President Ronald Reagan signed into law a  pilot program that included “income-contingent loans” to allow  students to repay their student loan over a period of time in excess  of ten years, in order to lessen the burden for new graduates and  reduce defaults.  The loans were unsubsidized—interest accrued  while the student remained in school, removing a costly Federal  subsidy.  In addition, colleges had to contribute 10 percent of the  loan, and annual repayment could never exceed 15 percent of the  Although the pilot program was discontinued, elements of it  survived and were implemented in more recent programs,  including among those of the Obama Administration.272   Regretfully, the Obama Administration’s programs, while similar  on the surface, are poorly designed and incentivize irresponsible  borrowing by passing the cost to taxpayers.  Reagan’s plan was  developed to increase the likelihood that students will repay the  full amount of their student loan.  In comparison, the Obama  Administration’s plan ensures that many students will have a  portion of their student debt burden passed on to taxpayers.  The Report touts the benefits to the borrower of the extended  payoff period for income-driven repayment plans while ignoring  the cost to taxpayers.273  The Obama Administration’s versions of  these plans were implemented in the 2012 Pay as You Earn  (PAYE), the 2015 Revised Pay as You Earn (REPAYE)—both  plans cap payments at 10 percent of graduates’ discretionary  income—and the 2009 and 2014 Income Based Repayment (IBR)  plans that cap payments at 10 or 15 percent of discretionary  income.  All of the plans forgive outstanding debt after 20 years  of payments.274  While appealing to borrowers, taxpayers bear a  With the recognition that loan repayments will never exceed 10 or  15 percent of earnings and that payments end after 20 years, there  is no additional cost to students for borrowing additional dollars— assuming students expect to have an unpaid balance after 20 years.   Figure 5-3 presents three scenarios.  Scenarios A and B assume a  $30,000 loan and a starting salary of $25,000, and scenario C  assumes a $60,000 loan and starting salary of $40,000.275  If the  students borrowed more than the $30,000 or $60,000, their  payments, and the total paid by borrower, would not change.  The  only change from a greater amount of debt is an increase in the  portion of their education expense borne by taxpayers—the last  column in the table.  Thus, the Obama Administration’s loan  policies incentivize students to maximize debt—borrowing  irresponsibly and exacerbating the problem of high student debt— leaving taxpayers responsible for the unpaid portion after 20 years.   A better program would require full loan repayment by the student  It is not surprising that, on average, the greater the educational  attainment achieved, the higher the salary earned.276  When the  economy is strong—high growth and a tight labor market—there  are more opportunities for college graduates.  However, when the  economy is weak and jobs are scarce, all Americans, including  recent graduates, suffer.  The current economic recovery is the  weakest in decades, falling far short of past recoveries.277  Annual  real GDP growth under the Obama Administration never reached  3 percent.278  No other Administration since 1933 has failed to  attain this level of growth, including Presidents that presided over  the Great Depression and the economic malaise of the 1970s. 279      Today, college graduates face a weak economy, high college debt,  and the responsibility of servicing the nearly $20 trillion gross  Federal debt—an amount that doubled under the Obama  Administration and is forecast to grow indefinitely.280  Federal  debt interest payments alone are forecast to nearly triple from 2017  to 2027, a cost that taxpayers must bear.281  Chapter 2 of this  Response presents a thorough discussion on the weak economy of  the past eight years.  A better strategy would be to pursue pro- growth policies that benefit all Americans—regardless of  educational attainment—rather than burdensome redistribution  Challenges for those from Disadvantaged Backgrounds  The Report states that the challenges to access quality post- secondary education are especially high for low-income families,  first-generation college families, and other disadvantaged  groups.282  Additionally, it states that loan default rates are highest  for students with a low amount of debt because they are more  likely to have dropped out of college prior to completing the  program.283  These two phenomena are linked in that public PreK- 12 schools often fail to prepare low-income and/or first-generation  college students for a successful college career; 284 and a large  portion of these students fail to complete a post-secondary  program, ultimately defaulting on their student loan.285  These issues are far from new.  In 2008, the Pell Institute  conducted a thorough analysis on the experiences of low-income  first-generation college students.286  The study recommends  substantial improvement for middle schools, high schools and  community colleges.  Middle schools need to better counsel  students about completing gateway courses well before high  school.  High schools need to offer study-skill support, encourage  student participation in college preparatory courses, assure  teachers are equipped to offer challenging college-preparatory and  advanced-placement courses, and assure that counselors have  more comprehensive knowledge about the college access process.   Community colleges need to help high school students develop a  comprehensive long-term education plan, including steps for high  school, two-year, and four-year colleges.  Additionally,  community colleges need to ensure students take courses that  address academic shortcomings—especially in math—and offer  strong transfer counseling with an emphasis on financial aid.    Over the past eight years, little has changed to better prepare these  students for a successful college career.  The Obama  Administration spent billions through the School Improvement  Grants (SIG) program to fix underperforming schools.  A  Department of Education review of the program found, “…no  significant impacts of SIG-funded models overall on math or  reading test scores, high school graduation, or college  enrollment…”287  Many American parents continue to be forced  to place their children in government-assigned public schools  based on their zip code rather than the parents’ opinion regarding  what is the best school for their child.  In some cases, these schools  fail to provide even basic education and safety, and often these  children have no alternatives because their state fails to offer any  education choices.288  While twenty-five states have some form of  school choice and charter schools, the others lack either one or  both of these options as shown in Figure 5-4.289    Continuing to pour billions of taxpayer dollars into the same  failing schools is not serving our children or taxpayers well.  While  progress must be made at the Federal level, state and local  governments must also improve.  Better policies would include  school voucher programs that encourage parent choice and  innovation, unleashing the drive and creativity of the free-market  system, and ultimately putting pressure on public schools to  improve.290  A market-based approach would reward those schools  that create value for their stakeholders while weeding out schools  that fail to create value.  This will allow children to attend better  schools, facilitate school improvement, and address students’  specific needs, ultimately better preparing them for the academic  Most students invest time and money into college to gain skills so  they can work in the career of their choice, earning a higher  income than they would be able to earn with solely a high school  diploma.  In other words, it is the existence of income inequality  that partly motivates and financially justifies investing in post- secondary education.  The Report correctly states that there is a 70  percent earnings premium for a bachelor’s degree over a high  school diploma.  However, the Obama Administration has  aggressively moved to reduce the reward for pursuing higher  education by implementing policies that reduce income for high  Chapter 3 of the Report discusses how the Obama Administration  has increased existing taxes on income—making the system more  progressive—and imposed new taxes to fund Federal spending.291   However, by reducing after-tax income, the earnings premium for  attending college decreases, which in turn reduces the incentive  and rationale for attending college.  This harms both the  individuals who then choose not to attend college and the nation  by weakening additional skill acquisition of the labor force.  A  better strategy would promote policies that increase the reward for  acquiring skills—college or otherwise—encouraging Americans  to better themselves.  This includes policies such as lowering  marginal tax rates and removing onerous business regulations and  To increase access and successful completion of college, America  should move away from a top-down bureaucratic education  system toward a more locally run system that includes private  lenders.  Additionally, policies that embrace choice and innovation  would improve PreK-12 and better prepare students for college.    The current one-size-fits-all Federally-run program ignores  regional differences, which precludes states and localities from  creating the most suitable program for their residents.  A higher  education program that suits a rural state like Wyoming may be  inappropriate for a state with a substantial urban and suburban  population, such as Maryland.  In the Report, the Obama  Administration cites the Knox Achieves and Kalamazoo Promise  as successful examples of Promise programs stating that,  “Evaluations of early local Promise programs show that these  programs can significantly improve high school graduation,  college enrollment, and college graduation rates.”292  However,  both programs were initiated prior to the Obama Administration,  and more importantly, neither was initiated nor managed by the  Federal Government.  Localities tailored these privately funded  programs to meet the needs of their residents.  Given the  differences between the two programs—Knox Achieves covers  two years of college while Kalamazoo Promise covers four—there  is no reason to believe that these programs are best for other states.  The static Federally-run system lacks the dynamic nature of  private financial markets and eliminates access to all of the lending  products that private-sector financial institutions might generate.   Unlike government at any level—Federal, state, or local—private- sector financial institutions can implement and test new forms of  lending without risking taxpayer dollars.  In an attempt to best  serve their customers, financial intermediaries will generate  various lending products.  The products and firms that serve their  customers well will expand and prosper; those firms that fail to  produce valued products face the discipline of the market.  This  process of creative destruction works best when firms are  permitted to enter markets freely and are not restricted by overly  burdensome regulations or excluded by the presence of a  government monopoly.  For example, the 1994 Riegle-Neal  Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act provides  evidence of the benefits of private lending and deregulation.  The  Act permitted banks to operate across state lines.293  The result was  expanded access to student loans and an increase in college  enrollment of roughly 4.9 percent, with the largest effect on low-  Today, the Federal student loan system passes all of the risk to  taxpayers.  A better system would distribute risk among various  willing parties.  Colleges and universities that receive the funds  should bear some of the risk.  They currently receive all of the  money upfront irrespective of student qualifications upon entering  the school, actual program completion, or eventual loan  repayment.  President Reagan’s pilot program applied the concept  of shared risk by requiring the educational institution to contribute  10 percent of the loan.  This gives the institution a stake in the  success of the student, alleviating part of the responsibility from  the taxpayer.  Private lenders should also bear some risk.  If the  pure Federal system of loans, created by the Obama  Administration, can be replaced by a system including private  financial intermediaries, then they should bear some of the risk.   The Federal Government could guarantee a part of the loan rather  than all of it—as they have done in the past—so they too have a  Other alternatives, beyond the traditional method of financing  college through loans, warrant consideration.  In his earlier  referenced testimony before the Committee, Mitchell Daniels also  recommended Income Share Agreements (ISA).295  ISA’s are  more like equity than debt; investors provide funding for students  in exchange for a negotiated, freely chosen percentage of future  income.  There are several benefits to this structure.  First, students  are assured that their payments never become too onerous, since  ISA payments remain a constant share of earnings rather than a  fixed payment; second, investors have a new investment  opportunity and stake in a student’s success in completing a degree  and in launching his or her career; and third, the risk is taken  voluntarily by the investor and not forced on taxpayers.       America must also improve PreK-12 education.  State  governments should expand school choice for students, especially  those forced to attend failing government-assigned schools.  There  is mounting evidence that school choice programs benefit  students.  School voucher programs create higher rates of youth  entrepreneurship.296  Student exposure to schools in the voucher  system is associated with higher graduation rates as well as  enrollment and persistence in four-year colleges.297  Evidence also  disadvantaged student populations.298  Globally, there is  substantial evidence that private schools outperform public  schools in the overwhelming majority of cases; thus, more access  In addition to reforming higher education financing and PreK-12,  new college graduates will benefit from entering a labor market  where their newly acquired skills will fetch them a prosperous  career.  This can only be achieved by moving away from the high- tax, high-regulation environment that the Obama Administration  created over the past eight years.  It is time for a change in course  in order to help current and future high school students, college  Rather than preparing students for the 21st century, the Obama  Administration’s policies have led to unsustainable levels of  student debt, rising tuition prices, fewer opportunities and rewards  for achieving success, and greater risk for taxpayers.  The Committee Majority recommends that policy makers examine  alternative approaches to expand opportunities and promote  \" Asking colleges and universities to share the risk  \" Including a greater role for private lenders in the student  \" Shifting the risk of student loans to borrowers and lenders  \" Promoting reforms that increase rather than deter the  \" Expanding school choice and charter school opportunities  for students, especially for those forced to attend failing  ! Chapter 6 of the Report highlights the events leading up to  the 2008 financial crisis and how it spread through the  ! Rather than acknowledge any part the government played,  the Obama Administration vastly expanded its role with  record-breaking levels of complex regulations based on  ! The Report claims progress toward ending “too big to fail”  banks but does not identify bank “runs” as the critical  ! Piling on more regulation does not make the financial  system more secure but furthers agency overreach and  ! Unproductive regulatory burdens hinder lending by  community banks and financial innovation, although the  The Report attributes the financial crisis to market failures but  does not fully explain the institutional framework in which the  market operated.  The government created that framework and has  been extensively involved in shaping the conduct of market  participants.  When the framework malfunctions, the government  Further, the government pursued social objectives with respect to  credit availability for specific segments of the population and  homeownership generally by the rules governing lending and  borrowing and by direct intervention as GSEs Fannie Mae and  Freddie Mac massively expanded credit to the mortgage market.   These actions similarly entangled the government in the course of  events.  Finally, the Federal Reserve influences interest rates and  affects the flow of credit through monetary policy, which has a  bearing on the housing sector from which the crisis emanated.  As in other chapters, the Report uses what it characterizes as  market failures to justify more government intervention, this time  in the financial sector.  That is fundamentally unhelpful.  The  government has legitimate functions in money and finance but  how and to what extent it should carry them out is the question.   The CEA does not make a sufficient case for the path the  government has taken since the crisis because it fails to completely  diagnose what is the key financial sector problem to be resolved  and acknowledge the inherent limitations of the regulatory  process, and it neglects to evaluate alternative approaches.    For a market economy to function properly, successful firms must  be allowed to earn profits and unsuccessful firms must be allowed  to incur losses.  Without the threat of losses, firms can take more  risk than is prudent and worry less about failure.  A “Too Big to  Fail” (TBTF) firm is one whose failure would have widely adverse  economic repercussions, and therefore would induce the  government to save it.  TBTF entities can enjoy higher profits from  taking more risk while taxpayers help to cover the losses.  TBTF  firms enjoy lower funding costs as investors expect a rescue in the  event of the firms’ failure.  The competitive advantage of such  firms in the capital market can be observed by the so-called TBTF  discount (also referred to as a premium), a measurable difference  in the cost of borrowing, credit insurance, and credit ratings.  Firms engaged in financial intermediation and, in particular,  liquidity and maturity transformation (borrowing short and  lending long), face the risk of “runs,” meaning that many lenders  want to withdraw their money or refuse to roll over their loans as  they mature, at the same time.  This problem is at the heart of bank  panics and financial crises and it is the problem government must  contain to secure the financial system.  TBTF is one manifestation  of the underlying problem of initiating widespread “runs,” but any  institution regardless of size whose failure could motivate a  general “freeze” of lending is systemically too important to fail.  Dodd-Frank promised to end TBTF; its preamble and President  Obama promised “the days of taxpayer-funded bailouts are  over.”300  Implicit in that statement is the contention that the  government will prevent or contain runs.  Dodd-Frank attempts to  do so with an enormous amount of regulation; it is a legislative  At 848 pages, Dodd-Frank is over 16 times larger than the Banking  Act of 1933, commonly known as “Glass-Steagall.”301   Researchers Patrick McLaughlin and Oliver Sherhouse quantified  the number of restrictive terms in Dodd-Frank’s promulgated  regulations and found more regulatory restrictions from the Act  than all the other Obama regulatory restrictions combined.302   Using the regulators’ cost calculations and paperwork hours  required, the American Action Forum estimates the 140 finalized  regulations from Dodd-Frank amount to cumulative costs of $36.5  billion and almost 75 million hours of compliance paperwork.303    Six years after Dodd-Frank was signed into law, many of the  regulations have yet to be written.  According to the Davis Polk  Dodd-Frank progress report, there are still 80 rules, or a fifth of  the 390 required rulemakings, that have not even been proposed  yet, and 32 of them have missed their statutory deadline.304      The problem of runs has not been solved.  Even with all its  laudatory claims about Dodd-Frank, the Report acknowledges the  TBTF premium.  As with many other claims about Obama-era  initiatives that did not live up to the rhetoric, the Report claims  success by a lower standard, namely that the chances of a firm  being considered too big to fail have decreased since the 2008  crisis.  But the premium will be low when financial markets are  calm as they are now and rise if and when anxiety spreads (see  Figure 6-x, p. 396 in the Report).  Despite the growing mountain  of regulation, there remains continuing concern that the risks of  bank runs reoccurring persists, supporting the belief that very large  financial institutions are safer because the government will have  no choice but to rescue them in order to keep the financial system  Meanwhile, the Dodd-Frank regulatory apparatus promotes  governmental overreach and causes unintended consequences.  “Shadow banking” outside of commercial banking started  growing rapidly around the start of the new millennium, as  depicted in Figure 6-6 (p. 366) of the Report.  Entities engaged in  financial activity include non-bank financial institutions that could  be insurance companies, for example, or parts of conglomerates.   Dodd-Frank created the Financial Stability Oversight Council  (FSOC) whose mandate includes identifying risks and responding  to emerging threats to financial stability, often referred to as  systemic risk, whatever the source.  The reason for creating the  FSOC was that it is no longer necessarily straightforward to define  a “financial institution,” and the risk of initiating widespread runs  is not necessarily quantifiable by a particular set of metrics.  In the  regulatory framework created that focuses on micromanaging  market participants’ conduct, identifying who and what needs  The problems are that (1) the individuals making the judgments  are fallible, and (2) judgment unconstrained by strict limits and  subject to due process can become arbitrary and capricious.   MetLife sued the FSOC for designating it a non-bank systemically  important financial institution (SIFI) and won.305  An alternative would be to set certain basic, easy to monitor  requirements, such as capital (i.e., equity) requirements for firms  engaged in financial dealings and minimize the regulation of  conduct.  Unfortunately, the Report does not evaluate alternatives  to the Dodd-Frank philosophy of financial regulation.  Dodd-Frank created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau  (CFPB) uniquely insulated from Congressional oversight and with  the ability to set its own budget.306  Rather than establish a board  or commission with a range of perspectives and experience, it  gives unchecked regulatory authority to a single director.  The  structure has been ruled unconstitutional by the District of  Columbia Circuit Court.307  The judges noted in their ruling that  “the [CFPB Director] enjoys more unilateral authority than any  other officer in any of the three branches of the U.S. Government,  Unlike the majority of Federal agencies and the military, the CFPB  is also completely outside the Congressional appropriations  process.  The CFPB obtains its funding from the earnings of the  Federal Reserve System without any input from Congress or the  Federal Reserve Chair.  Normally, annual reviews and budget  debates inform Americans about what priorities are adopted but  without any Congressional oversight, unaccountable bureaucrats  At the same time that a new agency with extraordinary powers is  regulating consumer credit, one wonders whether financial  oversight is sufficiently vigilant in matters that potentially could  be more damaging.  In 2016, hackers misdirected millions from  the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.  Iran-linked hackers have  continually attacked bank websites since 2011.309  Although the  Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFEIC)  attempts to raise awareness of cybersecurity risks, financial reform  As an independent agency, the Securities and Exchange  Commission (SEC) is not required to conduct cost-benefit analysis  of its rules.  However, multiple Federal court cases have struck  down new SEC rules in connection with Dodd-Frank directives  for insufficient justification.310  The House of Representatives  passed the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act in January 2017,  which would require the SEC to properly identify the problems it  intends to solve, calculate costs and benefits for its proposed  solutions, and review the effectiveness of the rules it implements  Unintended Consequences: Small and Community Banks  Small and community banks follow the traditional banking model.   They take in deposits from their community and lend it back to it  in the form of small business loans, various small loans to  households, and mortgages.  Small banks specialize in serving  their local citizens with products fitting their communities’ needs  and rarely engage in the complicated financial dealings that  contributed to the 2008 financial crisis.  In 2015, banks with $10  billion in assets or less accounted for $15.9 trillion in bank assets.   These same banks provide 55 percent of small business loans and  75 percent of agricultural loans, and according to the Federal  Reserve’s 2015 Small Business Credit Survey, small businesses  rate small banks as the most satisfactory lenders.312  The  importance of these institutions across the country cannot be  Community banks face increasing pressures from low interest  rates and regulatory burdens.  Small banks’ market share fell from  62 percent in 1992 to 19 percent in 2015.313  Dodd-Frank granted  an exemption from “extra supervision” for banks holding $50  billion or less in assets.  Unfortunately, this was too low and not  indexed to inflation.  Even former Representative Barney Frank  himself now concedes that the rules are too costly for the smallest  institutions and that the asset threshold for the exemption should  Although never cited by the Report, there is extensive research on  how community banks are faring under Dodd-Frank.  A 2013  survey of small banks across 41 states reveals that over 90 percent  of banks reported increased compliance costs since Dodd-Frank’s  passage.  Even more concerning, the same survey found over 80  percent of small banks experienced compliance cost increases of  over 5 percent.  Such burdens force small banks to change the  nature and mix of products; more than half were forced to do so in  response to regulatory requirements.315  In a 2016 Federal Reserve  and Conference of State Bank Supervisors survey of small  bankers, “regulatory burden” was the top reason that small bankers  reported curtailing services.  Some bankers are choosing to leave  certain markets as a result.  The new regulations are codifying a  big-bank style that limits community banks’ ability to adapt to  their communities’ needs.  One Ohio community banker described  compliance examinations as “taking away the uniqueness of  institutions and creating a culture with no opportunity to make  The results of a study conducted by Federal Reserve economists  indicate that compliance costs as a percent of noninterest expense  were three times as high for banks with less than $100 million in  assets compared to banks with assets of $1 billion to $10 billion.   Additionally, the researchers found that a higher compliance  expense was not uniformly associated with better performance.317   Regulation has caused thousands of banks to close or merge and  stopped new banks from opening, leaving a shrinking community  bank presence across the country.  Since the enactment of Dodd- Frank, there have only been three new bank charters approved  (Figure 6-1).318  Dodd-Frank created a system that the Federal  Reserve Bank of Dallas described as “too small to succeed.”319   The first de novo bank since 2010 was the Bank of Bird-in-Hand  serving Amish communities in Pennsylvania.  The local Amish  community needed farm loans.  The Federal Deposit Insurance  Corporation (FDIC) required the bank to appoint directors with  banking experience and required initial application documents that  Financial technology, also known as “fintech,” was barely known  in 2010 but has since skyrocketed in popularity according to  Google searches.321  The non-partisan Congressional Research  Service states that more than $24 billion has been invested in  fintech companies since 2010.322  The McKinsey Institute found  that the number of fintech startups doubled between April 2015  and February 2016.323  Modern consumers, especially younger  generations, readily adopt new fintech.  The Federal Reserve  reports that use of online/mobile banking has doubled in the past  five years, and it is the primary form of banking done by  millennials.324  Almost three out of every four millennials believe  Financial innovations that improve consumers’ lives are not  limited to traditional banking institutions.  “Peer-to-Peer” (P2P)  fund transfers managed by non-financial companies like PayPal,  Venmo, GooglePay and Square have increased rapidly, according  to Federal Reserve experts, with minimal impact from Dodd- Frank regulation (Figure 6-4). 326  More than half of millennials  report using these new payment services to transfer money.327   With these new financial services, millennials lead the charge on  going cashless.  More than a fifth of millennials carry less than  five dollars cash.328  Such innovation is most important to the  “underbanked,” consumers with a basic bank account who use  Approximately two-thirds of underbanked people own smart  phones, and as of 2015, 55 percent of them accessed online  banking services.  The most common services requested are low  balance alerts and payment due notices that help customers avoid  As emerging technologies play a larger role in financial services  and markets, care must be taken to protect beneficial innovation  from burdensome regulation that will repress new technologies in  favor of old.  With the FSOC’s and CFPB’s broad reach,  entrepreneurs can never be certain what the rules are and what  The Report covers the reforms and benefits of the Jumpstart Our  Business Startups (JOBS) Act.  Members of Congress, in a  bipartisan fashion, worked together to craft a law that would free  up capital for small business and democratize the ability for  Americans to lend as equity investors through crowdfunding.  The  JOBS Act, passed by Congress in 2012, provides an example of  how to assure investors access to new tools like crowdfunding by  applying proper disclosure and limits without discouraging  innovation.331  There is much need for more bipartisan initiatives  to ease regulatory burdens, increase regulatory certainty, and  At the end of 2016, the Federal Register had 95,749 (non-blank)  pages of regulations, an all-time high (Figure 6-5).332  Excluding  blank and skipped pages, the Obama Administration created seven  of the eight largest Federal Registers in history.333  Assuming the  same blank-to-substantive-page ratio from the Obama era holds  for 2016, the number of substantive pages in the register grew by  19.3 percent from 2015 to 2016 alone.334 The Competitive  Enterprise Institute estimated Federal regulations alone cost the  economy nearly $1.9 trillion in lost output in 2015.335  In 2016, regulatory agencies issued 18 official rules and  regulations for every law Congress passed.336  This total does not  account for “guidance documents” and other memos released by  agencies.  Such “guidance” purports to be advisory in nature but  often proves coercive, by broadly reinterpreting previous rules in  unintended ways to expand agency powers or advance an agenda  without following the normal rulemaking process.  These memos  have been called “regulatory dark matter,”337 and together with  rampant agency rulemaking threaten to usurp Congress as the  On January 3, 2017, the first day of the 115th Congress,  Representative Doug Collins introduced the Regulations from the  Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act (H.R.26).338  The bill  passed the House on January 5, and as of February 1 awaits action  in the Senate.  This bill is a successor of then-Congressman, now- Senator, Todd Young’s REINS Act from previous Congresses;  Senator Rand Paul is the Senate sponsor of the measure.  This  proposal inverts the Congressional Review Act (CRA) design by  requiring that major rules be affirmatively approved by Congress  rather than relying on the disapproval process currently in place.339   The bill would also establish a fast-track procedure for the  approval of these rules that would allow for expedited  consideration in Congress, thus ensuring that appropriate and  necessary rules can be affirmed in a timely manner.  The REINS  Act restores Congressional primacy by requiring major regulatory  actions directly affecting Americans be approved by their elected  Under President Trump, the CRA in its present form provides a  pathway for blocking the most egregious “midnight regulations”  issued by the Obama Administration in its final days, reversing  regulations submitted on or after June 13, 2016.340    Another proposal that allows for more direct Congressional  oversight of the regulatory burden in the United States is the  concept of a regulatory budget.  A regulatory budget would cap  the regulatory costs that agencies would be able to impose on  Americans alongside the normal Congressional budget process.  It  would limit red-tape growth while providing agencies incentives  to accomplish their goals in the least onerous way possible.   Regulatory budget levels would be set by Congress, and the  process would allow Congress and the President to join in direct  oversight of the level and type of regulations produced by the  On January 30, 2017, President Trump issued Executive Order  13771 requiring that for every new regulation put into place, two  old regulations must be rescinded.341  The United States now joins  a list of other governments using this approach to reduce  regulatory burdens.  The United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia  have all seen success in cutting red tape through similar  policies.342  The “one in, two out” policy is an excellent start to  address overregulation, but further reforms should be enacted to  codify red-tape control into statute and return Congress to its  position of primacy.  To that end, in the 114th Congress, Vice  Chairman Lee proposed the Regulatory Budget Act to allow  Congress to vote on the total regulatory burden each federal  agency imposes on the U.S. economy on an annual basis.343  The policies of the last eight years have had serious constraining  effects on the U.S. economy that are plainly visible.  The mass of  Federal regulation applied to the economy overall and to the  financial sector in particular has a large role in that.    For the economy to recover in a true sense, meaning for it to get  \" The overall regulatory onslaught must be turned back and  regulation of the financial sector must become geared  toward the critical risk factor, which is “runs” on financial  \" The government sponsored enterprises Fannie (Federal  National Mortgage Association) and Freddie (Federal  Home Loan Mortgage Corporation) must be reformed in a  manner that ensures they do not return to a status as private  entities that operate for profit but with implicit public  What can prevent or contain runs more efficiently than  government micromanaging private financial intermediation?   That is the central question.  The regulation in place now not  only is inefficient, it may actually increase the risk in certain  ways, such as by continuing to encourage financial institutions  to retain or acquire “TBTF” status, by providing a false sense  that regulators can control events, and by thwarting more  market competition from small banks and innovative financing  ! The Obama Administration’s approach to global warming  is ineffective and too costly; it is centered on U.S.  emissions, on wind and solar power, and is unconcerned  ! Greenhous gas emission reduction requires attacking large  ! We should find ways to spur faster development in  electrification that draws on various technologies and  ! U.S. workers and businesses should benefit from  increased gas and coal exports, in particular, and foreign  direct investments in modern natural gas, coal, and nuclear  Beyond rhetoric about U.S. leadership in greenhouse gas emission  control and advancing nonbinding international goals for  emissions reduction, the applied aspect of Obama Administration  climate policy focused on the domestic economy.  But domestic- only policies can lead to increased emissions abroad as a result of  so-called carbon leakage, i.e., from production shifting to other  countries with lesser controls.  The domestic focus also misses that  international trade and foreign direct investment can lead to  technology diffusion that can lower emissions in other  Economists are not climate scientists, but can speak to efficiently  reducing global greenhouse gas emissions.  The central principle  of using resources efficiently is to direct them where they make  the greatest difference in reaching an objective.346  For cutting  industrial emissions, that means adding more and better equipment  where it makes proportionally the largest difference, or  introducing control equipment where none exists.  The same holds  for substituting cleaner burning fuels or replacing an existing  In advanced economies, such as the United States, devoting  resources to reducing greenhouse gas emissions is unlikely to  produce the greatest incremental reduction.  Emission controls are  already far more extensive and intensive in North America,  Europe, and Japan than other countries where the emission volume  is large and growing.  Incremental efforts dedicated to reducing  emissions in the United States, for the most part, face greatly  diminishing returns.  Technology breakthroughs could change  that, but until they occur, incremental steps to push emissions still  lower are extraordinarily costly with marginal benefit and thus  The reverse is true in India, for example, which uses lower fuel  grades, less emission abatement equipment, and less efficient  technology for electric power generation and other purposes.   Energy consumption and associated emissions are rising  substantially in developing countries like India (non-OECD  countries), and not in the already more advanced countries like the  United States [see, Energy Information Administration (EIA)  According to EIA projections, worldwide energy-related carbon  dioxide emissions will rise from about 32 billion metric tons in  2012 to 36 billion metric tons in 2020 and then to 43 billion metric  tons in 2040, a 34 percent increase with current policies and  regulations.348 Most of the increase is in developing (non-OECD)  Economic efficiency considerations clearly would direct emission  reduction to countries like India where they are more easily  attainable and will have a larger impact.  The Report states that  some of the least expensive marginal emission reduction  opportunities are in the power sector, thereby invoking the  efficiency principle, but it refers only to the United States.349 The  CEA attaches great urgency to reducing emissions, but it ignores  the largest and fastest growing emission sources worldwide.  U.S. industry finds ways of cost and revenue sharing with other  countries to facilitate the development of their natural resources,  particularly oil and gas.  Foreign military sales can include joint  production agreements that preserve or increase production and  employment at home as well as abroad and possibly could serve  as a model for equipment and technology sales that lead to lower  emissions in emerging economies.  Prior Obama Administration  Reports never explored the critical question of what opportunities  exist for expanding U.S. foreign trade and investment in emerging  economies with respect to greener energy consumption and  The United States has the world’s largest reserves of coal, some of  which is low in sulfur and some of which has a high “heat rate,”  and may be superior to what other countries are burning.  The  United States also has large natural gas and uranium reserves.   American companies know how to build state-of-the-art electrical  power plants using these fuels.  Furthermore, the United States is  a leader in wind and solar power generation.350  Besides reducing  greenhouse gas emissions, greater U.S. energy exports and greater  foreign energy investments also would reduce toxic pollutants  resulting in substantial health and safety benefits, while increasing  U.S. jobs and earnings from exports and international investments.  Given the Report’s emphasis on reducing emissions sooner rather  than later, one would expect full consideration of all options.  The  Obama Administration initially paid lip service to an “all-of-the- above” energy strategy, but then devolved into advocating mostly  wind and solar—so-called zero emission sources—and energy  conservation, all of which focused on the United States.   Especially with respect to emission reduction, the omission of  nuclear power is striking.  It is a zero-emission source, and as  shown in Figure 7-3, already supplies 20 percent of the nation’s  Fear of radiation still causes anxiety the way electricity once did,  but commercial nuclear power generation protects against  radiation exposure.  Nuclear power generation has been  operational since 1958 in the United States, and U.S. submarines  and aircraft carriers started using nuclear power more than a half  century ago as well.  In France, nuclear power plants provide 75  percent of the national electricity supply.351 Around the globe,  more people are injured or die supplying the other energy sources  shown in Figure 7-3 than nuclear power.352 Long ago, one major  cause of anxiety was the so-called China Syndrome, which refers  to an accidental nuclear chain reaction that would burn through the  floor of a nuclear power plant and continue unstoppably through  the core of the earth all the way to the other side, i.e., come out in  The point is not to advocate for nuclear power, but its benefits as  a reliable, clean, and scalable option for power generation should  be weighed against its risks and costs, and other alternatives.  It is  a reliable and, importantly, scalable option for affordable power  generation that emits no greenhouse gases whatsoever.   Unfortunately, the Report does not discuss nuclear energy at all.354  The Report claims renewable sources are becoming cost  competitive with conventional energy sources.  It bases this claim,  in part, on the contention that solar and wind technologies have no  fuel costs.355  However, while sunlight and wind are free, they  must be collected and processed into usable energy much like  uranium, crude oil, coal, and natural gas, and the cost structure of  doing so matters greatly to the final cost of delivering electricity.  How much of the United States would have to be covered in solar  panels and windmills to raise their market share from a combined  5 percent to, say, 50 percent?  Visualizing a greatly expanding area  devoted to collecting and transmitting electricity derived from the  wind and the sun over increasing distances to where it is consumed  makes clear the long-run supply curve slopes upward.  The cost  estimates CEA cites consider only marginal increases in supply  and do not take account of the increasing difficulties siting ever  more windmills and solar panels presents.  By contrast, it is not  difficult to imagine the nuclear power supply increasing from a 20  percent to a 50 percent market share as it requires little space given  its high energy density.  Suitable placement of windmills and solar  panels is far more geography-dependent and more likely to  encounter land use limitations the larger the area they cover.  In  short, renewables, including biofuels,356 are subject to significant  diseconomies of scale whereas the nuclear power supply is not,  certainly not to the same extent; it may even be subject to  economies of scale.  In any event, the cost comparison and its  implications in the Report are incomplete and misleading.  Economists can also speak constructively to ways of protecting  humanity from adverse climate change effects.  The emphasis has  been on mitigating warming, but if efforts to reduce emissions will  be inadequate, then resources instead should be directed to  mitigating the warming’s adverse effects rather than the warming  itself.  This might include building higher, stronger dams,  fortifying infrastructure, strengthening building codes, moving  residences farther inland, and so on.  Certainly, we should do so in  places where mitigation efforts have reached diminishing returns  The point of making adaptation to climate change a priority is not  new.  The Committee’s 2013 Response remarked favorably on a  section in that year’s Report entitled “Preparing for Climate  Change,” but faulted it for not addressing the costs and benefits  relative to alternative policies.357  In 2014, former CEA chairman  Ed Lazear published an op-ed entitled “The Climate Change  Agenda Needs to Adapt to Reality”358 suggesting that by simple  arithmetic the Obama Administration’s far-reaching policies to  reduce carbon emissions and mitigate climate change are not  capable of making a difference.  He stated that we would be wise  to “consider strategies that complement and may be more effective  than mitigation—namely, adaptation.” This year’s Report also  raises the subject of adaptation, but again, it does not follow  A major weakness of the mitigation strategy is that we are not sure  how much we reduce warming for a given reduction in  emissions.359  It is easier to measure the benefits of adaptive  investments based on the damage from past floods, storms, and  droughts than of investments to reduce the global temperature.   Hence, one can perform cost-benefit analyses for alternative  adaptive investments and compare their relative returns with  reasonable accuracy, and one can do so without knowing the  reasons why floods, storms, and droughts occur.360  It would help policymakers immensely if the connection between  emissions and warming were reliably quantifiable.  Until it is,  economic reasoning recommends resources be devoted to  protecting humanity from the natural elements, and emission  mitigation efforts concentrate on where they have large  incremental impacts, because they are more likely to affect the  temperature and can cut high associated levels of toxic pollutants  In its fight against climate change, the Obama Administration  interpreted the U.S. global leadership role as demonstrating a  willingness to impose large, unspecified costs on Americans.  At  the Paris Climate conference in December 2015, the State  Department made a pledge for the year 2025 that the United States  will reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below  the 2005 level without specifying what it would mean for the  economy.361 Other countries made similar representations, but  there is no enforcement mechanism.  From an economic  India and other emerging economies struggle with the economic  growth tradeoff that emission control entails.  Whatever  governments and their citizens believe about global warming, they  know they have a pollution problem.  That is obvious from  pictures of people in China, for example, wearing protective  masks to filter the particle-filled air they must breathe.  The  population in emerging economies endures the pollution, because  the alternative is abject poverty.  What they want are solutions that  help their economy grow with less environmental stress.  Some believe massive aid transfers from rich countries is the  answer.  However, the general population in advanced economies  does not consider itself rich, for one thing; and for another,  subsidies are fraught with distorting, deleterious effects that get  worse the larger they are.  Market reforms and engaging with the  global economy bring accelerated economic growth and  ultimately lower harmful emission levels.362 Relying on markets  should be the first priority, and then the question is how the U.S.  government can best advance emissions-oriented public policy  through international trade and investment initiatives with  particular emphasis on benefits to U.S. companies and workers.   The Report touts President Obama’s call for global free trade for  specified environmental goods both in his Climate Action Plan in  2013 and in his negotiations on the Environmental Goods  Agreement the following year, with “a group of countries that  accounts for more than 85 percent of global trade in environmental  goods.”363 But it fails to mention that World Trade Organization  talks on that subject collapsed in December 2016.   America expends many resources where it makes relatively little  incremental difference to emissions, and it is unknown whether  the difference averts adverse temperature increases; it may even  push production abroad where there are fewer emission controls.   Facilitating trade and investment associated with diffusion of  modern technology around the world can create jobs at home, raise  living standards abroad, and lower undesirable emissions of  The Report does not address the relative efficiency of different  approaches to reducing emissions nor alternative approaches  preparing us for a warmer climate.  The government could do more  to protect citizens from the elements where the benefits are clear  and relatively large.  Doing so has calculable benefits for society  and the economy.  Specifically, it would not erode our economic  growth potential, as does blindly pouring resources into domestic  emission reductions.  The Committee Majority’s responses of  prior years have pointed out previous Reports’ neglect to take  The Obama Administration and former CEA recognized the need  for emission mitigation around the globe, and they touted the good  intentions many other countries have professed.  But if the  problem is big and the urgency great, then the focus and  mechanism are not up to the task.  We would need to get  international trade and investment moving in a way that can make  The Committee Majority recommends that policymakers:  \" Scope out opportunities for economic development deals  that can have environmental and climate benefits among  other things with foreign countries, such as electrical grid  buildout, power station upgrades, and cleaner fuels;  \" Evaluate the costs and benefits of expanded nuclear power  \" Analyze the costs and benefits of adaptive investments in  the United States to protect the population and the  ! Chapter 3 of the Report emphasizes tax policy as a means  of redistributing income among taxpayers, but it ignores  the pressing need to overhaul the extraordinarily  The Response seeks to fill the void by addressing:  ! How comprehensive tax reform will spur economic  ! How our high corporate rate and outdated international  ! Why tax reform that fails to address individual tax rates  ! Why heavy taxation on savings and investment, estate  taxes, and slow cost recovery dampens growth; and  ! How simplifying the tax code could relieve businesses,  families, and individuals of an unnecessary burden.  Tax policy affects individuals, businesses, and the broader  economy in ways that either help or hinder American prosperity.   An economy operating at full potential needs its working age  population in the workforce (labor supply), businesses willing and  able to hire and equip  workers with the best equipment and know- how (capital investment), and technological innovation that  empowers workers to produce more per hour (productivity).   Given the declines in labor force participation and sluggish  productivity growth during the Obama Administration described  in Chapter 2 combined with tax increases on capital that will be  discussed in this chapter, the current forecast of slow economic  As explained by the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT), tax  policy affects economic growth in several ways.  For example,  lowering the tax rate paid by individuals allows them to keep more  of the money they earn, thus increasing the incentive to work.   Similarly, lowering the tax rates paid by businesses allows them  to invest more in their workers by purchasing equipment that will  make employees more productive.364  That higher productivity  Tax policy can also distort individual behavior and the broader  economy by rewarding certain types of activities or industries over  others.  In an efficient economy, taxpayers would make decisions  based on what is best for their business or family, rather than what  In addition, tax policy can have a direct impact on the location of  investments.  If the domestic tax climate makes it less profitable  to invest in the United States, then businesses have a greater  incentive to invest in and possibly even relocate to other countries  with more favorable tax systems.  A tax code that makes America  the best place in the world to work, invest, and start a business is  Four years ago in the 113th Congress, policymakers seemed  focused on comprehensive tax reform to boost economic growth  and fix our broken tax system for businesses, families, and  individuals alike.  Unfortunately, the possibility of fundamental  reform was diminished by President Obama’s insistence on  massive tax increases on the individual side of the tax code, where  the rates and rules affect not only every individual taxpayer, but  also the vast majority of businesses.  Discussions then pivoted to  reforming the business side of the tax code in isolation because the  Administration had indicated openness to revenue neutrality in  that context.366  Unlike the 2017 Report’s single paragraph367 on  the subject, the 2015 Report contained an entire chapter dedicated  to business tax reform and its potential for spurring economic  growth.368  However, the Administration’s refusal to address the  high individual tax rates paid by small businesses limited  Later in the 114th Congress, the conversation narrowed again to  international tax reform, a subset of business tax reform  addressing the overseas tax climate for American companies.   Unfortunately, President Obama’s Fiscal Year 2017 budget plan  with large net tax increases on the business side of the code  doomed the possibility of business tax reform or even more limited  international tax reform during his tenure.369  Recognition that  taxes should be reformed in a holistic way that addresses the needs  of individuals and all types of businesses, both domestically and  abroad, is the key to boosting economic growth and making the  The Highest Corporate Tax Rate in the Developed World  Members of Congress from both parties as well as the Obama  Administration have acknowledged that the U.S. corporate tax rate  is too high and internationally uncompetitive.  The decades-old  corporate rate reduction in the Tax Reform Act of 1986 lowered the  U.S. rate so that it would be one of that era’s lowest  internationally.370 Since then, America has lost ground by standing  still while our global competitors moved aggressively to lower  their corporate rates and attract investment to their shores.  Today,  the U.S. corporate rate is the highest in the developed world.    Among the 34 advanced economies in the OECD, the U.S.  corporate rate tops all others at nearly 39 percent, including both  the 35 percent Federal rate and average state taxes (see Figure 8- 1).371  President Obama’s framework for business tax reform  proposed a Federal corporate rate reduction from 35 percent to 28  percent.372  While this would have been an improvement, it would  have left the U.S. rate still among the highest and far above the  24.2 percent average rate enjoyed by our OECD competitors.  In  contrast, America’s competitive position would be dramatically  improved by the 20 percent corporate rate in the tax reform  framework contained in Speaker Ryan’s Better Way plan.373   Further, President Trump proposed a top business rate of 15  percent for all sizes and types of companies.374   Clearly, the need for bold rate reduction and reform has become  even more urgent with the proliferation of patent boxes, or  innovation boxes, among our trading partners.  These  arrangements tax the income from intellectual property at rates far  below the statutory rate of the host country, and can entice  companies to locate valuable intellectual property and related jobs  In addition to facing the highest corporate rate in the developed  world, U.S. businesses are burdened with an uncompetitive  worldwide tax system rather than a territorial system.  Territorial  systems allow active income earned overseas to be brought back  to the home country with little or no tax.  In contrast, America’s  worldwide system subjects all income to U.S. taxation, regardless  of where it was earned.  As illustrated in Figure 8-1 by the  relatively few dark bars in the graph, America is an outlier in  taxing worldwide earnings and has the OECD’s highest tax rate.   The tax is triggered when profits are brought back to the United  States, giving companies a strong incentive to leave earnings  overseas.  This creates a lock-out effect, which results in reduced  levels of investment by these companies in the United States.  The  other six OECD countries with worldwide systems have the  advantage of significantly lower corporate rates.  Figure 8-2 shows  Rather than proposing a competitive territorial system, the Obama  Administration proposed international tax reform that it described  as “hybrid,” in which an immediate 19 percent minimum tax  would be imposed on all new foreign earnings of U.S.  Administration, Laura D’Andrea Tyson, criticized both the  Obama Administration’s failure to adopt a territorial approach and  the 19 percent minimum tax, which she pointed out would amount  to an effective rate of 22.4 percent because of its disallowances of  other taxes paid.377  In contrast, the Better Way tax reform plan  calls for a purely territorial system with no international minimum  tax so that American companies are free to use foreign earnings to  expand investment and jobs in the United States without  The exceedingly high U.S. corporate rate and uncompetitive  international taxation creates a strong incentive for American  companies to move their corporate headquarters overseas to more  favorable tax climates.  The Obama Administration attempted to  address this practice—also called a corporate inversion—through  a series of punitive legislative proposals and regulations.”379  Alternatively, the experience in Great Britain provides a lesson on  how pro-growth tax reform can more effectively stem the tide of  inversions and entice inverted companies to return.  Like the  United States, Great Britain underwent a period of “headquarter  flight,” but responded as the United States should: by lowering its  corporate tax rate and moving to an internationally competitive tax  system.  As a result, companies have returned to Great Britain and  new companies are incorporating there.380  The best solution for  stopping the loss of U.S.-headquartered companies is to treat the  root of problem—an uncompetitive tax system—rather than enact  Passthrough Businesses and the Individual Tax Rate  While the Obama Administration proposed a lower tax rate for C  corporations that pay the corporate tax, no similar rate reduction  was offered to the 95 percent of businesses that pay taxes at the  individual level rather than corporate level, known as passthrough  businesses.381  The vast majority of small businesses are organized  as passthroughs, and as such a lower corporate rate would be little  When President Obama took office, the top Federal tax rate paid  by small businesses was identical to the top rate paid by large  corporations, 35 percent.  However, with the combination of ACA  taxes and President Obama’s insistence on raising the top  individual rate and reviving other penalties, the top rate paid by  small businesses is now 44.6 percent.382  Significantly, the claim  in Chapter 3 of the Report that the hike in the top individual tax  rate and capital gains rate was simply a return to Clinton-era rates  is false, since it ignores the impact of the ACA’s 3.8 percent tax  The President’s reform framework would have put small  businesses in an even worse position.  If certain business tax  preferences were eliminated—a common feature of President  Obama’s and most reform frameworks—and the proceeds used  only to lower the corporate rate, then many small and mid-sized  passthrough businesses would have faced an even higher effective  tax rate.  The 2015 Report argued that higher passthrough rates are  justified because C corporations face a double tax at both the  corporate and shareholder level on dividends and capital gains,  while passthroughs generally pay only a single layer of tax.   However, CBO has found that passthrough businesses pay an  effective tax rate of 27 percent, only 4 percentage points lower  than the C corporation effective rate of 31 percent.384    Under President Obama’s framework, C corporations would have  experienced a top rate reduction from 35 percent to 28 percent,  while small businesses would have been taxed at a top rate of 44.6  percent and lost many of the tax preferences that lower their  effective rate.  This could have led to the worst of both worlds for  businesses, as President Obama’s preferred corporate rate would  not have been low enough to make large corporations competitive,  while the tax burden on smaller companies would have increased.    Policies aimed at penalizing the wealthy through higher individual  tax rates often hit business income, which in turn lowers  opportunities for workers, as explained above.  In fact, the Obama  Administration’s own Treasury Department found that almost 80  percent of taxpayers in the highest one percent of income earners  Another Obama Administration tax increase aimed at the wealthy  raised the top capital gains rate from 15 percent to 23.8 percent  when ACA taxes are included.386  President Obama also proposed  another hike in the top capital gains rate to 28 percent.387  As this  section makes clear, America already has the second-highest  integrated capital gains rate in the developed world.  Further, there  are sound economic and policy justifications for keeping capital  Under the current tax code, the published tax rates for long-term  capital gains and qualified dividends are lower than the tax rates  on ordinary income.  In reality, however, capital gains and  dividends face a hidden double tax that often exceeds ordinary  income rates.  The dividends companies pay to shareholders are  first taxed at the corporate level.  Shareholders also pay the  corporate tax when they sell stock and consequently receive a  reduced capital gain.  In addition, whenever a taxpayer buys stock,  land, or another capital asset, the income used to purchase the asset  was likely taxed at the individual level already.  A 2015 Ernst & Young study explains the economic damage  decisions. It lowers the after-tax return of equity- worker to work with, labor productivity is lowered,  generally, the double tax also distorts a number of  Inflation also operates as a hidden tax on capital gains.  Ordinary  income, such as wages or salaries, is generally taxed in the year it  is earned.  Capital gains are not taxed until the gain is realized  (generally when the asset is sold).  This delay can lead to  pernicious effects.  Economist Kyle Pomerleau illustrated this  point using a hypothetical saver: this saver may purchase stock for  $89.18 in 2000 and sell it in 2013 for $100 dollars.  Nominally,  this saver earned $10.82 in capital gains profit.  At a 23.8 percent  capital gains rate, the saver would pay $2.57 in taxes.  However,  because of inflation, the $100 in 2013 is worth less than the  original $89.18.  In real terms, the saver paid $2.57 in taxes on a  capital loss of $4.88, essentially an infinite effective tax rate.389    The level of the capital gains rate can have a very strong influence  on taxpayer behavior and the economy as a whole.  Taxpayers can  avoid paying a high capital tax by holding onto their assets, which  inhibits capital from moving to its highest valued uses, dampening  economic growth.  When capital gains taxes are low, taxpayers do  not face as strong a disincentive to sell assets.  For example, after  the capital gains tax rose to 28 percent in 1987, sales of capital  assets sank and remained depressed until Congress lowered the  capital gains rate to 20 percent in 1997.390  Following this cut,  capital gains tax revenues ballooned and helped balance the  This raises the question of what capital gains rate would generate  the most tax revenue.  The JCT estimates that we are already near  the revenue-maximizing rate, and that is perhaps why the Obama  Administration’s proposed additional hike went no further than 28  percent.  Other economists, such as Ohio State University  economist Paul D. Evans, have come to a very different  conclusion.  Using statistical analysis through the years 1976 to  2004, Professor Evans estimated how taxpayers would respond to  increasing capital gains taxation and found the revenue- maximizing rate would be much closer to 10 percent.392  This  implies that tax reform could raise more revenue and free up more  The Tax Foundation modeled President Obama’s proposed 28  percent capital gains rate and found that it would reduce GDP by  0.8 percent in the long run and result in lost revenues of over $11  billion.  Even worse, it would reduce the capital stock (tools,  machines, factories, buildings etc.) by over 2 percent and lower  wages by over 0.65 percent.393  In an ever competitive world,  American workers cannot afford to be less productive.  Regarding international competition, the 2013 increase in the  capital gains tax rate was opposite the historical trend among our  OECD trading partners.  Using an integrated capital gains rate that  accounts for the corporate and individual double tax on capital  gains, the United States ranks second in severity (Figure 8-3).   Even adding Brazil, Russia, India, and China, our rate remains the  In 2000, the average OECD integrated capital gains rate was 45.2  percent.  By 2014, the other OECD countries had an average  integrated capital gains rate of 39.7 percent, over five percentage  points lower than in 2000.  Japan, the world’s third-largest  economy, reduced its top integrated rate by 6 percentage points.   Canada reduced its top rate almost 20 percentage points from over  63 percent to just under 44 percent.394  Over that same time, the  United States’ integrated capital gains rate declined from 54.5  percent following the 2003 capital gains rate cut, and then rose to  a level of 56.3 percent.  This is not only a net increase of almost 2  percentage points domestically; it also places the U.S. rate more  than 16 percentage points above the OECD average.395   Rather than a separate rate structure for capital gains, the Better  Way tax reform plan would tackle double taxation by allowing  taxpayers to deduct half of their income from savings (capital  gains, dividends, interest, etc.) from taxation.  The other half  would be subject to the ordinary income tax rates.  With the  addition of the plan’s top individual rate of 33 percent, this would  effectively lower the top capital gains rate from the current 23.8  percent to 16.5 percent.  Additionally, the Better Way plan also  reduces the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to a flat 20  percent.396  This reform would reduce the top integrated rate from  a punishing 56.3 percent to roughly 41 percent, an over 15  percentage point decrease that would place the United States only  slightly above the OECD average.397  The Tax Foundation’s  analysis of the corporate rate and capital gains rate reductions in  the Better Way found that these two changes would boost GDP  growth by 2.0 percentage points in the long run.398    Under the current tax code, a business generally cannot deduct the  full cost of equipment in the year it is purchased.  Instead, a  company can deduct the cost from taxes only over a number of  years under applicable depreciation schedules.  In essence, the tax  code requires businesses to defer recognition of a substantial  portion of equipment cost for purposes of reporting their income,  so that the income reported and taxed in a given year exceeds the  actual cash profit earned.  This tax treatment discourages  businesses—particularly those that depend on cash flow—from  purchasing new equipment.  It also requires business owners to  track when an asset was purchased, which depreciation schedule  applies to particular assets, and how much has already been  Expensing allows businesses to recognize the full cost of an asset  in the tax year it is purchased when reporting its income.  With  expensing, businesses pay less tax early on after they purchase an  asset and can recover its cost faster.  Later on, their tax payments  will be larger as there is no depreciation to deduct from the  earnings.  Faster cost recovery means breaking even sooner on an  In 2015, Congress took the welcome step of making recent levels  of allowable expensing for small businesses permanent,399 a move  based on legislation introduced by the current JEC Chairman, Rep.  Pat Tiberi.400  This greatly improves certainty, encourages  investment, and relieves paperwork burdens on small businesses.   However, the tax code still limits the amount a business may  expense, the type of assets that can be expensed, and the total  amount of asset purchases a company can make and still qualify  In order to boost economic growth, Congress has also passed  temporary extensions of bonus depreciation, under which  companies of all sizes can deduct a large portion of the purchase  price in the first tax year.  However, bonus depreciation is  currently scheduled to phase down from an extra 50 percent  deduction in the year of purchase to 30 percent in 2019, after  In the last Congress, the current Committee Chairman introduced  legislation that would have made 50 percent bonus depreciation  permanent.403  The Tax Foundation estimates that this policy  would improve economic growth by 1 percent in the long run.404    The Better Way tax reform plan takes this pro-growth policy a step  further by allowing full expensing for all business assets  purchased domestically.405  The Tax Foundation estimates that this  element of the plan alone would boost GDP by 5.4 percent over a  The JCT has also acknowledged the growth potential of policies  that allow businesses to recover the costs of their investments  more quickly.  In 2012 testimony before the Senate Finance  Committee, JCT noted that while the extent of growth resulting  from expensing differs in the economic literature, “changes in  taxes do have a noticeable impact on investment.”407  Faster cost  recovery is one of the most powerful policies used to boost growth  While a change from depreciation to expensing appears to have a  large impact on revenue in the short term, over the long run much  of the revenue will be recouped as the depreciation deductions that  would have been taken in later years disappear.  Additionally, the  positive growth effects from faster cost recovery can mitigate the  revenue loss in the first decade.  For example, the Tax Foundation  estimates that without accounting for growth effects, moving to  expensing would reduce Federal revenues by $2.2 trillion dollars.   When the macroeconomic effects are included, the loss drops to  $883 billion.408  The loss will drop even further in the second  decade as write-offs from the old depreciation system fully  disappear.  Thus, while the loss to the Treasury from moving to  expensing would be largely temporary, the benefits to the  economy and workers from greater levels of investment would be  The current tax system treats a taxpayer’s death as a taxable event.   While an exemption is provided for assets worth $5 million ($10  million for spouses) or less, indexed for inflation, the tax code  imposes an estate tax of up to 40 percent on the remaining assets  of the deceased.409  The exemption amounts may seem large at first  glance, but the estate tax has a disproportionate impact on family- owned businesses and farms, many of which may appear rich in  land, equipment, or inventory, but in reality are cash-poor.  As a  result, the estate tax often breaks up businesses or family farms by  forcing the sale of land or other assets to pay the tax.  In 2011, economist Stephen J. Entin authored a report on the  economic effects of the estate tax that concluded the tax was so  devastating that it reduced, rather than raised, Federal revenue on  base. Our report takes this into consideration by  to calculate the budget effect of reducing the tax,  Another analysis examined the damaging economic effects of  compliance costs associated with the estate tax—which involve  complex valuations by both the taxpayer and tax collector of a  variety of assets—and concluded that compliance and avoidance  costs outweigh any revenue raised by estate taxes.411  Economic  efficiency is also lost when family businesses spend resources in  order to manage estate taxes so the company can survive to the  next generation that could be put to more productive uses.  Moreover, the estate tax may even be counterproductive with  respect to the Obama Administration’s goal of reducing income  inequality outlined in Chapter 3 of the Report.  The previous  analysis also determined that estate taxes have either a negligible  or counterproductive effect on inequality by preventing the  transfer of assets to heirs.412  The Better Way tax reform plan  would repeal the estate tax, which would not only reduce the  emotional and financial toll on families grieving the death of a  loved one, but also remove an impediment to economic growth.   The Tax Foundation’s model predicts that this change will boost  economic growth by 0.9 percent over a decade.413    As of 2014, a compilation of all the statutes, regulations, and case  law necessary to comply with the tax code totaled 74,608 pages.414   The U.S. Taxpayer Advocate Service (TAS) has also stated, “The  most serious problem facing taxpayers—and the [Internal  Revenue Service (IRS)]—is the complexity of the Internal  Revenue Code.”415  In a 2012 report, TAS found that the tax code  had been changed 4,680 times since 2001, a rate of more than one  change per day.416  More changes and complexities have been  TAS also estimated that Americans spend over 6.1 billion hours  each year preparing their taxes.417  The IRS projects that 90  percent of taxpayers seek assistance with tax preparation, either  through hiring a paid preparer (56 percent) or buying software (34  percent).418  Even 27 percent of IRS employees turn to outside help  The JCT has identified four specific negative effects of complexity  ! Reduced perceptions of fairness in the Federal tax  ! Increased difficulties in the administration of tax laws. 420  While estimates of the annual cost of compliance differ, a 2011  study by Arthur Laffer, Wayne Winegarden, and John Childs  found that Americans paid over $430 billion in a single year to  comply with the tax code.  Of this amount, $216 billion was borne  by individuals, businesses incurred roughly $162 billion, and the  remaining $53 billion represented preparers’ fees, IRS  Another calculation conducted by economists at the Mercatus  Center found a range of compliance costs between $67 and $378  billion annually.  The researchers then projected lost economic  growth from time spent planning and filing taxes at $148 to $609  billion per year.  Combining both the compliance and growth  estimates, the study projected that the U.S. tax system costs $215  The compliance burden that the U.S. tax system imposes on the  domestic economy also is large compared with other OECD  countries.  National Taxpayer Union Foundation analyst Michael  Tasselmyer measured the average time required each year for an  American business to comply with taxes compared to peers in the  OECD.  On average, a business spends just under 180 hours, or 22  and a half working days, to comply each year.  France is the closest  competitor on complexity with an average of 133 hours,  representing more than a full work week less than in the United  Many of these estimates were done prior to implementation of the  ACA, which imposed new taxes on both individuals and  businesses.  Even a provision designed to benefit taxpayers has  added complexity and compliance burdens.  The ACA distributes  its premium tax credit for purchasing health insurance on the  exchanges through the IRS.  As GAO has noted, the IRS has had  severe difficulty implementing the premium tax credit, further  burdening taxpayers with opaque requirements.424    In one of the studies previously mentioned, Laffer and his  coauthors also estimated the economic benefits of reducing  compliance costs.  For every $100 billion reduction in compliance  costs, the study projects the economy would benefit by $30 to $34  Another analysis indicated that low- and middle-income taxpayers  would benefit most from simplification.  The study found that 54  percent of the time and money saved by simplifying individual  taxes would benefit taxpayers with $50,000 or less in adjusted  The Better Way tax reform blueprint would make great strides in  simplification for both individuals and businesses.  Individuals  would be able to file taxes on a form no larger than a postcard.  In  addition, other elements of the plan such as flatter tax rates,  elimination of special tax provisions, full expensing, and repeal of  the estate tax would vastly reduce the compliance costs of  In order to boost economic growth, job creation, and the wages of  workers, the JEC Majority recommends enacting tax reform that:  \" Lowers and consolidates tax rates for both individuals and  \" Moves to a more competitive territorial tax system;  \" Eliminates special tax preferences that reward certain  \" Reduces the double taxation of capital and eliminates  In a time of stagnant economic growth and declining workforce  participation, our nation desperately needs pro-growth policies  like those outlined above that reward work, savings, and  investment while relieving unnecessary burdens on families and  businesses.  The Committee urges the new Congress and  Administration to implement the policies outlined in this Response  that will restore prosperity and boost America’s true growth  1 “Economic Report of the President (ERP) 2017,” Council of Economic  https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/administration/eop/cea/economic- 3 “Weekly Economic Update:  January 30 – February 3, 2017,” Joint  Economic Committee Republicans, January 30, 2017.  https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=0AE4B 4 “The Budget and Economic Outlook:  2017 to 2027”, Congressional Budget  Office, January 24, 2017. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52370   5 Ip, Greg, “How Demographics Rule the Global Economy,” The Wall Street  https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-demographics-rule-the-global-economy- 6 Proctor, Bernadette D. et al., “Income and Poverty in the United States:   http://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2016/demo/p 7 Boucher, Alex et al., “Growth in Personal Income Shows Uneven U.S.  Recovery,” The Pew Charitable Trusts, April 19, 2016.   analysis/analysis/2016/04/19/growth-in-personal-income-shows-uneven-us- 10 “The 2016 Distressed Communities Index,” Economic Innovation Group, p.  http://eig.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/2016-Distressed-Communities- 11 Russolillo, Steven, “Baby Boomers vs. Millennials:  The Uneven Jobs  Recovery,” The Wall Street Journal, December 1, 2016.   http://www.wsj.com/articles/baby-boomers-vs-millennials-the-uneven-jobs- 13 “ARRA’s Five Year Anniversary,” Republican Staff Analysis, Joint  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/14f6cd86-8235-4999-bd59- 1f22cf08f05d/stimulus-5-year-anniversary.pdf; see also: “Estimated Impact of  the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic  Output from October 2012 Through December 2012,” Congressional Budget  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/43945-ARRA.pdf   14 “Economic Report of the President 2014,” Council of Economic Advisers,  https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/sites/default/files/docs/full_2014_econ 15 The CEA did not apply “process evaluation” to the newly introduced ACA  (Chapter 4).  See, “Box 7-1: Impact Evaluations, Process Evaluations, and  20 “The Daily History of the Debt Results,” TreasuryDirect, U.S. Department  of the Treasury, January 20, 2009 – January 20, 2017.  https://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=01&startDay=20 &startYear=2009&endMonth=01&endDay=20&endYear=2017   21 “Historical Tables,” Office of Management and Budget, Table 1-2.  https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/budget/Historicals   22 “The 2016 Long-Term Budget Outlook”, Congressional Budget Office  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015- 23 Summers, Lawrence H., “Demand Side Secular Stagnation,” American  https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.p20151103   24 “Is the ‘Full Employment’ Glass Half Full?” Joint Economic Committee  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/b0aba7c1-5a2d-4470-abb8- b1fc0222f260/2-10-full-employment-brief.pdf; see also: “Estimated Impact of  the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic  Output in December 2013,” Congressional Budget Office, p. 8, February  2014.  http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/45122- 25 “Hearing on: The Economic Outlook,” Joint Economic Committee,  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings- calendar?ID=6C0739C1-5C9D-4EDD-BA4F-4DD1274F4B99   27 “Joint Economic Report 2016,” Joint Economic Committee, p. 13, March 1,  2016. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/0db793da-5e90-4f9d- ad9e-487f28652c7a/3-2-2016-joint-economic-report-w-minority-views- 29 Matthews, Dylan, “America’s Taxes are the Most Progressive in the World.   Its Government is Among the Least.,” The Washington Post, April 5, 2013.   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2013/04/05/americas-taxes- are-the-most-progressive-in-the-world-its-government-is-among-the- 30 “The Distribution of Federal Spending and Taxes in 2006,” Congressional  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013- 31 “Trends in the Distribution of Household Income between 1979 and 2007,”  Congressional Budget Office, p. XII, October 2011.   https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/10-25- 32 Henderson, David R., “Most of the Benefits of a Minimum Wage Increase  Would Not Go to Poor Households,” National Center for Policy Analysis,  33 Furman, Jason and Krista Ruffini, “Six Examples of the Long-Term  Benefits of Anti-Poverty Programs,” Council of Economic Advisers,    https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2015/05/11/six-examples-long- 34 Tanner, Michael, “SNAP Failure,” Cato Institute, October 16, 2013.  https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa738_web.pdf   The reforms to Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) that brought  about TANF proved highly successful in the immediate years following, but  much of that reform has been rolled back.  Early childhood education has been  mixed.  Food stamp programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance  Program (SNAP) have seen an incredible expansion of beneficiaries, which  remains elevated nearly eight years after the recession’s end.  Evidence  suggesting that SNAP’s success is measured by loosened eligibility standards  and active recruitment of new participants rather than addressing proper  nutrition and moving families to self-sufficiency.    35 Miron, Jeffrey A., “Rethinking Redistribution,” National Affairs, Issue  http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/rethinking-redistribution   36 “Volunteering in the United States – 2015,” Bureau of Labor Statistics, p. 1- 37 “The Reward of Work, Incentives, and Upward Mobility,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/2016/12/the-reward- 41 “The ‘New Normal’? Part 2:  Subdued Employment,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=7C5BB9 42 The ‘New Normal’? Part 2:  Subdued Employment.  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=7C5BB9 43 “The ‘New Normal’? Part 1:  Economic Stagnation,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=B47A02 44 “The ‘New Normal’? Part 3:  Fiscal Recklessness,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=4D3872 45 “Curing America’s Growth Gap,” Joint Economic Committee Republicans,  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/republican- 46 “Revisions to CBO’s Projection of Potential Output Since 2007,”  47 “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027,” Congressional Budget  Office, January 24, 2017. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52370  48 CBO estimates real potential GDP based on long-run labor force, capital,  and productivity trends. Business cycle fluctuations therefore should not affect  potential GDP, yet CBO progressively lowered its projection each year from  2007 to 2016.  CBO’s projection in 2007 of real potential annual GDP through  2017 provides a benchmark for the economy’s untapped potential while the  reduced estimates provide a measure of the output gap.  49 “Revisions to CBO’s Projection of Potential Output Since 2007,”  50 2017 was the last year both CBO’s Economic Outlook releases held in  52 The remaining 8 percent comes to changes in “other sectors” of the  economy.  The aforementioned estimates occurred in the nonfarm business  53 References to the previous expansion’s average in this chapter of the  Response refer to the period of December 2001 to November 2007.  54 References to the current expansion’s average in this chapter of the  Response refer to the period of July 2009 to the most recent available data.  57 Measured by the Bureau of Labor Statistics U-3 series.  It is frequently  58 “Is the ‘Full Employment’ Glass Half Full?” February 10, 2016.   59 “Revisions to CBO’s Projection of Potential Output Since 2007,” CBO.  60 “Multifactor Productivity Trends, 2015,” Bureau of Labor Statistics, May 5,  2016. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/prod3.nr0.htm  61 “Revisions to CBO’s Projection of Potential Output Since 2007,” CBO.  62 Measured from the BEA’s annual GDP (billons of chained 2009 dollars)  series.  The same calculation is applied for 2016.  At the time of publication,  63 “Budget FY 2017 – Economic Assumptions FY 1976 – FY 2017,” Office of  Management and Budget, Row 12, Sheet AT, February 2016.  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2017-EA/xls/BUDGET- 64 “Wall Street Journal January 2015 Economic Survey,” The Wall Street  http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/wsjecon1215.xls  65 “10-Year Economic Projections,” Congressional Budget Office, January  2016. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51135-2016-01- 66 Bullard, James, “The Rise and Fall of Labor Force Participation in the  United States,” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review, p. 2-3, Q1 2014.  67 We do not know what that capacity is exactly. We do know that we are  already in an uncomfortable range when one considers the possibility of  another crisis that may cause still larger deficits.  68 \"Federal Debt: Direction, Drivers and Dangers,\" September 8, 2016, United  States Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Washington, D.C.  https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2016/9/federal-debt-direction- 69 Net interest consists of the government’s interest payments on the debt held  by the public minus interest income the government receives.   70 “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 – 2027,” CBO, p. 92.  71 The Coalition for Fiscal and National Security is chaired by retired Navy  Adm. Mike Mullen, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and  includes former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger,  former Defense Secretaries Robert Gates and Leon Panetta, and former  National Security Advisers Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft.  72 Wong, Kristina, “National security experts sound alarm on long-term debt,”  The Hill, May 10, 2016. http://thehill.com/policy/defense/279320-prominent- group-says-long-term-debt-the-single-greatest-threat-to-us-national.  76 Tiberi, Patrick J., “H.R. 828 Investing in Opportunity Act,” Congress.gov,  February 2, 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house- 77 Ryan, Paul, “A Better Way: Poverty, Opportunity, and Upward Mobility,”  https://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay-Poverty- 80 Winship, Scott, “Choosing Our Battles: Why We Should Wage a Wage on  Immobility Instead of Inequality,” Testimony before the Joint Economic  Committee, U.S. Congress, Washington, DC, January 16, 2014.  https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/4472dcdb-4bc9-40e0-974d- 82 Winship, Scott, “The Surprising Basics of Economic Mobility,” FREOPP,  December 9, 2016. https://freopp.org/the-contrarian-basics-of-economic- 84 “The Reward of Work, Incentive, and Upward Mobility,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/6668a0d4-cf64-4bc5-8465- 85 Casey B. Mulligan, “How ObamaCare Wrecks the Work Ethic,” The Wall  http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142412788732362330457906142312263 88 Leonhardt, David, “In Climbing Income Ladder, Location Matters,” The  http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/business/in-climbing-income-ladder- 89 “Addressing the Opportunity Gap,” Joint Economic Committee  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/b237b83b-631f-4e4b-8373- b615fc48228b/addressing-the-opportunity-gap-increasing-economic-mobility- 90 Sawhill, Isabel V.  and Joanna Venator, “Six Quotes from Isabel Sawhill on  ‘Why Marriage is the Best Environment for Kids’,” Brookings Institution,  October 14, 2014, http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility- memos/posts/2014/10/17-marriage-best-environment-podcast-sawhill   91 Sawhill, Isabel V.  “Generation Unbound: Drifting into Sex and Parenthood  without Marriage,” Brookings Institution Press, September 25, 2014.  “Not Your Mother’s Labor Market,” Joint Economic Committee, May 9,  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=E84D7B 92 Fichtner, Jason and Jacob Feldman, “The Hidden Cost of Federal Tax  https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/Fichtner-Hidden-Cost-ch7-web.pdf   93 W. Bradford Wilcox, Joseph Price, and Robert I. Lerman, “Strong Families,  Prosperous States: Do Healthy Families Affect the Wealth of States?” Institute  for Family Studies, American Enterprise Institute, October 2015,  https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/IFS-HomeEconReport- 94 Testimony of C. Eugene Steuerle on “The Widespread Prevalence of  Marriage Penalties” before the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia  Committee on Appropriations, United States Senate, May 3, 2006,  http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/900952- The-Widespread-Prevalence-of-Marriage-Penalties.PDF   96 Plesko, George and Eric Toder, “Changes in the Organization of Business  Activity and Implications for Tax Reform,” National Tax Journal, Vol. 66 (4),  December 2013. http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- pdfs/413009-Changes-in-the-Organization-of-Business-Activity-and- 97 Schiff, Peter, “The Fantasy of a 91% Top Income Tax Rate,” The Wall  https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014241278873247051045781516015549 Smiley, Gene, “Cutting Marginal Tax Rates: Evidence from the 1920s,”  Foundation for Economic Education, October 1, 1996.  https://fee.org/articles/cutting-marginal-tax-rates-evidence-from-the-1920s/  Reynolds, Alan, “The Misuse of Top 1 Percent Income Shares as a Measure of  https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/WorkingPaper-9.pdf   98 Greenburg, Scott and Stephen Entin, “Modeling the Economic Effects of  Past Tax Bills,” Tax Foundation, September 14, 2016.  http://taxfoundation.org/article/modeling-economic-effects-past-tax-bills   101 Kaeding, Nicole, “State Individual Income Tax Rates and Brackets for  2016,” Tax Foundation Fiscal Fact, No. 500, February 2016.  https://files.taxfoundation.org/legacy/docs/TaxFoundation_FF500.pdf  103 “The Effects of a Minimum-Wage Increase on Employment and Family  Income,” Congressional Budget Office, February 18, 2014,  104 Thomas, Derek, “The Cliff Effect: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back,”  Indiana Institute for Working Families,” October 2012.  http://www.incap.org/documents/iiwf/2012/Cliff%20Effect.pdf  Jana Kasperkevic, “The Benefits Cliff: When Minimum Wage Increases  Backfire on the People in Need,” The Guardian, July 20, 2014,  https://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jul/20/benefits-cliff-minimum- 105 Casey Mulligan, “The Economist Who Exposed ObamaCare,” The Wall  http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB1000142405270230468090457936714388053 106 “Not Your Mother’s Labor Market,” Joint Economic Committee  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/2016/5/not-your- 109 “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2013,”  110 Mulligan, Casey, “The Affordable Care Act and the New Economics of  Part-Time Work,” Mercatus Center, October 7, 2014.  https://www.mercatus.org/publication/affordable-care-act-and-new- 111 Mulligan, Casey, “Labor-market growth turns negative, with many  coincidences,” supply and demand (in that order), January 9, 2017.  https://caseymulligan.blogspot.com/2017/01/slow-labor-market-growth- 114 Among recoveries lasting longer than 6 months.  115 Lawrence H. Summers, “Fiscal Stimulus Issues,” Testimony before the  Joint Economic Committee, January 16, 2008, http://larrysummers.com/wp! content/uploads/2012/10/1!16!08_Fiscal_Stimulus_Issues.pdf   116 “ARRA’s Five Year Anniversary: Reviewing the Performance of the  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act,” Joint Economic Committee,  February 18, 2014. http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/14f6cd86- 8235-4999-bd59-1f22cf08f05d/stimulus-5-year-anniversary.pdf   118 “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” United States Department  of Agriculture, February 3, 2017. https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/supplemental- 119 “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families March 2016 Baseline,”  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51314-2016-03-tanf.pdf   120 Jones, Garett and Daniel Rothschild, “Did Stimulus Dollars Hire the  https://www.mercatus.org/publication/did-stimulus-dollars-hire-unemployed   122 Bunker, Nick, “The shifting sources of U.S. business income and its  contribution to income inequality,” Washington Center for Equitable Growth,  September 28, 2015. http://equitablegrowth.org/equitablog/the-shifting- sources-of-u-s-business-income-and-its-contribution-to-income-inequality/   123 “Who Owns U.S. Business? How Much Tax Do They Pay?” National  124 Cooper, Michael et al., “Business in the United States: Who Owns It and  How Much Tax Do They Pay?” Department of the Treasury Office of Tax  Analysis, October 2015. https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax- 127 Winship, Scott, “The State of Economic Mobility and Why It Matters,” St.  https://www.stlouisfed.org/~/media/Files/PDFs/Community%20Development/ EconMobilityPapers/Section1/EconMobility_1-2Winship_508.pdf   130 Winship, Scott, “Why Are Fewer Adults Surpassing Their Parents’  Incomes?” FREOPP, December 9, 2016. https://freopp.org/the-new-chetty- bomb-fewer-adults-are-surpassing-their-parents-income-3b7e60d93b24  131 “Key Features of the Affordable Care Act By Year,” Health and Human  Services (HHS), https://www.hhs.gov/healthcare/facts-and-features/key- 132 “If you don’t have health insurance: How much you’ll pay,” HHS,  Healthcare.gov, https://www.healthcare.gov/fees/fee-for-not-being-covered/  https://www.ehealthinsurance.com/about-ehealth/our-story  134 “Healthcare.gov: Ineffective Planning and Oversight Practices Underscore  the Need for Improved Contract Management,” GAO Report to Congressional  Requesters, Government Accountability Office, July 2014,  135 Andrews, Wyatt and Anna Werner, “Healthcare.gov plagued by crashes on  http://www.cbsnews.com/news/healthcaregov-plagued-by-crashes-on-1st-day/   136 “HealthCare.gov Progress and Performance Report,” HHS, December 1,  2013, http://c0.nrostatic.com/sites/default/files/pdf_corner_120113_hhs.pdf  137 Dupree, Jamie, “Improved Healthcare.gov Website Not Exactly Revving at  High Speed Right Now,” Twitter, December 2, 2013,  138 “Healthcare.gov: Actions Needed to Enhance Information Security and  Privacy Controls,” GAO Report to Congressional Requesters, Government  Accountability Office,  March 2016, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-16- 140 “Overview: Final Rule for Health Insurance Market Reforms,” Center  Medicaid and Medicare Services  (CMS), February 27, 2013,  https://www.cms.gov/CCIIO/Resources/Files/Downloads/market-rules- 142 Wohlsen, Marcus, “Obamacare Website is in Great Shape—If This Were  https://www.wired.com/2013/12/obamacare-is-ecommerce/   143 Kliff, Sarah, “One in Four Obamacare Enrollees Are Young Adults. That’s  Below the Target,” The Washington Post, January 13, 2014,  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/01/13/one-in-four- obamacare-enrollees-are-young-adults-thats-below-the- 144 Levitt, Larry, Gary Claxton, and Anthony Damico, “The Numbers Behind  “Young Invincibles” and the Affordable Care Act,” Kaiser Family Foundation  (KFF), December 17, 2013, http://kff.org/health-reform/perspective/the- numbers-behind-young-invincibles-and-the-affordable-care-act/  145 Herman, Bob, “How Slow Uptake by ‘Young Invincibles’ is Driving the  ACA’s Exchange Rates Higher,” Modern Healthcare, May 14, 2016,  http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20160514/MAGAZINE/305149980  146 Blue Cross Blue Shield, “Newly Enrolled Members in the Individual  Health Insurance Market After Health Care Reform: The Experience from  2014 and 2015,” https://www.bcbs.com/news/press-releases/blue-cross-blue- shield-association-examines-health-conditions-and-costs-caring  147 Sun, Lena H., “They’re Sicker, Plus ACA enrollees Cost More in Care,  Major Insurer Finds,” The Washington Post, March 30, 2016,  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2016/03/30/theyre- sicker-plus-aca-enrollees-cost-more-in-care-major-insurer-finds/   148 Foster, Richard S., “Estimated Financial Effects of the ‘Patient Protection  and Affordable Care Act,’ as Amended,” CMS, April 22, 2010,  Systems/Research/ActuarialStudies/downloads/ppaca_2010-04-22.pdf  149 Elmendorf, Douglas W., Letter to Speaker Nancy Pelosi regarding  estimated spending and revenue effects of PPACA, Congressional Budget  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/amendreconprop.pdf   150 Tavenner, Marilyn, “Administrator, Center for Medicare & Medicaid  Services on the Affordable Care Act Before the U.S. House Committee on  Oversight & Government Reform,” December 9, 2014,  https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Tavenner-CMS- 151 Congressional Budget Office, “Insurance Coverage Provisions of the  Affordable Care Act—CBO’s January 2015 Baseline,” CBO, January 2015,  Table B-2, https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51298-2015- 152 “ March 31, 2015 Effectuated Enrollment Snapshot,” CMS, June 2, 2015,  https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2015- 153 “ March 31, 2016 Effectuated Enrollment Snapshot,” CMS, June 30, 2016,  https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2016- 154 “Health Insurance Marketplace 2017 Open Enrollment Period: January  https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2017- 10.html?DLPage=1&DLEntries=10&DLSort=0&DLSortDir=descending   155 “13.8 million Americans expected to select Marketplace plans during the  upcoming Open Enrollment,” HHS, October 19, 2016,  it.org/3926/20170127192735/https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2016/10/19/13 -8-million-americans-expected-to-select-marketplace-plans-during-the- 156 “Federal Subsidies Under the Affordable Care Act for Health Insurance  Coverage Related to the Expansion of Medicaid and Nongroup Health  Insurance: Tables from CBO's January 2017 Baseline,” CBO, Table 1,  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51298-2017-01- 157 O’Donnell, Jayne, “HealthCare.gov Opens for Insurance Plan Shoppers,”  http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/11/09/obamacare-open-  “Switching Plans Resulted in Significant Savings for Marketplace  https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2015/10/28/switching-plans-resulted- “More than 70 Percent of Consumers Can Find Marketplace Plans for Less  https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2016/10/24/more-70-percent-consumers- 158 “Insurer Participation in the 2017 Individual Marketplace,” Kaiser Family  Foundation. http://kff.org/slideshow/insurer-participation-in-the-2017- 159 Gruber, Jonathan, Leemore Dafny, Christopher Ody, “More Insurers  Lower Premiums: Evidence from Initial Pricing in Health Insurance  160 Obama, Barack J.D., “United States Health Care Reform: Progress to Date  http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2533698 p. 529-530.  161 “Competition and Choice in Health Insurance Marketplaces, 2014-2015,”  HHS ASPE. https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/competition-and-choice-health- insurance-marketplaces-2014-2015-impact-premiums   162 “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of Consumer  Operated and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) Program,” Proposed Rule, Federal  Register Vol. 76, No. 139, July 20, 2011, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 163 “Actual Enrollment and Profitability was Lower than Projections Made by  the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plans and Might Affect Their Ability to  Repay Loans Provided Under the Affordable Care Act,” Office of the  Inspector General, United States Department of Health and Human Services,  July 2015. http://oig.hhs.gov/oas/reports/region5/51400055.pdf, p. 5.  166 “CO-OP Catastrophe,” House Energy and Commerce Committee.  https://energycommerce.house.gov/healthcarecentral/co-op-catastrophe-total- 167 “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act; Establishment of Consumer  Operated and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) Program,” Proposed Rule, Federal  Register Vol. 76, No. 139, July 20, 2011, https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR- 169 Ghose, Carrie, “InHealth Mutual stays buoyant in face of red ink,”  http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/print-edition/2016/03/18/inhealth- 170 Ghose, Carrie, “Ohio shutting down state’s Obamacare nonprofit co-op  InHealth – claims paced $3M per week,” Columbus Business First, May 26,  2016. http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/05/26/ohio-shuts- 171 Sullivan, Peter, “Ohio ObamaCare co-op shutting down due to finances,”  The Hill, May 26, 2016. http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/281436-ohio- 172 Moulton, Kristen, “Utah shuts down Arches, the state’s nonprofit insurance  http://www.sltrib.com/home/3108049-155/utah-shuts-down-arches-utahs- 173 “Collapse of Utah Obamacare co-op leaves $33 million in unpaid claims,”  http://ifawebnews.com/2016/07/04/collapse-of-utah-obamacare-co-op-leaves- 174 “Consumer Oriented and Operated Plan (CO-OP) Loans Awarded,” Kaiser  Family Foundation, December 16, 2014. http://kff.org/health-reform/state- 175 Herman, Bob, “CMS’ Health Exchange Rates Show Modest Increases,”  http://www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20141114/NEWS/311149965   Levitt, Larry, Cynthia Cox, Gary Claxton, Rosa Ma, and Robin Duddy- Tenbrunsel, “Analysis of 2015 Premium Changes in the Affordable Care  Act’s Health Insurance Marketplaces,” Kaiser Family Foundation, January 6,  2015, http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/analysis-of-2015-premium- changes-in-the-affordable-care-acts-health-insurance-marketplaces/  176 “2017 Approved Obamacare Premium Increase Over Previous Year by  State,” Joint Economic Committee Republicans,, November 1, 2016,  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/state-aca-data/   177 Gabel, Jon R., Matthew Green, Adrienne Call, Heidi Whitmore, Sam  Stromberg, Rebecca Oran, “Changes in Consumer Cost-Sharing for Health  Plans Sold in the ACA's Insurance Marketplaces, 2015 to 2016,” The  http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2016/may/cost- 178 Jan, Tracy, “Critics say High Deductibles Make Insurance ‘Unaffordable,’”  https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2015/11/16/high-deductible- health-plans-make-affordable-care-act-unaffordable-critics- Pear, Robert, “Many Say High Deductibles Make Their Health Law Insurance  All but Useless,” The New York Times, November 14, 2015,  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/us/politics/many-say-high-deductibles- make-their-health-law-insurance-all-but-useless.html  Wood, Danny, “As Obamacare Enrollment Deadline Looms, People  Frustrated By High Cost of Plans,” KCUR, January 30,2017,  http://kcur.org/post/obamcare-enrollment-deadline-looms-people-frustrated- 179 Gabel, J., H. Whitmore, M. Green et al., “Consumer Cost-Sharing in  Marketplace vs. Employer Health Insurance Plans, 2015,” The  http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2015/dec/cost- Gabel, Jon R., Matthew Green, Adrienne Call, Heidi Whitmore, Sam  Stromberg, Rebecca Oran, “Changes in Consumer Cost-Sharing for Health  Plans Sold in the ACA's Insurance Marketplaces, 2015 to 2016,” The  http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2016/may/cost- 180 Politifact, “Obama: ‘If You Like Your Health Care Plan, You’ll Be Able to  Keep Your Health Care Plan,” Politifact, http://www.politifact.com/obama- 181 CNN Staff, “Fact Check: You Can Keep Your Doctor,” CNN Politics,  September 26, 2013, http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/26/fact- 182 Jacobson, Louis, “Barack Obama Says That What He’d Said Was You  Could Keep Your Plan ‘If It Hasn’t Changed Since the Law Passed,’”  Politifact, November 6, 2013, http://www.politifact.com/truth-o- meter/statements/2013/nov/06/barack-obama/barack-obama-says-what-hed- 183 Holan, Angie, “Lie of the Year: ‘If you like your health care plan, you can  keep it’,” Politifact, December 12, 2013. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o- meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you-like-your-health-care-plan-keep-it/  184 HHS, “10 Health Care Benefits Covered in Health Insurance Marketplace,”  Healthcare.gov, August 22, 2013, https://www.healthcare.gov/blog/10-health- care-benefits-covered-in-the-health-insurance-marketplace/   185 Crawford, Jan, “Policy Cancellations, Higher Premiums Add to Frustration  http://www.cbsnews.com/news/policy-cancellations-higher-premiums-add-to- See Also: Myers, Lisa and Hannah Rappleye, “Obama Administration Knew  Millions Could Not Keep Their Health Insurance,” NBC News, October 29,  2013, http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/obama-administration-knew- millions-could-not-keep-their-health-insurance-f8C11485678  186 Drobnic Holan, Angie, “Lie of the Year: ‘If You Like Your Health Care  Plan, You Can Keep It,’” Politifact, December 12, 2013,  http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2013/dec/12/lie-year-if-you- 187 “Grandfathered Health Insurance Plans,” HHS, Healthcare.gov,  https://www.healthcare.gov/health-care-law-protections/grandfathered-plans/  188 “Employer Health Benefits: 2016 Annual Survey,” KFF, p. 1, September  14, 2016, KFF, http://kff.org/health-costs/report/2016-employer-health- 189 Furman, Jason and Matt Fiedler, \"New Data Show Slow Health Care Cost  Growth is Continuing,\" WhiteHouse.gov, September 22, 2015,  https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/09/22/new-data-show-slow-health- 190 Wogan, J.B., “No Cut in Premiums for Typical Family,” Politifact, August  meter/promises/obameter/promise/521/cut-cost-typical-familys-health- 192 “Private Health Insurance Premiums and Federal Policy,” February 11,  2016, Congressional Budget Office, https://www.cbo.gov/publication/51130  193 “Employer Health Benefits: 2016 Annual Survey,” KFF, p. 87, exhibit 6.1,  September 14, 2016. http://kff.org/health-costs/report/2016-employer-health- 194 “Average Annual Workplace Family Health Premiums Rise Modest 3% to  $18,142 in 2016; More Workers Enroll in High-Deductible Plans With  Savings Option Over Past Two Years,” KFF Newsroom, KFF, September 14,  2016. http://kff.org/health-costs/press-release/average-annual-workplace- family-health-premiums-rise-modest-3-to-18142-in-2016-more-workers- enroll-in-high-deductible-plans-with-savings-option-over-past-two-years/   195 “Average Annual Workplace Family Health Premiums Rise Modest 3% to  $18,142 in 2016; More Workers Enroll in High-Deductible Plans With  Savings Option Over Past Two Years,” KFF Newsroom, KFF September 14,  2016. http://kff.org/health-costs/press-release/average-annual-workplace- family-health-premiums-rise-modest-3-to-18142-in-2016-more-workers- enroll-in-high-deductible-plans-with-savings-option-over-past-two-years/  196 “No family making less than $250,000 will see ‘any form of tax increase’,”  197 “CBO/JCT Confirm that Obamacare is a $1 Trillion Tax Hike,” House  Ways and Means Committee, July 25, 2012. https://goo.gl/7GkO5w  198 “Hearing to Consider the Anticipated Nomination of [Mnuchin] to be  Secretary of the Treasury,” Senate Finance Committee, January 19, 2017.  199 “Tax Revenues to More Than Double by 2023, While Top Tax Rates Hit  Highest Level Since 1986,” House Ways and Means Committee, February 13,  201 Herring, Bradley and Erin Trish, “Explaining the Growth in US Health  Care Spending Using State-Level Variation in Income, Insurance, and  Provider Market Dynamics,” INQUIRY: The Journal of Health Care  Organization, Provision, and Financing, Mercatus Center, February 2016,  https://www.mercatus.org/system/files/INQUIRY-2015-Herring- 202 JEC Republicans, “’The New Normal?’ Part 1: Economic Stagnation,”  Joint Economic Committee Majority, October 5, 2016,  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=B47A02 203 “National Health Expenditure Projections 2015-2025,” Center for  Medicare and Medicaid Services, p.  1.  https://www.cms.gov/Research- Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and- Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Proj2015.pdf  204 “NHE Tables,” CMS, Table 01.  https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics- Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Tables.zip  205 “National Health Expenditure Projections 2015-2025,” Center for  Medicare and Medicaid Services, p.  1.  https://www.cms.gov/Research- Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and- Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Proj2015.pdf  206 “NHE Fact Sheet,” CMS, 12-2-2016. https://goo.gl/YQ2Tve.  207 “National Health Expenditure Projections 2015-2025,” Center for  Medicare and Medicaid Services, p.  1.  https://www.cms.gov/Research- Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and- Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/Proj2015.pdf  208 “A Better Way: Our Vision for a Confident America, Health Care,”  https://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay-HealthCare- 210 A HRA is a health benefit plan in which an employer agrees to cover an  employee’s health spending up to a limit, with unused funds being available  for use in future years.  Unlike an HSA, HRAs are not portable.  Because a  HRA has an annual limit, stand-alone HRAs were restricted by the Obama  administration through regulations justified by the ACA.  212 See “How CBO Estimates the Effects of the Affordable Care Act on the  Labor Market,” Congressional Budget Office, December 2015, Pages 17-18.  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/114th-congress-2015- 2016/workingpaper/51065-ACA_Labor_Market_Effects_WP.pdf  230 “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027,” Congressional Budget  235 Garfield, Rachel and Anthony Damico, “The Coverage Gap: Uninsured  Poor Adults in States that Do Not Expand Medicaid,” Kaiser Family  Foundation, October 19, 2016. http://kff.org/uninsured/issue-brief/the- coverage-gap-uninsured-poor-adults-in-states-that-do-not-expand-medicaid/  236 “Access to Care: Provider Availability in Medicaid Managed Care,” Office  of the Inspector General for the Department of Health and Human Services,  Executive Summary Page, December 2014. https://oig.hhs.gov/oei/reports/oei- 237 Boccuti, Cristina, et al., “Primary Care Physicians Accepting Medicare: A  Snapshot,” KFF, October 30, 2015, http://kff.org/medicare/issue- brief/primary-care-physicians-accepting-medicare-a-snapshot/  238 “Medicaid Access in Brief,” Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access  Commission, November 2016, p. 2. https://www.macpac.gov/wp- content/uploads/2016/11/Adults-Experiences-in-Obtaining-Medical-Care.pdf   239 Wherry and Miller, “Early Coverage, Access, Utilization, and Health  Effects Associated with the Affordable Care Act Medicaid Expansions: A  Quasi-experimental Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine, April 2016.  Sommers et al., “Changes in Self-Reported Insurance Coverage, Access to  Care, and Health Under the Affordable Care Act,” The Journal of the  American Medical Association, p. 366-374, July 2015.  241 “Section 1115 Demonstrations,” CMS, https://goo.gl/BdHTpT  243 Thompson, Dennis, “Obama Signs 21st Century Cures Act,” United Press  http://www.upi.com/Health_News/2016/12/13/Obama-signs-21st-Century- 247 “Medicare – Congressional Budget Office’s January 2017 Baseline,” CBO,  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51302-2017-01- 248 “Medicare – Congressional Budget Office’s January 2017 Baseline,” CBO,  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/recurringdata/51302-2017-01- https://professionals.collegeboard.org/guidance/college/community-college  Some programs within community colleges are selective with limited  261 Duca, John V., “Subprime Mortgage Crisis,” Federal Reserve Bank of  http://www.Federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/55  262 Holmes, Steven A., “Fannie Mae Eases Credit to Aid Mortgage Lending,”  http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid- 264 “Federal Student Loan Portfolio,” Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of  Education. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/about/data-center/student/portfolio  265 “Options to Change Interest Rates and Other Terms on Student Loans,”  Congressional Budget Office, June 10, 2013, p. 1.   266 “Subsidized and Unsubsidized Loans,” Federal Student Aid, U.S.  Department of Education. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/loans/subsidized- 267 “Hearing on:  Financing Higher Education,” Joint Economic Committee,  September 30, 2015. http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings- 268 Bennett, William J., “Our Greedy Colleges,” The New York Times,  February 18, 1987. http://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/18/opinion/our-greedy- 269 Lucca, David O. et al, “Credit Supply and the Rise in College Tuition:  Evidence from the Expansion in Federal Student Aid Programs,” Federal  Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports, Staff Report No. 733, p. 35 – 37.  https://www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/media/research/staff_reports/sr733. 270 “Credit Supply and the Rise in College Tuition: Evidence from the  Expansion in Federal Student Aid Programs,” p. 3.   271 Rothman, Robert, “E.D. Selects 10 Colleges to Participate in Pilot Loan  http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/1987/05/13/3-33loan.h06.html  272 James, Kevin J., “Fixing student-loan repayment,” American Enterprise  Institute, September 12, 2015. https://www.aei.org/publication/fixing-student- 274 “Income-Driven Plans,” Federal Student Aid, U.S. Department of  Education. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/repay-loans/understand/plans/income- 275 “Income-Driven Plans,” U.S. Department of Education.   277 “The ‘New Normal’? Part 1: Economic Stagnation,” Joint Economic  http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/republicans/analysis?ID=B47A02 278 “National Economic Accounts,” Bureau of Economic Analysis, U.S.  280 “The 2016 Long-Term Budget Outlook,” Congressional Budget Office,  July 12, 2016, p. 7. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/51580  281 “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017 to 2027,” Congressional Budget  Office, January 24, 2017, p. 10. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th- 284 “Moving Beyond Access: College Success for Low-Income, First- 285 Stinebrickner, Todd and Ralph, “Academic Performance and College  Dropout: Using Longitudinal Expectations Data to Estimate a Learning  Model,” National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper  Series, No. 18945, p. 28, 29 , April 2013. http://www.nber.org/papers/w18945  286 Engle, Jennifer and Vincent Tinto, “Moving Beyond Access: College  Success for Low-Income, First-Generation Students,” The Pell Institute, 2008.   287 “School Improvement Grants: Implementation and Effectiveness,” U.S.  https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/pubs/20174013/pdf/20174013.pdf  288 “School Choice in America 2009: What it Means for Children’s Futures,”  The Heritage Foundation, Backgrounder, No. 2332, November 4, 2009.  http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2009/11/school-choice-in-america- 289 “Report Card on American Education,” American Legislative Exchange  Council, p. 8 - 58, 2016.  https://www.alec.org/app/uploads/2016/12/2016- 290 “Public Schools: Make Them Private,” Education Economics, Vol. 5, No.  293 Medley, Bill, “Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency  Act of 1994,” Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, September 1994.   http://www.Federalreservehistory.org/Events/DetailView/50  294 “Credit Constraints and Demand for Higher Education: Evidence from  Financial Deregulation,” The Review of Economics and Statistics, March  295 “Hearing on:  Financing Higher Education,” Joint Economic Committee,  September 30, 2015. http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/hearings- 296 “Does school choice increase the rate of youth entrepreneurship?”  Economics of Education Review, Volume 27, 2008, p. 429-438.     297 “School Vouchers and Student Attainment: Evidence from a State- Mandated Study of Milwaukee’s Parental Choice Program,” Policies Studies  298 “School Voucher Programs: What the Research Says About Parental  School Choice,” Brigham Young University Law Review, (2005), p. 415-446.    299 Coulson, Andrew J., “Markets vs. Monopolies in Education A Global  Review of the Evidence,” Cato Institute, Policy Analysis, No. 620, p. 10,  https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/pa620.pdf   300 Obama, Barack, “Weekly Address: Wall Street Reform is Working,” The  302 McLaughlin, Patrick and Oliver Sherhouse, “The Dodd-Frank Wall Street  Reform and Consumer Protection Act May Be the Biggest Law Ever,”  Mercatus Center, July 20, 2015. https://www.mercatus.org/publication/dodd- frank-wall-street-reform-and-consumer-protection-act-may-be-biggest-law- 303 “Explore the Data,” Regulation Rodeo (American Action Forum),  http://regrodeo.com/?year%5B0%5D=2016&year%5B1%5D=2015&year%5 B2%5D=2014&year%5B3%5D=2013&year%5B4%5D=2012&year%5B5%5 304 “Dodd-Frank Progress Report,” Davis Polk, July 19, 2016.  https://www.davispolk.com/sites/default/files/2016-dodd-frank-six-year- anniversary-report.pdf.  American regulators are not alone in their challenge  to meet regulatory deadlines.  The Third Basel Accord or Basel III represents  the newest international banking requirements agreed to in 2010 and 2011,  which were pursued by the Obama Administration, but international  regulators are delaying Basel III capital rules as they cannot reach agreement  with all the countries on the appropriate rules and requirements.  Brush, Silla,  et al., “Global Bank Capital-Rule Revamp Postpones as Europe Digs In,”  https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-01-03/global-bank- regulators-delay-key-meeting-on-capital-rule-revamp.  305 The U.S. District Court in D.C. rescinded the FSOC’s MetLife designation  on March 30 and unsealed its decision on April 7, 2016.  306 The House Financial Services Committee highlighted the results of CFPB  operating without Congressional controls in a 2013 hearing: “CFPB Lacks  Oversight and Accountability,” House Financial Services Committee, June 18,  http://financialservices.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=3 39512. See Also: Pollock, Richard, “Fat Paychecks of CFPB officials,  hundreds paid more than Fed Chairman, congressmen, Supreme Court  http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/fat-paychecks-for-cfpb-officials- hundreds-paid-more-than-fed-chairman-congressmen-supreme-court- 307Weiss, Debra Cassens, “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has  unconstitutional structure, DC Circuit rules,” ABA Journal, October 11, 2016.  http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/consumer_financial_protection_bure au_has_unconstitutional_structure_dc_circ; contains a summary of the ruling  308 “PHH Corporation, et al., v. CFPB,” United States Court of Appeals DC  https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/AAC6BFFC4C42614C8 309 “Iranians Charged with Hacking U.S. Financial Sector,” Federal Bureau of  Investigation, March 24, 2016. https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/iranians- 310 Zaring, David, “The State of Cost-Benefit Analysis at the S.E.C.,” The New  https://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/14/business/dealbook/the-state-of-cost- 311 Wagner, Ann, “SEC Regulatory Accountability Act,” Congress.gov,  January 3, 2017. https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house- bill/78?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22SEC+Regulatory+Accountiabilit 312 “2015 Small Business Credit Survey: Report on Employer Firms,” Federal  https://www.newyorkfed.org/smallbusiness/small-business-credit-survey- 313 “Too Small to Succeed?-Community Banks in a New Regulatory  Environment,” Dallas Federal Reserve, December 31, 2015.  https://www.dallasfed.org/~/media/documents/outreach/fi/2015/fi1504.pdf  314 Neidig, Harper, “Barney Frank admits ‘mistake’ in Dodd-Frank,” The Hill,  November 20, 2016. http://thehill.com/policy/finance/banking-financial- institutions/306906-barney-frank-admits-mistake-in-dodd-frank  315 Peirce, Hester et al., “How Are Small Banks Faring under Dodd-Frank?”  https://www.mercatus.org/publication/how-are-small-banks-faring-under- 316 “Community Banking in the 21st Century,” Federal Reserve / Conference  of State Bank Supervisors, September 28-29, 2016, p. 54.  https://www.communitybanking.org/documents/2016-Conference- 317 Dahl, Drew et al., “Bank Size, Compliance Costs and Compliance  Performance in Community Banking,” Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis,  May 2016. https://www.communitybanking.org/documents/2016-Conference- 318 “Statement of Martin J. Gruenberg, Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance  Corporation on De Novo Banks and Industrial Loan Companies before the  Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,” FDIC, July 13, 2016.  https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/speeches/spjul1316.html   319 “Too Small to Succeed,” Dallas Federal Reserve, December 2015.  320 Peters, Andy, “Amish Bank Charter to Set Standard for Future  https://www.americanbanker.com/news/amish-bank-charter-to-set-standard- https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=fintech  322 “Introduction to Financial Services: ‘Fintech’,” Congressional Research  Service, November 23, 2016. http://www.crs.gov/reports/pdf/IF10513  323 Dietz, Miklos et al., “Cutting through the noise around financial  http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/financial-services/our-insights/cutting- 324 “Consumers and Mobile Financial Services,” Federal Reserve Board of  https://www.Federalreserve.gov/econresdata/consumers-and-mobile-financial- 325 “American Millennials and Banking: A Cross-Generational Study,” ICBA,  2014. http://www.icba.org/docs/default-source/icba/solutions- whitepapers/icbacrossgenerationalstudyofamericansandbanking2014topline.pd 326 Nerdwallet explains the basics of P2P in Murakami-Fester, Amber,  “Venmo, PayPal, Square Cash and More: What Are Peer-to-Peer Payments?”  Nerdwallet, October 21, 2016. https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/banking/p2p- 327 Jankowiak, Lucas, “Millennials and Money: How Fintech Will Help Lower  The Risks in a Cashless Society,” International Business Times, January 23,  2017. http://www.ibtimes.com/millennials-money-how-fintech-will-help- 328 “American Millennials and Banking,” ICBA, 2014.  329 “Consumers and Mobile Financial Services,” March 2016, p. 2.   330 “Consumers and Mobile Financial Services,” March 2016, p. 25.  331 “Crowdfunding and the JOBS Act: What Investors Should Know,”  Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, May 16, 2016.  http://www.finra.org/investors/alerts/crowdfunding-and-jobs-act-what- 332 Ryan Young, “This Week in Ridiculous Regulations: 2016 Wrap-Up,”  Competitive Enterprise Institute, January 3, 2017. https://cei.org/blog/week- See Also: “Federal Register,” Vol. 81, No. 251, December 30, 2016, P.  97,110. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-12-30/pdf/FR-2016-12- 333 “Total Pages in the Federal Register, 1936 – 2015,” George Washington  https://regulatorystudies.columbian.gwu.edu/reg-stats  334 JEC Staff Calculation: Substantive Federal Register Pages 2015: 80,260.  Estimated Substantive Federal Register Pages 2016: 95,749. (95,749- 335 Crews, Clyde Wayne Jr., “Ten Thousand Commandments 2016,” p. 3, May  3, 2016. https://cei.org/sites/default/files/Wayne%20Crews%20- 336 Crews, Clyde Wayne, “The 2017 Unconstitutionality Index: 18 Federal  Rules for Every Law Congress Passes,” Competitive Enterprise Institute,  December 30, 2016. https://cei.org/blog/2017-unconstitutionality-index-18- 337 “Young, Ryan, “Regulatory Dark Matter,” Competitive Enterprise  Institute, December 9, 2015. https://cei.org/blog/regulatory-dark-matter  338 Rep. Doug Collins, “Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny  https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/26  339 Major rules are defined as any rules which are deemed to result in “an  annual effect on the economy of $100 million or more …, a major increase in  costs or prices for consumers, individual industries, government agencies, or  geographic regions, or … significant adverse effects on competition,  employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based  enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.” Rep. Bill Archer,  “Contract with America Advancement Act of 1996,” PL 104-121, March 29,  1996,  https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house- bill/3136?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22104-121%22%5D%7D&r=1   340 Davis, Christopher, and Richard Beth, “Agency Final Rules Submitted on  or After June 13, 2016, May Be Subject to Disapproval by the 115th  Congress,” Congressional Research Service, December 15, 2016.  341 “Presidential Executive Order on Reducing Regulation and Controlling  Regulatory Costs,” The White House, January 30, 2017.  https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/30/presidential- executive-order-reducing-regulation-and-controlling  342 Wheeler, Lydia and Lisa Hagen, “Trump signs '2-for-1' order to reduce  http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316839-trump-to-sign-order- 343 “Lee Unveils Article I Regulatory Budget Act,” May 25, 2016,  https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2016/5/lee-unveils-article-i- 345 Golub, Stephen et al., “Defining and Measuring Green FDI: An  Exploratory Review of Existing Work and Evidence,” Organization for  Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD Working Papers on  International Investment, 2011/02, September 1, 2011.  346 This is the reasoning underlying the concept of “cap-and-trade,”  incidentally, although the emissions cap in legislation that passed the House  (it was never brought to a vote in the Senate) was only on the United States.  347 Sieminksi, Adam, “International Energy Outlook 2016,” Center for  Strategic and International Studies, U.S. Energy Information Administration,  http://www.eia.gov/pressroom/presentations/sieminski_05112016.pdf   348 “International Energy Outlook 2016,” p. 3. Figure 7-1 is on page 10. Figure  350 “Solar Industry Data,” Solar Energy Industries Association.  www.seia.org/research-resources/solar-industry-data  The United States ranks 5th in the world in solar module manufacturing and  total installed capacity, but market shares are not necessarily a good measure  of technological leadership as government subsidies affect them and there  may be excess capacity as well. Data on reserves of U.S. natural resources is  351 “Country Analysis Brief: France,” U.S. Energy Information  www.eia.gov/beta/international/analysis.cfm?iso=FRA   In 2015, nuclear power generated about 76 percent of total net generation in  352 “Safety of Nuclear Power Reactors,” World Nuclear Association, May  2016. http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and- security/safety-of-plants/safety-of-nuclear-power-reactors.aspx   According to the World Nuclear Association, no nuclear workers or members  of the public have ever died as a result of exposure to radiation from a  commercial nuclear incident, with the exception of the 1986 accident at the  nuclear reactor in Chernobyl, Ukraine where the death toll was 56 people.   That accident and the ensuing release of radiation were the result of major  design deficiencies including that the Chernobyl reactor did not have a  containment building as used in the West and in post-1980 Soviet designs.   353 A movie by the title “The China Syndrome” was released in 1979 by  Columbia Pictures shortly after the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant  accident. However, the fear of such an uncontrolled chain reaction is  Nuclear receives incidental mention twice in the text, in some footnotes, and it  appears without commentary in two graphs, one of consumption by source  (Figure 7-16) and the other of future cost of new generations of different  356 For example, ethanol encounters a so-called blend wall in the gasoline  supply, which refers to the incompatibility of mid- and high-ethanol fuel  blends with the vast majority of vehicle engines and fueling infrastructure. See  Lewis, Marlow, Jr., “Running Drivers into the Blend Wall,” OnPoint, No.  219, Competitive Enterprise Institute, July 25, 2016.  https://cei.org/content/running-drivers-blend-wall  357 “Joint Economic Report 2013,” Joint Economic Committee, p. 30-40,  December 11, 2013. http://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/e00331db- e083-4b36-ab60-aa14946bc71b/2013-joint-economic-report.pdf   358 Lazear, Edward, “The Climate Change Agency Needs to Adapt to Reality,”  https://www.wsj.com/articles/edward-p-lazear-the-climate-change-agenda- 359 Lomborg, Bjorn, “Obama’s Climate Policy Is a Hot Mess,” The Wall Street  Journal, July 1, 2016. https://www.wsj.com/articles/obamas-climate-policy-is- Bjorn Lomborg, president of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, cites a range  of temperature estimates for the promises made at the Paris Agreement  worldwide of 0.08 degrees Fahrenheit from the U.N.’s model to 1.6 degrees  Fahrenheit for the Climate Action Tracker by the end of the century. The Paris  Agreement runs through 2030, but if one assumes that the cuts are not only  met but sustained through the rest of the century, then the U.N. model projects  a temperature drop of 0.3 degrees, the equivalent of delaying global warming  by less than four years at the end of the century. The Climate Tracker estimate  assumes that deeper cuts follow the Paris agreement. Lomborg cites cost  estimates running in the many trillions of dollars for these miniscule, model  generated temperature reductions decades into the future.   360 One can also run the analysis with alternative rates of future floods, storms,  For the 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference held in Paris from  November 30 to December 12, the State Department made a pledge for the  year 2025 that the United States will reduce its GHG emissions by 26 to 28  percent below the 2005 level, substantially surpassing the targeted reduction  See also: “Budget of the U.S. Government Fiscal Year 2017,” Office of  Management and Budget, p. 15 - 29, February 9, 2016.  https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BUDGET-2017-BUD/pdf/BUDGET- The Administration’s 2017 budget does not address quantitatively what its  climate policies mean for economic growth. In the section entitled “Economic  Assumptions and Interactions with the Budget,” the Office of Management  and Budget discusses its economic forecast at length and mentions policies  related to trade agreements, immigration reform, business tax reform,  infrastructure investment, community college subsidies, and boosting the  362 The stagnating centrally planned, nationalized economies of the former  Soviet bloc were among the worst environmental offenders—an important fact  to keep in mind whenever someone blames the profit motive for pollution.   364 “Economic Growth and Tax Policy,” Joint Committee on Taxation, p. 2-3,  https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4736, p. 2, 3.  365 Mankiw, Greg, “How are wages and productivity related?” Greg Mankiw’s  Blog, August 29, 2006. http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/08/how-are- 366 “General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2016 Revenue  Proposals,” Department of the Treasury, February 2015,  https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/General- 368 “2015 Economic Report of the President,” p. 10, February 2015.  https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/cea_2015_erp_complete.p 369 “The President’s Budget for Fiscal Year 2017,” Office of Management and  Budget. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/budget/  370 “Decision time for tax reform,” PriceWaterhouseCooper, p. 10, January  2017. https://www.pwc.com/us/en/tax-services/assets/2017-tax-policy-utlook- 371 “Table II.1 Corporate income tax rate,” OECD, Retrieved February 22,  2017. https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=TABLE_II1  372 “Fiscal Year 2017: Budget of the U.S. Government,” Office of  https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/bud 373 “A Better Way: Our Vision for a Confident America: Tax,” Better.gop, p.  15, June 24, 2016. https://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay- 374 Dan Mitchell, “The Growing Need for Trump’s Proposed 15 percent  https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2016/11/19/the-growing-need-for- 376 “General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2017 Revenue  Proposals,” Department of the Treasury, February 2016,  https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/General- 377 Tyson, Laura D’Andrea, “Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on  Finance,” Senate Finance Committee, p. 8-9, February 24, 2015.  http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Testimony%20-%20Tyson.pdf  378 “A Better Way: Our Vision for a Confident America: Tax,” Better.gop, p.  15, June 24, 2016. https://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay- 380 McBride, William, “Tax Reform in the UK Reversed the Tide of Corporate  Tax Inversions,” Tax Foundation, October 14, 2014,  http://taxfoundation.org/article/tax-reform-uk-reversed-tide-corporate-tax- 381 “Selected Issues Relating to Choice of Business Entity,” Testimony before  the Senate Finance Committee, p. 5, August 1, 2012,  https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4478   382 “Tax Revenues to More Than Double by 2023, While Top Tax Rates Hit  Highest Level Since 1986,” House Ways and Means Committee, February 13,  2013, http://waysandmeans.house.gov/tax-revenues-to-more-than-double-by- 2023-while-top-tax-rates-hit-highest-level-since-1986/  384 “Taxing Capital Income Effective marginal Tax Rates Under 2014 Law  and Selected Policy Options,” Congressional Budget Office, p. 10, December  2014, https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/113th-congress-2013- 385 Knittel, Matthew et al., “Methodology to Identify Small Business and Their  Owners,” Department of the Treasury Office of Tax Analysis, August 2011.  https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/tax- 386 “Corporate dividend and capital gains taxation: A comparison of the  United States to other developed nations,” Alliance for Savings and  Investment, p. 3, April 2015. http://theasi.org/assets/EY-ASI-2014- International-Comparison-of-Top-Dividend-and-Capital-Gains-Tax-Rates.pdf  387 “General Explanations of the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2016 Revenue  Proposals,” Department of the Treasury, p. 156, February 2015.  https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/Documents/General- 388 ASI, Corporate Dividend and Capital Gains Taxation, p. 3.  389 Pomerleau, Kyle, “How One Can Face an Infinite Effective Tax Rate on  https://taxfoundation.org/how-one-can-face-infinite-effective-tax-rate-capital- 390 Reynolds, Alan, “Why 70% Tax Rates Won’t Work,” The Wall Street  http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304259304576375951 “The Distribution of Household Income and Federal Taxes, 2011,”  https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/49440- 391  “The Buffett Ruse,” The Wall Street Journal, January 27, 2012.  http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052970203806504577183250 392 “The Relationship Between Realized Capital gains and Their Marginal  Rate of Taxation,” Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation,  October 9, 2009. http://iret.org/pub/CapitalGains-2.pdf  393 Entin, Stephen, “President Obama’s Capital Gains Tax Proposals: Bad for  the Economy and the Budget,” Tax Foundation, January 21, 2015.  https://taxfoundation.org/president-obama-s-capital-gains-tax-proposals-bad- 394 “Corporate Dividend and Capital Gains Taxation,” ASI, p. 13.  395 “Corporate Dividend and Capital Gains Taxation,” ASI.  397 JEC calculations using top capital gains rate from Better Way (16.5%), flat  corporate rate from Better Way (20 percent), and the weighted average of state  398 Pomerleau, Kyle, “Details and Analysis of the 2016 House Republican Tax  Reform Plan,” Tax Foundation, July 5, 2016. https://taxfoundation.org/details- and-analysis-2016-house-republican-tax-reform-plan; Note: Adds 0.3% and  399 “Section-By-Section Summary of the Proposed ‘Protecting Americas from  Tax Hikes Act of 2015’,” Senate Finance Committee.  https://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Summary%20of%20the%20Pr otecting%20Americans%20from%20Tax%20Hikes%20PATH%20Act%20of 400 “Tiberi, Kind Reintroduce America’s Small Business Tax Relief Act,”  http://tiberi.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=394730  401 See section 179 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.  402 See section 168(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.  403 Tiberi, Patrick, “H.R. 2510,” Congress.gov, May 21, 2015.  https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2510  404 Greenberg, Scott, “The Twelve Most Important Provisions in the Latest  https://taxfoundation.org/twelve-most-important-provisions-latest-tax-bill  406 “Options for Reforming America’s Tax Code,” Tax Foundation, June 6,  https://files.taxfoundation.org/20170130145208/TF_Options_for_Reforming_ 407 “Background and Present Law Relating to Cost Recovery and Domestic  Production Activities,” Joint Committee on Taxation, p. 80, March 6, 2012.  https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4401  408 Pomerleau, Analysis of the 2016 House Republican Tax Plan  409 See subtitle B of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.  410 Entin, Stephen, “Estate Taxes, Deficits, and Budget Implications,”  American Family Business Foundation, p. 2, October 2011.  http://businessdefense.org/sites/default/files/pages/estatetaxesdeficitsandbudge 411 Logan, David, “The Economic Effects of the Estate Tax,” Tax Foundation,  http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/tax_foundation_test 412 Logan, “The Economic Effects of the Estate Tax,” p. 3.  413 Pomerleau, “Analysis of the 2016 House Republican Tax Plan.”  414 “Federal Tax Law Keeps Piling Up,” Wolters Kluwer, 2014.  http://www.cch.com/wbot2014/Chart_TaxLawPileUp_(16)_f.pdf  415 “2010 Annual Report to Congress,” Taxpayer Advocate Service, January 5,  2011. http://www.taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov/2010-annual-report-to-congress  416 “Infographics,” Taxpayer Advocate Service, January 2013.  http://taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov/2012-Annual-Report/Report-Infographics.html  418 “Written Testimony of John A. Koskinen Commissioner Internal Revenue  Service before the Senate Finance Committee on Regulation of Tax Return  Preparers,” Senate Finance Committee, April 8, 2014.  http://www.finance.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Koskinen%20Testimony.pdf  419 “Analysis of Internal Revenue Service Employees’ Use of Tax Preparation  Assistance,” Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, January 9,  https://www.treasury.gov/tigta/auditreports/2012reports/201240001fr.pdf  420 “Complexity in the Federal Tax System,” Joint Committee on Taxation,  https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=4738  421 Laffer, Arthur et al., “The Economic Burden Caused by Tax Code  Complexity,” Laffer Center, April 2011. http://www.laffercenter.com/wp- content/uploads/2011/06/2011-Laffer-TaxCodeComplexity.pdf  422 Fichtner, Jason and Jacob Feldman, “The Hidden Cost of Federal Tax  http://mercatus.org/sites/default/files/Fichtner-Hidden-Cost-full-web.pdf  423 Tasselmyer, Michael, “A Complex Problem: The Compliance Burdens of  the Tax Code,” National Taxpayer Union, April 8, 2015.  http://www.ntu.org/foundation/policy-paper/a-complex-problem-the- 424 “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: IRS Needs to Strengthen  Oversight of Tax Provisions for Individuals,” Government Accountability  Office, July 29, 2015. http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-15-540  426 Warcholik, Wendy, et al., “The Rising Cost of Complying with the Federal  http://taxfoundation.org/article/rising-cost-complying-Federal-income-tax  I am pleased to share the Joint Economic Committee (JEC)  Democratic response to the 2017 Economic Report of the  President.  The JEC is required by law to submit findings and  recommendations in response to the Economic Report of the  President (or Report), which is prepared and released each year by  This Democratic response details the economic progress made  during the eight years of the Obama Administration and highlights  the risks posed to this progress by the policies of the Trump  Administration.  The response also points to the work we still need  to do to further strengthen the economy, especially in areas that  Our research shows that the policies proposed by the Trump  Administration would increase inequality, take health care  insurance away from millions of Americans, reduce access to a  college education, threaten financial stability and roll back actions  to address climate change.  These policies would harm Americans  This response provides a short review of the current state of the  U.S. economy nine years since the start of the Great Recession,  and focuses on select areas of the Report by evaluating issues  related to key structural challenges Americans face:  ! The Challenge of and Imperative for Reducing Inequality,  ! The Road Ahead for Americans’ Health Care System,  ! Issues in Higher Education Quality, Affordability, and  ! The Economic Risks and Opportunities of Climate Change  The Trump Administration inherited an economy in much stronger  shape than it was eight years ago when President Obama assumed  the office—a time when the economy was shedding 800,000 jobs  each month and the auto industry and financial sector were on the  brink of collapse.  As President Trump assumed office, the private  sector had added jobs for a record 83 consecutive months, the  unemployment rate had been cut by more than half from its peak,  As a result of sustained low unemployment, average hourly  earnings for non-management workers has begun to grow faster  than inflation again for the first time in years, producing real  income gains for American workers.1 More than 20 million  Americans have gained health insurance coverage and all  Americans currently enjoy the peace of mind of knowing that their  insurance company cannot cut off their coverage just when they  need it most, or deny them coverage in the first place, because they  have a pre-existing condition.  And we have started down a viable  path working in partnership with the private sector to tackle the  risks of climate change, seizing the opportunity to lead the world  in innovating and producing a clean energy revolution capable of  transforming the 21st Century economy.  Though progress is being  made, there is still a long way to go to make sure that America’s  economy is delivering for all the people who work and build their  Our nation must build on the progress of the past eight years, not  squander it—and that is how the Trump Administration should be  measured.  Job creation remains the top priority.  While the private  sector accounts for the overwhelming majority of jobs in the U.S.  economy, the government has a key role to play in supporting  continued economic recovery, rolling back inequality and laying  the groundwork for future growth by investing in education,  The economy confronts several long-term structural challenges.   The first is declining labor force participation.  As America’s baby  boomers begin aging out of the labor force, America will simply  have a smaller share of the population willing and able to work,  which may soon place upward bounds on America’s potential for  economic growth.  In addition to the downward pressure on  participation from an aging population, the country faces a broader  participation rate problem among prime-age workers, especially  men.  Among men ages 25-54, participation rates have fallen by  nine percentage points since 1953.  Women’s participation rates,  which had climbed during the second half of the 20th century,  Second, productivity gains have slowed since 2004, limiting GDP  growth and income gains.  Productivity gains and wages, which  used to move up together in the immediate post-World War II  period, have become delinked.  As productivity growth has  slowed, wages have not even kept pace with that slower growth.   Identifying ways to bolster productivity growth and ensure that  gains lead to wage increases are major challenges facing  policymakers.  Key to raising productivity will be redoubling  American efforts to invest in human capital through higher  education and lifelong skills training, and access to quality health  care.  Along with that, we must fund the technological and  physical infrastructure that will fuel job creation and enable goods,  services, people, and ideas to move more easily, reducing costs for  Third, Americans and the world face a crisis in climate change  that, if left unchecked, will impose steep costs on the U.S. and  global economies, dramatically altering the way we live.  Global  climate change presents some of the greatest risks and  opportunities for the U.S. economy today and in the decades  ahead.  The effects of climate change are already having  significant impacts on our economy that will continue to increase.   The risks posed by climate change also present opportunities for  broad, new areas of the economy to attract investment and provide  opportunities for those both in America’s urban and rural  Finally, America’s long-term trend of rising inequality continues  to worsen and constrain economic growth and opportunity for  upward mobility in the United States, making it increasingly  difficult for workers to provide for their families.  Rising  inequality does not have one singular cause, but rather is the result  of multiple policy and structural changes in our economy over the  past nearly four decades.  These include: decreasing progressivity  in our tax code; an erosion of labor market institutions, such as the  declining real value of the minimum wage and collective  representation in labor unions; deregulation and the increasing  prevalence of monopolistic market power, particularly in the  financial sector; increasing global competition from low-wage  countries under rules that do not set a level playing field; shifting  demands for workers of different skill levels; and of course the  discrimination against particular groups in our society.   Although some of these features are global in nature, others are  unique to the experience of the United States and will require  uniquely American solutions.  That America stands apart from  other advanced economies as one of the most unequal, even  though other countries face similar trends, suggests that policy  choices rather than natural law are the primary force behind  inequality.  It is clear that unless America can reverse this trend of  widening inequality, the promise of upward mobility that has  underpinned the American Dream risks slipping away, and will  undermine our country’s overall economic performance and  As the Trump Administration and Republican-led Congress  transition to governing, historical experience and economic theory  are clear that their vision will not make America great again.   Rather, the Republican agenda risks taking America backward in  all of our key structural challenges, undoing much of the economic  progress made over the past eight years, ultimately leaving  Americans worse off and ceding America’s economic leadership  The final Economic Report of the President (2017) of the Obama  Administration reviews economic developments over the past  eight years, evaluates the policies advanced in response to the  unfolding economic events and ongoing challenges to broadly  shared prosperity.  This response to the Economic Report from  Joint Economic Committee (JEC) Democratic staff emphasizes  some of these key structural challenges facing American families  and the U.S. economy overall, and looks ahead to the economic  issues that are likely to arise under the stewardship of President  Joint Economic Committee Democrats share President Obama’s  view that the American economy is not working until it is  delivering for all people in America.  We recognize both the  progress made for much of the country in the face of daunting  economic challenges, as well as the obstacles that remain to  achieving this goal as Republicans take control of government in  The steps taken by the Obama Administration to cushion the blow  from a real estate market collapse that began in 2006, a recession  that began in December 2007, and a financial crisis that unfolded  in September 2008—all before President Obama assumed  office—first and foremost halted America’s economic freefall.   These policy decisions helped contain the severe financial system  fragility and household economic stress in the economy inherited  when President Obama took office in January 2009.  Absent policy  responses from the outgoing George W. Bush Administration in  2008 and the Obama Administration thereafter, the economic  downturn in GDP would have been 3.5 times deeper,  unemployment would have spiked 1.6 times higher, and the  recession would have lasted more than twice as long.2  The  combined policy response to the Great Recession created an  additional 9 million job-years and boosted GDP by 9.5 percent  Even so, the downturn Americans faced was the worst since the  Great Depression, and the Obama Administration spent much of  its time and effort digging the U.S. economy out of this hole, often  with an uncooperative Congress.  Since the labor market bottomed  out in February 2010, private sector employers added more than  16 million new jobs.4  The unemployment rate receded to 4.8  percent in January 2017 before President Trump took office, down  from a high of 10.0 percent.  Though U.S. labor markets have  tightened enough to yield positive, inflation-adjusted wage growth  for the first time in a long time, significant shares of the population  exited the labor force and the economy is creating too few good  opportunities to entice would-be workers back in.  The share of  the overall population in work still has not recovered to the pre- recession level, which had never recovered in the previous  business cycle expansion to the peak before the much more mild  Additionally, the Obama Administration took steps to address  critical problems in key sectors of the economy.  The Dodd-Frank  Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act aimed to bring  stability to financial markets and rein in dangerous excesses in the  financial sector that had caused the real estate bubble and financial  collapse and undermined economic progress.  The Obama  Administration also took steps to remediate the crisis in America’s  health care system that left 44 million people without access to  health insurance and saw health care costs growing at alarming  rates that strained both public and family budgets, crowding out  other critical expenditures.  The 2010 Patient Protection and  Affordable Care Act (ACA), often colloquially referred to as  Obamacare, put a stop to the most predatory practices in the health  care sector, created incentives to reduce costs and improve health  outcomes, and drastically expanded the number of Americans with  access to health insurance coverage.  The Administration also took  steps to improve the affordability, accessibility, and quality of  higher education, which enhances the productivity and  technological leadership of America’s workforce.  The  Administration also set America and the world on a path to  environmental sustainability, taking steps to accelerate America’s  development of renewable energy systems and to lead Americans  and the world on a path to global environmental sustainability.   These initiatives staved off what certainly otherwise would have  been a deeper and wider spread economic collapse and laid a  foundation for future economic improvements.  President Trump  took over an economy in far better shape than his predecessor,  though there is still much work to be done to tackle structural  impediments to broadly-shared and growing prosperity in  JEC Democrats’ response to President Obama’s final economic  ! The Challenge of and Imperative for Reducing Inequality,  ! The Road Ahead for Americans’ Health Care System,  ! Issues in Higher Education Quality, Affordability and  ! The Economic Risks and Opportunities of Climate  JEC Democrats are gravely concerned that President Trump and  Congressional Republicans are poised to move America in the  wrong direction to address critical structural impediments to the  country’s and individual American families’ revitalized economic  success.  Given what we know from historical experience and from  economic research, the policy proposals President Trump and  Republicans in Congress intend to advance will make America’s  economic challenges worse and will leave us less prepared to  respond to unforeseen economic shocks that may arise under their  Rising inequality has constrained economic growth and  opportunity in the United States for decades, making it  increasingly difficult for families to lead comfortable, middle- class lives.  Even as the country has grown wealthier, the vast  majority of poor and middle-class households have been left  behind.  Since 1980, pre-tax income for the bottom half of  households has stagnated, while income for the top 1 percent more  than tripled.5  During this time period, the share of wealth held by  the top 1 percent increased from 24 percent to 42 percent.6  These  developments have prompted some economists to refer to the  United States as “a tale of two countries,” making the case for the  need to “rewrite the rules” of the economy in order to move toward  While the Obama Administration made strides toward combatting  inequality, the new President might unravel much of this progress.   The Trump Administration and the Republican Party want to ramp  up the trickle-down policies that exacerbated inequality in the first  place.  By claiming that a rising tide lifts all boats, the GOP is  hoping to justify tax cuts for the rich and large corporations,  deregulation of the financial industry, and a weakening of basic  worker protections.  History has shown that these policies benefit  Inequality is an Impediment to Overall Economic Prosperity  Traditionally, thinking within the field of economics reasoned that  there exists a tradeoff between equality and efficiency.8  An  implication of this theoretical belief was that focusing on  combatting inequality through policies such as progressive  taxation and income supports would ultimately prove futile by  diminishing long-term prospects for economic growth by creating  Recent empirical evidence in economics proves this long-held  belief not to be the case.  Economists at the International Monetary  Fund showed that not only do countries with lower inequality  exhibit higher growth rates and longer durations of growth spurts,  but also that generous redistribution systems are no impediment to  economic growth.10  In the United States in particular, this  conclusion should be obvious given how much sky-rocketing  incomes at the top of the distribution derive from economic  rents—income extracted by exercising market power rather than  earned from ability and effort.11  Economic rents are  fundamentally inefficient, so we should expect that increasing tax  progressivity to eliminate rents would have at worst negligible  effects on efficiency, though evidence indicates that promoting  equality could improve efficiency and performance in the overall  There is now greater recognition that inequality is harmful to  economic performance.13  For example, inequality may preclude  individuals from accessing a good education and quality health  care, keeping those individuals from realizing and contributing  their full productive potential.14  And despite the hypotheses held  by believers in supply-side economics, rising inequality can  actually undermine incentives for entrepreneurship.15  Economists  at the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development  (OECD) estimate that the increase in income inequality between  1985 and 2010 reduced growth across OECD countries by 4.7  Inequality also undermines democracy and political stability.   Though early economic research focused on this effect in  developing countries with weaker political and market institutions,  the effects of inequality on political polarization are almost  certainly being felt now in the United States and other advanced  economies.17  In his farewell address, President Obama recognized  this by calling stark inequality “corrosive to our democratic idea,”  sowing “cynicism and polarization in our politics.”18  Inequality  might allow the wealthy to have an undue influence over the  political process, reaping favors that further their personal gains  over the common good.19  Political science research emphasizes  inequality’s association with a general erosion of social trust,  which can increase transaction costs for businesses and divert  business investment into non-productive assets and activities such  as legal actions contesting property rights and technologies to  monitor workers and protect private property from crime.20  The  social pangs of inequality are felt deepest at a time when the  American promise of upward mobility appears to be slipping  Wealth inequality in the United States—the outcome of income  inequality—is even more extreme than that for income.  In fact,  the top 1 percent of households hold 42 percent of the wealth in  the United States.21  The racial wealth gaps are particularly  glaring.  The median Black and Latino households hold only 6 and  8 percent of the wealth of the median white household,  The Scale and Causes of Rising Inequality in the United States   In 2016, Americans expressed palpable frustration over our  economy working only for a narrow slice of the most privileged  workers.  This sentiment is borne out in the data.  With inequality  rising since roughly 1980, the United States has come to be among  Most people are more concerned with their own family’s  economic situation than how a small segment of the population at  the very top has fared.  This anxiety is reflected in increasing  household financial fragility, with median wages stagnating and  prices for key items like housing, health care, child care and higher  education accelerating way ahead of overall consumer price  inflation.24  The majority of Americans have been squeezed by  these rising costs while the top 1 percent of income earners  captured an increasing share of overall national income.  In 2010,  the share of income going to the bottom 99 percent in the U.S. was  63 cents of every dollar of income in the U.S. economy, whereas  in 1980 the bottom 99 percent took more than 78 percent of  Rising inequality does not have one singular cause, but rather is  the result of multiple policy and structural changes ensuing in our  economy over the past nearly four decades, including: decreasing  progressivity in our tax and transfer system; an erosion of labor  market institutions, such as the declining real value of the  minimum wage and membership in labor unions; monetary policy  that in practice privileges stable prices and low inflation over  maximum employment and wage growth; deregulation and the  increasing concentration of monopolistic market power,  particularly in the financial sector; increasing global competition  from low-wage countries; and, shifting demands for workers of  Some of these factors are relatively unique to the United States,  but others—like globalization and technological change—are  challenges shared across most countries.27  That other advanced  economies are similarly exposed to trade with low-wage  economies and employ computers and robots like the United  States, but have not experienced a similarly staggering increase in  inequality as the U.S., suggests that rising inequality results more  from policy choices than from immutable economic laws of  Other dimensions of inequality have a structural and enduring  nature, resulting from formal and informal discrimination against  specific social groups that limit opportunities to participate fully  in America’s economic life.  Such structural inequality  underscores the point that policy choices are at the root of  America’s inequality problems, choices that unnecessarily limit  This trend of rising inequality has put the American Dream further  out of reach for many Americans and left even those with means  with a sense of increased financial stress.29  Critically, the  development of high and rising inequality is undermining faith in  Americans’ opportunities for upward economic mobility.   Mounting evidence shows that opportunities for learning and  health early in a child’s life can impact cognitive and social  development and lifelong earnings potential.30  Inequality literally  begins before a child is born, with access to the right prenatal  health care, and continues into early childhood with the entrenched  nature of inequality of opportunities.  This means that a child’s  future socioeconomic status is often closely tied to the status of his  or her parents.  In the absence of effective policies to rebalance the  distribution of opportunity, such a phenomenon transmits  Progress Tackling Runaway Inequality under the Obama  The Obama Administration tackled inequality on three fronts: by  limiting the depth of the Great Recession and restoring growth;  providing health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care  Act; and enacting a more progressive tax code.  Together, these  measures will boost after-tax incomes of the poorest Americans  by 18 percent in 2017.31  President Obama also addressed  inequality by supporting initiatives to raise wages, such as a higher  minimum wage, expansions of the overtime pay rule, the Lilly  Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, and the White House Equal Pay Pledge,  When President Obama took office in January 2009, the United  States was on the heels of the worst financial crisis since the Great  Depression.32  Economic downturns tend to increase inequality  because of higher rates of unemployment and home foreclosures.   By pushing an aggressive fiscal response, the Administration  eased the depth of the Great Recession and saved jobs, setting the  economy back on track toward growth.  One study estimates that  without the broad policy response, the recession would have lasted  The Affordable Care Act reduced inequality by expanding health  insurance coverage to low-income families that are vulnerable to  financial hardship in the event of a major or chronic illness.  The  ACA increased coverage for families with incomes below 150  percent of the Federal poverty line by 13 percentage points, and  will boost incomes for families in the lowest quintile by 16  Changes in the personal income tax code help build toward a more  progressive tax system.  The Obama Administration restored  Clinton-era tax rates for the highest-income families, permanently  extended Bush-era tax rates for middle-class families, and  expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax  Credit (CTC).35  In addition to these efforts, the Obama  Administration also increased funding for higher education, job  training and apprenticeship programs, early childhood education,  and affordable child care—critical investments that will reduce  inequality in the long term.  All in all, the Administration’s efforts  constitute the largest increase in Federal investment to combat  inequality since the Great Society programs under President  Why President Trump’s and Congressional Republicans’  TAX REFORM.  Throughout the 2016 election, President Trump  pledged to help working Americans climb back up the economic  ladder.  However, his policy proposals and those favored by his  Cabinet appointees and allies in a Republican-led Congress will  do more harm than good.  In fact, President Trump’s proposals are  the same trickle-down policies that have failed average workers  President Trump promises to cut taxes for the middle-class, but his  proposal actually increases taxes for more than half of all single  parents and at least one in five households with children.  More  than 26 million individuals live in households that face a tax  increase, based on conservative estimates.  For example, a single  mom of three children making $50,000 with no child care  expenses will face a tax increase of $1,188.37  By contrast, the top  0.1 percent of earners will face an average tax break of $1.1  President Trump’s proposal will also reduce the corporate tax rate  to 15 percent, eliminate the alternative minimum tax (AMT) and  the estate and gift tax.39  President Trump supports repealing the  estate tax despite the fact that it only applies to 2 out of every 1,000  estates, and is only levied on an estate’s value in excess of $10.9  million per couple.40  Trump’s overall tax reform proposal will  increase the Federal debt by at least $7 trillion over ten years, and  at least $20.7 trillion by 2036, starving the budget of necessary  revenue to make investments in programs that can combat  The tax plan advanced by Republicans in Congress is equally  regressive.  Under the House GOP plan, the top 0.1 percent of  households would receive a tax break of $1.3 million, compared  with a mere $50 tax cut for the bottom 20 percent of earners.  By  2025, a remarkable 99.6 percent of the total tax cut would go to  President Trump also supports a repatriation tax holiday for  corporate profits held overseas with deferred tax payments.43  The  tax giveaway would impose a one-time, 10 percent tax on profits  held abroad—much lower than the tax due to the United States— to entice corporations to bring their profits back onshore.44  While  some imagine such a policy will spur a boon to business  investment, this belief is based on the same flawed supply-side  economics logic as discussed above.  Corporations with sufficient  resources to seek tax loopholes in offshore tax havens have no  problem raising capital for investment.  Thus, the untaxed profits  held overseas are not holding companies back from investing in  America; almost certainly, such money returning to the United  States will go straight into share buybacks and dividend payments,  contributing to rising inequality.  This is exactly what happened  during the tax holiday that was part of the American Jobs Creation  Act of 2004.  Instead of boosting investment or stimulating job  growth, the repatriated funds from the tax holiday were mostly  used for share repurchases and dividend issues.45   DEREGULATION.  President Trump and Republicans in Congress  have pledged to unleash industry by easing the regulatory burden  on businesses.  In his second week in office, President Trump  signed an executive order mandating that every new Federal  regulation must be accompanied by the repeal of two existing  regulations.46  Such a dogmatic approach to governing not only  threatens the welfare of citizens, workers, and consumers, but also  undermines the stability and efficiency of America’s market  institutions that entice business investment from all over the  President Trump has called the Dodd-Frank legislation a  “disaster,” and has promised to do “a big number” on it.47   President Trump has already begun chipping away at Dodd-Frank  through an executive order that authorizes a review of financial  regulations, with the intent of scaling back reforms.48  Despite oft- repeated rhetoric that Dodd-Frank is crippling America’s financial  sector, President Trump’s National Economic Council Chair Gary  Cohn has said, American banks are “the best, most highly  capitalized banks in the world” and Federal Reserve Chair Janet  Yellen testified that American banks today are outcompeting their  global rivals, so clearly Dodd-Frank regulations have not imposed  undue hindrance on the financial sector.49  Rather than hurting  small businesses, Dodd-Frank will contribute $351 billion to GDP  over a 10-year period by decreasing the likelihood of a future  financial crisis.50  While Dodd-Frank addressed many of the  institutional and regulatory failings that allowed the crisis to occur  and left American taxpayers rather than financial executives  footing the bill, the tools Dodd-Frank created to address potential  future crises have yet to be tested.  Undoing these reforms will re- expose American families and taxpayers to the risks of financial  President Trump has also moved toward deregulation by halting  the implementation of the fiduciary rule that requires financial  advisers to look out for the best interests of their clients rather than  their own profits.  Although President Trump campaigned on  doing what’s best for Main Street and not Wall Street, his actions  Deregulation will encourage the same kind of excessive risk- taking in the financial industry that crashed the economy during  the Great Recession.  These actions are effectively laying the  WORKER PROTECTIONS.  Average workers deserve a raise, but  President Trump and Republicans in Congress have resisted  efforts to raise the minimum wage, expand overtime pay, and  protect collective bargaining rights.  The minimum wage of $7.25  has not increased since 2009, and the tipped minimum wage of  $2.13 has not increased since 1991.51  Republicans have  repeatedly bucked efforts to gradually raise the minimum wage to  $12 an hour over the course of five years, despite the fact that such  an increase would raise wages for 35.1 million workers.52  In doing  so, Republicans ignore the popular will at their own peril.   Minimum wage increases remain very popular and almost always  win statewide ballot initiatives.  Republicans have also fought  President Obama’s efforts to raise the salary threshold for those  qualifying for overtime pay, currently blocking the new rule’s  implementation through legal action, despite estimates that it  Labor unions, which have historically played a central role in  raising wages and improving working conditions, have long faced  a secular decline with the widespread loss of manufacturing  production and employment in the United States.  Compounding  this decline are efforts by Republicans to roll back basic worker  rights of collective bargaining through “right-to-work” laws,  which have been adopted in 28 states.54  The union membership  rate today is nearly half of what it was in 1983, dropping from 20.1  percent to 10.7 percent.55  The private sector union membership  rate is even lower, at 6.4 percent.56  With workers already largely  marginalized in the workplace, Republicans continue to push  national and state-level “right-to-work” laws, restricting worker’s  rights to representation in collective bargaining and freedom of  THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT.  President Trump and Republicans in  Congress have vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act despite  not having a replacement.  As discussed in further detail in the  following chapter, repeal of the ACA will deteriorate individuals’  health, weaken the economy and bleed jobs, but it will also  escalate inequality.  Many poor and middle-class families depend  on the ACA for insurance, and repeal will make them vulnerable  to financial hardship.  The Congressional Budget Office (CBO)  estimates that following just the first year of implementation of the  repeal, 18 million individuals will lose their health insurance,  including 5 million individuals who receive coverage through the  Medicaid expansion.  By 2026, the number of uninsured will rise  by 32 million to a total of 59 million individuals.58   If the President is serious about helping working families thrive,  he should pursue policies that grow the economy from the middle  out instead of the top down.  This entails changing the rules of the  economy to facilitate shared prosperity.  Instead, President Trump  and his party in Congress appear poised to take America in the  President Trump inherits a health care sector that provides vastly  improved outcomes for consumers and employers.  Because of the  2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), millions  more Americans are covered by health insurance, insurance  companies can no longer discriminate against people because of  preexisting health conditions, and young adults are able to remain  on their parents’ insurance until the age of 26.  Rather than  building on the successes of the Affordable Care Act and tackling  the entrenched special interests that stand between Americans and  quality, affordable health care, President Trump and congressional  Republicans are actively seeking to dismantle hard-fought gains.   Congressional Republicans have voted repeatedly to repeal the  ACA, but they have no plan but to serve Americans up to private  insurance companies who would once again be able to deny  service and extract exorbitant prices from patients and medical  providers alike.  The irresponsible Republican approach should  raise concerns for every aspect of the health care economy, which  itself accounts for more than one-sixth of the overall U.S.  Prior to passage of the ACA, more than half of Americans received  health coverage through their employers, though strained by  rapidly rising costs, 44 million Americans were uninsured, and  families purchasing individual health insurance in the private  market struggled to find the coverage they needed at a price they  could afford.59  Insurance companies were able to discriminate  against consumers on a number of factors that led to higher prices,  higher out-of-pocket costs and health plans that provided  essentially nothing in the case of catastrophic medical events.  One  in three Americans struggled with medical debt even if they had  With as many as 129 million non-elderly Americans with a  preexisting condition, insurance companies could charge higher  premiums, set annual or lifetime limits, exclude coverage for the  very preexisting condition the consumer had, or deny coverage  outright.61  Insurance companies could also deny coverage for  maternity care, as they did in 62 percent of individual, “non- group” market plans for those without employer-based health care  and ineligible for Medicare or Medicaid.62  Additionally, 34  percent of enrollees in individual plans had plans that did not cover  substance use disorder services, and nearly one-fifth had plans that  did not cover mental health care.63  Consumers in the individual  market had limited options that included high cost-sharing  arrangements and plans that covered less than 60 percent of an  enrollee’s medical needs, less coverage than is available through  Further complicating matters, the pre-ACA delivery and payment  systems led to steeply rising costs that did not yield better health  and financial outcomes for patients, but did produce an abundance  of growth in a number of large firms in insurance, hospitals,  pharmaceutical medicines and medical devices, home health and  long-term care industries.  This consolidated monopolistic power  over national (and sometimes even global) markets for the private  sector services around which most U.S. health care is organized.   Amid a market structure incentivized to create and capture  economic rents from consumers and taxpayers, Americans were  saddled with a system that provided expensive, poorly coordinated  care which was denied to some while administered to others with  The fragmented and inaccessible system was also expensive.  In  2009, the United States spent 80 percent more as a share of GDP  than the median OECD country in combined public and private  spending, while yielding a life expectancy two years shorter than  America’s OECD peers.66  The Affordable Care Act set in motion  a series of reforms that have improved health outcomes and  stemmed health costs for the 317 million Americans covered  under private and public insurance programs (excluding  individuals covered by the U.S. military or Veterans  In March 2010, President Obama signed the Patient Protection and  Affordable Care Act into law.  For the past six years, those reforms  have increased access to coverage, slowed the growth of health  costs and improved health outcomes.  The ACA and subsequent  legislation sought to reform the health delivery and payment  systems by rewarding Medicare providers for efficient, quality  care instead of solely quantity of care, and encouraging private  insurers to share and use best practices.68  Progress is being made,  as 20 million more Americans now have health insurance and an  INDIVIDUAL MARKETPLACE.  The ACA revamped the individual  health insurance market to bring greater affordability and  transparency to consumers.  Here, consumers earning up to 400  percent of the Federal poverty level can qualify for a premium  support tax credit.  Eighty-five percent of consumers (more than 9  million people) who secure insurance in the individual market  receive a premium support tax credit to make the cost of insurance  PRIVATE INSURANCE REFORMS.  The ACA took on the insurance  industry and implemented a series of much-needed reforms  benefiting all consumers—both those shopping in the new  marketplace and those receiving employer-sponsored coverage.   No longer are insurance companies permitted to discriminate  against those with preexisting conditions or to set annual or  lifetime limits.  The rate of uninsured young adults dropped 7.4  percentage points in three years as 2.3 million young adults were  able to stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26.71  The ten  essential health benefits established by the ACA ensured that all  plans would provide access to core health services, such as  maternity care, behavioral health services and prescription drug  EXPANDED MEDICAID COVERAGE.  The Medicaid program, which is  jointly funded by the Federal Government and states, provides  health coverage to nearly 70 million Americans, including  children, pregnant women, low-income adults and seniors and  people with disabilities.73  To help drive down the number of  uninsured and increase the affordability of health care options, the  ACA expanded this program to reach adults up to 138 percent of  the Federal poverty line, which was $33,534 in 2016 for a family  of four, up from 100 percent of the poverty line, or $24,300.74   While a lawsuit prevented the immediate expansion of Medicaid  in all 50 states, 31 states and the District of Columbia elected to  expand Medicaid and received a total sum of $333.8 billion in  transfers in 2015 from the Federal Government to benefit  Medicaid enrollees in states that expanded Medicaid have reported  stronger financial security.  Since Medicaid coverage protects  enrollees from catastrophic out-of-pocket medical costs, fewer  people reported difficulty paying bills because of medical  expenses and debt collection dropped by $600 to $1,000 per new  enrollee.76  Hospitals in expansion states also benefited as higher  insurance rates cut uncompensated care costs in half.  These costs  would otherwise be factored into the prices that hospitals bill  MEDICARE COST SAVINGS FOR SENIORS AND TAXPAYERS.  The ACA  contained several provisions that strengthened and enhanced the  Medicare program.  Reforms in the ACA extended the solvency  of the Medicare program from 2019 to 2028.  In addition to  providing more preventive services at no cost to seniors, the ACA  helped stem the growth of Medicare spending, leading to lower  than expected premium costs for seniors.78  For example,  Medicare Part B premiums for 2016 were 10 percent lower than  projected, while Part D premiums were 29 percent lower, saving  seniors enrolled in both programs $336 per year as compared with  expectations.79  Seniors’ cost-sharing for Parts A and B were also  lower than forecast, 23 and 13 percent respectively, amounting to  an average of $372 in savings.  Together, slower growth in health  costs and other ACA-based reforms saved seniors an average of  $708 each in 2016 and CBO projects Medicare savings will save  Seniors who face high drug costs are also spending less on  prescription drugs despite rising prescription drug costs.81  Prior  to the ACA, seniors spending more than $2,700 on prescriptions  had to pay the next $3,500 in drug expenses out of their own  pocket before Medicare would pick up any additional costs.  The  ACA began reducing this financial burden—commonly referred  to as the “donut hole”—for seniors and is on track to eliminate the  donut hole completely by 2020.  By closing the donut hole, 11  million seniors have saved an average of $2,100 each on  EMPLOYER-BASED COVERAGE.  The 150 million Americans  receiving employer-sponsored health insurance also saw  improvements due to the ACA.  Because of slower growth in  health costs, employer-sponsored health plan premiums are about  $3,600 lower than projections based on pre-ACA growth levels.   Adding in reductions in out-of-pocket costs, families with  employer coverage saved $4,400 in 2016.83  Additionally, ACA  insurance reforms extended additional financial security to 22  million workers who faced unlimited out-of-pocket costs before  Increased financial security has freed workers from so-called “job  lock”—the inability to leave one’s job because of limited ways to  find quality, affordable health coverage.  As we enter the fourth  year of the marketplace’s operation, ACA reforms may have given  workers a viable alternative to employer-sponsored coverage, and  entrepreneurship.85  These reforms for workers took hold at the  same time that the economy rebounded and added 13.5 million  full-time jobs.  Contrary to Republican predictions that ACA  would reduce employment, states’ uninsured rates in 2013 show  essentially no correlation with employment growth in the years  following ACA implementation.86  In fact, states that expanded  Medicaid have experienced higher job growth than those that have  TAMING HEALTH CARE COSTS.  ACA reforms significantly slowed  the growth of health care costs, in turn improving households’ as  well as the nation’s financial outlook.  Prior to the ACA, health  costs were growing 5.4 percent annually during the preceding 50  years and 3.2 percent annually during the preceding decade.  After  passage of the ACA, health costs still grew, but at a much slower  rate of 1.7 percent annually, the slowest increase in health care  costs since economists began collecting this data in 1959.88  With  millions of Americans gaining health coverage, America’s  national expenditures on health care for the first decade after ACA  are now projected to be $2.6 trillion lower than projected before  the ACA.89  Through these multiple improvements, CBO found,  the ACA will reduce the budget deficit by more than $300 billion  The ACA has worked to tame skyrocketing health costs, improve  household financial stability, and strengthen the Federal  Government’s fiscal sustainability.  To continue this progress,  Congress should focus on improving the law to continue to drive  down premiums and other health care costs such as the growing  cost of pharmaceuticals, increase competition, and spur  innovation.91  Unfortunately, with President Trump in the White  House and majorities in both houses of Congress, Republicans are  advancing an agenda for the 115th Congress to scrap the ACA and  all of the improvements that came along with it, while leaving  The catch is that while Republicans are unified on tearing down  the health care system, they have little consensus on what to put  up in its place.  This tear it down first, fix it later approach  promises to spark financial concerns through every corner of the  health care sector and for middle-class families unable to take on  additional health care costs.  CBO estimates that repealing the  ACA would result in 18 million Americans losing their health  coverage in the first year following enactment of repeal, and  another 14 million joining the ranks of uninsured by 2026.  Taken  together, Republicans’ current plan would result in 32 million  Americans losing their health coverage.  For those who maintain  coverage, CBO estimates that repeal would cause insurers to hike  premiums in the individual market by 20 to 25 percent in the first  year following repeal and to double them by 2026.  Furthermore,  the Republican approach leaves 21 percent, or one in five, of the  Yet, Republicans do not need to wait to pass legislation or employ  budget gimmicks to upend the health insurance market.  On his  first day in office, President Trump signed an executive order  calling on relevant Federal departments overseeing the law to use  every tool available to minimize the law’s reach.93  While  ambiguous, the executive order signals to Federal workers and  health workers alike that, at best, the entire health system is on  shaky ground, and at worst, the Administration could be  orchestrating a collapse of our health system as we know it.   Now that the Senate has confirmed Dr. Tom Price to head the  Department of Health and Human Services, ACA-foes have the  perfect fox entering the health care henhouse.  A persistent ACA  opponent, Secretary Price has myriad ways to slow or reverse  health reform implementation that could spark the unraveling of  the law, such as forcing insurance companies to hike up premiums  Our nation’s health sector is at a unique crossroad.  Republican  leaders must determine whether to work to stabilize markets or  tear apart the system.  One thing is certain—as millions of  Americans are at risk of losing their health coverage, the nation’s  health care providers from our urban centers to our most rural  outposts will be watching to see how the actions or inaction in  Washington affects their ability to provide care in their  ISSUES IN HIGHER EDUCATION QUALITY, AFFORDABILITY, AND  In both good and bad economic times workers with higher  education levels on average fare better in the labor market: earning  higher wages, experiencing fewer episodes of unemployment, and  being more likely to hold jobs providing benefits like health  insurance and paid time off.  Higher education is not only a path  to a more prosperous career, it is also a part of the innovation and  productivity engine that drives America’s economy and secures  America’s technological leadership in the world.  The social  challenges of financing investment in higher education and the  tremendous positive spillovers that higher education yield our  economy make a strong case for a large public role in education.   Although workers at all education levels have seen unemployment  rates fall to at least half their height in the wake of the Great  Recession, today the unemployment rate for those with a college  degree remains less than a third of the rate for those with less than  a high school degree.94  The unemployment rate for those with an  advanced degree is even lower, at a mere 2.2 percent.95  As wage  growth begins to reflect the strength of the economy, almost every  educational group saw an increase in wage growth in 2016 over  the earlier stages of the recovery, but the earnings premium for  college graduates remains at historically high levels.96  Workers  with higher levels of education are also more likely to have access  to benefits: college graduates are twice as likely as those without  a high school degree to have access to paid leave and are also much  more likely to have access to health insurance. 97  Despite the efforts of the Obama Administration, there are still  issues to be dealt with in the education arena.  Concerns over  affordability and accountability of higher education continue in  policy discussions and at the kitchen tables of American families.   Instead of building on this progress and addressing the key  challenges of strengthening the affordability and quality of  American higher education, the Trump Administration and  Congressional Republicans want to undermine these efforts, often  In order to help students reap the benefits of higher education, the  Obama Administration took actions that led to at least an  additional 250,000 students attending college or completing a  college degree in the 2014-2015 academic year alone, and cut  taxes by an average of over $1,800 for nearly ten million families  with a family member getting a post-secondary education in 2016.   At the same time, partly due to state cuts, tuition continues to rise,  affecting affordability, and is deterring individuals from choosing  to pursue higher education.  According to the Center on Budget  and Policy Priorities, tuition at four-year public colleges has risen  by 33 percent since the 2007-2008 school year, while average state  spending is down 18 percent per student from 2008.98  President  Trump and Congressional Republicans have not announced any  plans to address this shortfall, and in fact seem likely to propose  In order to meet the gap between need and individual financial  resources, many students must take out loans.  While most  students can manage their student loan burdens, many cannot, and  even those who are current on their loans may need to postpone  investments in assets like housing as student loan payments crowd  out other expenditures in personal budgets. 99  The Trump  Administration and Congressional Republicans want to expand  the role of private industry in student loans—despite the fact that  a private loan can cost a typical borrower almost $250 more a  month than a Federal loan—and freeze Pell grants, which would  cost students up to around $1,500 dollars a year as of 2026.100  The Trump Administration also appears likely to undo the Obama  Administration’s Gainful Employment rules that protect students  from predation by institutions charging high fees and delivering  minimal learning or bleak employment prospects.  The institutions  affected by these rules are almost entirely for-profit institutions.   Fifty-five percent of students at for-profit colleges do not complete  their degrees and are by far the most likely to default on their  student loans.101  Other non-education policies already underway  in the Trump Administration have the potential to severely disrupt  higher education systems, including recent actions to restrict  Institutions in the United States are a global magnet for foreign  students to study in our universities, a significant share of whom  endeavor to remain in the country, contributing to the economy  with newly acquired skills and knowledge.  U.S. undergraduate  institutions enrolled over 400,000 international students in 2014  and graduate programs enrolled almost 350,000.102  International  students and professors contribute to our overall productivity;  research has shown that international faculty are more productive  Finally, we need to ensure that students for whom higher  education is not the right choice still have the chance to develop  skills that will help them achieve a more secure livelihood and to  contribute more to overall U.S. economic performance.  For  instance, apprenticeships are another way for workers to gain  skills that help them succeed in the workplace.  Employers get an  average return of almost 50 percent on apprenticeship  investments, and the average starting wage for an apprentice is  above $60,000.104  From 2014 to 2016, the United States added  more than 125,000 new apprenticeships, the largest increase in  nearly a decade.105  However, Congressional Republicans have  shown limited interest in funding apprenticeship programs.106  The Great Recession underscored a long evident truth about the  importance of education: those with higher levels of education are  better able to succeed in today’s labor market.  In the wake of the  Great Recession, unemployment of those with at least a bachelor’s  degree never rose above 5 percent, while for those with less than  a high school degree it rose to a high of 15.8 percent.107  The  relative resilience of labor markets for workers with higher levels  of education throughout the downturn and recovery is reflected in  their higher earnings.  Over the course of 2016, those with less  than a high school degree saw their nominal weekly wages  increase by 3.4 percent, those with a high school degree by 1.2  percent, those with some college by 4.4 percent, and those with at  least a college degree by 2.0 percent.108  The earnings premium for  college graduates is at historic levels: in 2015 it reached 70  percent.109  This premium has been steadily trending up from  The increased earnings of workers with higher levels of education  accumulate impressively over the course of a lifetime: the median  worker with a bachelor’s degree will earn nearly $1 million more  than a similar worker with only a high school diploma, and a  worker with an associate degree will earn about $330,000 more.110   While the entire premium is not attributable to education (those  who attend college differ from those who do not), researchers  calculate that attending college is responsible for an increase in  earnings of 5 to 15 percent on average per year of college.111   Education also improves the probability that individuals’ income  levels will surpass those of their parents.  At a time of decreasing  mobility, ensuring that individuals have increased education levels  has become even more important.  Children born to parents in the  bottom income quintile are 15 percentage points more likely to  out-earn their parents if they have a college degree.  Given the high  likelihood that these children out-earn their parents (81 percent of  those with no college degree out-earn their parents), it is also  useful to look at children whose parents are in the middle income  quintile.  Eighty-six percent of these children who earned a college  degree out-earn their parents, compared with 60 percent of those  Workers with higher levels of education also have better access to  non-wage benefits.  For instance, 71 percent of those with a  bachelor’s degree or higher had access to paid leave, whereas only  35 percent of those with less than a high school degree did.113   Only 61 percent of those with less than a high school degree had  health insurance, compared with over 90 percent of those with a  Higher levels of education do not just benefit the individual  worker—it creates widely-shared benefits for our economy  overall.  Researchers have found that GDP growth is positively  related to education of the populace.115  Higher productivity from  more educated workers can actually spillover to other workers,  leading to more productivity among these workers.116  Researchers  have found that a workforce that has stronger mathematics and  scientific skills “has a consistent, stable, and strong relationship  with economic growth.”117  Researchers have also emphasized that  it is not just the quantity of schooling, but the quality of schooling  that affects growth, reflecting the importance of measures that  direct students into programs that give them the skills they need to  succeed.118  Without the innovation and productivity growth  flowing from workers with higher education and our world- leading universities, future improvements in U.S. economic  growth and living standards would be severely curtailed.  There are several fundamental economic reasons for a strong  public role in education, and higher education in particular.  First,  while an individual certainly can gain skills and knowledge  making them more productive and capable of finding more  favorable employment opportunities, the gains from education are  not fully captured by the individual, but spillover to benefit others  in the economy.  Economists have long known that, where the  private gains from investment are not fully appropriable, private  individuals will tend to underinvest in those assets, even when  they may gain from doing so.  The higher productivity and  individual earnings associated with higher education carry a host  of social benefits from higher tax revenue, to lower government  expenditure on transfers, decreased crime, improved health, and  Second, many potential students face credit constraints.  The  private market is often unwilling to supply loans to students  because the asset they borrow is difficult for lenders to  collateralize, and the viability of the loan—particularly as higher  education costs rise—is less certain as the variation in returns for  higher education is increasing.  Thus, the private loan market  supplies an inefficiently low amount of credit, an issue that is  mitigated by the Federal Government’s role in higher education  Third, students may not understand the variations in quality of  schools or effects of program or study choices.  They may also  lack information about costs and options for financial aid.  Low- income and first-generation prospective students can overestimate  the costs by two or three times the actual amount.120  In addition,  the complexities of Federal aid can deter students: one study found  that 30 percent of college students who would qualify for a Pell  Despite the efforts of the Obama Administration, challenges  remain.  Costs of college remain out of reach for many  individuals—even with financial aid—and many borrowers still  struggle to repay student loans that can amount to more than the  cost of a house in many parts of the country.  Low-quality schools  that prey on unwitting students demand further regulation to  ensure that they do not take advantage of students striving to gain  a good education.  PreK-12 education also needs to be  strengthened so that students enter college with the knowledge and  Unfortunately, President Trump and Congressional Republicans  are unwilling to solve these market failures.  Instead of putting  forth plans to tackle these problems, the Trump Administration  wants to roll back the steps Democrats have taken to improve  chances for students to get an education that makes them and their  families better off.  Republican actions would hurt students’ ability  to pay for college, increase student susceptibility to bad actors, and  undermine the PreK-12 system that prepares students for college.    What is Needed to Improve Student Access and Benefits from  Over the past eight years, the Obama Administration took steps to  ensure that students can benefit from access to education and reap  the benefits in the labor market by helping students pay for  college; easing the burden of student loan debt; improving  information about college quality and protecting students from  low-quality programs; and ensuring more students are college- ready.  Although progress has been made, more action is needed  to ensure that students are receiving the education they need to  succeed in the workplace and to fuel the competitiveness of  business in America in a globally integrated and competitive  AFFORDABILITY.  During the Great Recession, as states cut funding  for public institutions, tuition and fees rose.  Tuition rose by 9.4  percent for the 2009-2010 school year and by 6.6 percent for the  2010-2011 school year.122  To help, President Obama and  Congress increased the maximum Pell Grant award by roughly  $1,000.  Pell Grants reduced the cost of college by $3,700 for over  8 million students last year.  Given research showing that an offer  of $1,000 in grant aid increases the probability of attending college  by 3.6 percentage points, these increases had large effects on  college attendance and completion.123  The Council of Economic  Advisers found that Pell Grant expansions under the Obama  Administration led to at least an additional 250,000 students  attending college or completing a college degree in 2014-2015, for  an additional $20 billion in earnings and a 2:1 return on the  investment.  The Obama Administration established the American  Opportunity Tax Credit (AOTC) to reduce taxes for low- and  middle-income families with a member attending college.  In  2014, 23 percent of credit and tuition deduction dollars went to  filers with incomes under $25,000, compared with 5 percent  before the AOTC.  In 2016, the AOTC cut taxes by an average of  over $1,800 for nearly ten million families.124  Due to the Obama  Administration’s actions, even as the sticker cost of attendance  rose from 2009 to 2017, the price after grants and tax aid rose more  The Obama Administration also took steps to both improve access  to Federal student loans and improve affordability.  The 2010  student reform law shifted over $60 billion in savings to students  from private financial institutions and banks and kept interest rates  for student borrowers low.  The Obama Administration also  worked to ensure that students have affordable loan payments.   While most students have modest levels of debt (59 percent of  borrowers owed less than $20,000 in 2015) or have high earnings  to match their high debt levels (as happens for instance for many  law school graduates), borrowers who attend low-quality schools  or leave without a degree struggle with repayment.  In fact,  defaults are actually more likely among those with lower debt  burdens because those borrowers tend to not have received the  quality education necessary to realize earnings gains.126  In  response, the Administration expanded income-driven repayment  plans: over 20 percent of borrowers are now in income driven  repayment, up from less than 4 percent in 2011.127  Although most students have levels of debt they can handle,  student loan debt may be causing them to delay or forgo other key  milestones in life such as buying a home, getting married, and  saving for retirement.  Investments in housing by young  Americans with student loan debt have yet to return to their pre- recession levels.128  Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of  Boston shows that student loan debt is associated with lower  wealth holdings, due to greater expenses and lower disposable  Many students also continue to have “unmet need”—the gap  between college costs and what students can afford to pay on their  own or with grants.130  The problem is particularly acute among  lower-income students: 95 percent of full-time students in  community college in the lowest income quartile had unmet need  in 2011-2012.131  Need-based grants can increase the probability  that students not only attend college, but also graduate.132  Instead of helping students afford higher education, Republicans  have proposed freezing the maximum Pell Grant for ten years, at  the same time as tuition and other costs are increasing.133   Maximum Pell Grants are already only about 30 percent of the cost  of attending a 4-year public college, down from about 70 percent  in 1980.  If their plan were put into place, by 2025 it would only  cover about 20 percent of the cost, hurting the ability of students  from low-income families to get an education and succeed in the  labor market.134  Assuming current inflation projections, this  would cost students up to around $1,500 dollars in 2026.135   The Trump Administration does not appear to be interested in a  large driver of increases in tuition costs, which is cuts in state  funding.136  On average, states are spending 18 percent less per  student than before the recession, and spending in nine states is  down by more than 30 percent.137  Decreases in state spending  contributed to high tuition increases: tuition at public 4-year  schools for the 2009-2010 school year was up by 9.4 percent over  the previous year, adjusted for inflation.138  While the growth rate  has now slowed to 1.6 percent in the most recent school year,  students have not seen a decrease since 1980-1981.139  The Trump  Administration has not proposed steps to increase state funding,  and if anything seems likely to propose further cuts.   Congressional Republicans have also called for expanding the role  of private industry in student loan origination, which would make  education less affordable for many students.140  Many students  find it difficult to obtain fair private-sector loans.  Future earnings  from education are difficult to predict, and lenders do not have  tangible assets that they can claim in the case of default (as  opposed to, for example, a mortgage).141  In addition, private  sector loans are often more expensive for students: they can have  interest rates that are at least four times as high as those available  from the Federal Government.142  That would mean that the  average student borrower graduating from college in 2015 could  be paying almost $250 more a month in student loans if they  borrow from a private lender, for a total cost of almost $30,000  over the life of the loan.143  Finally, while, the Federal Government  offers income-based repayment to help payers manage their loans,  current private sector loans do not offer such services.144   ACCOUNTABILITY.  The Obama Administration also worked to  inform students about colleges that may not serve them well.  The  Department of Education’s College Scorecard provides data on  college outcomes for all institutions, allowing students to see how  colleges perform on measures like graduates’ employment.  In  addition, given that some colleges fail to meet baseline levels of  quality, the Obama Administration took actions to protect  students.  Fifty-five percent of students at for-profit colleges do  not complete their degrees, and they are by far the most likely to  default on their student loans.  That is why the Gainful  Employment regulations state that Federal aid will be eliminated  to career college programs that consistently fail accountability  standards.  In 2014, about 1,400 programs serving 840,000  students did not pass these standards.  Ninety-nine percent of these  programs are at for-profit institutions.  The Obama Administration  also released rules to protect students from aggressive and  In contrast, President Trump wants to decrease college  accountability to the Federal Government, claiming that it would  save costs.146  Instead, he is likely to make students more  susceptible to for-profit institutions that make false claims to  students and leave them struggling with student loan debt.   Investors seem to believe that President Trump will be good for  the profits of for-profit schools: stock prices of for-profit college  companies rose sharply after the election.147  This supposition is  backed up by the testimony of Secretary of Education Betsy  DeVos during her confirmation, who stated that the Department of  Education would review the Gainful Employment rule.148  Despite  Republicans’ dire claims, research shows that sanctions on for- profit colleges lead to students enrolling in local community  colleges, meaning that they can access education at a more  Finally, President Trump and Congressional Republicans have  proposed actions that would undermine our K-12 educational  system expected to make more students unprepared for higher  education.  President Trump has proposed taking $20 billion in  Federal funding and turning them into block grants for vouchers  in the states.150  Research on other types of block grants to states  has shown that these funds tend to be used for purposes that are  not the original intention of the grants.151  Block grants also  respond poorly to changing conditions—such as an increase in the  number of students—that may require more funding.152  Vouchers  also do not work in rural areas or other areas of low population  density where there may be only one or two schools.153  Although the Obama Administration has taken more actions to  help students reap the benefits of higher education in an affordable  way, more needs to be done to reverse decades of rising costs,  ensure that students are protected from predatory or low-quality  institutions, and prepare students for a college education.154   Instead of taking steps to build on this progress, the Trump  Administration and Congressional Republicans want to let the  private sector once again benefit at the expense of students, cut  funding that helps students get a good education, and forgo the  societal benefits of increased college attendance.  These proposals  Global climate change presents some of the greatest risks and  opportunities for the U.S. economy today and in the decades  ahead.  The effects of climate change are already having  significant impacts on the U.S. and global economy.  These costs  and disruptions will only continue to grow in the future,  particularly if the United States and others in the global  community delay actions to avert irreversible climate changes.    In the near term, increased temperatures are projected to result in  adverse health outcomes for individuals, potentially lowering life  expectancies and increasing the cost of health care.  Labor  productivity for workers that spend substantial time outside will  decrease, and agricultural output along with it.  Rising  temperatures are also linked to an increase in extreme weather  events, such as heat waves and floods, which cause damage to  private and public property, disrupt economic activity, and  squeeze public budgets.  Further, rising sea levels will displace  coastal communities, can drastically lower property values, and  raise the specter of widespread crop failures.  In the longer term,  these changes will dramatically reshape how humans live across  The risks posed by climate change also present opportunities to  attract new investment and create good, new jobs producing  world-leading technological innovations—opportunities that will  benefit in America’s urban and rural areas alike.  Investment and  job creation, however, are unlikely to materialize on their own.   Advanced research in technologies relevant for renewable energy  generation and distribution, and technologies for climate change  adaptation face concrete market failures that result in less  investment supplied from the private sector than is socially  optimal.  This would be true even without the costly subsidization  of fossil fuel-based energy, even though innovation and  productivity gains are making renewable energies increasingly  cost competitive with legacy fossil-fuel technologies.  Recognizing these risks and opportunities, the Obama  Administration took historic strides to steer the United States on a  path toward lowering carbon emissions and mitigating the worst  of climate change’s effects, while stimulating investment in the  renewable energy systems of the future.  President Trump,  however, has repeatedly called climate change a hoax, and  members of his Administration, along with many Republican  members of Congress, have threatened to roll back the progress  made to date and attempted to muzzle privately and publicly  funded scientific research that threatens the status quo.156  If  climate change and science skeptics prevail, failure to mitigate the  risks and prepare for the devastation of climate change will saddle  future generations with severe environmental and economic  challenges.  Further, by obstructing the transition to a clean energy  economy already underway, Republicans are preventing  American workers and businesses from leading the world on what  may prove the 21st Century’s most important technological  Hidden and Explicit Pollution Subsidies Distort Business and  The issue of climate change raises numerous textbook examples  of negative externalities—costs of an individual’s choice or  activity that are borne by people beyond that individual.  These  costs are not incorporated in the market price signals that  consumers and investors face.  These negative externalities  resulting in climate change from greenhouse gas emissions are  significant and pervasive.  When buyers and sellers engage in  transactions that produce emissions and other pollutants, they  generally are not being asked to fully pay for the cost of the  damage to the environment and economy that result.  Because  prices in these markets do not reflect the true costs, individual  choices to consume goods with high negative externalities lead to  outcomes that produce more polluting emissions than is optimal  Without a policy that internalizes the costs that carbon emissions  and other pollution create, such as a carbon tax, the price of carbon  will not make economic sense.  Recent research from the National  Bureau of Economic Research finds that these incentive  structures, along with climate change skepticism, are lowering the  pace of innovation and implementation for clean energy  Current government policies exacerbate this even further, though.   Already implicitly subsidized by a policy failure to account for the  costs of pollution, the Federal Government explicitly subsidizes  fossil fuel production with $4 billion per year in tax credits,  incentivizing the over-exploitation of oil, coal and natural gas.158   The government has also leased out large swaths of Federal land  to coal companies at less than prevailing market values.  Flaws in  the auction and leasing processes for public lands and use rights  for extractive industries have resulted in coal companies receiving  extremely generous leases at below-market rates, subsidizing coal  production by more than $300 million a year.159  These policies  further distort the energy market to advantage fossil fuels at the  These market failures have led to rapid rises in greenhouse gas  emissions tracing back to the Industrial Revolution.  Since 1800,  the concentration of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere—the  main greenhouse gases emitted by humans—has risen by 45  percent, with half of that increase occurring in the past 35 years.160   Scientists overwhelmingly conclude that these increased  emissions (and those of other greenhouse gases) are driving the  warming that the globe is experiencing.161  Indeed, 2016 was the  warmest year on record, and the third straight year in which that  record was broken.  Moreover, 16 of the 17 warmest years on  Although challenging to quantify costs of the myriad externalities  associated with greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, the  Obama Administration estimated a measure of the Social Cost of  Carbon measure, which attempted to calculate this cost.  The  measure accounts for changes in net agricultural productivity,  human health, property damages from floods and energy system  costs, among other factors.  Overall, the Administration estimated  that one ton of CO2 emitted in 2015 cost society $42 that is not  consumption.163  With 6.9 million tons of CO2 emitted annually in  the United States, this is nearly $300 billion in costs that society  bears each year as a result of price signals failing to coordinate  efficient individual decisions in the private marketplace.164  The  measure projects that this cost will rise over time, as the marginal  impact of further emissions increases with the growing  prominence of greenhouse gasses in Earth’s atmosphere, and is  forecast to rise to $81 per ton of CO2 by 2050.165  A reliable Social Cost of Carbon measure allows Federal  regulators and policymakers to factor widely felt climate change  impacts into cost-benefit analyses.  Some experts, however,  believe that this measure errs on the conservative side by not fully  incorporating the full range of costs.  One recent study suggests  that the cost could already be as high as $225 per ton of CO2,  which equates to about an additional $2.21 per gallon of  In 2006, the United Kingdom released a review of the scientific  research on climate change.  This report, known as the Stern  Review, concluded that climate change will decrease global GDP  by 5 to 20 percent per year in the long run if no action is taken to  mitigate it.167  A more recent study suggests that the costs will  likely be at the high end of that range—costing the global economy  20 percent of GDP by the year 2100.168  Unless aggressive steps  are taken now to make headway in mitigating and adapting to the  challenges of climate change, changes will be irreversible and will  dramatically reshape the lives of Americans and the rest of the  There is little time to lose in mitigating the worst effects of climate  change.169  The Obama Administration took important strides  toward putting the United States on a path to do this: investing in  clean energy research and deployment; establishing emission  standards for power plants; updating and issuing new efficiency  standards for vehicles and appliances; and committing with a  group of 197 countries in agreeing to work together in mitigating  climate change in the 2015 Paris Agreement.170  The rhetoric of  President Trump and officials in his Administration, as well as that  of congressional Republicans, however, forebode hostile  resistance to the progress made to date that will set America back  in its efforts to tackle climate change and to harness the economic  opportunities created by this existential environmental challenge.  Republicans frequently and wrongly cite Obama-era regulations  as the main driver in the declining fortunes of the coal sector and  coal’s share in the U.S. energy portfolio.171  In reality, though,  coal’s declining market share is due to the emergence of cheap,  abundant natural gas and declines in the cost of renewable energy  production, even despite the implicit subsidy to coal production  and energy generation from externalities inadequately addressed  by law making and regulation.172  The hardships that traditional  coal-driven economies are an important concern for policymakers,  who must find ways to deliver investment and opportunities for  re-employment in good jobs for workers in coal country as the  industry becomes increasingly economically inviable.  But any  actions taken by Trump to artificially prop up legacy fossil fuel  companies are unlikely to permanently reverse the market-based  trends leading toward cleaner energy sources.  They will, however,  delay progress toward transitioning to clean energy and mitigating  As part of the Paris Agreement, the United States and other  countries agreed to work together to keep global temperatures  from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial  levels—the level of warming necessary to avert the most  devastating effects of climate change.173  Altogether, these  countries likely need to limit further carbon emissions to under  800 gigatons in order to meet the goal.  If all of the fossil fuels in  already-producing mines and oil fields were consumed, though,  total emissions would be more than 940 gigatons of CO2.174 This  suggests that countries should be looking to transition away from  existing fossil fuel extraction and energy generation, not  subsidizing the opening of new mines and fields.  President  Trump’s energy agenda, however, could include restarting  sweetheart Federal contracts for coal reserves.175  This would  further distort the market advantage enjoyed by fossil fuels from  implicit subsidies and incentivize fossil fuel producers to ramp up  extraction, putting GHG targets farther out of reach for Americans  President Trump and the GOP have also pledged to stop factoring  climate change into regulatory decision making, such as the  Administration’s decision to proceed with the Dakota Access  Pipeline.  President Trump’s transition webpage said that his  Administration would stop focusing on “phony” environmental  challenges, and pledged to repeal Obama-era regulations and  withdraw from the Paris Agreement.176  Speaker Paul Ryan’s  Better Way plan stated that “efforts to target [greenhouse gas]  emissions are a serious and growing barrier to energy development  and use.”177 In addition to the potential for actually repealing laws  and regulations that reduce greenhouse gases, this is a strong  signal to businesses and individuals that energy efficiency and  emission reduction are no longer priorities for the Federal  One of the primary Republican targets for deregulation is the  Clean Power Plan (CPP), which set carbon emission targets for  power plants and gave states the autonomy to tailor their own plans  for meeting these targets in ways that best fit each state’s unique  situation.  The CPP is projected to decrease emissions by 870  million tons of carbon by 2030, which would create a net benefit  to the economy of $25 billion to $45 billion in 2030.178  Removing  these targets would make it much harder to meet long-term  emission-reduction targets, and more likely that Americans will  The United States has a big role to play in taking on climate  change, as the second-largest contributor to global carbon  emissions according to the latest data available.179  The United  States also committed to support the Paris Agreement by  providing resources to developing countries to help them tackle  climate change.  Withdrawing from the Agreement and not  making progress toward its targets would greatly harm global  efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change.  It would also  make the United States one of the few countries not actively  This will likely only delay the United States’ efforts to take on  climate change, but it could also have lasting effects on the  economy.  The Council of Economic Advisers found that if a delay  causes global temperatures to rise to 3 degrees Celsius above pre- industrial temperatures, global output would fall by 0.9 percent.   Additionally, when the United States inevitably rejoins the fight  against climate change, even more dramatic steps will need to be  taken, which will undoubtedly cause the cost of taking those  Even under the most optimistic scenario, in which the United  States and other countries aggressively work toward mitigating  climate change, some adverse effects are unavoidable.   Temperatures are already on the rise, and extreme weather events  are becoming more frequent.181  Policymakers in the United States  need to prepare for these impacts at the same time as working  toward mitigation by enhancing infrastructure to withstand  extreme weather, building up emergency management resources  and funds, and educating people and businesses to make smart  energy use choices and investments.  If the Trump Administration  and Republicans in Congress fail to address these issues seriously,  state and local governments, businesses, and individuals will be  saddled with the full costs of climate change’s unavoidable  Missing Opportunities to Lead a New Energy Revolution  Republicans frequently depict climate change as a choice between  helping the environment and fostering economic growth, but the  two can be powerful complements when combined with smart  policymaking.  Many countries, including the United States, have  seen their economies grow while simultaneously decreasing  emissions in recent years.182  The Obama Administration  demonstrated how this can be accomplished, investing $90 billion  in clean energy research and deployment in response to the Great  Recession—these investments supported more than 100,000 jobs  per year from 2009 to 2015 while spurring major advances in  renewable energy.183  The Trump Administration and GOP,  however, can hinder the growth of the clean energy industry in  America, and in turn cause American workers to miss out on the  jobs and other economic benefits that it will create.  The clean energy sector is already a substantial part of America’s  economy.  More people now work in solar electricity generation  (373,000 workers) than in coal, natural gas and other fossil fuel  industries combined (198,000 workers).  Wind energy, too, is a  major employer in the United States, with more than 100,000 jobs  in 2016.  Overall, an additional 2.2 million Americans are  employed in the design, manufacturing and installation of energy  efficiency goods and services, according to the Department of  The industry has vast potential to continue growing.  Estimates  suggest that fully transitioning to clean energy would create more  jobs than are lost in fossil fuel sectors—potentially gaining two  million net new jobs.185  This aligns with research that  demonstrates that most job growth comes from new and growing  Clean energy jobs are generally good jobs, as well.  Brookings  Institution researchers found that workers in the Clean Economy  earned wages 13 percent higher than the median wage in 2011,  while the jobs also required less formal education than the average  job.  Further, the industry is more heavily concentrated in  manufacturing and exports a greater share of its products than the  economy overall.187  If the Trump Administration wants to follow  through on its promises to raise wages for the working class,  support American manufacturing, and reduce the trade deficit,  investing in clean energy would be a good place to start.  Evidence to date, though, suggests that the Trump Administration  and Congressional Republicans are more likely to attempt to  hinder this transition by reducing or even zeroing out Federal  investment in clean energy and continuing to distort markets to  advantage fossil fuels.188  While they are doing this, the rest of the  globe will be increasing their investments and efforts to transition  to the energy sources of the future.  China recently announced that  they would invest more than $360 billion in renewable energy by  2020—four times the investment the United States made in the  American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.189  Other countries,  too, are ramping up investments in clean energy technology.190  It is likely that America’s clean energy sector will continue to  grow despite Republicans’ best efforts.  However, absent a  significant role for the public sector to illuminate the path ahead  and to correct market failures by setting welfare-enhancing  incentives, the United States risks fall behind and becoming  dependent on imported renewable energy technology, goods, and  services.  With the Federal Government no longer supporting the  industry while other countries are enhancing their support, though,  it is also likely that some investments that would have otherwise  been made in America will go to China and other countries.   Having a president who is explicitly and vocally opposed to their  mission will factor into companies’ decisions on whether to locate  factories and other assets in the United States, or to locate them in  countries where they will receive support and investment from the  government.  Rather than leading the United States to energy  independence, President Trump is likely leading us to a future  where America is importing solar panels, wind turbine parts and  batteries from China or other foreign sources.     1 That is, production and non-supervisory workers.   2 Blinder, Alan S. and Mark Zandi. “The Financial Crisis: Lessons for the  Next One.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. October 15, 2015.  http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/10-15-15pf.pdf.   3 A “job-year” is the equivalent of one full-time job for one year. Council of  Economic Advisers. “Chapter 1: Eight Years of Recovery and Reinvestment,”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.   4 NBER business cycle dating identifies June 2009 as the overall economy’s  business cycle bottom. However, consistent with the preceding two business  cycles, the U.S. labor market remained depressed for some time. JEC  Democrats date the labor market trough from the Great Recession to February  5 Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman. “Economic growth  in the United States: A tale of two countries.” Washington Center for  Equitable Growth. December 6, 2016. http://equitablegrowth.org/research- analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/.   6 Zucman, Gabriel and Emmanuel Saez. “Wealth Inequality in the United  States since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data.” Accessed  February 15, 2017. http://gabriel-zucman.eu/uswealth/  7 Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman. “Economic growth  in the United States: A tale of two countries.” Washington Center for  Equitable Growth. December 6, 2016. http://equitablegrowth.org/research- analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united-states-a-tale-of-two-countries/; and,  Stiglitz, Joseph. Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy. New York:  8 Okun, Arthur M. Equality and Efficiency: The Big Tradeoff. Washington,  9 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 1: Inclusive Growth in the United  States.” In Economic Report of the President. February 2016.  10 Ostry, Jonathan D., Andrew Berg, and Charalambos G. Tsangarides.  “Redistribution, Inequality, and Growth.” International Monetary Fund.  February 2014. http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdf.   11 Bivens, Josh and Lawrence Mishel. “The Pay of Corporate Executives and  Financial Professionals as Evidence of Rents in Top 1 Percent Incomes.”  Journal of Economic Perspectives 27, no. 3 (2013): 57-78.  12 Stiglitz, Joseph. Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy. New York:  Roosevelt Institute, May 2015; Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 1:  Inclusive Growth in the United States.” In Economic Report of the President.  February 2016; and, Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, Stefanie Stantcheva.  “Optimal Taxation of Top Labor Incomes: A Tale of Three Elasticities.”  National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 17616. Revised  13 Stiglitz, Joseph. The Price of Inequality: How Today's Divided Society  Endangers Our Future. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, April 2013.   14 Ibid; and, Ostry, Jonathan D., Andrew Berg, and Charalambos G.  Tsangarides. “Redistribution, Inequality, and Growth.” International Monetary  http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2014/sdn1402.pdf.   15 Mondragón-Vélez, Camilo. “How Does Middle-Class Financial Health  Affect Entrepreneurship in America?” Center for American Progress. May  content/uploads/2015/05/MiddleClassEntrepreneurs-5.7.pdf.  16 OECD. In It Together: Why Less Inequality Benefits All. Paris: OECD  17 Alesina, Alberto and Dani Rodrik. “Distributive Politics and Economic  Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 109, no. 2 (1994): 465-490.  https://www.mtholyoke.edu/courses/epaus/econ213/rodrikalesina.pdf.   18 “President Obama’s Farewell Address: Full Video and Text.” The New York  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/10/us/politics/obama-farewell-address- 19 Pickett, Kate and Richard Wilkinson. “The Spirit Level: Why Greater  Equality Makes Societies Stronger.” New York: Bloomsbury Press, April  20 Pickett, Kate and Richard Wilkinson. “The Spirit Level: Why Greater  Equality Makes Societies Stronger.” New York: Bloomsbury Press, April  2010; Milanović, Branko. Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of  Globalization. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, April 2016; Bjørnskov,  Christian. “How does social trust affect economic growth?” Southern  http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/41638856.pdf; Jayadev, Arjun, and Samuel  Bowles. “Guard labor.” Journal of Development Economics 79 no. 2 (2006):  328-348; Boushey, Heather and Adam Hersh. “The American Middle Class,  Income Inequality, and the Strength of Our Economy.” Center for American  https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2012/05/17/11628/ the-american-middle-class-income-inequality-and-the-strength-of-our- economy/; and Piketty, Thomas, Emmanuel Saez, and Gabriel Zucman.  “Economic growth in the United States: A tale of two countries.” Washington  http://equitablegrowth.org/research-analysis/economic-growth-in-the-united- 21 Saez, Emmanuel and Gabriel Zucman. “Wealth Inequality in the United  States Since 1913: Evidence from Capitalized Income Tax Data.” The  Quarterly Journal of Economics 131, no. 2 (May 2016): 519-578.  http://gabriel-zucman.eu/files/SaezZucman2016QJE.pdf.   22 Demos and Institute for Assets & Social Policy. “The Racial Wealth Gap:  http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/RacialWealthGap_2.pdf;  Demos and Institute for Assets & Social Policy. “The Asset Value of  http://www.demos.org/sites/default/files/publications/Asset%20Value%20of% 23 While many developed countries exhibit similar levels of inequality in  market incomes, other countries stand apart from the United States in the way  their tax and transfer systems redistribute from the highest rungs of the  income ladder to those down below. Measured in post-tax and transfer  income—that is after redistribution and including social spending programs— the United States ranks most unequal among the advanced countries. For  example, see Gornick, Janet C. and Branko Milanovic. “Income Inequality in  the United States in Cross-National Perspective: Redistribution Revisited.”  https://www.gc.cuny.edu/CUNY_GC/media/CUNY-Graduate- Center/PDF/Centers/LIS/LIS-Center-Research-Brief-1-2015.pdf.   24 “The Middle-Class Squeeze: A Picture of Stagnant Incomes, Rising Costs,  and What We Can Do to Strengthen America’s Middle Class.” Edited By  Jennifer Erickson. Center for American Progress. September 14, 2014.  https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2014/09/24/96903/ 25 Giovannoni, Olivier. “What Do We Know About the Labor Share and the  Profit Share? Part III: Measures and Structural Factors.” Levy Economics  Institute of Bard College Working Paper 805. May 2014.  26 Stiglitz, Joseph. Rewriting the Rules of the American Economy. New York:  28 Hsieh, Chang-tai, et al. “The Allocation of Talent and U.S. Economic  Growth.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 18693.  January 2013. http://www.nber.org/papers/w18693.pdf.   29 Weller, Christian E. and Amy B. Helburn. “Financial Stress and  Asymmetric Financial Decisions.” PERI Working Paper 243, Political  Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts Amherst. December  2010. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/6262350.pdf.  30 Heckman, James J. and Dimitriy V. Masterov. “The Productivity Argument  for Investing in Young Children.” Review of Agricultural Economics 29, no.  http://jenni.uchicago.edu/papers/Heckman_Masterov_RAE_2007_v29_n3.pdf 31 The policies of the Obama administration will boost after-tax incomes of the  bottom quintile of households by 18 percent and reduce incomes of the top 0.1  percent by 10 percent in 2017. Altogether, these policies have scaled back  one-third of the decline in the share of after-tax income of households in the  bottom quintile that occurred between 1979 and 2007. Council of Economic  Advisers. “Chapter 3: Progress Reducing Inequality,” In Economic Report of  32 Bivens, Josh. “Worst Economic Crisis Since the Great Depression? By a  http://www.epi.org/publication/snapshot_20100127/.  33 Blinder, Alan S. and Mark Zandi. “The Financial Crisis: Lessons for the  Next One.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. October 15, 2015.  http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/10-15-15pf.pdf.   34 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 3: Progress Reducing Inequality,”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  37 Batcherder, Lily L. “Families Facing Tax Increases Under Trump’s Tax  Plan.” Urban Institute & Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. October 28,  2016. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- pdfs/2000983-Families-Facing-Tax-Increases-Under-Trumps-Plan.pdf.  38 Nunns, Jim et al. “An Analysis of Donald Trump’s Revised Tax Plan.”  Urban Institute & Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. October 18, 2016.  http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- pdfs/2000924-an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-revised-tax-plan.pdf.  39 Nunns, Jim et al. “An Analysis of Donald Trump’s Tax Plan.” Urban  Institute & Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. December 22, 2015.  http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/publication/128726/2000560 40 Huang, Chye-Ching and Chloe Cho. “Ten Facts You Should Know About  the Federal Estate Tax.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. September 8,  2016. http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/1-8-15tax.pdf.  41 Nunns, Jim et al. “An Analysis of Donald Trump’s Revised Tax Plan.”  Urban Institute & Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. October 18, 2016.  http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- pdfs/2000924-an-analysis-of-donald-trumps-revised-tax-plan.pdf.  42 Nunns, Jim et al. “An Analysis of the House GOP Tax Plan.” Urban  Institute & Brookings Institution Tax Policy Center. September 16, 2016.  http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication- pdfs/2000923-An-Analysis-of-the-House-GOP-Tax-Plan.pdf.  43 Picker, Leslie. “Will Donald Trump’s Corporate ‘Tax Holiday’ Create Jobs?  Not Necessarily.” The New York Times. December 26, 2016.  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/26/business/dealbook/will-donald-trumps- corporate-tax-holiday-create-jobs-not-necessarily.html?_r=0.  44 Sommer, Jess. “A Stranded $2 Trillion Overseas Stash Gets Closer to  Coming Home.” The New York Times. November 4, 2016.  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/06/your-money/strategies-corporate-cash- 45 Congressional Research Service, U.S. Library of Congress. “Tax Cuts on  Economic Stimulus: An Economic Analysis.” December 20, 2011.  https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40178.pdf; and, Clausing, Kimberly A. “Profit  Shifting and U.S. Corporate Tax Policy Reform.” Washington Center for  Equitable Growth. May 2016. http://equitablegrowth.org/report/profit- 46 Executive Order on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Costs. January  office/2017/01/30/presidential-executive-order-reducing-regulation-and- 47 Thrush, Glenn. “Trump Vows to Dismantle Dodd-Frank ‘Disaster.’” The  https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/30/us/politics/trump-dodd-frank- 48 Executive Order on Core Principles for Regulating the United States  Financial System. February 3, 2017. https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press- office/2017/02/03/presidential-executive-order-core-principles-regulating- 49 Bender, Michael C. and Damian Paletta. “Donald Trump Plans to Undo  Dodd-Frank Law, Fiduciary Rule.” The Wall Street Journal. February 3, 2017.  https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-moves-to-undo-dodd-frank-law- 1486101602. Yellen, Janet. “Monetary Policy and the State of the Economy,”  Testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial  50 Liner, Emily. “The Economic Benefit of a Stable Financial System.  http://www.thirdway.org/report/the-economic-benefit-of-a-stable-financial- 51 Economic Policy Institute. “Minimum Wage Tracker.” Last Modified  January 31, 2017. http://www.epi.org/minimum-wage-tracker/#/tip_wage/.  52 Cooper, David. “Raising the Minimum Wage to $12 by 2020 Would Lift  Wages for 35 Million American Workers.” Economic Policy Institute. July 14,  2015. http://www.epi.org/files/2015/raising-the-minimum-wage-to-12-dollars- by-2020-would-lift-wages-for-35-million-american-workers.pdf.    53 Eisenbrey, Ross and Will Kimball. “The new overtime rule will directly  benefit 12.5 million working people.” Economic Policy Institute. May 17,  54 National Conference of State Legislatures. “Right-to-Work Resources.”  Accessed February 15, 2017. http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-and- 55 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. “Union Members  56 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. “Table 3. Union  affiliation of employed wage and salary workers by occupation and industry,  2015-2016 annual averages.” Last Modified January 26, 2017.  57 National Right to Work Act, proposed bill, S. 391, 114th Cong. (2016).  https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/391.  58 Congressional Budget Office. “How Repealing Portions of the Affordable  Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums.” January  2017. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017- 59 Long, Michelle, Matthew Rae, Gary Claxton, and Anthony Damico.  “Trends in Employer-Sponsored Insurance Offer and Coverage Rates, 1999- 2014.” The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. March 21, 2016.   60 Pollitz, Karen, Cynthia Cox, Kevin Lucia, and Katie Keith. “Medical Debt  Among People With Health Insurance.” The Henry J. Kaiser Family  61 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: Reforming the Health Care  System.” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  64 Garber, Alan M. and Jonathan Skinner. “Is American Health Care Uniquely  Inefficient?” Journal of Economic Perspectives 22, no. 4 (2008): 27-50.  65 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: Reforming the Health Care  System.” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  67 Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health &  Human Services. “November 2016 Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment Data  Highlights.” https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/program- information/medicaid-and-chip-enrollment-data/report-highlights/index.html;  Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health &  Human Services. “Total Medicare Enrollment: Total, Original Medicare, and  Medicare Advantage and Other Health Plan Enrollment, Calendar Years  2008-2013.” https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and- Reports/CMSProgramStatistics/2013/Enrollment.html; Office of the Assistant  Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S. Department of Health & Human  Services. “Health Insurance Marketplaces 2016 Open Enrollment Period Final  Enrollment Report for the period: November 1, 2015 – February 1, 2016.”  https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/187866/Finalenrollment2016.pdf;  and, U.S. Census Bureau. “Health Insurance Coverage in the United States:  2015.” http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2016/demo/p60-257.html  68 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: Reforming the Health Care  System.” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  72 The ACA’s ten essential benefits that must be included in all health plans  are: ambulatory services, emergency services, hospitalization, maternity and  newborn coverage, behavioral health services, prescription drug coverage,  rehabilitation services and devices, laboratory services, preventive services,  and pediatric services. See, Patient Protection and Affordable Cart Act of  73 Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health &  Human Services. “November 2016 Medicaid and CHIP Enrollment Data  Highlights.” https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/program- information/medicaid-and-chip-enrollment-data/report-highlights/index.html.  74 Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S.  Department of Health & Human Services. “Computations for the 2016 Annual  Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the  https://www.cms.gov/Newsroom/MediaReleaseDatabase/Fact-sheets/2016- Fact-sheets-items/2016-06-30.html; The official income threshold is 133  percent of FPL plus provides a 5 percent income disregard to account for  unexpected income, making the effective threshold 138 percent of poverty.  See, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, U.S.  Department of Health & Human Services. “Prior HHS Poverty Guidelines and  Federal Register References.” https://aspe.hhs.gov/prior-hhs-poverty- 75 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: Reforming the Health Care  System.” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017; National  Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius. 11–393 (2011); and, Truffer,  Christopher J., Christian J. Wolfe, Kathryn E. Rennie. “2016 Actuarial Report  of the Financial Outlook for Medicaid.” Office of the Actuary, Centers for  Medicare & Medicaid Services, U.S. Department of Health & Human  Services. https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and- Systems/Research/ActuarialStudies/Downloads/MedicaidReport2016.pdf.   76 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: Reforming the Health Care  System.” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  85 Ibid; and, Chatterji, Pinka, Peter Brandon, and Sara Markowitz. \"Job  mobility among parents of children with chronic health conditions: Early  effects of the 2010 Affordable Care Act.\"  48 (2016): 26-43.  http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167629616300042.  86 Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. “Labor Force  92 Congressional Budget Office. “How Repealing Portions of the Affordable  Care Act Would Affect Health Insurance Coverage and Premiums.” January  2017. https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/115th-congress-2017- 93 Office of the Press Secretary, The White House. “Executive Order  Minimizing the Economic Burden of the Patient Protection and Affordable  https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2017/01/2/executive-order- minimizing-economic-burden-patient-protection-and.   94 Joint Economic Committee Calculations, from the Bureau of Labor  Statistics Weekly Earnings Data from the Current Population Survey.  95 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey, Table 7 Annual  96 Joint Economic Committee Calculations, from the Bureau of Labor  Statistics Weekly Earnings Data from the Current Population Survey; and,  Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher Education,”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  97 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: The Economics of Family- Friendly Workplace Policies,” In Economic Report of the President. February  2015; and, Joint Economic Committee Calculations, from the American  98 Mitchell, Michael, Michael Leachman, and Kathleen Masterson. “Funding  Down, Tuition Up.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2016.  http://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/funding-down-tuition-up.   99 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher Education,”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017; and, Cooper, Daniel and  J. Christina Wang. “Student Loan Debt and Economic Outcomes.” Federal  Reserve Bank of Boston: Current Policy Perspectives 2014, no. 7 (2014).  https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/current-policy- perspectives/2014/student-loan-debt-and-economic-outcomes.aspx.  100 Joint Economic Committee Calculations, based on a loan of $31,000 over  10 years, with 3.76 percent interest for Federal loans and 18 percent interest  101 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  102 National Science Board, Science & Engineering Indicators 2016. Table 2- 11. https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsb20161/uploads/1/12/tt02-11.pdf.   103 Mamiseishvili, Ketevan, and Vicki J. Rosser. \"International and citizen  faculty in the United States: An examination of their productivity at research  universities.\" Research in Higher Education 51, no. 1 (2010): 88.  http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11162-009-9145-8.   104 White House Fact Sheet. “Fact Sheet: Investing More than $50 Million  through ApprenticeshipUSA to Expand Proven Pathways into the Middle  https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/newsroom/newsreleases/WhiteHouseF 107 Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Population Survey.  108 Joint Economic Committee Calculations, from the Bureau of Labor  Statistics Weekly Earnings Data from the Current Population Survey.  109 The earnings premium compares the median full-time, full-year worker  over age 25 with a bachelor’s degree only to the same type of worker with just  a high school degree. Prior to 1992, bachelor’s degree is defined as four years  of college. Earnings premium from CEA calculations. Council of Economic  Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher Education,” In Economic Report of  110 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  112 Isaacs, Julia, Isabel V. Sawhill, and Ron Haskins. “Getting Ahead or  Losing Ground: Economic Mobility in America.” (2016).  content/uploads/2016/06/02_economic_mobility_sawhill.pdf.   113 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 4: The Economics of Family- Friendly Workplace Policies,” In Economic Report of the President. February  114 Joint Economic Committee Calculations, from the American Community  115 Barro, Robert J. “Economic Growth in a Cross Section of Countries.” The  Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, no. 2 (1991): 407-43.  116 Moretti, Enrico. “Workers' Education, Spillovers, and Productivity:  Evidence from Plant-Level Production Functions.” The American Economic  Review 94, no. 3 (2004): 656-90. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3592947.   117 Hanushek, Eric A., and Dennis D. Kimko. “Schooling, labor-force quality,  and the growth of nations.” American economic review (2000): 1184-1208.  118 Barro, Robert J. “Human capital and growth.” The American Economic  Review 91, no. 2 (2001): 12-17. http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2677725.pdf;  Barro, Robert and Jong-Hwa Lee. Education Matters: Global Schooling Gains  from the 19th to the 21st Century (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015);  and, Hanushek, Eric A., and Ludger Woessmann. “Do Better Schools Lead to  More Growth? Cognitive Skills, Economic Outcomes, and Causation,”  Journal of Economic Growth 17, no. 4, p. 267-321.   119 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  122 College Board, numbers adjusted for inflation.   123 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  128 Brown, Meta, Sydnee Caldwell, and Sarah Sutherland. “Just Released:  Young Student Loan Borrowers Remained on the Sidelines of the Housing  Market in 2013.” Federal Reserve Bank of New York: Liberty Street  Economics. 2014. http://libertystreeteconomics.newyorkfed.org/2014/05/just- released-young-student-loan-borrowers-remained-on-the-sidelines-of-the- 129 Cooper, Daniel and J. Christina Wang. “Student Loan Debt and Economic  Outcomes.” Federal Reserve Bank of Boston: Current Policy Perspectives  2014, no. 7 (2014). https://www.bostonfed.org/publications/current-policy- perspectives/2014/student-loan-debt-and-economic-outcomes.aspx.   130 Choitz, Vickie, and Patrick Reimherr. “Mind the Gap: High Unmet  Financial Need Threatens Persistence and Completion for Low-Income  http://www.clasp.org/resources-and-publications/files/CLASP-Unmet-Need- 131 Walizer, Lauren. “Barriers to Success: High Unmet Financial Need  Continues to Endanger Higher Education Opportunities for Low-Income  Students.” CLASP. 2015. http://www.clasp.org/resources-and- publications/publication-1/Barriers-to-Success-High-Unmet-Financial-Need- Continues-to-Endanger-Higher-Education-Opportunities.pdf.   132 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  133 House Budget Committee Majority Staff. “FY 2016 Budget Resolution: A  http://budget.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fy16budget.pdf.   134 Reich, David and Brandon Debot. “House Budget Committee Plan Cuts  Pell Grants Deeply, Reducing Access to Higher Education.” Center on Budget  and Policy Priorities. 2015. http://www.cbpp.org/research/house-budget- committee-plan-cuts-pell-grants-deeply-reducing-access-to-higher-education.   135 Congressional Budget Office. “The Budget and Economic Outlook: 2017  to 2017.” 2017. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/52370; and, Joint Economic  136 Mitchell, Michael, Michael Leachman, and Kathleen Masterson. “Funding  Down, Tuition Up.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2016.  http://www.cbpp.org/research/state-budget-and-tax/funding-down-tuition-up.   138 College Board. Table 2. Average Tuition and Fees and Room and Board.  https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2016-table-2.xls.   140 Stratford, Michael. “With GOP in control, private sector pushes for  increased role in student loans.” PoliticoPro. December 9, 2016.  https://www.politicopro.com/education/story/2016/12/with-gop-in-control- private-sector-pushes-for-increased-role-in-student-loans-140376.   141 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  142 Department of Education. “Federal vs. Private Loans.” Accessed February  15, 2017. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/loans/Federal-vs-private.   143 Assuming an average debt of $30,100 over 10 years, with a 3.76 percent  interest rate from Direct Subsidized Loans as opposed to an 18 percent interest  rate in the private sector. http://ticas.org/posd/map-state-data,  https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/loans/subsidized-unsubsidized#how-much.  Total payment over the life of the loan is a monthly payment over 10 years,  144 Department of Education. “Federal vs. Private Loans.” Accessed February  15, 2017. https://studentaid.ed.gov/sa/types/loans/Federal-vs-private.   145 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 5: Investing in Higher  Education,” In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  146 Douglas-Gabriel, Danielle. “Trump just laid out a pretty radical student  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/10/13/trump- just-laid-out-a-pretty-radical-student-debt-plan/?utm_term=.cfac23c0545c.   147 Dynarski, Susan. “With Trump, Investors See Profits Again in For-Profit  https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/upshot/with-trump-investors-see- 148 Douglas-Gabriel, Danielle. “What we learned about Betsy DeVos’s higher  education positions…not much.” Washington Post. January 18, 2016.  https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/01/18/what-we- learned-about-betsy-devoss-higher-education-positions-not- 149 Cellini, Stephanie R., Rajeev Darolia, and Lesley J. Turner. “Where Do  Students Go when For-Profit Colleges Lose Federal Aid?” National Bureau of  150 Donald J Trump for President. “Trump Outlines Bold New Plan for School  Choice.” Accessed February 15, 2017. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press- releases/donald-j.-trump-remarks-on-school-choice.   151 Schott, Liz and Ife Floyd. “How States Use Funds Under the TANF Block  Grant.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. 2017.  http://www.cbpp.org/research/family-income-support/how-states-use-funds- 152 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “Chart Book: TANF at 20.” 2016.  http://www.cbpp.org/research/family-income-support/chart-book-tanf-at-20.   153 Whitehurst, Grover. “Public School Vouchers: Where are the Campaigns?”  Brookings Institution. 2015. https://www.brookings.edu/research/public- 154 College Board. Table 2. Average Tuition and Fees and Room and Board.  https://trends.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/cp-2016-table-2.xls.   155 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  156 Jacobson, Louis. “Yes, Donald Trump did call climate change a Chinese  hoax.” Politifact. June 3, 2016. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o- meter/statements/2016/jun/03/hillary-clinton/yes-donald-trump-did-call- climate-change-chinese-h/; Volcovici, Valerie and P.J. Huffstutter. “Trump  administration seeks to muzzle U.S. agency employees.” Reuters. January 24,  2017. http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-epa-idUSKBN15822X;  and, Roberts, David and Brad Plumer. “Most people are wildly  underestimating what Trump’s win will mean for the environment.” Vox.  November 14, 2016. http://www.vox.com/science-and- health/2016/11/14/13582562/trump-gop-climate-environmental-policy.   157 Kahn, Matthew E. and Daxuan Zhao. “The Impact of Climate Change  Skepticism on Adaption in a Market Economy.” National Bureau of Economic  Research Working Paper 23155. http://www.nber.org/papers/w23155.   158 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  159 Council of Economic Advisers, “The Economics of Coal Leasing on  160 JEC Economic Committee calculations, using Mauna Loa CO2 weekly  mean and historical comparisons database, from “Trends in Atmospheric  Carbon Dioxide.” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.  https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/data.html.   161 “Scientific consensus: Earth’s climate is warming.” National Aeronautics  and Space Administration. Accessed February 15, 2017.  http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/; and, Intergovernmental Panel on  162 “NASA, NOAA Data Show 2016 Warmest Year on Record Globally.”  National Aeronautics and Space Administration. January 18, 2017.  https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-noaa-data-show-2016-warmest-year- 163 Adjusted to December 2016 dollars using CPI-U-RS. “The Social Cost of  Carbon.” Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed February 15, 2017.  https://www.epa.gov/climatechange/social-cost-carbon.  164 Joint Economic Committee calculations from Environmental Protection  Agency. “U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Report: 1990-2014.” April 2016.  https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/us-greenhouse-gas-inventory-report-1990- 165 Adjusted to December 2016 dollars using CPI-U-RS. “The Social Cost of  Carbon.” Environmental Protection Agency. Accessed February 15, 2017.  https://www.epa.gov/climatechange/social-cost-carbon.  166 Joint Economic Committee calculations, adjusted to December 2016  dollars using CPI-U-RS, from Moore, Frances C. and Delavane B. Diaz.  “Temperature impacts on economic growth warrant stringent mitigation  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271204757_Temperature_Impacts_o n_Economic_Growth_Warrant_Stringent_Mitigation_Policy; and, “How  much carbon dioxide is produced by burning gasoline and diesel fuel?” U.S.  Energy Information Administration. April 26, 2016.  https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=10&t=10.   167 Stern, Nicholas. “The Economics of Climate Change.” H.M. Treasury.  Commissioned by the Government of the United Kingdom. October 2006.  http://mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/~rmclima/pdfs/destaques/sternreview 168 Burke, Marshall, Soloman M. Hsiang, and Edward Miguel. “Global non- linear effect of temperature on economic production.” Nature 527. November  http://web.stanford.edu/~mburke/climate/BurkeHsiangMiguel2015.pdf.  169 Stern, Nicholas. “The Economics of Climate Change.” H.M. Treasury.  Commissioned by the Government of the United Kingdom. October 2006.  http://mudancasclimaticas.cptec.inpe.br/~rmclima/pdfs/destaques/sternreview 170 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  171 “An America First Energy Plan.” Trump-Pence Transition website. May  26, 2016. Accessed February 15, 2017. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press- 172 Saha, Devashree and Sifan Liu. “Coal plant retirements will continue  despite Trump’s EPA pick.” Brookings Institution. December 19, 2016.  https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2016/12/19/coal-plant- retirements-will-continue-despite-trumps-epa-pick/; and, “6 Charts that Will  Make you Optimistic About America’s Clean Energy Future.” U.S.  Department of Energy. September 28, 2016. https://energy.gov/articles/6- charts-will-make-you-optimistic-about-america-s-clean-energy-future.  173 “The Paris Agreement.” United Nations Framework Convention on  http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php.   174 Muttitt, Greg. “The Sky’s Limit.” Oil Change International. September  http://priceofoil.org/content/uploads/2016/09/OCI_the_skys_limit_2016_FIN 175 Sneed, Annie. “Trump’s First 100 Days: Climate and Energy.” Scientific  https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trumps-first-100-days-climate- 176 “An America First Energy Plan.” Trump-Pence Transition website. May  26, 2016. Accessed February 15, 2017. https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press- 177 “A Better Way: The Economy.” Speaker Paul Ryan. June 14, 2016.  http://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay-Economy- 178 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  179 The most recent international comparison data is from 2013, “CO2  emissions (kt).” The World Bank. Accessed February 15, 2017.  http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.KT.   180 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017.  181 Council of Economic Advisers. “Chapter 7: Addressing Climate Change.”  In Economic Report of the President. January 2017; and, Auel, Erin and  Allison Cassady, “The Costs of Climate Inaction.” Center for American  https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2016/09/22/144386/th 182 Saha, Devashree and Mark Muro. “Growth, carbon, and Trump: State  progress and drift on economic growth and emissions ‘decoupling.”  https://www.brookings.edu/research/growth-carbon-and-trump-state-progress- and-drift-on-economic-growth-and-emissions-decoupling/.   183 Council of Economic Advisers. “A Retrospective Assessment of Clean  Energy Investments in the Recovery Act.” The White House. February 2016.   184 “U.S. Energy and Employment Report.” U.S. Department of Energy.  https://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2017/01/f34/2017%20US%20Energy%20an 185 Jacobson, Mark Z. et al. “100% clean and renewable wind, water, and  sunlight (WWS) all-sector energy roadmaps for all 50 United States. Energy  http://web.stanford.edu/group/efmh/jacobson/Articles/I/USStatesWWS.pdf.  186 Haltiwanger, John C., Ron S. Jarmin, and Javier Miranda. “Who Creates  Jobs? Small vs. Large vs. Young.” National Bureau of Economic Research.  No. 16300. August 2010. http://www.nber.org/digest/feb11/w16300.html;  and, Wiens, Jason and Chris Jackson. “The Importance of Young Firms for  Economic Growth.” Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation. September 13,  2015. http://www.kauffman.org/what-we-do/resources/entrepreneurship- policy-digest/the-importance-of-young-firms-for-economic-growth.  187 Saha, Devashree, Jonathan Rothwell, and Mark Muro. “Sizing the clean  economy: A national and regional green jobs assessment.” Brookings  Institution. July 13, 2011. https://www.brookings.edu/research/sizing-the- clean-economy-a-national-and-regional-green-jobs-assessment/.  188 Roberts, David and Brad Plumer. “Most people are wildly underestimating  what Trump’s win will mean for the environment.” Vox. November 14, 2016.  http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/14/13582562/trump-gop- 189 Forsythe, Michael. “China Aims to Spend at Least $360 Billion on  Renewable Energy by 2020.” New York Times. January 5, 2017.  http://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/05/world/asia/china-renewable-energy- investment.html; and, Romer, Christina. “Impact of the American Recovery  and Reinvestment Act on the Clean Energy Transformation.” The White  https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/blog/2010/04/21/impact-american- recovery-and-reinvestment-act-clean-energy-transformation.  190 “Global Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2016.” Commissioned by  the United Nations Environment Programme. 2016. http://fs-unep- centre.org/sites/default/files/publications/globaltrendsinrenewableenergyinvest"
            },
            {
                "answer": "Trump said that before the coronavirus pandemic, the United States had \"the greatest economy in the history of our country.\"",
                "question": "What statement did Trump make about the economy before the coronavirus pandemic?",
                "url": "https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/oct/01/donald-trump/donald-trumps-dubious-statement-about-presiding-ov/",
                "scraped_text": "Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy. Donald Trump’s dubious statement about presiding over ‘the greatest economy’ in history • While unemployment was near historical lows under Trump, growth in gross domestic product was well below what previous presidents achieved, and other metrics such as wages and business investment ranged from decent to mediocre. During the first presidential debate in Cleveland, President Donald Trump repeated an assertion he’s made literally dozens of times. When the novel coronavirus appeared, Trump said, \"I had to close the greatest economy in the history of our country.\" The U.S. economy prior to the coronavirus was strong. But it was not the best in the nation’s history, economists say. The strongest evidence for Trump is the unemployment rate. On Trump’s watch, the unemployment rate plunged to levels that it hasn’t touched since the early 1950s. It appears to be the lowest peacetime unemployment rate over a three-year period, going back to the Great Depression, said Gary Burtless, an economist with the Brookings Institution. Trump benefited from the continuation of trends that had been in place under the Obama recovery. \"While Trump can take some credit, I see it like the relief pitcher who comes in during the 9th inning with a seven-run lead, then boasts about winning the game,\" said Dean Baker, co-founder of the liberal Center for Economic and Policy Research. \"It’s fine to get some credit for holding the lead, but this is much more an Obama story than a Trump story.\" Growth in the nation’s gross domestic product — probably the single most important statistic used to gauge the overall strength of the economy — has been so-so on Trump’s watch. It didn’t reach his pledge of 4% growth a year, earning it a Promise Broken. The annual increases in GDP under Trump were broadly similar to what they were during the final six years under his predecessor, Barack Obama. And GDP growth under Trump was well below that of prior presidents. If you adjust GDP to take account of population, the picture remains weak for Trump. Calculations by Burtless found that inflation-adjusted GDP per capita increased 1.9% annually under Trump, which makes this three-year period the 16th highest among the past 30 non-overlapping three-year periods — right about average compared with his predecessors. Economists added a couple other factors that cast doubt on the supremacy of the economy under Trump. One is wages. Adjusted for inflation, wages that began rising during the Obama years continued to increase under Trump. But these inflation-adjusted wage increases were modest compared with the 2% a year seen in the 1960s. \"This is not what you would expect with a 3.5% unemployment rate,\" Baker said, alluding to the pre-pandemic rate of February 2020. In addition, federal deficits relative to GDP have historically fallen during \"great\" economic periods, such as the 1960s and the late 1990s, when unemployment rates weren’t much higher than what the U.S. experienced before the pandemic, said Steve Fazzari, an economist at Washington University in St. Louis. By contrast, under Trump, the federal budget deficit widened even before the pandemic hit and has grown further during the crisis. Another factor undermining Trump’s claim is that the Federal Reserve was feeding the economy with historically low interest rates — rates on par with what the Fed usually enacts during poor economic times to revive the economy. In fact, the Fed went so far as to interrupt its plan to \"normalize\" interest rates by stopping interest-rate increases in early 2019, and it began cutting rates in August 2019, well before the pandemic. (The Trump administration made it clear that it wanted to keep rates low.) This \"certainly contradicts the assessment of the economy as being ‘great,’\" Fazzari said. Burtless also looked at the growth rate in personal consumption per person, adjusted for inflation — a metric that for many families is the bottom line of economic activity, determining how much they can spend on food, clothing, housing, health care, and travel. In Trump’s three years in office through January 2020, real consumption per person grew by 2% a year. Of the 30 non-overlapping three-year periods since 1929, this ranks Trump 12th from the bottom. Presidents can have an impact on economic conditions, but they are not the only factor. Oil price fluctuations, changes in technology and the state of the global economy are among the things outside of their control. In Trump’s case, even the things he did, such as the 2017 tax cut, had \"disappointing\" results for economic growth, Fazzari said. \"According to its supporters, the tax cut was supposed to rocket GDP growth upward and, in particular, stimulate business capital investment,\" Fazzari said. Specifically, he pointed to the inflation-adjusted rate of nonresidential private fixed investment, which measures purchases of such items as nonresidential structures, equipment and software. This metric rose for a while after the tax cut passed, but since then has been on a downward trend and actually went negative in late 2019 before collapsing during the pandemic. Trump said that before the coronavirus pandemic, the United States had \"the greatest economy in the history of our country.\" Economists pointed to multiple data points that undermine this assertion. While unemployment was near historical lows under Trump, growth in gross domestic product was well below what previous presidents achieved, and other metrics such as wages and business investment ranged from decent to mediocre. Donald Trump, remarks during the first presidential debate, Sept. 29, 2020 Bureau of Economic Analysis, interactive data, accessed Sept. 30, 2020 Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, \"Real Private Nonresidential Fixed Investment,\" accessed Sept. 30, 2020 Washington Post Fact Checker, \"President Trump’s repeated claim: ‘The greatest economy in the history of our country,'\" Sept. 7, 2018 Email interview with Gary Burtless, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, Sept. 30, 2020 Email interview with Dean Baker, co-founder of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, Sept. 30, 2020 Email interview with Steve Fazzari, economist at Washington University in St. Louis, Sept. 30, 2020 Donald Trump’s dubious statement about presiding over ‘the greatest economy’ in history In a world of wild talk and fake news, help us stand up for the facts."
            }
        ],
        "pred_label": "Supported"
    },
    {
        "claim_id": 7,
        "claim": "Ruth Bader Ginsburg was nominated and confirmed 43 days before an election",
        "evidence": [
            {
                "answer": "ciation on the nomination of the Honorable Ruth Bader Ginsburg,",
                "question": "Was Ruth Bader Ginsburg nominated and confirmed 43 days before an election?",
                "url": "https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-CHRG-GINSBURG/pdf/GPO-CHRG-GINSBURG.pdf",
                "scraped_text": "THE NOMINATION OF RUTH BADER GINSBURG, TO BE ASSOCIATE Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC 20402 Moynihan, Hon. Daniel Patrick, a U.S. Senator from the State of New York ...  D'Amato, Hon. Alfonse M., a U.S. Senator from the State of New York  Norton, Hon. Eleanor Holmes, a Delegate in Congress from the District Biden, Hon. Joseph R., Jr., a U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware: Hatch, Hon. Orrin G., a U.S. Senator from the State of Utah: Thurmond, Hon. Strom, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Carolina: Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts: Metzenbaum, Hon. Howard M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio: Simpson, Hon. Alan K., a U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming: DeConcini, Hon. Dennis, a U.S. Senator from the State of Arizona: Grassley, Hon. Charles E., a U.S. Senator from the State of Iowa: Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont: Specter, Hon. Arlen, a U.S. Senator from the State of Pennsylvania: Heflin, Hon. Howell, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama: Brown, Hon. Hank, a U.S. Senator from the State of Colorado: Simon, Hon. Paul, a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois: Cohen, Hon. William S., a U.S. Senator from the State of Maine: Kohl, Hon. Herbert, a U.S. Senator from the State of Wisconsin: Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, a U.S. Senator from the State of California: Moseley-Braun, Hon. Carol, a U.S. Senator from the State of Illinois: Pressler, Hon. Larry, a U.S. Senator from the State of South Dakota: Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, circuit court judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of II. Financial data and conflict of interest (public)  Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, circuit court judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Letter to Hon. Paul Simon, U.S. Senator, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC, from Tom Harkin, U.S. Senate, Committee on Labor and Human Resources, Washington, DC, July 14, 1993  Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, circuit court judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of Excerpt from confirmation hearing of Judge Clarence Thomas to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States: Colloquy between Sen- Letter to Hon. Charles E. Grassley, U.S. Senator, Senate Hart Office Build- ing, Washington, DC, from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. circuit judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC, July 21, 1993, responding to questions regarding membership in Woodmont Country Letters to Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, July 19, 1993: Response to Judge Ginsburg's letter of July 16, 1993  Letter to Hon. Arlen Specter, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Sen- ate, Washington, DC, from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, Washington, DC, July 16, 1993: Response to letter of July 15, 1993  William E. Willis, Chairman, Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, American Bar Association, accompanied by Judah Best, District of Colum- bia Circuit Representative, Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, William T. Coleman, Jr., O'Melveny and Myers, Washington, DC; Ches- terfield Smith, Holland & Knight, Miami, FL; Shirley M. Hufstedler, Hufstedler, Kaus, and Ettinger, Los Angeles, CA; and Ira M. Millstein, Gerald Gunther, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Stanford University, Stanford CA; and Herma Hill Kay, dean, School of Law, Edith Lampson Roberts, Washington, DC, and Kathleen Peratis, New Paige Comstock Cunningham, president, Americans United for Life, Chi- cago, IL; Rosa Cumare, Hamilton & Cumare, Pasadena, CA; Nellie J. Gray, president, March for Life Education and Defense Fund, Wash- ington, DC; Susan Hirschmann, executive director, Eagle Forum, Washington, DC; Kay Coles James, vice president, Family Research Council, Washington, DC; and Howard Phillips, chairman, the Conserv- Angela M. Bradstreet, California Women Lawyers, San Francisco, CA; Carlos G. Ortiz, president, Hispanic National Bar Association; John D. Feerick, president, Association of the Bar of the City of New York; Appendix: \"Is Abortion the 'First Right' for Women?\" by Paige Cunningham and Clarke Forsythe, excerpted from Abortion, Medicine Letter to Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC, from William E. Willis, Chair, American Bar Association, Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, Washington, DC, July 19, 1993 ..  Question and answer excerpted from Judge Ginsburg's initial questionnaire ...  Questions for Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC, from: Responses of Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC, to questions submitted by: Responses of Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC, to questions submitted by— Analyses of President Bill Clinton's nomination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, by Thomas L. Jipping, M.A., J.D., excerpted from Judicial Selection Monitoring Project: 'The Continuing Search for Moderation,\" July 13, 1993  Report on the Nomination of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the United States Supreme Court, submitted by the Alliance for Justice, a National Association of Organizations Working for Equal Justice, Washington, DC ....  Appendix: Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg's District of Columbia Circuit Letter to Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, from William C. Hou, president, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association, July 23, 1993  Report on the Nomination of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the U.S. Appendix: Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg's District of Columbia Circuit Question and answer excerpted from Judge Ginsburg's initial question- Letter to Judge Ginsburg, asking for responses to additional questions from Senators Biden, Thurmond, Kohl, and Pressler, July 27, 1993  Letter from Judge Ginsburg, July 27, 1993, responding to written ques- Appendix: \"Is Abortion the 'First Right' for Women?\" by Paige Cunningham and Clarke Forsythe, excerpted from Abortion, Medi- II. Financial data and conflict of interest (public)  Letter from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. circuit judge, U.S. Court of Ap- peals, District of Columbia Circuit, Washington, DC, July 21, 1993, responding to questions regarding membership in Woodmont Country Analyses of President Bill Clinton's nomination of Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, by Thomas L. Jipping, M.A., J.D., excerpted from Judicial Selection Monitoring \"The Continuing Search for Moderation,\" July 13, 1993  Letter from Judge Ginsburg, July 27, 1993, responding to written ques- Excerpt from confirmation hearing of Judge Clarence Thomas to be Asso- ciate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States: Colloquy between Senator Leahy and Judge Thomas re Roe v. Wade  Letter to Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., chairman, Committee on the Judici- ary, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC, from William C. Hou, president, Letter to Judge Ginsburg, July 23, 1993, asking for responses to addi- Letter from Judge Ginsburg, July 28, 1993, answering questions received Responses to written questions on Employer v. Union Rights  Responses to written questions on Minority Set-Aside Programs  Responses to written questions on the Supreme Court's decision in Letter from Tom Harkin, U.S. Senator, Committee on Labor and Human Letters to Hon. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, Washing- July 19, 1993: Response to Judge Ginsburg's letter of July 16, 1993 ...  Letter from Ruth Bader Ginsburg, U.S. Court of Appeals, Washing- ton, DC, July 16, 1993: Response to letter of July 15, 1993  Letter from Judge Ginsburg, July 27, 1993, responding to written ques- Letter to Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr., chairman, Committee on the Judici- Ginsburg, Ruth Bader, circuit court judge, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of William E. Willis, chairman, Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, American Bar Association, accompanied by Judah Best, District of Colum- bia circuit representative, Standing Committee on Federal Judiciary, Amer- Panel consisting of Gerald Gunther, William Nelson Cromwell Professor of Law, Stanford University, Stanford, CA; and Henna Hill Kay, dean, School Panel consisting of Edith Lampson Roberts, Washington, DC, and Kathleen Panel consisting of Paige Comstock Cunningham, president, Americans Unit- ed for Life, Chicago, IL; Rosa Cumare, Hamilton & Cumare, Pasadena, CA; Nellie J. Gray, president, March for Life Education and Defense Fund, Washington, DC; Susan Hirschmann, executive director, Eagle Forum, Washington, DC; Kay Coles James, vice president, Family Research Coun- cil, Washington, DC; and Howard Phillips, chairman, the Conservative Panel consisting of Angela M. Bradstreet, California Women Lawyers, San Francisco, CA; Carlos G. Ortiz, president, Hispanic National Bar Associa- tion; John D. Feerick, president, Association of the Bar of the City of New York; and Stephen Wiesenfeld, Fort Lauderdale, FL: The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:10 a.m., in room 216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. (chair- Also present: Senators Kennedy, Metzenbaum, DeConcini, Leahy, Heflin, Simon, Kohl, Feinstein, Moseley-Braun, Hatch, Thurmond, Simpson, Grassley, Specter, Brown, Cohen, and Pressler. The CHAIRMAN. The hearing will come to order, please. The CHAIRMAN. And, believe me, you are welcome here this morning. As I said to you a few moments ago, riding down on the train this morning I had my usual stack of newspapers. I will not name them all for fear of getting in trouble, but one that I had, beyond the Wilmington News Journal, which is the most important paper in America, was the New York Times. And I looked at page 1, and there was no comment about this hearing. I looked at page 2, and there was no comment, and page 3. And I literally thought Then, as they say, my heart sank when I realized it was page 8 or 10 or 12, which was the most wonderful thing that has hap- pened to me since I have been chairman of this committee: that a major hearing warranted the 8th or 9th or 10th page because thus far it has generated so little controversy. So you are welcome. But the real purpose of today's hearing is to welcome back Arlen Specter. Arlen, welcome. It is so good to have you back. It really The CHAIRMAN. I am one of the few people who can understand why he is wearing that hat. When I had a similar operation, Sen- ator, former President Reagan wrote me a letter saying, \"Dear Joe\"—and he had had the operation he had had on his skull some- what earlier, and he said, \"Dear Joe: Welcome to the Cracked Head Well, welcome, Arlen. I hope you wear it well. Welcome back. Senator SPECTER. I very much appreciate that, Mr. Chairman. I thought that, being a Senator, I had been a member of that club The CHAIRMAN. NO. YOU have been a member of a different—I won't characterize what the club is you are a member of. Welcome The CHAIRMAN. On a more serious note, today the Senate Judici- ary Committee welcomes Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Presi- dent's nominee to be Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. This is a very familiar setting for us. Since I became chairman of this committee 7 years ago, we have now convened hearings on The Constitution states clearly that the President \"shall nomi- nate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint * * * judges of the Supreme Court.\" Clearly the appoint- ment of a Supreme Court Justice is not a Presidential prerogative. The Senate is an equal partner in the process and has significant obligations attendant to its responsibilities. These confirmation hearings are a major part, though not the only part, of the process by which we attempt to fulfill our constitutional responsibility. The nomination of a Supreme Court Justice signals the renewal of a national debate over the meaning of our Constitution—a de- bate, I might add, that has been going on for over 200 years, with- out end, and that will go on for another 200 years, I suspect. How will the broad principles embodied in the Constitution— phrases like due process, equal protection, rights retained by the people—how will these and other ennobling phrases in the Con- stitution be applied to the realities of everyday life? That is the issue which we have been debating and will continue to debate. Profound questions with practical implications have and will con- tinue to confront us, as the judge only knows too well, questions Does religious freedom mean that Jewish-American soldiers can- not wear a yarmulke while on duty despite Army prohibition? Does liberty mean that each of us can decide, without the Gov- ernment deciding for us, whom we shall marry, whether we shall marry, where we will live, or whether to have children or choose Does the right to own property mean that the Government may not, without compensation, prohibit a property owner from pollut- ing the stream that flows through his or her land? These and hundreds of other thorny issues have no easy an- swers. There are not even any right answers in the usual sense of that word, but there are valid and varied constitutional approaches to answering them, applied over the last 200 years by Justices on the Court. The constitutional answers to such questions flow from the interpretive method judges apply to cases that come before Over the more than two centuries in which our constitutional de- mocracy has endured, our understanding of individual freedom has expanded. This trend is not new. The expansion of notions of lib- erty and equality began with the birth of this Republic. Our understanding of the Constitution has not been static; rath- er, it has flowed consistently in the direction of broadening the The document has remained, as its writers intended, in my view, a flexible and dynamic instrument. Throughout our history, each evolutionary change, though, has brought controversy. Each expan- sion of individual liberty has ignited resistance from those who pre- fer the status quo. But in every instance, moving ahead on liberty Removing the barriers of race to full equality generated enough conflict in the 19th century to fuel a bitter and bloody civil war, and resistance has been carried on into our own time. But today it is generally acknowledged, even where it was once most resisted, that reducing the barriers of race has strengthened American soci- The granting of more equal rights under the Constitution to women, a change that owes much to the lawyer who is our nominee today, has been similarly controversial. But today, with that proc- ess not yet complete, most Americans agree that it has been a change for the better in the life of this society. The Voting Rights Act, which has extended the practical right to vote to millions of formerly disenfranchised Americans, was and re- mains a source of controversy, even on the Supreme Court itself. But today there are hundreds of minority women and men holding public office where formerly there were few, even in areas where majority voters dominate the rolls, the entire process bringing us closer to the constitutional goal of representative government. The controversy that flows inevitably from change has found its way into these hearings in the past, into the confirmation process in the past decade-and-a-half. But it does not alter in any sense Our task today, as in all Supreme Court confirmation hearings, is to consider the character and qualities and the judicial philoso- Judge Ginsburg comes before the committee with her place al- ready secured in history. In the 1970's, Judge, you argued a series of landmark cases that changed the way our laws could distinguish legally between women and men, and you have significantly nar- rowed the circumstances under which distinctions among Ameri- cans may be made. You have already helped to change the meaning Now, as you face a new opportunity to help shape the future of America, we welcome you, and we invite you—and I personally in- vite you, Judge, to share with us and the American people your vi- [The prepared statement of Chairman Biden follows:] Today, the Judiciary Committee welcomes Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Presi- dent's nominee to be Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court. This is a familiar setting for us—since I became chairman of the committee seven years ago, we have now convened hearings on five nominees to the Supreme Court. And these confirmation hearings are a major part though not the only part, of the process by which we attempt to fulfill that constitutional duty. The nomination of a Supreme Court Justice signals the renewal of a national de- How will the broad principles embodied in the constitution—phrases like \"due process,\" \"equal protection\" and \"rights retained by the people\"—be applied to the Profound questions with practical implications have and will continue to confront Does religious freedom mean that a Jewish American soldier cannot wear a yarmulke while on duty despite an army prohibition? Does \"liberty\" mean that each of us can decide—without the government deciding for us—whom to marry, where to live, or whether to have children or use contracep- Does the right to own property mean that the government may not, without com- pensation, prohibit a property owner from polluting a stream that flows through his There are no easy answers to such questions—there are not even any \"right\" an- swers in the usual sense of the word; but there are valid and varied constitutional approaches to answering them, and the constitutional answers to such questions flow from the interpretive method justices apply to cases that come before them. Over the more than two centuries in which our constitutional democracy has en- dured, our understanding of individual freedom has expanded. This trend is not new: the expansion of notions of liberty and equality began with Our understanding of the constitution has not been static; rather it has flowed consistently in the direction of broadening the freeedoms of Americans. The document has remained, as its writers intended, a flexible and dynamic in- Throughout our history, each evolutionary change has brought controversy; each expansion of individual liberty has ignited resistance from those who prefer the sta- tus quo—but in every instance, moving ahead on liberty has proved to be the right Removing the barrier of race to full equality generated enough conflict in the 19th century to fuel a bitter and bloody civil war, and resistance has been carried into But today it is generally acknowledged, even where it was once most resisted, that reducing the barriers of race has strengthened American society. The granting of more equal rights under the constitution to women—a change that owes much to the lawyer who is our nonimee today—has been similarly con- But today, with that process not yet complete, most Americans agree that it has been a change for the better in the life of our nation. The voting rights act, which has extended the practical right to vote to millions of formerly disenfranchised Americans, was and remains a source of controversy, even on the Supreme Court itself; but today there are hundreds of minority women and men holding public office where formerly there were few—even in areas where majority voters dominate the rolls—bringing us closer to the constitutional goal of The controversy that flows inevitably from change has found its way into the con- firmation process. But it does not alter in any sense what we do here. Our task today—as in all Supreme Court confirmation hearings—is to consider the character, the qualities and the judicial philosophy of Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Judge Ginsburg, you come before the committee with your place in history already In the 1970's you argued a series of landmark cases that changed the way our You have already helped to change the meaning of equality in our nation. Now, as you face a new opportunity to help shape the future of America, we wel- come you and we invite you to share with us and the American people your vision The CHAIRMAN. I yield now to my colleague, Senator Hatch, the ranking member, who I would also like to publicly thank for expe- diting this process. As all of my colleagues know, if any of the members in this committee, and particularly the ranking member, concluded that it was not appropriate to move as rapidly as we have, under the Senate rules that could easily be done. It could be slowed. The Senator has been totally and completely cooperative from the outset. He has been a man of his word in suggesting that he would move where there was no controversy from his perspec- tive, would move judiciously, warning me that there may be future occasions when he might not be ready to be so cooperative. But I thank him for his cooperation, and I appreciate it very much. Senator HATCH. Well, thank you, Senator Biden, for your kind words, and welcome, Judge Ginsburg, to the committee. We are very happy and pleased to have you here and to finally have these I want to personally pay tribute to my colleague, Senator Spec- ter. We are happy to have him back and happy to have him in such good health and good condition. I do think he could have gotten a little better Pennsylvania hat than that one myself. The CHAIRMAN. And I wish you would fold the brim a little bit, Senator HATCH. At least curve the brim, Arlen. [Laughter.] Senator HATCH. Well, I want to congratulate you, Judge Gins- burg, for this wonderful opportunity to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. You have had a distinguished career in the law. You have been a law professor and pioneering advocate for equal rights for women, and for over 13 years, you have served as a thoughtful member of the Court of Appeals for the District of Co- You have been nominated to replace a really fine member of the Court, a distinguished public servant and patriot, Justice Byron White, a person I have had a personal, strong friendship and rela- tionship with, who I think is a great Justice. And I pay him tribute and wish him well as he enters into a well-deserved retirement. Judge Ginsburg's ability, character, intellect, and temperament to serve on the Supreme Court are not, in my mind, in question. I don't have any doubts at all about that. I have been favorably im- A Supreme Court Justice, in my view, however, must meet an additional qualification. He or she must understand the role of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, in our system of govern- ment. Under our system, a Supreme Court Justice should interpret the law and not legislate his or her own policy preferences from the bench. The role of the judicial branch is to enforce the provisions of the Constitution and the laws we enact in Congress as their Any other philosophy of judging requires unelected Federal judges to impose their own personal views on the American people in the guise of construing the Constitution and Federal statutes. There is no way around this conclusion. Such an approach is judi- cial activism, plain and simple. And it is wrong, whether it comes from the political left or whether it comes from the political right. Let there be no mistake: The Constitution, in its original mean- ing, can be readily applied to changing circumstances. That tele- phones did not exist in 1791, for example, does not mean that the fourth amendment's ban on unreasonable searches is inapplicable to a person's use of the telephone. But while circumstances may change, the meaning—the principle—of the text, which applies to Reasonable jurists can sometimes disagree over what a particu- lar constitutional or statutory provision was intended to mean and over how such meaning is properly applied to a given set of facts. But if the judicial branch is not governed by a jurisprudence of original meaning, the judiciary usurps the role the Constitution re- serves to the people through their elected representatives. When judges depart from those principles of construction, they elevate themselves not only over the executive and legislative branches, but over the Constitution itself and, of course, over the American people. These judicial activists, whether of the left or right, undemocratically exercise a power of governance that the Constitution commits to the people and their elected representa- tives. And these judicial activists are limited, as Alexander Hamil- ton shrewdly recognized over 200 years ago, only by their own As a consequence of judicial activism, we witnessed in an earlier era the invalidation of State social welfare legislation, such as wage and hour laws. Since the advent of the Warren court, judicial activism has resulted in the elevation of the rights of criminals and criminal suspects and the concomitant strengthening of the crimi- nal forces against the police forces of our country; the twisting of the constitutional and statutory guarantees of equal protection of the law such that reverse discrimination often results; prayer being chased out of the schools; and the Court's creating out of thin air a constitutional right to abortion on demand, to just cite a few in- stances and a few examples. One of the objectives of the judicial activists for the future is the elimination of the death penalty. The Constitution, as it has been amended through the years, in its original meaning, is our proper guide on all of these issues. It places primary responsibility in the people to govern themselves. It provides means of amendment through the agency of the people and their elected representatives, not by a majority of the Supreme Court. That is why appointing and confirming judges and Supreme Court Justices who won't let their own personal policy preferences A President is entitled to some deference in a selection of a Su- preme Court Justice. President Clinton and I are unlikely to agree on the person who ought to be nominated. But so long as the nomi- nee is experienced in the law, intelligent, of good character and temperament, and gives clear and convincing evidence of under- standing the proper role of the judiciary in our system of govern- ment, I can support that nomination and that nominee. Moreover, I do not expect to agree with any nominee, especially one chosen by a President of the other party, on every issue before the judicial branch. The key question is whether the nominee can put aside his or her own policy preferences and interpret the Con- Finally, I would point out that I disagree very much with some of Judge Ginsburg's academic writings and some views she held prior to ascending to the bench in 1980. I believe that Judge Gins- burg's judicial opinions, however, indicate her understanding that her policy views and earlier role as advocate are distinct from her role as a judge. I will explore that distinction in these hearings. It is my hope that Judge Ginsburg will satisfy this committee that she shares the judicial philosophy of applying the original meaning of our Constitution and laws in the cases which come be- fore her on the Supreme Court, if she is confirmed. [The prepared statement of Senator Hatch follows:] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I congratulate the nominee, Judge Ruth Bader Gins- burg, on her nomination to be Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. Judge Gins- burg has had a distinguished career in the law. She has been a law professor and pioneering advocate for equal opportunity for women. For over 13 years, she has served as a thoughtful member of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia She has been nominated to replace a fine member of the Court, a distinguished public servant and patriot, Justice Byron White. I pay him tribute and wish him Judge Ginsburg's ability, character, intellect, and temperament to serve on the Supreme Court are not, in my mind, in question. I have been favorably impressed A Supreme Court Justice, in my view, however, must meet an additional quali- fication. He or she must understand the role of the judiciary, including the Supreme Court, in our system of government. Under our system, a Supreme Court Justice should interpret the law and not legislate his or her own policy preferences from the bench. The role of the judicial branch is to enforce the provisions of the Con- stitution and the laws we enact in Congress as their meaning was originally in- Any other philosophy of judging requires unelected federal judges to impose their own personal views on the American people in the guise of construing the Constitu- tion and federal statutes. There is no way around this conclusion. Such an approach is judicial activism, plain and simple. And it is wrong, whether it comes from the Let there be no mistake: the Constitution, in its original meaning, can readily be applied to changing circumstances. That telephones did not exist in 1791, for exam- ple, does not mean that the fourth amendment's ban on unreasonable searches is inapplicable to a person's use of the telephone. But, while circumstances may change, the meaning—the principle—of the text, which applies to those new cir- Reasonable jurists can sometimes disagree over what a particular Constitutional or statutory provision was intended to mean and over how such meaning is properly applied to a given set of facts. But, if the judicial branch is not governed by a juris- prudence of original meaning, the judiciary usurps the role the Constitution re- serves to the people through their elected representatives. Alexander Hamilton, an advocate of a vigorous central government, in defending the judiciary's right to review and invalidate the Legislative Branch's acts which contravene the Constitution, made clear that federal judges are not to be guided by personal predilection. He rejected the concern that such judicial review made the judiciary superior to the legislature: \"A constitution, is, in fact, and must be re- garded by the judges as, a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascer- tain its meaning as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body * * *. It can be of no weight to say that the courts, on the pretense of a repugnancy [between a legislative enactment and the Constitution], may sub- stitute their own pleasure to the constitutional intentions of the legislature. The courts must declare the sense of the law; and if they should be disposed to exercise will instead of judgment, the consequence would equally be the substitution of their pleasure to that of the legislature body. [This] observation * * * would prove that there ought to be no judges distinct from that body.\" (Federalist 78.) And this com- mingling of the legislative and judicial functions, of course, would tend to start us down the road to the kind of tyranny the Framers warned about when the separate executive, legislative, and judicial functions are united in the same hands. When judges depart from these principles of construction, they elevate themselves not only over the executive and legislative branches, but over the Constitution itself, and, of course, over the American people. These judicial activists, whether of the left or right, undemocratically exercise a power of governance that the Constitution com- mits to the people and their elected representatives. And these judicial activists are limited, as Alexander Hamilton shrewdly recognized over 200 years ago, only by As a consequence of judicial activism, we witnessed, in an earlier era, the invali- dation of state social welfare legislation, such as wage and hour laws. Since the ad- vent of the Warren Court, judicial activism has resulted in the elevation of the rights of criminals and criminal suspects and the concomitant strengthening of the criminal forces against the police forces of our country; the twisting of constitutional and statutory guarantees of equal protection of the law such that reverse discrimi- nation often results; prayer being chased out of the schools; and, the Court's creat- ing out of thin air a constitutional right to abortion on demand to cite a few exam- ples. One of the objectives of the judicial activists for the future is the elimination The Constitution, as it has been amended through the years, in its original mean- ing, is our proper guide on all of these issues. It places primary responsibility in the people to govern themselves. It provides means of amendment through the agen- cy of the people and their representatives—not by a majority of the Supreme Court. That is why appointing and confirming judges and Supreme Court Justices who won't let their own policy preferences sway their judgment is so important. A President is entitled to some deference in a selection of a Supreme Court Jus- tice. President Clinton and I are unlikely to agree on the person who ought to be nominated. But so long as a nominee is experienced in the law, intelligent, of good character and temperament, and gives clear and convincing evidence of understand- ing the proper role of the judiciary in our system of government, I can support that Moreover, I do not expect to agree with any nominee, especially one chosen by a President of the other party, on every issue before the Judicial branch. The key question is whether the nominee can put aside his or her own policy preferences and interpret the Constitution and laws in a neutral fashion. Finally, I would point out that I disagree very much with some of Judge Gins- burg's academic writings and some views she held prior to ascending the bench in 1980. I believe that Judge Ginsburg's judicial opinions indicate her understanding that her policy views and earlier role as advocate are distinct from her role as judge. I will explore that distinction in these hearings. It is my hope that Judge Ginsburg will satisfy this Committee that she shares the judicial philosophy of applying the original meaning of our Constitution and laws in the cases which will come before her on the Supreme Court if she is con- Senator HATCH. NOW, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that I am pleased with this nomination. I am looking forward to these hear- ings. They are important. This is one of the great constitutional ex- ercises, and I think every Senator here will be asking some very interesting questions. But could I ask for a few more minutes just Senator HATCH. I want to thank the chairman, and I appreciate I believe my colleagues will agree with me that two members of this committee deserve special recognition for their service on this committee and in the Senate. The distinguished Senator from Mas- sachusetts, Senator Kennedy, has been a member of the Judiciary Committee since February 13, 1963—30 years, 5 months, and 1 week of service. This service included 2 years as chairman. I do not mean to age the Senator from Massachusetts, but his service on the committee began so long ago I had to ask the Senate Historical Fortunately, they did not have to go back as far as the Jurassic period, although he does tend to dwell in that period from time to Nineteen Supreme Court nominations have occurred during this time. Of course, we all know that Senator Kennedy has continued a long and distinguished family tradition of public service. Many Americans have gotten involved in public service as a result of the But I might add for other history buffs that Senator William E. Borah of Idaho, during his 31 years on this committee from 1909 to 1940, witnessed 22 Supreme Court nominations, a record which Senator Kennedy is now approaching. The Senator from Massachu- setts, however, is a mere youngster next to our distinguished col- league, the senior Senator from South Carolina, Strom Thurmond, I was interested to learn from the Senate Historical Office that Senator Thurmond's service on the committee began after that of Senator Kennedy, on January 16, 1967. Thus, Senator Thurmond has not sat on the committee for as many Supreme Court nomina- tions as Senator Kennedy. He missed the Abe Fortas nomination in committee in 1965, although, as we all know, he was on the com- mittee for Justice Fortas' unsuccessful nomination to be Chief Jus- But Senator Thurmond has been a Member of the Senate longer than any other current Member. He has witnessed 25 nominations as a Senator, beginning with President Eisenhower's nomination of John M. Harlan in January 1955. No other current Member of the Senate has been here for as many Supreme Court nominations. Through nine Presidents, all but one of whom, Jimmy Carter, sent nominees to the Senate, and as Supreme Court nominees and Su- preme Court Justices have come and gone, Senator Thurmond has Amazingly, I discovered that Senator Thurmond does not hold the Senate record—not yet, anyway. Senator Carl Hayden of Ari- zona, during his 42 years of Senate service, witnessed 28 Supreme Court nominations. Does anyone doubt that that record one day Earlier this year, I observed that my friend from South Carolina is a Senator's Senator, a tenacious advocate for the people of his State, the best interests of our country, and the principles he be- Now, let me mention something more. Senator Thurmond has served as an inspiration to generations of young people, not just South Carolinians, not just southerners, but young people all over the Nation. These Americans have been spurred to participate in the political life of their communities, their States, and their coun- try by the example of Senator Thurmond's devotion to limited gov- ernment, free enterprise, a strong national defense, and his deep, selfless love of country. Some of those he has inspired sit behind me. Others he has inspired, like myself, sit on this committee as his colleague, a privilege for which I am very grateful. I thought both of our colleagues deserve some small recognition for their service, and I want to thank Richard A. Baker, the Sen- ate's Historian, and Joanne McCormick Quatannens of his office for their timely help in compiling the details of the service of our two colleagues. And I want to thank my colleagues for this courtesy so I could make these remarks and pay tribute to these two colleagues The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank you, Senator. You have just solved a mystery for me. I wondered why Senator Thurmond spent so much time on the floor talking about Abe Fortas. Now I know. He wasn't on the committee. He didn't have a chance to speak in Now, we are going to go slightly out of order here, and the distin- guished chairman of the Finance Committee has the unenviable job of being the Chair of a conference committee that is just putting together the national budget and reconciliation. He is to convene that conference at 11. His distinguished colleague, Senator D'Amato, representing—I am going to figure out the New York con- nection here in a moment—is also here. So we are going to go with the three introducers now, and then return to Senators Kennedy and Thurmond and work our way through the committee. Senator Moynihan, welcome. It is a pleasure to have you here. Senator MOYNIHAN. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, Senator Hatch, Senator Specter, I am privileged to introduce and to recommend without reservation Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is especially qualified to be the 107th Justice of the Supreme Court of the Unit- Judge Ginsburg is perhaps best known as the lawyer and litiga- tor who raised the issue of equal rights for women to the level of constitutional principle. She has also distinguished herself in a wide range of legal studies and for the last 13 years has been one of our Nation's most respected jurists on the U.S. Court of Appeals I must tell you that Senator D'Amato and I take special pride in her nomination. She was born and raised in Brooklyn. The day after her nomination, the front page of the New York Daily News She attended Cornell where she was elected to Phi Beta Kappa, later Columbia Law School where she was tied for top of her class. Indeed, she actually attended two law schools, beginning at Har- vard and finishing at Columbia so that she could be with her hus- band, Martin, who had returned from Cambridge to begin the prac- tice of law in New York. Never before Ruth Bader Ginsburg had anyone been a member of both the Harvard and Columbia Law Re- With such a record, you would think it not surprising that she should be recommended to serve as law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter. Neither is it surprising that at that time, a time she has changed, Justice Frankfurter thought it would She clerked for Judge Edmund Palmieri, and then entered the Columbia Law School project on international procedures. She taught at Rutgers Law School, then Columbia, becoming one of the first tenured woman professors in the country, and then became the moving force behind the women's rights project of the American Civil Liberties Union, the prime architect of the fight to invalidate discriminatory laws against individuals on the basis of gender. Her imprint can be found on virtually every gender case which reached the Supreme Court in the 1970's. She herself argued six of the cases before the Court and won five of them. The specifics are well known to members of this honorable committee and will no doubt be discussed in detail. But I would call attention, sir, sim- ply to remarks of Erwin N. Griswold, the former Solicitor General of the United States and dean of the Harvard Law School at the time Judge Ginsburg was there. He spoke at a special session of the Supreme Court commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Dean Griswold spoke of the work of attorneys who had appeared before the Court on behalf of special interest groups, as he termed I think, for example, of the work done in the early days of the NAACP which was represented here by one of the country's great lawyers, Charles Hamilton Houston; work which was carried on later with great ability by Thurgood Marshall. And I may mention the work done by lawyers representing groups interested in the rights of women of whom Ruth Bader Ginsburg was an outstanding example. It is in that context, Mr. Chairman, that the American Bar Asso- ciation has given her its highest rating, and she has my most sin- STATEMENT OF HON. ALFONSE M. D'AMATO, A U.S. SENATOR Senator D'AMATO. Mr. Chairman, in the interest of time, let me second the magnificent introduction that the distinguished senior Senator, my colleague Senator Moynihan, has made on behalf of Judge Ginsburg. Let me say that I take very special pride in the fact that the judge grew and flourished in Brooklyn, my home Let me also add to this committee that there is no doubt that she has distinguished herself as teacher, lawyer, judge, and parent, with her magnificent and wonderful family here today. While we may not agree with all of the learned judge's decisions, no one can question her honesty, her integrity, her commitment to the process of law, and I commend her for your approval and ask that there be an extension for my written remarks to be included The CHAIRMAN. Without objection. I thank you very much, Sen- [The prepared statement of Senator D'Amato follows:] Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here this morning to join with my colleague, Senator Moynihan, to introduce Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to this Committee and to our nation. As most of you know, Judge Ginsburg comes to us from the rough and tumble streets of Brooklyn, although her public demeanor would not suggest such a background. However, I wouldn't let her temperament fool you, for I know of no one from Brooklyn who did not know how to stand up for themselves and As I stated, Judge Ginsburg was born and raised in Brooklyn during the depres- sion and World War II. Determined to succeed, Judge Ginsburg graduated from Cor- nell and entered Harvard Law at a time when it was not popular for young women to enter law school. Eventually transferring to and graduating from Columbia Law School, she had a difficult time breaking the \"old boy\" network that excluded so many other fine law graduates. In true Brooklyn form, though, this did not dissuade her, and through perseverance, she obtained a clerkship with U.S. District Judge After her clerkship, Judge Ginsburg went on to teach law at Rutgers University, where, during her nine years, she rose to become a full professor. She moved on to Columbia University Law School where she taught another nine years. During those years as a professor, Judge Ginsburg was quite successful before the bench arguing numerous cases, including winning five of six decisions before the Supreme Court regarding sex discrimination. Based on her intellect and ability, she was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in 1980. Since her appointment to the federal bench, Judge Ginsburg has written hundreds of decisions. While I may not agree with her on some of her opinions, I have found Judge Ginsburg to be honest to a fault, with the utmost in integrity, a keen mind, No Senator will agree with the opinions of a Supreme Court Justice 100 percent of the time. I know that I will not agree with Judge Ginsburg's decisions all of the time. However, I do know that hers will be the kind of decisions that will be under- taken with deliberate care and that even if I disagree with her, I will be confident that her opinion will not be the result of a rash or ill-thought decision making proc- Mr. Chairman, I am pleased, also, to welcome Judge Ginsburg's family—her hus- band Martin Ginsburg, a Professor of tax law at Georgetown University and a part- ner in the Washington office of Fried, Frank, Harris, and Shriver; her daughter Jane, a law Professor at Columbia University; her son James, a law student at the University of Chicago and a producer of classical recordings, and her lovely grand- Again, it is my pleasure to introduce Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg at her confirma- tion hearings to be an Associate Justice to the United States Supreme Court. The CHAIRMAN. NOW we will hear from Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton. We welcome you to the other body, and thank you for com- DELEGATE IN CONGRESS FROM THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Mr. Chairman, it is my great pleasure to introduce and rec- ommend Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to you. Now a resident of my district here in Washington, DC, Judge Ginsburg was born in Brooklyn. Brooklyn natives, of course, have often spread to far cor- ners, like the overseas Chinese, sharing the riches of that borough with places like Washington which thrive on such exports. Judge Ginsburg's service on our U.S. Court of Appeals has been unusually distinguished, a virtually foregone conclusion for any who knew her before her appointment in 1980. I have known Ruth Ginsburg for two decades. As a law professor, civil rights and civil liberties lawyer, she was the chief navigator in the journey that took women, after more than 100 years, into the safe harbor of the When Ruth Ginsburg founded the ACLU women's rights project, today's axiom that the 14th amendment applies to women was not axiomatic at all. As one of Judge Ginsburg's former students has Judge Ginsburg has spent her life making things how they ought to be. Using her gifted mind, honed by indefatigably hard work, she has used the law, always carefully, always defensibly, for all of those left at the margins, for want of a lawyer or a judge with the brilliance and commitment to pull them mainstream. As a lawyer, she was an activist intellectual who brought grace to both roles. As a judge, Ruth Ginsburg has not only resolved hard cases, she has contributed to legal theory and made collegiality among judges and its effect on the law a new and fascinating sub- Those who have expected great things of Ruth Ginsburg have al- ways gotten what they bargained for. Count on Justice Ginsburg I know all of you have other duties, and we appreciate your being here. Thank you for your input. And, Pat, I am delighted that you had the opportunity to introduce a woman who saves my daughter Ashley from having to be the second woman nominee to the Su- Now we will return to semiregular order, which is that Senator Kennedy would go next. But our distinguished colleague and rank- ing member of the Armed Services Committee has to attend a hear- ing at 11, and Senator Kennedy has graciously suggested that he Senator THURMOND. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wish to thank I want to express my appreciation to Senator Hatch for his kind words. He is a great Senator and a great man, and I appreciate We all welcome Senator Specter back, a great Senator and a true patriot of this country. So glad to see you in good health now. Now, Mr. Chairman, today the Senate begins consideration of the nomination of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be an Associate Jus- tice of the U.S. Supreme Court. If confirmed, Judge Ginsburg will be the 107th person to serve as a Justice, continuing the long tradi- tion of distinguished jurisprudence which began with Justice John Rutledge of South Carolina, who was appointed on September 26, 1789. Although I was not privileged to be in the Senate at that Lest anyone have doubts—Judge Ginsburg*s will be the 25th Su- preme Court nomination I have reviewed during my nearly 39 Since its first session in the Royal Exchange Building in New York City in 1790, the Supreme Court has been an indispensable part of our Government, securing individual rights and interpreting the laws of this Nation. Occasionally, however, the Federal courts have gone beyond their constitutional mandate and used their judi- cial authority to legislate from the bench. I believe that the Hamil- tonian vision of the judiciary is a correct one: Judgment, not will, Mr. Chairman, we have a very serious responsibility here. Article II of the Constitution confers upon the Senate the duty of giving \"advice and consent\" to the President's appointment of Supreme Court Justices. The detailed review of judicial nominations has been assigned by the Senate to the Judiciary Committee. To a great extent, our colleagues who are not on this committee depend upon our work to make their own decisions on a nominee's quali- fications to sit on the most important and prestigious court in America. These hearings also give the public an opportunity to see Justices occupy a position of immense power and are tenured for life. Furthermore, Justices and other Federal judges are not ac- countable to the public through the ballot box. It is, therefore, im- perative that the Senate exercise its role in the confirmation proc- ess with great care, ensuring that the nominee possesses the nec- essary qualifications to fill this immensely important role. Over the years, I have determined the special qualifications I be- lieve an individual must possess to serve on the Supreme Court, First, unquestioned integrity. A nominee must be honest, abso- Second, courage. A nominee must possess the courage to decide tough cases according to the law and the Constitution. Third, compassion. While a nominee must be firm in his or her decisions, they should show mercy when appropriate. Fourth, professional competence. The nominee must have the Fifth, proper judicial temperament. The nominee must have the self-discipline to base decisions on logic, not emotion, and to have respect for lawyers, litigants, and court personnel. Sixth, an understanding of the majesty of our system of govern- ment. The nominee must understand that only Congress makes the laws, that the Constitution is changed only by amendment, and that all powers not specifically delegated to the Federal Govern- These are the essential qualities which determine the fitness of an individual to serve on the Court, and it appears to me that Judge Ginsburg possesses them. She has had a distinguished scho- lastic and legal career and established a reputation as a person who thinks twice before acting—an especially valuable quality in a After 13 years on the D.C. Circuit Court, Judge Ginsburg has written hundreds of opinions, authored numerous articles, and de- livered many speeches. I am not in agreement with her on every issue. However, I respect her intelligence and ability, and I look forward to discussing her approach to constitutional issues and re- viewing her development on the D.C. Circuit Court. Mr. Chairman, as we begin this hearing, I am reminded of the thoughts conveyed by President Washington to Chief Justice John Jay and the Associate Justices during the first term of the Su- preme Court. His comments on the judicial branch remain as in- sightful and compelling today as when they were first delivered. He I have always been persuaded that the stability and success of the National Gov- ernment, and consequently the happiness of the people of the United States, would depend in a considerable degree on the interpretation and execution of its laws. In my opinion, therefore, it is important that the judiciary system should not only be independent in its operations, but as perfect as possible in its formation. Mr. Chairman, I believe this hearing is a continuation of ongoing efforts to create a judiciary which is as perfect as possible. As we pursue this worthy goal, it is incumbent upon the Senate to closely review Judge Ginsburg's qualifications to serve on the highest Judge Ginsburg, we welcome you here today and look forward to [The prepared statement of Senator Thurmond follows:] Mr. President, today, the Senate begins consideration of the nomination of Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg to be an Associated Justice of the United States Supreme Court. If confirmed, Judge Ginsburg will be the 107th person to serve as a Justice; continuing the long tradition of distinguished jurisprudence which began with Jus- tice John Rutledge of South Carolina, who was appointed on September 26, 1789. Although I was not privileged to be in the Senate at that time—lest anyone have doubts!—Judge Ginsburg's nomination will be the 25th Supreme Court nomination I have reviewed during my nearly 39 years in the Senate. Since its first session in the Royal Exchange Building in New York City in 1970, the Supreme Court has been an indispensable part of our government, securing in- dividual rights and interpreting the laws of this Nation. Occasionally, however, the Federal courts have gone beyond their constitutional mandate, and used their judi- cial authority to legislate from the bench. I believe that the Hamiltonian vision of the judiciary is the correct one: judgement, not will, is to be exercised by the judicial Mr. Chairman, we have a very serious responsibility here. Article II of the Con- stitution confers upon the Senate the duty of giving \"advice and consent\" to the president's appointment of Supreme Court Justices. The detailed review of judicial nominations has been assigned by the Senate to the Judiciary Committee. To a great extent, our colleagues who are not on this Committee depend upon our work to make their own decisions on a nominee's qualifications to sit on the most impor- tant and prestigious court in America. These hearings also give the public an oppor- Justices occupy a position of immense power, and are tenured for life. Further- more, justices and other federal judges are not accountable to the public through the ballot box. It is therefore imperative that the Senate exercise its role in the con- firmation process with great care, ensuring that the nominee possesses the nec- essary qualifications to fill this immensely important role. Over the years, I have determined the special qualifications I believe an individ- ual must possess to serve on the Supreme Court. They are as follows: First, unquestioned integrity. A nominee must be honest, absolutely incorruptible, Second, courage. A nominee must possess the courage to decide tough cases ac- Third, compassion. While a nominee must be firm in his or her decisions, they Fourth, professional competence. The nominee must have mastered the complexity Fifth, proper judicial temperament. The nominee must have the self-discipline to base decisions on logic, not emotion, and to have respect for lawyers, litigants and Sixth, an understanding of the role of the Court. The nominee must understand that only Congress makes the laws, that the Constitution is changed only by amend- ment, and that all powers not specifically delegated to the Federal government are These are the essential qualities which determine the fitness of an individual to serve on the court, and it appears to me that Judge Ginsburg possesses them. She has had a distinguished legal career, and established a reputation as a person who thinks twice before acting—an especially valuable quality in a judge. After 13 years on the D.C. Circuit Court, Judge Ginsburg has written hundreds of opinions, authored numerous articles and delivered many speeches. I am not in agreement with her on every issue. However, I respect her intelligence and ability, and I look forward to discussing her approach to constitutional issues and reviewing Mr. Chairman, as we begin this hearing, I am reminded of the thoughts conveyed by President Washington to Chief Justice John Jay and the Associate Justices dur- ing the first term of the Supreme Court. His comments on the judicial branch re- main as insightful and compelling today as when they were first delivered. He stat- \"I have always been persuaded that the stability and success of the national gov- ernment, and consequently the happiness of the people of the United States, would depend in a considerable degree on the interpretation and execution of its laws. In my opinion, therefore, it is important that the judiciary system should not only be independent in its operations, but as perfect as possible in its formation.\" (End of Mr. Chairman, I believe this hearing is a continuation of ongoing efforts to create a judiciary which is as perfect as possible. As we pursue this worthy goal, it is in- cumbent upon the Senate to closely review Judge Ginsburg's qualifications to serve Judge Ginsburg, we welcome you here today, and look forward to your testimony. Senator KENNEDY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to extend my appreciation for the kind words of my good friend from Utah, and it is a pleasure to serve on this committee I join in congratulating Judge Ginsburg on her nomination, and Nominations to the Supreme Court are among the most impor- tant decisions that any President makes, and the confirmation process is one of Congress' most important responsibilities. The Supreme Court is the guardian of our most basic constitu- tional rights and liberties. The Justices of the Supreme Court have the last word on the meaning of the Constitution; and they are called upon to decide many of the most important and difficult May a State consider the race of its citizens in drawing legisla- tive districts? May a State impose a greater punishment for a crime because the criminal is motivated by racial or religious big- otry? What is the proper boundary between church and state when government furnishes aid to students in religious schools? These are just a few of the questions that the Justices of the Su- preme Court decided in the past term. The rules announced by the Court in its decisions affect the daily lives of all Americans. Senators must satisfy themselves that a Supreme Court nominee has the outstanding ability, unquestionable character, and fair and balanced temperament to decide the important and difficult cases that come before the Court. And, no less important, Senators must determine whether a nominee to the Supreme Court possesses a deep understanding and commitment to the fundamental values of liberty, fairness, and equality enshrined in the Constitution. Our constitutional freedoms are the historic legacy of every American. The Members of the Senate have an obligation to ensure that those freedoms are entrusted to women and men on the Su- preme Court who will preserve their meaning for future genera- Based on her pathbreaking work as a law professor and a legal advocate for the rights of women, and based on her distinguished career as a Federal appeals court judge, it appears that Judge Ginsburg easily meets these high standards. Her creative strate- gies to win legal recognition of the right of women to equal protec- tion of the laws have earned her the admiration and respect of every American committed to ending discrimination in our Nation. Her impressive and scholarly work on the Federal appeals court here in Washington has earned her a reputation as one of the very The members of this committee, nonetheless, have a constitu- tional responsibility to carefully examine Judge Ginsburg's opinions and articles and to ask her about her legal philosophy and ap- proach to the Constitution, to assure ourselves that she deserves the high honor of joining the Nation's highest court. I commend President Clinton for this excellent nomination, and The CHAIRMAN. Because we went out of order at the outset, the Judge Ginsburg, congratulations on your nomination and wel- It has been a long time since a Democratic President has made a Supreme Court nomination. Justice White's resignation means that all of the remaining Justices were nominated by Republican This day is welcome, for many reasons. For 12 years, Supreme Court nominees have been sent to this committee in the hope of promoting a political and social agenda directly from the planks of the Republican Party platform. A core element of that agenda was the reversal of Supreme Court decisions in the areas of abortion, civil rights, individual liberties, and the first amendment. Unfortu- nately, their efforts have met with considerable success. As a result, the Supreme Court today is plagued by a vision of the Constitution which is cramped and narrow. The current Court lacks either the will or the commitment to make the promises and principles of our Constitution a reality for all Americans. This Nation faces difficult—and sometimes divisive—social prob- lems. We need leadership that is inclusive and tolerant. And we need a Supreme Court that is a source of inspiration and moral leadership. Only then will individual liberty, equal justice, and fun- damental fairness be a reality for everyday Americans, as we pre- President Clinton took one large step in that direction by nomi- nating Ruth Bader Ginsburg. No one can seriously claim that the President selected Judge Ginsburg to carry out a political agenda. The President found in Judge Ginsburg the nominee he was searching for, a person of enormous talent and integrity, a gener- ous character, and an unyielding fidelity to the Constitution and Judge Ginsburg's record as a litigator is the envy of lawyers throughout the country. She spent the bulk of her career as a law- yer working to secure equal rights for women. She succeeded, due to her comprehensive knowledge of the law and her keen under- standing of what would persuade the male members of the Su- She developed a brilliant litigation strategy, which included at times using men as plaintiffs in gender discrimination suits. This tactic helped the then all-male Supreme Court see that discrimina- tion based on gender was incompatible with the great constitu- tional principle of equal protection under the law. She showed courage and determination, when opportunities were closed to her due to discrimination against women. She didn't just get angry and resentful. She fought to change the law for the bene- With such an outstanding career as a lawyer, it is no surprise that President Carter selected her for the Federal Bench. Her ten- ure on the Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has distinguished her as one of the country's finest judges. As President Clinton said in introducing her to the Nation, she is \"pro- gressive in outlook, wise in judgment, balanced and fair in her Judge Ginsburg's record is exemplary, and I am frank to say that I expected nothing less in a nomination by President Clinton. But As an advocate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg pushed the Court to land- mark decisions on behalf of women's rights. While she fought for women one case at a time, she had a goal, a vision of a Constitu- While a circuit court of appeals judge, her duty has been to faith- fully apply the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. But, if confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice, she would have the opportunity to shape the law, rather than merely apply it. I want to know whether Judge Ginsburg will embrace this opportunity to shape the law to make the enduring principles of our Constitution a reality for all Americans, no matter how rich or poor, no matter what race or religion, no matter how unpopular their cause might As an appeals court judge, Judge Ginsburg is well known for her preference for measured or incremental movement in the law. She speaks of permitting constitutional doctrine, especially in con- troversial areas, to emerge from a dialog between the courts, other branches of government, and the people. I am concerned she will always take a similar approach on the Supreme Court, and I will When Judge Ginsburg speaks of a dialog, she apparently envi- sions a concept of gradualism in applying the Constitution's provi- sions. That causes me concern, because any delay in enunciating or protecting constitutional rights is justice denied. There are times and there are issues when the Supreme Court must show leadership. History demonstrates that it is sometimes the Court, rather than Congress or the President, which must have the will and the vision to define the Constitution's promises of lib- erty and justice, even when it is unpopular to do so. I expect to in- quire in this area, to know whether Judge Ginsburg will lead the Judicial leadership in addressing the great social and political problems of our day can be controversial. Judge Ginsburg will prob- ably hear much about judicial activism and judge-made laws from my colleagues during these hearings. I suspect they will warn her against judicial activism, notwithstanding the considerable conserv- ative judicial activism we have seen from the current Supreme But we must rise above this wornout debate to recognize that leadership in applying the cherished principles of our Constitution is not judicial activism. It is leadership we need from Judge Gins- T^e role of the Supreme Court in preserving and promoting indi- vidual liberty, equal opportunity, and social justice must be re- stored. Judge Ginsburg, your career as an advocate suggests that you have the intelligence, determination, and courage to begin the work that needs to be done. Your career as an appeals court judge suggests that you have the temperament and judicial skills to begin that restoration. My only question for you during these hear- [The prepared statement of Senator Metzenbaum follows:] Judge Ginsburg, congratulations on your nomination and welcome to these hear- It has been a long time since a Democratic President has made a Supreme Court nomination. Justice White's resignation means that all of the remaining Justices were nominated by Republican Presidents. So, I am relieved and pleased that Presi- This day is welcome for another reason. For twelve years, Supreme Court nomi- nees have been sent to this committee in the hope of promoting a political and social agenda directly from the planks of the Republican Party platform. A core element of that agenda was the reversal of Supreme Court decisions in the areas of abortion, civil rights, individual liberties, and the first amendment. Unfortunately, their ef- As a result, the Supreme Court today is plagued by a vision of the Constitution which is cramped and narrow. The current Court lacks either the will or the com- mitment to make the promises and principles of our Constitution a reality for all This Nation faces difficult—and sometimes divisive—social problems. We need leadership that is inclusive and tolerant. And we need a Supreme Court that is a source of inspiration and moral leadership. Only then will individual liberty, equal justice, and fundamental fairness be a reality for everyday Americans as we prepare President Clinton took one large step in that direction by nominating Ruth Bader Ginsburg. No one can seriously claim that the President selected Judge Ginsburg to carry out a political agenda. The President found in Judge Ginsburg the nominee he was searching for—a person of enormous talent, integrity, a generous character, and an unyielding fidelity to the Constitution and the rule of law in the service of Judge Ginsburg's record as a litigator is the envy of lawyers throughout the coun- try. She spent the bulk of her career as a lawyer working to secure equal rights for women. She succeeded due to her comprehensive knowledge of the law and her keen understanding of what would persuade the members of the Supreme Court. She developed a brilliant litigation strategy, which included at times using men as plaintiffs in gender discrimination suits. This tactic helped the then, all-male Su- preme Court see that discrimination based on gender was incompatible with the great constitutional principle of equal protection under the law. She showed courage and determination when opportunities were closed to her due to discrimination against women. She didn't just get angry and resentful, she fought to change the law for the benefit of all women, and men. With such an outstanding career as a lawyer, it is no surprise that President Carter selected her for the Federal bench. Her tenure on the Circuit Court of Ap- peals for the District of Columbia has distinguished her as one of the country's fin- est judges. As President Clinton said in introducing her to the Nation: She is \"pro- gressive in outlook, wise in judgment, balanced and fair in her opinions.\" Judge Ginsburg's record is exemplary; and I am frank to say that I expected noth- ing less in a nomination by President Clinton. But there is still more that I want As an advocate, Ruth Bader Ginsburg pushed the Court to landmark decisions on behalf of women's rights. While she fought for women one case at a time, she had a goal—a vision—of a Constitution that protected women against discrimination. While a circuit court of appeals judge, her duty has been to faithfully apply the law as interpreted by the Supreme Court. But, if confirmed as the next Supreme Court Justice, she would have the opportunity to shape the law rather than merely apply it. I want to know whether Judge Ginsburg will embrace this opportunity to shape the law to make the enduring principles of our Constitution a reality for all Americans—no matter how rich or poor, no matter what race or religion, no matter As an appeals court judge, Judge Ginsburg is well known for her preference for \"measured\"—or incremental—movement in the law. She speaks of permitting con- stitutional doctrine, especially in controversial areas, to emerge from a dialogue be- tween the courts, other branches of government, and the people. I am concerned she will always take a similar approach on the Supreme Court; and I will make it no When Judge Ginsburg speaks of a dialogue, she apparently envisions a concept of gradualism in applying the Constitution's provisions. That causes me concern be- cause any delay in enunciating or protecting constitutional rights is justice denied. There are times and there are issues when the Supreme Court must show leader- ship. History demonstrates that it is sometimes the Court—rather than Congress or the President—which must have the will and the vision to define the Constitu- tion's promises of liberty and justice, even when it is unpopular to do so. I want to know whether Judge Ginsburg will lead the Court at such times. Judicial leadership in addressing the great social and political problems of our day can be controversial. Judge Ginsburg will probably hear much about judicial activ- ism and judge-made laws from my colleagues during these hearings. I suspect they will warn her against judicial activism, notwithstanding the considerable conserv- ative judicial activism we have seen from the current Supreme Court. But, we must rise above this worn-out debate to recognize that leadership in ap- plying the cherished principles of our Constitution is not judicial activism. It is lead- ership we need from Judge Ginsburg on the Supreme Court. The role of the Supreme Court in preserving and promoting individual liberty, equal opportunity, and social justice must be restored. Judge Ginsburg, your career as an advocate suggests that you have the intelligence, determination, and courage to begin the work that needs to be done. Your career as an appeals court judge sug- gests that you have the temperament and judicial skills to begin that restoration. My only question for you during these hearings is whether you will meet that chal- Senator SIMPSON. Mr. Chairman, in the past, following Howard has always gotten me pretty well primed up, but not this time, ex- cept for a few rambling remarks there about Republican Presidents and a Democratic President, too, he is right on track. I appreciate your leadership, Mr. Chairman. You have always been very fair and open, serious and practical with us. Welcome back to Arlen, a wonderful legislator and friend and a In going through many of the things that you have written, I noted an article in the Illinois Law Review where you said, in car- rying out its duty to consider the President's nominees to the Su- preme Court, we have a \"weighty responsibility to consider what will serve the national interest.\" We indeed do, and we will attempt to carry that out responsibly and with a serious intent of a knowl- edge of our responsibility by considering, among other things, your judicial philosophy, how you will think and reason, as you con- template the pressing legal issues of the day, questions of the day, and we must do that without compromising your judicial independ- There are, of course, other important considerations and quali- fications for a nominee to the Supreme Court. A nominee's rec- titude and deportment are critical considerations. We must be cer- tain that the nominee has the edu