{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "is_view": false, "human_description_en": "where congress = 113 sorted by date descending", "rows": [["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1142", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Highlights + Senate", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCHAMBER", "D1142", "D1150", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"124\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"226\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"564\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"595\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"684\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1800\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3018\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3020\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3608\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4030\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. D1142", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1142-D1150]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                         Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n[[Page D1142]]\n\n                              Daily Digest\n\nHIGHLIGHTS\n\n      Senate passed H.R. 5771, Tax Increase Prevention Act.\n      Senate agreed to H. Con. Res. 125, and stands adjourned sine die.\n\n                                 Senate\n\nChamber Action\nRoutine Proceedings, pages S6869-S6934\nMeasures Introduced: Three bills were introduced, as follows: S. 3018-\n3020.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6921\nMeasures Passed:\n  Tax Increase Prevention Act: By 76 yeas to 16 nays (Vote No. 364),\nSenate passed H.R. 5771, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to\nextend certain expiring provisions and make technical corrections, to\namend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax\ntreatment of ABLE accounts established under State programs for the\ncare of family members with disabilities, by the order of the Senate of\nTuesday, December 16, 2014, 60 Senators having voted in the\naffirmative.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Pages S6869-70, S6898-S6903\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On page D1142, December 16, 2014, the following language\nappears: Measures Passed: Tax Increase Prevention Act: By 76 yeas\nto 16 nays (Vote No. 364), Senate passed H.R. 5771, to amend the\nInternal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain expiring\nprovisions and make technical corrections, to amend the Internal\nRevenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of ABLE\naccounts established under State programs for the care of family\nmembers with disabilities, by the order of the Senate of Tuesday,\nDecember 16, 2014, 60 Senators having voted in the affirmative.\nPages S6898-S6903\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: Measures Passed:\nTax Increase Prevention Act: By 76 yeas to 16 nays (Vote No. 364),\nSenate passed H.R. 5771, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of\n1986 to extend certain expiring provisions and make technical\ncorrections, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide\nfor the tax treatment of ABLE accounts established under State\nprograms for the care of family members with disabilities, by the\norder of the Senate of Tuesday, December 16, 2014, 60 Senators\nhaving voted in the affirmative. Pages S6869-70, S6898-S6903\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\n  Enrollment Correction: Senate agreed to H. Con. Res. 124, providing\nfor a correction in the enrollment of H.R. 5771.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6903\n  Grand Portage Band Per Capita Adjustment Act: Senate passed H.R.\n3608, to amend the Act of October 19, 1973, concerning taxable income\nto members of the Grand Portage Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians.\n                                                             Page S6924\n  Father Richard Marquess-Barry Post Office Building: Senate passed\nH.R. 4030, to designate the facility of the United States Postal\nService located at 18640 NW 2nd Avenue in Miami, Florida, as the\n``Father Richard Marquess-Barry Post Office Building''.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6924\n  Mni Wiconi Project Act Amendments: Senate passed S. 684, to amend the\nMni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 to facilitate completion of the Mni\nWiconi Rural Water Supply System, after agreeing to the committee\namendments, and the following amendment proposed thereto:\n                                                         Pages S6924-29\n  Pryor (for Johnson (SD)) Amendment No. 4122, to provide an offset.\n                                                             Page S6926\n  Bureau of Reclamation Transparency Act: Senate passed S. 1800, to\nrequire the Secretary of the Interior to submit to Congress a report on\nthe efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation to manage its infrastructure\nassets, after agreeing to the committee amendment in the nature of a\nsubstitute, and the following amendment proposed thereto:\n                                                         Pages S6924-29\n  Pryor (for Barrasso) Amendment No. 4123, to provide an offset.\n                                                             Page S6928\n  Recognizing Nobel Laureates Kailash Satyarthi and Malala Yousafzai:\nSenate agreed to S. Res. 595, recognizing Nobel Laureates Kailash\nSatyarthi and Malala Yousafzai for their efforts to end the financial\nexploitation of children and to ensure the right of all children to an\neducation, after agreeing to the committee amendment in the nature of a\nsubstitute and with an amended preamble.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6929\n  100th Anniversary of the Birth of James Cleveland ``Jesse'' Owens:\nCommittee on the Judiciary was discharged from further consideration of\nS. Res. 226, celebrating the 100th anniversary of the birth of James\nCleveland ``Jesse'' Owens and honoring him for his accomplishments and\nsteadfast commitment to promoting the civil rights of all people, and\nthe resolution was then agreed to, after agreeing to the following\namendment proposed thereto:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6929\n  Pryor (for Brown) Amendment No. 4126, to amend the preamble.\n                                                             Page S6929\n  Centennial of the Passenger Pigeon Extinction: Committee on\nEnvironment and Public Works was discharged from further consideration\nof S. Res. 564, honoring conservation on the centennial of the\npassenger pigeon extinction, and the resolution was then agreed to,\nafter agreeing to the following amendments proposed thereto:\n                                                         Pages S6929-30\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On page D1142, December 16, 2014, the following language\nappears: Centennial of the Passenger Pigeon Extinction: Committee\non Environment and Public Works was discharged from further\nconsideration of S. Res. 564, honoring conservation on the\ncentennial of the passenger pigeon extinction, and the resolution\nwas then agreed to, after agreeing to the following amendments\nproposed thereto: Page S6929\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: Centennial of the\nPassenger Pigeon Extinction: Committee on Environment and Public\nWorks was discharged from further consideration of S. Res. 564,\nhonoring conservation on the centennial of the passenger pigeon\nextinction, and the resolution was then agreed to, after agreeing\nto the following amendments proposed thereto: Pages S6929-30\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\n[[Page D1143]]\n\n  Pryor (for Brown) Amendment No. 4124, to amend the resolving clause.\n                                                             Page S6929\n  Pryor (for Brown) Amendment No. 4125, to amend the preamble.\n                                                             Page S6929\n  Adjournment Resolution: Senate agreed to H. Con. Res. 125, providing for\nthe sine die adjournment of the second session of the One Hundred Thirteenth\nCongress.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6930\nAppointments:\n  United States-China Economic Security Review Commission: The Chair\nannounced, on behalf of the Republican Leader, pursuant to the provisions of\nPublic Law 106-398, as amended by Public Law 108-7, and in consultation with\nthe Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the Senate\nCommittee on Finance, the re-appointment of the following individuals to\nserve as members of the United States-China Economic Security Review\nCommission: Robin Cleveland of Virginia, Dennis Shea of Virginia.\n                                                                  Page S6930\nAuthorizing Leadership To Make Appointments--Agreement: A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that, notwithstanding the upcoming recess or\nadjournment of the Senate, the President of the Senate, the President Pro\nTempore, and the Majority and Minority Leaders be authorized to make\nappointments to commissions, committees, boards, conferences, or\ninterparliamentary conferences authorized by law, by concurrent action of\nthe two Houses, or by order of the Senate.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6930\nSigning Authority--Agreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was reached\nproviding that during the adjournment or recess of the Senate from\nWednesday, December 17, 2014, through Friday, January 2, 2015, Senators\nRockefeller, Cardin, Levin be authorized to sign duly enrolled bills or\njoint resolutions.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6930\n114th Congress--Agreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was reached\nproviding that when the Senate adjourns sine die under the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 125 and when it convenes at 12 noon, on Tuesday, January 6, 2015,\npursuant to P.L. 113-201, following the presentation of the certificates of\nelection and the swearing-in of elected Members, and the required live\nquorum, the morning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be\napproved to date, and the time for the two Leaders be reserved for their use\nlater in the day.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6930\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On page D1143, December 16, 2014, the following language\nappears: 114th Congress--Adjournment: A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that when the Senate adjourns sine\ndie under the provisions of H. Con. Res. 125 and when it convenes\nat 12 noon, on Tuesday, January 6, 2015, pursuant to P.L. 113-201,\nfollowing the presentation of the certificates of election and the\nswearing-in of elected Members, and the required live quorum, the\nmorning hour be deemed expired, the Journal of proceedings be\napproved to date, and the time for the two Leaders be reserved for\ntheir use later in the day. Page S6930\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: 114th Congress--\nAgreement: A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing\nthat when the Senate adjourns sine die under the provisions of H.\nCon. Res. 125 and when it convenes at 12 noon, on Tuesday, January\n6, 2015, pursuant to P.L. 113-201, following the presentation of\nthe certificates of election and the swearing-in of elected\nMembers, and the required live quorum, the morning hour be deemed\nexpired, the Journal of proceedings be approved to date, and the\ntime for the two Leaders be reserved for their use later in the\nday. Page S6930\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\nNominations Confirmed: Senate confirmed the following nominations:\n  Daniel J. Santos, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Defense Nuclear\nFacilities Safety Board for a term expiring October 18, 2017.\n                                                     Pages S6870, S6933\n  Frank A. Rose, of Massachusetts, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nState (Verification and Compliance).\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6870, S6933\n  By 55 yeas to 39 nays (Vote No. EX. 360), Sarah R. Saldana, of Texas,\nto be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security.\n                                        Pages S6872-83, S6884-86, S6933\n  During consideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action:\n   By 53 yeas to 41 nays (Vote No. 359), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6885\n  By 55 yeas to 38 nays (Vote No. EX. 362), Antony Blinken, of New\nYork, to be Deputy Secretary of State.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6886-97, S6934\n  During consideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action:\n   By 53 yeas to 40 nays (Vote No. 361), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6897\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On page D1143, December 16, 2014, the following language\nappears: Nominations Confirmed: Senate confirmed the following\nnominations: Daniel J. Santos, of Virginia, to be a Member of the\nDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board for a term expiring\nOctober 18, 2017. Page S6870 Frank A. Rose, of Massachusetts, to\nbe an Assistant Secretary of State (Verification and Compliance).\nPage S6870 By 55 yeas to 39 nays (Vote No. EX. 360), Sarah R.\nSaldana, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland\nSecurity. Pages S6872-83, S6884-86 During consideration of this\nnomination today, Senate also took the following action: By 53\nyeas to 41 nays (Vote No. 359), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination. Pages S6884-85 By 55 yeas\nto 38 nays (Vote No. EX. 362), Antony Blinken, of New York, to be\nDeputy Secretary of State. Pages S6886-97 During consideration of\nthis nomination today, Senate also took the following action: By\n53 yeas to 40 nays (Vote No. 361), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination. Pages S6896-97\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: Nominations\nConfirmed: Senate confirmed the following nominations: Daniel J.\nSantos, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Defense Nuclear\nFacilities Safety Board for a term expiring October 18, 2017.\nPages S6870, S6933 Frank A. Rose, of Massachusetts, to be an\nAssistant Secretary of State (Verification and Compliance). Pages\nS6870, S6933 By 55 yeas to 39 nays (Vote No. EX. 360), Sarah R.\nSaldana, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland\nSecurity. Pages S6872-83, 6884-86, S6933 During consideration of\nthis nomination today, Senate also took the following action: By\n53 yeas to 41 nays (Vote No. 359), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination. Page S6885 By 55 yeas to\n38 nays (Vote No. EX. 362), Antony Blinken, of New York, to be\nDeputy Secretary of State. Pages S6886-97, S6934 During\nconsideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action: By 53 yeas to 40 nays (Vote No. 361), Senate\nagreed to the motion to close further debate on the nomination.\nPage S6897\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\n  Karen Kornbluh, of New York, to be a Member of the Broadcasting Board\nof Governors for a term expiring August 13, 2016.\n  Richard J. Engler, of New Jersey, to be a Member of the Chemical\nSafety and Hazard Investigation Board for a term of five years.\n  Manuel H. Ehrlich, Jr., of New Jersey, to be a Member of the Chemical\nSafety and Hazard Investigation Board for a term of five years.\n  Nicholas J. Rasmussen, of Virginia, to be Director of the National\nCounterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of National\nIntelligence.\n  Mark E. Lopes, of Arizona, to be United States Executive Director of\nthe Inter-American Development Bank for a term of three years.\n  Leigh A. Bradley, of Virginia, to be General Counsel, Department of\nVeterans Affairs.\n  Mark R. Rosekind, of California, to be Administrator of the National\nHighway Traffic Safety Administration.\n  Helen Tierney, of Virginia, to be Chief Financial Officer, Department\nof Veterans Affairs.\n  Charles P. Rose, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees\nof the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a term\nexpiring May 26, 2019.\n  Mark Thomas Nethery, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the Board of\nTrustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a\nterm expiring October 6, 2018.\n  Anne J. Udall, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees of\nthe Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a term expiring\nOctober 6, 2016.\n\n[[Page D1144]]\n\n  Camilla C. Feibelman, of New Mexico, to be a Member of the Board of\nTrustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a\nterm expiring April 15, 2017.\n  Martha L. Minow, of Massachusetts, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2017.\n  Charles Norman Wiltse Keckler, of Virginia, to be a Member of the\nBoard of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\nexpiring July 13, 2016.\n  Gloria Valencia-Weber, of New Mexico, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2017.\n  John Gerson Levi, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2017.\n  Robert James Grey, Jr., of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2017.\n  Thomas Hicks, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Election Assistance\nCommission for a term expiring December 12, 2017.\n  Matthew Vincent Masterson, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Election\nAssistance Commission for a term expiring December 12, 2017.\n  Christy A. McCormick, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Election\nAssistance Commission for a term expiring December 12, 2015.\n  David Rivera, of Tennessee, to be United States Attorney for the Middle\nDistrict of Tennessee for the term of four years.\n  Arthur Lee Bentley III, of Florida, to be United States Attorney for the\nMiddle District of Florida for the term of four years.\n  Isobel Coleman, of New York, to be Representative of the United States of\nAmerica to the United Nations for U. N. Management and Reform, with the rank\nof Ambassador.\n  Isobel Coleman, of New York, as an Alternate Representative of the United\nStates of America to the Sessions of the General Assembly of the United\nNations during her tenure of service as Representative of the United States\nof America to the United Nations for U.N. Management and Reform.\n  Paige Eve Alexander, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Administrator of the\nUnited States Agency for International Development.\n  David J. Berteau, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary of Defense.\n  Robert M. Scher, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant Secretary\nof Defense.\n  Jess Lippincott Baily, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nMacedonia.\n  Robert Francis Cekuta, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nAzerbaijan.\n  Margaret Ann Uyehara, of Ohio, to be Ambassador to Montenegro.\n  Richard M. Mills, Jr., of Texas, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nArmenia.\n  Michael P. O'Rielly, of New York, to be a Member of the Federal\nCommunications Commission for a term of five years from July 1, 2014. (Prior\nto this action, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation was\ndischarged from further consideration.)\n  Laurie I. Mikva, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of\nthe Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July 13, 2016.\n  Victor B. Maddox, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of\nthe Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July 13, 2016.\n  Joseph Pius Pietrzyk, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Board of Directors of\nthe Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July 13, 2017.\n  James L. Huffman, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees of\nthe Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a term expiring\nOctober 6, 2020.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6903-04, S6933-34\n  James Cole, Jr., of New York, to be General Counsel, Department of\nEducation.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904, S6933\n  Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the Federal\nEnergy Regulatory Commission for the remainder of the term expiring June 30,\n2017.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6897-98, 6904, S6934\n  During consideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action:\n   By 65 yeas to 28 nays (Vote No. 363), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6897\n  Estevan R. Lopez, of New Mexico, to be Commissioner of Reclamation.\n                                                           Page S6905, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904\n  Marcus Dwayne Jadotte, of Florida, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nCommerce.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6905, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904\n  Jonathan Nicholas Stivers, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nAdministrator of the United States Agency for International Development.\n                                                           Page S6905, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904\n  John Charles Cruden, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Attorney General.\n                                                           Page S6905, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904\n  Christopher Smith, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy\n(Fossil Energy).\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6905, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6904\n\n[[Page D1145]]\n\n  By 51 yeas to 38 nays (Vote No. EX. 366), Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri,\nto be United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.\n                                                        Page S6905-06, S6933\n  During consideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action:\n  By 51 yeas to 38 nays (Vote No. 365), Senate agreed to the motion to close\nfurther debate on the nomination.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906\n  Jorge Luis Alonso, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the\nNorthern District of Illinois.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Haywood Stirling Gilliam, Jr., of California, to be United States District\nJudge for the Northern District of California.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Amit Priyavadan Mehta, of the District of Columbia, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the District of Columbia.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Allison Dale Burroughs, of Massachusetts, to be United States District\nJudge for the District of Massachusetts.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  John Robert Blakey, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Northern District of Illinois.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Amos L. Mazzant, III, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of Texas.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-07, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Robert Lee Pitman, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the\nWestern District of Texas.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-08, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Robert William Schroeder III, of Texas, to be United States District Judge\nfor the Eastern District of Texas.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906, S6933\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Joan Marie Azrack, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of New York.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-08, S6934\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Elizabeth K. Dillon, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Western District of Virginia.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-08, S6934\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n  Loretta Copeland Biggs, of North Carolina, to be United States District\nJudge for the Middle District of North Carolina.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPages S6906-08, S6934\n  A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion to\ninvoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\nPage S6906\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On pages D1144-1145, December 16, 2014, the following language\nappears: James L. Huffman, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board\nof Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation\nfor a term expiring October 6, 2020. Pages S6903-04 James Cole,\nJr., of New York, to be General Counsel, Department of Education.\nPage S6904 Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member\nof the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for the remainder of\nthe term expiring June 30, 2017. Pages S6897-98, 6904 During\nconsideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action: By 65 yeas to 28 nays (Vote No. 363), Senate\nagreed to the motion to close further debate on the nomination.\nPage S6897 Estevan R. Lopez, of New Mexico, to be Commissioner of\nReclamation. Page S6905 Subsequently, the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination was withdrawn. Page S6904 Marcus Dwayne Jadotte,\nof Florida, to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce. Page S6905\nSubsequently, the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination was\nwithdrawn. Page S6904 Jonathan Nicholas Stivers, of the District\nof Columbia, to be an Assistant Administrator of the United States\nAgency for International Development. Page S6905 Subsequently, the\nmotion to invoke cloture on the nomination was withdrawn. Page\nS6904 John Charles Cruden, of Virginia, to be an Assistant\nAttorney General. Page S6905 Subsequently, the motion to invoke\ncloture on the nomination was withdrawn. Page S6904 Christopher\nSmith, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil\nEnergy). Page S6905 Subsequently, the motion to invoke cloture on\nthe nomination was withdrawn. Page S6904 [[Page D1145]] By 51 yeas\nto 38 nays (Vote No. EX. 366), Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri, to\nbe United States District Judge for the Western District of\nMissouri. Page S6906 During consideration of this nomination\ntoday, Senate also took the following action: By 51 yeas to 38\nnays (Vote No. 365), Senate agreed to the motion to close further\ndebate on the nomination. Pages S6905-06 Jorge Luis Alonso, of\nIllinois, to be United States District Judge for the Northern\nDistrict of Illinois.\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: James L. Huffman,\nof Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees of the Morris\nK. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a term expiring\nOctober 6, 2020. Pages S6903-04, S6933-34 James Cole, Jr., of New\nYork, to be General Counsel, Department of Education. Pages S6904,\nS6933 Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the\nFederal Energy Regulatory Commission for the remainder of the term\nexpiring June 30, 2017. Pages S6897-98, S6904, S6934 During\nconsideration of this nomination today, Senate also took the\nfollowing action: By 65 yeas to 28 nays (Vote No. 363), Senate\nagreed to the motion to close further debate on the nomination.\nPage S6897 Estevan R. Lopez, of New Mexico, to be Commissioner of\nReclamation. Pages S6905, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was\nreached providing that the motion to invoke cloture on the\nnomination, be withdrawn. Page S6904 Marcus Dwayne Jadotte, of\nFlorida, to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce. Pages S6905,\nS6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the\nmotion to invoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn. Page\nS6904 Jonathan Nicholas Stivers, of the District of Columbia, to\nbe an Assistant Administrator of the United States Agency for\nInternational Development. Pages S6905, S6933 A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6904 John Charles Cruden,\nof Virginia, to be an Assistant Attorney General. Pages S6905,\nS6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the\nmotion to invoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn. Page\nS6904 Christopher Smith, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nEnergy (Fossil Energy). Pages S6905, S6933 A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6904 [[Page D1145]] By 51\nyeas to 38 nays (Vote No. EX. 366), Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri,\nto be United States District Judge for the Western District of\nMissouri. Pages S6905-06, S6933 During consideration of this\nnomination today, Senate also took the following action: By 51\nyeas to 38 nays (Vote No. 365), Senate agreed to the motion to\nclose further debate on the nomination. Page S6906 Jorge Luis\nAlonso, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the\nNorthern District of Illinois. Pages S6906-07, S6933 A unanimous-\nconsent agreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke\ncloture on the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Haywood\nStirling Gilliam, Jr., of California, to be United States District\nJudge for the Northern District of California. Pages S6906-07,\nS6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the\nmotion to invoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn. Page\nS6906 Amit Priyavadan Mehta, of the District of Columbia, to be\nUnited States District Judge for the District of Columbia. Pages\nS6906-07, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was reached\nproviding that the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination, be\nwithdrawn. Page S6906 Allison Dale Burroughs, of Massachusetts, to\nbe United States District Judge for the District of Massachusetts.\nPages S6906-07, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was reached\nproviding that the motion to invoke cloture on the nomination, be\nwithdrawn. Page S6906 John Robert Blakey, of Illinois, to be\nUnited States District Judge for the Northern District of\nIllinois. Pages S6906-07, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was\nreached providing that the motion to invoke cloture on the\nnomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Amos L. Mazzant, III, of\nTexas, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District\nof Texas. Pages S6906-07, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was\nreached providing that the motion to invoke cloture on the\nnomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Robert Lee Pitman, of Texas,\nto be United States District Judge for the Western District of\nTexas. Pages S6906-08, S6933 A unanimous-consent agreement was\nreached providing that the motion to invoke cloture on the\nnomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Robert William Schroeder III,\nof Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern\nDistrict of Texas. Pages S6906, S6933 A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Joan Marie Azrack, of\nNew York, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern\nDistrict of New York. Pages S6906-08, S6934 A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Elizabeth K. Dillon,\nof Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the Western\nDistrict of Virginia. Pages S6906-08, S6934 A unanimous-consent\nagreement was reached providing that the motion to invoke cloture\non the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906 Loretta Copeland\nBiggs, of North Carolina, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Middle District of North Carolina. Pages 6906-08, S6934 A\nunanimous-consent agreement was reached providing that the motion\nto invoke cloture on the nomination, be withdrawn. Page S6906\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\nNominations Returned to the President: The following nominations were\nreturned to the President failing of confirmation under Senate rule\nXXXI at the time of the sine die adjournment of the 113th Congress:\n  Carlos J. Torres, of Virginia, to be Deputy Director of the Peace\nCorps.\n  Russell C. Deyo, of New Jersey, to be Under Secretary for Management,\nDepartment of Homeland Security.\n  Michael P. Botticelli, of the District of Columbia, to be Director of\nNational Drug Control Policy.\n  Daniel Henry Marti, of Virginia, to be Intellectual Property\nEnforcement Coordinator, Executive Office of the President.\n  Gilberto de Jesus, of Maryland, to be Chief Counsel for Advocacy,\nSmall Business Administration.\n  Jeanne E. Davidson, of Maryland, to be a Judge of the United States\nCourt of International Trade.\n  Michele Thoren Bond, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of State (Consular Affairs).\n  Michael Young, of Pennsylvania, to be a Member of the Federal Mine\nSafety and Health Review Commission for a term of six years expiring\nAugust 30, 2020.\n  Benjamin L. Cardin, of Maryland, to be a Representative of the United\nStates of America to the Sixty-ninth Session of the General Assembly of\nthe United Nations.\n  Ronald H. Johnson, of Wisconsin, to be a Representative of the United\nStates of America to the Sixty-ninth Session of the General Assembly of\nthe United Nations.\n  Carol Leslie Hamilton, of California, to be an Alternate\nRepresentative of the United States of America to the Sixty-ninth\nSession of the General Assembly of the United Nations.\n  Leslie Berger Kiernan, of Maryland, as an Alternate Representative of\nthe United States of America, to the Sixty-ninth Session of the General\nAssembly of the United Nations.\n  Francine Berman, of New York, to be a Member of the National Council\non the Humanities for a term expiring January 26, 2020.\n\n[[Page D1146]]\n\n  Victoria Ann Hughes, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Corporation for National and Community Service for a\nterm expiring October 6, 2016.\n  Eric P. Liu, of Washington, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring December 27, 2017.\n  Deborah Willis, of New York, to be a Member of the National Council\non the Humanities for a term expiring January 26, 2020.\n  Dallas P. Tonsager, of South Dakota, to be a Member of the Farm\nCredit Administration Board, Farm Credit Administration, for a term\nexpiring May 21, 2020.\n  Mario Cordero, of California, to be a Federal Maritime Commissioner\nfor the term expiring June 30, 2019.\n  Tho Dinh-Zarr, of Texas, to be a Member of the National\nTransportation Safety Board for the remainder of the term expiring\nDecember 31, 2018.\n  Maria Echaveste, of California, to be Ambassador to the United\nMexican States.\n  Brian James Egan, of Maryland, to be Legal Adviser of the Department\nof State.\n  Paul A. Folmsbee, of Oklahoma, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nMali.\n  Mary Catherine Phee, of Illinois, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nSouth Sudan.\n  Matthew T. McGuire, of the District of Columbia, to be United States\nExecutive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and\nDevelopment for a term of two years.\n  Maria Cancian, of Wisconsin, to be Assistant Secretary for Family\nSupport, Department of Health and Human Services.\n  Mark Sobel, of Virginia, to be United States Executive Director of\nthe International Monetary Fund for a term of two years.\n  Victoria Reggie Kennedy, of Massachusetts, to be a Governor of the\nUnited States Postal Service for a term expiring December 8, 2016.\n  Todd Sunhwae Kim, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate\nJudge of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals for the term of\nfifteen years.\n  Juan Carlos Iturregui, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring June 26,\n2014.\n  Juan Carlos Iturregui, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring June 26,\n2020.\n  Roberta S. Jacobson, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring\nSeptember 20, 2014.\n  Roberta S. Jacobson, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring\nSeptember 20, 2020.\n  Monica C. Regalbuto, of Illinois, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nEnergy (Environmental Management).\n  Ronald Lee Miller, of Kansas, to be United States Marshal for the\nDistrict of Kansas for the term of four years.\n  Linda Struyk Millsaps, of North Carolina, to be a Member of the\nInternal Revenue Service Oversight Board for a term expiring September\n14, 2018.\n  Dean A. Reuter, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring September 14, 2016.\n  Steven H. Cohen, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees\nof the Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation for a term expiring\nDecember 10, 2019.\n  Jane Toshiko Nishida, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Administrator\nof the Environmental Protection Agency.\n  Sunil Sabharwal, of California, to be United States Alternate\nExecutive Director of the International Monetary Fund for a term of two\nyears.\n  Nancy B. Firestone, of Virginia, to be a Judge of the United States\nCourt of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.\n  Thomas L. Halkowski, of Pennsylvania, to be a Judge of the United\nStates Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.\n  Anthony G. Collins, of New York, to be a Member of the Advisory Board\nof the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation.\n  Marcia Denise Occomy, of the District of Columbia, to be United\nStates Director of the African Development Bank for a term of five\nyears.\n  John Maeda, of Massachusetts, to be a Member of the National Council\non the Arts for a term expiring September 3, 2016.\n  Gentry O. Smith, of North Carolina, to be Director of the Office of\nForeign Missions, and to have the rank of Ambassador during his tenure\nof service.\n  Robert M. Gordon, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant\nSecretary for Planning, Evaluation, and Policy Development, Department\nof Education.\n  Armando Omar Bonilla, of the District of Columbia, to be a Judge of\nthe United States Court of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.\n  Patricia M. McCarthy, of Maryland, to be a Judge of the United States\nCourt of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.\n  Jeri Kaylene Somers, of Virginia, to be a Judge of the United States\nCourt of Federal Claims for a term of fifteen years.\n\n[[Page D1147]]\n\n  Jessie Hill Roberson, of Alabama, to be a Member of the Defense\nNuclear Facilities Safety Board for a term expiring October 18, 2018.\n  Leslie E. Bains, of New York, to be a Director of the Securities\nInvestor Protection Corporation for a term expiring December 31, 2015.\n  Robert Michael Simon, of Maryland, to be an Associate Director of the\nOffice of Science and Technology Policy.\n  Marc A. Kastner, of Massachusetts, to be Director of the Office of\nScience, Department of Energy.\n  Jonathan Elkind, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary of Energy\n(International Affairs).\n  Victoria Marie Baecher Wassmer, of Illinois, to be Chief Financial\nOfficer, Environmental Protection Agency.\n  Thomas A. Burke, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Administrator of the\nEnvironmental Protection Agency.\n  Kenneth J. Kopocis, of Virginia, to be an Assistant Administrator of\nthe Environmental Protection Agency.\n  Janet L. Yellen, of California, to be United States Alternate\nGovernor of the International Monetary Fund for a term of five years.\n  Carlos Pascual, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of State (Energy Resources).\n  Catherine Ann Novelli, of Virginia, to be United States Alternate\nGovernor of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.\n  George James Tsunis, of New York, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of\nNorway.\n  John L. Estrada, of Florida, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nTrinidad and Tobago.\n  Michael Keith Yudin, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant\nSecretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department\nof Education.\n  Massie Ritsch, of the District of Columbia, to be Assistant Secretary\nfor Communications and Outreach, Department of Education.\n  Ericka M. Miller, of Virginia, to be Assistant Secretary for\nPostsecondary Education, Department of Education.\n  Steven M. Wellner, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate\nJudge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of\nfifteen years.\n  Sherry Moore Trafford, of the District of Columbia, to be an\nAssociate Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for\nthe term of fifteen years.\n  William Ward Nooter, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate\nJudge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of\nfifteen years.\n  James C. Miller, III, of Virginia, to be a Governor of the United\nStates Postal Service for the term expiring December 8, 2017.\n  Stephen Crawford, of Maryland, to be a Governor of the United States\nPostal Service for the remainder of the term expiring December 8, 2015.\n  David Michael Bennett, of North Carolina, to be a Governor of the\nUnited States Postal Service for a term expiring December 8, 2018.\n  Yvette Roubideaux, of Maryland, to be Director of the Indian Health\nService, Department of Health and Human Services, for the term of four\nyears.\n  Jennifer Prescod May-Parker, of North Carolina, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the Eastern District of North Carolina.\n  Michael P. Boggs, of Georgia, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Northern District of Georgia.\n  Constance B. Tobias, of Maryland, to be Chairman of the Board of\nVeterans' Appeals for a term of six years.\n  Mark E. Lopes, of Arizona, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Inter-American Foundation for a term expiring September 20,\n2016.\n  Alfredo J. Balsera, of Florida, to be a Member of the United States\nAdvisory Commission on Public Diplomacy for a term expiring July 1,\n2014.\n  Alfredo J. Balsera, of Florida, to be a Member of the United States\nAdvisory Commission on Public Diplomacy for a term expiring July 1,\n2017.\n  Linda Thomas-Greenfield, an Assistant Secretary of State (African\nAffairs), to be a Member of the Board of Directors of the African\nDevelopment Foundation for the remainder of the term expiring September\n27, 2015.\n  Carolyn Watts Colvin, of Maryland, to be Commissioner of Social\nSecurity for the term expiring January 19, 2019.\n  Christopher A. Hart, of Colorado, to be Chairman of the National\nTransportation Safety Board for a term of two years.\n  John W. Leslie, Jr., of Connecticut, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the African Development Foundation for a term expiring\nSeptember 22, 2019.\n  Stafford Fitzgerald Haney, of New Jersey, to be Ambassador to the\nRepublic of Costa Rica.\n  Alissa M. Starzak, of New York, to be General Counsel of the\nDepartment of the Army.\n  Charles C. Adams, Jr., of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Republic\nof Finland.\n  James L. Huffman, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of Trustees\nof the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall Foundation for a term\nexpiring October 6, 2014.\n  Adri Davin Jayaratne, of Michigan, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nLabor.\n\n[[Page D1148]]\n\n  Mickey D. Barnett, of New Mexico, to be a Governor of the United\nStates Postal Service for a term expiring December 8, 2020.\n  Jonodev Osceola Chaudhuri, of Arizona, to be Chairman of the National\nIndian Gaming Commission for the term of three years.\n  Therese W. McMillan, of California, to be Federal Transit\nAdministrator.\n  Willie E. May, of Maryland, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for\nStandards and Technology.\n  Perry L. Holloway, of South Carolina, to be Ambassador to the Co-\noperative Republic of Guyana.\n  Rafael J. Lopez, of Maryland, to be Commissioner on Children, Youth,\nand Families, Department of Health and Human Services.\n  Carmen Amalia Corrales, of New Jersey, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation for a term\nexpiring December 17, 2015.\n  Manson K. Brown, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of Commerce.\n  Brodi L. Fontenot, of Louisiana, to be Chief Financial Officer,\nDepartment of the Treasury.\n  Lourdes Maria Castro Ramirez, of California, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of Housing and Urban Development.\n  Andrew LaMont Eanes, of Kansas, to be Deputy Commissioner of Social\nSecurity for the term expiring January 19, 2019.\n  Mari Carmen Aponte, of the District of Columbia, to be Permanent\nRepresentative of the United States of America to the Organization of\nAmerican States, with the rank of Ambassador.\n  Mary Lucille Jordan, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Federal Mine\nSafety and Health Review Commission for a term of six years expiring\nAugust 30, 2020.\n  Ronald Alan Pearlman, of the District of Columbia, to be a Member of\nthe Internal Revenue Service Oversight Board for a term expiring\nSeptember 14, 2015.\n  Deven J. Parekh, of New York, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation for a term\nexpiring December 17, 2016.\n  Todd A. Fisher, of New York, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Overseas Private Investment Corporation for a term expiring\nDecember 17, 2016.\n  Carlos A. Monje, Jr., of Louisiana, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nTransportation.\n  Seth B. Carpenter, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of the Treasury.\n  Sheila Gwaltney, of California, to be Ambassador to the Kyrgyz\nRepublic.\n  Jennifer Ann Haverkamp, of Indiana, to be Assistant Secretary of\nState for Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific\nAffairs.\n  Nancy Bikoff Pettit, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Republic of\nLatvia.\n  Vicki Miles-LaGrange, of Oklahoma, to be a Member of the Board of\nTrustees of the Harry S Truman Scholarship Foundation for a term\nexpiring December 10, 2015.\n  Shelly Colleen Lowe, of Arizona, to be a Member of the National\nCouncil on the Humanities for a term expiring January 26, 2018.\n  Patricia Nelson Limerick, of Colorado, to be a Member of the National\nCouncil on the Humanities for a term expiring January 26, 2018.\n  Martha L. Minow, of Massachusetts, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2014.\n  Gloria Valencia-Weber, of New Mexico, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2014.\n  John Gerson Levi, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2014.\n  Harry James Franklyn Korrell III, of Washington, to be a Member of\nthe Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\nexpiring July 13, 2014.\n  Robert James Grey, Jr., of Virginia, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term expiring July\n13, 2014.\n  Thomas Edgar Rothman, of Maryland, to be a Member of the National\nCouncil on the Arts for a term expiring September 3, 2016.\n  Mark D. Gearan, of New York, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring December 1, 2015.\n  Janet Garvin McCabe, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nAdministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.\n  Suzette M. Kimball, of West Virginia, to be Director of the United\nStates Geological Survey.\n  Heidi Neel Biggs, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring October 6, 2017.\n  Westley Watende Omari Moore, of Maryland, to be a Member of the Board\nof Directors of the Corporation for National and Community Service for\na term expiring October 6, 2016.\n  Richard Christman, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Corporation for National and Community Service for a\nterm expiring October 6, 2017.\n\n[[Page D1149]]\n\n  Shamina Singh, of New York, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring October 6, 2014.\n  Shamina Singh, of New York, to be a Member of the Board of Directors\nof the Corporation for National and Community Service for a term\nexpiring October 6, 2019.\n  William P. Doyle, of Pennsylvania, to be a Federal Maritime\nCommissioner for a term expiring June 30, 2018.\n  Ann Elizabeth Dunkin, of California, to be an Assistant Administrator\nof the Environmental Protection Agency.\n  Mileydi Guilarte, of the District of Columbia, to be United States\nAlternate Executive Director of the Inter-American Development Bank.\n  Cassandra Q. Butts, of the District of Columbia, to be Ambassador to\nthe Commonwealth of The Bahamas.\n  Allison Beck, of the District of Columbia, to be Federal Mediation\nand Conciliation Director.\n  Earl L. Gay, of the District of Columbia, to be Deputy Director of\nthe Office of Personnel Management.\n  Alfred H. Bennett, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Southern District of Texas.\n  George C. Hanks, Jr., of Texas, to be United States District Judge\nfor the Southern District of Texas.\n  Jose Rolando Olvera, Jr., of Texas, to be United States District\nJudge for the Southern District of Texas.\n  Jill N. Parrish, of Utah, to be United States District Judge for the\nDistrict of Utah.\n  Jeffery S. Hall, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the Farm Credit\nAdministration Board, Farm Credit Administration, for a term expiring\nOctober 13, 2018.\n  Jay Neal Lerner, of Illinois, to be Inspector General, Federal\nDeposit Insurance Corporation.\n  Dava J. Newman, of Massachusetts, to be Deputy Administrator of the\nNational Aeronautics and Space Administration.\n  Mark Scarano, of New Hampshire, to be Federal Cochairperson of the\nNorthern Border Regional Commission.\n  Sim Farar, of California, to be a Member of the United States\nAdvisory Commission on Public Diplomacy for a term expiring July 1,\n2015.\n  Sim Farar, of California, to be a Member of the United States\nAdvisory Commission on Public Diplomacy for a term expiring July 1,\n2018.\n  William Joseph Hybl, of Colorado, to be a Member of the United States\nAdvisory Commission on Public Diplomacy for a term expiring July 1,\n2015.\n  Azita Raji, of California, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Sweden.\n  Romonia S. Dixon, of Arizona, to be a Member of the Board of\nDirectors of the Corporation for National and Community Service for a\nterm expiring October 6, 2018.\n  Walter A. Barrows, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Railroad Retirement\nBoard for a term expiring August 28, 2019.\n  Robert A. Salerno, of the District of Columbia, to be an Associate\nJudge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia for the term of\nfifteen years.\n  David S. Shapira, of Pennsylvania, to be a Governor of the United\nStates Postal Service for a term expiring December 8, 2019.\n  Michelle K. Lee, of California, to be Under Secretary of Commerce for\nIntellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and\nTrademark Office.\n  Adewale Adeyemo, of California, to be an Assistant Secretary of the\nTreasury.\n  Daniel R. Elliott III, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Surface\nTransportation Board for a term expiring December 31, 2018.\n  Marisa Lago, of New York, to be a Deputy United States Trade\nRepresentative, with the rank of Ambassador.\n  Antonio F. Weiss, of New York, to be an Under Secretary of the\nTreasury.\n  David Avren Jones, of Connecticut, to be a Member of the Federal\nRetirement Thrift Investment Board for a term expiring October 11,\n2018.\n  Michael D. Kennedy, of Georgia, to be a Member of the Federal\nRetirement Thrift Investment Board for a term expiring September 25,\n2018.\n  Luis Felipe Restrepo, of Pennsylvania, to be United States Circuit\nJudge for the Third Circuit.\n  Kara Farnandez Stoll, of Virginia, to be United States Circuit Judge\nfor the Federal Circuit.\n  Dale A. Drozd, of California, to be United States District Judge for\nthe Eastern District of California.\n  LaShann Moutique DeArcy Hall, of New York, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the Eastern District of New York.\n  Michael Greco, of New York, to be United States Marshal for the\nSouthern District of New York for the term of four years.\n  Elissa Slotkin, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of Defense.\n  John E. Mendez, of California, to be a Director of the Securities\nInvestor Protection Corporation for a term expiring December 31, 2015.\n  Loretta E. Lynch, of New York, to be Attorney General.\n\n[[Page D1150]]\n\n  Matthew Stuart Butler, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Election\nAssistance Commission for a term expiring December 12, 2015.\n  Ann Donnelly, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of New York.\n  Roseann A. Ketchmark, of Missouri, to be United States District Judge\nfor the Western District of Missouri.\n  Travis Randall McDonough, of Tennessee, to be United States District\nJudge for the Eastern District of Tennessee.\n  9 Air Force nominations in the rank of general.\n  7 Army nominations in the rank of general.\n  1 Coast Guard nomination in the rank of admiral.\n  1 Marine Corps nomination in the rank of general.\n  1 Navy nomination in the rank of admiral.\n  Routine lists in the Air Force, Army, Foreign Service, and Navy.\n                                                         Pages S6930-33\nMessages from the House:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6920\nPetitions and Memorials:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Pages S6920-21\nAdditional Cosponsors:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6921\nStatements on Introduced Bills/Resolutions:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Pages S6921-23\nAdditional Statements:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Pages S6918-20\nAmendments Submitted:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page S6924\nRecord Votes: Eight record votes were taken today. (Total--366)\n                                         Pages S6885, S6897, 6903, 6906\nAdjournment: Senate convened at 10 a.m. and adjourned sine die,\npursuant to the provisions of H. Con. Res. 125, at 11:25 p.m., until 12\np.m. on Tuesday, January 6, 2015. (For Senate's program, see the\nremarks of the Acting Majority Leader in today's Record on page S6930.)"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1150-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCHAMBER", "D1150", "D1151", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"706\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1744\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1772\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2131\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2278\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5887\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5888\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. D1150", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1150-D1151]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        House of Representatives\n\nChamber Action\nPublic Bills and Resolutions Introduced: 2 public bills, H.R. 5887-\n5888; were introduced.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page H10325\nAdditional Cosponsors:\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page H10325\nReports Filed: A report was filed on December 15, 2014 as follows:\n  H.R. 2131, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance\nAmerican competitiveness through the encouragement of high-skilled\nimmigration, and for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 113-\n676, Part 1).\n  Reports were filed today as follows:\n  H.R. 1772, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make\nmandatory and permanent requirements relating to use of an electronic\nemployment eligibility verification system, and for other purposes,\nwith an amendment (H. Rept. 113-677, Part 1) and\n  H.R. 2278, to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to improve\nimmigration law enforcement within the interior of the United States,\nand for other purposes, with an amendment (H. Rept. 113-678, Part 1).\n                                                            Page H10324\nSpeaker: Read a letter from the Speaker wherein he appointed\nRepresentative Neugebauer to act as Speaker pro tempore for today.\n                                                            Page H10319\nGuest Chaplain: The prayer was offered by the Guest Chaplain, Br.\nThomas More Garrett, Dominican House of Studies, Washington, DC.\n                                                            Page H10319\nMeeting Hour: Agreed by unanimous consent that when the House adjourns\ntoday, it adjourn to meet at 12 noon on Friday, December 19th, unless\nit sooner has received a message from the Senate transmitting its\nconcurrence in H. Con. Res. 125, in which case the House shall stand\nadjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\u0000\n  Page H10321\nSenate Messages: Messages received from the Senate by the Clerk and\nsubsequently presented to the House today appear on pages H10320.\nSenate Referrals: S. 706 and S. 1744 were held at the desk.\n                                                            Page H10320\nQuorum Calls Votes: There were no yea-and-nay votes, and there were no\nRecorded votes. There were no quorum calls.\nAdjournment: The House met at 12 noon and at 12:08 p.m., the House\nstands adjourned until noon on Friday, December 19, 2014, unless it\nsooner has received a message from the Senate transmitting its\nconcurrence in H. Con. Res. 125, in which case the House shall stand\nadjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.\n\n[[Page D1151]]"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1150", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Senate Committee Meetings", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDSCMEETINGS", "D1150", "D1150", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. D1150", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1150]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n(Committees not listed did not meet)\n  No committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1151-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR 2014-12-17", "", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDCOMMITTEEMEETINGS", "D1151", "D1151", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. D1151", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1151]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   COMMITTEE MEETINGS FOR WEDNESDAY,\n\n                           DECEMBER 17, 2014\n\n        (Committee meetings are open unless otherwise indicated)\n\n                                 Senate\n\n  Committee on Environment and Public Works: Subcommittee on Clean\nAir and Nuclear Safety, to hold an oversight hearing to examine the\nEnvironmental Protection Agency's proposed National Ambient Air\nQuality Standards for ozone, 2:30 p.m., SD-406.\n\n                                 House\n\n  No hearings are scheduled."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1151-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/Next Meeting of the SENATE + Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES + Other End Matter", "SENATE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDENDMATTER", "D1151", "D1152", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. D1151", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Pages D1151-D1152]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n\u0000CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (USPS 087-390).\n\n\u0000The Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, D.C.\n\u0000 The public proceedings of each House of Congress, as reported\n\u0000 by the Official Reporters thereof, are printed pursuant to\n\u0000 directions of the Joint Committee on Printing as authorized by\n\u0000 appropriate provisions of Title 44, United States Code,\n\u0000 and published for each day that one or both Houses are in session,\n\u0000 excepting very infrequent instances when two or more unusually\n\u0000 small consecutive issues are printed one time.\n\u0000\u0014Public access to the Congressional Record is available online\n\u0000 through the U.S. Government Publishing Office, at www.fdsys.gov,\n\u0000 free of charge to the user. The information is updated online each day\n\u0000 the Congressional Record is published. For more information,\n\u0000 contact the GPO Customer Contact Center, U.S. Government Publishing Office.\n\u0000 Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free). E-Mail,\n\u0000 contactcenter@gpo.gov.\n\u0000\u0014To place an order for any of these products, visit\n\u0000 the U.S. Government Online Bookstore at: bookstore.gpo.gov. Mail\n\u0000 orders to: Superintendent of Documents, P.O. Box 979050, St. Louis,\n\u0000 MO 63197-9000, or phone orders to 866-512 091800 (toll-free),\n\u0000 202-512-1800 (D.C. area), or fax to 202-512-2104. Remit check or\n\u0000 money order, made payable to the Superintendent of Documents, or use\n\u0000 VISA, MasterCard, Discover, American Express, or GPO Deposit Account.\n\u0000\u0014Following each session of Congress, the daily Congressional Record\n\u0000 is revised, printed, permanently bound and sold by the\n\u0000 Superintendent of Documents in individual parts or by sets.\n\u0000\u0014With the exception of copyrighted articles, there are no\n\u0000 restrictions on the republication of material from the\n\u0000 Congressional Record.\n\n\u0000 POSTMASTER:\n\n\u0000 Send address changes to the Superintendent of Documents,\n\u0000 Congressional Record,\n\u0000 U.S. Government Publishing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402,\n\u0000 along with the entire mailing label from the last issue received.\n\n[[Page D1152]]\n\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n                       Next Meeting of the SENATE\n                      12 noon, Tuesday, January 6\n\n                             Senate Chamber\nProgram for Tuesday: Following the presentation of the certificates of\nelection and the swearing-in of elected Members, there will be a\nrequired live quorum.\n\n              Next Meeting of the HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES\n                      12 p.m., Friday, December 19\n\n                             House Chamber\nProgram for Friday: To be announced.\n_______________________________________________________________________\n\n           Extensions of Remarks, as inserted in this issue.-\n              HOUSE\n\nAderholt, Robert B., Ala., E1848, E1853\nBentivolio, Kerry L., Mich., E1849\nFarr, Sam, Calif., E1847\nIsrael, Steve, N.Y., E1852\nKaptur, Marcy, Ohio, E1854\nLipinski, Daniel, Ill., E1847\nPallone, Frank, Jr., N.J., E1854\nRoybal-Allard, Lucille, Calif., E1847\nSmith, Adam, Wash., E1852\nStockman, Steve, Tex., E1849\nVan Hollen, Chris, Md., E1848"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgD1151", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Daily Digest/House Committee Meetings", "HOUSE", "DAILYDIGEST", "DDHCMEETINGS", "D1151", "D1151", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. D1151", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Daily Digest]\n[Page D1151]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nCommittee Meetings\n  No hearings were held.\n\nJoint Meetings\n  No joint committee meetings were held."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1847-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "RECOGNIZING SARAH ELISABETH ENGLAND ON THE OCCASION OF HER BAT MITZVAH", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "RECOGNIZING", "E1847", "E1847", "[{\"name\": \"Lucille Roybal-Allard\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1847", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1847]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n RECOGNIZING SARAH ELISABETH ENGLAND ON THE OCCASION OF HER BAT MITZVAH\n\n                                 ______\n\n                       HON. LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD\n\n                             of california\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the\nthirteenth birthday and Bat Mitzvah celebration of Sarah Elisabeth\nEngland. In the company of her parents Lori Slass and Bill England, as\nwell as her grandparents, uncles, classmates, and numerous friends and\nneighbors, Sarah celebrated her Bat Mitzvah at Congregation KolAmi in\nElkins Park, Pennsylvania, on December 13, 2014, her thirteenth\nbirthday. Sarah is a wonderful young lady, and the ceremony she led\nwith Rabbi Elliot Holin was rich in both tradition and meaning. Sarah's\nthoughtful, articulate, and touching comments during the ceremony were\na particular highlight of the celebration, and I would like to share\nthem here so everyone can become familiar with this promising young\nlady.\n\n                       sarah england's dvar torah\n\n       I enjoy being Jewish because of the feeling that everyone\n     is friends and family. I am proud to be part of a tradition\n     that has been going on for thousands of years. And I am glad\n     that I am learning about the tragedies that have happened to\n     our people. Don't get me wrong, I hate the idea that this\n     stuff has happened to us, but I am glad that we are not\n     trying to hide them from our younger generations. These are\n     things that cannot be allowed to forget. For if the world is\n     to forget, it will be much easier for it to happen again.\n        My favorite holy day is Tu b'Shevat, the New Year of\n     Trees. Even though it's not as popular as say, Rosh Hashanah,\n     it is an entire holiday wrapped around something I love,\n     nature!\n        My Mitzvah Project is helping women get business clothing\n     so they can get back up on their feet to find jobs and other\n     opportunities. I have done a drive to collect clothing and I\n     will be volunteering to separate clothing in the coming\n     months.\n        A particularly transforming personal experience I have had\n     was when I realized how poorly the LGBTQ community is\n     treated, and I was appalled. I could not believe that people\n     would treat each other like this. People complain about\n     something that is racist or sexist, but they overlook how\n     people treat people who just love each other. When I found\n     out that my family members were part of the LGBTQ community,\n     I couldn't stop smiling. I am so proud of them and everyone\n     who keeps fighting. I hope that marrying someone you truly\n     love is soon legal in all states.\n        I chose to chant verses from Genesis 37:5-8 and 19-24 of\n     my Torah Portion. It is about Joseph telling his brothers his\n     dream, and their plans for revenge. The narrative warns us\n     not to talk about something, even a dream, that shows you\n     overpowering someone. It could make them mad and ruin your\n     relationship with them. It also shows that the response of\n     hatred could make you do things that you might not mean to\n     do, but in the heat and anger of the moment, might make you\n     do crazy things.\n        My two favorite prayers are the Avote v'Imahote and the\n     G'vurote. Even though my beliefs in god have changed, I think\n     these prayers truly help us understand how he tries to use\n     his powers for good.\n       If I were to re-write the Avote, it would read, ``Thank\n     You, God, for our mothers and fathers from the beginning.\n     Thank You for creating us. Thank You for being You. Thank You\n     for Your love and kindness. We are forever grateful. Blessed\n     are You, God, helper and shield of Sarah.''\n       If I were to re-write the G'vurote, it would read: ``Thank\n     You, God, for life. Thank You for creation. Thank You for\n     freedom. Thank You for Your many mighty acts. Thank You for\n     everything. Who is like You: creator and destroyer of life?\n     Who is like You, all-powerful being?\n        As for my relationship with God, it's not that I don't\n     believe in something, it's just that if God really cared\n     about all of their creations, then why are people starving\n     and going to war and committing mass murder? I don't think\n     that God functions in the way that some people think God\n     does. I think that God just created us and said, ``Have\n     fun!'' To quote Rabbi in a note he left me during our time in\n     writing this speech: ``the interesting and fascinating thing\n     about free will is that we make the choices and bear the\n     responsibility, but it is always easier to point our finger\n     outward to blame God or others, rather than inward to take\n     responsibility for what we have done wrong as individuals/\n     community/society''.\n        I was motivated to study for my Bat Mitzvah by my mother.\n     She has helped me so much during my studies, and even made\n     sure I was listening to the recordings of my portion during\n     my concussion. The idea of being able to say that I have had\n     my Bat Mitzvah is awesome! And I don't mind having my\n     thirteenth birthday party on the same day. Thank you mom,\n     Rabbi, and everyone who has ever helped me with my Hebrew,\n     you are the truly amazing people in this world.\n        Rabbi Holin asked me to talk about some of the greatest\n     challenges facing our country or the world, and I think it is\n     the need for greater gun control. The idea that someone can\n     obtain a weapon capable of murdering men, women, and children\n     with great futures to be had, just makes me sick. It is wrong\n     that people can acquire guns so easily. I would pass a law\n     that states, ``To own a gun, you must undergo multiple mental\n     and physical tests administered by a higher force''. A police\n     member or maybe a new job could be created specially trained\n     in this task. I would also ask that anyone who owns a gun at\n     the moment to also take the test so that we know if they are\n     able to have one.\n        Some personal goals I have are being able to fully recover\n     from my concussion, being able to see the LGBTQ community\n     fully accepted as who they are, seeing gun violence stopping,\n     and getting into a good college.\n        I would like to take a moment now to thank all of the\n     people that have helped me to be where I am today, my mom and\n     dad, Rabbi Holan, Rebecca Schwartz, Mrs. Holtzman, Mr.\n     Monblatt, and anyone else who helped me during this journey\n     and during my concussion.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1847-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "THANKING KATHLEEN THERESE MEANY FOR HER SERVICE AS PRESIDENT OF THE MWRD BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1847", "E1847", "[{\"name\": \"Daniel Lipinski\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1847", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1847]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n  THANKING KATHLEEN THERESE MEANY FOR HER SERVICE AS PRESIDENT OF THE\n                      MWRD BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS\n\n                                 ______\n\n                          HON. DANIEL LIPINSKI\n\n                              of illinois\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. LIPINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Kathleen Therese\nMeany who will retire from her position as President of the Board of\nCommissioners of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District (MWRD) of\nGreater Chicago.\n   Commissioner Meany is a former professor of Political Science. She\ntaught at Harold Washington College, one of the City Colleges of\nChicago. She earned her Bachelor of Arts degree from Roosevelt\nUniversity and her Master's Degree from Harvard University's John F.\nKennedy School of Government.\n   Commissioner Meany was elected to the Board of Commissioners in 1990\nand served as Vice President for 16 years. Her eight fellow\nCommissioners then unanimously elected her to serve as President in\nJanuary 2013. She also serves as Chairman of the Ethics Committee and\nthe Pension, Human Resources and Civil Service Committee, as well as\nVice Chairman for the Federal Legislation Committee, the Finance\nCommittee and the Maintenance and Operations Committee.\n   One of her accomplishments on the MWRD Board was the introduction of\na program to collect and properly dispose of household hazardous waste,\nwhich had previously been discharged indiscriminately into the sewage\nsystem. I commend Commissioner Meany for always looking out for the\nbest interests of the people she represents and hope that future\ncommissioners will look to her as a fine example.\n   Commissioner Meany has made it her duty to keep the communities of\nthe Chicago area connected to the MWRD's operations. She is truly a\ndedicated public official and it is only appropriate that the Kathleen\nTherese Meany Presidential Garden was dedicated to her on June 20th in\nCicero, Illinois.\n   Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in thanking Commissioner\nMeany for all she has done for the Chicago area and wish her all the\nbest as she moves forward after retiring from the Board.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1847-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "IN HONOR OF CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER MANUEL \"MANNY\" REAL", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "HONORING", "E1847", "E1848", "[{\"name\": \"Sam Farr\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1847", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Pages E1847-E1848]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n       IN HONOR OF CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER MANUEL ``MANNY'' REAL\n\n                                 ______\n\n                             HON. SAM FARR\n\n                             of california\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Chief Probation Officer\nManuel ``Manny'' Real on the occasion of his retirement from the County\nof Monterey. On December 12,\n\n[[Page E1848]]\n\n2014 Chief Real will relinquish his position and retire after 39 years\nof exemplary public service.\n   Manny has served as the Chief Probation Officer of Monterey County\nsince February 12, 2004 and has overseen a staff of approximately 300\nalong with an all administrative budget, operational aspects of the\nProbation Department's Divisions of Administration, Adult Juvenile Hall\nand Youth Center and Alternative Programs. At the time of his\nappointment, Chief Real was already a 30-year veteran of the Monterey\nCounty Probation Department having worked in various capacities in both\nthe adult and juvenile divisions. He worked in investigations and field\nsupervision. At various times ``Manny'' served as a juvenile traffic\nhearing officer, a child custody investigator and a court officer. His\ntenure as Chief began in the middle of a series financial crises. Chief\nReal worked tirelessly to with the CAO's budget office to mitigate any\nnegative side effects, preserve the progress made, and ultimately\nrestore balance between available resources, community needs and\neffective interventions.\n   Chief Real has worked hard in strengthening relations and\ncollaborations County Social Services, Behavioral Health, education,\nlaw enforcement, criminal justice, behavioral health and community\norganizations. Chief Real was integral in securing the use of the old\nNatividad Hospital to establish the Silver Star Gang Prevention and\nIntervention Program a one-stop gang prevention and intervention\nprogram. The program is unique as it combines probation supervision,\neducational, vocational and job training, counseling services and\ntruancy abatement, along with mentoring and community outreach\nstrategies to help decrease gang activity. It was a pleasure having\nworked with Chief Real at the federal level to bring in $1.5 million\ndollars to assist with anti juvenile violence and the programs at the\nSilver Star Resource Center continues to serve many families in\nMonterey County.\n   Mr. Speaker, I know I speak for the whole House in extending our\nmost sincere gratitude for Chief Real's service. I want to wish Chief\nReal the best as he embarks on a new chapter in his life and know he\nwill enjoy spending more time with his wife, children and\ngrandchildren.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1848-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "CONGRATULATING FYFFE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "CONGRATULATIONS", "E1848", "E1849", "[{\"name\": \"Robert B. Aderholt\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1848", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Pages E1848-E1849]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             CONGRATULATING FYFFE HIGH SCHOOL FOOTBALL TEAM\n\n                                  _____\n\n                        HON. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT\n\n                               of alabama\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate the Fyffe High\nSchool Football Team on winning the Alabama High School Class 2-A\nChampionship on December 5, 2014.\n  Coach Paul Benefield, his players, and staff achieved the very\ndifficult task of a 15-0 record during the 2014 season. I would\nofficially like to congratulate them on their victory.\n  Coach Benefield has spent 34 years in the coaching and teaching\nprofession, winning many games and awards. In 18 years as the head\ncoach at Fyffe, Benefield has won more than 200 games and 13 region and\narea\n\n[[Page E1849]]\n\nchampionships. Now he can add to that list a state championship.\n  I want to commend the fine young men who make up this championship\nteam at Fyffe. They set a goal at the beginning of the season to take\nthe Red Devils to the state championship, and that's exactly what they\ndid. These players worked in the scorching heat of late summer and on\nmany cold nights in the late fall, but they never lost sight of their\ngoal.\n  By beating Elba High School 28-17 in the championship game, the Fyffe\nRed Devils saw their goal realized and did much more. The win, and the\nhard work it took to get there, taught life-lessons these young men\nwill carry with them for the rest of their lives. While the winning is\ncertainly an important accomplishment, the struggle to get there will\nprove to be just as valuable.\n  Again, I want to congratulate the Fyffe Red Devils on this great\nachievement. They have brought pride to their school, community, DeKalb\nCounty and to the Fourth Congressional District. I wish them continued\nsuccess in the seasons to come.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1848", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "IN OPPOSITION TO THE FY15 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION (NDAA) CONFERENCE REPORT", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1848", "E1848", "[{\"name\": \"Chris Van Hollen\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2481\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. E1848", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1848]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n    IN OPPOSITION TO THE FY15 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION (NDAA)\n                           CONFERENCE REPORT\n\n                                  _____\n\n                         HON. CHRIS VAN HOLLEN\n\n                              of maryland\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to the\nConference Report for the FY2015 National Defense Authorization Act.\n  For the last 53 years, Congress has passed--and the President has\nsigned into law--an annual Defense Authorization bill to provide\ncritical resources our Armed Forces need to maintain the best military\nin the world. While I recognize that there are many important programs\nthat are authorized in this legislation, this NDAA also contains many\nmajor policy decisions affecting our country and our armed forces.\nUnfortunately, Congress was not allowed to consider a single amendment\ndealing with very consequential policy issues to this 1648-page bill.\n  The NDAA Conference Report also authorizes funding to deploy an\nadditional 1,500 troops to Iraq. I support the core pillars of the\nPresident's plan to fight ISIS, including the use of American\nsurveillance, intelligence assets and air power against ISIS targets in\nIraq and Syria and the arming and training of the Iraqi Army and\nKurdish forces to stop the ISIS advances in Iraq. I also believe we\nshould supply weapons to those groups in Syria, such as the Syrian\nKurds, who have consistently fought ISIS, and whose priority is to\ndefeat ISIS. However, I believe the Congress should make it clear that\nAmerican ground troops should not be used in a combat role in Iraq or\nSyria.\n  The President has asserted that the 2001 Authorization to Use\nMilitary Force (Public Law 107-40) provides the Executive with broad\nauthority to take all military action necessary in both Iraq and Syria\nto degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL. While the President has\nindicated that he does not intend to deploy U.S. ground forces into\ncombat, there is nothing in current law to prevent him from doing so.\nCongressman McGovern, Congressman Jones, and I asked the House Rules\nCommittee to allow us to offer an amendment to ban the use of U.S.\nforces in ground combat in Iraq, with the exception of rescue\noperations for Americans. Unfortunately, this request was denied.\n  The NDAA Conference Report also provides a two-year authorization to\ndeploy American troops to train and equip the so-called ``moderate''\nSyrian rebels. In September, a majority in Congress voted to\ntemporarily authorize preparation for such a mission for a short period\nending December 11th. This bill extends that authorization for two more\nyears and is written so that the four defense committees can\nexclusively decide how much funding should be allocated for this\nmission. Congressman Dent and I led a bipartisan letter to Speaker\nBoehner urging him to give us the opportunity to vote on that\nprovision. We also presented an amendment to the House Rules Committee\nwhich would have presented this authority. Once again, we were not\nprovided the opportunity to vote on this measure.\n  My primary concern with the proposal to arm the so-called\n``moderate'' Syrian opposition is that it will have unintended negative\nconsequences that will not serve our ultimate goal of defeating ISIS.\n  First, the primary objective of these Sunni Islamist fighters is the\ndefeat of Assad and his Alawite dominated regime--not the defeat of\nISIS. Since the start of the war there have been shifting alliances\namong these Sunni Islamist forces that include the al-Qaeda affiliate,\nJabhat al-Nusra, different elements of the Free Syrian Army, the\nIslamist Front, Ahrar al-Sham and ISIS, among others. Their common\ncause and overriding objective is defeating Assad. Indeed, the\ncommander of the Syria Revolutionaries' Front, Jamal Maarouf, one of\nthe most militarily proficient commanders of the FSA, recently said\nthat, ``It's clear that I'm not fighting against al-Qaeda. This is a\nproblem outside of Syria's border, so it's not our problem. I don't\nhave a problem with anyone who fights against the regime inside\nSyria.''\n  While there is no doubt that Assad is a brutal dictator, he does not\npose the same threat to the United States as ISIS, and his forces have\nrecently been battling ISIS. At this point, arming fighters whose\nprimary purpose is to weaken Assad has one unintended result--\nstrengthening ISIS. Indeed, I fear that the arms we provide to the so-\ncalled Syrian opposition are more likely to end up in the hands of ISIS\nor al Nusra.\n  I also have significant concerns about other measures in the NDAA\nConference Report. I was disappointed that it includes a provision to\ncontinue funding restrictions on the construction or modification of\ndetention facilities in the United States to house Guantanamo\ndetainees. It also removes the prohibition on transfers of Guantanamo\ndetainees to Yemen that was included in the SASC-reported bill.\n  Despite my overall opposition to this legislation, it does authorize\nmany important programs. I was pleased that the Women's Small Business\nProcurement Parity Act, S. 2481, was included in the final Conference\nReport. This language provides much needed guidance to assist federal\nagencies in reaching the goal of awarding 5 percent of federal\ncontracts to women-owned small businesses.\n  Today's bill also restores more than $818 million in cuts made to\nmilitary readiness accounts. This will allow our military to invest in\ncritical repairs and upgrades to many mission-critical facilities such\nas electrical and fire protection system upgrades.\n  I am also encouraged that this bill builds on a number of provisions\npassed in last year's NDAA and continues to address the problem of\nsexual assault in the military. In particular, it would eliminate the\nso-called ``good soldier defense'' in court-martial proceedings,\nprohibiting a soldier from using good military character as a defense\nin a sexual assault case. These proceedings should be based on the\nspecific evidence presented in the case.\n  Finally, I am pleased that the bill contains many long-delayed public\nlands conservation measures to protect more than one million acres of\npublic land, including 245,000 of new wilderness.\n  While I support each of these measures, the fact remains that without\nthe amendments I proposed, the bill could create a very slippery slope\nthat would drag American troops even more deeply into Syrian war and\nrenewed conflict in Iraq. For those reasons, I regretfully am unable to\nvote in favor of this year's NDAA Conference Report.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1849-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "BATTLES WORTH FIGHTING", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1849", "E1852", "[{\"name\": \"Kerry L. Bentivolio\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3635\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. E1849", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Pages E1849-E1852]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         BATTLES WORTH FIGHTING\n\n                                  _____\n\n                        HON. KERRY L. BENTIVOLIO\n\n                              of michigan\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. BENTIVOLIO. Mr. Speaker, a war is raging for the soul of America.\nIt is not a war of steel and cartridge. It is a conflict of ideas,\nfought not in trenches, jungles or a desert; instead, it is played out\nin town halls, roundtables, tea party and Liberty groups all across the\nnation. Instead of cannonades, there are editorials; instead of bombs,\nthere are speeches; instead of rifle volleys, there is education on the\nbenefits of Liberty ordained by God protected by a United States\nConstitution.\n  There is a genuine feeling today, especially among people who attend\nthe various Tea Party and Liberty Groups that we, our country more\nspecifically, may not make it. Many people consider these folks, the\ncommon everyday people who attend the Tea Party meetings `fringe, ring\nwing nut cases and extremists'. Many of the people who attend the Tea\nParty meetings, sometimes weekly, most commonly monthly, and more\nattend intermittently, sense something is drastically wrong. For the\nmost part, they sense it and yet cannot firmly point their finger and\nclaim what exactly is the cause of their discontent, the uneasiness;\nthe fear danger is lurking just around the corner. It is not\nnecessarily a feeling of doom from a nuclear, biological or chemical\nattack on our country from some foreign enemy or terrorism either. It\nis more serious than any violence a bad actor can bring. It is\nsomething more innate, a sense that they somehow lost something but\ncan't remember what it was, like when you know you lost something\nimportant, an item you need to accomplish a task but can't remember\nwhat it is and where you placed it. You know it's around somewhere and\nif you looked hard enough you'll see it and you can continue with your\ntask.\n  What is missing, what they are looking for, is our capacity for\ngoverning. Today, in Washington, D.C. we have a President inept in\noffering any sort of cooperative government. According to the President\nthe House of Representatives is a non-entity. As President he has a pen\nand a phone to make the changes he sees as necessary to move his\npolitical agenda and the People's house has no say in the matter. But,\nthe great threat to our country, our Constitutional government, is not\nentirely the President. It is easy to blame him for our dysfunctional\ngovernment. Rather, the blame lies entirely with the system itself. We\nhave created by our apathy a system that has normalized a process that\ndistorts the will of the people by an economy of influence. A system\ndesigned to make those most connected rich. Our system of government\ncreated a class of rich whose wealth does not come from innovation,\ncreativity or hard work, instead a new class of rich who secured their\nwealth through the manipulation of politicians and government agencies.\nThe great new classes of wealth are a breed of financial politicians\nwho could not secure their power by traditional methods that instead\nturned to the massive wealth directed by our government as the means to\nsecure wealth and power for themselves and their circle of supporters.\n  Our enemy is not simply a Democrat or a Republican; it is a new breed\nin thousand dollar suits. They have changed laws agreeable to their\nbusiness interests, bought and paid for politicians, judges, the media\nand skirted criminal laws and for the most part they are engaged in bad\ngovernment and fail to actively track the will of the people. To them\nDemocracy is a charade, only rhetoric for political messaging of a lost\nideal to placate the masses still engaged in the political process-\nwhile they make money for themselves and\n\n[[Page E1850]]\n\ntheir friends. That voice is often louder than the voice of the people,\nthe middle class, the very people who as the backbone of the American\neconomy, who join our armed services to serve rather than take, our\nmiddle class carries the burden and suffers the most, silenced and\nplacated by promises of a better life, the hope and change for the\nfuture that never really comes.\n  There are battles to be fought on the way we spend our taxpayer\ndollars, how we handle immigration and border security issues,\nreligious freedom, education, veterans, and our National Defense. There\nis a major battle on protecting the rights of our citizens because it\nis Congress' principle duty to protect our rights not take them away.\nTogether, we must strive valiantly and dare greatly and fight these\nbattles.\n  Through these past 24 months in Congress my convictions were tested\nand clarified. And they will continue to be tested in the weeks and\nmonths to come.\n  I want to tell you the fight is just beginning.\n  I WENT TO Congress an average person with certain and specific values\nI learned as a young man and a soldier in the military. The principles\nof leadership I hold dear;\n  And a lifelong motto;\n  To STRIVE VALIANTLY and DARE GREATLY\n  These are not simply words on a page for me. Or rhetoric for an\nelection campaign to get votes.\n  They run deeper.\n  LEADERSHIP is living a life BY EXAMPLE.\n  And NEVER asking a soldier or a constituent to do something you would\nnot do.\n  As one of the most CONSERVATIVE members of Congress I passed 3\nimportant pieces of legislation with 100% Bi-partisan support.\n  It bothers me when someone says they wish I would comprise and be\nmore moderate.\n  Rated as the number #1 most transparent congressman out of 84\nfreshman members of Congress, and rated in the top 30% out of the 435\nmembers of congress with an extensive record of working with the other\nside.\n  I know there are issues needing our attention and that working\ntogether we can accomplish great things. There are issues and work to\nbe done, as a team, not as adversaries.\n  There are battles yet to be fought.\n  I know there are children who deserve a quality education and not\ngetting it. K-12 education has been largely stagnant. College costs\nhave risen as federal subsidies have ballooned. Graduates indentured to\ncollege debt have lesser prospects for future employment than any time\nin our history.\n  I once gave a speech to a Conservative Group on the issues in\nEducation. As a former private and public school teacher, certified and\nhighly qualified in both vocational and general education, I think I am\nwell suited to offer suggestions. My presentation was well received by\nthe Conservative audience.\n  During the question and answer portion of my presentation a lady\nasked me how I felt being a Conservative teacher, in a public school\nand a member of the Liberal Teacher's Union.\n  Madam, I said, ``I think I feel the same way Jane Fonda would feel at\na VFW Convention!''\n  This is a battle worth fighting. I want to tell you that all across\nthe country there are people of all ages struggling with health issues\nand their health insurance.\n  The Unaffordable Health Care Act undermines the doctor-patient\nrelationship, limits patient choice, centralizes government control of\nour health care administered by bureaucrats NOT your family doctor. The\nadministration was not transparent. They lied and deceived the American\npeople into thinking they could keep their doctor, there hospital,\ntheir insurance and insurance premiums would be less expensive. Mr.\nGruber admitted in testimony before the Oversight and Government Reform\nCommittee he helped direct this deception.\n  No matter your political party affiliation, promises were made and\nbroken. Facts speak for themselves, Obamacare is unpopular, unworkable,\nand unaffordable and should be stopped and repealed in its entirety.\n  Together we can discuss and find alternatives that produce affordable\nhealth care BEFORE it becomes law.\n  Remember the lady speaker who said, ``We must pass it before we can\nsee what's in it?'' The last time I heard that was when my doctor asked\nfor a stool sample. And in both cases he got the same thing!\n  Look what ``We must pass it Before we can see what's in it'' has\nbrought upon us!\n  Division, not unity!\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want to tell you within our country there are people who have given\nup looking for work and lost hope in ever finding the American dream.\n  Obamacare, and the Obama administration have increased annual\nregulatory costs by nearly $70 Billion dollars. Unnecessary regulatory\ndictates hinder job creation and innovation while undermining America's\nfundamental freedoms.\n  Passing legislation that ensures a congressional check on\nGovernmental regulators as well as the accountability of Congress is a\ngood idea. This will help get America back to work and restore the\nAmerican dream.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want you to know that right now while some are very skittish on\nissues like immigration and trying to figure it out, this country's\nborders are worth protecting.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  FRIENDS, Since the attacks of September 11, 2001 more than fifty\nterrorist plots against the United States have been foiled because of\ndomestic and international cooperation. Yet, many of the intelligence\ntools to combat terrorism are controversial and many unconstitutional.\nEach and every one of these tools should be reexamined carefully to\nguarantee that America liberties are protected. At the same time we\nmust ensure our defense agencies have legal tools at their disposal to\nPROTECT and DEFEND our great country.\n  THIS is a battle worth fighting.\n  Mr. Speaker, I want you to know America needs a reformed tax code\nthat facilitates, not inhibits, economic growth and job creation.\n  Taxes and the cost of doing business are higher. Part-time work is\nreplacing full time work. Wages are stagnant An uncertain future is the\nnorm rather than the exception.\n  The tax code has become an enormous chain around the neck of a\nstagnate economy.\n  You do not need to have a Ph.D in economics to know Investment goes\nwhere it is welcome and stays where it is appreciated.\n  Tax rates on families, businesses, and investment are too high. Our\ntax code needs to be hassle free, simpler, and fair. Our present tax\nsystem prevents the economy from reaching its potential and further\nsuppresses wages.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want to tell you Religious liberty in this country is not merely\nthe ``freedom to worship.'' Individuals should be free to work, speak,\nand serve according to their deeply held beliefs seven days a week.\n  Religious freedom is under assault at every corner, in every form of\nmedia, especially from burdensome government policies and efforts to\nundermine marriage, a religious, not a government blessing.\n  I want to tell you about how GOD not government, determines life.\n  And how that LIFE shall have liberty to pursue dreams and\nopportunity.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want to tell you about our basic freedoms of speech, our 2nd\nAmendment protections and our rights to due process.\n  Basic rights given us by God are gradually stolen from to us by\ngovernment regulators, executive orders, and YES even members of the\nmedia spread the propaganda undermining these freedoms.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want to tell you that our most personal and confidential financial\nand health information is viewed and administered by political\nappointees whose interests are more political than helpful in improving\nyour life.\n  I want to tell you about how Government websites are unprotected.\n  That these Federal Websites lack basic and sound security protocols\nexposing your most confidential personal financial and health\ninformation to criminal hackers and bad actors both foreign and\ndomestic.\n  I am pleased the House unanimously passed my bill H.R. 3635, The Safe\nand Secure Federal Websites Act, it had 126 original cosponsors, a\nrecord for a GOP freshman member of Congress. Thank-you.\n  This is a battle worth fighting.\n  I want to tell you there are people in Washington who want to rob our\nsenior citizens of the monies they paid into programs like social\nsecurity and renege on the promises to our veterans.\n  As a veteran I have firsthand knowledge of the abuse and neglect\ninflicted on members of our armed services when they returned home from\nAfghanistan and Iraq as well as the treatment my fellow Vietnam\nveterans and I received coming home.\n  Our VA hospitals are under additional and justifiable scrutiny.\n  There are long wait times at VA hospitals . . . and instead of\naddressing the issues, they threw a convention for VA employees\nspending almost $1 million and an additional $350,000 for souvenirs\nbecause they had extra money . . .\n  Many government bureaucrats receive millions of dollars in bonuses\nwhen they are neither accountable nor transparent to taxpayers when\nfound abusing their authority. Rather than properly address our\nveterans . . .\n  The suicides . . .\n  The homelessness . . .\n  The wait times . . .\n  The healthcare . . .\n  The hypocrites are the first to demand war and are the last if at all\nto send their own son or daughter to fight it!\n  And yet, they are responsible for policy failures making us\nvulnerable to our enemies. Domestic policies and actions that weaken\nnot\n\n[[Page E1851]]\n\nstrengthen our country. The list of harmful policies and actions is a\nlong and growing. There are the lies and hidden cost of Obamacare that\nare undermining the quality and availability of healthcare; the rapid\ngrowth of welfare that is putting an additional strain on our economy;\nDistortions in presenting the real unemployment numbers; bailouts that\ndid not work; irresponsible investments in alternative energy sources\nthat can provide minimal benefits at best; encouragement of an\nentitlement mentality; no leadership on immigration so that our borders\nare open to ISIS and other terrorist groups; a burgeoning list of\ncostly regulations; poor handling of the pullout from Iraq and the draw\ndown in Afghanistan; a lack of leadership in dealing with Iran's\nnuclear threat; the projection of weakness in Benghazi, Crimea,\nUkraine, and containment of the civil war in Syria; the haphazard, too-\nlittle-too-late approach to ISIS in Iraq; meekly referring to terrorist\nattacks against American soldiers as work place violence instead of\ncalling it what it is--terrorism; swapping terrorist leaders for an\nAmerican deserter; and the list goes on.\n  Big government is stealing the American dream and future prosperity\nfrom our children by enslaving them to more than $18 trillion dollars\nof debt not of their own choosing. Congress did not ask permission from\nour children to borrow the money, nor receive it as a gift. The money\nis stolen from future generations and this is selfish and immoral.\n  Our military and the defense of our nation is top priority and yet,\nno help for Benghazi, an unsecure border, veterans issues, military\ntraining and equipment to defend us in the years to come is languishing\nin media hype, misinformation and political propaganda.\n  I want to tell you Washington's blatant disregard for a responsible\nfiscal policy, their wasteful over spending and continued borrowing\nweakens our country's ability to respond to future unexpected\nchallenges.\n  And those challenges will come.\n  They will come. And they will come very soon.\n  My friends these are battles worth fighting.\n  It is a time to choose whether we want a big bloated Nanny government\ntelling us what light bulbs we can purchase, how much water we can\nflush down a toilet, what our children can and cannot eat in school or\nwhat we can teach them and to what standards?\n  Do we want our Federal government to tell us who we can call doctor\nand what hospital we can visit in an emergency?\n  Do we want our Federal government to regulate who and who cannot\nvoice opposition to abusive authority and the moral corruption of God\ngiven liberties?\n  Do we want a dismantled national defense leaving us defenseless?\n  Our country is broken, bankrupt morally and financially.\n  There it is. Plain and simple.\n  As a member of the United States House of Representatives, I swore an\noath to defend the Constitution and as a soldier to defend the people\nof this great nation.\n  Before I close I want to tell you the reason I served both in the\nmilitary and here in Congress.\n  I began in the neighborhood where I grew up as the eldest of four\nsons. My grandfather served in WWI and my father and uncles served in\nthe 1940's. The gentleman who lived in the house across the street was\na former sailor in WW2. He was on an aircraft carrier that was hit by a\nkamikaze. Our next door neighbor was Charles Parker senior. As a\nMarine, he received a purple heart on Iwo Jima. His son, a few years\nolder than me, was my best friend, Chuck Jr. His name is inscribed on\nthe Vietnam War Memorial on the Mall in DC. Down the street a few\nhouses was another neighbor who fought in the Korean War, his daughter,\nCookie gave me my first kiss. Near him was another veteran who served\nin the Navy on a destroyer and there were two men across the street\nfrom him who served together in Gen Patton's Third Army and were part\nof the force that relieved the 101st Airborne at Bastogne. I can still\nsee their faces. Their examples of service all played a part in why I\nserved in the Armed Forces. Perhaps, they were the reason why the words\nof our President Kennedy, ``Ask not what your country can do for you\nbut rather what you can do for your country'' rang so true.\n  I don't think John Kennedy would recognize his party today.\n  I think my understanding of service can be best summed up by the\nmessage of the movie, ``Saving Private Ryan.'' I hope some of you have\nseen it. If you haven't let me tell you what it's about. The movie\nbegins with an elderly man walking through the cemetery off the beach\nat Normandy, down a sidewalk with his family behind him.\n  The scene then shifts to a landing craft heading for the beaches of\nNormandy on D-Day. Tom Hanks plays the part of Cpt Miller, 2nd Rangers.\nThe landing craft hits the beach and the soldiers, and well, they\nexperience the horrors of battle. Many of his fellow soldiers are\nkilled and wounded in the scenes that follow.\n  After securing the beach head, Cpt Miller receives new orders. His\nnew mission is to locate and bring home Private Ryan, played by Matt\nDamon, who's in the 101st Airborne because Ryan's three brothers were\nrecently killed within weeks of each other and the Army thinks that no\nfamily should lose four sons to war. Cpt Miller, with a small\ncontingent of soldiers set off to locate Ryan.\n  In the course of several days Cpt Miller loses several soldiers in\nthe quest to locate Ryan. Eventually, they find him in a small village\nin France, but alas, he decides to stay with his fellow soldiers--his\nbrothers in arms--to defend a small bridge in the village.\n  They fight the Germans and in the course of the battle most all of\nMiller's soldiers are killed. Only two remain. Cpt Miller receives a\nmortal wound and sits gasping his last breaths, his back against a\nmotorcycle, looks up at young Private Ryan says, with his last breaths,\n``earn this . . . earn this.'' The scene changes to a close up of Matt\nDamon, his face changes from young Ryan to the older man we met at the\nbeginning of the movie, he's overlooking a gravestone that reads,\n``Captain Miller, 2nd Rangers.''\n  Old Ryan falls to his knees in front of the gravestone and says,\n``Not a day goes by that I don't remember what you all did for me. I\ntried to live my life the best that I could. I hope that was enough. I\nhope that, at least in your eyes, I've earned what all of you have done\nfor me.''\n  Let me tell you something: Not a day goes by I do not remember what\nthe fathers of my childhood friends and playmates did for us to protect\nthe American dream. No matter where your family hails from, no matter\nwhat cultural or religious background, as citizens we are all\nfundamentally equal and self-governing because the generation before us\nstood up to do what's right and to protect our nation's exceptional\nprinciples.\n\n  We are supposed to have a limited government, outlined in the\nConstitution, which gives us the liberty and opportunity to live our\nlives, control our fate, and pursue our happiness. Everyone here has a\nright to the rewards of his or her labor. These ideas challenge the\nnotion that life is a zero sum game where if I win you lose. We have\ncreated a society in which every member can work hard, achieve success,\nand advance in life to the benefit of all. Because of this our economy\nproduces almost a quarter of the world's wealth and our military forces\nare the most powerful on the globe.\n  It is the potent combination of liberty under the rule of law, the\nendless creativity of the marketplace, and the enduring moral character\nof the American people that assures opportunity for all and fuels the\nunlimited promise of America.\n  That is the ``this'' in the phrase ``earn this'' from ``Saving\nPrivate Ryan.''\n  Americans have been told by the Administration that prosperity\nrequires more spending, more government, and more taxes. Liberals\nconstantly want people to believe that if one American does well that\nmeans another one isn't. They have continued down this phony path even\nthough most Americans think government does too much. Only the House of\nRepresentatives has served as a brake, trying to divert us from this\ndangerous road ahead.\n  Some argue that conservatives should accept the liberal premise. They\nsay we must be resigned to permanent economic stagnation, give up our\nfirearms and our religious values; submit to bureaucratic rule, and\nnational decline. Many of my friends in the House and I disagree.\n  The time is now to champion the ideas of opportunity and upward\nmobility and to redouble our efforts to change America's course,\nheading back down the path created by our forefathers. We will meet the\ndemands of the moment and address the magnitude of the challenges\nbefore us. We will fight whenever possible, constantly pointing out the\nfalse promises of liberalism, and offering conservative alternatives at\nevery turn.\n  We will take our arguments to all Americans: To middle-class families\nstruggling in a bad economy; to young people worried about their\nprospects; to retirees worried about their grandchildren; to job\ncreators seeking to expand prosperity; to those who are stuck in\npoverty grasping for that first rung on the ladder of opportunity--\nconservatism is for everybody. This is what our founding fathers, our\ngrandfathers and fathers, our uncles and neighbors, our friends\nstruggled to protect.\n  The moment has arrived. It will take courage to stop the government\nfrom growing out of control while self-interests are pulling the levers\nof power. You don't need a uniform to fight for our freedoms. I am\nasking every American to stand side by side and explain to our friends\nand neighbors that while this is the easy way to live; it's a hard way\nto be free and prosperous. It's our time to ``earn this'', to keep the\npromises of our forefathers and earn what they gave us. Freedom.\n\n[[Page E1852]]\n\n  Never let it be said that this generation stood idle and let liberty\nslip from our fingers, never let it be said we let a day go without\nremembering what our forefathers did for us.\n  I have honored that promise on the battlefields in Vietnam, in Iraq\nand in the halls of Congress.\n  My number one mission, as always, is to protect our God given rights.\nNot take them away!\n  Today, not tomorrow, we must decide whether we want to manage our own\ndestiny, in our states, in our cities and towns as individuals or\nwhether we want a Washington bureaucrat locked away in some distant\nFederal building spying on us, telling us how to manage our own lives,\nfamilies, doctors and our schools!\n  Do we determine our own destiny or let government bureaucrats run our\nlives?\n  The time for choosing is once again upon us.\n  Mr. Speaker, my dear Patriots, friends and neighbors, the battle is\nhere now, today, not in some distant jungle or desert, and we must\ndecide whether or not we want a brighter future for ourselves and our\nchildren and grandchildren.\n  Mr. Speaker, We, together, today, must decide whether our uniquely\nAmerican culture made up of people respectfully representing every\ncultural, religious, and ethnic background on earth is a nation divided\nor united in a common cause for freedom and the opportunity liberty\noffers each of us.\n  We must choose whether we will join our friends and neighbors\ndefending liberty and opportunity or become grease for the wheels of\nbig government.\n  In respectful civil disobedience, I for one will not submit to the\nchains of tyranny. I fly the Stars and Stripes in my yard not the red\nhammer and cycle!\n  I choose to continue the fight for a smaller, non-intrusive, fiscally\nresponsible, constitutional government. I choose Freedom for America! I\nchoose prosperity for America!\n  Mr. Speaker, I pledged to the citizens of my State, and to the\nAmerican people, that as their elected representative I will work to:\nRestore liberty, not restrict it; Shrink government, not expand it;\nReduce taxes, not raise them; Abolish programs, not create them;\nPromote the freedom and independence of citizens, not the interference\nof government in their lives; and Observe the limited, enumerated\npowers of our Constitution, not ignore them. I trust I honored that\npledge.\n  I praise God for my American roots and pray that HE may continue to\nBless all of us and this great nation.\n  I want to thank my fellow citizens and members of Congress for the\nprivilege, honor and experience to serve in the 113th Congress these\nlast 24 months. And lastly, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to wish the 114th\nCongress my very best wishes.\n  Merry Christmas to all and to all a good night!\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1849", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRANSATLANTIC TRADE AND INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1849", "E1849", "[{\"name\": \"Steve Stockman\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1849", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1849]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             TRANSATLANTIC TRADE AND INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIP\n\n                                  _____\n\n                          HON. STEVE STOCKMAN\n\n                                of texas\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. STOCKMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit today important\ninformation regarding the proposed trade deal between the United States\nand the European Union. The following article was written for Roll Call\nby my Legislative Assistant Zachary Leshin. During his time as my\nLegislative Assistant, Mr. Leshin has conveyed a profound understanding\nof the issue at hand, and has been an important asset to my office.\n\n                    [From Roll Call, Oct. 22, 2014]\n\n                          (By Zachary Leshin)\n\n              Should Congress Reconsider TTIP?--Commentary\n\n       Recently there has been discussion over whether the United\n     States should enter into a free trade agreement with the\n     European Union known as the Transatlantic Trade and\n     Investment Partnership. There are several major issues with\n     TTIP that make it not in the interest of the United States to\n     enter into the agreement.\n       One major issue is non-tariff barriers to free trade that\n     are not addressed by TTIP. In the European Union there are\n     certain classes of product known as Protected Designation of\n     Origin and Protected Geographical Indication. One example of\n     a PDO is Parmigiano-Reggiano cheese, which legally can be\n     made only in a certain region of northern Italy. Currently,\n     American dairy farmers are not allowed to sell Parmesan\n     cheese in the European Union because the name sounds too\n     similar to Parmigiano-Reggiano. In all of the European\n     Union's trade agreements, PDO and PGI protection has been\n     extended to include the products in the other countries who\n     are party to such agreement and the European Union has stated\n     its intent to include that in TTIP under the guise of\n     ``intellectual property rights.''\n       There are many examples of how arbitrary and nonsensical\n     the designation process is. Newcastle Ale had to request that\n     its PDO status be revoked so it could move its factory just\n     across a river. Stilton cheese is not allowed to be made in\n     the English village of Stilton from which it derives its\n     name, but only in three neighboring villages. Feta cheese is\n     allowed to be produced only in Greece, but not in Cyprus or\n     other areas where ethnic Greeks may be living.\n       Another major issue with TTIP is that automatically having\n     a free trade agreement with the United States would provide a\n     major incentive for more countries to join the European\n     Union. The European Union has increasingly become more of a\n     centralized government over its member states, especially\n     since the signing of the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. In some\n     areas (such as rules regarding the standardization of driving\n     licenses) the European Union government has more control over\n     its member states than the United States federal government\n     has over US states.\n       Encouraging further expansion of the European Union is bad\n     for the people of Europe, as the European Union has been\n     eroding the sovereignty of its member states. The European\n     Union has been imposing many absurd and burdensome\n     regulations. One regulation requires all projects that\n     receive funding from the European Regional Development Fund\n     to fly the flag of the European Union. Another regulation\n     states that prepackaged products are allowed to be sold only\n     in certain sized packages, and packages that deviate from the\n     proscribed size dimensions are prohibited from sale.\n       What also needs to be considered is not only what these\n     regulations are, but how they are established. In the United\n     States, the heads of the federal executive agencies, which\n     are responsible for establishing regulatory policies, are\n     nominated by an elected president and confirmed by elected\n     senators. The European Union has no such accountability\n     mechanism.\n       Another issue that needs to be considered is discriminatory\n     trade policies imposed by the European Union. In May 2014,\n     the European Union put in place a ban on the import of\n     poultry and eggs raised by Jews in Judea and Samaria, but\n     still permits import of poultry and eggs raised by Arabs in\n     that same region. The European Union has also been\n     considering implementation of discriminatory meat labeling\n     policies where meat products slaughtered using religious\n     methods are required to label the method, but meat products\n     slaughtered using other methods are not.\n       Supporting TTIP may impact the proposed referendum on\n     United Kingdom membership of the European Union that is\n     planned for 2015, skewing the outcome in favor of maintaining\n     membership in the European Union. Instead, the United States\n     should seek to establish a free trade agreement with a free\n     and independent Britain. This will encourage other European\n     Union member states to leave the European Union as well and\n     will hopefully serve as a catalyst for the dissolution of the\n     European Union. It is not in the strategic interests of the\n     United States, nor in the interests of the people of Europe,\n     for the European Union to become a more centralized\n     institution.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1852-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "URGING NOMINATION OF HARRY CHAPIN IN THE SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1852", "E1853", "[{\"name\": \"Steve Israel\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1852", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Pages E1852-E1853]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n   URGING NOMINATION OF HARRY CHAPIN IN THE SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME\n\n                                 ______\n\n                           HON. STEVE ISRAEL\n\n                              of new york\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. ISRAEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to celebrate the career of\nHarry Chapin, and to urge the Songwriters Hall of Fame to nominate him\nfor induction. Harry Chapin is known not only for his powerful\nsongwriting but also for his philanthropy and activism, as he spent his\nlife fighting hunger and poverty in his Long Island community and\naround the world. His eminence as a songwriter and as an activist\nproves that he is deserving of this honor. I am also submitting for the\nrecord my letter to the Songwriters Hall of Fame as well as a letter\nfrom Sandy Chapin, Harry's wife.\n  Though his musical career lasted only a decade, Harry Chapin's talent\nlives on through his timeless songs and powerful storytelling. He wrote\nover 400 songs in that time, including classic songs like ``Taxi'' and\n``Cat's in the Cradle;'' released nine albums; and wrote a Broadway\nmusical, ``The Night That Made America Famous.'' He also wrote songs\nfor television and film. He was inducted into the Long Island Music\nHall of Fame in 2006.\n  Furthermore, Harry's humanitarian work serving the people of Long\nIsland deserves to be remembered and honored. He donated half of his\nconcert revenue to charity and founded various organizations that\ncontinue to fight hunger and poverty on Long Island and around the\nworld. Harry co-founded WhyHunger, a grassroots organization that\nsupports over 8,000 community groups nationwide in their efforts to\ndevelop innovative programs to eliminate hunger and provide\nsustainable, health food sources. He founded New York City's Hunger\nHotline and Long Island's first food bank, Long Island Cares, which\ntoday distributes more than six million pounds of food every year. Long\nIsland Cares also provides community members with nutrition education,\njob training, and veterans' services, because Harry understood that\nending hunger requires addressing the root causes of poverty. In 1977,\nhe lobbied Congress and President Carter to establish a Presidential\nCommission on World Hunger, on which he served as an active member. For\nall of his humanitarian work, Harry posthumously received a\nCongressional Gold Medal in 1987. His legacy lives on with the Harry\nChapin Foundation, which continues to support charities that fight\nhunger and poverty, as well as organizations that support arts\neducation.\n  Harry Chapin's contributions to music and to the world should not be\nforgotten, and again I encourage his nomination to the Songwriters Hall\nof Fame.\n                                                     Steve Israel,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                                December 16, 2014.\n     Board Members,\n     Songwriters Hall of Fame, New York, NY.\n       To the Board Members of the Songwriters Hall of Fame: I\n     write today to ask for full and fair consideration for Harry\n     Chapin, a Long Island treasure, as a nominee for induction\n     into the Songwriters Hall of Fame. In his life, Harry Chapin\n     was known not only for writing songs that resonated but also\n     for his philanthropic efforts and activism to combat hunger\n     and poverty both in his Long Island community and around the\n     world. His eminence as a songwriter and as a leader in the\n     fight against poverty and hunger proves him truly deserving\n     of this honor.\n       Though his musical career lasted only a decade, Harry\n     Chapin's enduring legacy ensures that his talent will live on\n     through his timeless songs that reverberate across\n     generations. During that brief period, Harry wrote over 400\n     songs, including classics like ``Taxi'' and ``Cat's in the\n     Cradle;'' released nine albums; and wrote a Broadway musical,\n     ``The Night That Made America Famous.'' He also wrote songs\n     for television and film. He was inducted into the Long Island\n     Music Hall of Fame in 2006.\n       Harry's unparalleled humanitarian work serving the people\n     of Long Island also deserves recognition. Along with donating\n     half of his concert revenue to charity and founding various\n     organizations to fight hunger and poverty on Long Island and\n     around the world, Harry also served as a powerful voice\n     lobbying Congress and President Carter to establish a\n     Presidential Commission on World Hunger, on which he served\n     as an active member. For all of his humanitarian work, Harry\n     posthumously received a Congressional Gold Medal in 1987. His\n     legacy lives on with the Harry Chapin Foundation, which\n     continues to support charities that fight hunger and poverty,\n     such as Long Island Cares, as well as organizations that\n     support arts education.\n       Today, I'm proud to give much deserved recognition to Harry\n     Chapin's contributions to music and to the world in the House\n     of Representatives. Harry's legacy is timeless and should not\n     be forgotten. I once again ask for full and fair\n     consideration for his nomination to the Songwriters Hall of\n     Fame.\n           Sincerely,\n                                                     Steve Israel,\n                                               Member of Congress.\n                                  ____\n\n                                               September 15, 2013.\n     Board Members,\n     Songwriters Hall of Fame, New York, NY.\n       Board Members of the Song Writers Hall of Fame: I am\n     writing to ask that you might consider Harry Chapin as one of\n     your\n\n[[Page E1853]]\n\n     next recipients for the Songwriters Hall of Fame Award. While\n     reading your news letter about the recipients for 2008 Awards\n     I couldn't help but think that Harry is long overdue for a\n     honor such as this.\n       Harry Chapin earned a devoted audience during the '70s,\n     through his music and his charity work as a social activist.\n     Harry wrote and recorded a reasonably large body of work\n     before his death in 1981. Though many may not know all of\n     Harry's songs (he wrote over 400), his legion of fans\n     continue to buy his CD's, as well as attempt to unearth lost\n     recordings by the man to this day.\n       Harry Chapin is remembered by a generation of music fans as\n     one of America's greatest musical storytellers and\n     troubadours, but as Ralph Nader said, ``to talk about Harry\n     Chapin only as a singer-composer is like viewing Theodore\n     Roosevelt as a state assemblyman or Babe Ruth as a pitcher.\n     More that any other entertainer in his generation, Harry was\n     a citizen-artist.''\n       Harry's albums, musical plays and TV contributions are\n     listed as follows:\n       Chapin Music (1966, Rock-Land Records) Harry's early years\n     with brothers Tom and Steve.\n       Heads and Tales (1972, Elektra) Harry's first album with\n     Elektra, was released in the summer of 1972 and became a\n     success thanks to the hit single ``Taxi,'' which soon became\n     the songwriter's signature tune. Taxi became the most\n     requested song in America for ten weeks in a row and earned\n     Harry a Grammy nomination as best new artist.\n       Sniper and Other Love Songs (1972, Elektra)\n       Short Stories (1973, Elektra) This album it spent 23 weeks\n     on the charts due to the success of the single ``W.O.L.D.,''\n     a story about the life of a disc jockey.\n       Verities & Balderdash (1974, Elektra) This album became his\n     biggest hit, becoming a gold record. The album's success was\n     benefited by the number-one single ``Cat's in the Cradle,'' a\n     song about an inconsiderate, career-oriented father that was\n     based on a poem written by Sandy Chapin, his wife. He earned\n     another Grammy nomination as best male vocal performer.\n       Portrait Gallery (1975, Elektra) his follow-up to Verities\n     and Balderdash. The album performed respectably, peaking at\n     number 53.\n       The Night That Made America Famous In the mean time, Harry\n     had been working on his musical which opened on February 26,\n     1975. The show earned two Tony nominations.\n       Make a Wish Harry won an Emmy award in the spring for his\n     contributions of songs to ABC television's children's series\n     Make a Wish, which was hosted by his brother Tom. At that\n     time Harry also co-founded World Hunger Year, a charity\n     designed to raise money to fight international famine; the\n     organization earned over $350,000 in its first year.\n       Greatest Stories Live (Double Album, 1976, Elektra) This\n     double album, became the singer/songwriter's second gold\n     album, peaking at number 48. Chapin was becoming more\n     politically active throughout 1976, as evidenced by his role\n     as a delegate at that summer's Democratic Convention.\n       Dance Band on the Titanic (Double Album, 1977, Elektra)\n     This album was also on the charts.\n       Living Room Suite (1978, Elektra) The following year, Harry\n     Chapin met with President Jimmy Carter, discussing the need\n     for a Presidential Commission on Hunger; he also released\n     Living Room Suite that summer, which peaked at number 133.\n       Legends of the Lost and Found (Double Album, 1979, Elektra)\n     His second live album.\n       Sequel (1980, Boardwalk Records) Harry signed with\n     Boardwalk Records, releasing Sequel; the title track of the\n     album was a sequel to his first hit single, ``Taxi,'' and\n     became his last Top 40 hit before his death.\n       Mothers & Daughters: The Loving War (1980, ABC Friday Night\n     Movie) Harry wrote the music for this TV production.\n       Cotton Patch Gospel (1981) The off-Broadway premiere of\n     Cotton Patch Gospel, original score by Harry Chapin received\n     praise as ``The best music Harry Chapin ever wrote'' by--\n     David Marsh, Rolling Stone Magazine. This was his last after\n     a career as one of the great American folk singers and one of\n     the great humanitarians having raised over 5 million dollars\n     for World Hunger.\n       Anthology of Harry Chapin (1985, Elektra)\n       Remember When the Music (1987, Dunhill Compact Classics)\n       The Gold Medal Collection (1988, Elektra)\n       The Last Protest Singer (1988, Dunhill Compact Classics)\n       Harry Chapin Tribute (1990, Relativity Records)\n       The Bottom Line Encore Collection (1998, Bottom Line/Koch)\n       Story of a Life (1999, Elektra)\n       VHI Behind the Music The Harry Chapin Collection (2001, MTV\n     Networks)\n       Sequel (2001, re-mastered and re-released on CD Chapin\n     Productions LLC)\n       Sniper and Other Love Songs (Re-mastered and re-released on\n     CD 2002, Wounded Bird Records)\n       The Last Protest Singer (2002, re-mastered and re-released\n     on CD Chapin Productions LLC)\n       Harry Chapin Songwriter (2002) Originally produced in 1975\n     for the educational series Pipeline, this CD closes the\n     distance between listener and performer. A real treat for any\n     aspiring musician, who, regardless of his status as a Harry\n     Chapin fan, will no doubt gain a clear and simple outline for\n     writing a successful song. The disc is broken down into five\n     parts: a short, friendly introduction, the second part, a\n     soulful, acoustical version of a previously unrecorded gem\n     called ``Too Many Miles.'' The third part is the meat of the\n     disc. Harry talks of the difference between ``attitudinal''\n     songs and his own unique style of story songs. He then goes\n     through the process of building a chorus and its verses,\n     discussing the pitfalls of first-time songwriter, strategies\n     for successful rhyming, and finding a ``zinger.'' In the\n     fourth part Harry plays a short upbeat track off the Portrait\n     Gallery album, ``Stop Singing These Sad Songs.'' In the fifth\n     and final part, he conveys easily such concepts as tonal\n     consistency and ``architectural constants.'' The conversation\n     closes with Harry talking about what is plainly evident\n     throughout Songwriter, his ``joy of doing it.''\n       Heads and Tales/Sniper and Other Love Songs (2004, Elektra.\n     Double CD re-release of first two albums with bonus tracks)\n       Legends of the Lost and Found (Double Album, 2005, re-\n     mastered and re-released on CD, Chapin Productions LLC)\n       Introducing. Harry Chapin (2006)\n       Harry Chapin Cat's In the Cradle and Other Songs (2008,\n     Elektra)\n       Harry performed more than 250 concerts every year, and\n     donated the proceeds for half of them to charity. After his\n     concerts, he would go into the lobby and sign autographs and\n     sell records, T-shirts and song books. And every penny he\n     took in would go to charity, especially the battle to end\n     world hunger. He spent four months nearly single-handedly\n     successfully lobbying both Congress and President Carter to\n     form a Presidential Commission on Domestic and International\n     Hunger and Malnutrition, activity serving as a member of the\n     commission.\n       On Sunday July 26, 1981, Ralph Nader wrote in the Sunday\n     New York Times: ``We hope that Taxi is sung as long as there\n     are taxis and lovers with long memories. And we hope as well\n     that Harry Chapin's legacy will include not only his music\n     but his citizenship, so that others may learn of his example\n     and emulate it. For he was a model of what Justice Felix\n     Frankfurter once referred to as the highest position in a\n     democracy--the office of citizen. That was no third-rate folk\n     singer (as he called himself), only a first rate American.''\n       Harry Chapin was inducted into the Long Island Music Hall\n     of Fame on October 15, 2006.\n       I have enclosed a copy of the CD, Harry Chapin Songwriter\n     as a gift to you, thinking that you may find it an\n     appropriate piece considering my request. May you enjoy it!\n           Sincerely,\n                                                    Sandra Chapin,\n     Chapin Productions LLC.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1852", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PERSONAL EXPLANATION", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "PERSONALEXPLAIN", "E1852", "E1852", "[{\"name\": \"Adam Smith\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"83\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"775\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"776\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1000\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1204\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2244\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2719\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4681\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5699\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5781\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5806\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. E1852", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1852]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          PERSONAL EXPLANATION\n\n                                  _____\n\n                            HON. ADAM SMITH\n\n                             of washington\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. SMITH of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, December 9,\nWednesday, December 10, and Thursday, December 11, 2014, I was out on\nmedical leave continuing to recover from surgery and unable to be\npresent for recorded votes.\n  Had I been present, I would have voted: ``yes'' on roll call vote No.\n552 (on the motion to recommit H.R. 5781); ``no'' on roll call vote No.\n553 (on passage of H.R. 5781); ``no'' on roll call vote No. 554 (on\nagreeing to the resolution H. Res. 775); ``yes'' on roll call vote No.\n555 (on the motion to suspend the rules and pass S. 1000); ``yes'' on\nroll call vote No. 556 (on approving the journal); ``yes'' on roll call\nvote No. 557 (on passage of S. 2244); ``yes'' on roll call vote No. 558\n(on the motion to suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment\nto H.R. 4681); ``yes'' on roll call vote No. 559 (on the motion to\nsuspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 2719);\n``yes'' on roll call vote No. 560 (on the motion to suspend the rules\nand concur in the Senate amendment to H.R. 1204); ``no'' on roll call\nvote No. 561 (on agreeing to the resolution H. Res. 776); ``no'' on\nroll call vote No. 562 (on the motion to suspend the rules and pass\nH.R. 5806); ``no'' on roll call vote No. 563 (on the motion to concur\nin the Senate amendment to H.R. 83 with an amendment); and ``yes'' on\nroll call vote No. 564 (on the motion to suspend the rules and pass\nH.R. 5699, as amended).\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1853", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "70TH WEDDING ANNIVERSARY OF ATLEY A. KITCHINGS AND BETTY JANE LANGLEY", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "ALLOTHER", "E1853", "E1854", "[{\"name\": \"Robert B. Aderholt\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1853", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Pages E1853-E1854]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n 70TH WEDDING ANNIVERSARY OF ATLEY A. KITCHINGS AND BETTY JANE LANGLEY\n\n                                  _____\n\n                        HON. ROBERT B. ADERHOLT\n\n                               of alabama\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. ADERHOLT. Mr. Speaker, today marks the 70th anniversary of a very\nimportant occasion. On December 16, 1944, two special people, Atley A.\nKitchings and Betty Jane Langley, were married in Miami, Florida. So,\ntoday I would like to congratulate, pay tribute to, and honor these two\ngreat Alabamians.\n  I first had the occasion to meet Atley Kitchings when I was a student\nat the Cumberland School of Law at Samford University in Birmingham,\nAlabama in the late 1980's. Atley was an adjunct professor teaching\ncommunications law. We became friends while I was a student of his. In\n1995, I was working as Assistant Legal Advisor to then-Governor Fob\nJames, and Atley was doing some legal work in Montgomery when our paths\ncrossed again. It was at that time that our friendship began to bloom.\nIt wasn't long before my wife, Caroline, and I met his lovely wife\nBetty Jane.\n  Atley A. Kitchings, Jr. was born in Louisville, KY on June 10, 1925.\nBetty Jane Langley was born on February 13, 1925 in Jackson, MS. Atley\nmoved with his parents to Clinton, MS when he was 3 years old. He met\nBetty Jane in high school in Clinton, MS, and they began dating at\nMississippi College, in Clinton, MS where they were both college\nstudents. World War II was ongoing, and Atley joined the Navy,\nparticipating first in the V-12 program at Mississippi College, and\nthen earning a commission as an Ensign in the Navy after completing\nmidshipman's school at Northwestern University in Chicago on November\n22, 1944.\n  Atley was assigned to Miami for further training, and on December 16,\n1944 (the day the Battle of the Bulge began in Europe), he and Betty\nJane were married at a Baptist Church in downtown Miami, FL. Atley\nshipped out a week later to lead the crew of a sub-chaser out of San\nJuan, Puerto Rico to hunt Nazi U-Boats, although they never found any.\nAtley left active duty in 1946, but he remained in the Navy reserves\nuntil 1978, when he retired with the rank of Captain.\n  Atley graduated from the University of Virginia School of Law and has\nhad a distinguished legal career, including: a time in the US\nAttorney's office in Birmingham, AL, a 25\n\n[[Page E1854]]\n\nyear career with AT&T, and time with several law firms in Birmingham,\nincluding his current firm of Wallace, Jordan, Ratliffe and Brandt. He\nstill practices law at the age of 89!\n  Betty Jane was an elementary school teacher in the early years of\ntheir marriage. Wanting to spend more time as a homemaker, she stopped\nteaching to raise the couple's two children, Jane Marlea and Atley\nLangley Kitchings.\n  Both Atley and Betty Jane are individuals who have touched thousands\nof lives over the years and have been an inspiration to all those who\nhave known them and that continues even today. So today, December 16,\n2014, I would like to wish Atley and Betty Jane a sincere\ncongratulations on 70 years of marriage. On Sunday afternoon, December\n21, they plan to celebrate this momentous occasion with their family\nand friends in Birmingham, Alabama.\n  May God grant them many more years together.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1854-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "IN HONOR OF LEONARD R. SENDELSKY", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "HONORING", "E1854", "E1854", "[{\"name\": \"Frank Pallone, Jr.\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1854", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1854]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                    IN HONOR OF LEONARD R. SENDELSKY\n\n                                  _____\n\n                        HON. FRANK PALLONE, JR.\n\n                             of new jersey\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in commemoration of the life\nof Mr. Leonard R. Sendelsky. Mr. Sendelsky, a longtime resident of the\nColonia section of Woodbridge, New Jersey, passed away on December 6,\n2014 after a life filled with numerous professional and personal\naccomplishments.\n  Mr. Sendelsky was a fixture of the building industry. His commitment\nto high quality and standards set him apart as a leader and advocate in\nthe industry. He earned several honors and accolades, including the New\nJersey Builders Golden Hammer Award and the New Jersey Builders\nAssociation inaugural Lifetime Achievement Award.\n  Not only was Mr. Sendelsky a prominent representative of the building\nindustry, he was also an active member of the community and the\nHungarian Reformed Church of Carteret. His work with the Thomas Edison\nCouncil of the Boy Scouts of America, the Raritan Bay YMCA and the\nMiddlesex County College Foundation exemplify his commitment to service\nand support of the community.\n  Born and raised in Perth Amboy, New Jersey, Mr. Sendelsky lived in\nColonia for over 50 years with his wife Judy. He and Judy were married\nfor 60 years and together had two sons, Leonard Drew and Guy Sean. Mr.\nSendelsky is remembered by his loving family, including his wife and\nsons, daughter-in-law Susan, granddaughter Christine Marie, sisters\nJoan Maher and Jean Muni, as well as many other relatives and friends.\n  Mr. Speaker, I sincerely hope that my colleagues will join me in\nhonoring Leonard Sendelsky for his dedication to his family and\ncommunity and his immeasurable contributions to the building industry."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgE1854", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "CONGRATULATING VOICE OF AMERICA, UKRAINE SERVICE ON THE OCCASION OF THEIR 65TH ANNIVERSARY", "HOUSE", "EXTENSIONS", "CONGRATULATIONS", "E1854", "E1854", "[{\"name\": \"Marcy Kaptur\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. E1854", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Extensions of Remarks]\n[Page E1854]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n  CONGRATULATING VOICE OF AMERICA, UKRAINE SERVICE ON THE OCCASION OF\n                         THEIR 65TH ANNIVERSARY\n\n                                  _____\n\n                           HON. MARCY KAPTUR\n\n                                of ohio\n\n                    in the house of representatives\n\n                       Tuesday, December 16, 2014\n\n  Ms. KAPTUR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Voice of\nAmerica, Ukraine Service on the occasion of their 65th anniversary. For\n65 years, from the dark days of Stalin's rule to Putin's current\naggression against their country, VOA's Ukrainian Service has been a\ncrucial source of news and information for the people of Ukraine.\nThroughout the Euromaidan revolution and Russia's campaign of\naggression against Ukraine, VOA's Ukrainian Service has served an\nessential role as a unique and comprehensive source of news,\ninformation and discussion about the year-long crisis and the U.S.\nresponse.\n  Nearly every moment of television airtime has been devoted to U.S.\nofficial and expert commentary and analysis regarding the Ukrainian\npeople's drive to overthrow authoritarian rule and integrate with the\nWest, Russian President Vladimir Putin's determination to stop them by\nany means, and American and European efforts in support of Ukraine.\nThis surge in Ukraine-related content was accompanied by an expansion\nof broadcasts, and both initiatives, combined, resulted in remarkable\nratings, with the Service reaching more than 18 percent of the adult\naudience in Ukraine in a given week and maintaining VOA Ukrainian's\nposition as the most popular Western international broadcaster in\nUkraine.\n  VOA began broadcasting in Ukrainian on December 12, 1949. Throughout\nthe Cold War, it was a beacon of freedom for the citizens of Soviet\nUkraine, who were living under repressive rule. With the collapse of\nthe U.S.S.R., VOA Ukrainian took advantage of new opportunities offered\nby Ukraine's declaration of independence. After decades of jamming, VOA\nwas able to sign contracts with the government broadcast channel and\nlocal FM stations for transmission of VOA radio programs on Ukrainian\nairwaves. In 1993, the agency launched VOA's first television program,\na weekly Ukrainian-language TV magazine, Window on America.\n  Every week, VOA's Ukrainian Service reaches millions of people in\nUkraine, a strategically located country of 45 million with a\npersistent Soviet legacy but with strong European aspirations.\nUkrainian news organizations have a very limited reporting presence in\nthe United States, thus VOA provides viewers in Ukraine with a unique,\nthoughtful and revealing window on America life, and remains the\nleading international broadcaster in the country. Through its daily\nreporting on U.S. politics, foreign policy, social issues, business,\nculture and the arts, VOA provides comprehensive, accurate and\nauthoritative information that Ukrainians can employ in strengthening\ntheir nascent democracy, market economy and independent statehood.\n  This past year, perhaps more than any other, the service of VOA\nUkraine has been a crucial lifeline between the people of the United\nStates and Ukraine. It is with great pride that I warmly congratulate\nVOA Ukraine and their highly capable staff, notably chief Adrian\nKarmazyn, on this extraordinary milestone and wish them another 65\nyears of success in the public service.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH-FrontMatter-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "FRONTMATTER", "H10319", "H10319", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10319", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10319]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n             H O U S E  O F  R E P R E S E N T A T I V E S\n\nVol. 160\n\nWASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2014\n\nNo. 155"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10319-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HDESIGNATION", "H10319", "H10319", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10319", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10319]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                 DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Speaker:\n\n                                               Washington, DC,\n\n                                                December 16, 2014.\n       I hereby appoint the Honorable Randy Neugebauer to act as\n     Speaker pro tempore on this day.\n                                                  John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker of the House of Representatives.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10319-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PRAYER", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "PRAYER", "H10319", "H10320", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10319", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Pages H10319-H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 PRAYER\n\n  Brother Thomas More Garrett, Dominican House of Studies, Washington,\nD.C., offered the following prayer:\n  Dear God, as we enter a time of expectation and new beginnings, help\nus to direct our minds toward the things that will last.\n  Let us be attentive to why we act and what we seek and how we want\nour last days to be spent.\n  Give us the space to rest this season in the cell of self-knowledge.\n  Remove the curtains of ignorance that shield us from the light of\nfaith.\n  Open us to transcendent wisdom, and enlighten the dark corners of our\nneglected hearts and scatter there Your cheerful beams.\n  Amen.NOTICE\n\nIf the 113th Congress, 2nd Session, adjourns sine die on or before\nDecember 24, 2014, a final issue of the Congressional Record for\nthe 113th Congress, 2nd Session, will be published on Wednesday,\nDecember 31, 2014, to permit Members to insert statements.\nAll material for insertion must be signed by the Member and\ndelivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters of\nDebates (Room HT-59 or S-123 of the Capitol), Monday through\nFriday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through\nTuesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Wednesday,\nDecember 31, 2014, and will be delivered on Monday, January 5,\n2015.\nNone of the material printed in the final issue of the\nCongressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to any\nevent, that occurred after the sine die date.\nSenators' statements should also be formatted according to the\ninstructions at http://webster/secretary/cong_record.pdf, and\nsubmitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany the signed\nstatement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at\n``Record@Sec.Senate.gov''.\nMembers of the House of Representatives' statements may also be\nsubmitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany the signed\nstatement, and formatted according to the instructions for the\nExtensions of Remarks template at\nhttps://housenet.house.gov/legislative/research-and-reference/\ntranscripts-and-records/electronic-congressional-record-inserts.\nThe Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted\nelectronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the\nhard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the\nOfficial Reporters in Room HT-59.\nMembers of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material\nsubmitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record may do so by\ncontacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the\nGovernment Printing Office, on 512-0224, between the hours of 8:00\na.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily.\nBy order of the Joint Committee on Printing.\n\nCHARLES E. SCHUMER, Chairman.\n\n[[Page H10320]]\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10319", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "House of Representatives", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "CALLTOORDER", "H10319", "H10319", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10319", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10319]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page H10319]]\n\nHouse of Representatives\n\n  The House met at noon and was called to order by the Speaker pro\ntempore (Mr. Neugebauer).\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "PLEDGE", "H10320", "H10320", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will lead the House in the Pledge\nof Allegiance.\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore led the Pledge of Allegiance as follows:\n\n       I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of\n     America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation\n     under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"121\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"123\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3979\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 12, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 12, 2014 at 6:20\n     p.m.:\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H. Con. Res. 121.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H. Con. Res. 123.\n       That the Senate concurs in the House Amendment to the\n     Senate Amendment H.R. 3979.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"131\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk.\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 13, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 13, 2014 at 4:25\n     p.m.:\n       That the Senate agreed to without amendment H.J. Res. 131.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-5", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"83\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"122\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 15, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 15, 2014 at 8:56\n     a.m.:\n       That the Senate agreed to without amendment H. Con. Res.\n     122.\n       That the Senate agrees to the House Amendment to the Senate\n     Amendment to the bill H.R. 83.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-6", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2591\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5859\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 15, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 15, 2014 at 9:55\n     a.m.:\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 2591.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5859.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-7", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"706\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1206\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1378\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2754\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3027\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3572\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4276\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4416\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4651\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5050\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5185\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5331\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5562\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5687\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5816\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 16, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 16, 2014 at 9:03\n     a.m.:\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 2754.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 3572.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 1206.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 1378.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5050.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5185.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5816.\n       That the Senate passed S. 706.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 3027.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 4416.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 4651.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5331.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5562.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 4276.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 5687.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-8", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HCLERK", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1068\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1744\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2866\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2901\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               COMMUNICATION FROM THE CLERK OF THE HOUSE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following\ncommunication from the Clerk of the House of Representatives:\n\n                                              Office of the Clerk,\n\n                                     House of Representatives,\n\n                                Washington, DC, December 16, 2014.\n     Hon. John A. Boehner,\n     Speaker, U.S. Capitol, House of Representatives, Washington,\n         DC.\n       Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to the permission granted in\n     Clause 2(h) of Rule II of the Rules of the U.S. House of\n     Representatives, the Clerk received the following message\n     from the Secretary of the Senate on December 16, 2014 at\n     10:57 a.m.:\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 2901.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 1068.\n       That the Senate passed without amendment H.R. 2866.\n       That the Senate passed S. 1744.\n       With best wishes, I am\n           Sincerely,\n     Karen L. Haas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320-9", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HANNOUNCEMENT", "H10320", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1353\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1474\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2640\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3096\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3329\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4771\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5057\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Pages H10320-H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 4 of rule I, the\nfollowing enrolled bills were signed by Speaker pro tempore Wolf on\nFriday, December 12, 2014:\n\n       H.R. 2640, to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to\n     adjust the Crooked River boundary, to provide water certainty\n     for the City of Prineville, Oregon, and for other purposes;\n       H.R. 3096, to designate the building occupied by the\n     Federal Bureau of Investigation located at 801 Follin Lane,\n     Vienna, Virginia, as the ``Michael D. Resnick Terrorist\n     Screening Center;''\n       H.R. 3329, to enhance the ability of community financial\n     institutions to foster economic growth and serve their\n     communities, boost small businesses, increase individual\n     savings, and for other purposes;\n       H.R. 4771, to amend the Controlled Substances Act to more\n     effectively regulate anabolic steroids;\n       H.R. 5057, to amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act\n     to permit exemptions for external power supplies from certain\n     efficiency standards, and for other purposes;\n       S. 1353, to provide for an ongoing, voluntary public-\n     private partnership to improve cybersecurity, and to\n     strengthen cybersecurity research and development, workforce\n     development and education, and public\n\n[[Page H10321]]\n\n     awareness and preparedness, and for other purposes;\n       S. 1474, to amend the Violence Against Women\n     Reauthorization Act of 2013 to repeal a special rule for the\n     State of Alaska, and for other purposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10320", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "THE JOURNAL", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HJOURNAL", "H10320", "H10320", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"775\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"775\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10320", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10320]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                              THE JOURNAL\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3(a) of House Resolution\n775, the Journal of the last day's proceedings is approved.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ADJOURNMENT TO FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2014", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ADJOURNMENT", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                ADJOURNMENT TO FRIDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2014\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, when the House adjourns\ntoday, it shall adjourn to meet at noon on Friday, December 19, 2014,\nunless it sooner has received a message from the Senate transmitting\nits adoption of H. Con. Res. 125, in which case the House shall stand\nadjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.\n  There was no objection.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ENROLLED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ENROLLEDSIGNED", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"131\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2640\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3096\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"3329\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4471\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5057\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               ENROLLED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTION SIGNED\n\n  Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House, reported and found truly enrolled\nbills of the House of the following titles, which were thereupon signed\nby the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. Wolf, on Friday, December 12, 2014:\n\n       H.R. 2640. An act to amend the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act\n     to adjust the Crooked River boundary, to provide water\n     certainty for the City of Prineville, Oregon, and for other\n     purposes.\n       H.R. 3096. An act to designate the building occupied by the\n     Federal Bureau of Investigation located at 801 Follin Lane,\n     Vienna, Virginia, as the ``Michael D. Resnick Terrorist\n     Screening Center.''\n       H.R. 3329. An act to enhance the ability of community\n     financial institutions to foster economic growth and serve\n     their communities, boost small businesses, increase\n     individual savings, and for other purposes.\n       H.R. 4471. An act to amend the Controlled Substances Act to\n     more effectively regulate anabolic steroids.\n       H.R. 5057. An act to amend the Energy Policy and\n     Conservation Act to permit exemptions for external power\n     supplies from certain efficiency standards, and for other\n     purposes.\n\n  Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House, further reported and found truly\nenrolled a joint resolution of the House of the following title, which\nwas thereupon signed by the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. Wolf, on Saturday,\nDecember 13, 2014:\n\n       H.J. Res. 131. Joint resolution making further continuing\n     appropriations for fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "SENATE ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ENROLLEDSIGNED", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1353\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1474\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                      SENATE ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED\n\n  The Speaker pro tempore, Mr. Wolf, on Friday, December 12, 2014,\nannounced his signature to enrolled bills of the Senate of the\nfollowing titles:\n\n       S. 1353. An act to provide for an ongoing, voluntary\n     public-private partnership to improve cybersecurity, and to\n     strengthen cybersecurity research and development, workforce\n     development and education, and public awareness and\n     preparedness, and for other purposes.\n       S. 1474. An act to amend the Violence Against Women\n     Reauthorization Act of 2013 to repeal a special rule for the\n     State of Alaska, and for other purposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-5", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "JOINT RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ALLOTHER", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"130\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              JOINT RESOLUTION PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT\n\n  Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House, reported that on December 11,\n2014, she presented to the President of the United States, for his\napproval, the following joint resolution:\n\n       H.J. Res. 130. Making further continuing appropriations for\n     fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-6", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ADJOURNMENT", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "ADJOURNMENT", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"125\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                              ADJOURNMENT\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, pursuant to the order of\nthe House of today, the House stands adjourned until noon on Friday,\nDecember 19, 2014, unless it sooner has received a message from the\nSenate transmitting its adoption of H. Con. Res. 125, in which case the\nHouse shall stand adjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.\n  There was no objection.\n  Thereupon (at 12 o'clock and 8 minutes p.m.), under its previous\norder, the House adjourned until noon on Friday, December 19, 2014,\nunless it sooner has received a message from the Senate transmitting\nits adoption of H. Con. Res. 125, in which case the House shall stand\nadjourned pursuant to that concurrent resolution.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321-7", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "EXECUTIVECOMM", "H10321", "H10324", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Pages H10321-H10324]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.\n\n  Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive communications were taken from\nthe Speaker's table and referred as follows:\n\n       8337. A letter from the Chief of Staff, Natural Resources\n     Conservation Service, Department of Agriculture, transmitting\n     the Department's ``Major'' interim rule -- Environmental\n     Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) [Docket No.: NRCS-2014-\n     0007] (RIN: 0578-AA62) received December 16, 2014, pursuant\n     to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Agriculture.\n       8338. A letter from the Under Secretary, Personnel and\n     Readiness, Department of Defense, transmitting a letter on\n     the approved retirement of Vice Admiral David H. Buss, United\n     States Navy, and his advancement to the grade of vice admiral\n     on the retired list; to the Committee on Armed Services.\n       8339. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Defense,\n     transmitting a letter on the approved retirement of Vice\n     Admiral Paul J. Bushong, United States Navy, and his\n     advancement to the grade of vice admiral on the retired list;\n     to the Committee on Armed Services.\n       8340. A letter from the Senior Procurement Executive,\n     Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's rule --\n     Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition Circular\n     2005-79; Introduction [Docket No.: FAR 2014-0051; Sequence\n     No. 7] received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Armed Services.\n       8341. A letter from the Senior Procurement Executive,\n     Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's interim\n     rule -- Federal Acquisition Regulation; Establishing a\n     Minimum Wage for Contractors [FAC 2005-79; FAR Case 2015-003;\n     Item I; Docket No.: 2014-0050; Sequence No. 1] (RIN: 9000-\n     AM82) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Armed Services.\n       8342. A letter from the Senior Procurement Executive,\n     Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's interim\n     rule -- Federal Acquisition Regulation; Prohibition on\n     Contracting with Inverted Domestic Corporations [FAC 2005-79;\n     FAR Case 2014-017; Item II; Docket No.: 2014-0017, Sequence\n     No. 1] (RIN: 9000-AM70) received December 16, 2014, pursuant\n     to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Armed Services.\n       8343. A letter from the Senior Procurement Executive,\n     Office of Acquisition Policy, General Services\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule\n     -- Federal Acquisition Regulation; Federal Acquisition\n     Circular 2005-79; Small Entity Compliance Guide [Docket No.:\n     FAR 2014-0052, Sequence No. 7] received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Armed\n     Services.\n       8344. A letter from the General Counsel, Federal Housing\n     Finance Agency, transmitting the Agency's final rule --\n     Housing Trust Fund (RIN: 2590-AA73) received December 11,\n     2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Financial Services.\n       8345. A letter from the Director, Regulations Policy and\n     Management Staff, OC/OPPLA/OP/RPMS, Department of Health and\n     Human Services, transmitting the Department's final rule --\n     Uniform Compliance Date for Food Labeling Regulations [Docket\n     No.: FDA-2000-N-0011] (formerly Docket No.: 2000N-1596)\n     received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.\n       8346. A letter from the Secretary, Department of Health and\n     Human Services, transmitting a report entitled ``Performance\n     Evaluation of Accreditation Bodies under the Mammography\n     Quality Standards Act of 1992 as amended by the Mammography\n     Quality Standards Reauthorization Acts of 1998 and 2004''\n     covering January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2013; to the\n     Committee on Energy and Commerce.\n       8347. A letter from the General Counsel, Federal Energy\n     Regulatory Commission, transmitting the Commission's final\n     rule -- Revisions and Technical Corrections to Conform the\n     Commission's Regulations to the Hydropower Regulatory\n     Efficiency Act of 2013 [Docket No.: RM14-22-000; Order No.\n     800] received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.\n       8348. A letter from the Secretary, Federal Trade\n     Commission, transmitting the Commission's 2014 Report on\n     Ethanol Market Concentration, pursuant to Section 1501(a)(2)\n     of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, as codified at 42 U.S.C.\n     7545(o)(10); to the Committee on Energy and Commerce.\n       8349. A letter from the Executive Secretary, National Labor\n     Relations Board, transmitting the Board's final rule --\n     Representation ---- Case Procedures (RIN: 3142-AA08) received\n     December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the\n     Committee on Education and the Workforce.\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  December 16, 2014, on page H10321, the following appeared: 8349.\nA letter from the Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations\nBoard, transmitting the Board's final rule -- Representation ----\nCase Procedures (RIN: 3142-AA08) received December 16, 2014,\npursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Energy and\nCommerce\n\n  The online version should be corrected to read: 8349. A letter\nfrom the Executive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board,\ntransmitting the Board's final rule -- Representation ---- Case\nProcedures (RIN: 3142-AA08) received December 16, 2014, pursuant\nto 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Education and the\nWorkforce\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\n       8350. A letter from the Director, Defense Security\n     Cooperation Agency, transmitting\n\n[[Page H10322]]\n\n     Transmittal No. 14-58, Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter\n     of Offer and Acceptance, pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the\n     Arms Export Control Act, as amended; to the Committee on\n     Foreign Affairs.\n       8351. A letter from the Assistant Secretary, Legislative\n     Affairs, Department of State, transmitting Transmittal No.\n     RSAT-14-4160, pursuant to the reporting requirements of\n     Section 36(d) of the Arms Export Control Act; to the\n     Committee on Foreign Affairs.\n       8352. A letter from the Director, Office of Personnel\n     Management, President's Pay Agent, transmitting a report\n     justifying the reasons for the extension of locality-based\n     comparability payments to Non-General Schedule categories of\n     positions that are in more than one executive agency,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5304(h)(2)(C); to the Committee on\n     Oversight and Government Reform.\n       8353. A letter from the Chair, Equal Employment Opportunity\n     Commission, transmitting the Inspector General's Semiannual\n     Report to Congress and the Semiannual Management Report for\n     the period ending September 30, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     app. (Insp. Gen. Act), section 5(b); Public Law 95-452,\n     section 5(b); to the Committee on Oversight and Government\n     Reform.\n       8354. A letter from the Administrator, Small Business\n     Administration, transmitting the semiannual report to\n     Congress of the Office of Inspector General for the period\n     April 1, 2014, through September 30, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. app. (Insp. Gen. Act), section 5(b); Public Law 95-\n     452, section 5(b); to the Committee on Oversight and\n     Government Reform.\n       8355. A letter from the Inspector General, U.S. House of\n     Representatives, transmitting the Audit of the Electronic\n     Voting System final report, Report No. 14-CLK-18; to the\n     Committee on House Administration.\n       8356. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS,\n     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting\n     the Administration's final rule -- Magnuson-Stevens Fishery\n     Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries of the\n     Northeastern United States; Northeast Groundfish Fishery;\n     Gulf of Maine Haddock Annual Catch Limit Revision [Docket\n     No.: 140903748-4748-01] (RIN: 0648-BE45) received December\n     11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee\n     on Natural Resources.\n       8357. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule\n     -- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone off Alaska;\n     Monitoring and Enforcement; At-Sea Scales Requirements\n     [Docket No.: 140113040-4919-02] (RIN: 0648-BD90) received\n     December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the\n     Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8358. A letter from the Director, Office of Sustainable\n     Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's temporary\n     rule -- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;\n     Dusky Rockfish in the Western Regulatory Area of the Gulf of\n     Alaska [Docket No.: 130925836-4174-02] (RIN: 0648-XD630)\n     received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8359. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries/Atlantic\n     HMS Division, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's final rule\n     -- Highly Migratory Species; Technical Amendment to\n     Regulations [Docket No.: 140930815-4916-01] (RIN: 0648-BE54)\n     received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8360. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of\n     Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's temporary\n     rule -- Fisheries Off West Coast States; Modifications of the\n     West Coast Commercial and Tribal Salmon Fisheries; Inseason\n     Actions #10 through #23 [Docket No.: 140107014-4014-01] (RIN:\n     0648-XD425) received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8361. A letter from the Director, Office of Sustainable\n     Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's temporary\n     rule; inseason action; Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South\n     Atlantic; 2014 Recreational Accountability Measure and\n     Closure for Gray Triggerfish in the South Atlantic [Docket\n     No.: 120815345-3525-02] (RIN: 0648-XD628) received December\n     11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee\n     on Natural Resources.\n       8362. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of\n     Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's temporary\n     rule -- Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska;\n     Pacific Ocean Perch in the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands\n     Management Area [Docket No.: 131021878-4158-02] (RIN: 0648-\n     XD612) received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8363. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS,\n     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting\n     the Administration's final rule -- Fisheries of the Exclusive\n     Economic Zone Off Alaska; Amendment 96 to the Gulf of Alaska\n     Fishery Management Plan; Management of Community Quota\n     Entities [Docket No.: 131115973-4885-02] (RIN: 0648-BD74)\n     received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8364. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS,\n     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting\n     the Administration's final rule -- Fisheries of the Exclusive\n     Economic Zone Off Alaska; Modifications to Federal Fisheries\n     Permits and Federal Processor Permits [Docket No.: 090313314-\n     4831-02] (RIN: 0648-AX78) received December 11, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Natural Resources.\n       8365. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS,\n     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting\n     the Administration's interim final rule -- Magnuson-Stevens\n     Fishery Conservation and Management Act Provisions; Fisheries\n     of the Northeastern United States; Northeast Groundfish\n     Fishery; Fishing Year 2014; Emergency Gulf of Maine Cod\n     Management Measures [Docket No.: 141002822-4933-01] (RIN:\n     0648-BE56) received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8366. A letter from the Deputy Assistant Administrator for\n     Regulatory Programs, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS,\n     National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, transmitting\n     the Administration's final rule -- Fisheries of the\n     Caribbean, Gulf of Mexico, and South Atlantic; Snapper-\n     Grouper Fishery Off the Southern Atlantic States; Regulatory\n     Amendment 14 [Docket No.: 130403320-4891-02] (RIN: 0648-BD07)\n     received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8367. A letter from the Acting Director, Office of\n     Sustainable Fisheries, NMFS, National Oceanic and Atmospheric\n     Administration, transmitting the Administration's temporary\n     rule -- Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Atlantic\n     Herring Fishery; 2014 Sub-Annual Catch Limit (ACL) Harvested\n     for Management Area 1A [Docket No.: 130919816-4205-02] (RIN:\n     0648-XD570) received December 11, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Natural Resources.\n       8368. A letter from the Senior Counsel, Office of the\n     Attorney General, Department of Justice, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- National Instant Criminal\n     Background Check System Regulation [Docket No.: FBI 152; AG\n     Order No.: 3477-2014] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to\n     5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on the Judiciary.\n       8369. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     Department of Transportation, transmitting the Department's\n     final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Airplanes\n     [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0425; Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-\n     180-AD; Amendment 39-18024; AD 2014-23-08] (RIN: 2120-AA64)\n     received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8370. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Robinson\n     Helicopter Company Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2013-0159;\n     Directorate Identifier 2012-SW-010-AD; Amendment 39-18032; AD\n     2014-23-16] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8371. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0168;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-208-AD; Amendment 39-18039; AD\n     2014-24-06] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8372. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2013-1066; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-021-AD; Amendment 39-18029; AD 2014-23-13] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8373. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Various\n     Restricted Category Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0337;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-029-AD; Amendment 39-18008; AD\n     2014-22-03] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8374. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Piper\n     Aircraft, Inc. [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0437; Directorate\n     Identifier 2012-CE-036-AD; Amendment 39-18019; AD 2014-23-03]\n     (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8375. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; PILATUS\n     AIRCRAFT LTD. Airplanes\n\n[[Page H10323]]\n\n     [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0594; Directorate Identifier 2014-CE-\n     022-AD; Amendment 39-18005; AD 2014-22-01] (RIN: 2120-AA64)\n     received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8376. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2013-0836;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-126-AD; Amendment 39-18011; AD\n     2014-22-06] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8377. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0193; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-234-AD; Amendment 39-18040; AD 2014-24-07] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 18, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8378. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0289;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-146-AD; Amendment 39-18016; AD\n     2014-22-11] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8379. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0452; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-185-AD; Amendment 39-18013; AD 2014-22-08] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8380. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives;\n     Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0483;\n     Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-082-AD; Amendment 39-18012; AD\n     2014-22-07] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8381. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0232;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-100-AD; Amendment 39-18010; AD\n     2014-22-05] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8382. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0288;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-101-AD; Amendment 39-18009; AD\n     2014-22-04] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8383. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0192; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-221-AD; Amendment 39-17992; AD 2014-20-19] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8384. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2013-1064; Directorate Identifier\n     2012-NM-101-AD; Amendment 39-17991; AD 2014-20-18] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8385. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Establishment and Amendment of\n     Class D and Class E Airspace; Santa Rosa, CA [Docket No.:\n     FAA-2014-0305; Airspace Docket No.: 14-AWP-2] received\n     December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the\n     Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8386. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airspace Designations;\n     Incorporation by Reference Amendments [Docket No.: 2014-0540;\n     Amendment No.: 71-46] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received December 16,\n     2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8387. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class E Airspace;\n     Lakeport, CA [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0309; Airspace Docket No.:\n     14-AWP-3] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8388. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class E Airspace;\n     Apalachicola, FL [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0831; Airspace Docket\n     No.: 14-ASO-12] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8389. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Fokker\n     Services B.V. Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0062;\n     Directorate Identifier 2012-NM-031-AD; Amendment 39-18025; AD\n     2014-23-09] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8390. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Pratt\n     and Whitney Division Turbofan Engines [Docket No.: FAA-2013-\n     0072; Directorate Identifier 2013-NE-04-AD; Amendment 39-\n     17525; AD 2013-15-09] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16,\n     2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8391. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class D Airspace;\n     MacDill AFB, FL [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0541; Airspace Docket\n     No.: 14-ASO-8] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8392. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Establishment of Class D and Class\n     E Airspace, and Amendment of Class E Airspace; Hammond, LA\n     [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0600; Airspace Docket No.: 14-ASW-6]\n     received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8393. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No. FAA-2014-0256;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-214-AD; Amendment 39-18020; AD\n     2014-23-04] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8394. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives;\n     Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0489;\n     Directorate Identifier 2014-NM-048-AD; Amendment 39-18022; AD\n     2014-23-06] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8395. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Amendment of Class E Airspace;\n     Roanoke Rapids, NC [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0792; Airspace\n     Docket No.: 14-ASO-11] received December 16, 2014, pursuant\n     to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation\n     and Infrastructure.\n       8396. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Amendment of Multiple Air Traffic\n     Service (ATS) Routes; North Central and Northeast United\n     States [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0986; Airspace Docket No.: 14-\n     AGL-14] (RIN: 2120-AA66) received December 16, 2014, pursuant\n     to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation\n     and Infrastructure.\n       8397. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0449; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-259-AD; Amendment 39-18021; AD 2014-23-05] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8398. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Agusta\n     S.p.A. Helicopters (Type Certificate Currently Held by\n     AgustaWestland S.p.A.) (Agusta) [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0472;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-SW-040-AD; Amendment 39-18018; AD\n     2014-23-02] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8399. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Aviation Training Device Credit\n     for Pilot Certification [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0987; Amdt.\n     Nos.: 61-133, 141-18] (RIN: 2120-AK62) received December 16,\n     2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8400. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30983 Amdt.\n     No.: 3613] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n\n[[Page H10324]]\n\n       8401. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0132; Directorate Identifier\n     2012-NM-007-AD; Amendment 39-18023; AD 2014-23-07] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8402. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30984;\n     Amdt. No.: 3614] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8403. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives;\n     Bombardier, Inc. Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0191;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-256-AD; Amendment 39-18030; AD\n     2014-23-14] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8404. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30982;\n     Amdt. No.: 3612] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8405. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30981;\n     Amdt. No.: 3611] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8406. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0170;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-169-AD; Amendment 39-18027; AD\n     2014-23-11] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8407. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0174;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-212-AD; Amendment 39-18028; AD\n     2014-23-12] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8408. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30989;\n     Amdt. No.: 3618] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8409. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30988;\n     Amdt. No.: 3617] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8410. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Agusta\n     S.p.A. Helicopters [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0971; Directorate\n     Identifier 2014-SW-055-AD; Amendment 39-18035; AD 2014-24-02]\n     (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8411. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30987;\n     Amdt. No.: 3616] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8412. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0235;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-249-AD; Amendment 39-18015; AD\n     2014-22-10] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8413. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Standard Instrument Approach\n     Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle Departure\n     Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments [Docket No.: 30986;\n     Amdt. No.: 3615] received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5\n     U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8414. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Airbus\n     Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0776; Directorate Identifier\n     2013-NM-240-AD; Amendment 39-18033; AD 2014-23-17] (RIN:\n     2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.\n     801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Transportation and\n     Infrastructure.\n       8415. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Dowty\n     Propellers Constant Speed Propellers [Docket No.: FAA-2009-\n     0776; Directorate Identifier 2009-NE-32-AD; Amendment 39-\n     18007; AD 2010-17-11R2] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December\n     16, 2014, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee\n     on Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8416. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Rolls-\n     Royce plc Turbofan Engines [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0433;\n     Directorate Identifier 94-ANE-39-AD; Amendment 39-18041; AD\n     2014-24-08] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8417. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; Various\n     de Havilland Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0701;\n     Directorate Identifier 2014-CE-025-AD; Amendment 39-18034; AD\n     2014-24-01] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8418. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0430;\n     Directorate Identifier 2014- NM-083-AD; Amendment 39-18014;\n     AD 2014-22-09] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n       8419. A letter from the Management and Program Analyst,\n     FAA, Department of Transportation, transmitting the\n     Department's final rule -- Airworthiness Directives; The\n     Boeing Company Airplanes [Docket No.: FAA-2014-0195;\n     Directorate Identifier 2013-NM-195-AD; Amendment 39-18026; AD\n     2014-23-10] (RIN: 2120-AA64) received December 16, 2014,\n     pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on\n     Transportation and Infrastructure.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10321", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HANNOUNCEMENT", "H10321", "H10321", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HJRES\", \"number\": \"131\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10321", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10321]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE\n\n  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 4 of rule I, the\nfollowing enrolled joint resolution was signed by Speaker pro tempore\nWolf on Saturday, December 13, 2014:\n\n       H.J. Res. 131, making further continuing appropriations for\n     fiscal year 2015, and for other purposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10324", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HPUBCOMMREPORT", "H10324", "H10325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"1772\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2131\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2278\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10324", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Pages H10324-H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n         REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS\n\n  Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to\nthe Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as\nfollows:\n\n[Pursuant to the order of the House on December 11, 2014 the following\n                 report was filed on December 15, 2014]\n\n       Mr. GOODLATTE: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 2131. A\n     bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to enhance\n     American competitiveness through the encouragement of high-\n     skilled immigration, and for other purposes; with an\n     amendment (Rept. 113-676, Pt. 1). Referred to the Committee\n     of the Whole House on the state of the Union.\n\n[Pursuant to the order of the House on December 11, 2014 the following\n                 report was filed on December 16, 2014]\n\n       Mr. GOODLATTE: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 1772. A\n     bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make\n     mandatory and permanent requirements relating to use of an\n     electronic employment eligibility verification system, and\n     for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 113-677, Pt. 1).\n     Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of\n     the Union.\n       Mr. GOODLATTE: Committee on the Judiciary. H.R. 2278. A\n     bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to improve\n     immigration law enforcement within the interior of the United\n     States, and for other purposes; with an amendment (Rept. 113-\n     678, Pt. 1). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on\n     the state of the Union.\n\n                         discharge of committee\n\n           [The following actions occurred December 16, 2014]\n\n  Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XIII the Committees on Ways and Means\nand Education and the Workforce discharged from further consideration.\nH.R. 1772 referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of\nthe Union.\n  Pursuant to clause 2 of rule XIII the Committees on Homeland\nSecurity, Agriculture, and Natural Resources discharged from further\nconsideration.\n\n[[Page H10325]]\n\nH.R. 2278 referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of\nthe Union.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10325-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Constitutional Authority Statement", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "CASTATEMENT", "H10325", "H10325", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. H10325", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY STATEMENT\n\n  Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII of the Rules of the House of\nRepresentatives, the following statements are submitted regarding the\nspecific powers granted to Congress in the Constitution to enact the\naccompanying bill or joint resolution."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10325-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Constitutional Authority Statement for H.R. 5887", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "CASTATEMENT", "H10325", "H10325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5887\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10325", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n            By Mr. KILMER:\n        H.R. 5887.\n        Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant\n     to the following:\n       Article I, Section 8, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution\n     under the General Welfare Clause."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10325-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Constitutional Authority Statement for H.R. 5888", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "CASTATEMENT", "H10325", "H10325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5888\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10325", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n            By Mr. CLEAVER:\n        H.R. 5888.\n        Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant\n     to the following:\n       power of Congress to establish post offices and post roads,\n     as enumerated in Article I, Section 8, Clause 7 of the U.S.\n     Constitution\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10325-5", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ADDITIONAL SPONSORS", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HADDSPONSORS", "H10325", "H10325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"688\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HRES\", \"number\": \"781\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2502\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4612\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4872\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5182\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5186\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5267\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5475\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5644\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5866\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10325", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          ADDITIONAL SPONSORS\n\n  Under clause 7 of rule XII, sponsors were added to public bills and\nresolutions, as follows:\n\n       H.R. 2502: Mr. Polis.\n       H.R. 4612: Mr. Fleming.\n       H.R. 4872: Mr. Joyce.\n       H.R. 5182: Ms. Clark of Massachusetts.\n       H.R. 5186: Ms. Bass.\n       H.R. 5267: Mr. Welch.\n       H.R. 5475: Mr. Rodney Davis of Illinois.\n       H.R. 5644: Mr. Posey.\n       H.R. 5866: Ms. Clark of Massachusetts.\n       H. Res. 688: Mr. Swalwell of California.\n       H. Res. 781: Mr. McGovern."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgH10325", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS", "HOUSE", "HOUSE", "HPUBBILLS", "H10325", "H10325", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5887\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5888\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. H10325", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[House]\n[Page H10325]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                      PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS\n\n  Under clause 2 of rule XII, public bills and resolutions of the\nfollowing titles were introduced and severally referred, as follows:\n\n           By Mr. KILMER:\n       H.R. 5887. A bill to repeal the provisions of the\n     Consolidated and Further Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015,\n     which amended the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to\n     establish separate contribution limits for contributions made\n     to national parties to support presidential nominating\n     conventions, national party headquarters buildings, and\n     recounts; to the Committee on House Administration.\n           By Mr. CLEAVER:\n       H.R. 5888. A bill to designate the facility of the United\n     States Postal Service located at 200 Westport Road in Kansas\n     City, Missouri, as the ``Nutterville Post Office Building'';\n     to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS-FrontMatter-6", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "FRONTMATTER", "S6869", "S6869", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6869]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                              S E N A T E\n\nVol. 160\n\nWASHINGTON, TUESDAY, DECEMBER 16, 2014\n\nNo. 155"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6869-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PRAYER", "SENATE", "SENATE", "PRAYER", "S6869", "S6869", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6869]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 PRAYER\n\n  The Chaplain, Dr. Barry C. Black, offered the following prayer:\n  Let us pray.\n  O God of wisdom and order, who filled the universe with the mysteries\nof Your power; sustain Your lawmakers with the knowledge of Your mercy\nand providence. May they always look to You, the architect of\ndestinies, for guidance in the precarious journey of defending freedom.\nLord, help them to grow in grace and in a knowledge of Your will and\npurposes. Sustain them and their loved ones with Your everlasting arms.\nMay Your hand lead our Senators and Your right hand protect them.\n  We pray in Your mighty Name. Amen.NOTICE\n\nIf the 113th Congress, 2nd Session, adjourns sine die on or before\nDecember 24, 2014, a final issue of the Congressional Record for\nthe 113th Congress, 2nd Session, will be published on Wednesday,\nDecember 31, 2014, to permit Members to insert statements.\nAll material for insertion must be signed by the Member and\ndelivered to the respective offices of the Official Reporters of\nDebates (Room HT-59 or S-123 of the Capitol), Monday through\nFriday, between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. through\nTuesday, December 30. The final issue will be dated Wednesday,\nDecember 31, 2014, and will be delivered on Monday, January 5,\n2015.\nNone of the material printed in the final issue of the\nCongressional Record may contain subject matter, or relate to any\nevent, that occurred after the sine die date.\nSenators' statements should also be formatted according to the\ninstructions at http://webster/secretary/cong_record.pdf, and\nsubmitted electronically, either on a disk to accompany the signed\nstatement, or by e-mail to the Official Reporters of Debates at\n``Record@Sec.Senate.gov''.\nMembers of the House of Representatives' statements may also be\nsubmitted electronically by e-mail, to accompany the signed\nstatement, and formatted according to the instructions for the\nExtensions of Remarks template at\nhttps://housenet.house.gov/legislative/research-and-reference/\ntranscripts-and-records/electronic-congressional-record-inserts.\nThe Official Reporters will transmit to GPO the template formatted\nelectronic file only after receipt of, and authentication with, the\nhard copy, and signed manuscript. Deliver statements to the\nOfficial Reporters in Room HT-59.\nMembers of Congress desiring to purchase reprints of material\nsubmitted for inclusion in the Congressional Record may do so by\ncontacting the Office of Congressional Publishing Services, at the\nGovernment Printing Office, on 512-0224, between the hours of 8:00\na.m. and 4:00 p.m. daily.\nBy order of the Joint Committee on Printing.\n\nCHARLES E. SCHUMER, Chairman.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6869-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "PLEDGE", "S6869", "S6869", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6869]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE\n\n  The President pro tempore led the Pledge of Allegiance, as follows:\n\n       I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of\n     America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation\n     under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6869-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6869", "S6869", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6869]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   RECOGNITION OF THE MAJORITY LEADER\n\n  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The majority leader is recognized.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6869-5", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TAX INCREASE PREVENTION ACT OF 2014--MOTION TO PROCEED", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6869", "S6870", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6869-S6870]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n         TAX INCREASE PREVENTION ACT OF 2014--MOTION TO PROCEED\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I now move to proceed to Calendar No. 627,\nwhich is H.R. 5771. It is the tax extender legislation.\n  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report the motion.\n\n[[Page S6870]]\n\n  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 627, H.R. 5771, a bill to\n     amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend certain\n     expiring provisions and make technical corrections, to amend\n     the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax\n     treatment of ABLE accounts established under State programs\n     for the care of family members with disabilities, and for\n     other purposes.\n\n                                Schedule\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, following my remarks and those of the\nRepublican leader, the Senate will resume executive session and vote on\nthe confirmation of the Santos and Rose nominations. Those will be done\nby voice.\n  Following disposition of the nominations, there will be up to 3 hours\nfor debate equally divided and controlled between the two leaders or\ntheir designees in relation to the Saldana nomination.\n  The time from 2:15 p.m. to 2:30 p.m. will be equally divided and\ncontrolled in the usual form, followed by two rollcall votes on cloture\nand confirmation of the Saldana nomination.\n  There will be our usual party caucuses today at noon. Rollcall votes\nwill occur for sure this evening at 6 p.m.\n\n                       Reservation of Leader Time\n\n  The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the leadership\ntime is reserved.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6869", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Senate", "SENATE", "SENATE", "CALLTOORDER", "S6869", "S6869", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6869", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6869]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[[Page S6869]]\n\nSenate\n\n  The Senate met at 10 a.m. and was called to order by the President\npro tempore (Mr. Leahy).\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6870-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Vote on Rose Nomination (Executive Session)", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECSESSION", "S6870", "S6870", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6870", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6870]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        Vote on Rose Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate on the Rose\nnomination, the question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the\nnomination of Frank A. Rose, of Massachusetts, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of State (Verification and Compliance)?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motions to\nreconsider are considered made and laid upon the table, and the\nPresident will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6870-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "CLOTURE MOTION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCLOTURE", "S6870", "S6872", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6870", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6870-S6872]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                             CLOTURE MOTION\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there is 3 hours of\ndebate equally divided in the usual form on the motion to invoke\ncloture on the Saldana nomination.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, it would probably be appropriate that I\nsuggest the absence of a quorum but ask unanimous consent that the time\nbe divided equally.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. REID. This would be during all quorum calls today--because there\nwill be several of them--that the time be divided equally on the\nSaldana matter.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum\ncall be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, more than 3 months ago I was proud to\nintroduce a fellow Texan, Sarah Saldana, to the Homeland Security and\nGovernmental Affairs Committee in connection with her nomination to\nbecome the Nation's top immigration enforcement official, a position\nimportant to our country and particularly to Texas.\n  Ms. Saldana was born in Corpus Christi, TX, and became the first\nLatina U.S. attorney in Texas history and only the second woman to hold\nthat position in the 135-year history of Texas, in the northern\ndistrict, a region that includes the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex, spans\n100 counties, and stretches across 95,000 square miles. I, along with\nformer Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, was proud to support her\nnomination to that important job.\n  In her role as U.S. attorney and previously as a line prosecutor,\nSarah Saldana has fought public corruption. She has fought organized\ncrime, sex traffickers and other dangerous criminals. She has also\nprosecuted numerous high-profile public corruption cases, including the\nvery publicized corruption trial that resulted in the conviction of the\nformer Dallas mayor pro tem, Don Hill, and the ongoing case against\nDallas county commissioner John Wiley Price--both members of her\npolitical party--which put her in some disfavor, as you might imagine,\nin Democratic political circles. But it was something which\ndemonstrated to me that she was a person of courage and conviction and\nshe believed in enforcing the law beyond purely deferring to personal\npolitical interests.\n  Throughout her career she has developed an outstanding reputation,\nand based on her qualifications alone, we would be hard-pressed to find\na person better suited for the job at Immigration and Customs\nEnforcement than Sarah Saldana.\n  Unfortunately, the President changed everything this last November by\nhis Executive action on immigration. To be clear--I have said this\nbefore on the floor, but I will just repeat--I believe the President's\nactions are beyond his constitutional authority and are a reckless\npolitical stunt.\n  Here are the sorts of things the President is claiming to do. The\nDepartment of Homeland Security has issued a series of directives\npursuant to the President's instructions on November 21, doing\neverything from repealing the Secure Communities Program, by which\nlocal law enforcement cooperates with Immigration and Customs\nEnforcement and when a person is arrested who also is in the country\nillegally, they are detained by local law enforcement, even though they\nhave served their time or otherwise are subject to release so that ICE\ncan come pick them up and return them to their country of origin. The\nPresident's Executive action and the Department of Homeland Security\ndirectives pursuant to that eliminate the Secure Communities Program.\n  It also purports to prioritize immigration enforcement according to\nthree priorities. The problem is these add even more confusion to what\nis already an indecipherable and confusing mess, and it also puts to\nthe lowest priority people who have been convicted of crimes such as\nchild abuse, stalking, theft, some child pornography offenses,\npossession, distribution of alcohol to minors, hit-and-run, including\nsome hate crimes, property destruction, false imprisonment, some\nabduction offenses and the like. In other words, the President's\npriorities for immigration enforcement really represent a wholesale\n\n[[Page S6871]]\n\nchange in the law--if they were actually authorized. Until they are set\naside by a court or if Congress were to repeal them along with what\nwould require a Presidential signature, they are the standing\nrequirement for any Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement.\nThe President, purportedly, also used his authority to issue work\npermits for millions of people illegally in the country. While I don't\nbelieve our country would ever engage in mass deportation, the fact\nthat the President has usurped the authority of Congress and purports\nto take on the authority to issue work permits to people illegally in\nthe country to me is mind boggling.\n  This is the situation into which the President has put a good and\ndecent person such as Sarah Saldana. The President has put the next\nDirector of Immigration and Customs Enforcement in an untenable\nposition. When confirmed, she will be the principal enforcer of our\nimmigration laws. Unfortunately, she now claims the President was\noperating within his legal authority to issue this Executive action. I\nsay that because several Senators on the Senate Judiciary Committee\nissued written questions to the nominee about this Executive action,\nand it is clear in her responses that Ms. Saldana has wholeheartedly\nembraced the President's Executive action and claims that it is within\nhis authority.\n  If you think about it, a Presidential nominee has two choices. They\ncan either say, well, I disagree with what the President has done, so I\nwill refuse to serve, or if they are already confirmed, I am going to\nresign my position, or they can embrace the President's policies,\nbecause the President is the one who makes those policies. Clearly, Ms.\nSaldana has embraced the President's policies, which I believe are\nunconstitutional.\n  I believe we should be deeply concerned about the damage the\nPresident's Executive actions will do to our already broken immigration\nsystem because they reinforce the dangerous message that the President\nis already sending to the world that our laws against illegal\nimmigration will not be enforced. This is an invitation for\nlawlessness, and it will make it much more likely that we will\nexperience further humanitarian crises and a surge of illegal\nimmigration such as we saw last spring and which we have seen this year\nwith more than 60,000 unaccompanied children coming from Central\nAmerica through Mexico to our southern border. So the President's\npolicies are a green light, and, unfortunately, Ms. Saldana has\nembraced those policies.\n  I believe that the recent election was a mandate for us to work\ntogether on bipartisan solutions to our country's biggest challenges,\nbut apparently the President didn't get the memo. I was actually at a\nlunch at the White House with other leaders of both parties across the\nCapitol where Speaker Boehner, the incoming majority leader and I, and\nthe current majority leader said to the President: Please don't do\nthis. Don't poison the well. Give us a chance to do our job as the new\nmajority in the House and the Senate to try to pass consensus\nimmigration reform bills and put them on your desk. The President\nignored that. So the President chose to poison the well and to make it\nharder for us to do what we know we all have to do; and that is to fix\nour broken immigration system to the best of our ability.\n\n  The President's reckless Executive actions have done further damage.\nThey are deeply unfair to people who have been waiting patiently in\nline according to the written immigration laws--the people who have\nbeen playing by the rules. To allow millions of people simply to jump\nahead of those people who have been waiting patiently in line and\nplaying by the rules is profoundly unfair. At a time when our economy\nis starting to recover from the financial crisis in 2008 and the\npolicies that have intervened, we know that there is potential harm to\nhard-working middle class families who are already living on stagnant\nwages and a rising cost of living to have millions more people eligible\nfor work permits under the President's purported authority in these\nExecutive actions. We ought to be careful about that, we ought to be\ndeliberative about that, and we ought to make sure we are doing the\nsorts of things that will protect--not harm--hard-working middle class\nfamilies. But the President has ignored all that and just done it his\nway.\n  Well, some pundits have suggested perhaps the President's real goal\nwas to provoke Republicans to taking the bait and descending into\nfurther dysfunction. Well, if I heard one message from my constituents\nand people as I campaigned for reelection in Texas, it is that people\nreally want us to work together. They want this place to function. In\nmany instances they don't care so much about what we do, as long as we\ndo something to work together. Of course, they care about what we do,\nand there are areas where we disagree. But there are areas of common\nground where we can work together to solve these problems. We are not\ngoing to take the bait if that is what the President's intention was,\nand we are not going to descend into even more dysfunction. That would\nbe a repudiation of the message and mandate the voters sent to us on\nNovember 4.\n  So we are going to plow ahead. When the new majority takes place on\nJanuary 6, working with our colleagues in the House, working with our\ncolleagues across the aisle, we are going to try to find places where\nwe can pass bipartisan immigration legislation--not in a comprehensive\nfashion but in a step-by-step fashion to try to make some progress to\nimprove our broken immigration system.\n  I am most concerned about the precedent the President's actions would\nset for our system of government. What if future Presidents take upon\nthemselves the claimed authority to issue other Executive actions that\nignore the separation of powers and allocation of responsibilities\ngiven to the different branches of government under our Constitution?\nIt is a dangerous precedent. If the President cannot be trusted to\nenforce the laws passed by the people's elected representatives, then\nself-governance is an illusion. This is very dangerous.\n  The American people should never stand for rule by Executive fiat,\nand they should demand the rule of law be enforced under our\nConstitution. The President's frustration with the Republican House of\nRepresentatives is no justification for doing what he has done. He\nneeds to give us an opportunity to do our job, and he needs to join us\nat the negotiating table to make progress on our broken immigration\nsystem.\n  Although I admire Ms. Saldana, I fear she will be tasked with\ncarrying out the implementation of the President's unconstitutional\nExecutive actions, refusing to enforce our immigration laws.\nUnfortunately, when given the chance to address the constitutionality\nof these actions with the Judiciary Committee, these fears were not\nalleviated. Members of the committee were denied a chance to ask her\nquestions during an open confirmation hearing, something several\nprevious nominees for this position have undergone.\n  As a matter of fact, Senator Grassley, the ranking Republican on the\nJudiciary Committee, and I invited Ms. Saldana to appear at an informal\nquestion-and-answer session, since the chairman of the Judiciary\nCommittee denied us an opportunity to have a formal hearing, so she\ncould perhaps answer our questions and clarify her position--the\nposition she took in the written answers to the questions for the\nrecord, which I referred to earlier.\n  I don't know whether she got bad advice or whether she, herself,\ndecided it would be a futile effort, but she decided not to appear for\nthat informal give-and-take.\n  Maybe it would have helped her clarify her answers to the questions\nsent by the committee, maybe not. Maybe she would have stood by her\nanswers, but we will never know.\n  It is for these reasons I regrettably cannot support her nomination.\nMs. Saldana, as I said, is somebody whom I admire and respect, but if\nshe is determined to help the President implement this deeply flawed\nExecutive action and refuses to enforce the law Congress has written\nand has been signed by previous Presidents, I cannot support her\nnomination.\n  I will not aid and abet a President dead set on unilaterally defying\nour Nation's immigration laws.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.\n\n[[Page S6872]]\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6870", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Vote on Santos Nomination (Executive Session)", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECSESSION", "S6870", "S6870", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6870", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6870]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       Vote on Santos Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there is no further debate on the Santos\nnomination, the question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the\nnomination of Daniel J. Santos, of Virginia, to be a Member of the\nDefense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board?\n  The nomination was confirmed."], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6872", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF SARAH R. SALDANA TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6872", "S6883", "[{\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mitch McConnell\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mike Lee\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Robert Menendez\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Tim Kaine\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Thomas R. Carper\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Thune\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jeff Merkley\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Sherrod Brown\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mazie K. Hirono\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"212\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6872", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6872-S6883]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nNOMINATION OF SARAH R. SALDANA TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HOMELAND\n                                SECURITY\n\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Chair\nreport the Saldana nomination, Calendar No. 1084.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The legislative clerk read the nomination of Sarah R. Saldana, of\nTexas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, my colleague from Texas has just stepped\noff the floor. He has spoken at some length about his position on this\nnomination. With the utmost respect for my colleague from Texas, I wish\nto address the same issue.\n  We disagree on many political issues, but we are truly friends, and\nwe work together on the Senate Judiciary Committee. I respect him very\nmuch, even though we disagree on this issue. I just wanted to express\nmy respect for the senior Senator from Texas before I speak about the\nnominee to be Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security.\n  I am at a loss to explain the position of the Senator from Texas and\nthe Republican Party of America when it comes to the issue of\nimmigration. What are we to make of what they tell us when we talk\nabout immigration? Without fail, they say to us: First and foremost, we\nmust have enforcement at our borders. Once we have secured our borders\nfrom the inflow of illegal immigrants, then--and only then--can we\ndiscuss fixing our broken immigration system.\n  How often have we heard that? I have heard it every time the\nRepublicans address the issue of immigration: First, fix the border,\nand then we will talk.\n  It was about 540 days ago--on the floor of the Senate--when we called\nup an immigration reform bill for consideration. That immigration\nreform bill was put together--a comprehensive bill--by Democrats and\nRepublicans. I was one of eight who helped to put that bill together.\nWe sat down for months and negotiated that bill.\n  The Republican side of the table had John McCain of Arizona, former\nRepublican candidate for President; Jeff Flake of Arizona, a border\nState Senator with passionate feelings about this issue; Marco Rubio,\none of the two Hispanic Members of the Republican Senate caucus; and\nLindsey Graham of South Carolina, a man who is an attorney, works in\nthe Air Force Reserve in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, and is a\nconservative by every measure. Those were our four on the Republican\nside. On the Democratic side we had Senator Charles Schumer, chairman\nof the Senate immigration subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee; Bob\nMenendez, of the Presiding Officer's State of New Jersey and a Hispanic\nleader; Michael Bennet of Colorado; and myself.\n  We negotiated not for weeks but for months. We laboriously went\nthrough every aspect of immigration in America, and, to the amazement\nof ourselves as well as the public, we reached an agreement, a\ncompromise. I was not happy with parts of the bill. Some of it I didn't\nlike at all, and I thought other parts were excellent. That is the\nnature of a compromise.\n  We brought this bill to the Senate Judiciary Committee and opened it\nup for amendment. We said to Republicans and Democrats alike: Improve\nit if you can. There were scores of amendments that were offered in\nthat committee.\n\n  The bill was favorably reported from the Senate Judiciary Committee\nand came to the floor of the Senate, where once again it was amended.\nOne amendment, offered by Senator Corker of Tennessee and Senator\nHoeven of North Dakota, Republicans, dramatically increased border\nenforcement.\n  We currently spend more on immigration enforcement than on all other\nFederal law enforcement efforts combined. We have made a huge\ncommitment, and the Hoeven-Corker amendment increased it with 700 miles\nof fences, more personnel than ever, to the point where they could\nliterally have an agent every 1,000 feet along the southern border.\n  Are we serious about border enforcement in our comprehensive bill?\nYes, we are. We adopted the Hoeven-Corker amendment. Although some said\nwe were overdoing it, we adopted it in the spirit of compromise and\noffered it on the floor for passage. On the final vote, we had 68\nSenators who voted in favor of comprehensive immigration reform. There\nwere 14 Republicans who voted for it, along with the Democrats, which\nmade a majority of 68, and we passed the comprehensive immigration\nreform bill.\n  Sadly, the senior Senator from Texas voted no. He voted no on\ncomprehensive immigration reform. We did our job. We had a bill\nendorsed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO. This bill was\nendorsed by faith leaders all across the United States and had the\nsupport of the civil rights community as well as conservatives such as\nGrover Norquist. We passed it. It is what the Constitution said we had\nto do.\n  We sent it through the Rotunda and across the Capitol to the House of\nRepresentatives, where it fell into this dark and gloomy pit never to\nbe seen again. We have waited about 540 days now for the House of\nRepresentatives to at least acknowledge it, maybe even debate it,\nperhaps change it or even offer it on the floor of the House of\nRepresentatives, but no, they chose to do nothing. In the view of the\nHouse of Representatives, we have a broken immigration system. Yet they\ndecided to leave it untouched.\n  So the President said time and again to Speaker Boehner: When are you\ngoing to accept your responsibility when it comes to fixing this broken\nimmigration system?\n  The Speaker kept saying: Give me some time. Give me some time. Give\nme some time.\n  Eighteen months passed, and the President said: I am sorry. I have to\ndo something. If you are going to do nothing in the House of\nRepresentatives when it comes to immigration, I must do something as\nPresident.\n  He went into an effort--I know because we spoke--of research to\ndetermine what previous Presidents had done when it came to immigration\nby Executive action. He started off somewhat skeptical, and he said as\nmuch publicly, as to the limits of what he could do.\n  He said: I need to carefully research this, and he did. He found that\nsome 11 Presidents have engaged in Executive action on immigration, and\nso he set out to do the same, to carefully construct Executive action\nto deal with our broken immigration system, all the while knowing the\nRepublicans in the House of Representatives, and many here in the\nSenate, were going to do nothing when it came to immigration.\n  He issued his Executive action a few weeks ago. What did it say? It\nsaid: If you have been in the United States at least 5 years and come\nforward and register with this government by giving us your name, your\naddress, and vital information, we will then submit you to an extensive\ncriminal background check to determine whether you have done anything\nwhile in the United States or before that makes you ineligible to stay.\nIf you fail that initial criminal review, you are gone--no questions\nasked. But if you pass it and are prepared to register with this\ngovernment and pay your fair share of taxes for working in the United\nStates, you will be given a temporary work permit that must be renewed,\nas we review every several years whether you are still eligible to\nstay. That is the Executive action that has driven the Republicans to\ndistraction.\n  The notion is that this President is going to try to fix a broken\nimmigration system by at least guaranteeing that those who are here\nworking legally have no criminal background problems and are paying\ntheir fair share of taxes. They are so distraught over this that they\nhave come up with a strategy that is incredible.\n  The Republican Party, which has insisted time and time again that\nborder enforcement is their highest priority, have--in protest to this\nExecutive action by the President--decided to do two things. First,\nthey passed a spending bill in the House of Representatives which\nfunded all of the Federal Government with a budget for the next year\nexcept for one agency. Which agency would that have been? It turned out\nto be the Department of Homeland Security, which is responsible for\nborder enforcement. The party that is dedicated\n\n[[Page S6873]]\n\nto border enforcement as the starting point for an immigration\ndiscussion starts off by tying the hands of the agency responsible for\nborder enforcement when it comes to their budget.\n  Why would you do that? If you truly want the border enforced and you\nwant people there doing their job, why would you limit their resources?\nWhy would you make it more difficult for them to operate? But the\nRepublicans--in protest of the President's decision--insisted on it.\nThat was the first thing they did, and now we are seeing the second\npart of the Republican strategy, which is in protest to the President's\nExecutive action.\n  They are prepared to stop the nomination of Sarah Saldana to become\nan Assistant Secretary leading U.S. Immigration and Customs\nEnforcement. That title describes what she would do, but for the record\nshe would be responsible for making certain that the people who are\nprotecting our border are doing their job right and spending their\nmoney well, and it turns out she is eminently qualified to do it.\n  I will read a quote from Sarah Saldana's confirmation hearing:\n\n       Ms. Saldana [is] the first Latina United States Attorney in\n     Texas history, and only the second woman to hold that\n     position in the 135-year history of Texas' Northern District.\n     . . . In her role as U.S. Attorney and prosecutor over the\n     past decade, Ms. Saldana has served our state with honor--\n     fighting corrupt public officials, organized crime, sex\n     traffickers, and other dangerous criminals. Throughout her\n     career, Ms. Saldana has developed a reputation for her\n     decisive and fair temperament and her commitment to\n     excellence.\n\n  What is the source of this glowing tribute to Ms. Saldana? It turns\nout the source is the Senator who just left the floor, the senior\nSenator from Texas who announced today he is voting against her.\n  After making this statement, he is voting against her. Why? He said\nbecause she would aid and abet this President of the United States in\nimplementing his Executive action.\n  Elections have consequences. I noted that President Obama was\nreelected by the people of the United States of America and given the\nresponsibility to lead this great Nation. He has asked for a team to do\nthat, and whether I agree or disagree with any given policy of this\nPresident, it is clear the American people said: Mr. Obama, lead this\nNation.\n  He has asked for help to lead this Nation, and it is help long\noverdue. Do my colleagues know how long it has been since we filled\nthis critical spot to protect our border from unlawful immigration?\nOver 2 years. July of 2012 was the last time this spot was filled.\nThere have been objections to those people who have been suggested by\nthe President over and over again, by the same political party that\ninsists border enforcement is their highest priority. Yet they will not\nfund the agency responsible for it in a systematic, orderly way, and\nthey refuse to fill the vacancy of the person responsible for\nadministering this border enforcement.\n  I am at a loss to explain this. It appears to me their feelings about\nthis President have reached a point where they are not thinking\nclearly. They cannot announce on one hand that first we must have\nborder enforcement and then fail to fund the agency. They cannot\nannounce that first we need to make sure we stop the flow of\nundocumented immigrants and then refuse to fill the position\nresponsible for administering that responsibility. Yet that is exactly\nwhat they want to do today.\n  I hope good sense will prevail. I hope Ms. Saldana is given her\nchance to serve this Nation. I am certainly going to support her in\nthat process. It is time we have a Senate-confirmed head of this\nagency, and it is overdue for us as a Senate and a House of\nRepresentatives to address comprehensive immigration reform.\n  The Republicans who are critical of the President's Executive action\nwhen it comes to immigration, in the words we learned in law school, do\nnot have clean hands. They have failed to support immigration reform.\nThey have failed to call on the House of Representatives. They have\nfailed to fund the agency responsible for border enforcement, and they\nwant to fail today in even filling the spot to administer it.\nLeadership requires that we step forward with the President and do what\nis necessary.\n  I see the minority leader and my colleague from Utah are on the\nfloor. I will close by saying that President Obama, when he announced\nhis Executive action, said to his critics on the other side of the\naisle: There is a way to deal with this issue and to stop this\nExecutive action. Pass a bill.\n  We have waited over 500 days for the House of Representatives. I hope\nwe don't have to wait much longer.\n  I yield the floor.\n\n                   Recognition of the Minority Leader\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Republican leader is recognized.\n\n                       Honoring Our Armed Forces\n\n                      Staff Sergeant Daniel T. Lee\n\n  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, today I rise to honor the life of a\nbrave soldier in the U.S. Army Special Forces from Kentucky who gave\nhis life to defend his country. SSG Daniel T. Lee of Fort Wright, KY,\nwas killed on January 15, 2014, in Afghanistan from wounds received\nduring combat action in the Parwan Province while searching for\nmilitants wanted for recent attacks on Bagram Air Base. He was 28 years\nold.\n  For his service in uniform, Staff Sergeant Lee received many awards,\nmedals, and decorations, including the Bronze Star Medal, the Purple\nHeart, the Meritorious Service Medal, the Army Commendation Medal, the\nArmy Achievement Medal, the Army Good Conduct Medal, the National\nDefense Service Medal, the Afghanistan Campaign Medal, the Iraq\nCampaign Medal, the Global War on Terrorism Service Medal, two\nNoncommissioned Officers Professional Development Ribbons, the Army\nService Ribbon, two Overseas Service Ribbons, the NATO Medal, the\nCombat Infantryman Badge, the Basic Parachutist Badge, and a Special\nForces Tab.\n  Danny's mother Frances Lee has this to say about her son:\n\n       Danny became consumed with being all that he could be; not\n     only in Special Forces but as a father, husband, brother, and\n     son. He never lost his sense of humor and was rarely without\n     a smile. His smile was infectious even in dire times.\n\n  A northern Kentucky native, Danny's childhood was filled with\nfriends, family, and sports. He was a member of the Beechwood diving\nteam from the age of 5. In the eighth grade, he transferred to\nTurkeyfoot Junior High School and began playing football. He also\nplayed basketball, baseball, and softball.\n  Danny graduated from Dixie Heights High School in 2003 and moved to\nTennessee ``for a fresh start,'' says Danny's mother. He began working\nfor a Knoxville electrical company but soon moved to Lowe's hardware\nchain, where he got a job as a manager in Crossville, TN.\n  His mother said:\n\n       While in Crossville, he enlisted in the U.S. Army, a move\n     that took all of us by surprise. We packed up the house and\n     off he went to Fort Benning. He is the only person I have\n     ever heard say that he loved basic training!\n\n  After enlisting in the U.S. Army in October of 2007, Danny completed\nbasic training at Fort Benning. His first assignment was with the 2nd\nSquadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment at Fort Lewis, WA. While serving in the\n1st Cavalry Regiment, Danny deployed to Iraq in support of Operation\nIraqi Freedom in 2009.\n  Daniel's service in Iraq compelled him to join the elite ranks of\nsome of our finest fighters in the Armed Forces. Danny's mother said:\n\n       Upon his return from Iraq, he became a man with a mission.\n     That mission was to become a Special Forces Green Beret.\n\n  Danny began his Special Forces training in March of 2011 and\nultimately earned his Green Beret when he graduated as a Special Forces\ncommunication sergeant. To earn that Green Beret, Danny attended\nAirborne School at Fort Benning and went to Qualification School at\nFort Bragg, NC. For approximately 20 months he completed a series of\nrigorous classes covering skills and tactics such as languages,\nleadership, navigation, survival, evasion, resistance, and escape.\n  While in Qualification School, Danny also married his wife Suzanne,\nwhom he met while stationed at Fort Lewis. Danny graduated from Special\nForces training in May 2013, and he and Suzanne had a child, Daniel\nRoderick, in July of that same year.\n  In August 2013, Danny was assigned to C Company, 2nd Battalion, 3rd\nSpecial Forces Group, Airborne, based in Fort Bragg. In September of\nthat year,\n\n[[Page S6874]]\n\nhe was deployed to Afghanistan in support of Operation Enduring\nFreedom.\n  After Danny's death, the Kentucky General Assembly appropriately\ndesignated a portion of Kentucky Route 1072 in northern Kentucky's Kent\nCounty as the ``Sergeant Daniel Tyler Lee Memorial Highway.''\n  We are thinking of Danny's loved ones today as I recount his story\nfor my colleagues in the Senate, including his wife, Suzanne; his son,\nDaniel; his parents, Frances and Daniel Patrick Lee; his sister, Jamie\nHahn; and many other beloved family members and friends.\n  The motto of the U.S. Army Special Forces, of which Daniel T. Lee was\na proud member, is ``de oppresso liber'' or ``to liberate the\noppressed.''\n  As an elite member of the Nation's Armed Forces, with service in both\nIraq and in Afghanistan, Staff Sergeant Lee certainly fulfilled a\nmission to the best of his ability. The Commonwealth of Kentucky and\nthe U.S. Senate are both grateful for his service and for his\nsacrifice.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.\n  Mr. LEE. Mr. President, I rise in opposition to the nomination of\nSarah Saldana to be in charge of Immigration and Customs Enforcement\nwithin the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.\n  As we all know, the President of the United States recently announced\nhe will take unilateral Executive action on immigration. In so doing,\nhe has circumvented the democratic process, and he has broken the law\nand subverted our constitutional order.\n  It is incumbent on every Member of this body, no matter what their\npolitics or what immigration policies they might prefer to enact, to\noppose that usurpation of legislative power and to defend the rule of\nlaw. Fulfilling that duty--the duty to defend the rule of law and our\nconstitutional order--leads me to oppose Ms. Saldana's nomination to be\nthe Director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, as it is\ncommonly known. Although I respect her and respect her record of public\nservice, including an admirable and independent streak she demonstrated\nas U.S. attorney, I am concerned that she has also demonstrated that\nher commitment to the rule of law may falter where the Immigration and\nNationality Act is concerned.\n  In response to a question raised by several members of the Senate\nJudiciary Committee, including me, Ms. Saldana said that she agreed\nwith DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson that immigrants who enter the country\nillegally and have now been targeted for the so-called deferred action\nprogram have ``earned the right to be citizens.'' That is bold. This is\nan extraordinarily bold assertion on her part.\n  No doubt Congress could and many people think Congress should ease\nthe path to citizenship for some aliens, some immigrants who are\ncurrently here unlawfully, but to assert that citizenship--not just the\nright to remain here for a time but full-blown citizenship--is a matter\nof right and that it has been earned by the very act of breaking our\nimmigration laws is an unacceptable view for a person who has been\nnominated to be the head of our Nation's immigration enforcement\noffice, but, as I told the Senate last week, this seems to be precisely\nthe mentality of this administration.\n  Although President Obama has repeatedly denied clearing a path to\ncitizenship for those who have crossed our borders illegally, his\ndenial is false, and he knows it. A 2010 Department of Homeland\nSecurity memorandum explicitly contemplated this very thing. We see\nsome evidence of this. There was a 2010 memorandum within the U.S.\nDepartment of Homeland Security--one that made it all the way up to\nthen-Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano--that explicitly\ncontemplated using a legal device called parole to enable aliens who\ncrossed our border unlawfully to become citizens.\n  Now, the law makes it possible for aliens with U.S. citizen children\nwho have been paroled into the United States to adjust their\nimmigration status and become green card holders, but parole is\nsupposed to be very rare. In other words, there is a way to get here\nbut not by use of parole.\n  Federal law--specifically INA S. 212 (d)(5)(a)--forbids the\nPresident, forbids the executive branch of government from paroling\naliens into the country except for under very limited circumstances,\nincluding ``urgent humanitarian reasons or significant public\nbenefit.'' That is the text of the statute enacted into law by\nCongress. But now, despite denying having cleared the path to\ncitizenship, the administration has begun granting parole to\nbeneficiaries of deferred action under the very thinnest of pretexts:\nThe President's policies now allow deferred action recipients to get\nadvanced parole so long as they have a client meeting or an interview\nor some academic research to perform overseas--hardly an urgent\nhumanitarian crisis. When they get back from their trips, these same\nindividuals would then be paroled into the country and will eventually\nbecome eligible to adjust their status and get green cards--exactly as\nthe 2010 DHS memo suggested.\n  All of this, of course, is illegal. But it is worse than illegal; it\nis illegitimate. If Congress decides to make it easier for illegal\nimmigrants who have children here to obtain citizenship, then so be it,\nbut that is a decision for the American people through their elected\nofficials in the legislative branch of the Federal Government to make.\nIf the President dislikes the law, he, as any other citizen, must ask\nthis body to change the law--must ask Congress to change that law. He\nhas no more right than anyone else who lives in this country to ignore\nor change the law outside the constitutional process.\n  But the President and this administration have talked themselves into\ndoing just that. They can try to rationalize that action--to us and\nperhaps themselves--only by donning the mantle of moral indignation. It\nisn't just that it would be prudent or merciful to reform our\nimmigration regime. Instead, the administration's argument is that\nthose who flout our laws have, by the very act of flouting them and by\nthe very act of breaking them, earned some kind of moral entitlement to\nhave the law changed or at least to have the law ignored. If Congress\nwill not oblige them, they will do it themselves. They will draft a law\ncalled an Executive order that overturns national immigration policy as\nestablished by law and passed by Congress, and they will announce it at\na press conference. There will be no debate; there will be no\namendments; there will be no vote. In short, there will be no\ndemocracy.\n  We have passed through the looking glass. And to see how far we have\ngone inside, observe: Today, the President asks us to install as\ncustodian of our border a person who evidently believes that crossing\nour border illegally earns you the right to vote. The Constitution\ngives the Senate the responsibility to give the President advice about\nhis Executive nominations and ultimately consent.\n  My advice is this: The President should not proffer a nominee for the\njob of executing our immigration laws who affirmatively supports\nsubverting those very same laws, those same laws she would be called\nupon to enforce and implement and execute if, in fact, she were\nconfirmed to this position. But that is exactly what the President\ndoes. That is exactly what the President has done by submitting this\nname to the Senate for confirmation. I cannot and will not give my\nconsent.\n  With that, I yield the floor.\n  I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Schatz). The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                                 Cyprus\n\n  Mr. MENENDEZ. Mr. President, I come to the floor to speak on two\nseparate and distinct topics. The first is about Cyprus.\n  This year marks the 40th anniversary of the Turkish invasion. We\nhoped it would have brought a fair settlement to the Cyprus question;\nthat would have brought an end to a 40-year-long occupation and\ndivision of the island by Turkey.\n  There is always cause for optimism and room for faith that the\nrealization of a reunified Cyprus is in the near future. Global and\nregional dynamics\n\n[[Page S6875]]\n\nhave made the reunification of Cyprus a priority, driven in part by\nCyprus's newly found energy resources. This is particularly true in\nlight of Russia's Machiavellian-like power plays in Central Europe that\nhave placed Cyprus and Israel at the forefront of the discussion of\nEuropean energy security.\n  The natural resources that have been discovered this year in the\neastern Mediterranean offer both Greek and Turkish Cypriots alike a\npowerful incentive to reach an agreement. Cyprus can play a pivotal\nrole in regional energy security. But the dynamics have again changed,\nwhich is why I rise today to express my grave concern over the Republic\nof Turkey's incursion into Cyprus's exclusive economic zone.\n  On October 20, Turkey sent a Russian vessel--the Barbaros--into\nCyprus's exclusive economic zone to stop the Government of Cyprus from\nexercising its lawful and sovereign right to explore the natural gas\nwithin the exclusive economic zone. In the days following, Turkey\ndispatched warships to support the Barbaros in its illegal activities,\nwhere they remain to this day.\n  The incident is merely the latest in a long series of violations on\nthe part of Turkey against Cyprus's sovereign right to explore and\nexploit its natural resources within its own exclusive economic zone.\nTurkey, of course, also illegally occupies, with 40,000 Turkish troops,\nthe northern portion of the island and has for 40 years prevented any\nmeaningful reconciliation efforts.\n  This map, from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration,\nshows the positions of the Turkish ships in red. They are sitting\nbetween the island of Cyprus and its own ships in its own exclusive\neconomic zone.\n  There is no doubt in my mind that Turkey's actions have endangered\npeace talks between the Greek and Turkish Cypriots that began in\nFebruary with a joint communique issued by the two communities. That\ncommunique committed to finding a durable solution based on a bizonal,\nbicommunal federation with political equality. But because of Turkey's\nbullying practices, peace talks are now on hold. For peace talks to\nresume, Turkey must immediately withdraw its ships operating in and\naround Cyprus.\n  The international community has been abundantly clear in supporting\nCypriot President Nicos Anastasiades in recognizing Cyprus's right to\nexplore the resources within its economic zone and in condemning Turkey\nfor this blatant violation.\n  On November 13, the European Parliament adopted a resolution strongly\ncondemning Turkey's ``illegal and provocative actions'' in Cyprus,\nstressing that ``the Republic of Cyprus has the full and sovereign\nright to explore the natural resources within its exclusive economic\nzone.''\n  Turkey's recent actions in Cyprus are only one instance of its\nbelligerent and bellicose rhetoric and backsliding on peace and\ndemocracy. In recent weeks, President Erdogan and his Cabinet have used\nunusually belligerent and anti-Western rhetoric to attack the West. He\nactually said--and I am amazed at the rhetoric:\n\n       Americans look like friends but they want us dead--they\n     like seeing our children die.\n\n  He said: They like seeing our children die. This is the President of\nTurkey. He also said:\n\n       Women are not equal to men. Our religion has defined a\n     position for women: motherhood.\n\n  Erdogan said this at a summit in Istanbul on justice for women.\n  He went on to say:\n\n       Some people can understand this, while others can't. You\n     cannot explain this to feminists because they don't accept\n     the concept of motherhood.\n\n  He then went on so far as to say that Muslims discovered America, not\nColumbus.\n  He has vowed to make lessons in the Arabic alphabet Ottoman language\ncompulsory in high schools--a highly symbolic move which enraged\nsecularists who proclaim he is assuming an increasingly extremist\nagenda.\n  These statements, along with Turkey's illegal actions in Cyprus's\nexclusive economic zone, are a dramatic escalation of Turkey shifting\naway from democracy and its partners in the West, and in my view\nrequires an immediate and forceful response.\n  The Cypriot people need a strong voice on this issue. They need us to\ndemand President Erdogan to immediately withdraw from Cyprus's\nexclusive economic zone so reunification talks can resume.\n  Cyprus's leaders deserve credit for trying to change the dynamics and\nreturn to talks. They also deserve credit for being an ally and\nadvocate of America's interests.\n  Cyprus's active role in supporting counterterrorism efforts, terror\nfinancing, and the removal of chemical weapons from Syria have not gone\nunnoticed to this Senator. Cyprus is clearly positioning itself as part\nof the Western security architecture and is a resource, advocate, and\nan ally for our interests.\n  These developments have led the White House to play an active role on\nbehalf of Cyprus, and I was very pleased to see our former colleague\nand now Vice President--Vice President Biden--visit in May and to hear\nof his commitment to resolving the Cyprus question. I share his support\nfor the confidence-building measures in Famagusta that would benefit\nboth sides and accelerate progress toward a final settlement where\nCypriots control their destiny and their territory, and where at the\nend of the day any settlement is from the people of Cyprus, by the\npeople of Cyprus, and for the people of Cyprus, and Cyprus alone.\n\n  To that end, I recently sent a letter to President Obama urging his\ncontinued engagement on the issue of reunification of the island and\nthe restoration of human rights for all its citizens. I also wrote to\nAmbassador Power urging her active involvement in the extension of the\nisland's U.N. peacekeeping operation, and I was pleased when the\nextension was formalized at the end of July.\n  I hope President Erdogan, now that his election is behind him, will\nuse this opportunity to play a renewed role in finding a fair\nsettlement. We all appreciate that any progress will depend on a true\ncommitment by the Turks to the peace process.\n  As the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, I believe the\nUnited States is committed to supporting Cyprus as a friend and ally.\nSo as we mark the 40th year of a divided Cyprus, let us hope and pray\nthat a fair and mutually beneficial settlement will be reached very\nsoon and that, once again, the island will be reunited. Above all, let\nthe warship and let the other ships that do not belong in Cyprus's\nwaters be removed and removed now.\n  Mr. President, at this time, I would like to switch the topic to the\nnomination of Sarah Saldana, and I want to reiterate my strong support\nfor Sarah Saldana, a woman eminently qualified to serve our country and\nto lead ICE as our next Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security.\n  The junior Senator from Texas began this long legislative weekend\nengaged in his own political battle, wholly dependent on a strategy of\nobstructionism, delay, and some quixotic fixation on preventing the\nSenate from exercising its constitutional responsibility to legislate\nand ensure that critical leadership positions for our Nation are filed\nin a timely manner.\n  Unfortunately, some of my friends on the other side have joined in\nthe politics of obstructionism. Now they want to prevent a duly elected\nPresident from filling a position they themselves feel is of paramount\nimportance. They have railed about the need for strong Immigration and\nCustoms Enforcement; and now, given the chance finally to confirm a\nDirector of ICE to give them the strong enforcement they have demanded,\nthey refuse, they obstruct, they delay, and they reverse their\npositions from when they voted for her to be a U.S. attorney. They now\nuse her nomination to score political points with their base because\nthey disagree with the President's politics--not with the\nqualifications of the nominee, but with the President's policies.\n  Sarah Saldana is qualified, and Senators Cruz, Cornyn, Sessions, and\neveryone on the other side of the aisle know it. I think they have said\nso themselves. She currently serves as the U.S. Attorney for the\nNorthern District of Texas. She is the first Latina U.S. Attorney for\nthe Northern District of Texas and would be the first Latina to head\nICE.\n  In 2011, she won bipartisan approval to serve as the U.S. Attorney in\nthe Dallas-based Northern District of Texas. Senators John Cornyn and\nKay Bailey Hutchison at that time of Texas\n\n[[Page S6876]]\n\nbacked her for that post. She has been endorsed by the law enforcement\ncommunity, including the Major Cities Chiefs Association president and\nthe Philadelphia Police Department Police Commissioner Charles Ramsey.\n  She is an effective, qualified, competent, outstanding U.S. attorney.\nIn fact, the senior Senator from Texas, my friend Senator Cornyn, has\npraised her as being ``tough, smart and fiercely independent.'' Now she\nis being denied confirmation for that same toughness, intelligence, and\nindependence. Why? Because--surprise of all surprises--she happens to\nagree with the policies of the President who nominated her; just as\nAttorney General Herbert Brownell agreed with President Eisenhower in\n1956 when he paroled foreign-born orphans into the United States for\nadoption; just as Attorney General Edward Levi agreed with President\nGerald Ford in 1976 when he granted extended voluntary departure to\nLebanese citizens; just as Ed Meese agreed with Ronald Reagan in July\nof 1987 when he shielded Nicaraguan refugees from deportation, and\nlater when he shielded Polish nationals from deportation; and in\nOctober 1987 when President Reagan protected from deportation the minor\nchildren of parents legalized in the 1986 immigration law; just as\nAttorney General Richard Thornburgh agreed with George Herbert Walker\nBush in November of 1989 when he protected Chinese nationals from\ndeportation after Tiananmen Square, and in February of 1990 when\nPresident Bush extended President Reagan's family fairness policy to\nspouses and unmarried children, all undocumented at the time; and just\nas John Ashcroft agreed with President George W. Bush when he expedited\nnationalization for green-card holders who enlisted in the military in\n2002.\n  So this isn't a fundamental Republican policy issue backed by history\nor by the facts, it is a modern-day extreme conservative issue driven\nby politics, despite the facts contrary to their own history. The fact\nis they do not agree with the President on just about anything--\ncertainly not on immigration, as proven by the statements we have heard\non this floor.\n  I want to be very clear. We cannot judge the qualifications of Sarah\nSaldana to run Immigration and Customs Enforcement based solely on the\nfact she agrees with the policy decisions of the President who\nnominated her. That is an absurd and completely illogical standard. We\njudge nominees based on their qualifications, their integrity, their\nrecord, and their willingness to serve the Nation.\n  The fact is we don't deny confirmation to score political points. We\nmay disagree on the issues, but we cannot raise the political bar so\nhigh in this Chamber that we no longer are able to carry out our\nconstitutional mandate of advice and consent. I don't believe that is\nwhat my colleagues will suggest, but that appears to be how they are\njudging this nominee and why they have chosen to hold up confirmation\nof so many nominees. They have raised the political bar so high as to\ndeny any ability for this President to fill key positions in government\nand in our embassies abroad--all to score political points and diminish\nthe ability of this President and this institution of government.\n\n  Sarah Saldana is more than qualified to head Immigration and Customs\nEnforcement. She is more than qualified to oversee the agency my\nRepublican colleagues fully support, which is responsible for\nenforcement of immigration laws, national security, drug smuggling,\nhuman trafficking, cyber security, and child exploitation.\n  She will direct the agency that tracks down people without\ndocumentation--that is what my Republican friends want. Yet they have\nset the political bar so high that they have made it impossible for\nthem to get what they claim to want most when it comes to immigration\npolicy--that is immigration enforcement. The illogic of their position\nis just mind boggling.\n  The Senator from Texas comes to this floor for one purpose, and one\npurpose only, in my view--to rail against the President, to castigate\nhim for doing what his own party's iconic Ronald Reagan did when he was\nPresident, George H.W. Bush did when he was President, and what every\nPresident has done to defer deportations when keeping people's lives\nand families together were in the balance.\n  My friend from Texas wants to join his House colleagues and score\npolitical points with the most extreme elements of his party. So be it.\nBut I wish to remind everyone that this isn't a game. I would say to\nthe junior Senator from Texas that instead of floor theatrics and\nplaying politics, it is time to step up and govern. It is time to\nconfirm Sarah Saldana and put her in charge of Immigration and Customs\nEnforcement. Let's do the work we were sent here to do.\n  I say to my friend from Texas what I have said before on this floor.\nThere is a simple antidote to Executive action. It is to have our\nfriends in the House of Representatives pass immigration reform. Pass\nit. Call it up for a vote. That is the end of it--not disinformation\nand misleading speeches about what the President's action does and does\nnot do or blocking this nominee.\n  Let's be clear. The President's Executive action will not grant\nanyone legal status or citizenship. It is not a free pass. But it will\nclear the way for many to come forth out of the shadows, register with\nthe government, pass a criminal background check, get a work permit,\npay taxes, and no longer live in fear of having their families ripped\napart.\n  As a result of the President's actions--which is replicated actions\nby 11 Presidents for the last 60 years on 39 different times--more\nBorder Patrol will be sent to the southern border, more felons will be\ndeported, more people will pay taxes like the rest of us, and more\nfamilies will stay together. Those are all goals and values I think we\nwould want to espouse.\n  The fact is, the Senate is being prevented from conducting the\npeople's business. For some Members that is the goal. For them it is\nall or nothing. For them it is an ideological war that can only be won\nor lost. For them it is not about governing; it is about winning.\n  So I would say to my colleagues, there is a very important\ndifference, and that difference is the basis of millions of Americans\nwho expect us to work for them. They don't care if we win or lose\npolitical battles. They want us to help them with their battles in\ntheir lives for their families. That is what they want. It is what they\ndeserve. I ask my friends to help us do the people's business.\n  Our agencies have waited long enough. They need positions filled by\nqualified appointees, and Sarah Saldana is more than qualified. So I\nurge my colleagues to confirm this nominee and fill the position that\nis responsible for law enforcement activities that keep our country\nsafe.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia.\n\n                Authorization For Use Of Military Force\n\n  Mr. KAINE. Mr. President, I wish to discuss the work that Congress\nstill must do regarding America's ongoing war against ISIL, and I am\nglad to follow my colleague, the chairman of the Senate Foreign\nRelations Committee, who has played such a critical role in initiating\nthe first major step that Congress has taken. I want to talk about that\nstep and the steps in which we would continue to engage.\n  It was my strong hope as of December 2014 that Congress would have\nspoken by now with a clear voice regarding ISIL and authorizing the\nmilitary action commenced by President Obama on August 8. While that\nhas not occurred, action taken by the Senate Foreign Relations\nCommittee last week finally moves the body into the sort of good-faith\nlegislative process regarding this ongoing military action, and it is\nmy hope the process will be completed early in 2015.\n  I first began speaking about this issue in the spring of 2013. I had\ngrown deeply concerned that the administration, as did the previous\nadministration, was using the 2001 Al Qaeda authorization and the 2002\nIraq authorization to justify military actions significantly beyond\nwhat Congress had intended when those authorizations passed. So during\nan Armed Services hearing in May 2013, I told administration witnesses\nthat any decision to introduce U.S. forces into Syria would require, in\nmy view, a new authorization.\n  I was pleased when President Obama sought congressional approval for\nmilitary action in Syria in August 2013, and\n\n[[Page S6877]]\n\nI believe the Senate Foreign Relations Committee vote at that time\nhelped lead to the ultimate destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons\nstockpile--one of the largest stockpiles in the world.\n  There is an important lesson. The President's determination that U.S.\nmilitary action is necessary is made more powerful when Congress joins\nin that decision.\n  In June of this year, when it became apparent that the advances of\nISIL in Iraq and Syria posed a threat to humanitarian values, to\nregional allies, to U.S. citizens and embassies and to our broader\nnational interests, I publicly argued and encouraged the administration\nto address the threat--but only using military force after consultation\nand approval by Congress.\n\n  Make no mistake. ISIL is a major threat. But Presidents cannot\nconstitutionally start military action without Congress unless there is\na direct and imminent threat to the United States.\n  In this instance, with ISIL's activities occurring halfway across the\nglobe and with the administration admitting that the organization poses\nno imminent threat of attacking the United States, a new congressional\nauthorization is necessary.\n  Now, I regret that the administration started military action--what\nPresident Obama called going on offense against ISIL--in August without\ncongressional approval. The White House asserts that the current action\nis justified by the 2001 and 2002 authorizations, but most outside\nobservers and most Members of Congress believe the current campaign\nagainst ISIL needs its own legal authorization. The White House has not\nproposed authorizing language, and so it is up to Congress to do the\njob of providing a legal framework for this war.\n  I introduced a proposed authorization for war against ISIL within\ndays after President Obama addressed the Nation on television on the\nevening of September 10. Since then, I have been working to have the\nmatter heard--first in the Foreign Relations Committee and then by the\nfull Senate. I have been greatly assisted in my effort by many\ncolleagues, none more so than the chairman, Senator Menendez, who has\npassionately worked to advance this item in the business of the Senate.\n  The pace of our efforts has been frustratingly slow. But last week,\nafter a series of hearings and business meetings, the Senate Foreign\nRelations Committee voted on an authorization to authorize the ongoing\nmilitary action.\n  The authorization is a sound product that does a number of things.\nFirst, it authorizes and describes the military campaign against ISIL.\nSecond, it establishes a 3-year duration of the authorization, with the\nability for reauthorization if the Congress determines it to be in the\nnational interests. Third, the authorization repeals the 2002 Iraq\nauthorization and sunsets the 2001 Al Qaeda authorization in 3 years as\na mechanism for forcing Congress to review and revise that Al Qaeda\nauthorization.\n  Finally, what we did last week places limitations on the use of U.S.\nground troops in the war on ISIL in accord with President Obama's clear\npledges to the American public and our considered judgment that the\nU.S. role should be primarily to assist ground troops from the region\nin battling the region's own extremist violence.\n  After reporting the authorization out of committee, Senator Menendez\nfiled it as an amendment to the omnibus budget bill with numerous\ncosponsors, including me. That was entirely appropriate because the\nbudget contained funding for the ongoing operation against ISIL. But\nthe amendment was not allowed, and, thus, in all likelihood, we will\nadjourn our 2014 session without taking action beyond the SFRC vote.\n  But just as the SFRC vote in August 2013 played a significant role\nleading to the destruction of the Syrian chemical weapons stockpile, I\nbelieve the authorization we passed last week will also have a\nsignificant effect. It becomes the first formal action by Congress in\nproviding a legal framework for the war that, until now, has been\ncarried out without any clear legal authority. It will be the basis for\nour discussions in January as we complete the necessary work of\nauthorizing this military action.\n  It is my hope that the authorization passed in Senator Menendez's\ncommittee will be introduced early in 2015, with dozens of cosponsors,\nand ultimately enable a full congressional vote on this most important\nmatter.\n  I do believe the dialogue in Congress since August--since the\nPresident initiated unilateral military action on August 8--does offer\nsome important lessons.\n  First, not surprisingly--and especially as a Virginian I have to say\nthis--the Framers of our Constitution had it right--Framers such as\nMason, Madison, and Jefferson. We shouldn't go to war without\ncongressional approval. Unilateral action by the Executive without\ncongressional support deprives the public of the full debate necessary\nto educate everybody about whether military action is in the national\ninterest.\n  Just as importantly--maybe more importantly--it is unfair to send\nAmerican troops into harm's way without a clear political consensus\nsupporting the mission. We have already had three Americans who have\nlost their lives in Operation Inherent Resolve.\n  Congressional debate and approval expresses a support for the\nmission. But the lack of clear congressional support subjects an\nambivalence about whether military action is a good idea or bad, and\nthat is not healthy when we are asking people to risk their lives.\n  Second, when a President decides that military action is needed, the\nevents of the last few months demonstrate it is best for the President\nto propose a draft authorization to Congress. When the President spoke\nto the Nation on September 10, he should have sent a draft\nauthorization of the war against ISIL to Congress immediately. A clear\ndefinition of the proposed mission by the President is the best way to\nencourage full congressional debate and build the national consensus in\nsupport of the proposed mission.\n  Now, if a President does not propose an authorization, that doesn't\ngive the Article I branch--the legislature--a pass from our\nconstitutional obligations. We cannot let the lack of Presidential\naction slow us down in doing our job. But the process works better if\nthe President initiates military action with a clear proposed\nauthorization of Congress.\n  Third, the administration's reliance on the 2001 and 2002\nauthorizations in prosecuting this war on ISIL without congressional\naction demonstrates the profound need to revisit those authorities,\nbecause using a 13-year-old authorization crafted in different times\nfor a different circumstance under a different administration for a\ndifferent bit of geography with the support of a vastly different\nCongress to justify a new war 13 years later is not the way the Nation\nshould make the great decision about whether to go to war. That is why\nthe repeal of the 2002 authorization and a significant revision of the\n2001 authorization is so important.\n  Finally, the events of the last months revealed yet again the\nweaknesses of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, an act whose\nprovisions have been ignored by Presidents and Congresses of both\nparties since the ink was dry on the original. This fall, as an\nexample, the President provided Congress notice of the start of\nmilitary action as provided by the 1973 act, but then he completely\nignored the 60- and 90-day timeline for ceasing military action and\ninstead continued military operations in a unilateral way. It is time\nto update the 1973 law so it will work, for gosh sake. Senator McCain\nand I have introduced a significant revision of the law to improve the\nconsultation between Congress and the President on matters of war, to\ndefine the magnitude of conflict that should trigger a required\ncongressional vote, and to set out mandatory timelines for\ncongressional action.\n  I am fully aware that a better, more consistent process for\ninitiating war will not make our security challenges easy ones. The\nworld is a difficult place. We have bellicose authoritarian regimes--\nNorth Korea and Russia--we have non-State actors such as ISIL or Boko\nHaram or the al-Nusra Front or Al Qaeda. It is a complicated security\nsituation that we have right now, and if we have a better process it\nwill not make those security challenges easy, but I maintain--and my\nbelief has grown stronger with every day I have\n\n[[Page S6878]]\n\nbeen in this body--that the absence of a process for making decisions\nabout war coupled with the twin pathologies of Executive overreach and\ncongressional abdication make it harder for us to do the right thing\nwith clarity and with speed.\n  The events of the last month show that America can make decisions\nabout war in a better way, and it is my hope we will address this\nimportant issue promptly as we reconvene in 2015.\n  Thank you.\n  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Heitkamp). The clerk will call the roll.\n  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. CARPER. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum\ncall be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                         Tribute to Don Marfisi\n\n  Mr. CARPER. Madam President, over the past few years I have had the\ngreat privilege, along with Dr. Tom Coburn, to chair the Committee on\nHomeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Our committee has many\nresponsibilities, one of those being oversight of the Department of\nHomeland Security.\n  The Department of Homeland Security was created just shy of 12 years\nago--a young organization compared to most other agencies. It was\nestablished in 2003 following the terrorist attacks of 9/11. It brought\ntogether under one umbrella 22 different and disparate agencies. Trying\nto form one unified agency has not been easy. There have been growing\npains aplenty. Our current Secretary Jeh Johnson, Deputy Secretary Ali\nMayorkas, and their leadership team have made great strides in\naddressing challenges, and I am confident their hard work will continue\nand pay off.\n  Behind the leadership team at the Department of Homeland Security are\nthe more than 200,000 men and women who go to work each day to fulfill\none critical mission, to create a safe, secure, and resilient place\nwhere the American way of life can thrive. Whether these employees are\nencountering terrorism, securing our borders and our airports,\nresponding to natural disasters or bolstering our defenses in cyber\nspace, few other agencies and employees touch the lives of Americans on\na daily basis more than does the Department of Homeland Security.\n  As chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs\nCommittee, I have had the great honor and pleasure of meeting with many\nof these men and women and learning more about their work, learning\nabout their families, their frustrations, and their dedication to the\nservice of our Nation. We have also heard the Department of Homeland\nSecurity leadership from across the Department, including Secretary Jeh\nJohnson, sing their praises and describe the mission-critical work they\nperform day in and day out in communities across America and around the\nworld.\n  A young man named Don Marfisi of Kansas City, MO, is one of those\nemployees. I wish to take a few minutes to talk about him and to\nacknowledge his service. Don grew up in Omaha, NE. He is the son of a\ncivil servant and homemaker. His father worked for the city of Omaha,\nhis brother worked for the Department of Justice, and his son currently\nworks for the Metropolitan Community College in Kansas City, MO.\nClearly, public service is a deep tradition in his family--and from\nwhat I hear, it is something Don takes to heart.\n  Don began his Federal service more than 24 years ago as a supply\nclerk with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency in\nLincoln, NE. Four years later, in August of 1998, he joined the\nImmigration and Naturalization Service in the Department of Justice.\nAfter a little over 1 year there, he was transferred to Citizenship and\nImmigration Services in the new Department of Homeland Security. Within\nCitizenship and Immigration Services, Don works at the National Records\nCenter where he is responsible for logistics, procurement, and property\nmanagement. We can still find him there today. In fact, his colleagues\nconsider him a ``cave pillar,'' having worked at the Center since\nopening day.\n\n  What does the National Records Center do exactly? According to the\nDepartment, it is the keystone to the recordkeeping of the agency for\nwhich he serves. We call it USCIS--housing millions of paper records\nthat have been centralized into a single state-of-the-art facility. The\nCenter where Don works improves the integrity of USCIS's recordkeeping\nand dramatically reduces the time it takes to retrieve a file or\npaperwork, meaning faster application processing for an agency charged\nwith overseeing our immigration system.\n  Don's current job title, mission support specialist, doesn't do his\nwork justice. Colleagues say Don is not just a support specialist but\nan integral part of the National Records Center's mission support team\nand plays an important role in nearly all the logistics-related\nprojects executed at the center. In this position, he develops and\nadministers best practices for Federal procurement and property\nmanagement. While he avoids the spotlight, he is highly valued and\nsought out for his expertise in the asset management field.\n  Don's colleagues told me, ``Through his painstaking attention to\ndetail and timely responsiveness . . . he has provided a superior level\nof customer service to local employees and other stakeholders.''\n  Don's attention to detail ensures that folks within Citizenship and\nImmigration Services have the tools and resources they need to get\ntheir job done. Don's critical eye and expertise in procurement is also\ncredited for saving the government and the taxpayers over $500,000 in\nfiscal year 2013 and over $800,000 to date in fiscal year 2014. Let me\nrepeat that: Don has saved the American taxpayers in the last 2 fiscal\nyears $1.3 million.\n  His service and stewardship don't end there. At the same time he is\nsaving the Department and taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars,\nhe is also finding a way to give back. Along with the money he has been\nable to trim off the Federal deficit, he has managed to arrange the\ncontributions of nearly $800,000 in equipment to local schools through\nthe GSA Property Disposal Program. Through this program he ensures that\nunused or older government equipment goes directly to local schools.\nBecause of his efforts, computers and other equipment that would\notherwise be trashed are recycled and used to boost education and raise\nstudent achievement in schools across the country.\n  As one can imagine, educators, communities, and the students\nthemselves who receive the equipment have been overjoyed with the\ngenerous donations. But don't take my word for it. In 2012 the Miami R-\n1 School District, in Amoret, MO, a small K-12 school located on the\nMissouri border in the middle of cornfields and cow pastures, received\n$45,000 worth of recycled technology equipment.\n\n  Sharon Knuth, the school's technology administrator, wrote to Don\nsaying that her district was ``blessed by the GSA Property Disposal\nprogram.'' She added:\n\n       We are limited in our funds and budgets so we do not always\n     have the chance to purchase the latest technology equipment.\n     Because of your generosity, we will put the computers,\n     monitors, speakers and plugs to good use. . . . We will grow\n     and prosper only because we found some great friends like you\n     who gave us support along the way.\n\n  Another school in Chadwick, MO, thanked Don for the ``blessing''--\nthat is their term--of this new technology they received through his\nefforts. But there is more. Don was also a member of the Office of\nEqual Opportunity and Inclusion's Minority Serving Institutions Program\nteam which facilitated more than $1 million in computer equipment\ndonations in the past fiscal year 2014.\n  Don has been recognized for his extraordinary accomplishments in\nyears past. In 2013, for example, he was recognized as USCIS Employee\nof the Year and as one of the National Record Center's Employees of the\nQuarter. Yet despite these great accomplishments and high praise from\nhis colleagues and from people all over the country, Don insisted that\nevery award he has received is a team award. When he learned he was\ngathering such high praise for his work, his response was:\n\n       Being recognized for your efforts is appreciated, however,\n     I'm the fortunate one, I get to reuse items and give--two\n     things I enjoy doing.\n\n  Like a true leader, this man is humble.\n\n[[Page S6879]]\n\n  Don remembers something that I learned from Department Secretary Jeh\nJohnson during his confirmation. I learned that one of Secretary\nJohnson's guiding principles is a lesson from Dr. Benjamin--known as\nBennie--Mays, former president of Morehouse College, who said: ``You\nearn a living by what you get; you earn a life by what you give.''\n  Think about that for a second, and then think about this man right\nhere and all the giving he has done throughout his career and his\nservice to our country. I just have to say to Jeh Johnson, the\nSecretary of the Department, that you have a remarkable employee. You\nare blessed with a lot of remarkable employees, and Don is certainly at\nthe top of the list.\n  Don's service doesn't end at the Department. He has a couple of other\ncritical roles. He is a husband and a dad. He and his wife Pam have\nbeen married for 30 years. He has a son, Josiah, and daughter Anna.\nWhen he is able to find some well-deserved downtime, he enjoys watching\na Big Ten team, the Nebraska Cornhuskers, with his family.\n  I have to say that as a proud Ohio State graduate, we enjoyed playing\nyou guys this year and look forward to next year--maybe you guys will\nget some revenge next year.\n  To Pam, Josiah, and Anna, thank you for sharing your husband and dad\nwith us. He has done extraordinary work for our country and for a lot\nof communities. We are proud of him, and I bet that you are as well.\n  Finally, I say to Don Marfisi--on behalf of my colleagues, Democrats,\nRepublicans, and a couple of Independents as well, and the folks who\nwork here in the Capitol, even the pages who are sitting at the bottom\nof the Presiding Officer's desk--we all thank you for what you do for\nus every day, for your service, and for your immeasurable generosity to\nour great Nation.\n  I also wish to thank Alejandro Mayorkas. Ale is the Deputy Secretary\nof the Department of Homeland Security. We were meeting with a number\nof employees at the Department of Homeland Security. They were\ndiscussing how to raise morale, although that is not their day job; it\nis an additional responsibility they have undertaken. The folks at the\nDepartment of Homeland Security--for the 12 years it has been in\nexistence--has suffered from low morale, and sadly, still does. I think\nthat is starting to change.\n  I am an old Navy guy, and I like to say that things that are hard to\ndo are like changing the course of an aircraft carrier. I think the\naircraft carrier is starting to turn at Homeland Security.\n  One of the keys for an organization to do well is to have great\nleadership. As the Presiding Officer knows, at the beginning of this\nyear, there were gaping holes in the top ranks of the Department of\nHomeland Security. One of the things Dr. Coburn, the committee, and I\ndid--when the administration would nominate a candidate with good\nleadership skills--was to bring those nominations to the Senate and\ndebate them and vote them up or down. We have made great progress this\nyear, and I am grateful to Senator Heitkamp for being so supportive and\na big part of that process.\n  We have a vote this afternoon on another critical nomination. Sarah\nSaldana is a U.S. prosecuting attorney. She leads our operation in the\nnorthern part of Texas and oversees 100 counties in her great State.\nShe tries to make sure the Federal laws are enforced across her\ncounties.\n  She has been nominated to be Assistant Secretary at the Office of\nImmigration and Customs Enforcement, also called ICE. It is a huge job\nwith tens of thousands of employees who work all across America.\n  I hope when we debate her nomination--she has been supported very\ngraciously by John Cornyn, the senior Senator from Texas, who\nintroduced us to her at our committee hearing--our colleagues will join\ntogether in supporting her nomination.\n  We have this photograph here, and I said earlier this is Don Marfisi\nin the middle, also known as Pam's husband.\n  I will be coming to the floor about once a month to talk about this\ndepartment, which doesn't get the kind of credit it deserves, and the\npeople who work there don't get the credit they deserve. We are trying\nto make sure that changes, and part of changing the course of the\naircraft carrier is to say thanks to the good people at the Department.\nDon is one of many employees who deserves our thanks.\n\n  In this photograph to my right, this handsome young man is Ethan\nCole. Ethan is the supervisor for the work that Don and these folks do.\n  We have here Terry Sloan. She is the Deputy Director of the National\nRecords Center, and we are proud of her and her services. Standing next\nto Terry is another TC--we have Tom Coburn, Tom Carper, and Tom Cioppa.\nI think when this picture was taken, Tom was the Director of the\nNational Records Center, and now he is the District Director of the\nChicago District.\n  Not long ago Ale Mayorkas and a number of Homeland Security employees\nwere paying us a visit. The reason I mentioned Ale is because of a\nstory he told us about a visit someone made to NASA headquarters. I\ncan't recall if it was during the evening or weekend, but it was during\noff hours. As they were going through one of the big buildings at NASA,\nthe visitor came across a guy who was a custodian. The visitor said to\nthe custodian: What do you do here? The janitor looked him right in the\neye and said: I am helping to put a man on the moon.\n  The people at Homeland Security, including Don, are helping to ensure\nthat our country is safe and secure. We are in their debt.\n  With that, I am looking to see if there is anyone else trying to\nspeak. I understand the Senator from South Dakota may be emerging from\nthe Republican cloakroom and looking for a moment to shine. If he\ndoesn't get out here fast, I will just note the absence of a quorum and\nwill let him call it off when he gets here.\n  I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                         New Era in the Senate\n\n  Mr. THUNE. Madam President, the American people made one thing clear\nin November, and it was this. They are ready for change in Washington.\nThe Senate Republicans are too. In fact, I think even some Senate\nDemocrats are ready for a change in Washington.\n  When the Republicans take the majority in January, things will look\nvery different here in the Senate. The start of our majority will mark\nan end to the dysfunction that has characterized the Senate under the\nDemocrat's leadership. Under Republican leadership, the Senate will\nreturn to regular order.\n  We will once again empower the committee chairmen to start the\nlegislative process. Bills will be drafted in committee with input from\nMembers of both parties before the bills are fully debated on the\nSenate floor, and Members of both parties will be able to offer\namendments, which is in strong contrast to the Democratic Senate, where\nthe minority party has been almost entirely prevented from getting\namendment votes.\n  History shows us that the Senate functions best when all Members are\nallowed to have amendments and votes. In the early years of the Reagan\nadministration, President Reagan aggressively pursued tax cuts that\nfaced opposition from Republicans as well as Democrats. However, after\n2 weeks of debate and consideration of 141 amendments, the Senate\npassed the bill by an overwhelming vote of 89 to 11.\n  In President Reagan's second term, the Tax Reform Act of 1986 saw 3\nweeks of debate on the Senate floor. After the consideration of 109\namendments and 24 rollcall votes, the bill received 97 votes in the\nSenate.\n  These are just a couple of examples of a Senate functioning as our\nFounders intended. An open amendment process softens division among\nMembers and builds bipartisan support for major legislation. The result\nis reforms which are not only historic but longstanding.\n  In addition to returning to regular order, the Senate will also focus\non its oversight responsibilities. Our job is not just to pass\nlegislation. We also have a responsibility to take a look at all\ngovernment programs and existing legislation to make sure the\ngovernment is doing its job in the most efficient and effective way\npossible.\n\n[[Page S6880]]\n\n  Whether it is the IRS targeting conservative groups or a Department\nof Veterans Affairs that is failing our veterans, Senate Republicans\nwill conduct aggressive oversight to hold unelected bureaucrats and\nexecutive branch political appointees accountable for their actions.\n  Finally, and most importantly, Republicans are going to change the\nSenate's priorities. No longer will the Senate's time be tied up with\npartisan legislation designed to please the Democrats' far left\nconstituencies. Instead, Americans' priorities will be our priorities--\njobs, the economy, and the middle class.\n  As even the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate admitted recently,\nDemocrats have not done too well at focusing on the people's\npriorities.\n  The senior Senator from New York said:\n\n       Unfortunately, Democrats blew the opportunity the American\n     people gave them. We took their mandate and put all of our\n     focus on the wrong problem--health-care reform.\n\n  Republicans do not intend to blow the opportunity the American people\nhave given us. We will get right to work on legislation to create jobs,\ngrow the economy, and expand opportunities for hard-working Americans.\nWe will take up the dozens of jobs bills that have passed the House but\nhave been collecting dust on the Democratic leader's desk here in the\nSenate.\n  We will take up legislation to improve the Keystone XL Pipeline and\nthe more than 42,000 jobs that it would support. We will work with the\nPresident to reauthorize trade promotion authority to open new markets\nto American farmers and manufacturers and make sure that American goods\nare competing on an equal playing field internationally.\n  We will take up legislation to improve flexibility for working\nfamilies so Americans can meet their responsibilities at work while\nstill having the time they need for their families at home. And, of\ncourse, we will take up legislation to address ObamaCare.\n  The President's health care law is not only making our health care\nsystem worse, it is also hurting our already sluggish economy. Senate\nRepublicans want to repeal and replace this law with real health care\nreforms--reforms that will actually lower costs and improve America's\naccess to care.\n  In the meantime, however, we will chisel away at the law's most\ndamaging provisions--provisions like the medical device tax, which has\neliminated thousands of workers' jobs in this industry and is driving\nup the price of lifesaving devices such as pacemakers and insulin\npumps, and the 30-hour workweek, which is forcing employers to cut\nworkers' hours and wages in order to afford ObamaCare-mandated health\ncare costs. We will also work to repeal the health care law's\nindividual mandate. The Federal Government should not be in the\nbusiness of forcing Americans to buy a government-approved health\ninsurance product.\n  Finally, Republicans will tackle some of the big challenges that need\nto be addressed if we are going to put our country back on a path to\nlong-term prosperity. We want to make our Nation's costly and\ninefficient Tax Code fairer and simpler for families and businesses. We\nalso intend to take up regulatory reform.\n  Recent regulations released by the President's EPA illustrate just\nhow pressing the need is to reform our country's out-of-control\nbureaucracy. Just one of the recently proposed EPA regulations--the\nPresident's national energy tax--would eliminate tens of thousands, if\nnot hundreds of thousands of jobs and devastate entire communities. No\nexecutive agency should be able to damage our economy in that way or to\ndestroy the livelihoods of so many hard-working Americans. It is time\nto get America's regulatory agencies under control.\n  Republicans heard what the American people said in November, and we\nare not going to let them down. January 6 marks the start of a new era\nin the Senate. The Republican majority will focus on the American\npeople's priorities: creating jobs, growing the economy, and increasing\nopportunity for middle-income American families. We hope the Democrats\nwill join us.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.\n  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the\nSenator from Ohio be allowed to speak directly after the conclusion of\nmy remarks.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                             Klamath Basin\n\n  Mr. MERKLEY. Madam President, I rise today to address a key\nunfinished piece of business that is extremely important to the Klamath\nBasin of southern Oregon.\n  The Klamath Basin Act has still not been enacted as of the close of\nthis Congress. In that failure, Congress is missing a critical\nopportunity to put in place a locally developed solution to a longtime\nwater dispute. This failure creates a substantial risk of catastrophic\nconsequences for our ranching and farming families--risks that were\nentirely avoidable.\n  Let me start by telling my colleagues what an amazing place Klamath\nBasin is. Klamath Basin is one of the natural wonders of the American\nWest. It has one of the biggest salmon runs in the Pacific and part of\none of the largest continuous blocks of wild rivers and wildlands on\nthe Pacific coast. It is one of the most important migration points in\nthe Pacific coast flyway for bird migration. It is an important place\nfor duck hunters up and down the west coast.\n  The Klamath River itself charts a path to the south of Crater Lake--\nan amazing natural wonder where a crater created by a very large\ncascade volcanic mountain that blew its top--and the California\nRedwoods to the south. It connects the Great Basin geology, the\ncascading volcanos, and the deep and majestic rivers and canyons along\nits way. Amidst this natural wonder, in its basin lies some of the most\nfertile and productive agricultural land in the northwest, generating\n$600 million a year in barley, potatoes, onions, mint, and, as we can\nsee in this photo, beef.\n  The settlement of the Klamath Basin by pioneers from the east and the\nsubsequent development of farming and ranching in the Klamath Basin has\na storied history. The first White explorer thought to enter the area\nwas John Freeman, on his way to play a notorious role in taking control\nof California during the Mexican-American war. The first White settlers\nwere the pioneering Applegate family, scouting an easier southern route\nfor the final stages of the Oregon Trail. Agriculture was, of course, a\nmajor focus of settlement efforts, and even some of the more recently\ndeveloped agricultural lands played into key moments in American\nhistory when part of the Klamath Reclamation Project was developed by\nthe Federal Government and offered as homesteading opportunities to\nveterans returning from World War II.\n  Of course, this region had a history long before settlers from the\nEast came to it. It was already inhabited by Native communities who\nhave lived in the Klamath Basin for 10,000 years and who have a deep\nconnection to this amazing place. The Klamath and Modoc Tribes have\ninherited oral histories of the eruption of Mount Mazama 8,000 years\nago, which formed today's Crater Lake. The tribes on the lower river in\nCalifornia--the Yurok, the Karuk, and the Hoopa--talked about having\nfirepits in home sites still in use today that have been carbon-dated\nas being in human use many thousands of years ago. In the Klamath\nCounty Museum, there is on display the oldest sandals in the world that\nwe have ever discovered made of sagebrush.\n  The early history of settlement from the East led quickly to\nconflict. John Fremont's expedition led to a violent battle with the\nKlamath Tribes. The opening of the Applegate Trail through the basin\nled to conflict between the Modoc Tribes and White settlers along the\nLost River. The resulting Modoc War--a dark chapter in our Nation's\npersecution of tribes--led to a standoff where the Army held a few\ndozen Modoc families under siege in barren, hostile lava beds for\nmonths.\n  Unfortunately, for too much of recent history, conflict has continued\nto define the Klamath Basin.\n  In the 1950s the Federal Government terminated Federal recognition of\nthe Klamath Tribes, converting their 2 million-acre forested\nreservation into a combination of national forest lands and private\nlands.\n\n[[Page S6881]]\n\n  In the 1970s conflict erupted between the lower river tribes and\nFederal fisheries managers of the tribes' rights to harvest fish they\nhave harvested for thousands of years. Very soon after, farmers,\nranchers, and tribes initiated litigation over water rights, and that\nlitigation has been going intensely until very recently. On the one\nhand, tribes want to be assured of their rights to continue fishing\npractices they have passed down from generation to generation for\nthousands of years. Farmers and ranchers want to be sure they will have\nthe water they need to sustain the operations their families depend on\nfor success.\n  For decades the tension over water has been accentuated in times of\ndrought, culminating most famously in a standoff in 2001 that made\nnational news. During that 2001 drought irrigation water for the\nKlamath Reclamation Project was shut off to protect endangered\nfisheries. Thousands of people gathered in Klamath Falls in sympathy\nwith the farmers. There was civil disobedience, and people were worried\nabout the possibility of violence.\n  When Vice President Cheney intervened and guaranteed water deliveries\nrather than fish protections, the result was the largest fish kill in\nU.S. history. Meanwhile, agriculture was damaged. Families saw major\nlosses, and some had to sell their farms. There were no real winners.\n  At the time, many people thought that these issues were intractable\nand that the arguments and lawsuits would continue interminably,\nperhaps for generations to come. But a number of years ago a group of\nleaders in the community had the boldness to start rethinking how they\nframed their quest for water and the water wars. Their briefing to me\nwas one of the first briefings I received as a U.S. Senator. I was\nsurprised to see individuals representing parts of the community who\nhad often been bitter enemies together. They were talking about sitting\ndown and hammering out a different vision for the future to replace the\nlose-lose water battles of the past with something different: greater\nreliability of water for farmers and ranchers and protection for the\ntribes and their fishing rights and better health for the stream. We\nhad leaders from many different parts of the community sitting down\ntogether because--they said to me: Senator, the only folks who are\nwinning right now are the lawyers. They wanted to change that.\n  I was skeptical that groups who had battled for so long could sit\ndown and work out an agreement. As we say in the West, whiskey, that is\nfor drinking, and water, that is for fighting. But these folks said: We\nare going to pursue a different path.\n  I pledged that if they were able to develop a solution, I would do\neverything I could at the Federal level to help implement it. They\ndefied the expectation of every cynic by coming up with a remarkable\nplan that solved an array of complex problems. The irrigators committed\nto reducing the total amount of water they take from the river from a\nvariety of conservation practices. They are working collaboratively\nwith the community and the tribes to restore habitat. In exchange, they\nget certainty and predictability for guaranteed amounts of water. The\ntribes and conservation groups and fishing organizations agreed to stop\nchallenging these irrigators' water allocations. In exchange, they get\na community partnering to restore natural resources that are of\ncultural and economic importance to the tribes and to help them\nreacquire some of the land they lost 50 years ago.\n  Complementing all of this and augmenting the natural resource\nrestoration is a plan to remove four antiquated dams and open up new\nhabitat for fish. The private utility that owns these dams agrees that\nthe best business decision is to remove these dams. So this is a win-\nwin situation, or actually a win-win-win-win situation.\n  Let me give an example of this in terms of water looked at from the\nperspective of the agricultural community. This chart shows, over a\nvariety of years--2010 through 2014--what the actual deliveries were in\nacre-feet, thousands of acre-feet, 189,000 acre-feet, and what they\nwould receive in the settlement: substantially more; substantially more\nin 2011 and substantially more in 2013. So this also provides more\nwater for the refuge, and we can see a change of positive water for the\nrefuge as well.\n  This is why everyone is coming to the table and finding a path that\nworks better during difficult times for all of the major goals of water\nmanagement in the region.\n  The deal is a lifeline for farming and for ranching: tens of\nthousands of additional acre-feet added and in some cases 100,000 acre-\nfeet of water in some areas; at the same time, stream flows for fish,\nremoving obstacles for migration of the fish, improving habitat. It is\na truly remarkable deal.\n  Community leaders not only developed a visionary agreement, they also\nremained dedicated to this agreement during some difficult drought\nyears in 2010 and 2013 and low water in 2014. So they could have been\nshattered, the coalition could have been blown up by these difficult\ndrought years, but instead they viewed it as reinforcing why they\nneeded to come to an agreement to save the ranching and the farming and\nimprove the fish and restore important provisions for the tribes. They\nhave continued to work together while we here in Congress have not\nacted. Also, they worked on an additional agreement to bring in\nadditional ranchers from the upper basin into the agreement, and that\nworked as well. They worked to dramatically reduce the cost of the\nhabitat restoration investments that the original plan called for. They\ndrafted a bill with no new spending. The entire agreement was\nchallenged by the litigation of the water rights in that the\nadjudication of these water rights was finally completed and, for the\nmost part, the Klamath tribes were awarded water rights to time\nimmemorial.\n\n  That is a powerful tool. The tribes could have walked away from the\ntable. They could have taken this enormous control over water rights\nand said the agreement hasn't been implemented; we are walking away and\ngoing to use these water rights with maximum leverage.\n  They created partnerships. They pledged to work together, as all of\nthese groups have, advocating not just for themselves but for the\ncollective future of the community and collective stakeholders.\n  Quite frankly, this is a remarkable development in what is happening\nwith all of these stakeholder leaders sticking together. Congress is\nkey, however, to passing legislation that implements the provisions of\nthis plan.\n  It is time for Congress to act. The Senate did its work. The Energy\nand Natural Resources Committee held hearings under the leadership\nfirst of Senator Wyden and Senator Murkowski, then under the leadership\nof Senator Landrieu and Senator Murkowski. Senator Murkowski, Senator\nWyden, and I were able to negotiate bipartisan revisions of the bill\naddressing significant and legitimate concerns that had been raised.\n  We modified Federal authority related to dam removal and requiring\nGovernors to sign off and giving Congress a 1-year period to veto a\ndecision to take out a particular dam. We removed provisions that the\nCongressional Budget Office said might contribute to the deficit. The\nEnergy and Natural Resources Committee voted the bill out of committee\non a bipartisan basis.\n  The community leaders have gone to work getting even broader\nstatements of support. The Klamath County Chamber of Commerce endorsed\nthe bill. The Klamath County Farm Bureau has endorsed the bill. The\nKlamath County Cattlemen's Association and the statewide Oregon\nCattlemen's Association have endorsed the bill. The Klamath Falls City\nCouncil has endorsed the bill, and the Oregon Water Resources Congress\nhas endorsed the bill.\n  The Senate has been ready to act, but the U.S. House of\nRepresentatives has not. Here we are in the last days of this Congress\nunable to complete this bill. So today I am calling upon our leaders in\nthe House and in the Senate to work together to make this an item of\nimmediate action when we start our new session in January.\n  The tribe is held back on enforcing its water rights, and the\nstakeholders have stayed together, saying they were\n\n[[Page S6882]]\n\ngoing to support the multiple provisions for themselves and their\npartners. But that cannot last forever. Congress has to act to seal the\ndeal. Without cooperation, this vision, so carefully, diligently, and\npainfully constructed over years of involvement of community\nstakeholders, will fall apart. What that will do is put the entire\nfarming and ranching community in great jeopardy. We can see hundreds\nof families lose their water in a matter of months due to Congress's\nfailure to act.\n  This community has done everything right. They have put aside\nlongstanding tensions and conflicts. They sat down time and time again\nto work out these complicated provisions. They sought the help of the\nInterior Department which came and signed off on the agreement. They\nsought the State government and the Governor to sign off on the\nagreements. They solicited local support. They put aside damaging\nrhetoric during times of intense drought over the last couple of years,\nand they hung together. They have done everything we could have ever\nasked a group to do to prepare for this legislation to be passed, yet\nit has not been passed because the House of Representatives has not\nbeen ready to act.\n  We must not let this opportunity escape. We must come back in January\nwith support from the Senate and from the House and complete this deal.\nThis opportunity might not come again.\n  I ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to recognize that when\nin a region great work has been done to resolve a longstanding\nconflict, they need Congress to step in and seal the deal, make the\nagreement real, and implement the agreement. We must give it the utmost\nattention and help make it happen for the health of the stream, for the\nwelfare of the tribes, for the success of the farming community, for\nthe conditions that make ranching a vital component of the Klamath\nBasin--for all of these reasons.\n  I certainly pledge to come back and work toward that end and look\nforward for us early next year to not be here on the floor lamenting\nthe fact we have failed to complete this agreement but to be here\nthanking all of those who came together to seize this critical\nopportunity.\n  I yield the floor to my colleague from Ohio.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.\n  Mr. BROWN. I ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, the\nSenator from Hawaii be recognized.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                       Tribute To Jay Rockefeller\n\n  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor one of my best\nfriends in the Senate and a long-time public servant whom I greatly\nadmire, John D. Rockefeller IV.\n  In 1964, in Athens, OH, President Johnson went to Ohio University,\nand he said:\n\n       Poverty hides its face behind a mask of affluence. But I\n     call upon you to help me to get out there and unmask it, take\n     that mask off of that face of affluence and let the world see\n     what we have, and let the world do something about it.\n\n  Several months later, John D. Rockefeller IV, 27 years old, came to\nWest Virginia as a VISTA volunteer. Well-educated and well-connected,\nJay Rockefeller could have chosen any career he wanted. But to him, it\nwas about public service.\n  This year marks Jay's 50th year in public service. He found himself\nin Emmons, WV. Emmons, WV, is a small town. Jay didn't shy away. Jay\ndidn't keep his distance. He wanted to know the people he was going to\nbe working with, and he set out to do that. For 2 years, he worked\nalongside the people of Emmons for accessible health care, for\neducation, for opportunities. His work included dismantling and moving\na condemned elementary school from a neighboring town onto a flatbed\ntruck, and establishing it in Emmons as a community center.\n  Jay never forgot that, Jay, who in this Chamber sits across the aisle\nfrom me at this desk. I was sitting here 2 weeks ago and Jay was\ntalking about Emmons. He said going to Emmons--and I will quote from\nhis farewell speech 2 weeks ago to the Senate:\n\n       That set my moral compass and gave me direction. Where\n     everything in my real life began. Where I learned how little\n     I knew about the problems people face. I was humbled by that\n     lesson.\n\n  He went on to say:\n\n       My time in Emmons was transformative. It explains every\n     policy I pursued and every vote I have cast. It was where my\n     beliefs were bolted down. And where my passion met my\n     principle.\n\n  Fifty years ago, Jay learned those lessons. For 50 years, as a VISTA\nvolunteer, as a State legislator, as the Secretary of State, as the\nGovernor of West Virginia, and as a Senator for 3 decades from West\nVirginia, he learned those beliefs. They were bolted down, and he\npracticed those beliefs.\n  In 1966, he was elected to the West Virginia House. Two years later,\nJay had an opportunity that most people I know would not have refused.\n  Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated--the Senator from New York at that\ntime. In June of 1968, the Governor of New York, Nelson Rockefeller--\nJay Rockefeller's uncle--offered that appointment to the U.S. Senate to\nJay Rockefeller. The Governor offered that position to Jay Rockefeller,\nand his answer to his uncle was: No, thank you. I want to earn a seat\nsome day in the U.S. Senate.\n  That is what Jay set out to do. He reminded us a few weeks ago:\n\n       Important undertakings can't be halfhearted. You have to\n     commit your whole self--almost like pushing a heavy rock\n     uphill. With both of your hands you push, because if you let\n     up for a split second with either hand, you and the rock go\n     tumbling backwards into the abyss.\n\n  Jay had a chance to prove that in this body over 20 years ago. He\npushed that rock uphill to fight to protect retired coal miners'\npromised health care benefits. It is easy for Members of this Senate\nwho have good titles, who are well paid, who dress like this, who don't\nreally need to go out and listen to the public very much, to forget\npeople like union coal miners or nonunion coal miners.\n  He called this ``the greatest moment of my career.'' Jay threatened\nto keep the Senate in session. He was going to do whatever it took--22\nyears ago, over Christmas, over New Year's, whatever it took--to make\nsure his colleagues didn't leave town before passing the 1992 Coal Act.\nBecause of his legislation, more than 200,000 coal miners and their\nfamilies have kept the benefits they were promised.\n\n  He spearheaded efforts to ensure workplace safety. I have talked to\nJay after coal-mining disasters when miners are killed in one of the\nmost treacherous, difficult, and dangerous jobs we can imagine. I can\nsee the pain in his face because he knows people who work in the mines\nand he has listened to them.\n  When Lincoln's staff wanted him to stay in the White House and win\nthe war and free the slaves and preserve the Union, Lincoln used to\nsay, I have to go out and get my public opinion bath. That is what Jay\ndid. A son and grandson of privilege, Jay understood that he served the\npublic best when he got his public opinion bath and when he went out\nand listened to people. He fought against unfair trade practices, and\nhe fought against tax policies that shipped jobs overseas. He\nreinvigorated the steel caucus, fighting for an industry that clearly\nhas been victimized by unfair trade practices.\n  Most importantly in Jay's career--and the thing I think he is most\nproud of--was another lesson he learned in Emmons, WV. He learned that\nmany of the community school-aged children had never been to a doctor,\nthey had never seen a dentist before because their families simply\ndidn't have the money. Because of that, Jay made accessible, affordable\nhealth care for children part of his lifelong mission. He believes that\nhealth care is a right and not a privilege.\n  He championed Medicaid expansion, and he championed this new health\ncare law. It has Jay Rockefeller's fingerprints all over it. That is\nwhy hundreds of thousands of people in my State are grateful to Jay\nRockefeller, because hundreds of thousands of people in Ohio now have\nhealth insurance who didn't have it before. Hundreds of thousands of\nfamilies have benefited for a couple of decades because their children\nhad health insurance. Again, this is because of Jay Rockefeller.\n  In 1997, he devoted much of his time and career at that point to help\nwrite the Children's Health Insurance Program, CHIP. Because of CHIP, 8\nmillion\n\n[[Page S6883]]\n\nchildren across this country--some of them in Emmons, WV, and some of\nthem in my hometown of Mansfield, OH--now have access to health care,\nhealth care that they would not have otherwise. He continues that fight\nalways on health care.\n  I want to close with this. I have seen a lot of Senators come and go.\nI have seen a lot of Members come and go. I have seen a lot of public\nofficials come and go. There can be a shortage of humility in these\njobs. As Members of the House and Members of the Senate, sometimes we\nare a little puffed up about our titles and about the power that many\nof us have, and we are caught up in the way we are treated. People are\noften obsequious to Members in Congress, and all of that.\n  What stands out to me--it is even more remarkable when you consider\nhis family and what he came from--is Jay Rockefeller's humility. Here\nis the best example, I think. I found out almost by accident what Jay,\nas a member of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, would do regularly\nduring his time in the Senate is he would send all the staff away, he\nwould send the press away, and he would go to someone's home or\ncommunity center or rec center or labor hall and he would sit with a\nnumber of veterans and listen to their stories. He would take notes and\nhelp those individually who might need help. Most importantly, he was\nlistening to their stories.\n  It reminds me of another story from Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln's staff\nwatched him, during one of his public opinion baths, talk to a number\nof people who were pushing him on something that mattered to them\npersonally.\n  His staff wanted to send them away. Lincoln said, ``No, I am not\ngoing to do that.'' Then Lincoln said--about these people who were\ntalking to him, ordinary citizens outside the White House or anywhere\nelse the President of the United States may have been--Lincoln said:\nThey don't want much. They get so little. Each one considers his\nbusiness of great importance. I know how I should feel if I were in\ntheir place.\n  I can see Jay Rockefeller meeting with veterans, many of whom had\nnever been thanked for their service. Many of them were suffering from\nwartime injuries from their time in the service, coming back to West\nVirginia and eking out a living. I can see Jay Rockefeller saying the\nsame thing: They don't want much. They get so little. Each one\nconsiders his business of great importance. I know how I should feel if\nI were in their place.\n  Going back 2 weeks ago to Jay's farewell speech across the aisle at\nthis desk, he called upon us to remember that ``our north star must\nalways be the real needs of the people we serve.'' Jay used his\nfarewell speech to exhort us to do better on behalf of miners, on\nbehalf of veterans, on behalf of single parents, on behalf of children,\non behalf of sick people, people who do not always get a fair shake in\nlife.\n  He found his north star in public service, a career he chose because\nhe wanted a mission to complete, a cause to believe in, a dream to\nfollow. He found that mission. He found that cause. He found that dream\nin Emmons, WV, in 1964. It never left him. That is my friend Jay\nRockefeller. For all of that we are so grateful.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Hawaii.\n  Ms. HIRONO. Madam President, I rise today in support of the\nnomination of Sarah Saldana to serve as Director of the U.S.\nImmigration and Customs Enforcement, better known as ICE.\n  Before I proceed, I would like to thank the good Senator from Ohio\nfor his tributary remarks regarding Jay Rockefeller, an uncommon man of\nthe people.\n  Prior to supporting Ms. Saldana's nomination in the Judiciary\nCommittee, I did have a chance to meet with her. Growing up in a large\nfamily near our southern border in Corpus Christi, TX, Ms. Saldana\nmanaged to overcome hardship and become the first Latina U.S. Attorney\nin Texas history.\n  Sarah Saldana is fully qualified to serve as ICE's Director. She is a\nsenior Federal law enforcement official for a border State district\nthat spans almost 100,000 miles. Ms. Saldana has been on the ground in\nTexas and fully understands the complexities and challenges we face\nwith our immigration system.\n  Republicans and Democrats agree that our immigration system is\nbroken. Until recently, we also agreed, Republicans and Democrats\nalike, that Sarah Saldana needed to be confirmed as the Director of\nICE. However, now Republicans are playing politics with this nomination\nto a critical homeland security agency. ICE is responsible for\nimportant law enforcement issues that make us all safer and has been\nwithout a permanent Director for over a year.\n  ICE's 19,000 people are responsible for enforcement of our\nimmigration laws, for drug interdiction, for fighting child\nexploitation, and for keeping us safe from national security threats.\nThe Senate needs to do its job and let Sarah Saldana get to work as the\npermanent Director of ICE. I understand that some of my colleagues on\nthe Republican side now oppose Sarah Saldana because of the President's\nExecutive order on immigration.\n  President Obama's Executive action allows millions of fathers,\nmothers, and students to step out of the shadows, pass background\nchecks, work legally, and pay their taxes. The President's action is\nrooted in the reality that our immigration system is broken and that we\nneed to exercise prosecutorial discretion on who to go after with our\nlimited resources.\n  As Director of ICE, it is Ms. Saldana's responsibility to focus on\nhomeland security resources on deporting felons and other criminals who\nhave crossed our borders. It is simply not possible for the Federal\nGovernment to remove all 11 million undocumented persons in this\ncountry.\n  That is another point on which most Republicans and Democrats agree.\nWe have to prioritize the resources we have. That is what the\nPresident's order does. It prioritizes deporting felons, not families.\nLet me repeat that: Deporting felons, that is all we need to do, not\nbreaking apart families. President Obama's action is grounded on\nprecedent and Executive powers.\n  Every single President since Eisenhower has used Executive action to\nprovide discretionary relief from deportation. Nonetheless, the\nPresident's critics have relentlessly attacked the legitimacy of his\naction. Some of my colleagues have emphasized that we must enforce our\nimmigration laws and secure our borders in their opposition to Ms.\nSaldana.\n  Ironically, my Republican colleagues are opposing the nomination of\nthe Director of an agency responsible for these very things: securing\nour border and enforcing our immigration laws. Some Republicans do not\neven want to fund the Department of Homeland Security at all.\n  Those who are concerned about immigration enforcement and border\nsecurity should ask themselves: How does opposing Sarah Saldana's\nnomination and putting DHS funding in question make our borders more\nsecure? How do these actions ensure effective enforcement of our laws?\nThey do not.\n  If you want to truly and permanently address our broken immigration\nsystem, we need Congress to work together to pass comprehensive\nimmigration reform, which the American people overwhelmingly support.\nIt has been over a year since comprehensive immigration reform was\npassed on the Senate floor. Congress must continue working to pass\ncommonsense, humane reform that puts families first.\n  As the President himself has said, Executive action does not replace\ncongressional action. To those in Congress concerned with what he has\ndone, we need to step up. We need to pass comprehensive reform. But in\nthe meantime, we need to confirm Sarah Saldana so she can get on with\nthe job at ICE.\n  I urge my colleagues to vote yes on her nomination.\n\n                           Order of Procedure\n\n  I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now recess until 2:15 p.m.;\nthat following the 2:30 p.m. votes, the clerk report Executive Calendar\nNo. 1150, the Blinken nomination, and the time until 5 p.m. be equally\ndivided in the usual form, with all other provisions of the previous\norder remaining in effect.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6883", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "RECESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SRECESS", "S6883", "S6884", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6883", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6883-S6884]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                                 RECESS\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate stands in\nrecess until 2:15 p.m.\n\n[[Page S6884]]\n\n  Thereupon, the Senate, at 1:08 p.m., recessed until 2:15 p.m. and\nreassembled when called to order by the Presiding Officer (Ms.\nBaldwin).\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6884", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF SARAH R. SALDANA TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HOMELAND SECURITY--Continued", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6884", "S6886", "[{\"name\": \"Thomas R. Carper\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Patrick J. Leahy\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Michael B. Enzi\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Roger F. Wicker\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6884", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6884-S6886]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nNOMINATION OF SARAH R. SALDANA TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF HOMELAND\n                          SECURITY--Continued\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 2:30\np.m. will be equally divided in the usual form.\n  Who yields time?\n  If neither side yields time, both sides will be equally charged.\n  The Senator from Delaware.\n  Mr. CARPER. Madam President, I rise today to urge my colleagues to\nvote in a few minutes to confirm Sarah Saldana to be Assistant\nSecretary for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.\n  A number of our friends have come to the floor opposing Ms. Saldana's\nnomination, but incredibly enough, I have not heard them question her\nqualifications. Their opposition appears to be in response to the\nPresident's decision to bring 5 million hard-working, law-abiding\nimmigrants out of the shadows earlier this month.\n  Let me just say, as one Member of the Senate, we can quarrel about\nthe timing and we can quarrel about the policy. I think for the most\npart the policy in the President's proposal is good. Do I wish we had\ndone it as a body? Do I wish we had done our job? You bet I do. But I\nwish the President had delayed the announcement until a little bit\nlater this year. He did not. So that is where we are.\n  Whether you like the President's Executive order or not, today it is\nabout whether we take our responsibility seriously to ensure that\nFederal agencies have the leadership they need to operate efficiently\nand effectively.\n  The single most important ingredient of any organization, I do not\ncare whether it is a governmental entity--I spent some time in the\nNavy--whether it is a military unit, whether it is a sports team,\nwhether it is a school, business, whatever it might be, the single most\nimportant ingredient to the success of that entity is leadership.\n  This is an agency where we are talking about filling a big gap in\nleadership in Immigration and Customs Enforcement. We call it ICE. It\nis critical. It is a critical law enforcement agency within the\nDepartment of Homeland Security. Listen to this: It has been without a\nPresidentially appointed leader now for more than 16 months. That is\nfar too long, particularly when we consider all the issues we face\nalong our borders and the more than 400 laws that this agency,\nImmigration and Customs Enforcement, enforces.\n  The agency plays a critical role in securing our borders. They take\ndangerous criminals off the streets. They send them back to their own\ncountries in many instances. In fact, on any given day ICE arrests some\n370 criminal aliens in the interior of our country, they have some\n34,000 people in detention in this country, and they remove nearly 500\ncriminal aliens from our country ever day. Every day all that happens.\n  Managing such a large agency, with one of the most complex missions\nin the Federal Government, is a tall, tall order. This mission is made\nall the harder when the agency is forced to go month after month\nwithout permanent leadership.\n  Immigration and Customs Enforcement had the unfortunate distinction\nof finishing last in the annual survey of employee morale among Federal\nagencies. That is right--actually, not last; they were tied for last.\nIn how many agencies were the employees really quizzed or questioned\nabout whether they are satisfied with their work? They finished last\nout of not 100, not 200, not 300, but out of 314 agencies. When I\nvisited the agency recently, employees told me that one of their\nbiggest frustrations was the lack of Senate-confirmed leadership.\nThankfully, this is one problem we can remedy, and we can remedy it\ntoday.\n  Ms. Saldana is a true American success story. She rose from humble\nbeginnings in South Texas as the youngest of seven children. She went\non to become an accomplished partner at a major law firm. She is now\none of the Nation's top law enforcement officers. She could not be more\nqualified to lead Immigration and Customs Enforcement.\n  But do not take my word for it. One of our good friends here in the\nSenate, Mr. John Cornyn, the senior Senator from Texas, felt strongly\nenough about her qualifications that he was good enough to come and\nintroduce Ms. Saldana at her confirmation hearing before the committee\nI chair and the Presiding Officer serves on, the Committee on Homeland\nSecurity and Governmental Affairs. Senator Cornyn told us that day that\nshe was highly qualified, fiercely independent, and had served her\nState with honor.\n\n  This is what he said:\n\n       If respect for the rule of law is our standard, and I think\n     it should be, we would be hard pressed to find a person more\n     qualified to enforce the law than Ms. Saldana.\n\n  His comments. That is high praise, and I could not agree more.\n  Nevertheless, Senator Cornyn and some of his colleagues now oppose\nSarah Saldana's nomination--not because she is unqualified, not because\nshe does not work hard, not because she does not have good values, but\nbecause she will have to carry out the President's recent Executive\norder on immigration. That may be understandable. I think it is also\nunfortunate. It does not punish the President to leave this position\nunfilled. It does not just punish the employees to leave this position\nunfilled. In the end, it punishes the citizens of this country. It\nmakes it harder for Immigration and Customs Enforcement to accomplish\nits critical mission of helping to secure our borders. It makes it\nharder for them to do their job in terms of taking dangerous criminals\noff of our streets. And it hurts the men and women at ICE who deserve a\nleader to ensure this important agency runs as effectively as possible.\n  I believe the President acted within the bounds--I know not everyone\nagrees with me on this, but I believe the President acted within the\nbounds of the law in announcing his Executive action. While I may\nquarrel with the timing of it, I also feel very deeply if we--not in\nthis body but in the other body on the other side of the Capitol--had\ndone our job with respect to immigration reform, we would not have this\ndustup today over this nomination. But whether or not you agree with\nme, opposing Ms. Saldana's nomination will do nothing to change what\nthe President has done--nothing.\n  I said it before; I will say it again. It is irresponsible for us to\nleave a critical agency such as this without a proven leader. It has\nbeen more than 16 months. It should not be another month or two or\nthree.\n  So I hope Ms. Saldana--the first Hispanic person and the second woman\never to be nominated to run Immigration and Customs Enforcement--does\nnot fall victim to politics here in the Senate. By all accounts, she is\nexactly what this critical agency needs: a proven leader, a respected\nmember of the law enforcement community.\n  I urge all of my colleagues--Democratic and Republican and even the\ntwo Independents who are here with us serving their States--I urge you\nto support her. I am proud to do that today.\n  Thank you, Madam President.\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before\nthe Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.\n  The bill clerk read as follows:\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the\n     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,\n     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of\n     Sarah R. Saldana, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of\n     Homeland Security.\n         Harry Reid, Thomas R. Carper, Patrick J. Leahy, Patty\n           Murray, Tom Udall, Brian Schatz, Charles E. Schumer,\n           Barbara Boxer, Benjamin L. Cardin, Richard Blumenthal,\n           Jeff Merkley, Al Franken, Robert P. Casey, Jr., Martin\n           Heinrich, Elizabeth Warren, Richard J. Durbin,\n           Christopher Murphy.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate\nthat debate on the nomination of Sarah R. Saldana, of Texas, to be an\nAssistant Secretary of Homeland Security, shall be brought to a close?\n  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The bill clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\n\n[[Page S6885]]\n\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), and the Senator from\nAlabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber\ndesiring to vote?\n  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 53, nays 41, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 359 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--53\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Leahy\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--41\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Blunt\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Hatch\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kirk\n     Lee\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--6\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 53, the nays are\n41.\n  The motion is agreed to.\n  Mr. LEAHY. Madam President, today, we will vote on the nomination of\nMs. Sarah Saldana to serve as Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security,\nwhere she will lead the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, ICE,\noffice. Ms. Saldana has been considered and favorably reported by both\nthe Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee and the\nSenate Judiciary Committee.\n  A native of South Texas, Ms. Saldana is the youngest of seven\nchildren. Inspired by her mother's emphasis on education, Ms. Saldana\nwent to college and graduated from law school. She established a\nsuccessful career as an attorney in private practice before becoming a\nFederal prosecutor. In 2011, with the support of her home State\nSenators from Texas, the Senate unanimously confirmed her as U.S.\nattorney for the Northern District of Texas, and she became the first\nLatina U.S. attorney in the State's history. In this position, Ms.\nSaldana has earned a reputation as a tough but fair prosecutor.\nThroughout her career, she has demonstrated a firm and unequivocal\ncommitment to enforcing the law, and she has pledged that she will\nmaintain that commitment if confirmed to lead ICE.\n  At her hearing before the Senate Homeland Security and Government\nAffairs Committee in September, Senator Cornyn introduced Ms. Saldana\nand vouched for her qualifications, stating: ``If respect for the rule\nof law is our standard . . . we would be hard-pressed to find a person\nmore qualified to enforce the law than Ms. Saldana.'' I agree. Ms.\nSaldana has made clear that, if confirmed, she will ``faithfully\nexecute all immigration laws, including those laws that [she] or the\nPresident disagree with.''\n  Some want to use Ms. Saldana's nomination as an opportunity to attack\nPresident Obama's Executive action on immigration, but that is not the\nissue we are considering today. There is no evidence that she was\ninvolved in either the House's refusal to allow a vote on the Senate-\npassed comprehensive immigration reform bill or the President's\ndecision to take what steps he could in the wake of the House's refusal\nto act. The vote before us concerns Ms. Saldana's qualifications to\nlead ICE, and she has proved that she is more than capable of executing\nthe duties of the position. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has\nbeen without a Senate-confirmed leader for more than a year. If\nSenators want our immigration laws enforced, they should focus on\nfilling this key leadership position.\n  There is no question that Sarah Saldana is qualified to lead the\nImmigration and Customs Enforcement office. I urge Senators to vote to\nconfirm her to this important law enforcement position at the\nDepartment of Homeland Security without further delay.\n  Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I wish to express my opposition to the\nnomination of Sarah Saldana to be Assistant Secretary of Homeland\nSecurity.\n  My concerns are not based on Ms. Saldana's qualifications. In fact I\nsupported reporting her out of the Homeland Security and Governmental\nAffairs Committee on November 12, 2014 with every other member of that\ncommittee. However, in the wake of the President's unilateral changes\nto our immigration policies through Executive actions, I cannot support\nher confirmation at this time.\n  The head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement is responsible for\nenforcing Federal laws governing border control, customs, trade and\nimmigration. But last month President Obama announced that he and his\nCabinet do not intend to deport several million illegal immigrants, and\nI cannot vote for someone who will not enforce our laws.\n  By circumventing Congress on immigration and instituting his will\nthrough Executive actions last month, President Obama is eroding the\nvery foundation of our country and form of government. This sets a\ndangerous precedent where future Presidents can flout any law they\nhappen to disagree with and alter the law without going through\nCongress. Each branch of government is to act as a check against the\nothers and not sit idly by as one exercises authority it does not have.\n  For these reasons I must oppose Ms. Saldana's nomination at this\ntime.\n  Under the previous order, all postcloture time has expired. The\nquestion occurs on the nomination.\n  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination\nof Sarah R. Saldana, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland\nSecurity?\n  Mr. WICKER. I ask for the yeas and nays.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?\n  There appears to be a sufficient second.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant bill clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), and the Senator from\nAlabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Manchin). Are there any other Senators in\nthe Chamber desiring to vote?\n  The result was announced--yeas 55, nays 39, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 360 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--55\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coburn\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Hatch\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Leahy\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--39\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Blunt\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Collins\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kirk\n     Lee\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--6\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to\nreconsider is considered made and laid\n\n[[Page S6886]]\n\nupon the table, and the President will be immediately notified of the\nSenate's action.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6886", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF ANTONY BLINKEN TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6886", "S6897", "[{\"name\": \"Barbara A. Mikulski\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Orrin G. Hatch\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Benjamin L. Cardin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Johnny Isakson\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Hoeven\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Sheldon Whitehouse\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Tom Coburn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John McCain\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Robert Menendez\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Michael B. Enzi\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jon Tester\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3013\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3019\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6886", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6886-S6897]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n      NOMINATION OF ANTONY BLINKEN TO BE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF STATE\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will\nproceed to the consideration of the following nomination, which the\nclerk will report.\n  The bill clerk read the nomination of Antony Blinken, of New York, to\nbe Deputy Secretary of State.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the time until 5\np.m. will be equally divided in the usual form.\n  The Senator from Maryland.\n\n         Unanimous Consent Request--Executive Calendar No. 1058\n\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I come to the floor with my colleague\nSenator Ben Cardin from Maryland.\n  Mr. President, the Senate is not in order.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order. Take your\nconversations out of the Chamber.\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Does that mean all conversations, Mr. President?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Please take your conversations outside the\nChamber. Thank you.\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. President, I am on the floor, along with my\ncolleague Senator Ben Cardin from Maryland, to advocate for Carolyn\nColvin to be confirmed as the Social Security Commissioner, making her\nthe chief executive officer of the Social Security Administration.\n  I am very frustrated that her nomination has become a casualty of the\nSenate clock and unfair attacks by some Members of the Republican\nParty. We need a Social Security Administrator and we need a competent,\nqualified person to lead it and that is Carolyn Colvin. Ms. Colvin's\nnomination is important because the work of the Social Security\nAdministration is important.\n  Over 60 million Americans rely on Social Security--900,000 in\nMaryland. Seniors, individuals with disabilities, and children depend\non the benefits and services of the Social Security Administration. It\nis a big agency with big responsibilities. It supports 63,000 Social\nSecurity employees; 11,000 are in the Social Security headquarters in\nWoodlawn. It is not about the numbers, it is about what they do.\n  Guess what they do. They administer $950 billion in benefit payments,\napproximately 25 percent of all government spending. Last year over 40\nmillion people came to its field offices, 47 million people called the\n800 number, 5 million came for retirement, 2.8 million came for their\ndisability. I go through the numbers because it shows an agency, with\nthe magnitude of its responsibility, making sure we determine who is\neligible for Social Security, that there is no fraud in Social\nSecurity, and that it is administered in a competent, careful way for\nthe American people.\n  That means you have to have a permanent Administrator; you cannot\nhave someone acting. That is why we go to Carolyn Colvin. She is\nskilled. She is seasoned. She is experienced. She started out as a\nclerk at Social Security, and in her public service she has risen\nthrough the ranks in a variety of very important positions, being well\nknown and well respected, and is an excellent public administrator. She\nis a problem solver, she is a reformer, and she has been the Deputy\nsince December 2010 and Acting Commissioner since February 2013.\n  I am frustrated at the attacks on Ms. Colvin. It is about a techno\nboondoggle that began under her predecessor, not under her. In fact,\nshe commissioned the McKinsey & Company to study the problem. The\nminute she wanted to get to the bottom of the problem, she was accused\nof all kinds of things.\n  Everything has been referred to the inspector general. They said\nlet's wait for the inspector general. Guess what. The inspectors\ngeneral keep recusing themselves for this reason or that reason. While\nthey are recusing, the Republicans are using it as excusing, and we\ncan't get to Carolyn Colvin.\n  For those who need Social Security, as well as for those who want to\nmake sure the benefits are administered competently, we need a\npermanent Administrator.\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the\nfollowing nomination: Calendar No. 1058, the nomination of Carolyn\nWatts Colvin to be the Commissioner of Social Security; and further\nthat the Senate proceed to vote on the confirmation of the nomination;\nthe motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table\nwith no intervening action or debate; and that no further motions be in\norder to the nomination; that any related statements be printed in the\nRecord; and that the President be immediately notified of the Senate's\naction.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Mr. HATCH. Reserving the right to object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  Mr. HATCH. No, Mr. President; reserving the right to object.\n  I spoke at length on the floor about my opposition to confirming Ms.\nColvin at this time. While I do not doubt Ms. Colvin's qualifications\nfor this position, there is a cloud hanging over her nomination, and I\ndo not believe the Senate should move forward with her confirmation\nuntil that cloud is removed.\n  Since Ms. Colvin's nomination was reported out of the Finance\nCommittee, several sources, including the House Ways and Means\nSubcommittee on Social Security, the House Oversight and Government\nReform Committee, and individual whistleblowers have reported that the\nSocial Security Administration, over a 6-year period, burned through\n$300 million in a failed attempt to develop and implement the\nDisability Case Processing System or DCPS. Some of this happened on Ms.\nColvin's watch as she has served as Acting Commissioner of the SSA.\n  Sadly, it gets worse. We also heard allegations from multiple sources\nthat SSA officials intentionally misled the agency's inspector general,\nas well as Congress, about the deficiencies in the development of the\nDCPS in order to facilitate Ms. Colvin's confirmation in the Senate.\n  These are serious allegations, and an investigation--one that may\nvery well conclude a criminal element--is ongoing. Once again, Ms.\nColvin currently serves as the Acting Commissioner of SSA. This\ninvestigation includes people working in her immediate office.\n  Put simply, the Senate should not move forward on her nomination\nuntil this matter is resolved. I intend to work with our two colleagues\nfrom Maryland to see if we can resolve this issue. It may very well be\nthat Ms. Colvin has done nothing wrong. I voted for her out of\ncommittee. I certainly hope she has done nothing wrong. I hope that is\nthe case. But we should at least be sure before we move her nomination\nforward; therefore, I have to object at this time.\n  I believe my colleague Senator Isakson may have some comments on this\nmatter as well.\n  I will surely try to work with my colleagues and see if we can\nexpedite this if there is no problem.\n  I have nothing against Ms. Colvin at all. In fact, I interviewed her\nin my office. I quite enjoyed meeting with her.\n  We will see what we can do to move this forward, but as of right now\nI have to object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  The junior Senator from Maryland.\n  Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I greatly respect Senator Hatch and his\nrespect for the integrity of our system. I know he is acting with his\nsincere beliefs, but I am disappointed and I need to say that.\n  The inspector general's report is a serious investigation. It\ninvolves episodes that took place during the previous administration in\nwhich the Commissioner was appointed by a Republican. There is no\nindication at all of Carolyn Colvin being the subject of the\ninvestigation.\n  In fact, she has tried to take steps to be totally open and\ntransparent about what has happened and has been totally forthcoming\nwith our committee, the Ways and Means Committee, in providing\ninformation.\n  I wish to stress what Senator Mikulski said about the urgency of this\nmatter. If we don't confirm her during the lameduck session, it will be\nmore than 2 years that the Social Security Administration has operated\nwithout a\n\n[[Page S6887]]\n\nconfirmed Commissioner. This is one of the most important agencies in\nthe government.\n  As an Acting Commissioner, she cannot appoint her key team in order\nto carry out the responsibilities of the Social Security\nAdministration. The morale of the agency is very much impacted when you\ncan't get a confirmed Commissioner. Quite frankly, the Senate Finance\nCommittee recommended her appointment 3 months ago, and as Senator\nHatch pointed out, it was a 22-to-2 vote. The vote in the Senate\nFinance Committee at that time was not even close, and now we cannot\nget her confirmed.\n  As Senator Mikulski pointed out, we know Carolyn Colvin. She started\nout as a stenographer clerk at the Social Security Administration in\nthe 1960s while working her way through college. She went on to become\nthe Deputy Commissioner, carrying out major responsibilities.\n  Her passion has always been for public service. She was the secretary\nfor human resources for the State of Maryland. She knows State; she\nknows Federal. Her whole life has been devoted to public service. She\nis a very honorable person and is dedicated to leading the Social\nSecurity Administration.\n  We have some very critical issues in the next Congress, and we may\nhave some different views on some of those issues, but that is what\nthis Senate is about--to debate those issues. But we need to have a\nconfirmed Commissioner in place to help us sort through the challenges\nwe face. Tens of millions of Americans depend upon the Social Security\nsystem. They demand accountability, not just from us but from the\nagency. How can you have accountability if you don't have a confirmed\nCommissioner?\n  All I can say is we have a qualified person who has gone through the\nprocess and has been recommended by the committee. She has all the\ntalent, commitment, and drive to do the job, and it looks like we are\nnot going to be able to get this person confirmed. If we don't confirm\nher now, we will have to wait until the next Congress and start all\nover again, and we don't know how long that will take.\n  I appreciate Senator Hatch's willingness to work with us, and I know\nwe will work together on this issue. Senator Hatch has always been an\nhonorable person--and I very much appreciate that--to work with on so\nmany different issues, but I have to express to my colleagues my deep\ndisappointment that we cannot get this nomination up for a vote.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.\n  Mr. ISAKSON. Mr. President, I have the greatest of regard for my two\ncolleagues from the State of Maryland, and I respect their passion for\nthis nominee, but I rise to support delaying the advancement of Carolyn\nColvin for the Social Security Administration, and I wish to explain\nwhy. In fact, my reasons somewhat address some of the reasons for my\nurgency.\n  I interviewed Carolyn Colvin on July 29 as a nominee to come before\nthe Finance Committee in my office, as I do with every nominee who will\ntalk to me. It was 2 days after the 2014 trustee's report of the Social\nSecurity Administration--a report that talked about the disability\ntrust fund being in danger by 2016 and Social Security being in danger\nin 22 years.\n  I asked her questions about what she would recommend to us to fix the\nunfunded mandates that would be coming up with Social Security. Her\nanswers were at best glib and at worst nonexistent.\n  I was one of the two votes against her nomination that Senator Cardin\nreferred to in the committee because I didn't feel I got the kind of\npassionate answer I needed from her as someone who was going to run the\nSocial Security Administration.\n  Subsequent to that vote, and before today's debate, the issue came up\narising from the disability technology problem and the investigation\nthat is taking place at the Social Security Administration.\n  I recognize this implementation took place before she was in the\nposition she is now in, but she is in a position of responsibility at\nthe Administration. So until that investigation is complete, I think it\nwould be a rush to judgment to confirm her for the position.\n  I don't get up and oppose many people on the floor of the Senate. I\ntake my job very seriously, but I do represent the people of my State--\nthose who are Social Security beneficiaries today and those who will be\nbeneficiaries in the future.\n  I was reading an announcement today about the chief counsel, who is\nalso the State director in my office in Georgia, Edward Tate. He and\nhis wife recently had a baby, Whitaker McMillan Tate, born 4 months\nago. Seventy years from now he will probably be a beneficiary in the\nSocial Security Administration. We have to fix it in some way so it is\nthere for him in the future.\n  I want to make sure the appointees we approve in this Senate are\nappointees--while they have the Social Security Administration under\ntheir care--who will do the things I would want them to do so when I am\nlong gone, those children who will be beneficiaries in the future will\nhave the funds and the money and the Administration to see to it that\nthey are paid.\n  Reluctantly, but for reasons of commitment, I object to the\nadvancement of the nomination of Carolyn Colvin to the Social Security\nAdministration.\n  I yield the floor.\n  Ms. MIKULSKI. To be continued.\n  Mr. CARDIN. I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. HOEVEN. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum\ncall be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                      Tax Increase Prevention Act\n\n  Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I am here this afternoon to talk about the\nTax Increase Prevention Act. I have been speaking on this issue and I\nintend to speak on it until we get this legislation passed. I am\nhopeful that we will get this legislation moved tonight or maybe even\ntomorrow. But in any event, we need to get this very important\nlegislation passed this week to make sure that taxes don't go up on our\nsmall businesses, farmers, and the hard-working citizens of this\ncountry. That is why I have been down talking about the legislation and\nits importance, and I have also been presenting and reading letters and\nemails from my constituents who have been contacting me about the\nimportance of getting this done. I want them to be heard because they\nknow very well how heavy their tax burden is and why we need to make\nsure they get relief for their families and for their businesses. I am\ntalking about family farmers, men and women who work long hours and\nlong days on the farm. I am talking about small business owners,\nmanufacturers, shopkeepers, the whole gamut of small businesses across\nthis great country, your neighbors and mine.\n  First I am going to talk about some of the provisions in the\nlegislation. I am going to start with one that is incredibly important\nfor farmers in my State but really for small businesses across the\ncountry, as I said earlier. That is the section 179 small business\nexpensing and depreciation provision.\n  The section 179 small business expensing limitation and phaseout\namounts in effect from 2010 to 2013 through 2015: Taxpayers can expense\nup to $500,000 of acquired business property, rather than the current\nlevel of expensing $25,000 and $200,000 respectively. The $200,000 is\non the depreciation.\n  The section 179 expensing and depreciation provision is very\nimportant for small businesses. It is very important that we get it in\nplace now because they are doing their year-end planning, and they are\ndoing their tax planning. They need to know the rules of the road. They\nneed to know what they can expense and what they can depreciate and how\nmuch. It is not just an issue of preparing their tax returns; it is\nalso very much an issue in terms of their planning for next year. What\nequipment do they buy? If you are a farmer, what ag equipment do you\nbuy? If you are a small manufacturer, what manufacturing equipment do\nyou buy? What repairs do you do? Can you expense those repairs or do\nyou have to go through an elaborate process of setting up a\ndepreciation schedule and then depreciate that repair over a long\nperiod of time?\n\n[[Page S6888]]\n\n  These are things that make it very difficult to do business for small\nbusinesses and also impede their willingness and their ability to go\nout and buy equipment and to make those needed repairs to keep their\noperation running. That hurts our economy. That hurts job creation in\nour country. It is very important. The section 179 provision is\nincredibly important to our farmers and small businesses throughout the\ncountry.\n  Also, another very important provision is the bonus depreciation for\nproperty that is placed in service during 2014 or, in some cases, 2015\nfor property with a longer production period. If we are not allowed to\ntake that depreciation, you may not buy that new equipment. If you\ndon't buy that new equipment, obviously that has ramifications all the\nway through our economy.\n  There are eight provisions in the legislation for individuals,\nincluding the deductibility of State and local sales tax, the deduction\nof certain expenses for elementary and secondary schoolteachers, the\nextension of the above-the-line-deduction for qualified tuition, and\nthe extension of tax redistributions from individual retirement plans\nfor charitable purposes.\n  Also included in the legislation are a total of 30 business-related\nprovisions in addition to section 179 and the bonus depreciation. They\nare very important and make a big difference in terms of the taxes our\nbusinesses will be required to pay.\n  The legislation includes the research and development tax credit that\nallows companies a 20-percent credit for incremental qualified research\nexpenses or a 14-percent alternative simplified credit for R&D\nperformed in the United States. I will use an example. We have a large\nMicrosoft location in my State, in Fargo. They employ more than 1,700\npeople at their campus in Fargo.\n  I am going to use Microsoft as an example. Microsoft is on a pace to\nspend over $12 billion on research and development this year, primarily\non U.S. jobs. Other countries are competing for the same R&D investment\nfrom Microsoft and other companies. Many of them have lower corporate\nincome tax rates, they have stable R&D incentives, and plenty of\nresearch and development talent. A consistent and stable U.S. R&D tax\ncredit gives businesses such as Microsoft an incentive to invest and do\nthat research and development in the United States versus some other\ncountry.\n  Again, we are talking about not only economic activity and jobs in\nour country, but we are talking about innovation right in our country\nthat drives job creation and economic growth. As I said, the real key,\nI believe, is the impact this legislation has on small business across\nthis country. Small business is the backbone of our economy.\n  I want to take a few minutes to read some more of the letters and\nemails I have been receiving on the importance of passing this\nlegislation and putting in place the section 179 expensing and\ndepreciation for our small businesses.\n  The first letter I am going to read is from Wayne Hauge, a CPA from\nRay, ND, a small town in North Dakota. He is speaking on behalf of many\nof his clients. He writes:\n\n       Senator Hoeven, what about the IRC Section 179? $25,000 is\n     far too low of a limit, and should be eliminated if that is\n     all that can be expensed in a year. Far better would be\n     reinstating prior limits and making such a change permanent.\n       A farmer does not plan a crop after you've harvested it.\n     You plan it a year in advance. Income tax planning is the\n     same. It is an extremely poor financial planner who decides\n     to buy something based on an ever-changing tax policy, and\n     after the fact.\n       I realize the political system in this country is\n     stagnated, with refusals by both parties to agree on\n     anything. But the time is now to put some semblance of future\n     planning back on the table and help us to stay on top of the\n     game, rather than whining about what should have been done.\n\n  We owe it to Wayne and his clients to get this bill done before we\nleave.\n  Here is another one. This one is from Mike Van Gorkom with Titan\nMachinery in Wishek, ND. Titan Machinery is a dealer for Case IH, Case\nConstruction, New Holland, and New Holland Construction. Titan\nMachinery also represents Titan Rentals, Titan Aggregate, and a varied\nlist of short-line equipment to meet specialized customer demand and\nniche product needs.\n\n       I was just wondering if anyone can tell me when to expect a\n     vote on extending Section 179 tax deductions. I have been\n     following this bill along with many of my customers. Many\n     farmers are waiting to purchase equipment from me until they\n     find out if they can use it for this year's deductions or\n     wait until next year. Thank you and have a nice day.\n\n  Lawrence D. Stockert, a small business owner in Bismarck, ND, wants\nto purchase new equipment this year, but he is not certain he can\nbecause we have yet to pass the tax extender package. He writes:\n\n       I would like to know if there is a possibility for the\n     Senate to pass the increases in the Section 179 depreciation\n     rules. The previous year's provision enabled me to buy new\n     equipment. Can you take this bill to the Senate and get it\n     passed? I would like to purchase additional equipment this\n     year as well.\n\n  Then from Stephen Stafki, vice president of service, General\nEquipment & Supplies in Fargo, ND. He is concerned about the bonus\ndepreciation provision in the extender package. The Tax Increase\nPrevention Act extends the 50-percent bonus depreciation to property\nacquired and placed in service during 2014 or 2015 for certain property\nwith a longer production period. He writes:\n\n       Senator Hoeven, I am writing to you to express my support\n     for passing bonus depreciation before the end of 2014. As a\n     small business owner this legislation is crucial to us and\n     our customer base. I truly hope you will fight to push this\n     legislation through Congress and garner enough support to be\n     able to override any Presidential veto.\n\n  The last letter I would like to read today comes from Jay Hansen of\nFargo, ND. It is especially telling, because like the earlier letter I\nread from a CPA, he is also a CPA. Essentially he is speaking for the\n1,000 farmers whom he does work for.\n\n       My name is Jay Hansen. I am a CPA working for Iver Eliason\n     CPA PC in Minot, ND. We have approximately 1,000 farm clients\n     who rely heavily on depreciating farm machinery as part of\n     their overall tax planning strategy. With the discussion\n     regarding the tax extender bill being on the agenda before\n     the end of the year, we are curious to know if you have any\n     insight on what we can expect and when we can expect it. Any\n     information you can provide me regarding the Section 179\n     expense deduction would be greatly appreciated.\n\n  So time is of the essence. We are days from the end of the tax year,\ndays away from the holidays. Millions of Americans are depending on us\nto spare them a burden that will hurt their businesses and hurt their\nfamilies. If we do not act, taxes will go up on hard-working Americans,\non small businesses across this country, on farmers. So we need to act.\nWe need to make sure that does not happen. We need to pass the\nlegislation we have here on the floor. We need to get it done now.\n  So I urge my colleagues to join together in bipartisan fashion and\nget this done. Let's pass the Tax Increase Prevention Act and make sure\nwe do not see a tax increase on our small businesses and the hard-\nworking taxpayers of this great Nation.\n  I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                             Climate Change\n\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, we are winding down the end of this\nyear and, indeed, the end of this Congress, and I am here today to give\nthe last ``Time to Wake Up'' speech in this Congress. I am particularly\npleased to be delivering it while my friend from West Virginia is\npresiding. He actually took the trouble to come to Rhode Island and\nhear firsthand about what is happening in my State on these issues.\n  The year that is ending now ushered in some mighty dubious\nmilestones. January through November 2014--the year so far--were the\nhottest first 11 months of any year recorded. Unless something dramatic\nchanges in December, 2014 is on track to be the hottest year since we\nbegan keeping records back in 1880. That would mean that 14 of the\nwarmest 15 years on record were in this century. According to the World\nMeteorological Organization's secretary general, ``There is no\nstandstill in global warming.''\n  This chart shows the decades-long rise in the ocean's heat content\nfrom the surface down to a depth of 2,000 meters--a little over 1 mile.\nLook at 2005 to 2014, the red part. NASA estimates that the amount of\nenergy needed to\n\n[[Page S6889]]\n\naccount for that much warming in that much ocean is equivalent to four\nmagnitude-6.0 earthquakes occurring every second for those 9 years.\nFour 6.0 earthquakes every second for 9 years would create the kind of\nenergy necessary to warm that much. Well, obviously it wasn't\nearthquakes that did it. We would have known about that. And the first\nlaw of thermodynamics--conservation of energy--decrees that all that\nheat in the ocean had to come from somewhere. The near certain source\nof that heat is increased greenhouse gases, mostly carbon pollution\ntrapping heat from the Sun.\n  Since the rise of fossil fuel energy, we have been on a carbon binge.\nAs long as humans have been on the Earth, we have existed safely in a\nrange of about 170 to about 300 parts per million carbon dioxide in the\natmosphere. This year the concentration of carbon dioxide in the\natmosphere, measured at the famous Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii,\nexceeded 400 parts per million for more than 3 months. Archeologists\nestimate that our human species has been around on this planet for\nabout 200,000 years. The Earth last saw such high levels of carbon as\n400 parts per million for that long a period more than 800,000 years\nago.\n  Oceans have absorbed more than 90 percent of the excess heat that the\ncarbon has trapped. As seawater warms--we all know by the law of\nthermal expansion--it expands, and as a result sea levels rise.\nSatellite measurements show that in this period, global average sea\nlevel rose about an inch. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory attributes\nabout one-third of global mean sea level rise to the warming of the\nupper ocean. Combine that with the melting of glaciers on land, and you\ncan see that climate change is significantly increasing sea level\nworldwide. In my home State I see this. And the Presiding Officer was\nthere. The Newport tide gauge records nearly 10 inches more water than\nit did in the 1930s.\n  Carbon pollution in the atmosphere also dissolves in the ocean. It\ndoesn't just warm it up, it dissolves in it. When it dissolves in it,\nit makes it more acidic. Indeed, the extra carbon dioxide that humans\nhave pumped into the oceans has caused a nearly 30 percent increase in\nthe acidity of the upper ocean, which means a lot for shellfish, such\nas mussels and clams and oysters, that make their shells from calcium\ncarbonate because calcium carbonate dissolves in acidified seawater.\n  In July 2014 a Maine oyster farmer--a guy named Bill Mook--came to\nthe Environment and Public Works Committee and described for us the\ndifficulty his oyster crop--his oyster spat, they call it--had\nmaturing. Here is what he said:\n\n       Through observation, trial, and error, we reached the same\n     conclusion made by researchers using controlled, replicated\n     experimentation. Acidification is not a future problem. It is\n     a problem now, and it will only get worse.\n\n  He said it is a problem now and it will only get worse.\n  Measurements of the atmosphere and ocean tell us that climate change\nis real. We already see the harm connected with it in storm-damaged\nhomes, flooded cities, drought-stricken farms, and raging wildfires, in\nfish disappearing from warming, acidifying waters, in shifting habitats\nand migrating contagions. Climate change loads the dice for these\nevents, which carry real costs to homeowners, business owners, and\ntaxpayers. A key cause is undeniably carbon pollution.\n  Some of my Republican colleagues continue to deny that climate change\nis even happening or at best they will stand mute in the face of the\nchanges we see, in the face of so much evidence. ``I am not a\nscientist'' is all we get from some. Well, if they are not scientists,\nmaybe they should ask one. Ask NOAA. Ask NASA. Ask our National\nAcademies. If a Senator doesn't know what they are talking about, they\nshould study up. That is our job. If they can't be bothered to ask a\nscientist, then look at what the military is saying about climate\nchange or what the business community is saying.\n\n  The military's 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review, for example, offers a\nstraightforward assessment of the threat climate change poses to\nnational and international security. Even in Pentagon bureaucratese,\nthe assessment is pretty harsh:\n\n       Climate change poses [a] significant challenge for the\n     United States and the world at large.\n       Climate change may exacerbate water scarcity and lead to\n     sharp increases in food costs. The pressures caused by\n     climate change will influence resource competition while\n     placing additional burdens on economies, societies, and\n     governance institutions around the world.\n\n  The Pentagon also released a Climate Change Adaptation Roadmap this\nyear, detailing the military's plans for a changed climate. The report\nstates in no uncertain terms:\n\n       Climate change will affect the Department of Defense's\n     ability to defend the Nation and poses immediate risks to\n     U.S. national security.\n\n  That would seem to me to be a phrase worth listening to.\n  The business and financial community also see climate risk. Former\nBush Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson teamed up with former New York\nCity business tycoon and Mayor Michael Bloomberg, former Republican\nSenator Olympia Snowe, and others, to put together an evidence-based\nassessment of the risks posed by climate change to the U.S. economy.\nTheir report found that between $66 billion and $106 billion worth of\nexisting American coastal property will likely be below sea level by\nmidcentury. That pricetag could top $500 billion by the end of the\ncentury.\n  They also found extreme heat could reduce labor productivity of\noutdoor workers by as much as 3 percent by the end of the century.\n  They found that shifting agricultural patterns could cause States in\nthe Southeast, the lower Great Plains, and Midwest to see a 50- to 70-\npercent loss in average annual crop yields. It is a risk we would be\nreckless to ignore.\n  One bright light of 2014 has been the proposed limits on carbon\nemissions from existing coal plants announced this year by the Obama\nadministration. The new standard will not only reduce emissions, it\nwill change the way the polluters think. Now that it is no longer going\nto be free to pollute, I suspect some new thinking by polluters will be\nfollowed in short order with some new thinking on the other side of the\naisle here in the Senate.\n  Another bright light of 2014 was the Obama administration's carbon-\nreduction agreement with China, the world's largest carbon polluter\nnow, followed by news this weekend from Lima that every nation in the\nworld is expected to put forward a plan to rein in its carbon\npollution.\n  The public is with us on this, too. A recent poll released by the\ninsurance firm Munich Re showed that 83 percent of Americans believe\nthe climate is changing.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. I ask unanimous consent for 1 additional minute to\nconclude the page in front of me.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Seven Americans in ten say we should use more solar\nand wind power to battle climate change. An AP poll released this week\nsaid that half of Republicans favor regulations on carbon dioxide\nemissions.\n  In 2014, the physical evidence of climate change continued to mount.\nOur military, our business leaders, our President, and the American\npeople all affirmed their commitment to fending off the worst effects\nof carbon pollution. So in 2015, Congress will need to step up to the\nplate.\n  I have introduced carbon fee legislation that would provide a\npractical tool for getting this done. By charging a fee on carbon\npollution, we can correct the market failure that lets polluters unload\nthe costs of their pollution on the rest of us, and compete unfairly in\nenergy markets. We can use those proceeds to reduce other taxes. Most\nimportant, we can significantly reduce harmful carbon pollution. We\njust need to wake up. Maybe 2015 will be the year.\n  I thank the Senator from Oklahoma for his courtesy, and I yield the\nfloor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.\n\n              Social Security Disability Program and Fraud\n\n  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I hope not to use all our remaining time.\nBut I come to the floor to talk about an issue that should be very\nimportant to every American.\n  In less than 20 months, the Social Security Disability system will be\nbankrupt--out of money. That may sound\n\n[[Page S6890]]\n\nlike just a scare tactic, but that is what the trust fund trustees say.\nAnd we have known this for some time.\n  My colleague Carl Levin, as chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on\nInvestigations, and myself as ranking, have spent a great deal of time\noversighting Social Security disability. We issued a report that had\nsome pretty remarkable findings in it. I thought I would go through\nsome of those findings today, because I have two major concerns.\n  One is that those people with true disabilities are going to see in\n18 months a 20-percent cut in what they get paid each month, and they\nare barely surviving on the disability payments we give them today.\n  The second thing is the failure of the Justice Department, when\nhanded an absolutely, totally perfect case to prosecute criminals\ntaking advantage not only of people with disabilities but other people\nof this country.\n  Social Security disability insurance is an important safety net for a\nlarge number of people--about 11 million--in this country. In the past\n5 years, we have gone from 11 million to 14.1 million applications for\ndisability--some of that is associated with our recession, but some\nwith true injury.\n  We started out very meticulously as we looked at this, and I wish to\napplaud some of the employees of the Social Security Administration\nbecause they were the ones who highlighted to me--people who worked in\nthe Oklahoma City Social Security office--the lousy quality of what was\nhappening as these were being processed.\n  So what we did is we went to the Social Security Administration and\nwe asked them to randomly select 300 case files--100 each--from 3\ndifferent geographical locations throughout the country. That included\nOklahoma County, in my home State.\n  What we looked at was a large random number of cases, most of them\ndrawn from decisions made by the Social Security Administration's 1,500\nadministrative law judges.\n  What we found, using Social Security's own criteria, was that 25\npercent of the cases were decided absolutely erroneously, according to\ntheir own rules and their own guidelines.\n  But that didn't surprise the Social Security Administration, because\nthey had been looking at it all along and they knew that, according to\ntheir records, 23 to 24 percent of all the cases had been being decided\nerroneously.\n  Our second step was to look where we saw this abuse at the highest,\nand that was in the Huntington, WV, Social Security Disability Hearing\nOffice. So Senator Levin and I set our investigators about doing a\ntotal and comprehensive investigation of that office.\n\n  The problems we found there were similar to the problems we found in\nour prior investigation in these three other offices, except much\nworse. The Huntington office got our attention in part because it\nprocessed more disability cases than almost every other Social Security\noffice in the Nation--much of that to just one attorney by the name of\nEric Christopher Conn.\n  Despite practicing in a town of only 500 people, Mr. Conn had become\nthe third highest paid disability attorney in the entire United States.\nHe helped thousands of people get on to the disability program, and in\n2010 he received $4 million in payments from the Social Security\ndisability program. The only other attorneys receiving more from SSA\nwere Charles Binder of Binder and Binder--who, I noticed, filed\nbankruptcy this week--who received $22 million; and Thomas Nash of\nChicago who received $6.3 million.\n  When we looked more closely at Mr. Conn's operations, what we found\nwere reasons for serious concern. While some of what Mr. Conn did\ninvolved outright fraud--which we have documented and proven--at times\nhe was simply able to exploit loopholes in Social Security's system.\nBoth of those things should be a concern to Congress.\n  To ensure the cases were approved and his attorney fees kept flowing,\nMr. Conn colluded with an ALJ in the Huntington office by the name of\nDavid B. Daughtery. The two men worked together to award hundreds of\nmillions, if not billions, of dollars in fraudulent disability claims.\nThis is an administrative law judge.\n  The plan involved several calculated steps. First, Judge Daugherty\nneeded to ensure that Mr. Conn's cases were assigned to him. Normally,\nagency rules require cases to be assigned to the ALJs on a rotational\nbasis, with the oldest case being assigned to a hearing date first.\nThis way, no one administrative law judge receives too many of one\nattorney's cases.\n  Judge Daugherty, however, would at times intercept Mr. Conn's cases\nand assign them to himself. If cases would slip past him and get\nassigned to another judge, Judge Daugherty would inappropriately go\ninto the computer system and move the case to his jurisdiction.\n  The next step in the plan involved Judge Daugherty calling Mr. Conn's\noffice every month to let them know what kind of additional evidence he\nneeded for each client to be able to award disability benefits. Judge\nDaugherty started the monthly call by relaying the name and Social\nSecurity number of each person he was ready to approve. He would then\nsay whether the new piece of evidence should relate to a mental or a\nphysical medical impairment. The list of claimants would then be typed\nup by employees in Mr. Conn's law firm. Mr. Conn's staff referred to\nthese monthly lists as the DB lists--the David B. Daugherty list.\n  We reviewed these DB lists, every one of them, from June 2006 through\nJuly 2010. Each list contained as many as 52 names each month. In\ntotal, the DB lists from that time period contained the names of 1,823\nclaimants who were all approved for disability benefits.\n  After Judge Daugherty told Mr. Conn the kind of medical evidence he\nneeded, the next step shifted to Mr. Conn to ensure a doctor provided\nthat evidence. Fortunately for Mr. Conn, he had a crew of doctors in\nhis pocket, ready to provide what he needed.\n  To find doctors willing to go along with him, Mr. Conn searched the\nInternet for ones with checkered pasts. The doctors Mr. Conn used often\nhad histories of malpractice and some had medical license revocations\nin multiple States. In fact, Mr. Conn's ``go-to'' doctor was the\nsubject of numerous malpractice lawsuits and even had his medical\nlicense revoked and suspended in several States. Mr. Conn scheduled the\nDB list of claimants to be seen by his doctors. The doctors spent as\nlittle as 15 minutes evaluating each claimant and sometimes saw 35 to\n40 claimants a day. Mr. Conn paid the doctors that he knew $500 for\neach claimant they saw.\n\n  The doctors would complete a form used by the agency to determine a\nclaimant's residual functional capacity to work in any job available in\nthe national economy. While the evidentiary forms provided by the\ndoctors were supposed to be specifically tailored to the physical or\nmental impairments of each client, all of Mr. Conn's forms were the\nsame. They were prefilled out. He had 15 versions of the physical form\nand 5 versions of the mental form that were rotated among the clients.\nAs a matter of fact, a committee determined that 97 of Mr. Conn's\nclaimants approved by Judge Daugherty had exactly the same residual\nfunctional capacity--a statistical impossibility. It could not happen.\n  Mr. Conn would then submit the RFC forms--the residual functional\ncapacity forms--with a brief description of the claimant to Judge\nDaugherty. Judge Daugherty would then approve the claim for benefits in\nan abbreviated decision, determining the evidence presented by Mr. Conn\noutweighed all the other evidence in the claimant's medical file. At\ntimes, the medical evidence Judge Daugherty ignored could be thousands\nof pages long.\n  The plan made Mr. Conn millions. In 2010 SSI paid Mr. Conn almost $4\nmillion in attorney fees, making him the third highest-paid attorney in\nthe country. In turn, he paid out almost $2 million to the doctors who\nwere giving the unscrupulous, ill-advised, and absolutely erroneous\npremanaged outcomes. Judge Daugherty, mysteriously, under our subpoenas\nhad received some $100,000 in unexplained cash deposits into his bank\naccounts during this time. But Judge Daugherty wasn't approving just\nMr. Conn's cases. In the last 5 years of working for the agency, Judge\nDaugherty awarded more than $2.5 billion in disability benefits. During\nthat period, he approved more cases then any other ALJ in the entire\nUnited States.\n  There was another judge, Chief Judge Charlie P. Andrus, who played a\nmajor role in approving the fraudulent\n\n[[Page S6891]]\n\nclaims. He allowed Judge Daugherty to decide a high number of claims.\nHe and Judge Andrus enjoyed accolades and national recognition. The\nHuntington office rose to have the second fastest processing time in\nthe entire country. No wonder--they didn't actually process claims. It\nwas a slam dunk. You get under Judge Andrus, you get under Judge\nDaugherty, you get Eric Conn, and you get approved--no matter whether\nit is true or not. Mr. Andrus, as the acting superior judge, did\nnothing to stop Mr. Conn and Judge Daugherty. He actually colluded with\nMr. Conn to target a whistleblower from his own office.\n  The second thing I would note about Judge Andrus was he was not\ntruthful in his testimony before the committee under oath, and we have\nevidence of his lying to the committee under oath.\n  When all of this was exposed, the agency put Judge Andrus on paid\nadministrative leave and filed a claim with the Merit Systems\nProtection Board. That was in January of 2013.\n  In 2014 Mr. Andrus voluntarily retired according to a decision from\nthe Merit Systems Protection Board. The complaint the agency filed\nagainst Mr. Andrus charged him with conduct unbecoming an ALJ; engaging\nin an apparent conflict of interest; lack of candor; and unauthorized\ndisclosures.\n  Despite these charges, as part of the settlement agreement, the\nagency agreed to refrain from pursuing any disciplinary action against\nAndrus and to provide a neutral reference to prospective future\nemployers. Andrus retired with his pension. So a crook retires with\ntheir pension. So no disciplinary action is taken against Charlie\nAndrus, even after he turned a blind eye for years and allowed Judge\nDaugherty to award billions of dollars in disability benefits, admitted\nhe conspired to retaliate against an employee, and was untruthful to\nCongress under oath. Nor has the Department of Justice taken any action\nagainst Mr. Conn or Judge Daugherty. In fact, Mr. Conn continues to\nrepresent disability claimants before the Social Security\nAdministration--these two men who actively committed fraud on one of\nthe most important safety net programs our government runs.\n  We should not let the actions of these individuals go unpunished. But\nthat is what is happening. I recently had a visit with the IG from the\nSocial Security Administration, Mr. Patrick O'Carroll. At this point\nthe U.S. attorneys in West Virginia and Kentucky had both recused\nthemselves and declined to prosecute Mr. Conn. Now I wonder what he has\nover them. I wonder what it is when you have a closed case--a\nprosecutorial case that you have to do no work on--and the U.S.\nattorneys will not prosecute a thief of the highest order. Since both\nU.S. attorneys recused themselves, Mr. O'Carroll is now trying to\nconvince the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice here in\nWashington, DC, to take action. But to date no charges have been filed\nagainst Mr. Conn, Judge Daugherty or Judge Andrus.\n\n  If they do not take action against Mr. Conn, the Justice Department\nis sending a message that disability fraud will go unpunished. We need\nto be sending the opposite message--that these types of fraudulent\npractices by attorneys like Eric Conn must be prosecuted to the fullest\nextent of the law--otherwise the disability program, no matter how much\noversight we do on it, will continue to be abused, leaving those\nAmericans who have no choice but to rely on it with less than what they\nexpected.\n  I would add one final statement. In working with a lot of the\ndisability community, we introduced this week what we hope the Congress\nwill take up in future years as a reform to the disability program that\ntakes the fraud out of it--the opportunity for fraud--that takes the\nability actually to hold people accountable and also gives back the\ndignity to those who can get back to work and uses that to help them\naccomplish that goal.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.\n  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I certainly appreciate all the remarks the\nSenator from Oklahoma has said. He is one of the great Senators of all\ntime, as far as I am concerned.\n  I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to give this statement,\nwhich shouldn't be much more than 15 minutes.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                     Tribute to Departing Senators\n\n  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, as we wind down the final days of the 113th\nCongress, it is a good time both to reflect on the past and to look\ntoward the future. I have been very moved as I listened to the farewell\nspeeches of our departing Senators, and I wish I had time to pay\ntribute to each one of them. They have all been wonderful colleagues,\nand I enjoyed working with and getting to know every one of them. I\nwish them all the very best in all their future endeavors. They will\nmost certainly be missed.\n  In terms of the future there are a number of challenges before us. We\nhave an economy that despite recent upticks is still struggling. We\nhave a national debt that despite recent reductions in the deficit is\nheaded toward astronomical levels, and we have a pending crisis with\nour entitlement programs that threatens to swallow up our government\nand take our economy down with it. I believe we can fix these problems,\nbut it is not going to be easy.\n\n                               Tax Reform\n\n  Today I would like to take a few minutes to talk about a particularly\nimportant effort that I believe will help address some of these\nfundamental changes and challenges. I am talking about tax reform. Over\nthe last few years I have spoken numerous times on the floor and\nelsewhere about the need to fix our broken Tax Code. I would understand\nif there are some who tire of hearing me talk about tax reform, but\nthat doesn't mean I am going to stop any time soon.\n  Tax reform is no longer optional but essential. If we are going to\nget our economy moving again, we need a Tax Code that will stop\nstanding in the way. Make no mistake. Promoting job creation and\neconomic growth is the first and most important step we need to take in\norder to address our Nation's most pressing problems. This is no secret\nto anyone in this Chamber. I don't believe I have been blessed with\nunique insight into these matters. We all know what we have to do and\nthat, in and of itself, is pretty remarkable. Indeed, with all the\npartisanship and division we have seen over the past few years, there\nis bipartisan agreement on the need to reform our tax system. There are\ndisagreements on the details that cannot at this time be overlooked,\nbut on the basic question surrounding the need for reform, people in\nboth parties have reached the same answer: Reform is necessary, and it\nneeds to happen sooner rather than later.\n\n  My hope is that today I can say a few words that will help to set the\nstage for our reform efforts in the near future. Last week I released a\nreport drafted by my staff on the Senate Finance Committee entitled\n``Comprehensive Tax Reform for 2015 and Beyond.'' This report--I have\nbeen calling it a book because it is 340 pages long--outlines the major\nissues policymakers would have to confront as we undertake tax reform.\nIt describes where we are with our current Tax Code, where we have\nbeen, and most importantly, it gives some direction as to where we\nshould go with our reform efforts in the future. I hope all of our\ncolleagues will take time to read through it.\n  I need to be clear. This is not a tax reform plan. It is a discussion\nof ideas and principles that I hope will be the first step in a renewed\nbipartisan effort to reform our Nation's Tax Code in the very near\nfuture. More than anything, I hope my colleagues will view this book as\nan invitation to work together in this most important endeavor.\n  As I outlined in the book, tax reform, in my view, should be\nundertaken with a set of simple principles in mind. The most important\nprinciples are the three set out by President Reagan the last time\nCongress was able to pass a major tax overhaul, nearly three decades\nago. President Reagan's first principle, and in my view the most\nimportant, is economic growth. Tax reform should significantly reduce\nmany of the economic distortions that are present under the current\nincome tax system and promote growth in our economy. It should\neliminate the anticompetitive nature of the current tax system, such as\nthe high U.S. corporate tax rate, which stifles job growth. High\nmarginal tax rates are present up and\n\n[[Page S6892]]\n\ndown the income scale and they act as disincentives for work,\nentrepreneurship, and investment. These growth deterrents--which are\nembedded nearly everywhere in our Tax Code--should be eliminated.\n  President Reagan's second principle was fairness. The income tax\nbase, which has become riddled with exclusions, exemptions, deductions,\nand credits, should be as broad as possible. Tax reform should reduce\nthe number of tax expenditures, thereby broadening the tax base while\nsimultaneously lowering tax rates. A broader tax base coupled with\nsignificantly lower tax rates is the basis of what would be a much\nfairer tax system.\n  The final principle outlined by President Reagan was simplicity. Our\nTax Code has grown to almost four million words. Today, approximately\n59 percent of American households use paid preparers to do their\nindividual income taxes and another 30 percent use tax software to\nassist them. Taxpayers and businesses spend over $168 billion annually.\nThat is larger than the size of the entire economy of New Zealand, and\nan amount that would employ more than three million workers full time\nat an hourly wage of $25.\n  A simpler Tax Code would greatly reduce these compliance costs,\nresulting in greater efficiency and compliance by American taxpayers.\nLet's unleash resources from being devoted to figuring out or gaming\nour broken Tax Code and make the resources available for job creation.\n  The three principles from President Reagan would be vital to our tax\nreform efforts. But, as I said, it has been nearly 30 years since\nCongress tried to put President Reagan's principles into action. Much\nhas changed in that time. In order to address the needs of today,\nadditional principles are necessary.\n  One of those principles is permanence. The Tax Code needs certainty.\nThe Joint Committee on Taxation lists almost 100 tax provisions that\nwill expire between 2013 and 2023. Individuals and businesses need to\nbe able to rely on provisions in the tax law for planning purposes. The\nlack of certainty in our tax laws hinders job creation and stifles\neconomic growth. We need a tax system that no longer threatens to\nchange from year to year.\n  Another important principle is competitiveness. The combination of a\nhigh corporate tax rate, worldwide taxation, and the temporary nature\nof some tax incentives make U.S. companies less competitive when\ncompared to their foreign counterparts. In addition, U.S.\nmultinationals are discouraged from repatriating foreign earnings\nbecause of the U.S. corporate tax that applies at the time of\nrepatriation--a corporate rate that is the highest in our\nindustrialized world.\n\n  Tax reform should reduce the high tax rates on businesses and also\nachieve neutrality through a competitive international tax system,\nthereby placing worldwide American companies on a level playing field\nwith their foreign competitors when conducting business in other\ncountries. The result would be more worldwide American companies\nestablishing or retaining their corporate headquarters in the United\nStates, more exports to global markets, and retention and investment of\nmoney in the United States rather than abroad.\n  Promoting savings and investment is another important principle. Many\naspects of the U.S. income tax system discourage savings and\ninvestments by individuals, thereby hindering long-term growth. Tax\nreform should result in a tax system that actually encourages people to\nsave and invest.\n  Last, but certainly not least, there is the principle of revenue\nneutrality. I know this will be a sticking point for some, though, for\nthe life of me I can't see why. If we are scouring the Tax Code looking\nfor ways to squeeze more revenue to fuel government spending, we are\nnot reforming the Tax Code, we are raising taxes. It is as simple as\nthat.\n  Tax reform should not be used as an excuse to raise taxes on the\nAmerican people or on U.S. businesses. Any effort to use tax reform as\na revenue-raising exercise is a needless distraction. Anyone who\nbelieves that the American people are currently undertaxed should look\nat historical trends.\n  According to the Congressional Budget Office, Federal revenues are\nset to exceed historical averages as early as next year and will remain\nthat way. We can talk about shoring up deficits and paying for\nspending, but we should not be looking to the Tax Code as a resource\nfor additional revenue.\n  If you count up these principles--including those established by\nPresident Reagan, and the ones added since--there are seven in total.\nIn my view, these seven principles should serve as guideposts for our\ntax reform efforts. Any idea or proposal we consider should link back\nand be relevant to at least one of these principles. The best ideas and\nproposals should probably link back to all of them.\n  As I said, the book we released last week outlines these principles\nand also provides a wealth of background information about our Tax Code\nand the need for reform. I view it as a first major step in a tax\nreform effort that I hope will get underway early next year.\n  In the coming weeks and months, I plan to reveal additional steps. I\nplan to involve many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle,\nparticularly those who will be joining me on the Senate Finance\nCommittee.\n  My hope is that as this conversation continues, a path toward real\nbipartisan tax reform will begin to take shape. Of course, it will take\nmore than just talk and discussion. It will take hard work, commitment,\nand, of course, compromise.\n  I said it many times before, and I will say it again today: I am\nwilling to work with anyone, Republican or Democrat, to reform our\nNation's Tax Code, and I look forward to continuing this effort in the\n114th Congress, and, if necessary, beyond.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Warren). For the information of the\nSenate, as of 5 p.m., the time until 6 p.m. is equally divided in the\nusual form.\n  The Senator from Arizona.\n  Mr. McCAIN. Madam President, I rise to discuss my opposition to the\npending vote concerning Mr. Anthony ``Tony'' Blinken, who is not only\nunqualified, but, in fact, in my view, one of the worst selections of a\nvery bad lot that this President has chosen.\n  I hope that many of my colleagues will understand that I do not come\nto the floor to oppose a nomination of the President of the United\nStates often because I believe that elections have consequences. In\nthis case, this individual has actually been dangerous to America and\nto the young men and women who are fighting and serving our country.\n  Mr. Blinken has been a foreign policy adviser to Vice President Biden\nsince his days in the Senate, but as Robert Gates has noted, Mr. Biden\nhas been ``wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national\nsecurity issue over the past four decades.''\n  At the Special Operations Fund Annual Meeting on May 6, 2013, Mr.\nBlinken discussed a number of the administration's achievements,\nincluding, one, ending the war in Iraq responsibly; two, setting a\nclear strategy and date for the withdrawal from Afghanistan; three,\ndecimating Al Qaeda's senior leadership; and four, repairing our\nalliances and restoring America's standing in the world.\n  That is as Orwellian as any statement I have ever heard. Each and\nevery issue--the conditions are a far cry from the so-called\nachievements that Mr. Blinken describes.\n  In his capacity as an assistant to the President and Deputy National\nSecurity Adviser, Mr. Blinken has been a functionary and an agent of a\nU.S. foreign policy that has made the world much less safe today.\n  Let's review some major elements of that policy, and in particular,\nMr. Blinken's role in conceptualizing and furthering it.\n  U.S. foreign policy is in a shambles. It is, at best, astrategic, and\nat worst, antistrategic. It lacks any concept of how to obtain our\nforeign policy goals. This has led to countless foreign policy\nfailures, including the continued slaughter of the Syrian people by\nPresident Bashar al-Assad; the Russian reset that culminated with\nPresident Putin's invasion of Ukraine; the betrayal of our key allies,\nespecially in Central Europe, not to mention Israel; failing to achieve\na status-of-forces agreement that would help to maintain Iraqi security\nand stability; following similarly unwise strategies in Afghanistan--we\nwill see the same movie in Afghanistan that we saw in Iraq if we\n\n[[Page S6893]]\n\nhave a date-driven withdrawal rather than a status-driven, conditions-\ndriven situation; and our feckless position in negotiations with Iran\non nuclear weapons that has failed to produce any progress towards an\nagreement.\n  I could go into many other failures, such as the vaunted Geneva\nConvention of 40 nations that was supposed to arrange for the\ntransition of power from Bashar al-Assad and the object failure of the\nIsraeli-Palestinian peace talks, and what will either be an imminent\nfailure of an Iranian nuclear weapons agreement or an agreement that\nwill be disastrous in the long run.\n  There are two common sayings by the administration officials, not me,\nthat have defined the President's approach to foreign policy: ``Leading\nfrom behind,'' and ``Don't do stupid [stuff].'' These approaches have\nresulted in a failed foreign policy that has made America and Americans\nless safe.\n  Even President Obama's most strident supporters have begun to\nquestion the President's foreign policy decisions.\n  In an article entitled ``Damage to Obama's Foreign Policy Has Been\nLargely Self-Inflicted,'' the Washington Post's David Ignatius, a key\nsupporter of the administration's foreign policy goals, wrote, ``At key\nturning points--in Egypt and Libya during the Arab Spring, in Syria, in\nUkraine, and, yes, in Benghazi--the administration was driven by\nmessaging priorities rather than sound, interests-based policy.''\n  What has Mr. Blinken had to say about all of these issues, my\nfriends? I will give you a few examples.\n\n  On Iraq, at the Center for American Progress, on March 16, 2012--I am\nnot making this up--Mr. Blinken said:\n\n       What's beyond debate is that Iraq today is less violent,\n     more democratic and more prosperous--and the United States\n     more deeply engaged there--than at any time in recent\n     history.\n\n  Less violent, more democratic, and more prosperous.\n  At a White House briefing on March 16, 2012, Mr. Blinken said:\n\n       President Obama and Vice President Biden came to office\n     with this commitment: To end the Iraq war responsibly.\n       Both parts of that sentence are critical.\n       End the war.\n       Responsibly.\n       Under the leadership of President Obama and Vice President\n     Biden, who the President asked to oversee our Iraq policy--\n     and who has made 8 trips to Iraq since being elected--we have\n     followed that path to the letter.\n\n  He went on to say:\n\n       At every significant step along the way, many predicted\n     that the violence would return and Iraq would slide backward\n     toward sectarian war.\n\n  Get this. He said:\n\n       Those predictions proved wrong.\n\n  He went on to say:\n\n       Over the past three years, violence has declined and\n     remains at historic lows--even after we completed the\n     drawdown of U.S. forces late last year.\n\n  Remember, he said this in 2012.\n\n       Weekly security incidents fell from an average of 1,600 in\n     2007-2008 to fewer than 100 today.\n\n  He went on to say:\n\n       And in December, after more than eight wrenching years,\n     President Obama kept his promise to end the war--responsibly.\n       And, while Iran and Iraq will inevitably be more\n     intertwined than we, and many of its neighbors, would like,\n     one thing we learned, over more than eight years in Iraq is\n     that the vast majority of its leaders, including the Prime\n     Minister--\n\n  Who at that time was Prime Minister Maliki--\n\n     --are first and foremost Iraqi nationalists and resistant to\n     outside influence from anywhere--starting with Iran.\n\n  Everybody knows that the Iranians are probably the most influential\nnation in Iraq, certainly under Maliki.\n  On foreign policy, December 27, 2013, he said:\n\n       If we still had troops in Iraq today, the numbers would\n     have been very small. They would not have been engaged in\n     combat. That would not have been their mission, so the idea\n     that they could or would have done something about the\n     violence that is going on now in Iraq seems, to me, detached\n     from the reality of what the mission would have been had they\n     stayed in any small number.\n\n  Now you don't have to take my word for it. Take the word of Secretary\nGates, Secretary Panetta, Ambassador Crocker, and any knowledgeable\nperson about Iraq, and I will insert their quotes for the record,\nincluding Ambassador Crocker, who said: ``Of course we could have left\na residual force behind.'' Both Panetta and Gates said the same thing.\n  At no time was there a public statement by the President of the\nUnited States or Mr. Blinken that they wanted to very seriously. In\nfact, they trumpeted the fact that the last American troop at that\ntime--now we have many troops back--left Iraq and bragged about what a\ngreat day it was.\n  On Fox News with Chris Wallace, September 28, 2014:\n  Wallace:\n\n       Finally, President Obama spoke to the U.N. this week, but I\n     wanted to ask you about his speech to the U.N., saying--\n     general assembly last year, in which he said we are ending a\n     decade of war. How could the President have been so wrong?\n\n  Blinken:\n\n       The president was exactly right. What we're doing is\n     totally different than the last decade. We're not sending\n     hundreds of thousands of American troops back to Iraq or\n     Afghanistan or anywhere else. We're not going to be spending\n     trillions of American dollars.\n\n  Wallace:\n\n       Mr. Blinken . . . he said all our troops left Iraq. In\n     fact, he has just sent at least 1,600 troops back into Iraq.\n     He said we've dismantled the core of al Qaeda. [And yet,] the\n     Khorasan group which you struck in the first day is an\n     offshoot of the core of al Qaeda, and, in fact, follows the\n     direct orders of the leader of al Qaeda, Ayman al Zawahiri.\n\n  Blinken:\n\n       Chris, they fled. Because we were so successful and\n     effective in Afghanistan and Pakistan, they fled, because we\n     decimated the core of Al Qaeda. They removed themselves. They\n     went to Syria.\n\n  At the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on October 30,\n2014:\n\n       The White House ``sought to leave a limited residual\n     force'' in Iraq, but the Iraqi Government simply refused to\n     agree to legal protections for such troops, said then-Deputy\n     National Security Adviser Tony Blinken, who argued the final\n     decision to withdraw all U.S. troops ``was not the result of\n     a failure to negotiate.''\n       ``It's something we worked very hard,'' he said. ``But . .\n     . after a 10-year `occupation,' the Iraqi body politic did\n     not want us to stay in Iraq. That's what happened'' . . . We\n     were focused and acting on ISIL and the threat that it posed\n     more than 1 year before the fall of Mosul, but the problem\n     began to outrun the solution fueled by the conflict in Syria,\n     Iraqi reluctance, and renewed sectarianism in Iraq in advance\n     of elections with politicians on all sides playing to their\n     bases.\n\n  Statements such as these are so divorced from reality, one can only\ndraw one of two conclusions: either that Mr. Blinken is abysmally\nignorant or he is simply not telling the truth for whatever motive\nthere is.\n  By the way, here is what Ryan Crocker said on Iraq:\n\n       As a former ambassador to Iraq from 2007 to 2009, do you\n     think it was a mistake not to push hard for the Status of\n     Forces agreement with Iraq before the U.S. pullout?\n\n  I would remind my colleagues, Ryan Crocker--probably the most\nrespected member of our diplomatic corps alive today--said:\n\n       I do. We could have gotten that agreement if we had been a\n     little more persistent, flexible, and creative. But what\n     really cost us was the political withdrawal. We cut off high-\n     level political engagement with Iraq when we withdrew our\n     troops. There were no senior visits, very few phone calls.\n     Secretary of State John Kerry made one visit prior to this\n     current crisis, mainly to lecture the Iraqis on how bad they\n     were being for facilitating Iranian weapon shipments to\n     Syrian president Bashar al-Assad. And we left them to their\n     own devices, knowing that left to their own devices, it would\n     not work out well.\n\n  So we have Mr. Blinken's comments, and juxtapose them with those of\nAmbassador Crocker.\n  Here is what Leon Panetta, Democrat, Secretary of Defense said:\n\n       It was clear to me--and many others--that withdrawing all\n     our forces would endanger the fragile stability then barely\n     holding Iraq together.\n\n  That is from Secretary Leon Panetta's book.\n  Then he went on to say:\n\n       My fear, as I voiced to the President and others, was that\n     if the country split apart or slid back into the violence\n     that we'd seen in the years immediately following the U.S.\n     invasion, it could become a new haven for terrorists to plot\n     attacks against the U.S. Iraq's stability was not only in\n     Iraq's interest but also in ours. I privately and publicly\n     advocated for a residual force that could provide training\n     and security for Iraq's military.\n\n  Then he went on to say, talking about the Pentagon:\n\n       Those on our side viewed the White House as so eager to rid\n     itself of Iraq that it was willing to withdraw rather than\n     lock in arrangements that would preserve our influence and\n     interests.\n\n[[Page S6894]]\n\n  That is a statement by Leon Panetta.\n  I will move on to Afghanistan.\n  Mr. Blinken said:\n\n       We have been very clear. We have been consistent. The war\n     will be concluded by the end of 2014. We have a timetable,\n     and that timetable will not change.\n\n  This is why I am so worried about him being in the position he is in,\nbecause if they stick to that timetable, I am telling my colleagues\nthat we will see the replay of Iraq all over again. We must leave a\nstabilizing force behind of a few thousand troops or we will see again\nwhat we saw in Iraq.\n  So let's move on to Syria.\n  In an MSNBC interview in 2014, responding to a question about\nPresident Obama's comment in August 2014 calling it ``a fantasy'' to\nsay that arming the Syrian rebels 3 years ago would have helped the\nsituation, Blinken:\n\n       Fantasy was the notion that had we started to work with\n     these guys--\n\n  Talking about the Free Syrian Army--\n\n     six months earlier, that that somehow would have turned the\n     tide.\n\n  Blinken:\n\n       Candy, you know, Assad has been a magnet for the very\n     extremism we're now fighting against. And it is inconceivable\n     to think of Syria being stable with Assad as its leader. He\n     has forfeited his legitimacy. ISIL right now is the wolf at\n     the door. But the answer to both Assad and ISIL actually is\n     the moderate opposition. They need to be built up, so that\n     they can be a counterweight to Assad. In the near term, they\n     need to be built up so they can work on the ground to help\n     deal with ISIL.\n\n  Candy Crowley:\n\n       So ISIS is the wolf at the door now, but Assad, as far as\n     the U.S. is concerned, is the next wolf at the door?\n\n  Mr. Blinken:\n\n       We have been very clear that there needs to be a transition\n     in Syria, that as long as Assad is there, it's very hard to\n     see Syria being stable, and he will continue to be a magnet\n     for the extremists we are fighting.\n\n  Crowley:\n\n       But a transition is not the same as, we will actively help\n     you bring this guy down.\n\n  Blinken:\n\n       The best way to deal with Assad is to transition him out so\n     that the moderate opposition can fill the vacuum. That's what\n     we have been working on. The more you build them up, the more\n     you make them a counterweight, the more possible that\n     becomes.\n\n  Let me just remind my colleagues of what has happened. There is a guy\nnamed Caesar who about a year and a half ago smuggled out thousands of\npictures. These pictures are the most gripping and horrifying I have\never seen. They were actual pictures which have been authenticated of\nthe atrocities committed by Bashar Assad. They are wrenching, they are\nheartbreaking, and they are terrible.\n  Now, 200,000 people have been butchered in Syria, and 3.5 million are\nrefugees; 150,000 are still in Bashar Assad's prison experiencing\natrocities such as this. These are little children here. These are\nlittle children. They have been massacred by Bashar Assad.\n  What have we done? What have we done in response to this? First of\nall, amazingly, these photographs have been authenticated by this guy\nCaesar. He did testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee. It\ndidn't seem to rise to the interest of the Senate Foreign Affairs\nCommittee or the American people or this administration.\n  I was at a refugee camp in Jordan where at that time there were, I\nthink, 75,000 refugees. I was being taken around by a young woman who\nwas a schoolteacher, and she said:\n  Senator McCain, do you see all of these children?\n  I said: Yes.\n  She said: Those children believe that you have abandoned them,\nSenator McCain, that you Americans have abandoned them, and when they\ngrow up, they are going to take revenge on you.\n  So here we are, this incredible slaughter, massacre, torture taking\nplace, and what is this administration doing? It is trying to make a\ndeal with the Iranians and leaving Bashar Assad to wreak havoc on the\nSyrian people who are still able to fight, butchering them with barrel\nbombs. Most of my colleagues know what a barrel bomb is. It is a huge\ncylinder, and it is packed with explosives and nuts and bolts and\npieces of shrapnell. Bashar Assad, unimpeded, flies his helicopters and\nthey drop these barrel bombs. Then, when they capture these people,\nthis is what is done to them.\n  Today it is clear that what is happening is that we are attacking\nISIS in Syria. We are not attacking Bashar Assad, this butcher. In\nfact, Bashar Assad has intensified his attacks on the Free Syrian\nArmy--intensified them. Not surprisingly, the morale of the Free Syrian\nArmy is very low.\n  So General Allen and others have recently proposed a no-fly zone or\nan aircraft exclusion zone, an idea we have been arguing for, for about\n3 years. This President still refuses to do it. It is heartbreaking. It\nis heartbreaking and it is tragic and it will go down in American\nhistory as one of the most shameful chapters because of our failure and\nthe President's personal decision not to arm the Free Syrian Army when\nall of his key national security advisers--his Secretary of State,\nHillary Clinton; the head of the CIA, General Petraeus; and Secretary\nof Defense, Secretary Panetta all strongly recommended providing arms\nto the Free Syrian Army.\n  I will move on to Ukraine. Mr. Blinken:\n\n       What Putin has seen is the President mobilizing the\n     international community both in support of Ukraine and to\n     isolate Russia for its actions in Ukraine, and Russia is\n     paying a clear cost for that.\n       The notion that this is somehow the result of Syria makes\n     very little sense to me. . . . That's because this is not\n     about what we do or say in the first instance, it's about\n     Russia and its perceived interests.\n\n  What Mr. Blinken doesn't understand is that weakness in one place\ntranslates throughout the world.\n  When I tell my colleagues, when I tell my fellow citizens that we\nwill not supply the Ukraine people with defensive weapons, they don't\nbelieve me. They have watched the country dismembered. They have\nwatched Crimea go. They have watched the shoot-down on an airliner that\nnobody talks about anymore, and they continue to create unrest and\nkilling in eastern Ukraine, and we will not even supply the Ukrainians\nwith weapons with which to defend themselves.\n  I see that I am nearly out of time. I would like to say I wish Mr.\nBlinken's words were matched by his deeds.\n  At the Holocaust Museum, October 6, 2014, he said:\n\n       A new notion is gaining currency: the ``Responsibility to\n     Protect.'' It holds that states have responsibilities as well\n     as interests--especially the responsibility to shield their\n     own populations from the depraved and murderous. This\n     approach is bold. It is important. And the United States\n     welcomes it and has included it as a core element of our\n     National Security Strategy, along with our commitment to\n     prevent genocide and hold those who organize atrocities\n     accountable.\n\n  No one can look at those pictures, the thousands, and believe that we\nhave held Bashar Assad responsible.\n  He ended up by saying:\n\n       Endorsing the responsibility to protect is one thing;\n     acting on it is another. All of us in the international\n     community will have to muster the political will to act--\n     diplomatically, economically, or, in extreme cases,\n     militarily--when governments prove unable or unwilling to\n     prevent the slaughter of their citizens.\n\n  That is a remarkable statement from an individual whose actions have\nclearly contradicted that at every turn in literally every corner of\nthe Earth.\n  I know we will probably lose the vote, but I believe history will\nhold this administration accountable. History will hold those\nindividuals who are part of this administration, who allowed these\nslaughters to go on--a dismemberment of a country called Ukraine, the\nfirst time a European country has been departitioned since World War\nII; the needless slaughter of thousands and thousands of Ukrainian men,\nwomen, and children, and the thousands and thousands of Syrian\nchildren. The list goes on and on.\n  Now we are going to promote this individual to replace probably the\nfinest diplomat I have known, Secretary Burns. Not only is Mr. Blinken\nunqualified, but he is, I believe, a threat to the traditional\ninterests and values that embody the United States of America.\n  Madam President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a\nquorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. MENENDEZ. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum\ncall be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. MENENDEZ. Madam President, I come to the floor in favor of the\nconfirmation of Tony Blinken, who is no\n\n[[Page S6895]]\n\nstranger to this institution and no stranger to the most significant\nnational security issues this Nation has faced in a generation.\n  As the former staff director of the Foreign Relations Committee and a\nclose confidant of then-Chairman Biden and now a member of the\nPresident's national security team, he has earned a reputation as hard-\nworking, studious, and keenly analytical. He comes from a family of\ndiplomats and has lived his life in and around the Foreign Service.\n  His nomination as Deputy Secretary of State comes at a time when the\nUnited States is facing a range of critical challenges, from Ebola in\nwest Africa, to Russian aggression in Ukraine, to the challenge of\ncountering ISIL in Syria and Iraq, to Iran's continued request for a\nnuclear weapons program. At the same time, we are forging new global\nalliances and partnerships with India, in the Middle East and Asia, and\nlooking for opportunities to expand American exports and business\nopportunities. There will be no shortage of critical issues he will\nface.\n  Foremost on our national security agenda is countering the barbarity\nof ISIL, whose terrorist ambitions threaten our national security as\nwell as the stability of an entire region. We also face a continued\ncrisis in Ukraine, where the cease-fire has collapsed and Russian\ntanks, troops, and weapons continue cross-border incursions into\neastern Ukraine.\n  Clearly, the list of challenges is long and the diplomatic\ncalculations are complicated, and all of these challenges will be part\nof the portfolio of the Deputy Secretary of State. There will be times\nwhere we will agree and times where we will disagree. I look forward to\nworking closely with Mr. Blinken should he be confirmed, and I expect\nthat he will be.\n  I know there is opposition by some of my colleagues to Mr. Blinken.\nAs we considered his nomination in the Foreign Relations Committee last\nweek, several of my colleagues raised concerns which I would like to\ntake a few minutes to address.\n  First, there is an incredible notion that Mr. Blinken is somehow\nunqualified. Anyone who has served the Senate Foreign Relations\nCommittee as staff director, two Presidents, a Vice President, as\nDeputy National Security Adviser to the President of the United States,\nand has chaired the National Security Council's Deputies Committee is\nmore than qualified, and my colleagues know it. They simply disagree\nwith the politics and the policies of the President which are the\nresponsibility of the person who is serving that President to\nultimately promote--anyone he chooses to appoint to a key position. But\nthey cannot disagree that Mr. Blinken has served the Nation admirably,\nwith dignity, diplomacy, and has honored every position he has held,\nthat he has devoted his life serving this Nation's national security\ninterests, and he has excelled at doing it. Frankly, if Mr. Blinken is\nunqualified, then the bar my colleagues have set is too high for any\nhuman being to reach.\n  I ask those who would object to this nominee, what additional\nqualifications can there be? Outside of already occupying the position\nfor which he is nominated, it is hard to understand what additional\nqualifications my colleagues would expect Mr. Blinken to have to\ndemonstrate his worthiness. Perhaps they would prefer that he be\nnominated by a different President whose policies they agree with, but\nthat is not how it works.\n  This is an eminently qualified candidate who has the full trust and\nconfidence of this President, my colleagues' policy concerns\nnotwithstanding. They may disagree with specific policy decisions of\nthis President dutifully carried out--I repeat, carried out--by Mr.\nBlinken.\n  Even listening to my dear friend and colleague Senator McCain, a\ndistinguished member of the committee whom I regret we are going to\nlose in the next Congress from the committee--when he made the comment\nthat the President's personal decision--referring to Syria--when all\nhis national security advisers recommended providing arms to the Free\nSyrian Army, Mr. Blinken is clearly one of those national security\nadvisers, but the President is the one who ultimately makes the\ndecision on what policy will be pursued.\n  That leads us to the questions about Mr. Blinken's participation and\ndecisions involving Iraq, Afghanistan, and other parts of the world,\nwith which certain Members of this body have taken issue.\n  Mr. Blinken has had to defend those decisions no matter his personal\nviews or advice. That is his job. You can disagree with the President's\npolicies, but you cannot blame this nominee for doing his sworn\nconstitutional duty to carry them out.\n  I want to be very clear. We cannot judge the qualifications of this\nnominee or, for that fact, any nominee based on the policy decisions of\nthis President or any President. He has been part of\nthis administration, to be sure, but if the Senate starts to hold every\nnominee to account for every decision made by every President they\nserve, I think we will find that there is no one who will pass muster\nand no one who will be confirmed.\n\n  I happen to think President Bush's decision to evade Iraq was a\ngeostrategic blunder of the highest order. I opposed it at the time,\nand history, tragically, has proven that judgment right. The brave\nsacrifice of our young men and women and the squandering of hundreds of\nbillions of our children's and grandchildren's inheritance have\ncompounded the magnitude of this error. Would my colleagues suggest\nthat I should oppose all future Republican nominees who served in the\nBush administration because no matter how qualified they are, somehow\nthey must be held accountable for what I believe history will show in\nevaluating the Bush Presidency as a historic blunder that led to the\ncivil and secular wars that are changing the shape of the Middle East?\nI don't believe that is what my colleagues would suggest, but that\nappears to be how they are judging Mr. Blinken. But none of that is\nreason to oppose Mr. Blinken or any nominee.\n  I hear these references to Iraq. Well, Prime Minister Maliki at the\ntime opposed signing a status of forces agreement, and without such an\nagreement it was impossible to have our forces continue to be in Iraq\nsubject to the possibilities of any issues being pursued legally under\nIraqi law versus our own law, or, in Afghanistan, the question of what\nthe force size should be in 2014. The President has made the statement\nof what it is to be, and maybe we can even have disagreements with what\nthe size of those forces should be in 2014 as we see things evolve, but\nit is not for someone in an appointed position who is supposed to carry\nout the President's policies to say: No, we are not going to have that\nsize; we are going to have a bigger size.\n  I fully expect that if confirmed, there will be a number of issues\nwhere Mr. Blinken and I probably won't see eye to eye--or, rather, the\nadministration he will represent and I may not see eye to eye. When\nthose issues arise, I fully intend to let Mr. Blinken know exactly how\nI feel and to engage him in debate to influence the policy, and I will\navail myself of all the tools a Senator can use to do so.\n  Frankly, given his experience working for this body and given his\nprofessionalism and experience with the Senate Foreign Relations\nCommittee, I would rather it be Mr. Blinken who will be across the\ntable from me rather than someone else who doesn't have any\nunderstanding of this institution and the prerogatives of Senators. I\nam confident he will understand where I am coming from even when we\ndisagree, and I am confident that he willing approach these discussions\nwith an open mind, that he will seek to persuade but he also will be\nopen to persuasion.\n  I don't think any of us here in this body would like to be held to a\nstandard of perfection in our judgments, one that holds no space for\nloyal service to this Nation and no space for qualified nominees who\nhave honorably and faithfully implemented the policies of their\nPresident.\n  Let's be clear. We are not judging the President's policies; we are\njudging the qualifications of a man who has loyally and professionally\ncarried out those policies.\n  I do not doubt the sincerity of my colleagues in this body. Even when\nI may disagree, I do not doubt that they are seeking what they believe\nis the best for our Nation. At times I think they are right. At other\ntimes I think\n\n[[Page S6896]]\n\nthey are wrong. Today, as it relates to Mr. Blinken, they are wrong.\n  Tony Blinken is a tireless and able public servant who serves the\nNation well, and I urge my colleagues to confirm this nominee. He is a\nman of the Senate, a qualified public servant, and an accomplished\nnational security and foreign policy expert.\n  I yield the floor.\n  I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be\npermitted to proceed as though in morning business for 5 minutes.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n               Ending Insider Trading in Commodities Act\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, last month the Senate's Permanent\nSubcommittee on Investigations concluded a 2-year bipartisan\ninvestigation into Wall Street bank involvement with physical\ncommodities. Our investigation, which focused on Goldman Sachs, Morgan\nStanley, and JPMorgan Chase, culminated in a 400-page report and 2 days\nof hearings. The subcommittee's investigation found these banks\ninvolved in a breathtaking array of physical commodities activities.\nThey owned coal mines and oil pipelines, oil tankers and refineries,\nelectric powerplants, massive amounts of copper and aluminum and even\nuranium.\n  We examined multiple aspects of financial holding company involvement\nwith physical commodities, including the nature and extent of those\nactivities with the attendant risk, such as the threat to a bank's\nsafety and soundness from a catastrophe along the lines of the BP\noilspill in the Gulf of Mexico. We also examined the impact of those\nactivities on consumers, manufacturers, and markets. One key area of\nconcern relates to possible price manipulation and unfair trading.\n  What we found is that involvement in physical commodities gave these\nbanks access to important nonpublic information that they could use to\nprofit in their trading of financial products tied to those same\ncommodities. In the stock market, the use of such nonpublic information\nis prohibited, but no such clear prohibition exists in commodities\nmarkets. That gives the biggest Wall Street banks an enormous incentive\nto pursue physical commodities activities--often to the detriment of\nconsumers and manufacturers--in order to profit in financial trades by\nthe use of the nonpublic information they gain from their physical\ncommodities activity and to provide the opportunity in some cases to\nengage in market manipulation.\n  I have introduced, with Senator McCain, a bill intended to prevent\nsuch abuses. The Ending Insider Trading in Commodities Act, S. 3013,\nwhich we just introduced, would prevent a large financial institution\nfrom trading in physical commodities and commodity-related financial\ninstruments while at the same time in possession of material nonpublic\ninformation arising from its ownership or interests in a business or\nfacility used to store, ship, or use the same commodity. A large\nfinancial institution should not be able to control, for instance, a\nhuge number of warehouses and then use the nonpublic information that\nit gains and sometimes creates from the operation of those warehouses\nto trade on the same kinds of commodities stored in those warehouses.\n  As we learned from our investigation, a financial institution that\nowns warehouses may manipulate warehouse operations in ways that move\nthe prices of the very financial instruments and commodities the\nfinancial institution is trading.\n  In the case of aluminum, we saw that Goldman Sachs owned dozens of\nwarehouses in the Detroit area, which it used to build a near monopoly\non the storage of aluminum in the United States that is used to settle\ntrades on the London Metal Exchange, which sets the benchmark price for\naluminum around the world. Using that dominant position, Goldman\napproved warehouse deals and practices that lengthened the lines, the\nqueues for metal owners to get their metal out of the warehouses to\nnearly 2 years. By lengthening the queues, Goldman raised the premium\nthat includes such costs as storage and transportation and which, along\nwith the London Metal Exchange's benchmark price, makes up the total\nprice consumers pay for aluminum. Goldman manipulated these warehouse\npractices in ways that made metal owners wait to get their metal and\ninfluenced prices paid to buy aluminum and hedge aluminum costs. All\nthe while, Goldman was trading in aluminum and aluminum-related\nfinancial instruments.\n  It is a rigged game. It needs to be stopped, and that is what this\nbill is intended to do. I thank Senator McCain for joining me in this\nimportant effort. We hope our colleagues will take up this bill and\ncarry on this effort in the next Congress.\n  (The remarks of Mr. LEVIN pertaining to the introduction of S. 3019\nare printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills\nand Joint Resolutions.'')\n  Mr. LEVIN. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I wish to express my opposition to the\nnomination of Antony Blinken to be Deputy Secretary of State.\n  There is no shortage of global conflicts or crises facing the United\nStates, and as one of the key positions at the State Department, the\nDeputy Secretary of State will play a key role in developing and\nimplementing our foreign policy. Unfortunately, I must oppose Mr.\nBlinken's nomination at this time because his track record on some of\nthe most significant foreign policy and national security issues has\nraised serious concerns about the direction his leadership would take\nour Nation's foreign policy.\n  Mr. Blinken has been a foreign policy advisor for several years and\nplayed a significant role in determining how and when the United States\nleft Iraq. I believe this has contributed to the instability in the\nregion. Additionally, Mr. Blinken has been less than forthright with\nsome of my colleagues, and has misstated the Administration's position\nwith respect to Iran sanctions.\n  I am also concerned about the speed of this nomination. He was\nnominated a month ago and is being forced through in the lame duck. I\nbelieve a nominee of this significance should be subject to a more\nthorough review because at a time when the United States is facing\ncritical national security challenges on many fronts, we must have\nproven and effective leadership.\n  For these reasons, I must oppose Mr. Blinken's nomination.\n  Mr. TESTER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order\nfor the quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before\nthe Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.\n  The bill clerk read as follows:\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the\n     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,\n     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of\n     Antony Blinken, of New York, to be Deputy Secretary of State.\n         Harry Reid, Brian Schatz, Patrick J. Leahy, Bernard\n           Sanders, John E. Walsh, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Tom\n           Udall, Sheldon Whitehouse, Amy Klobuchar, Debbie\n           Stabenow, Christopher A. Coons, Robert Menendez, Carl\n           Levin, Barbara Boxer, Tom Harkin, Richard J. Durbin.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate\nthat debate on the nomination of Antony Blinken, of New York, to be\nDeputy Secretary of State, shall be brought to a close?\n  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The bill clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the Senator from\nUtah (Mr.\n\n[[Page S6897]]\n\nLee), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee) would\nhave voted ``nay.''\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber\ndesiring to vote?\n  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 53, nays 40, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 361 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--53\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Leahy\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--40\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Blunt\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Hatch\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kirk\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--7\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Lee\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 53, the nays are\n40.\n  The motion to invoke cloture is agreed to.\n  Cloture having been invoked, under the previous order, all time is\nyielded back.\n  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination\nof Antony Blinken, of New York, to be Deputy Secretary of State?\n  Mr. REID. I ask for the yeas and nays.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?\n  There appears to be a sufficient second.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the Senator from\nUtah (Mr. Lee), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber\ndesiring to vote?\n  The result was announced--yeas 55, nays 38, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 362 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--55\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coons\n     Corker\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Flake\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Leahy\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--38\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Blunt\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Hatch\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kirk\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--7\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Lee\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the motion to\nreconsider is considered made and laid upon the table, and the\nPresident will be immediately notified of the Senate's action.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6897-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6897", "S6898", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"124\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6897", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6897-S6898]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL\n                      ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.\n  The legislative clerk read the nomination of Colette Dodson\nHonorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory\nCommission.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I am going to submit to the body a unanimous\nconsent request in just a minute. However, I want everyone to\nunderstand we are trying our utmost to have a pathway so we can move\nalong. We don't have that done yet, but we are working on it. We have a\nlot of work still to do.\n  I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n\n[[Page S6898]]\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask that everyone be patient. I am trying\nto be as patient as I can be, as is the Republican leader.\n\n                 UNANIMOUS CONSENT AGREEMENT--H.R. 5771\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding\ncloture having been invoked, the Senate now resume legislative session\nand the Senate then proceed to consideration of Calendar No. 627, H.R.\n5771, which is the tax extenders legislation; that there be 30 minutes\nof debate equally divided between the two leaders or their designees\nprior to a vote on passage of the bill, which will be a 60-vote\nthreshold; that there be no amendments, motions or points of order in\norder prior to the vote; further, that if H.R. 5771 is passed, the\nSenate proceed to consideration of H. Con. Res. 124, which is a\nconcurrent resolution correcting the enrollment of H.R. 5771, modifying\nthe title of the bill; that the concurrent resolution be agreed to; and\nthat following disposition of the concurrent resolution, the Senate\nresume executive session and consideration of the Honorable nomination.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6897", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "CLOTURE MOTION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCLOTURE", "S6897", "S6897", "[{\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6897", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6897]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                             CLOTURE MOTION\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before\nthe Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.\n  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the\n     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,\n     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of\n     Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the\n     Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.\n         Harry Reid, Brian Schatz, Patrick J. Leahy, Bernard\n           Sanders, John E. Walsh, Patty Murray, Jack Reed, Tom\n           Udall, Sheldon Whitehouse, Amy Klobuchar, Debbie\n           Stabenow, Christopher A. Coons, Robert Menendez, Carl\n           Levin, Barbara Boxer, Tom Harkin, Richard J. Durbin.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate\nthat debate on the nomination of Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas,\nto be a Member of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, shall be\nbrought to a close?\n  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the Senator from\nUtah (Mr. Lee), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Donnelly). Are there any other Senators in\nthe Chamber desiring to vote?\n  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 65, nays 28, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 363 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--65\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Boozman\n     Brown\n     Burr\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Graham\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Hirono\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Leahy\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     McConnell\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murkowski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Portman\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--28\n\n     Barrasso\n     Blunt\n     Coats\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Grassley\n     Hatch\n     Heller\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kirk\n     McCain\n     Moran\n     Paul\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--7\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Lee\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 65, the nays are\n28.\n  The motion is agreed to.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6898", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "LEGISLATIVE SESSION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SLEGISLATIVE", "S6898", "S6903", "[{\"name\": \"Ron Wyden\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Maria Cantwell\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mark  Begich\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Patrick J. Leahy\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jack Reed\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Sheldon Whitehouse\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Robert P. Casey Jr.\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Orrin G. Hatch\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Richard Burr\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6898", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6898-S6903]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\nLEGISLATIVE SESSION\n                                  ____\n\n                  TAX INCREASE PREVENTION ACT OF 2014\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.\n  The legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A bill (H.R. 5771) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of\n     1986 to extend certain expiring provisions and make technical\n     corrections, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to\n     provide for the tax treatment of ABLE accounts established\n     under State programs for the care of family members with\n     disabilities, and for other purposes.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, with this tax bill, the Congress is turning\nin its tax homework 11\\1/2\\ months late and expects to earn full\ncredit. Tax incentives will last just 2 weeks before families and\nbusinesses are thrown back into the dark with respect to the taxes they\nowe. The legislation accomplishes nothing for 2015.\n  The debate takes place against the backdrop of positive economic\nnews, showing that unemployment is down and wages are up--just the kind\nof news the Congress ought to build on by providing certainty and\npredictability for families and businesses. Instead, the Congress is\nabout to pass a tax bill that doesn't have the shelf life of a carton\nof eggs.\n  Of course, we have the power to enshrine tax provisions for any\nlength of time we choose. What the Congress can't do is travel back\nthrough time. The Congress can pass this $41 billion bill, but it\ncannot change anything taxpayers did 6, 8 or 10 months ago. Those\ndecisions have been made.\n  The only new effects of this legislation apply to the next 2 weeks.\nThat is not enough time for the key provisions; for example, putting a\ndent in veterans unemployment, to start a clean energy project, to hire\nnew workers or to help a student who is on the fence about whether to\nenroll in college next semester. Particularly important is this bill\ndrops the health coverage tax credit, yanking away an economic lifeline\nthat working-class Americans were counting on this April 15. This means\nthat for tens of thousands of our people in States such as Wisconsin,\nIllinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, who have been kicked down by a\nfiercely competitive economy, they are going to face a very unpleasant\nsurprise this spring.\n  I am just going to spend a minute talking about how the Senate got\nhere and where our tax policy should go in the future. The truth is the\nSenate didn't need to be in this spot. Within a few weeks after I\nbecame chairman of the Finance Committee, with the help and good\ncounsel of Senator Hatch and many members of the committee, we\nunanimously passed the EXPIRE Act, a balanced, bipartisan bill that\nwould provide 2 years of certainty and a springboard to comprehensive\nreform. When the bill came to the floor, a host of Senators said they\nwere eager to move it forward. Democrats and Republicans all wanted to\nmove ahead, but the toxic Senate environment and a battle over\namendments caused the EXPIRE Act to stall out.\n  This fall there were discussions with the House about a bipartisan,\nbicameral agreement. I was encouraged at the outset, especially when\nthe House indicated they would accept the Senate's bipartisan work. We\nalso talked about the possibility of making several provisions\npermanent. In my view, any agreement on permanent tax policy has to be\nbalanced--balanced between support for business and support for working\nfamilies. A deal that is skewed in just one direction fails the test of\nfairness. The Democrats on the Finance Committee felt the same way. The\nnegotiations progressed, more offers were traded, and there was real\nhope. However, after weeks of hard work, there was a conflicting\nprocess and that drove House Republicans to quit the negotiations.\nSenate negotiators, in effect, were left without a dance partner. Our\nteam kept making new offers. We tried to suggest proposals that had\ndrawn support from Republicans and Democrats in the past, but the House\nsettled on passing this 2-week extender bill that is now before us this\nevening.\n  However Senators choose to vote on this legislation, I want to\nrecognize that this bill proves, once and for all, how broken America's\ntax system is. The Congress is about to spend $41 billion on a tax\nincentive package that when done right ought to lift the cloud of\nuncertainty and strengthen the important parts of our American economy.\nInstead, all of the $41 billion in this legislation is going to go for\nthings that happened months and months ago. Virtually all of the $41\nbillion has absolutely no incentive power whatsoever. Reforming the Tax\nCode is going to be hard, but it can be done. I sat next to our former\ncolleague Senator Gregg every week for 2 years to produce the first\nbipartisan Federal income tax reform bill. I am very grateful to our\ncurrent colleague Senator Coats, who picked up on those efforts.\nSenator Hatch--and I commend him for it--put out an analysis for tax\nreform issues, recognizing that getting more perspectives in the debate\nis going to help advance reform.\n  I know Senator Hatch is going to keep working diligently when he\ntakes the gavel--and I congratulate him for that--in January, and I\nlook forward to working with him.\n  Before we wrap up for the year, I also want to congratulate Senator\nCasey and Senator Burr, who worked tirelessly in a bipartisan way on\nbehalf of the disabled. I met with these disabled folks in our\ncommunity, and I commend Senator Casey and Senator Burr for their work.\n  Here is the bottom line for the future: The middle class deserves a\ntax cut. The tax system in America needs to do more to promote\ninnovation and launch a new wave of job creation. Our country\ndesperately needs a simpler and more competitive corporate tax system\nthat draws investment and jobs to our country. We have to end the cycle\nof stop-and-go policy that leaves taxpayers in the dark time and time\nagain.\n  I want to yield our remaining time to my colleague Senator Cantwell,\nfrom Washington and close by saying, retroactive tax bills, such as the\none before the Senate tonight, may satisfy some, but they leave our\nworkers, our families, and businesses wanting. It is the time for real\ntax reform.\n  For the last word on our side, my colleague and seatmate, Senator\nCantwell.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.\n  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, I thank the Senator for his leadership\non the Finance Committee and just point out to my colleagues who come\nfrom States that don't have an income tax that this legislation before\nus tonight includes making sure we are able to deduct our State sales\ntax from our Federal tax obligations. I hope we will be here someday\nwhen we can actually get tax fairness in the code. This is a permanent\nsolution. We don't have to go back every year to try to get the tax\nfairness our States deserve. My colleague Senator Murray is here and\nknows this issue well. But tonight at least we can say Washingtonians\ncan\n\n[[Page S6899]]\n\ntake the sales receipts they have this year and make sure they are\ndeducted from their tax obligations for 2014. But as the Presiding\nOfficer said, let's make sure we take these provisions that are so\nimportant for our economy to move forward and give the taxpayers\npredictability and certainty.\n  I would say that is making the sales tax deduction permanent, but I\nam glad Washingtonians will at least have this opportunity this year\nand we will move forward to have a more robust debate.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, how much time does our side have left?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 6\\1/2\\ minutes.\n  Mr. WYDEN. I want to yield 3 minutes to Senator Begich and 3 minutes\nto Senator Casey.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.\n  Mr. BEGICH. Mr. President, I will be brief. I wanted to say I\nappreciate the Senator's comments, and what I thought was most\nimportant about it was the fact that these tax benefits come after the\nfact. It is not going to create new opportunities. The tax reform\nlegislation the Senator has been working on with Senator Gregg, Senator\nCoats, and myself is about real reform. It is about setting economic\nopportunities and creating growth. It is not about looking back. It is\nabout looking forward. I have the same feelings the Senator has on this\nbill; that doing the short term, really 2 weeks, and then putting\nuncertainty back into the system again for another year would be a\nmistake. From my perspective, it is a $40 billion bill that is not paid\nfor. Let's deal with it. Let's figure out real tax reform.\n  I will not be here in January. I wish all the Members will sit down,\nafter years of work that you have done, and focus on a longer term\nsituation that actually creates incentive for small business and not\nafter the fact. My wife is in a small business, and they don't spend\nthe last 2 weeks trying to figure out what their tax benefits will be\nto help do to investments. They have done it already. If we really want\nto do something for the economy and have real tax reform and real tax\nrelief, focus into the future and not the past.\n  I commend you for the work that has been done on this, but I agree\nthat there are a lot of problems with this and the way it is laid out\nfor 2 weeks which is problematic.\n  Mr. WYDEN. I want the body to know the Senator from Alaska has\nwritten some of the really thoughtful provisions with respect to\neducation tax credits, and I commend him for that.\n  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, today, the Senate is considering the Tax\nIncrease Prevention Act of 2014, a House-passed bill that extends a\nlimited and narrow set of expired tax credits and deductions, and\nincludes the Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014, ABLE Act.\nOnce again, Congress has waited until the eleventh hour to address tax\ncredits that expired nearly a year ago. Once again, this has resulted\nin needless confusion for families and businesses who have been unable\nto plan and unable to grow, given the uncertainty of the outcome of\nthese credits. I heard from Vermonters over the last year concerned\nabout the expiration of these credits--and the pending expiration of\ndozens of more tax credits that benefit hardworking, middle-class\nfamilies. Congress has a responsibility to do its part to provide\ncertainty within the Tax Code to ensure families in Vermont and across\nthe country have the predictability they need to make financial\ndecisions. While I support extending these tax credits, I cannot\nsupport an effort that once again simply kicks the can down the road\nand leaves for the next year the unfinished business of this Congress.\n  I am disappointed that, earlier this year, Republicans in the Senate\nsquandered an opportunity to consider a more comprehensive package that\nwould have benefited small businesses, researchers, the environment,\nand middle-class families. I have been deeply disappointed in the\nprocess, which has left us with a choice between bad: passing the House\nbill; and worse: not doing anything. This legislation revives more than\n55 expired tax deductions from 2013, and while I agree these are\nimportant provisions, I cannot support this bill on principle. We\ncannot continue to retroactively fix problems Congress carelessly and\nirresponsibly creates, without addressing the same tax provisions that\nwill expire in just a few short weeks from now, only to have the same\nfight next year. It is time we have a meaningful, full debate about tax\nreform, and how Congress can ensure that our Tax Code reflects the\nneeds of all Americans, not just those who are the wealthiest among us.\n  Included in this patch bill is the important ABLE Act, which allows\nthose with disabilities to plan for their futures by creating tax-free\nsavings accounts. I have strongly supported this legislation, and\ncontinue to do so. This legislation creates opportunities for\nindividuals with disabilities to save for college or retirement or\nother living expenses and opens doors for families across the country.\nThe House of Representatives held two votes last week related to taxes:\none on the extenders package, and one on the ABLE Act. If the Senate\nwere allowed to do so, I would cast my vote in strong support of the\nABLE Act.\n  I asked Vermonters to elect me as their representative in the Senate\nbecause I wanted carry their voices to the decision centers in\nWashington. I strongly believe in the best of what the Senate has been,\nshould be, and can once again become. There are many Vermonters, and\npeople across the country, who are counting on us to provide\ncomprehensive, long-term solutions to our country's problems. I hope\nthat in the new Congress we can work together instead of kicking the\ncan down the road, yet again. We were elected to find solutions, not\nexcuses.\n  Mr. REED. Mr. President, the House has sent us a $42 billion year-\nlong extension of several tax provisions known as tax extenders. This\nyear-long extension is unpaid for, and while I will support this\nmeasure because several provisions in this bill need to be extended--\nand soon--I must raise concerns about the approach here to once again\nstack the deck against middle-class families. They rightfully are\nconcerned that they have been left out--and continually so--in policies\nthat this body finds the will to pass.\n  Case in point is the effort I engaged in all year with my Republican\ncolleague, Senator Heller, to restore emergency unemployment insurance\nbenefits for 1.3 million Americans. Now this program is typically\nconsidered an emergency measure because it has been fundamental to\nsupporting our economic recovery, and as such the $24 billion cost to\nextend the program through 2014 would normally not be paid for. Well\nthis year that was not the case and several of my colleagues,\nparticularly House Republicans, insisted that this typical emergency\nmeasure be offset for it to get consideration.\n  So Senator Heller and I worked with several of our colleagues to\ncraft a paid-for measure that would extend the program for 5 months.\nThat paid-for bill passed the Senate, but the House has since refused\nto give it an up-or-down vote--despite the fact that it met the\ncondition of being paid-for and the Congressional Budget Office had\nestimated a full year extension of the program would create 200,000\njobs and boost economic growth by 0.2 percent of GDP. So it strikes me\nas incredibly one-sided and patently unfair that House Republicans\nwould send us a $42 billion unpaid-for retroactive year-long extension\nof tax provisions that would not generate the same kind of economic\nboost as UI, but they still would not consider helping the long-term\nunemployed as they search for work. Indeed, in the bipartisan Senate\nextenders bill, we included a provision that would encourage employers\nto hire the long-term unemployed--but even that modest change to the\nWork Opportunity Tax Credit was not included in the House bill.\n  This is part of a troubling pattern created by some of my colleagues\non the other side of the aisle and in the other body--if it helps a\nsmall set of businesses or special interests, well the deficit does not\nseem to matter to them. But if a proposal or initiative is aimed at\nhelping low and middle-income Americans get a foothold in the economy,\nthen the standard is much higher and constantly changing.\n  The 1-year tax extenders bill does have some good provisions, like\nthe extension of credits that help families afford college, make it\neasier for homeowners and lenders to keep families in\n\n[[Page S6900]]\n\ntheir homes, or promote the production of renewable energy like wind.\nBut the bill also has tax breaks for race horses, rum, NASCAR and is\nskewed towards corporations. All equaling a total of $42 billion in\nunpaid-for tax cuts.\n  Indeed, we also considered an appropriations bill, which included a\nsnuck-in provision that allows pension cuts on the backs of middle-\nincome employees and retirees in multiemployer pension plans. We should\nnot have considered such far-reaching pension reform without\nthoughtful, strenuous, and open debate. So the insertion of a pension\ndeal, negotiated behind closed doors, that hurts middle-income\nemployees and retirees at the waning hours of a lame duck Congress is\nuntenable and further cause for Americans to think that their\ngovernment does not have their back or care about their economic\nsecurity. They will see Congress giving tax deals for race horses and\nNASCAR, while their pensions are cut. That's not how this body should\ngovern.\n  Now as we enter a new Congress, we will have to confront the\nimpending sequester that we will face head on again in fiscal year\n2016, which will seriously frustrate our ability to provide for the\nnational defense and general welfare. Those sequestration cuts, brought\non by the refusal of my colleagues on the other side to reach a deficit\nreduction agreement that included raising revenue, total $109 billion\nper year and will impact non-defense and defense spending equally. So\nagain it is striking that many of my colleagues on the other side will\nhave no problem voting for $42 billion in unpaid-for tax cuts--or even\nas was reported last month, a $450 billion unpaid-for permanent\nextension of these tax breaks--but when it comes to helping American\nworkers or confronting and undoing the sequester cuts to our domestic\nprograms my colleagues on the other side apply a tougher standard that\nis tilted against everyday Americans.\n  I have made the tough choices in the 1990s to balance the budget and\nI have supported over $3.3 trillion in deficit reduction since 2010,\nover two-thirds of that coming from spending reductions. The deficit is\non its fastest decline since World War II and has been cut by more than\nhalf since 2009. But the economy has not been growing fast enough and\nmany Americans have seen stagnating wages and have the sense that the\neconomy is stacked against them. So I will work with my colleagues, as\nI have consistently tried to do, to urge them to join with Democrats to\nspur broad-based growth for every American and ensure the economy and\ngovernment works for them--not just for large corporations or special\ninterests.\n  Mr. WHITEHOUSE. Mr. President, the Senate will likely pass\nlegislation to extend several dozen expired tax provisions. While I\nsupport a number of the individual provisions extended by this bill, I\nrise today to explain why I reluctantly plan to oppose it.\n  The so-called ``tax extenders'' package includes the 1-year extension\nof a hodgepodge of over 4 dozen tax provisions. This extension is not\nfor the year ahead of us, as one might reasonably expect, but rather\nfor the year that's mostly past us. In other words, we will be\nextending for 2014 tax programs that expired at the end of 2013. This\nmeans that, for the most part, the bill will offer credits and\ndeductions to reward things that have already happened while doing\nabsolutely nothing to help businesses and individuals plan for the\nfuture.\n  If tax policy is intended to influence behavior, the extenders bill\nis a double failure: it spends money rewarding things that have already\nhappened and offers no incentives for businesses and individuals for\nthe year ahead.\n  Let's take for example the production tax credit for wind energy, a\nprogram I strongly support that encourages the construction of wind\nfarms. The provision in the extenders bill offers this incentive for\nproperties for which construction has commenced by the end of 2014.\nThat's 3 weeks from now. Instead of giving energy companies time to\nplan and prepare wind projects, we are saying: if you happen to have\none ready to go, you have got until the end of the holiday season to\nbreak ground. The clock is ticking.\n  In contrast to Congress's temporary, year-to-year treatment of the\nwind tax credit and other incentives for renewable energy, Big Oil and\nGas enjoy permanent subsidies in the Tax Code. It is long past time to\nreform the Tax Code so it reflects America's 21st century energy\npriorities. Permanent incentives for oil and gas and temporary programs\nfor renewable energy is simply upside-down public policy.\n  In total, there are 50 or so extensions in this bill, and the only\nthing they seem to have in common is that Congress repeatedly packages\nthem together. It is truly a mix of the good, the bad, and the ugly.\nLet's start with some of the good provisions. In addition to clean\nenergy incentives, the bill extends a popular tax credit that\nencourages businesses to hire veterans, a host of incentives for energy\nefficiency, and a provision that ensures that families that lose their\nhomes in foreclosure do not incur tax bills for the deficiencies. These\nprovisions have strong bipartisan support.\n  Then there is the bad: the unjustifiable tax giveaways. These include\nso-called ``bonus depreciation,'' a program that allows corporations to\ndeduct the costs of equipment right away instead of spreading out the\ndeductions over the life of the equipment. Congress first included this\nprovision in 2009 in the Recovery Act when it made some sense. The idea\nwas to encourage businesses to accelerate their purchases when the\neconomy most needed the investments. We have extended it so many times,\nthough, that now we are just giving money away to corporations for\nbuying things they would have bought anyway. That is a nice subsidy for\nthe businesses, but not a wise use of taxpayer dollars.\n  The bill also includes tax giveaways for NASCAR tracks and\nracehorses. While I know these sports are popular, it is hard to\njustify subsidizing them with taxpayer dollars at a time when we are\nrunning large deficits and face the prospect of more budget\nsequestration.\n  And then there is the ugly, the stuff that does actual harm. There is\na pair of provisions in the bill--the ``active financing'' and\n``controlled foreign corporation look through'' provisions--that reward\nU.S. corporations for shifting money overseas to avoid paying taxes.\nSadly, there are already a number of provisions in the Tax Code that\nencourage companies to move operations and assets overseas. We should\nrepeal those provisions, not enhance them as the extenders bill does.\n  This 1-year, retroactive mixed bag of extensions will increase the\nbudget deficit by over $41 billion. To put that figure into\nperspective, that is more than the annual budget for the entire\nDepartment of Homeland Security.\n  Earlier this year, my senior Senator from Rhode Island, Jack Reed,\nlead an effort to extend unemployment benefits for the millions of\nAmericans who have struggled to find work in this uneven economic\nrecovery. Republicans repeatedly filibustered his unemployment\ninsurance legislation, with many citing the $17 billion price tag and\nthe offsets included to pay for it.\n  I expect many of these same Republicans will vote to pass the $41\nbillion tax extenders bill, legislation which is not offset and will\nadd to the deficit. If Republicans are truly as worried about the\ndeficit as many of them claim to be, they need to raise these concerns\nconsistently and not forget them when it is convenient. Spending\nthrough the Tax Code is still spending, and we should offset it.\n  Mr. President, next year this body will have new leadership and a\nfresh opportunity to tackle our Nation's problems. I hope Senate\nRepublicans will show us they can exercise the power of being in the\nmajority responsibly. President Obama says he is eager to work with the\nRepublican majority on several major bills including tax reform. I too\nam eager to work with Republicans on sensible, responsible tax reform--\nreform that ends the era of year-to-year extensions, eliminates\nwasteful tax spending, and decreases the deficit.\n  Mr. WYDEN. I yield the rest of our time to Senator Casey.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.\n  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I am honored to be able to rise tonight. I\nwill have a longer statement later to talk about the ABLE Act that\nSenator Burr and I worked on coming through the Finance Committee and\ntalking with Chairman Wyden and Ranking Member Hatch. I want to thank\nthe\n\n[[Page S6901]]\n\ntwo leaders--Majority Leader Reid and Republican Leader McConnell--for\nnot having just a bipartisan effort in the Senate but really a\nbicameral support for this legislation--over 400 Members of Congress\nsupporting the ABLE Act, simple. For years we have created incentives\nin the Tax Code to save for higher education, the cost of college, to\nsave for retirement. Now at long last for Americans who have a\ndisability, those families will be able to save for a disability,\nwhether it is to pay for health care or education, the basic expenses\nthat these individuals with disabilities have wanted to save for, for\nmany years.\n  I am honored to be part of it. I will have a longer statement later.\nThis is a great testament to bipartisanship, coming together on such an\nimportant issue. We believe--this is what undergirds the ABLE Act--\npeople with a disability have the ability to live a full life if we\ngive them the tools. One of those tools is an incentive in the Tax Code\nto save for the future for an individual with a disability.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?\n  The Senator from Utah.\n  Mr. HATCH. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished Senator from North\nCarolina.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Carolina.\n  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I thank the soon-to-be chairman of the\nFinance Committee and the current chairman of the Finance Committee for\nthe their help. I want to turn to my good friend Bob Casey about this\nin just a second.\n  This has taken 8 years to bring to this point. The amazing thing is\nthat we have taken the opportunity to meet with every group on every\nside of this issue and to find agreement finally, and to go out and\ntell the American people what we are doing, and they look at us and say\nthis makes commonsense; what took so damned long. I am embarrassed it\ntook so long, but this is a product that Congress, the Senate, can be\nproud of.\n  Senator Casey just covered a lot of the specifics of the legislation.\nI will not go over those again.\n  I want to say to my colleagues: One of the clues that something was\nwrong was the fact that we penalized individuals who had disabilities\nfrom holding assets. It meant they couldn't buy a car and have it be in\ntheir name. It meant they could only earn so much before they were\npenalized. What we have done is changed the landscape, and we have\nactually put into effect something that allows them to accumulate\nsomething for the later years when parents are gone and when they are\ngoing to need the funds. We have tried to be fiscally responsible in\ncapping the annual amounts, capping total amounts, affecting benefits\nif they exceed those amounts, and automatically reinstate them if they\nfall back below.\n  I think this is a bill that the Senate and the House of\nRepresentatives can be proud of. I thank the chairs, and I thank\nSenator Casey. I also want to take the opportunity on behalf of our\ncolleagues in the House to say to Congressmen Crenshaw, Sessions and\nCongresswoman McMorris Rodgers that we couldn't have done it without\ntheir leadership and an overwhelming vote in the House of\nRepresentatives. I urge my colleagues to not only vote yes but to be\nproud of this legislation.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.\n  Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, I am going to personally thank the\ndistinguished Senators from North Carolina and Pennsylvania for their\nwork on the act. It is a very important bill. I want to give them\ncredit for doing such a good job. The Senate will soon vote on a 1-year\ntax extenders package that, if enacted, will retroactively extend tax\nprovisions that expire at the end of 2014. It is quite literally the\nbest we can do. At this point it is something we must do. We are\nactually disappointed that 1-year package that was sent over to the\nHouse was basically rejected by the President. We would have preferred\nto have had that package. On the other hand, this is reckoning time at\nthe end of the year. I might add in his epic speech, Prime Minister\nWinston Churchill stated, ``Never in the field of human conflict has so\nmuch been owed by so many to so few.''\n  In the case of the legislation before us, it could be said: Never in\nthe history of tax legislation have so many voted for so little and\nbeen so disappointed. In fact, today, for the first time in 20 years,\nwe will ensure that the new Congress will start with all of the regular\nso-called tax extenders already expired at the end of the first\nsession, as the distinguished Senator from Oregon has explained. That\nis a dubious distinction that was entirely avoidable in our view.\n  The problem of course is the President and some of his allies in the\nSenate pulled the plug on a bipartisan negotiation that would have\nproduced a more satisfying result. As we all know, the Speaker of the\nHouse and the Senate majority leader were, just a few weeks ago, on the\nverge of reaching a deal that both sides could reasonably support.\nPresident Obama caught wind of the emerging deal which had yet to be\nfinalized and promptly issued a veto threat. That threat was then\nratified by many in this Chamber, including some at the negotiating\ntable. For those who wish we were voting on a better extenders package,\nthey should know who to blame--President Obama and his supporters in\nthe Senate. At this late hour, passing a 1-year extension is the only\noption left for us.\n  I plan to support the bill before us, and I urge my colleagues to do\nthe same. I should also note this bill includes, as we have said, the\nABLE Act--a great piece of legislation that our colleagues, Senators\nCasey and Burr, have worked on for years right up to this point. I want\nto applaud them for their work on behalf of families affected by\ndisabilities. I take a great interest in that myself, so I am very\npleased to see these two leaders getting this bill finally through.\n  I am pleased we are coming to the end of this session; hopefully in\nthe next year, we can all work together to do an even better job than\nwe have done this year.\n  How much time do we have remaining?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 9 minutes remaining.\n  Mr. HATCH. How much time does the other side have?\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There is 3 minutes remaining.\n  Mr. HATCH. The Senate will soon vote on a one-year tax extenders\npackage that, if enacted, will retroactively extend tax provisions that\nexpired at the end of 2013. It is, quite literally, the least we can\ndo, and at this point, it is something we must do.\n  The remarkable thing about this tax extenders bill is that no one\nseems to be happy with it. I don't know a single Member of Congress\nthat is pleased that we're going to pass a simple, one-year extension\nof expiring provisions. But, sadly, that's where we are. Of course, it\ndidn't have to be this way.\n  There was a time in the not-too-distant past when we were working on\na package that would not only extend most of the expired provisions for\na longer period time, but also make a number of important provisions\npermanent, thus eliminating much of the year-to-year roller coaster\nthat individuals, families, and businesses have to go through when\nplanning for their taxes.\n  There was bipartisan agreement on such an approach. And, in fact, at\none point it appeared that a deal--a bipartisan, bicameral deal--was on\nthe immediate horizon. But, as we all know now, that deal came crashing\ndown after the President and some of his more liberal allies here in\nthe Senate decided they were unwilling to compromise.\n  I came to the floor to talk about this debacle a couple weeks back,\nbut some of the points bear repeating.\n  Just before Thanksgiving, the Senate majority leader and the Speaker\nof the House were very close to reaching a deal on the tax extenders,\none that would have included all of the provisions of the Senate\nFinance Committee's extenders package--the EXPIRE Act--while also\nmaking a number of tax extenders permanent.\n  The emerging deal was a reasonable compromise. It would have been\nsomething both Republicans and Democrats could support, and I have\nlittle doubt that it would have passed easily through both Chambers.\n  It wasn't perfect. There were certainly parts of it that I,\npersonally, could have lived without and provisions that most\nRepublicans that I know didn't really support. But, as a\n\n[[Page S6902]]\n\ncompromise between two negotiating positions, it was a very good deal,\nand, as I said, I believe it would have passed easily through both the\nHouse and Senate.\n  Unfortunately, the deal was not good enough for President Obama, who\nwas apparently less willing than the Senate majority leader to\ncompromise on the extenders package. Before the negotiations were even\ncompleted and a deal was even reached, the President issued a veto\nthreat. That's right, the President issued a veto threat on a deal\nstill under negotiation. That's how eager he was to put the kibosh on a\ncompromise.\n  That was unfortunate. What was even more unfortunate, however, was\nthat parties to the negotiations decided to ratify this threat and pull\nthe plug on the deal being negotiated by the leaders of the two\nChambers. The President's excuse for issuing his veto threat on the\nemerging deal was that it did too much to help the business community\nand not enough to help individuals and families.\n  For those of us who have been working on tax issues and have been\nasking the President to engage on these matters, this statement from\nthe White House was more than just a little bit strange. After all,\nwhile Republicans have for years been strongly advocating for\ncomprehensive tax reform, encompassing both the individual and business\ntax systems, the President has only expressed a willingness to engage\nin tax reform on the business side. Indeed, he has more or less refused\nto even talk about tax reform for individuals and families, unless, of\ncourse, such reform amounted to a massive tax increase.\n  In other words, he threatened to veto a tax extenders package that,\nin his eyes, only helped businesses and not individuals, while at the\nsame time, maintaining a vision for tax reform that did just what he\nsaid he opposed--helping businesses and not individuals.\n  The mental gymnastics at play here are dizzying, and you would be\nforgiven for being confused by the White House's attempt to be on both\nsides of this issue.\n  I am definitely confused by the President's statements. I am even\nmore confused as to why some of my colleagues here in the Senate opted\nto go along with it.\n  It is no secret that things are going to change around here in the\nnext Congress. I can't imagine that any of my colleagues really think\nthey are going to get a better deal on the tax extenders than the one\nthat was being negotiated by the current Senate majority leader. But,\nas is too often the case around here, simple and obvious logic can\neasily be cast aside when there is a political point to be made. That's\nwhat I think is going on here. Pure politics. Sadly, as is also too\noften the case around here, the American people are the ones who are\ngoing to suffer.\n  Rather than a longer tax extenders deal with some permanency in some\nkey provisions, the American people will be left with a 1-year,\nretroactive extension. Rather than being able to plan for the future,\nindividuals, families, and businesses will instead have to wait around\nand hope that Congress can do better the next time around.\n  Don't get me wrong, I plan to support the 1-year extension, as I have\nsaid before, but, we could have done better. And, it's unfortunate\nthat, once again, politics and an unwillingness to compromise stopped a\ngood deal--one that would have satisfied the majority of both parties--\nfrom being made.\n  In his epic speech on the Battle of Britain, Prime Minister Winston\nChurchill stated: ``Never in the field of human conflict has so much\nbeen owed by so many to so few.''\n  In the case of the legislation before us, it could be said: Never in\nthe history of tax legislation have so many voted for so little and\nbeen so disappointed.\n  In fact, today, for the first time in 20 years, a new Congress will\nstart with all the regular so-called tax extenders already expired at\nthe beginning of the first session. That is a dubious distinction that\nwas entirely avoidable.\n  I have been pretty hard on the President for his actions on this\nmatter. But, it is not just him. There are many in this Chamber who\nsupported and went right along with him, and, as a result, the package\nwe will be voting on is not nearly as good as it could have been. But,\nin the end, we don't have much choice on this matter. Passing the 1-\nyear extension is the only option left to us at this late hour. So, I\nplan to support the bill before us, and I urge my colleagues to do the\nsame.\n  Finally, I just want to say I am very pleased that an extremely\nimportant bill will accompany the extenders package. I'm talking about\nthe Achieving a Better Life Experience Act of 2014, or the ABLE Act.\n  The ABLE Act makes permanent changes to the tax code that will\nprovide critical assistance to families saving private funds for the\nsupport of individuals with disabilities. These funds may be used to\nmaintain health, independence, quality of life, and pay for all manner\nof disability-related expenses. The funds may be used throughout the\ndisabled person's life, an important feature for parents that worry\nabout providing for children with lifelong challenges. The funds will\nsupplement, but not supplant, benefits provided through private\ninsurance, Medicaid, Social Security, and employment.\n  I especially want to thank my friends and colleagues, Senator Casey\nand Senator Burr, who for several years have done the heavy lifting\nnecessary to make this law a reality. For decades to come disabled\nAmericans will owe these two Senators and their fine staffs an enormous\ndebt of gratitude.\n  I yield the floor without losing any time.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, as I indicated earlier, what is especially\ntroubling to me is that we are talking about $418 billion, in effect,\nthat is supposed to provide incentives. But it cannot change anything\ntaxpayers did 6, 8 or 10 months ago. The decisions have been made. This\nis a 2-week bill.\n  I would just say, from my own standpoint, having worked with our\ncolleague Senator Coats to present a bipartisan alternative, that the\nlesson out of this debate is that this cannot happen again. Senator\nHatch and I put together a bipartisan bill, the EXPIRE Act. We thought\nthat was the way to go. I continue to believe that had we had the\nopportunity, without an alternative process coming out in the home\nstretch, we could have built on that. That is not going to be possible\ntonight.\n  I hope that Senators will say, however they vote tonight, that the\nreal lesson out of this is when you have an opportunity to provide\ncertainty and predictability for the American economy, take it. Do not\nwalk away from it. Unfortunately, because this bill is only 2 weeks\nlong, that is what we are doing. We are walking away from the chance to\nprovide some certainty and predictability.\n  Instead, our citizens are going to be in the dark come January 1 with\nrespect to taxes. Let's make sure that next time on a bipartisan basis\nwe do better.\n  I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.\n  Mr. HATCH. If the Senator is prepared to yield back his time, I will\nyield back ours.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I yield back the time on our side.\n  Mr. HATCH. I yield back our time.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.\n  The bill was ordered to a third reading and was read the third time.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill having been read the third time, the\nquestion is, Shall the bill pass?\n  Mr. BURR. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?\n  There appears to be a sufficient second.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer)\nand the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from Mississippi (Mr.\nCochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the Senator from\nIllinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), and the Senator\nfrom Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber\ndesiring to vote?\n  The result was announced--yeas 76, nays 16, as follows:\n\n[[Page S6903]]\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 364 Leg.]\n\n                                YEAS--76\n\n     Alexander\n     Ayotte\n     Baldwin\n     Barrasso\n     Begich\n     Blumenthal\n     Blunt\n     Booker\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Collins\n     Coons\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Cruz\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Enzi\n     Feinstein\n     Fischer\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Hatch\n     Heinrich\n     Heitkamp\n     Heller\n     Hirono\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Levin\n     Markey\n     McCain\n     McCaskill\n     McConnell\n     Menendez\n     Mikulski\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Paul\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Roberts\n     Rockefeller\n     Rubio\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Shelby\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Thune\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Vitter\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Wicker\n\n                                NAYS--16\n\n     Bennet\n     Brown\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Crapo\n     Flake\n     Leahy\n     Manchin\n     Merkley\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Scott\n     Toomey\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                             NOT VOTING--8\n\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Kirk\n     Lee\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The 60-vote threshold having been achieved,\nthe bill (H.R. 5771) is passed.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6903-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "EXECUTIVE SESSION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECSESSION", "S6903", "S6903", null, null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6903", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6903]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           EXECUTIVE SESSION\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will\nresume executive session.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6903-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "EXECUTIVE CALENDAR, NOMINATION DISCHARGED, AND PRIVILEGED NOMINATIONS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECCAL", "S6903", "S6904", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mark L. Pryor\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Thune\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6903", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6903-S6904]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n EXECUTIVE CALENDAR, NOMINATION DISCHARGED, AND PRIVILEGED NOMINATIONS\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to the consideration of Calendar Nos. 900, Broadcasting Board\nof Governors; 651, 970, Chemical Safety Board; 1079, Rasmussen; 514,\nLopes; 1104, Bradley; 1141, Rosekind; 933, Tierney; 644, 645, 646, 737,\nUdall Foundation; 844, 845, 862, 864, 865, Legal Services Board; 757,\n1085, 1086, Election Assistance Corporation; 1062, 1005, U.S.\nAttorneys; 1099, 1100, Coleman; 790, Alexander; 1111, Berteau; 1110,\nScher; 1090, Baily; 1091, Cekuta; 1092, Uyehara; 1093, Mills; further,\nthat the commerce committee be discharged from further consideration of\nthe nomination PN 2092, O'Rielly; further, that the HELP Committee be\ndischarged from further consideration of PN2065, PN1279, PN1280, Legal\nServices Board; further, that the Environment and Public Works\nCommittee be discharged from further consideration of PN1916, Udall\nFoundation; that the nominations be agreed to; the motions to\nreconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no\nintervening action or debate; that no further motions be in order to\nthe nominations; that any statements related to the nominations be\nprinted in the Record; and that the President be immediately notified\nof the Senate's action.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The nominations considered and confirmed are as follows:\n\n                    broadcasting board of governors\n\n       Karen Kornbluh, of New York, to be a Member of the\n     Broadcasting Board of Governors for a term expiring August\n     13, 2016.\n\n             chemical safety and hazard investigation board\n\n       Richard J. Engler, of New Jersey, to be a Member of the\n     Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board for a term of\n     five years.\n       Manuel H. Ehrlich, Jr., of New Jersey, to be a Member of\n     the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board for a term\n     of five years.\n\n            office of the director of national intelligence\n\n       Nicholas J. Rasmussen, of Virginia, to be Director of the\n     National Counterterrorism Center, Office of the Director of\n     National Intelligence.\n\n                    inter-american development bank\n\n       Mark E. Lopes, of Arizona, to be United States Executive\n     Director of the Inter-American Development Bank for a term of\n     three years.\n\n                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS\n\n       Leigh A. Bradley, of Virginia, to be General Counsel,\n     Department of Veterans Affairs.\n\n                      DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION\n\n       Mark R. Rosekind, of California, to be Administrator of the\n     National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.\n\n                     DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS\n\n       Helen Tierney, of Virginia, to be Chief Financial Officer,\n     Department of Veterans Affairs.\n\n            MORRIS K. UDALL AND STEWART L. UDALL FOUNDATION\n\n       Charles P. Rose, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board\n     of Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall\n     Foundation for a term expiring May 26, 2019.\n       Mark Thomas Nethery, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the\n     Board of Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall\n     Foundation for a term expiring October 6, 2018.\n       Anne J. Udall, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of\n     Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall\n     Foundation for a term expiring October 6, 2016.\n       Camilla C. Feibelman, of New Mexico, to be a Member of the\n     Board of Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall\n     Foundation for a term expiring April 15, 2017.\n\n                       legal services corporation\n\n       Martha L. Minow, of Massachusetts, to be a Member of the\n     Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a\n     term expiring July 13, 2017.\n       Charles Norman Wiltse Keckler, of Virginia, to be a Member\n     of the Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation\n     for a term expiring July 13, 2016.\n\n                       legal services corporation\n\n       Gloria Valencia-Weber, of New Mexico, to be a Member of the\n     Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a\n     term expiring July 13, 2017.\n       John Gerson Levi, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board\n     of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\n     expiring July 13, 2017.\n       Robert James Grey, Jr., of Virginia, to be a Member of the\n     Board of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a\n     term expiring July 13, 2017.\n\n                     election assistance commission\n\n       Thomas Hicks, of Virginia, to be a Member of the Election\n     Assistance Commission for a term expiring December 12, 2017.\n       Matthew Vincent Masterson, of Ohio, to be a Member of the\n     Election Assistance Commission for a term expiring December\n     12, 2017.\n       Christy A. McCormick, of Virginia, to be a Member of the\n     Election Assistance Commission for a term expiring December\n     12, 2015.\n\n                         department of justice\n\n       David Rivera, of Tennessee, to be United States Attorney\n     for the Middle District of Tennessee for the term of four\n     years.\n       Arthur Lee Bentley III, of Florida, to be United States\n     Attorney for the Middle District of Florida for the term of\n     four years.\n\n                             united nations\n\n       Isobel Coleman, of New York, to be Representative of the\n     United States of America to the United Nations for U.N.\n     Management and Reform, with the rank of Ambassador.\n       Isobel Coleman, of New York, as an Alternate Representative\n     of the United States of America to the Sessions of the\n     General Assembly of the United Nations during her tenure of\n     service as Representative of the United States of America to\n     the United Nations for U.N. Management and Reform.\n\n           united states agency for international development\n\n       Paige Eve Alexander, of Virginia, to be an Assistant\n     Administrator of the United States Agency for International\n     Development.\n\n                         department of defense\n\n       David J. Berteau, of Maryland, to be an Assistant Secretary\n     of Defense.\n       Robert M. Scher, of the District of Columbia, to be an\n     Assistant Secretary of Defense.\n\n                          department of state\n\n       Jess Lippincott Baily, of Ohio, a Career Member of the\n     Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be\n     Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United\n     States of America to the Republic of Macedonia.\n       Robert Francis Cekuta, of New York, a Career Member of the\n     Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be\n     Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United\n     States of America to the Republic of Azerbaijan.\n       Margaret Ann Uyehara, of Ohio, a Career Member of the\n     Senior Foreign Service, Class of Minister-Counselor, to be\n     Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United\n     States of America to Montenegro.\n       Richard M. Mills, Jr., of Texas, a Career Member of the\n     Senior Foreign Service, Class of Counselor, to be Ambassador\n     Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the United\n\n[[Page S6904]]\n\n     States of America to the Republic of Armenia.\n\n                   FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION\n\n       Michael P. O'Rielly, of New York, to be a Member of the\n     Federal Communications Commission for a term of five years\n     from July 1, 2014.\n\n                       LEGAL SERVICES CORPORATION\n\n       Joseph Pius Pietrzyk, of Ohio, to be a Member of the Board\n     of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\n     expiring July 13, 2017.\n       Laurie I. Mikva, of Illinois, to be a Member of the Board\n     of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\n     expiring July 13, 2016.\n       Victor B. Maddox, of Kentucky, to be a Member of the Board\n     of Directors of the Legal Services Corporation for a term\n     expiring July 13, 2016.\n\n            morris k. udall and stewart l. udall foundation\n\n       James L. Huffman, of Oregon, to be a Member of the Board of\n     Trustees of the Morris K. Udall and Stewart L. Udall\n     Foundation for a term expiring October 6, 2020.\n\n  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the action of\nthe Senate with respect to discharging PN Nos. 2065, 1279, 1280, and\n1916 from the HELP and EPW Committees be vitiated.\n  For the information of the Senate, these nominations were on the\ncalendar on the privileged nominations list.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          Rosekind Nomination\n\n  Mr. THUNE. Mr. President. I support the nomination of Dr. Mark\nRosekind to be the next administrator of the National Highway Traffic\nSafety Administration, NHTSA.\n  Dr. Rosekind has served as a member of the National Traffic Safety\nBoard, NTSB since 2009. His expertise is in developing countermeasures\nfor fatigue in order to enhance vehicle safety. He also previously\nserved at NASA for a number of years, and founded a technology company\naimed at creating software that helps to reduce the role of fatigue in\ntraffic incidents.\n  While I have some reservations about his somewhat limited management\nexperience, given the size of the workforce he has been nominated to\nlead, I believe Dr. Rosekind's experience and expertise will enable him\nto approach this agency that many perceive to be in crisis with an eye\ntoward making it more agile and technologically capable. I believe that\nNHTSA must have a leader who can hit the ground running, and Dr.\nRosekind's extensive work in the safety area gives me confidence that\nhe will be the right leader at this time.\n  As I stated at Dr. Rosekind's nomination hearing last week, the\nstring of auto recalls this year has been cause for grave concern. We\nare on pace to have the all-time worst year for auto recalls in U.S.\nhistory, with about 60 million vehicles being subject to recalls so\nfar. In many of these cases, there are legitimate questions about\nwhether NHTSA should have identified the defective products earlier and\ncommunicated more effectively with the public.\n  Since the start of the year, I have called on President Obama to\nnominate a qualified individual to lead NHTSA without delay because\ninaction sends a terrible signal to the regulated community and the\nAmerican people about automobile safety and oversight.\n  It took 343 days for President Obama to nominate a qualified\nindividual to lead NHTSA, at a time when the Nation faced a year of\nrecord recalls, from the GM ignition switch recalls that began in\nFebruary to the recalls involving defective Takata air bags. In fact,\nPresident Obama did not formally nominate Dr. Rosekind until the\nevening before the Commerce Committee was to hold a hearing regarding\nthese defective Takata air bags.\n  By contrast, it has taken only 22 days for the Senate to receive the\nnomination, work through regular order at the Commerce Committee to\nhold a hearing and a markup for Dr. Rosekind's nomination, and today,\nto confirm his nomination by the full Senate. I believe the Senate's\naction today sends the clear signal that Senators on both sides of the\naisle care very deeply about improving auto safety.\n  I look forward to working with Dr. Rosekind as NHTSA continues to\nwork through the issues underlying the record number of recalls this\nyear. I particularly look forward to learning the conclusions of the\ntop-to-bottom review of NHTSA currently being conducted by the Obama\nadministration, which Dr. Rosekind has promised to share publicly. Dr.\nRosekind has a challenging road ahead of him, and the Commerce\nCommittee will continue to pursue rigorous oversight of NHTSA for the\nforeseeable future, as well as possible solutions to better address\nsome of the lapses that have occurred both at NHTSA and with certain\nauto manufacturers and parts suppliers.\n  I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor and suggest the\nabsence of a quorum.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6903", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PROVIDING FOR A CORRECTION IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 5771.", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6903", "S6903", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"124\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HCONRES\", \"number\": \"124\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6903", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6903]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n       PROVIDING FOR A CORRECTION IN THE ENROLLMENT OF H.R. 5771.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will\nproceed to the consideration of H. Con. Res. 124, which the clerk will\nreport by title.\n  The legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 124) providing for a\n     correction in the enrollment of H.R. 5771.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the concurrent\nresolution (H. Con. Res. 124) is agreed to.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6904-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "EXECUTIVE CALENDAR", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SEXECCAL", "S6904", "S6904", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6904", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6904]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           EXECUTIVE CALENDAR\n\n  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to\nexecutive session to consider Calendar No. 618; that the nomination be\nconfirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon\nthe table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions\nbe in order to the nomination; and that the President be immediately\nnotified of the Senate's action.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The nomination considered and confirmed is as follows:\n\n                        Department of Education\n\n       James Cole, Jr., of New York, to be General Counsel,\n     Department of Education.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6904-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION--Continued", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6904", "S6905", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6904", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6904-S6905]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL\n                ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION--Continued\n\n                           Order of Procedure\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the cloture\nmotions with respect to the following nominations be withdrawn:\nCalendar Nos. 840, Lopez; 922, Jadotte; 901, Stivers; 735, Cruden; and\n553, Smith; further, that all postcloture time on the Honorable\nnomination be considered expired and the Senate proceed to vote on\nconfirmation of the Honorable nomination; that upon disposition of the\nHonorable nomination, the Senate proceed to confirmation votes on the\nfollowing nominations: Calendar Nos. 840, Lopez; 922, Jadotte; 901,\nStivers; 735, Cruden; 553, Smith; further, that if any nomination is\nconfirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon\nthe table with no intervening action or debate; that no further motions\nbe in order to the nomination; that any statements related to the\nnomination be printed in the Record; and that the President be\nimmediately notified of the Senate's action.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                      Vote on Honorable Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time on the Honorable nomination has\nexpired.\n  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination\nof Colette Dodson Honorable, of Arkansas, to be a Member of the Federal\nEnergy Regulatory Commission?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n[[Page S6905]]\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6904", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION--Continued", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6904", "S6904", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6904", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6904]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n NOMINATION OF COLETTE DODSON HONORABLE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE FEDERAL\n                ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION--Continued\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we are doing our best to keep everyone\nadvised. We have got a picture; we have made a lot of progress. But in\nthe meantime, my favorite words: I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6905-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "CLOTURE MOTION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCLOTURE", "S6905", "S6906", "[{\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6905", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6905-S6906]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                             CLOTURE MOTION\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Pursuant to rule XXII, the Chair lays before\nthe Senate the pending cloture motion, which the clerk will state.\n  The legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n                             Cloture Motion\n\n       We, the undersigned Senators, in accordance with the\n     provisions of rule XXII of the Standing Rules of the Senate,\n     hereby move to bring to a close debate on the nomination of\n     Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri, to be United States District\n     Judge for the Western District of Missouri.\n         Harry Reid, Patrick J. Leahy, Christopher A. Coons,\n           Dianne Feinstein, Richard J. Durbin, Richard\n           Blumenthal, Brian Schatz, Debbie Stabenow, Michael F.\n           Bennet, Jeff Merkley, Patty Murray, Barbara Boxer,\n           Christopher Murphy, Edward J. Markey, Al Franken, Tom\n           Harkin, Sheldon Whitehouse.\n\n[[Page S6906]]\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Is it the sense of the Senate\nthat debate on the nomination of Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri, to be\nUnited States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri,\nshall be brought to a close?\n  The yeas and nays are mandatory under the rule.\n  The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer),\nthe Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr.\nSanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from Missouri (Mr.\nBlunt), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from\nMississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the\nSenator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), and\nthe Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.\nAlexander) would have voted ``nay''.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. King). Are there any other Senators in the\nChamber desiring to vote?\n  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 51, nays 38, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 365 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--51\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--38\n\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Hatch\n     Heitkamp\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--11\n\n     Alexander\n     Blunt\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Johanns\n     Kirk\n     Leahy\n     Lee\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. On this vote, the yeas are 51, the nays are\n38.\n  The motion is agreed to.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6905", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF ESTEVAN R. LOPEZ TO BE COMMISSIONER OF RECLAMATION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6905", "S6905", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Tom Coburn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2244\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2244\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6905", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6905]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n    NOMINATION OF ESTEVAN R. LOPEZ TO BE COMMISSIONER OF RECLAMATION\n\n                                 F_____\n\n  NOMINATION OF MARCUS DWAYNE JADOTTE TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF\n                                COMMERCE\n\n                                 F_____\n\n      NOMINATION OF JONATHAN NICHOLAS STIVERS TO BE AN ASSISTANT\nADMINISTRATOR OF THE UNITED STATES AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT\n\n                                 F_____\n\n NOMINATION OF JOHN CHARLES CRUDEN TO BE AN ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL\n\n                                 F_____\n\nNOMINATION OF CHRISTOPHER SMITH TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF ENERGY\n                            (FOSSIL ENERGY)\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will now proceed to the following\nnominations, which the clerk will report.\n  The assistant legislative clerk read the nominations of Estevan R.\nLopez, of New Mexico, to be Commissioner of Reclamation; Marcus Dwayne\nJadotte, of Florida, to be an Assistant Secretary of Commerce; Jonathan\nNicholas Stivers, of the District of Columbia, to be an Assistant\nAdministrator of the United States Agency for International\nDevelopment; John Charles Cruden, of Virginia, to be an Assistant\nAttorney General; and Christopher Smith, of Texas, to be an Assistant\nSecretary of Energy (Fossil Energy).\n\n                        Vote on Lopez Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and\nconsent to the nomination of Estevan R. Lopez, of New Mexico, to be\nCommissioner of Reclamation?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Jadotte Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and\nconsent to the nomination of Marcus Dwayne Jadotte, of Florida, to be\nan Assistant Secretary of Commerce?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Stivers Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and\nconsent to the nomination of Jonathan Nicholas Stivers, of the District\nof Columbia, to be an Assistant Administrator of the United States\nAgency for International Development?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Cruden Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and\nconsent to the nomination of John Charles Cruden, of Virginia, to be an\nAssistant Attorney General?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                        Vote on Smith Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and\nconsent to the nomination of Christopher Smith, of Texas, to be an\nAssistant Secretary of Energy (Fossil Energy)?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. REID. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call\nbe rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  Under the previous order, the motions to reconsider are considered\nmade and laid upon the table and the President will be immediately\nnotified of the Senate's action.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for\nthe quorum call be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                   unanimous consent request--s. 2244\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nresume legislative session and proceed to the consideration of the\nHouse message to accompany S. 2244, which is the Terrorism Risk\nInsurance Act; that the majority leader be recognized for the purpose\nof offering a motion to concur in the House amendment to S. 2244; that\nthere be up to 10 minutes of debate equally divided between the two\nleaders or their designees prior to a vote on the motion to concur;\nthat there be no motions to concur with an amendment or motions to\nrefer in order prior to a vote on the motion to concur; finally, the\nvote on adoption of the motion to concur be subject to a 60-\naffirmative-vote threshold.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Mr. COBURN. Reserving the right to object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.\n  Mr. COBURN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Schumer for trying to work\nwith me on this bill, and the members of the banking committee. They\nhave known my objections all along on both NARAB and the options we\noffered.\n  We offered this evening to the House three options under which they\ncould enroll to come back to where the Senate had been in terms of a 2-\nyear sunset provision. They disagreed with that. And the other options\nwe offered--taking NARAB completely out of this bill--which doesn't\nhave anything to do with the terrorism risk insurance bill, or to give\nStates an opt-out so the States that don't want to be a part of the\nNARAB provision don't have to be a part of it, we have not been able to\nfind agreement on that, despite the best efforts of a lot of people\nhere this evening.\n  I ask the majority leader if he would agree to amend his request to\nstrike the NARAB provision from the bill.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the majority leader so modify his\nrequest?\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, my friend\nfrom Oklahoma seeks to amend the House-passed TRIA bill with an\nunrelated piece of legislation in the sense that he knows--we all\nknow--would change the bill, it is gone, and that would be a\nmodification to the bill. If the Senate were to amend TRIA, we would\nhave to send it back to the House of Representatives. They are gone.\nThey are not going to change anything in the bill. We have been told\nthat many times. Amending the TRIA bill would be just another way to\nkill the TRIA bill.\n  I say with respect to my friend from Oklahoma, whom I have worked\nwith for 10 years, from the very beginning we have tried to work out\nsomething with him on this bill. We have been unable to do that. It is\nunfortunate, but his objection is going to kill TRIA. I am very sorry\nabout that, but that is a fact. So I cannot accept his modification.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  Is there objection to the original request?\n  Mr. COBURN. Reserving the right to object, to continue one portion of\nmy statement, if I might.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oklahoma.\n  Mr. COBURN. According to industry calculations, TRIA has made the\nindustry $40 billion in the last 12 years. The American taxpayer takes\nall the risks, except for 35 percent, and the insurance industry makes\nthe money.\n  We had a compromise bill coming out of the banking committee. My\nobjections were well known at that time. They were trying to be\naccommodated by Senator Schumer.\n  With that, I must object to the bill.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6906", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "NOMINATION OF STEPHEN R. BOUGH TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SNOMINATIONS", "S6906", "S6908", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Claire McCaskill\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"John Cornyn\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6906", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6906-S6908]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n NOMINATION OF STEPHEN R. BOUGH TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR\n                    THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the nomination.\n  The assistant legislative clerk read the nomination of Stephen R.\nBough, of Missouri, to be United States District Judge for the Western\nDistrict of Missouri.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.\n\n                           Order of Procedure\n\n  Mr. REID. With this nomination, this will be the last vote of this\nCongress.\n  I ask unanimous consent that the remaining cloture motions with\nrespect to judicial nominations be withdrawn and the Senate proceed to\nvote on the nominations in the order upon which cloture was filed and\nall time on the Bough nomination be yielded back.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  All time is yielded back.\n  The question is, Will the Senate advise and consent to the nomination\nof Stephen R. Bough, of Missouri, to be United States District Judge\nfor the Western District of Missouri.\n  Mrs. McCASKILL. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?\n  There is a sufficient second.\n  The clerk will call the roll\n  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.\n  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Mrs. Boxer),\nthe Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), and the Senator from Vermont (Mr.\nSanders) are necessarily absent.\n  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the\nSenator from Tennessee (Mr. Alexander), the Senator from Missouri (Mr.\nBlunt), the Senator from Georgia (Mr. Chambliss), the Senator from\nMississippi (Mr. Cochran), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Hatch), the\nSenator from Nebraska (Mr. Johanns), the Senator from Illinois (Mr.\nKirk), and the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sessions).\n  Further, if present and voting, the Senator from Tennessee (Mr.\nAlexander) would have voted ``no''.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber\ndesiring to vote?\n  The result was announced--yeas 51, nays 38, as follows:\n\n                      [Rollcall Vote No. 366 Ex.]\n\n                                YEAS--51\n\n     Baldwin\n     Begich\n     Bennet\n     Blumenthal\n     Booker\n     Brown\n     Cantwell\n     Cardin\n     Carper\n     Casey\n     Coons\n     Donnelly\n     Durbin\n     Feinstein\n     Franken\n     Gillibrand\n     Hagan\n     Harkin\n     Heinrich\n     Hirono\n     Johnson (SD)\n     Kaine\n     King\n     Klobuchar\n     Landrieu\n     Levin\n     Manchin\n     Markey\n     McCaskill\n     Menendez\n     Merkley\n     Mikulski\n     Murphy\n     Murray\n     Nelson\n     Pryor\n     Reed\n     Reid\n     Rockefeller\n     Schatz\n     Schumer\n     Shaheen\n     Stabenow\n     Tester\n     Udall (CO)\n     Udall (NM)\n     Walsh\n     Warner\n     Warren\n     Whitehouse\n     Wyden\n\n                                NAYS--38\n\n     Ayotte\n     Barrasso\n     Boozman\n     Burr\n     Coats\n     Coburn\n     Collins\n     Corker\n     Cornyn\n     Crapo\n     Cruz\n     Enzi\n     Fischer\n     Flake\n     Graham\n     Grassley\n     Heitkamp\n     Heller\n     Hoeven\n     Inhofe\n     Isakson\n     Johnson (WI)\n     Lee\n     McCain\n     McConnell\n     Moran\n     Murkowski\n     Paul\n     Portman\n     Risch\n     Roberts\n     Rubio\n     Scott\n     Shelby\n     Thune\n     Toomey\n     Vitter\n     Wicker\n\n                             NOT VOTING--11\n\n     Alexander\n     Blunt\n     Boxer\n     Chambliss\n     Cochran\n     Hatch\n     Johanns\n     Kirk\n     Leahy\n     Sanders\n     Sessions\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF JORGE LUIS ALONSO TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR\n                   THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS\n\n                                 ______\n\n   NOMINATION OF HAYWOOD STIRLING GILLIAM, JR., TO BE UNITED STATES\n         DISTRICT JUDGE FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF AMIT PRIYAVADAN MEHTA TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n                      FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF ALLISON DALE BURROUGHS TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n                   FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF JOHN ROBERT BLAKEY TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR\n                   THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF AMOS L. MAZZANT, III, TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n                   FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF ROBERT LEE PITMAN TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR\n                     THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF ROBERT WILLIAM SCHROEDER III TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT\n                JUDGE FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS\n\n                                 ______\n\n[[Page S6907]]\n\nNOMINATION OF JOAN MARIE AZRACK TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE FOR\n                    THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK\n\n                                 ______\n\n NOMINATION OF ELIZABETH K. DILLON TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n                  FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA\n\n                                 ______\n\nNOMINATION OF LORETTA COPELAND BIGGS TO BE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE\n               FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA.\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will\nproceed to the following nominations, which the clerk will report.\n  The bill clerk read the nominations of Jorge Luis Alonso, of\nIllinois, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District\nof Illinois; Haywood Stirling Gilliam, Jr., of California, to be United\nStates District Judge for the Northern District of California; Amit\nPriyavadan Mehta, of the District of Columbia, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the District of Columbia; Allison Dale Burroughs, of\nMassachusetts, to be United States District Judge for the District of\nMassachusetts; John Robert Blakey, of Illinois, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the Northern District of Illinois; Amos L. Mazzant,\nIII, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern\nDistrict of Texas; Robert Lee Pitman, of Texas, to be United States\nDistrict Judge for the Western District of Texas; Robert William\nSchroeder III, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of Texas; Joan Marie Azrack, of New York, to be United\nStates District Judge for the Eastern District of New York; Elizabeth\nK. Dillon, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the\nWestern District of Virginia; and Loretta Copeland Biggs, of North\nCarolina, to be United States District Judge for the Middle District of\nNorth Carolina.\n\n                           ALONSO NOMINATION\n\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I speak in support of Jorge Alonso, who\nhas been nominated to serve as a Federal district court judge in the\nNorthern District of Illinois. He will fill the vacancy that opened\nwhen Judge Ronald Guzman took senior status last month.\n  Judge Alonso is an outstanding nominee for the Federal bench. He was\nreported out of the Judiciary Committee last month on a unanimous voice\nvote.\n  I want to thank Chairman Leahy for his efforts to move Judge Alonso's\nnomination promptly through the Judiciary Committee, and I want to\nthank the majority leader, Senator Reid, for scheduling this vote on\nthe floor.\n  Since 2003, Jorge Alonso has served as an associate judge for the\nCook County Judicial Circuit. He is currently in his third appointed\nterm as a State trial court judge. Judge Alonso has presided over\nhundreds of cases that have gone to verdict or judgment, including at\nleast 88 jury trials.\n  He also presides over the Women's Justice Mental Health Call in Cook\nCounty. Judge Alonso helped to create this program, which provides\nintensive support and services to women in the justice system who have\nsuffered from trauma and addiction.\n  Prior to serving as a State court judge, Judge Alonso served for 12\nyears as an assistant public defender in Cook County. As a public\ndefender, he participated in approximately 30 jury trials and 150 bench\ntrials.\n  In addition to his substantial courtroom and judicial experience,\nJudge Alonso has an admirable record of service to the Chicago\ncommunity. Among his activities, he serves on the boards of the Daniel\nMurphy Scholarship Fund, which provides scholarships and support to\nlow-income Chicago students, and the Cristo Rey Jesuit High School in\nChicago's Pilsen neighborhood.\n  He also works as a judicial intervenor with the Lawyers' Assistance\nProgram, which assists members of the bar who are struggling with\nmental health or addiction issues.\n  Judge Alonso came highly recommended to me by a bipartisan judicial\nscreening committee that I established in the Northern District. I was\npleased to recommend Judge Alonso's name to the White House for this\nnomination.\n  I also thank my colleague, Senator Kirk, for submitting his blue slip\nin support of the nomination.\n  In short, Judge Alonso has the experience, the integrity and the\njudgment to be an excellent addition to the Federal bench in Chicago. I\nurge my colleagues to support this outstanding nominee.\n\n                       Vote on Alonso Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Jorge Luis\nAlonso, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the\nNorthern District of Illinois?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Gilliam Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Haywood\nStirling Gilliam, Jr., of California, to be United States District\nJudge for the Northern District of California?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                        Vote on Mehta Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Amit Priyavadan\nMehta, of the District of Columbia, to be United States District Judge\nfor the District of Columbia?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                      Vote on Burroughs Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Allison Dale\nBurroughs, of Massachusetts, to be United States District Judge for the\nDistrict of Massachusetts?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                           Blakey Nomination\n\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I speak in support of the nomination of\nJack Blakey to serve as a Federal district court judge in the Northern\nDistrict of Illinois. Mr. Blakey has been nominated to fill the seat\nthat was left vacant when Chief Judge James Holderman took senior\nstatus last December.\n  In Illinois we have a bipartisan process for recommending Federal\ndistrict court judges to the White House. Under this process, Mr.\nBlakey was recommended by my colleague, Senator Kirk, and I support his\nnomination.\n  Mr. Blakey currently serves as the chief of the Special Prosecutions\nBureau in the Cook County State's Attorney's Office. He has served in\nthis position since 2009. During that time, he has also served as a\nspecial assistant U.S. attorney in the Northern District of Illinois.\nHe helps supervise all joint State-Federal investigations and\nprosecutions in Cook County.\n  Mr. Blakey previously served as an assistant U.S. attorney in Chicago\nfrom 2004 to 2009, as an AUSA in Miami from 2000 to 2004, and as an\nassistant State's attorney in Cook County from 1996 to 2000.\n  Mr. Blakey has gained significant courtroom experience over the\ncourse of his career. He has tried over 90 cases to final verdict,\nincluding at least 27 jury trials.\n  Mr. Blakey is a graduate of the University of Notre Dame and Notre\nDame Law School.\n  Upon Mr. Blakey's confirmation, the Federal district courts in\nIllinois will be operating at full strength, with no vacancies in the\nState.\n  I urge my colleagues to support this nomination.\n\n                       Vote on Blakey Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of John Robert\nBlakey, of Illinois, to be United States District Judge for the\nNorthern District of Illinois?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Mazzant Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Amos L.\nMazzant, III, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of Texas?\n\n =========================== NOTE ===========================\n\n  On page S6907, December 16, 2014, in the third column, the\nfollowing language appears: . . . advise and consent to the\nnomination of Amos L. Mazzant III, of Texas, to be United States\nDistrict Judge . . . .\n\n  The online Record has been corrected to read: . . . advise and\nconsent to the nomination of Amos L. Mazzant, III, of Texas, to be\nUnited States District Judge . . . .\n\n ========================= END NOTE =========================\n\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Pitman Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill\n\n[[Page S6908]]\n\nthe Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Robert Lee Pitman,\nof Texas, to be United States District Judge for the Western District\nof Texas?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                      Vote on Schroeder Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Robert William\nSchroeder III, of Texas, to be United States District Judge for the\nEastern District of Texas?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Azrack Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Joan Marie\nAzrack, of New York, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern\nDistrict of New York?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                       Vote on Dillon Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Elizabeth K.\nDillon, of Virginia, to be United States District Judge for the Western\nDistrict of Virginia?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n\n                        Vote on Biggs Nomination\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the question is,\nWill the Senate advise and consent to the nomination of Loretta\nCopeland Biggs, of North Carolina, to be United States District Judge\nfor the Middle District of North Carolina?\n  The nomination was confirmed.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the motions to\nreconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no\nintervening action or debate; that any statements related to the\nnominations be printed in the Record; and that the President be\nimmediately notified of the Senate's action.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6908-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 5701", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCONSENTREQUEST", "S6908", "S6908", "[{\"name\": \"Ron Wyden\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"David Vitter\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5701\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5701\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5701\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6908", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6908]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 5701\n\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to the immediate consideration of H.R. 5701, which is at the\ndesk; that the bill be read three times and passed; and that the motion\nto reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table with no\nintervening action or debate.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  The Senator from Louisiana.\n  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Sessions, I object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, this objection is very unfortunate. The\nOregon congressional delegation has teamed up in a bipartisan way to\nprovide, among other things, trust land for the two remaining Native\nAmerican tribes in our State that have no land base. These tribes have\nbeen waiting for over 100 years, and Senator Merkley and I, with the\nwhole Oregon congressional delegation, intend to be back early next\nyear working to pass these bills and stay at it until justice is done.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6908-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 4137", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCONSENTREQUEST", "S6908", "S6908", "[{\"name\": \"David Vitter\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Ron Wyden\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4137\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4137\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4137\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6908", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6908]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                  UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--H.R. 4137\n\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.\n  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, also on behalf of Senator Sessions, I ask\nunanimous consent that the Committee on Finance be discharged from\nfurther consideration of H.R. 4137; that the Senate proceed to its\nimmediate consideration; that the bill be read a third time and passed;\nand that the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the\ntable.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Mr. WYDEN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.\n  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I want to be clear, as chair of the Senate\nFinance Committee, that I oppose taxpayers subsidizing illegal conduct,\nand I also oppose setting up a one-size-fits-all Federal mandate that\nis going to create redtape and confusion for our States to implement.\n  This proposal says that TANF electronic benefits cannot be used in\nany retail store which sells marijuana. This means that a TANF card\ncannot be swiped in these locations. The reality is that TANF benefits\ncan be withdrawn for cash, and cash can be spent anywhere. Yet this\nproposal does not seem to recognize that fact.\n  Of course, we here in the Senate often hear of burdensome Federal\nrules and regulations that are imposed on our States and our\nbusinesses. My view is this sounds like the epitome of needless\nbureaucracy in its current form and actually achieves nothing except\ngenerating a lot of regulatory hassle.\n  For the reasons I have stated, I object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  The Senator from Massachusetts.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6908-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1898", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCONSENTREQUEST", "S6908", "S6909", "[{\"name\": \"Elizabeth Warren\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Patrick J. Toomey\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1898\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1898\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6908", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6908-S6909]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST--S. 1898\n\n  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I came to the floor last week to ask a\nsimple question: Who does this government work for? Does it work only\nfor the billionaires and the biggest corporations or does it work for\nall of us?\n  I asked that question last week as Congress considered the government\nfunding bill--a bill that included a completely unrelated provision\nliterally written by Citigroup lobbyists that increased the risk of\nfuture taxpayer bailouts just so the biggest banks in this country\ncould rake in more profits. Sadly, that bill was just the latest\nexample of how the government works just fine for those who have\nalready made it.\n  In the past few years, Federal agencies have entered into a number of\nmajor settlement agreements with big banks and other large corporations\nafter those companies have broken the law. These agencies have touted\nthese settlements as being worth millions or in some cases billions of\ndollars. That sounds like a great deal for taxpayers, but often that\nsticker price is much higher than the actual value at the settlement.\nAgencies have often permitted corporations to deduct the cost of the\nsettlement from their taxes, which can cut the actual value of the\npayment by more than 30 percent. And instead of requiring corporations\nto actually pay the full settlement amount, agencies often give\ncorporations credits toward the settlement amount for taking certain\nactions--actions the corporations would have taken even if the\nsettlement had never existed. By structuring the settlements this way,\nagencies can get credit for being tough on corporate wrongdoers even\nwhen the actual deal paints a much different picture.\n  In January I introduced a bill with Senator Coburn to shed more light\non this kind of backroom dealmaking. This bipartisan bill, the Truth in\nSettlements Act, is pretty simple. It just requires Federal agencies to\npublicly disclose certain basic information about the major settlements\nthey enter into with corporations--information such as whether a\nsettlement is going to be tax deductible or whether it lets companies\nclaim credit for things they are already doing. That is pretty much it.\n  The idea behind the bill is straightforward. If the government is\ngoing to cut deals on behalf of the American people, the American\npeople are entitled to know what kind of a deal they are getting. That\nis the only way the public can hold agencies accountable.\n  The Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee approved the\nTruth in Settlements Act in July without any objections from any\nDemocrats or any Republicans. The CBO found the bill wouldn't cost\ntaxpayers a single dime. This is a nonpartisan, commonsense measure\nthat simply brings more transparency to\n\n[[Page S6909]]\n\ncritical actions the government takes on behalf of the public.\n  Accordingly, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the\nconsideration of Calendar No. 566, S. 1898; that the committee-reported\nsubstitute amendment be agreed to; the bill, as amended, be read a\nthird time and passed; and the motion to reconsider be considered made\nand laid upon the table with no intervening action or debate.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Cornyn, I object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  Ms. WARREN. Mr. President, I am disappointed but not surprised that\nthere is an objection to this request because although there is\nbipartisan support for this bill and only one outside group has raised\nconcerns--that group is the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a powerful\nlobbying organization that represents the interests of large\ncorporations. The chamber's concern about this bill demonstrates just\nhow much the interests of these giant corporations that break the law\nconflict with public interests.\n  In its letter opposing the bill, the Chamber wrote that the bill\n``would remove the incentive for investigation targets to settle and\nforce the government to expend more resources to prove its assertions\nin court.'' Think about that for a second. The chamber's position is\nthat agencies shouldn't disclose basic facts about settlement\nagreements to the public because if the public were aware of those\nfacts, they would demand more accountability for corporate wrongdoers.\n  The chamber's position boils down to this: Let's keep the details of\nthese agreements hidden from view so that corporate wrongdoers don't\nhave to worry about any real accountability for their illegal actions.\nThat sounds great if you are a big company that breaks the law, but I\ndon't think it sounds great to the American people. I think the\nAmerican people are tired of seeing large corporations break the law\nand then negotiate sweetheart deals behind closed doors.\n  While we will not be able to pass the Truth in Settlements Act this\nCongress, I will be reintroducing it in the next Congress, and I will\ncontinue to fight for the public to get access to the details of these\nagreements because we weren't sent here to work for big companies and\nto protect them from accountability when they break the law; we were\nsent here to stand up for everyone.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6908", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SMBUSINESS", "S6908", "S6908", "[{\"name\": \"Harry Reid\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6908", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6908]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to a period of morning business for debate only, with Senators\npermitted to speak for up to 10 minutes each.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6909", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "UNANIMOUS CONSENTS REQUEST--H.R. 2126", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6909", "S6911", "[{\"name\": \"Jeanne Shaheen\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Patrick J. Toomey\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Kelly Ayotte\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Rob Portman\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Lisa Murkowski\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mark L. Pryor\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2126\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2126\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2126\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6909", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6909-S6911]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                 UNANIMOUS CONSENTS REQUEST--H.R. 2126\n\n  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I am here with Senator Portman of Ohio\nto try--I think for about the sixth time--to get energy efficiency\nlegislation passed.\n  Senator Portman and I have been working on legislation called the\nEnergy Savings and Industrial Competitiveness Act for 4 years now. We\nhave tried to bring it to the floor, and it has been objected to not\nbecause of provisions in the bill but because of extraneous provisions\nthat have people holding it up.\n  Tonight we are again trying to pass a smaller version of that bill.\nIt is H.R. 2126, the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act, which was\npassed out of the House with a strong bipartisan vote of 375 to just\n36. It was sponsored in the House by Representative McKinley from West\nVirginia and Representative Welch from Vermont. Senator Portman and I\nintroduced the same bill here in the Senate a couple of weeks ago.\n  I am going to be asking for unanimous consent that the Senate\nconsider passage of this legislation. Before I do that, it is my\nunderstanding it is going to be objected to again and that Senator\nToomey is here to do that. But I wonder if I could get an answer to a\nquestion from Senator Toomey about what his specific objections are to\nthe legislation.\n  I understand the Tenant Star provision in the bill is what he is\nobjecting to. Yet this would establish best practices, and it would set\nup a voluntary certification system for efficiency and commercial\ntenant spaces. What it does not do is provide financial incentives or\ncreate new regulations. It is a voluntary, market-based, business-\nfriendly approach to encouraging energy efficiency--which is the\ncheapest, fastest way to deal with our energy needs in this country. It\nis something everybody agrees we should try and do.\n  So I wonder if I can ask my colleague from Pennsylvania if he could\ndescribe his concerns about that provision in the bill.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania.\n  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, I am objecting on behalf of a colleague\nwho is unavoidably detained. So the Senator from New Hampshire will\nhave to take this up with our colleague.\n  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, in that case, I ask unanimous consent\nthat the energy committee be discharged from further consideration of\nH.R. 2126, the Energy Efficiency Improvement Act, and the Senate\nproceed to its consideration; that the bill be read a third time and\npassed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon\nthe table with no intervening action or debate.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?\n  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, on behalf of my colleague who is\nunavoidably detained, I object.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.\n  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I yield to my colleague from Ohio who I\nknow is here to talk about the legislation or my colleague from New\nHampshire who has been working on the Tenant Star provision with\nSenator Bennet from Colorado.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Hampshire.\n  Ms. AYOTTE. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from New Hampshire\nand my colleague from Ohio, Senators Shaheen and Portman, for their\nwork on this legislation.\n  As my colleague from New Hampshire has said, unfortunately this is a\npiece of legislation that is being blocked. As we saw on the floor, we\ndon't even know the reason it is being blocked. I think, when we have\nan objection on the Senate floor, we should have to come to the floor\nand state what our objection is.\n  So here we are. We are going to again ask for this legislation to be\nbrought forward that passed overwhelmingly in the House and in fact has\noverwhelming support from both the business community and environmental\ngroups.\n  If the Tenant Star provision is what is being raised--we are not\nquite sure what the objection is because we haven't heard here\npublicly.\n  This program is supported not only by commercial landowners but also\ntenants, the business community, and environmental groups. What it does\nis establish a market-based approach that is not a mandate but\nencourages both the commercial owners and tenants to be able to create\na voluntary Tenant Star certification to encourage commercial tenants\nto implement cost measures that will help reduce energy consumption.\n  Energy efficiency is a bipartisan way we can reduce energy costs, we\ncan protect our environment, and we can ensure that we don't have to be\ndependent on countries overseas. It is about security of this country\ntoo.\n  I thank my colleagues, Senators Shaheen and Portman, for working so\nhard on this bill. It is surprising, this bill that passed--obviously,\na smaller version of the bill that they have introduced and I am proud\nto cosponsor, but it has overwhelming support. It passed the House. It\nis unfortunate that we are here and aren't going to be able to get this\ndone because it is just common sense.\n  Again, the program is not a mandate. There is no tax incentive, no\ngrant program. It contains no regulatory authority, no new costs. This\nis one that just makes common sense.\n  So I am very disappointed that this bill is not going to be brought\nforward tonight. It is unfortunate that we are essentially here\nfighting against something we don't even know what the objections are\nbecause they haven't been stated publicly.\n  With that, I again thank my colleagues for working on this bill. I\nhope to support their efforts in the next Congress to get this\nbipartisan, commonsense energy efficiency legislation through this\nbody.\n\n[[Page S6910]]\n\n  With that, I turn to my colleague from Ohio.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.\n  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I am also joined by our colleague from\nAlaska, the ranking member on the energy committee who will be the\nchair come January. I want to give her a chance to talk in a moment,\nbut let me state a few things.\n  First, this legislation represents a lot of hard work by a lot of\npeople, including Senator Ayotte from New Hampshire, who spoke, Senator\nShaheen also from New Hampshire, Senator Bennet, and others. It is an\nexample of smart, bipartisan legislation that was worked out with the\nbusiness community, with folks who are concerned about energy\nefficiency who are in nonprofits. It has no objection, as far as I\nknow, in the real world; meaning there is no group, not a single group,\nthat has objected to it.\n  On the other hand, there are dozens of people who support it,\nincluding business groups, environmental groups, and people who want to\nhave the opportunity on a voluntary basis--no mandates, as the Senator\nfrom New Hampshire has said, to be able to know that there is a\ncertification that a building is energy efficient, to be able to have\ninformation.\n  Second, I want to make the point that it is part of four provisions,\none of which is urgent because it involves a decision we have to make\nnow--tonight--in the Senate in order to keep a regulation from the\nDepartment of Energy unfairly imposed on businesses and consumers in\nAmerica, and this is the water provision.\n  So not only are we objecting to something I don't think anyone\nobjects to in the real world, but also we are blocking something that\nwould be good for our consumers and good for business.\n  Because of our inaction tonight--because we had this objection for\nreasons we don't know because we have not been able in two nights on\nthe floor to get a reason. All we heard was: We object. No reason. We\nare stopping the ability for companies to produce water heaters that\nare then used by rural electric co-ops that are used in an energy-\nefficient way, because during a peak demand they are turned off. So\nthey could superheat the water and be turned off in peak demand, called\ndemand response. It is an efficiency measure.\n  The regulation doesn't make any sense that bans the production of\nthese water heaters, but it is because of legislation that Congress\npassed that DOE feels they have to oppose the regulation.\n  So tonight we had the opportunity not only to pass something good on\nTenant Star, not only to do other things that are good for the Federal\nGovernment to become efficient--the biggest energy user in the world,\nby the way--but also we have an urgent matter before us; that is, to\nchange this regulation before manufacturers are blocked from producing\nthese water heaters.\n  Rural electric co-ops all over the country are watching tonight, and\nthey are disappointed. Why? Because they use these water heaters, and\nthey use them in an energy-efficient way. They are not going to be able\nto do that going forward because manufacturers are literally having to\nstop producing these water heaters because we are not acting.\n  So after the first of the year I hope we will be able to, in regular\norder, take this forward, and hopefully some of these manufacturers\nwill begin to produce these water heaters again. Once we can take care\nof the regulations that are onerous on business owners and consumers\nand does not make sense for energy efficiency.\n  Finally, this is part of what I hope will be the past Congress. I\nhope in the future Congress, which will start in January, that we do\nthings in a different way. I hope we begin to look at ideas from both\nsides of the aisle, find common ground, and move forward in legislation\nto help the American people.\n  This is a small matter. I understand that. It is a big matter if you\nare a rural electric co-op or if you are one of these commercial\nbuildings that want to use Energy Star or if we care about the fact\nthat we think about $5 billion is wasted in energy inefficiency by\nthe Federal Government that could be addressed by some of the other\nprovisions here tonight.\n\n  I think this is, unfortunately, symbolic of where we are as a\nCongress. We can't even get simple things done.\n  This legislation was reported out of the committee in the House\nunanimously--all four provisions. We are talking about the Republican-\nled House unanimously on the floor of the House passed by a vote of\n375. I think it was 375 to 34, as I recall. We don't see those kind of\nbipartisan votes often.\n  Then it came over here. It has gone through the energy committee. The\nenergy committee's vote was something like 18 to 3, as I recall. It has\ncome to the floor now for the third time--the fourth time, if we\ninclude last night.\n  This legislation has been fully vetted. We have had hearings on it.\nWe have done all the right things. We have played by the rules, and\nthose of us who played by the rules on this legislation again are being\nstopped as we get to the floor of the Senate.\n  I hope we will see not just good energy efficiency legislation passed\nin the next Congress but other legislation as well to deal with our Tax\nCode that is out of date, antiquated, to deal with the overreach and\nregulations, some of the regulatory reform measures that the Presiding\nOfficer and I have talked about.\n  We can deal with the fact that we are falling behind in terms of\nexports; that we are not dealing with some of our urgent problems we\nshould be dealing with to get this economy moving.\n  We have to change the way we are doing business around here. We are\nletting things move only in very incremental and, unfortunately,\npartisan ways. We are not allowing the process to work.\n  So I am hopeful this legislation will be taken up in January. I am\nvery disappointed it was objected to again tonight for no apparent\nreason. I am hopeful this will lead us to be able to better represent\nthe people who hired us, the people who said: Go to Washington. I want\nyou to find common ground because there are big problems to solve, not\njust give speeches. We have had enough of those. There is enough\nrhetoric. It is time to get things done. This is a small example of\nwhat could have gotten done tonight but for an objection with no\napparent reason.\n  With that, I appreciate the fact that my colleague from Alaska has\nstayed late to be able to talk about this tonight. She will be the next\nchair of the energy committee, and she has the ability. Working with\nher colleagues on the other side of the aisle, to get some great\nlegislation accomplished, and I hope this will be one of them.\n  Mr. President, I yield the floor.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alaska.\n  Ms. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I join with my colleagues and express\nmy disappointment that we are again at this place: A good measure that\nhas good, strong, bipartisan, bicameral support has been blocked. It\nhas been objected to.\n  I made a comment last evening when we once again attempted to bring\nup the unanimous consent order to advance the energy efficiency bill.\nIt kind of feels like ``Groundhog Day,'' the movie, where it is just\nthe same scene over and over again, the third time to the floor on a\nmeasure that enjoys strong support. It kind of begs the question, why?\nWhat is the problem with it? But as both my colleagues Senator Shaheen\nand Senator Ayotte from New Hampshire have outlined in terms of the\nspecifics, there is no opposition there.\n  As the cosponsor, my colleague from Ohio has pointed out these four\nprovisions that are contained in this House measure have so much\nbipartisan support that it passed the House unanimously coming over\nhere.\n  So we have to ask: If we cannot advance a measure in this body such\nas energy efficiency that enjoys this level of support, how can we do\nanything around here?\n  I asked the question months ago, when I was being stopped in the\nhallway by reporters asking: What is going to happen to the energy\nefficiency bill, and I was bullishly optimistic because, as I said,\nthis is a measure that enjoys strong support. It enjoys strong support\nand it is common sense.\n  I said: If we can't demonstrate that, we can't get a measure such as\nenergy\n\n[[Page S6911]]\n\nefficiency through both Houses and enacted into law, how are we ever\ngoing to get to the really thorny, difficult issues?\n  I have been working with my colleagues on the appropriating side of\nenergy and water, the Senator from California and Senator Alexander\nfrom Tennessee working with us on the authorizing side. First it was me\nand Senator Wyden, and then it was me and Senator Landrieu, and in\nJanuary it will be Senator Cantwell.\n  We will be trying to figure out how we are going to deal with the\nissues surrounding nuclear waste disposal. These are tough issues.\nThese are contentious. We have got some issues that will face us in the\nnew Congress relating to the export of our energy resources. These are\nalso going to be contentious. How are we ever going to get to the tough\nones if--on the easy ones, what we describe around here as the low-\nhanging fruit--we cannot get through this process?\n  So I have to say, it is late--it is not the 11th hour; it is beyond\nthe 11th hour because we have just taken the last vote, the last vote\nof the 113th Congress. We are done, and what we are leaving people with\nis uncertainty. When we are talking about those ways that we as a\nCongress can help right some of the problems in this country--how we\ncan get our economy on a better track, how we can move towards more\njobs and job creation--the best thing we can do is offer a level of\ncertainty.\n  Well, right now you have these manufacturers of these water heaters\nthat are saying: We don't know whether we are going to have any kind of\na reprieve from this regulation or not. So we are not only not going to\nbe making these water heaters, but that means we don't have the\nworkers, those in the manufacturing companies who are going to be there\nor the people that are selling them. Think about what we have done with\nthis one hurdle that we just couldn't get around. Yet we couldn't get a\nstraight answer as to what the opposition--what the push-back--was.\n  Something is wrong with this process when we cannot advance measures\nsuch as the energy efficiency bill, a measure that has been worked on\nfor years--diligently and in good faith--in a very, very open and\nbipartisan way. So I am hopeful that the 114th Congress is going to\nbring with it not only some fresh air--fresh perspective--but a\nwillingness and a commitment to move through a process. If there is an\nobjection, it should be stated, and we can work it out. But to continue\nto block and block when we have the level of support on a measure that\nwe have, that is just not right. There has to be a better way. So I\nhave pledged to my colleagues, the sponsors of this bill and all of\nthose who have been working hard on it, that we are taking this back up\nagain in the new year. We are going to work to make sure this has, yet\nagain, the committee process, now for the third time, and we will work\nto advance it to the floor. It is my hope that if someone has problems\nwith it, they have a solution to fix it, and they then come down and\noffer their amendments, we will debate them, and we will move on. But\nwe have to be in a better place than where we have ended this evening.\n  So it is with regret that I say we will take it up again next year.\nBut my hope is that we will do right by our energy policy, by focusing\nnot only on the production side, not only the renewable side, but our\nefficiency measures that we have included in this bill. We are going to\ndo right for a lot of the right reasons.\n  With that, I yield the floor.\n  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.\n  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.\n  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the quorum\ncall be rescinded.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6911-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ACHIEVING BETTER LIFE EXPERIENCE ACT", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6911", "S6911", "[{\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6911", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6911]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                  ACHIEVING BETTER LIFE EXPERIENCE ACT\n\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I want to thank my Senate colleagues for\njoining me in supporting and passing the Achieving Better Life\nExperience Act. I especially want to acknowledge Senator Robert Casey,\nwho has been a champion for all people with disabilities and the ABLE\nAct for years.\n  Earlier this year, Senator Casey introduced us to Sara Wolff--a 31-\nyear-old law clerk at O'Malley and Langdon in Scranton, PA. Since 2007,\nSara has been an advocate for the National Down Syndrome Society. She\nalso happens to have Down syndrome. Currently, Sara cannot have more\nthan $2,000 in assets before her government aid is cut off. Every\nmonth, she works with her employer so that she doesn't earn more than\n$700. This enables Sara to maintain her much needed government\nbenefits.\n  Over a year ago, Sara lost her mother to a sudden illness. It was a\ntremendous loss--her mother was her No. 1 advocate. Before her mother\npassed, Sara promised her that she would fight to get the ABLE Act\npassed. Sara has her whole life ahead of her and she needs a savings\naccount to plan for her future, and she is not alone. Thousands of\npeople with disabilities are outliving their parents. Parents need the\npeace of mind that their children will be taken care of.\n  Everywhere I go in Illinois, I meet people whose lives have been\naffected by disabilities. Take Gene and Lynn Bensinger--from the north\nside of Chicago. Gene and Lynn are the parents of two adult sons. Their\noldest son, Nate, is 21 years old and has autism spectrum disorder.\nNate is about to ``age out'' of services offered through Chicago Public\nSchools and will no longer be eligible for special education services\nthat he relies on. Nate's parents, along with thousands of Illinois\nfamilies, experience many sleepless nights worrying about their\nresponsibility to financially support their adult children today, in\nthe future, and long after they are gone. Without this important\nlegislation, it is almost impossible for those with disabilities--like\nNate and Sara--to save enough so that they can be financially\nindependent.\n  The ABLE Act will encourage and assist individuals and families to\ninvest in private savings accounts, which can then be used to support\nactivities that allow those with disabilities to maintain a healthy,\nindependent life. Here's how it will work. The ABLE Act establishes\ntax-exempt accounts to assist parents of children with a disability to\nhelp provide for their long-term care. The accounts can be used to pay\nfor medical care, dental care, education, housing, transportation and\nother community-based supports for individuals with disabilities. The\nmoney earned in an ABLE account would supplement but not replace\nMedicaid, Social Security, or other benefits. This would enable people,\nlike Sara, to earn a livable wage and save for the future without\nworrying about losing coverage for critical health services.\n  I thank Senators Robert Casey, Richard Burr, and 77 of my colleagues\nfor cosponsoring this legislation. This is a true bipartisan effort. By\npassing this bipartisan bill today, Sara gets to keep her promise to\nher mother--and thousands of people with disabilities--like Nate--will\nfinally be able to save for the bright futures they deserve.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6911-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "SENATOR PAUL SIMON WATER FOR THE WORLD ACT", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6911", "S6912", "[{\"name\": \"Richard J. Durbin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6911", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6911-S6912]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               SENATOR PAUL SIMON WATER FOR THE WORLD ACT\n\n  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, today we celebrate the passage of a bill I\nhave been working on for 6 years--the Senator Paul Simon Water for the\nWorld Act.\n  The bill is aptly named after my predecessor from Illinois in the\nSenate--Paul Simon. Paul Simon was ahead of his time on so many\nissues--including on the importance of clean water and sanitation for\nthe world's poor.\n  He understood if you wanted to avoid conflict between some nations,\nyou had to look at the issue of water. He understood if you wanted to\nkeep a girl in school or reduce infant mortality, you had to provide\nadequate sanitation and clean water. He understood that without clean\nwater and sanitation, efforts\n\n[[Page S6912]]\n\nto improve health and economic opportunities will never be fully\nrealized.\n  In fact, a dollar spent on clean water and sanitation returns between\n$4 and $8 in economic, health, and other benefits. Paul understood all\nthis.\n  In 1998, he wrote the book, Tapped Out. It was prescient in its\nwisdom and policy proposals. Despite my recommendations, the book never\nbecame a bestseller. Though Senator Simon's wife, Patti Simon, has\nbecome a champion on water in her own right.\n  In 2005, the Congress passed the Senator Paul Simon Water for the\nPoor Act, which made providing access to clean water and sanitation for\nthe world's poor a key priority in U.S. development assistance.\n  When we passed this bill, it was the first time our Nation had\nwritten into law our commitment to any of the United Nations Millennium\nDevelopment Goals.\n  Since then, we have succeeded in increasing funding for these\nimportant goals. USAID established an Office of Water and a Senior\nWater Coordinator for Water, and last year, it launched its first-ever\nGlobal Water and Development Strategy to significantly increase clean\nwater and sanitation programs.\n  These efforts and the original legislation have made real differences\nin the lives of the world's poor. I have seen the simple wells\nproviding water for thousands in Haiti.\n  For the first time, water and toilets have been provided to slum\ncommunities in Indonesia, where USAID's program has helped the local\nwater utility reach thousands upon thousands of poor people who never\nhad access to clean water and sanitation.\n  In fact, in 2012, the world achieved the Millennium Development Goal\nof reducing by half the proportion of people in the world without\naccess to clean drinking water and basic sanitation. At that time, it\nwas the only Millennium Development Goal to have been achieved.\n  So for the last several years, we have tried to pass the Simon Water\nfor the World Act--and in 2009 it passed the full Senate, only to stall\nin the House. Again last Congress, it passed out of the Senate Foreign\nRelations Committee.\n  Today's version does not include everything from the original bill--I\nwish it would have included more. But such is the nature of compromise.\n  Today, with passage of the Senator Paul Simon Water for the World\nAct, we are going to make more progress.\n  It would not have happened without my partner in this effort, Senator\nCorker, and strong support from Senators Coons, Flake, and Murray here\nin the Senate. I also need to acknowledge the leadership of\nRepresentatives Blumenauer and Poe and the great help of Representative\nRoyce in the House.\n  This bill will lock in many of the leadership, program, and strategic\nchanges that have occurred around USAID water and sanitation programs\nin recent years. It will establish the diplomatic and conflict\nmitigation priorities around water at the Department of State. It will\nrefine and establish key criteria to ensure our scarce foreign\nassistance dollars for water and sanitation are truly reaching the\nworld's most impoverished populations.\n  We have made progress. But there are still almost 1 billion people\naround the world who lack access to clean water, and at least 2.5\nbillion more people lack access to adequate sanitation.\n  Every day in the developing world, 5,000 children die from water-\nborne diseases. Millions of poor children miss school every day because\nthey have to walk for hours to find water for their families, or they\nare sick from drinking dirty water. Girls and women suffer most when\nthis happens because they are the water-carriers of the world.\n  Experts in the Pentagon and elsewhere have called the world water\nshortage a real and growing threat to America's own security.\n  New York Times columnist Tom Friedman published a devastating piece\nabout how drought and water mismanagement contributed to Syria's bloody\ncivil war that makes that clear.\n  We also know that every dollar we invest in clean water and basic\nsanitation yields many times that amount in benefits: people are\nhealthier; kids stay in school; food is safer; AIDS drugs and other\ncritical health treatments are able to work.\n  So I thank my colleagues, my key cosponsors in the Senate and House,\nPatti Simon, and the many organizations for supporting this important\nlegislation. It will help save lives.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6911", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "MORNING BUSINESS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SMBUSINESS", "S6911", "S6911", "[{\"name\": \"Mark L. Pryor\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6911", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6911]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            MORNING BUSINESS\n\n  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be\nin a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak for\nup to 10 minutes each.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6912-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ARMY PUBLIC SCHOOL MURDERS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6912", "S6912", "[{\"name\": \"Christopher A. Coons\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6912", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6912]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       ARMY PUBLIC SCHOOL MURDERS\n\n  Mr. COONS. Mr. President, I wish to offer my heartbroken condolences\nto the people of Pakistan and to the friends and family, the parents\nand loved ones, of those murdered yesterday at the Army Public School\nin Peshawar.\n  As the Pakistan military continues its assault on the Pakistani\nTaliban in North Waziristan, the terrorist group responded yesterday\nwith an act of murder and barbarity that simply has no parallel, as\nnine gunmen murdered more than 140 students and teachers who together\nwere simply gathered to ensure a brighter future for their country.\n  This is a crime that simply passes comprehension. As the father of\nthree, I can only imagine in my worst nightmares the reality that those\nparents are now living.\n  Unfortunately, as a nation, Americans have in our not so distant past\nalso felt the grief that now envelops Pakistan.\n  Two years ago this past weekend, a gunman stormed the Sandy Hook\nElementary School in Newtown, CT and murdered 26 of our sons and\ndaughters, our brothers and sisters. Two years later we remain in\nmourning, for the lives taken from us and for the futures that were so\nquickly extinguished.\n  My prayers are with all Pakistanis who mourn today and with the loved\nones of the victims of Newtown who remain in mourning. May we pray for\nthe safety of those who are most precious and sacred to us, and may we\nremain undeterred in the face of such evil.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6912-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTES TO DEPARTING SENATORS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6912", "S6918", "[{\"name\": \"Robert P. Casey Jr.\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Jeanne Shaheen\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Mazie K. Hirono\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Barbara Boxer\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6912", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6912-S6918]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     TRIBUTES TO DEPARTING SENATORS\n\n  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, before this Congress ends, I wanted to pay\ntribute to several of my colleagues who will not be here when we\nconvene next year. Some chose not to run again, and others\nunfortunately lost their reelection campaigns, but we will miss them\nall next year. I begin in order of seniority.\n\n                              Tim Johnson\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to begin with Senator Tim Johnson. After\nseveral years of service in South Dakota, where he received the\nOutstanding Citizen Award and the Billie Sutton Award for Legislative\nAchievement, Tim was elected to the House of Representatives in 1986.\nHe served there for 10 years, earning many distinctions, among them,\none for passing more legislation than the other 50 first-term Members.\nIn 1996 he was elected to the Senate, where he has served three terms.\nIn recent years Senator Johnson has served as chairman of the banking\ncommittee, of which he has been a member since 1997. Over the years he\nhas advocated for community banks in South Dakota, worked to pass the\nSafe and Fair Deposit Insurance Act of 2005, which updated the Federal\ndeposit insurance system, and pushed to deal with the special needs of\nconsumers in rural areas. Tim has also shown immense courage in dealing\nwith health issues and has been an exemplary public servant. We will\nmiss him next year and wish him and Barbara well.\n\n                             Mary Landrieu\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Mary Landrieu started a career of public\nservice in the Louisiana State Legislature and then as State treasurer.\nShe was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1996 becoming her State's first\nfemale Senator. Senator Landrieu has always fought for her State, a\nfact never more apparent than in the aftermath of Hurricanes\n\n[[Page S6913]]\n\nKatrina and Rita when she fought valiantly for disaster funding and\nreforms that helped countless people in Louisiana. Mary has also been a\nchampion for our children, and I have seen her commitment as we worked\ntogether on adoption and foster care issues over the years. We will\nmiss Mary's spirit, but we know she will never stop fighting for what\nshe believes in. I wish Mary and Frank well in this new chapter of\ntheir lives.\n\n                               Mark Pryor\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Mark Pryor comes from a family with a history\nof public service. Mark served as Arkansas attorney general before\nbeing elected to the Senate in 2002, occupying the same Senate seat his\nfather David held. As a member of the Agriculture Committee, Mark\nfought hard to protect the interests of Arkansas' farmers, and through\nhis position on the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee\nhe pushed for regulatory reform, all the while asking how each decision\nhe made would impact people back in Arkansas. Through his work, Mark\nembodied what it meant to be a public servant.\n\n                               Mark Udall\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Mark Udall's family has served the United\nStates for decades. His cousin Tom has served beside him in the Senate\nfor the past 6 years. His father Morris ``Mo'' Udall was a Member of\nthe U.S. House of Representatives for 30 years and also ran for\nPresident. His uncle Stewart served as Interior Secretary under\nPresidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson in the 1960s. Before\nbeing elected to the Senate in 2008, Mark served in the U.S. House of\nRepresentatives and the Colorado State Legislature. Through his\nposition on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, Mark has\ncontinued his family's commitment to our public lands and resources,\nchairing the National Parks Subcommittee. Senator Udall has also worked\nhard to help the U.S. Government get its fiscal house in order, pushing\nhis colleagues to make tough choices today to help create a better\ntomorrow. As a member of the Armed Services and Select Intelligence\nCommittees, Mark has advocated for more transparent detention and drone\npolicies and pushed to make public the ``Committee Study of the Central\nIntelligence Agency's Detention and Interrogation Program.''\n\n                               Kay Hagan\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Kay Hagan spent 10 years serving in the North\nCarolina State senate before being elected to the U.S. Senate in 2008.\nI have had the pleasure of sitting next to Kay on the Health,\nEducation, Labor and Pensions Committee and working with her on issues\nsuch as medication therapy management to help ensure our seniors are\ntaking the prescription drugs that help keep them healthy and the\nNewborn Screening Saves Lives Reauthorization Act that provides funding\nfor the screening of newborn babies for heritable disorders, allowing\nthem the earliest possible access to treatments. Through her position\non the Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, Senator Hagan has\npushed to protect and grow North Carolina jobs. On the Armed Services\nCommittee, she has fought for North Carolina's military families. I\nwish Kay and Chip well in the years ahead.\n\n                              Mark Begich\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Mark Begich arrived in the Senate in 2008,\nhaving previously served as mayor of Anchorage. Mark worked hard and\naccomplished a lot in his 6 years here, but what I will always remember\nis Mark's commitment to our veterans. Alaska has more, veterans per\ncapita than any other state in our Nation, and through his position on\nthe Veterans' Affairs Committee, Senator Begich has been their\nchampion. I thank Mark for his public service and his commitment, and I\nwish him and Deborah well.\n\n                            Jay Rockefeller\n\n  Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, I wish to pay tribute to my friend and\ncolleague, Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, who will soon retire from\nthe Senate after representing his beloved West Virginia for the last 30\nyears.\n  Senator Rockefeller and I both came to Washington after having\npreviously served as Governors of our home States, and I have been\ngrateful for his friendship and counsel. I would also note that Senator\nRockefeller has some familiarity with New Hampshire, having graduated\nfrom Phillips Exeter Academy.\n  Senator Rockefeller will forever be remembered in the Senate for his\ndedication to the hard-working people of West Virginia. When West\nVirginia coal mining companies threatened to abandon their pension\nobligations to miners, Senator Rockefeller successfully fought to pass\nthe Coal Act of 1992 to safeguard their retirements. Among his numerous\nother legislative accomplishments, Senator Rockefeller will certainly\nbe remembered as the father of the Children's Health Insurance Program.\nSince its creation in 1997, CHIP has provided millions of low-income\nchildren and pregnant women access to health insurance. Just last year,\nCHIP touched the lives of more than 8 million Americans.\n  During his lengthy career Senator Rockefeller chaired the Senate\nCommittees on Veterans' Affairs, Intelligence, and most recently\nCommerce, Science, and Transportation. As a chairman, Senator\nRockefeller believed strongly that good policy started with listening\nand ran his committees in a way that allowed all Senators, no matter\ntheir party, a voice and a role in the legislative process.\n  The example set by Senator Rockefeller is an inspiration to all of us\nwho serve in the Senate. On behalf of the people of New Hampshire, I\nthank him for his years of dedicated service to our country and wish\nhim the best in his well-deserved retirement.\n\n                               Carl Levin\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to honor Senator Carl Levin as he prepares to\nretire after 36 years of dedicated service in the Senate.\n  As the longest serving Senator in Michigan's history, Senator Levin\nhas been a stalwart advocate for the people of his State. In the\naftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, Senator Levin played a critical\nrole in drafting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to ensure\nit would bolster the Midwestern manufacturers that would prove integral\nto our national economic recovery. As cochair of the Great Lakes Task\nForce, Senator Levin has worked throughout his career to protect the\nvast waterways that are critical to Michigan's economy and those of the\nother Great Lakes States.\n  I have had the honor of serving on the Senate Armed Services\nCommittee under the leadership of Chairman Levin, and his concern for\nthe people of Michigan is perhaps only matched by his concern for the\nsoldiers, sailors, marines, and airman who defend our Nation, as well\nas the families who support them. Under his steady leadership the\nSenate has kept faith with our military by passing the annual National\nDefense Authorization Act, and this year's defense bill bears Senator\nLevin's name as tribute to his lengthy service on the Committee. As\nchair of the Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness and Management\nSupport, I have always appreciated Senator Levin's commitment to a\nstrong bipartisan spirit in the work of the committee, and I know it\nwill endure thanks to his example.\n  A sharp legal mind, Senator Levin also worked in a bipartisan fashion\nas chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations to\nhold powerful public and private institutions accountable. Born from\nthe highly successful Truman Committee formed in the lead-up to World\nWar II, Senator Levin's subcommittee investigated critical issues such\nas the 2008 financial crisis, systemic credit card fraud, as well as\ncorporate abuse of off-shore tax havens--bringing light to complex and\nobscure issues to the benefit of the American people.\n  Senator Levin has been a source of reasoned counsel for many in the\nSenate, and I know his presence will be missed. However, I also know he\nis looking forward to spending some well-earned time back in Michigan\nwith his children, grandchildren, and wife Barbara.\n\n                               Tom Harkin\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to recognize Senator Tom Harkin and his 30\nyears of Senate service.\n  When Senator Harkin retires at the end of this year, he will also\nstep down from his chairmanship of the Senate Committee on Health,\nEmployment, Labor, and Pensions, a post from which he has advocated\nprogressive policies\n\n[[Page S6914]]\n\naimed at increasing opportunity for all Americans.\n  One of Senator Harkin's greatest legislative achievements is the\nAmericans with Disabilities Act, legislation that he fought for on\nbehalf of millions of disabled Americans. The ADA is truly a landmark\nlaw in this country, and Senator Harkin's decades of work on this issue\nwill never be forgotten.\n  Senator Harkin also has a strong legacy as a champion for human\nrights, which began even before his election to public office while he\nwas still a staffer on Capitol Hill. Invited to travel with a\ncongressional delegation to Vietnam in the summer of 1970, Senator\nHarkin arranged for the group to visit the Con Son prison in order to\ninvestigate allegations of human rights abuses by the South Vietnamese\nGovernment. At the prison, the delegation strayed from the official\ntour and found abused prisoners held in so-called ``tiger cages,''\nwhich Senator Harkin documented extensively with a camera. In defiance\nof some of the delegation members, Senator Harkin courageously handed\nover the pictures to Life magazine in order to better educate the\nAmerican public about U.S involvement in Vietnam.\n  I have been fortunate to witness firsthand Senator Harkin's passion\nfor U.S. leadership in human rights during our service together on the\nSenate Appropriations Committee, where he has brought heightened\nattention to the scourge of child labor and exploitation. I know this\nis one particular issue on which Senator Harkin feels his work has just\nbegun, and I look forward to hearing of his continued efforts on behalf\nof vulnerable children around the world.\n  On a more personal note, I will miss competing with Senator Harkin's\noffice for the most staff participants in the Everybody Wins! DC\nreading mentorship program, a great cause in which Senator Harkin has\nbeen involved in for the last 16 years.\n  I join my colleagues in thanking Senator Harkin for his dedicated\nservice in the Senate and wish him all the best in retirement.\n\n                               Kay Hagan\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Hagan and I came to the Senate 6 years ago\nwith a shared commitment to bipartisan problem solving reflective of\nthe independent spirit of the States we represent. I am glad to say\nthat in Senator Hagan I found not only a strong partner in policymaking\nbut also a good friend.\n  Born in Shelby, NC, Senator Hagan got her start in politics, as many\nof us do, at the State level. During 10 years in the North Carolina\nSenate, she built a reputation as a committed public servant, and that\nreputation would eventually propel her to the United States Senate.\n  In Washington, Senator Hagan has used her position on the Senate\nArmed Services Committee to support the military families stationed at\nFort Bragg, Camp Lejune, and other military installations in North\nCarolina. Thanks to her efforts, Congress passed legislation in 2012 to\nprovide health care and compensation to military families impacted by\nwater contamination at Camp Lejune. Also a member of the small business\ncommittee, Senator Hagan's private sector experience has been a\ntremendous asset to the legislative work of the committee.\n  I would like to wish the very best to Senator Hagan, who I know is\nlooking forward to the opportunity to spend more time with her family,\nespecially her grandchildren.\n\n                               Mark Udall\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to take a moment to thank my friend and\ncolleague Senator Mark Udall for his dedicated service to the people of\nColorado and our Nation.\n  As many of my colleagues are aware, long before Senator Udall was\nclimbing the steps to Capitol Hill he was hiking the mountains of\nColorado as a course director and educator with Outward Bound, an\norganization he would eventually lead as executive director. However,\nas a member of the Udall family, headed by his father Congressman\nMorris ``Mo'' Udall, who served in the House of Representatives for 30\nyears, elected office was never far from Senator Udall's mind. After 20\nyears with Outward Bound, Senator Udall left to pursue a career in\npublic service.\n  After serving a term in the Colorado State Legislature, Senator Udall\nran successfully to represent Colorado's Second Congressional District\nin the House of Representatives, a seat he held for five consecutive\nterms. When we arrived at the Senate in 2008, Senator Udall and I found\ncommon cause in our work on both the Senate Armed Services Committee\nand the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Senator\nUdall's commitment to working across the aisle to confront the\ndifficult issues facing our Nation was appreciated by many in the\nSenate, and I know his presence will be missed.\n  I wish the very best to Senator Udall and thank him for his service.\n\n                             Mary Landrieu\n\n  Mr. President, my friend from Louisiana Senator Mary Landrieu has\ndevoted her entire life to public service, and today I wish to\nrecognize the extraordinary leadership and energy that she has brought\nto the Senate throughout her career.\n  Senator Landrieu has been a leader on so many issues, none more so\nthan as a passionate advocate for children around the world. I was\nproud to work with her on legislation to address the decline in\ninternational adoptions, in addition to several other bills that\nSenator Landrieu has authored to support children both in the United\nStates and in developing nations. This issue is particularly near to\nSenator Landrieu's heart, and I know I am speaking for countless\nchildren around the world when I thank her for her efforts to ensure\nall children experience the benefits of a safe and loving family.\n  I also had the pleasure of working with Senator Landrieu during her\nleadership of the Senate Small Business Committee, as well as on the\nSenate Energy and Natural Resources Committee.\n  Senator Landrieu has always fought hard for her home State of\nLouisiana, and her dedication to her constituents was made clear in the\naftermath of Hurricane Katrina. All Americans vividly recall the scenes\nof destruction caused by the storm--more than 1,800 killed and $100\nbillion in property destroyed in just days. Those who were fortunate to\nescape the storm physically unscathed were more than likely left\nhomeless, and over 80% of Senator Landrieu's hometown of New Orleans\nwas under water for weeks after Katrina made landfall.\n  After the storm Senator Landrieu immediately set to work building\nsupport for legislation to jump start the gulf coast recovery and help\nher constituents put their lives back together. Senator Landrieu nearly\nsinglehandedly pushed through critical funding and reforms to help\nLouisiana rebuild.\n  It has been an honor working with her, and I thank her for her years\nof service to the Senate and the Nation.\n\n                              Mark Begich\n\n  Mr. President, today I wish to recognize my fellow Senator from the\nclass of 2008, Senator Mark Begich of Alaska.\n  Senator Begich's career in public service began earlier than most at\nthe young age of 19, when he was hired by the Anchorage city health\ndepartment. By that time, Senator Begich was also well on his way to\nestablishing himself as an enterprising businessman and entrepreneur.\nBorn and raised in Anchorage, AK, Mark Begich would go on to serve in\nthe Anchorage Assembly where he was the youngest member ever elected,\nbefore successfully running for the post of mayor in 2003, a role in\nwhich he served until his election to the Senate.\n  Here in Washington Senator Begich has used his position as chair of\nthe commerce Subcommittee on Oceans, Atmosphere, Fisheries, and Coast\nGuard, as well as his extensive knowledge of the Alaska economy, to\nadvocate for Alaska-first policies. As a Senator from a State with one\nof the highest populations of veterans per capita, Senator Begich has\nalso been a passionate defender of our Nation's military. I also have\nhad the pleasure of serving with Senator Begich on the Senate\nAppropriations Committee and have greatly appreciated his\ncontributions.\n  I would like to thank Senator Begich for his years of dedicated\nservice both to Alaska and the Nation.\n\n                               Mark Pryor\n\n  Mr. President, Senator Mark Pryor of Arkansas has served the people\nof Arkansas in the Senate for the last 12 years, guided by his strong\nfaith and\n\n[[Page S6915]]\n\ndetermination to bridge the partisan divide.\n  As a member of the Appropriations Committee, Senator Pryor has\nsuccessfully directed Federal assistance to his Arkansas constituents,\nhelping to strengthen his State's economy. As a member of the commerce\ncommittee, he prioritized bringing broadband Internet service to the\nrural parts of Arkansas. When Senator Pryor served on the Senate Armed\nServices Committee, he successfully introduced and passed legislation\nto provide tax relief for our servicemembers deployed in combat zones,\nas well as legislation to more quickly inform military families when\ntheir loved ones are injured in combat.\n  Senator Pryor has time and again proved his dedication to the State\nwhere he was born and raised, and I wish to thank him for his service\nin the Senate.\n\n                              Mike Johanns\n\n  Mr. President, over three decades as a public servant, my friend and\ncolleague Senator Mike Johanns of Nebraska has proven time and time\nagain that politicians can be deeply principled while still recognizing\nthe need to find common ground on the complex and difficult choices we\nmust make as a nation. I believe this is a lesson that all former\nGovernors carry with them after holding executive office, and Senator\nJohanns and I were often able to reach an understanding on that basis.\n  Before coming to the Senate in 2009, Mike Johanns had already built a\ndistinguished record of public service as a county board member, city\ncouncil member, mayor and two term Governor of Nebraska. Senator\nJohanns also served for 3 years in the White House Cabinet as Secretary\nof Agriculture to President George W. Bush. While leading the\nDepartment of Agriculture, Senator Johanns helped U.S. agriculture\nproducers find new markets overseas, promoted expanded use of renewable\nfuels, and encouraged conservation of agricultural lands. Having played\na key role in developing the farm bill passed by Congress in 2008,\nthen-Secretary Johanns decided to return to legislating full time and\nsuccessfully ran to represent Nebraska in the Senate.\n  Senator Johanns' time in Congress is best characterized by his low-\nkey approach to the most high-profile and consequential issues of the\nday. He was one of the bipartisan Gang of 8 Senators who tackled the\nchallenge of crafting a comprehensive Federal deficit reduction plan in\n2011, and in 2013 we worked together on a bipartisan deal to reopen the\nFederal Government and avoid a default on our national debt. I was also\nvery proud to work with Senator Johanns on legislation to address the\nunacceptable trends in military sexual assault. Senator Johanns always\nbrought the work ethic he developed growing up on a Nebraska farm to\nour business in the Senate, and for that and many other reasons I very\nmuch enjoyed working with him.\n  Senator Johanns has given many years to public service, earning him\nthe right to seek a bit of a break from the spotlight, and I wish him\nall the best in his retirement.\n\n                               Carl Levin\n\n  Ms. HIRONO. Mr. President, I take this opportunity to pay tribute to\nSenator Levin as his distinguished Senate career comes to a close at\nthe end of the 113th Congress. Senator Levin has proudly represented\nthe people of Michigan in the Senate for 36 years.\n  The desire to help others has been in Senator Levin's makeup long\nbefore coming to Washington. In fact, one might say it is in his DNA.\nHe comes from a family with a distinguished record of public service. I\nserved with his brother Sander in the House of Representatives, another\ntruly distinguished Member of Congress. Their father served on the\nMichigan Corrections Commission. His uncle served as a chief judge on\nthe U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and his\ncousin was a Michigan Supreme Court Judge.\n  Given this public service pedigree, it is no surprise that he got\nstarted in politics at an early age. He was elected class President at\nDetroit's Central High School. After Swarthmore College and Harvard Law\nSchool, he served as an assistant attorney general and general counsel\nof the Michigan Civil Rights Commission. In 1969 he was elected to the\nDetroit City Council and in 1978 joined the Senate.\n  Senator Levin has served on the Armed Services Committee for as long\nas he has been in the Senate. His Armed Services Committee tenure has\nprovided him the opportunity to work with 11 Secretaries of Defense,\nhelping to ensure that our Armed Forces were ready and able to meet the\nnational security challenges facing our Nation. He has long been a\nchampion of the men and women of our military and their families. From\nvisiting deployed troops far from home, to ensuring much needed\ntraining, equipment, and pay increases, and improving the delivery of\nbenefits and services they have earned, Carl Levin has been there for\nour troops.\n  Senator Levin is also a problemsolver. In order to improve the way\nthe Pentagon buys its weapons and to get the most out of the taxpayer\ndollars the government is entrusted to spend, he has worked hard to\nimprove acquisition practices throughout his career. In this arena, he\nled the way in passing the Competition in Contracting Act and the\nWeapons System Acquisition Reform Act.\n  I was fortunate to serve on the Armed Services Committee during my\nfirst 2 years in the Senate. I have been able to observe Chairman Levin\nfirsthand as he led the committee with a steady hand in a very\nbipartisan manner. I have been proud to be part of two National Defense\nAuthorization Acts--including the one this body passed last week, which\nbears his name--which preserve our readiness and provides for the well-\nbeing of our men and women of the armed services and their families.\n  Senator Levin also chairs the Permanent Subcommittee on\nInvestigations, where he has led investigations in many critical areas,\nincluding the 2008 financial crisis, energy and food market\nspeculation, abusive offshore tax havens, and unfair practices within\nthe credit card industry. His investigations have led to many reforms\nand laws to fix these problems. In 2012, the National Journal wrote\nthat ``the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations is one of the few\ninstitutions in Congress that's still working. Carl Levin is a big\nreason why.''\n  The Senate is losing one of its giants--a voice of reason, integrity,\nand fairness. Michigan's working families are losing a lifelong\nadvocate for their best interests who has really made a difference.\nCarl, thank you for your service to our country. I wish you, Barbara,\nand your entire family all the best as you move to the next chapter of\nyour journey.\n  Aloha Carl, a hui hou, ``until we meet again.''\n\n                               Tom Harkin\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to recognize the accomplishments of the\ndistinguished Senator from Iowa, Tom Harkin, who is retiring this year.\n  Senator Harkin has served in the House and Senate for nearly 40\nyears. During those 40 years he has been a consistent and inspirational\nvoice for the idea that America should be a place where everyone can\nsucceed.\n  Tom's life experiences shaped who he fought for and why. His mother\ndied when he was 10. His father never got beyond the sixth grade and\nsuffered from black lung disease. He grew up in a tiny town in Iowa. He\nsaw what the New Deal, Social Security, and Medicare did for his family\nand he saw government as a force that could lift people up and give\nthem hope.\n  Last week, during his farewell remarks to this body, he said\nsomething that the progressives among us should take to heart. He said:\n\n       `` . . . I believe government must not be just an observant\n     bystander to life. It must be a force for good, for lifting\n     people up, for giving hope to the hopeless.''\n\n  Under Tom Harkin's watch, government certainly has not been a\nbystander.\n  One of his proudest accomplishments was gaining passage of the\nAmericans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Tom stood with people with\ndisabilities, one of the largest minorities in the United States, to\nenact historic legislation that changed the lives of millions of\npeople. I was proud to cosponsor and support the 2008 Americans with\nDisabilities Amendments Act, which passed with overwhelming bipartisan\nsupport. His commitment to creating and expanding\n\n[[Page S6916]]\n\nopportunities for those with disabilities is a hallmark of his career.\n  Senator Harkin will also be remembered for his tireless leadership as\nthe chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions\nCommittee. As chairman he worked to promote health care and education,\nfairness for workers, equal rights, and, above all, the American dream.\nHe worked to fund those priorities for years on the Appropriations\nCommittee.\n  These are some of Tom's signature issues. But equally important has\nbeen his work fighting injustice and human rights violations across the\nglobe.\n  As a young Congressional staffer he travelled to Vietnam and\nuncovered torture on Con San Island, off of Vietnam. There people were\nbeing held in ``tiger cages''--5 foot by 9 foot cells dug into the\nground where three to five people were held captive.\n  While he lost his staff job over the pictures he took, he shed light\non atrocities that too many others had either ignored or covered up.\n  Tom's values and the results he has been able to achieve have made\nhim a powerful moral and progressive voice for decades. Some of us were\ndrawn to Tom during his Presidential run in 1992. I was. As a Hawaii\nState legislator, I supported the Senator from Iowa long before I ever\nhad the privilege of serving with him in the Senate. In fact, when his\nbid for the presidency ended, some of us continued to support him,\nmaking buttons with a slogan I coined: ``Harkin for the Heck of It!''\n  Tom Harkin has done much to help build the ladders of opportunity\nthat he so firmly believes is a big part of what government should do.\nHis work inspires us to continue pushing to see that every individual\nin our country has an opportunity to improve his or her life for the\nbetter.\n  Last week in his farewell remarks, Tom noted that while he is\nretiring from the Senate, he is not retiring from ``the fight.'' He\nalso gave those of us who are still here a list of unfinished business\nto continue the fight.\n  First, we have to do more to address income inequality and restack\nthe deck so that working people have confidence that their government\nworks on their behalf. Second, we have to work on addressing climate\nchange. Third, we have to do more to give employment opportunities to\nthe disabled, and finally, we have to pass the U.N. Convention on the\nRights of Persons with Disabilities.\n  These are all big fights. But it speaks to Tom's passion for public\nservice and improving access to opportunity that in his farewell\nremarks, he would give us a list of unfinished business.\n  I will miss him in the Senate. I am confident that Tom Harkin will be\na prominent voice in American society for years to come.\n  Aloha Tom, a hui hou, or ``until we meet again.''\n\n                            Jay Rockefeller\n\n  Mr. President, I also wish to pay tribute to a man who has dedicated\nnearly 50 years to public service. That is our retiring colleague\nSenator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia.\n  Jay Rockefeller's lifetime of service was shaped by his experience as\na VISTA worker in a rural coal town in West Virginia. Jay told me that\nthis experience was life changing, coming as he did from a very\nprivileged background. Working day-to-day in that community, learning\nthe hopes and fears and anxieties of the people, and seeing their\nstruggles led to his lifelong commitment to improving the lot of\nworking people everywhere.\n  In his farewell remarks to the Senate, Senator Rockefeller said that\nthe Senate must be a ``place in which we embrace the commitment to be\ndeliberative, passionate, and unrelenting.''\n  Senator Rockefeller embodied these qualities while serving the people\nof West Virginia. He has been a deliberative, passionate, and\nunrelenting champion, especially for those whose circumstances in life\nare the hardest.\n  His work on health care has impacted Americans in every corner of the\nUnited States, from the mountains of West Virginia, to my State of\nHawaii. He was instrumental in the efforts to establish the Children's\nHealth Insurance Program, or CHIP, which provides care to more than 8\nmillion children across the Nation. More than 30,000 of those children\nwho currently receive coverage for necessary primary and preventive\nhealth care are those children in my State of Hawaii.\n  From his Medicare Drug Savings Act to his Rebuilding America's\nSchools Act, Jay Rockefeller has truly been a champion for those who\nneeded a hand up in life.\n  We are all aware of Jay's efforts to enhance our national security\nwhile also holding our Nation to the highest standards possible as a\nchairman and member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. His\ncommitment to keeping America safe is met only by his commitment to\nensure that our Nation's veterans get the care and benefits that they\nhave earned and deserve. I have been privileged to serve with Jay on\nthe Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee.\n  Senator Rockefeller reminds us that to those upon whom fortune has\nsmiled, there is no greater calling than to dedicate ourselves to fight\nhard for those struggling, for those hard working, and for those who\nput us here.\n  As Senators I hope that we heed Jay's words and in the coming\nCongress we work together on a bipartisan basis to collaborate and\ncompromise on behalf of America's workers and families.\n  On a personal note, Jay and I had one of the best conversations\nrecently on the Senate floor where we discovered that we were two\npretty private people, some would even describe as introverts, who\npicked a most public of arenas, politics, to do our life's work of\nmaking a difference in the lives of those we are privileged to\nrepresent.\n  Thank you for your service, Senator Rockefeller. It has been an honor\nbeing your colleague and serving with you.\n  Aloha Jay, a hui hou, or ``until we meet again.''\n\n                              Tim Johnson\n\n  Mr. President, I wish to recognize the contributions of Senator Tim\nJohnson of South Dakota, who is retiring at the end of this year.\n  Senator Johnson has served South Dakota in the House and the Senate\nfor nearly 28 years. He was elected to the House in 1986 and was\nelected to the Senate in 1996. During those 28 years, Senator Johnson\nhas been an advocate for bipartisanship to get results in Congress. In\nfact, bipartisanship could be considered one of the campaign platforms\nthat first got him elected to Congress. As he related in his farewell\nremarks on this floor last week, when he first ran for the House of\nRepresentatives, he told the people of South Dakota that neither party\nhad all the answers, that both parties had good ideas, and that both\nparties had men and women of good will.\n  ``My job, as I understood it, would be to work in a bipartisan\nmanner, listening to all parties and reaching a good fit--also known as\ncompromise.''\n  Twenty-eight years later, it is clear that he not only understood his\njob well then, but his efforts to compromise have paid big dividends\nfor South Dakota. Over the years he has worked on a number of issues,\nfrom the farm bill, to highway funding, to flood relief and to protect\nSouth Dakota's Ellsworth Air Force Base.\n  No one Senator can deliver results on their own, but by working\nacross the aisle, Tim has not only done well for his constituents but\nhas gained a good reputation here in the Senate. He has served in\nleadership positions on the Senate banking committee, which he\ncurrently chairs, as well as the Senate Appropriations, Energy and\nNatural Resources, and Indian Affairs Committees. On each of these\ncommittees, Senator Johnson has championed issues that are important to\nthe people of his State but has always done so with an eye toward\nfairness--listening to all parties, promoting compromise, and doing\nwhat is right for working people across the country.\n  For these reasons, Senator Johnson is well-respected and has earned\nthe good will of the Senate. When he was faced with the challenge of a\nlifetime--a brain hemorrhage in 2006--he was supported by a Senate\ncommunity that set aside partisanship and political calculations.\nEveryone wanted to see him recover. When he returned to the Senate\nafter months of recovery, he was welcomed by the whole community. Tim\ncontinues to be a profile in courage.\n  His legacy is one of compromise and collaboration--two attributes\nthat are\n\n[[Page S6917]]\n\ncritical to the functioning of this body and two attributes which we\nwould do well to remember.\n  We will all miss Senator Johnson in the Senate. Aloha to him, his\nwife Barbara, his three children, and his six grandchildren, and a hui\nhou, ``until we meet again.''\n\n                               MARK UDALL\n\n  Mr. President, I would like to say a few words about my colleague,\nSenator Mark Udall of Colorado, who will be ending his 6-year tenure in\nthe Senate at the end of this Congress.\n  Senator Udall has served in public office for 18 years, serving in\nthe Colorado House of Representatives for 2 years before being elected\nto the U.S. House of Representatives, where he served for 10 years. He\nwas elected in 2008 to the Senate.\n  For Mark, public service is a family affair. His father, Arizona\nRepresentative Mo Udall, served in Congress for 30 years. His father\nran for the U.S. Presidency. His uncle, Stewart Udall, served as\nPresident Kennedy's Secretary of the Interior. And his cousin, Tom\nUdall, serves as one of New Mexico's U.S. Senators.\n  This legacy, coupled with Mark's love of the outdoors, give him a\nunique perspective on public service. Before running for office, Mark\nworked as an educator and executive director of the Colorado Outward\nBound School. As an avid mountaineer and educator, Mark understands the\nvalue of America's open spaces, smart policies for conservation and\neconomic growth, and finding practical solutions to our shared\nchallenges.\n  Mark Udall is a champion for the environment. His efforts to support\nprogressive renewable energy policies as a State legislator and Member\nof Congress have helped Colorado become a frontrunner in clean,\nsustainable energy to prepare for a more sustainable future. He has\nalso fought hard to expand the National Park Service, saying the Earth\nis borrowed from our children, not inherited from our parents, and that\nwe must work to preserve these public lands to ensure their existence\nfor future generations.\n  I have had the privilege of serving with Mark in the House and on the\nSenate Armed Services Committee to support the men and women who defend\nour country. We have worked together to focus on making our military\nmore energy efficient and less reliant on fossil fuels.\n  Mark has climbed some of the most daunting peaks in the world. The\nkind of self-reliance and focus required to meet those kinds of\nchallenges mark his work in public service. His decency and integrity\nin fighting for the middle class, for our environment, for transparency\nin government, inspire us to continue his work.\n  It has been a privilege to serve with Mark.\n  Aloha Mark and Maggie and a hui hou, ``until we meet again.''\n\n                               kay hagan\n\n  Mr. President, I thank my colleague Kay Hagan for her service in the\nSenate. Kay has spent every day of her 6 years fighting for North\nCarolina's families.\n  Kay's father, brother, husband, and father-in-law are all veterans.\nShe has two nephews on Active Duty. Their experiences--and the stories\nof thousands of North Carolina servicemembers and veterans--have helped\nguide Kay's work on the Senate Armed Services Committee, SASC, where I\nhave been privileged to serve with her.\n  As a member of SASC, I have seen firsthand Kay's deep knowledge and\ncommitment to our servicemembers, veterans, and military families--in\nNorth Carolina and around the country. North Carolina, like Hawaii, has\na large number of servicemembers and veterans, and Kay has worked to\nmake sure our troops get the support they need while they are in harm's\nway and when they get home.\n  Making sure veterans get the benefits they have earned and are\ntreated with respect is another area where Kay has been a strong\nleader. She has worked to make sure veterans are able to transition to\ncivilian life and prepare for college and career. Whether that means\nprotecting veterans from scams or making sure colleges are serving\nveterans effectively, Kay has their back.\n  Kay also is a strong advocate for children and families. She has\nworked on reauthorizing newborn screening legislation to make sure\nillnesses are detected and treated early. Just last week she got her\nbipartisan newborn screening bill across the finish line, and it will\nsoon head to President Obama's desk.\n  On education, Kay has worked on financial literacy in middle school\nand high school and turning around the highest-need K-12 schools. She\nhas fought for minority-serving institutions and making sure job-\ntraining and college help adults earn an associate's degree or industry\ncredential as soon as possible.\n  As I was running for the Senate, I got a chance to get to know Kay,\nand upon my election, she was very helpful in showing me the ropes as a\nnew Senator. The 20 Senate women have regular bipartisan dinners where\nwe leave politics at the door, get to know each other, and relax. Kay\nis well known for her tireless work on behalf of her constituents, her\ngraciousness as a host of Super Bowl parties, and her indefatigable\npositive attitude that rubs off on the rest of us.\n  I and the Senate sisterhood will miss Kay. However, I expect that she\nwill continue the spirited advocacy on behalf of the people of North\nCarolina whatever she next undertakes.\n  Aloha Kay and a hui hou, ``until we meet again.''\n\n                              Mark Begich\n\n  Mr. President, I recognize the accomplishments of Senator Mark\nBegich, our colleague from the State of Alaska. These last 2 years, I\nhave had the privilege to work with Senator Begich on a range of\nissues--from Native Adult Education and Health Care to fishing rights--\nand I consider him a good friend. Senator Begich is not only someone\nwho is easy to work with as a reasonable, open-minded legislator, but\nis also someone who truly cares about the people of his State and\nembodies the values of the Senate.\n  In his farewell remarks last week, Senator Begich commented on the\nrelative size of his State, which, at 660,000 square miles, is more\nthan twice and three times as large as other large States such as Texas\nand California geographically.\n  That is 164 times larger than my home State of Hawaii. It also gets a\nlot colder. Despite the differences between our States, as the two non-\ncontiguous U.S. States, Hawaii and Alaska have always had a special\nbond.\n  That bond was forged by Senators Inouye and Stevens--two of the\nSenate's giants. Those two men, who were from different parties and\nvery different States, looked out for one another. They did a lot of\ngood for our States, and all who come after them have sought to emulate\ntheir example of working together and looking out for each other.\n  Mark did that for me even before I was sworn in to the U.S. Senate.\nAs many of my colleagues may know, Senator Inouye passed away just\nweeks before I was to be sworn in. At the time I would been assigned to\nthe Energy, Judiciary, and Veterans' Affairs Committees. However, with\nSenator Inouye's passing--and I have to thank our leadership here as\nwell--I asked for a seat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, an\nappointment critical to Hawaii, where military activity is a vital part\nof our economy.\n  Mark Begich gave his seat up on the committee to open a slot for me.\nNot to shortchange Alaska, Mark got a seat on Appropriations. But I\nwill never forget that he recognized how important the military was to\nHawaii and how he agreed to help me out.\n  Not only was Mark reinforcing the long-lasting Hawaii-Alaska bond,\nbut it was also characteristic of Mark's desire to help-something that\nhis constituents know all too well.\n  As Senator Begich mentioned in his farewell remarks, ``Alaska is a\nvery small place in many ways. People make personal connections with\ntheir elected officials.''\n  Whether it is answering constituent letters, or helping people\nnavigate the Federal bureaucracy, Senator Begich has been there for\nAlaskans. He has also taken their concerns and made sure that everyone\nin Washington knows about them--whether it is the situation in the\nArctic, fishing, energy development, or the challenges of Alaska\nNatives. There is not a Member of this body who has not heard Senator\nBegich talk about Alaska's unique challenges.\n  As he also mentioned, most people in his State pretty much know each\nother.\n  In a State like Alaska--much like Hawaii--you can't ``go\nWashington.'' You have got to stay grounded in the day-to-day concerns\nof the unique local communities back home. Sometimes this can be tough,\nbut Mark has always\n\n[[Page S6918]]\n\nkept Alaskans first and foremost in all of his work in the Senate.\n  I have had the privilege of serving with Mark on the Senate Veterans'\nAffairs Committee, and have seen firsthand how hard he has worked on\nbehalf of Alaska's veterans. He has been tenacious in working to see\nthat Alaska's veterans and Natives have access to health care--and\ncreatively, worked to see that veterans can access the tribal health\ncare delivery system. As he has put it, if the clinics are there for\nsome, why not have them be available to all?\n  This is the kind of commonsense solution that is a hallmark of his\ntime in the Senate.\n  I will miss his good humor and his hard work. It is been a pleasure\nserving with Mark and I wish him and his family all the best in their\nnext chapter.\n  Aloha Mark and a hui hou, ``until we meet again.''\n\n                               John Walsh\n\n  Mr. President, I rise to pay tribute to our colleague, Senator John\nWalsh of Montana. While his Senate career is shorter than any of us\nwould have hoped, the institution is better for his service and he will\nbe missed.\n  His road to this body is different than most anyone else. He grew up\nin Butte, MT, close enough to a copper mine that his house would shake\nwhen the dynamite went off. His dreams were modest--get an education,\nfind a job, and do some fishing.\n  But life often takes unexpected turns. He enrolled in the Montana\nNational Guard in order to pursue those modest dreams, and found a home\nin the Guard. He rose to serve as Adjutant General of the Montana\nNational Guard. In this capacity he commanded troops in Iraq in 2004\nand 2005. He earned the Bronze Star, Legion of Merit Award, and Combat\nInfantry Badge for his efforts leading over 700 young men and women.\nThis military experience is one that he carries with him in ways that\nmost of us will never know.\n  After retiring from the National Guard in 2012 he served as Montana's\nLieutenant Governor, and currently, as a Senator. He is the first Iraq\nwar combat veteran to serve in the Senate.\n  His experience growing up in a working-class family, serving in the\nmilitary, and as a public servant in elected office have made him a\nvaluable Member of this body.\n  His advocacy for Montana, and for our servicemembers and veterans,\nand his perspective on national security matters--particularly reigning\nin the National Security Agency--have been valuable to our caucus. I\nknow that he will carry these priorities forward in whatever endeavor\nhe pursues next.\n  I am proud to have to served as his colleague in the Senate. Aloha\nJohn, and a hui hou, ``until we meet again,'' to you, your wife Janet,\nand your family.\n Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I wish to celebrate and thank the\n13 outgoing Senators who have worked tirelessly to represent their home\nStates in the Senate: Senator Mark Begich, Senator Saxby Chambliss,\nSenator Tom Coburn, Senator Kay Hagan, Senator Tom Harkin, Senator Mike\nJohanns, Senator Tim Johnson, Senator Mary Landrieu, Senator Carl\nLevin, Senator Mark Pryor, Senator Jay Rockefeller, Senator Mark Udall,\nand Senator John Walsh.\n  I have worked side by side with these men and women for years--some\nfor decades--and witnessed firsthand their extraordinary commitment to\npublic service and the people they so proudly represent.\n  Even when we didn't see eye to eye on every issue, I always deeply\nrespected and admired their service to our Nation and their dedication\nto fight for what they believe in.\n  It has been a privilege to serve alongside each and every one of\nthese extraordinary colleagues. I will miss their leadership and their\nfriendship, and I wish them all the best as they embark on the next\nchapter.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6912", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "VOTE EXPLANATION", "SENATE", "SENATE", "VOTEEXPLAIN", "S6912", "S6912", "[{\"name\": \"Bill Nelson\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6912", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6912]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                            VOTE EXPLANATION\n\n  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I was necessarily absent for the vote on\nthe motion to proceed to executive session to consider the confirmation\nof the nomination of Sarah R. Saldana, to be an Assistant Secretary of\nHomeland Security, which occurred on Saturday, December 13, 2014. Had I\nbeen present, I would have voted in favor of the motion.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6918-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO CHIP ROY", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TRIBUTETO", "S6918", "S6918", "[{\"name\": \"Ted Cruz\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6918", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6918]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                          TRIBUTE TO CHIP ROY\n\n  Mr. CRUZ. Mr. President, I rise today to recognize a fearless leader,\nand one I am blessed to call a friend. Chip Roy. Chip reluctantly\nagreed to travel from Texas to Washington--frequently leaving his\nbeautiful wife Carrah and his two precious children, Charlie and\nVirginia--to help build and lead one of the most talented and\nprincipled conservative teams on Capitol Hill, and to Make D.C. Listen.\nHe did. He will continue to lead in Texas, now just from a different\nfront.\n  My good friends in Texas, especially newly elected Attorney General\nPaxton and Governor Abbott, are fortunate to have such a principled\nfighter for liberty assuming the role as First Assistant to the\nAttorney General. I look forward to many opportunities to continue\nworking side-by-side to champion the rights of Texans, and all\nAmericans.\n  Chip is a man of conviction. His passion is matched only by his\nunceasing faith. I am confident he will continue to shine a light on\nthe truth and to serve the Great State of Texas and this Nation with\nthe utmost dedication to the Constitution and to the Lord Almighty.\n  I will always be grateful for the many days--and nights--Chip\ndedicated to critical fights here in the Senate, from protecting\ncitizens' Second Amendment rights, to securing our borders, to leading\na national debate on the harms of Obamacare. Chip knows DC well, but he\nknows the American people better, and his courage to help change the\nway Washington does business to put our fellow Texans and Americans\nfirst is a rare gift that will continue to live on.\n  This is simply the beginning, as we both continue to battle to\nprotect our God-given rights, to secure a future filled with\nopportunity for our beloved children, and to keep America the land of\nthe free. May we continue to make Texas a beacon of liberty.\n  Chip, thank you for your tireless service, especially in the wake of\nyour courageous battle against cancer. Thank you for your\nuncompromising principles. Thank you for your continued friendship.\nFor, as Proverbs 27:17 says, ``As iron sharpens iron, so a man sharpens\nthe countenance of his friend.'' Your leadership has, and will continue\nto, make all who are privileged to know you stronger. May God continue\nto bless you, and the Great State of Texas.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6918-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO MARIA HARRISON", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SADDITIONAL", "S6918", "S6919", "[{\"name\": \"Kay  R. Hagan\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6918", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6918-S6919]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         ADDITIONAL STATEMENTS\n\n                                 ______\n\n                       TRIBUTE TO MARIA HARRISON\n\n Mrs. HAGAN. Mr. President, Maria Harrison reported for her\nfirst day of work with the Federal Aviation Administration on Monday,\nJune 18, 1973. On January 3, 2015, she will retire from the U.S.\nDepartment of Transportation after 41 years and 6 months of service to\nour country as a Federal employee. Except for 10 months at the Small\nBusiness Administration, she spent her career in the transportation\nfield:\n  Federal Aviation Administration, 6/18/1973 to 07/30/1977; Small\nBusiness Administration, 07/31/1977 to 05/20/1978; Department of\nTransportation/OST, 05/21/\n\n[[Page S6919]]\n\n1978 to 04/03/1982; Department of Transportation/MARAD, 04/04/1982 to\n12/24/1983; Department of Transportation/FAA, 12/25/1983 to 06/04/1988;\nDepartment of Transportation/FRA, 6/05/1988 to 11/03/2001; and\nDepartment of Transportation/OST, 11/04/2001 to Present.\n  Ms. Harrison currently works in the Office of Governmental Affairs at\nU.S. DOT, where she has been of assistance to my office and\nconstituents numerous of times. I am sure that every office in the U.S.\nSenate benefited directly from her good works. As much as her\ncolleagues at U.S. DOT will miss her, she has earned the right to spend\nmore time with her friends and family, especially her granddaughter\nwhose pictures adorn the desk of her office. She has earned the deepest\nof gratitude from those of us in the U.S. Senate. Above all else, she\nhas earned the thanks of the country she has so unselfishly served for\nover 41 years. Thank you Ms. Harrison.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6918", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO HAROON KHAN", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TRIBUTETO", "S6918", "S6918", "[{\"name\": \"Tim Johnson\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6918", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6918]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         TRIBUTE TO HAROON KHAN\n\n  Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota. Mr. President, I wish to recognize and\nto extend my thanks and appreciation to Haroon Azam Khan.\n  For almost two decades, I have been truly fortunate to have had\nHaroon on my side.\n  Haroon's personal story is uniquely American. While his parents\nMohammad Azam and Anjum Khan immigrated to the United States in the\n1960's, the first members of Haroon's family arrived in the United\nStates in 1906 and settled in Willows, CA.\n  Haroon's interest in government started early, first as an intern in\nthe district office of my friend and former colleague Congressman Bob\nMatsui and then as an intern in The White House.\n  After graduating from the University of California at Berkeley,\nHaroon joined my first Senate campaign and then worked with me as my\nfinance and political director on each of my reelection efforts. He\nalso worked with my colleagues Senator Dianne Feinstein and Senator\nChris Dodd in the same capacity.\n  Eventually, after working in the private sector, I invited Haroon to\nwork for me as deputy staff director of the Senate Committee on\nBanking, Housing and Urban Affairs.\n  It has been a pleasure to watch Haroon grow both personally and\nprofessionally, and it is with sincere gratitude that I would like to\nthank Haroon for his years of dedicated friendship, counsel and\nsupport.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6919-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO RUSS SMITH", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TRIBUTETO", "S6919", "S6919", "[{\"name\": \"Thomas R. Carper\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6919", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6919]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         TRIBUTE TO RUSS SMITH\n\n Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, on behalf of the Delaware\nDelegation, I wish to honor the exemplary service of the superintendent\nof the First State National Historical Park, Mr. Russell P. Russ Smith.\nA native of New Castle, DE, and a devoted husband to his wife\nJacqueline, two sons and two grandchildren, Russ returned to Delaware\nin May 2013 to cap his 42-year career with the National Park Service at\nthe First State National Historical Park.\n  Russ began working for the National Park Service shortly after\nearning a degree in American history from the University of Delaware.\nFor the 10 years prior to his work in Delaware, he managed\nFredericksburg and Spotsylvania National Military Park in\nFredericksburg, VA. His 28 years of field experience have included\nassignments at Prince William Forest Park, Fort Sumter National\nMonument, Independence National Historical Park, Hopewell Furnace\nNational Historic Site and George Washington Birthplace National\nMonument.\n  In 11 years at Independence National Historical Park, Russ oversaw\nnearly 100 employees and was responsible for telling the park's great\nstory in American history by planning interpretive programs, creating\nmuseum and outdoor exhibits, and developing videos and publications. In\n1989, Russ continued telling America's great stories when he was named\nchief of interpretation and visitor services for the Mid-Atlantic\nregion, a position in which he pioneered the current interpretive\nplanning system used by the National Park Service.\n  It is fitting that his long career led him back to Delaware, where in\nMarch of 2013, President Barack Obama authorized sites in Delaware to\nbe a part of the First State National Monument. The monument tells the\nstory of early colonial settlement leading up to the ratification of\nthe constitution. For the first time, Delaware was included in the\nNational Park System, and Russ was back home, leading the monument as\nsuperintendent. Under his watch, the First State National Monument\nturned into the First State National Historical Park, finally giving\nDelaware the national park it long deserved.\n  Russ has received the Mid-Atlantic Region's Freeman Tilden Award, the\nhighest award for interpretation, the Director's Design Award for his\ninterpretive plan for the Edgar Allan Poe National Historic Site, a\nSuperior Service Award from the Department of the Interior for\nredesigning the National Park Service interpretive planning system and\nthe National Park Service's Appleman-Judd-Lewis Award for excellence in\ncultural resource management.\n  Russ is a visionary and a leader. His work touched as many as 70\nnational park units from Maine to West Virginia and has allowed\nAmericans and visitors from around the world to understand and enjoy\nthe history and beauty that our Nation's national parks and monuments\nhold. Russ has devoted his life's work to our Nation's park service and\nhas done a tremendous job of inspiring others to enjoy our Nation's\nhistory.\n  On behalf of Senator Chris Coons and Congressman John Carney, I\nwholeheartedly thank Russ for his 42 years of service to the National\nPark Service and to our Nation. His model leadership and dedication to\neducate those of all generations is his legacy. We offer our sincere\ncongratulations on a job well done, and wish him, his wife Jacqueline,\nand their family many happy, healthy and successful years to\ncome.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6919-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "REMEMBERING MELVIN MARK RICHARDSON", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6919", "S6920", "[{\"name\": \"Mike Crapo\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6919", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6919-S6920]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                   REMEMBERING MELVIN MARK RICHARDSON\n\n Mr. CRAPO. Mr. President, I wish to honor the life of Mel\nRichardson, an\n\n[[Page S6920]]\n\nIdaho leader with a legacy in public service and broadcasting, who\npassed away last week.\n  Mel Richardson's radio broadcasting career thankfully brought him and\nhis wife of 61 years, Dixie, to Idaho more than six decades ago. And we\nare better for it. Over the span of his 62-year radio and television\nbroadcasting career, Mel hosted several sports and public affairs\nprograms and was a sportscaster for professional, college and high\nschool athletics.\n  He also devoted considerable time to public service. During the\nKorean war, he served in the Active Army Reserves and later was the\nfirst elected mayor of the City of Ammon, where he led significant\npublic works projects, paving the way for the town's future progress. I\nwas honored to serve in the Idaho State Legislature with him. During my\ntime in the Idaho State Senate, he served in the Idaho House of\nRepresentatives, and was elected to the Idaho State Senate seat I\nvacated when I was elected to Congress in 1992. For 16 years, he served\nin the Idaho State Senate, where he utilized his position to expand\neducation opportunities for Idaho students by furthering the adoption\nof technology in Idaho schools.\n  Mel served our community and Idaho with civility and excellence. In\naddition to his tenure in the legislature, he served in numerous other\npositions. These included serving as director of Idaho Association of\nCities; co-chairman of the Idaho Centennial Commission; Bonneville\nCounty Recreation commissioner; chairman of the American Family\nInstitute; and chairman of the United Way. His exemplary work was\nrecognized through numerous awards and honors that included being named\nLegislator of the Year by the Idaho State Republican Party, Idaho\nLibrary Association, State Farm Bureau and Idaho School Administrators.\n  He was also active in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day\nSaints, in which he served in numerous leadership positions.\nAdditionally, he supported the Boy Scouts of America through which he\nwas the recipient of the Silver Beaver Award of Merit. Mel also\nrecognized the life lessons afforded in sports and instilled these\nvalues through coaching youth athletic teams.\n  Mel welcomed me as a regular guest on the radio program he hosted\nwith his son, Mark, who continues to host the talk show. I greatly\nadmired Mel's openness in taking all sides of an issue into account,\nand his kindness and consideration. Mel had one of the greatest\nqualities: As his son, Todd, recognized, ``He could disagree with you\nwithout being disagreeable.'' I could always count on an interesting,\nthoughtful discussion, and I looked forward each week to our\nconversations.\n  But among all those accomplishments and public accolades, Mel's pride\nand strength was found in his family and home. He and Dixie raised five\nchildren, who have all gone on to contribute to their own communities.\nHe loved the time that he spent with them; in fact, he passed up some\ninteresting career opportunities to ensure that he would be able to\nspend time with them. Mel's enthusiasm and joy in life can also be\nfound in his 25 grandchildren and 28 great-grandchildren.\n  I extend my deep condolences to Dixie, their children and his many\nfamily members and friends. We are all better for having known him, and\nhis legacy of thoughtfulness, inclusiveness and devotion to furthering\nopportunities for others and Idaho's future will not be\nforgotten.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6919", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TRIBUTE TO REBECCA SCHMIDT", "SENATE", "SENATE", "TRIBUTETO", "S6919", "S6919", "[{\"name\": \"Edward J. Markey\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6919", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6919]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                       TRIBUTE TO REBECCA SCHMIDT\n\n Mr. MARKEY. Mr. President, I would like to recognize the\noutstanding career of Rebecca L. Schmidt, who retired in 2014 after 30\nyears of dedicated service in the Federal Government. For the last 8\nyears of her career, Ms. Schmidt served the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory\nCommission as the Director of the Office of Congressional Affairs. In\nthat position, she brought to the agency a fresh approach to\ncongressional relations, implementing a more rigorous and proactive\nliaison role with congressional offices as well as expanding the\noffice's outreach to other Federal agencies and external groups. She\nreceived the Meritorious Executive Presidential Rank Award in 2010 in\nrecognition of her valuable contributions to the agency, including her\norganizational and communications skills and her ability to build\nbetter relationships between the NRC, Congress and community groups.\n  Ms. Schmidt started her career in the Congressional Budget Office,\nand later was selected for the Presidential Management Intern Program,\nwhere she participated in executive development assignments throughout\ngovernment. Ms. Schmidt's assignments included working in the Office of\nProgram Analysis and Evaluation for the Army Chief of Staff; the Budget\nDivision at Army Western Command Headquarters, Hawaii; the Management\nSecretariat and the National Security Division at OMB; and the House\nBudget Committee.\n  She later worked for the U.S. Army Support Command in Hawaii, where\nshe supervised analysts responsible for formulating long-run strategic\nplans and performing management studies for the installation. For the\nnext 7 years she worked for the Congress serving as a senior defense\nand international affairs analyst for the House Budget Committee and\nthen as a senior professional staff member of the House Armed Services\nCommittee where she briefed Members of Congress on technical budget\nmatters and legislative language for the Defense authorization bill.\n  Following her time working for Congress, Ms. Schmidt spent the next\n10 years working for the Secretary of Defense. Her service included\nevaluating costs and benefits for operating bases as the Deputy\nDirector of the Base Closure Office; serving as staff assisting the\nmembers of Secretary Cohen's Defense Reform Task Force; and as a budget\nanalyst developing the Department of Defense's 5-year budget for the\nUnder Secretary of Defense, Comptroller. Prior to her work at the NRC,\nMs. Schmidt served 6 years in the Senior Executive Service as the\nAssociate Director for Budget Presentation and Congressional Liaison in\nthe Office of the Secretary of Defense for the Comptroller. She was\nresponsible for preparing the Secretary of Defense, the Deputy\nSecretary of Defense, and the Comptroller for all budget hearings\nbefore Congress.\n  Over the years, she worked for four NRC Chairmen, three Secretaries\nof Defense and four congressional committee chairmen. She contributed\nher knowledge of nuclear, defense, and budget process issues and became\nskillful in political strategy, strategic planning and management\nanalysis. During her three decades of public service, she demonstrated\nintegrity, a commitment to excellence, and outstanding leadership.\n  Ms. Schmidt received a bachelor's degree from Wittenberg University\nand earned a master's degree in public policy analysis from Duke\nUniversity. She has remained a loyal supporter of the Blue Devils since\nher graduate school days, and her blue frosted cupcakes and enthusiasm\nfor her basketball team will be greatly missed by her congressional\naffairs staff during March Madness and regular season games.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6920", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "RECOGNIZING THE YOUNG MARINES", "SENATE", "SENATE", "RECOGNIZING", "S6920", "S6920", "[{\"name\": \"Jeff Merkley\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6920", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6920]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     RECOGNIZING THE YOUNG MARINES\n\n Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, I wish to state for the record my\nsupport for the Young Marines and their work to help reduce drug abuse\nin America. The abuse of drugs plagues our communities, disrupts our\nschools, and has a negative effect not only on the people who use\ndrugs, but their communities as well. Drug abuse devastates our\nfamilies, children and neighborhoods.\n  I support programs that demonstrate effective strategies to decrease\ndrug abuse. As one of the largest drug prevention programs in the\nNation, the Red Ribbon Campaign educates our youth about the problems\nand risks associated with drug use. The Young Marines' effort to\neducate and inform community members through the Red Ribbon Campaign\nhelps increase awareness about drug abuse, and in turn, helps reduce\nthe demand for drugs.\n  The Young Marines is a national non-profit youth education and\nservice program for boys and girls, age 8 through the completion of\nhigh school. The Young Marines promotes the mental, moral and physical\ndevelopment of its members. The program focuses on teaching the values\nof leadership, teamwork and self-discipline so its members can live and\npromote a healthy, drug-free lifestyle. This program was brought to my\nattention earlier this year by Branson Coiteux of Portland, OR who\nhimself is a Young Marine and is working hard to educate his fellow\nstudents about the dangers of drug abuse. Each year Brandon and his\nfellow Young Marines participate in the national Red Ribbon Week and\nhelp educate and raise awareness about drug abuse.\n  We need more groups like the Young Marines and programs to fight drug\nabuse and bring the discussion about drug abuse out in the open and\neducate our children about the dangerous effects that drug abuse can\nhave on our families. I thank them for their hard work and service and\nhope that we can end the devastating effect that drugs have on our\nNation.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6920-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "REMEMBERING JOYCE CRAIG LEWIS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6920", "S6920", "[{\"name\": \"Patrick J. Toomey\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6920", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6920]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                     REMEMBERING JOYCE CRAIG LEWIS\n\n Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, today, I honor fallen Philadelphia\nfirefighter, Joyce Craig Lewis. Ms. Craig Lewis tragically perished on\nTuesday, December 9, 2014, while courageously battling a house fire in\nthe West Oak Lane section of Philadelphia.\n  Ms. Craig Lewis was a proud 11-year veteran of the Philadelphia Fire\nDepartment and a certified EMT. A native of Philadelphia, Ms. Craig\nLewis was one of 58 women among the nearly 1,800 firefighters in the\ncity. Joyce served in several of the most active firehouses in\nPhiladelphia.\n  Philadelphia Fire Commissioner Derrick Sawyer praised Ms. Craig Lewis\nfor having a strong work ethic as evidenced by her desire to be\nstationed in challenging environments. Mayor Michael Nutter aptly\nstated that her passing is a tremendous loss for Philadelphians.\n  Joyce Craig Lewis is the first female firefighter in Philadelphia to\ndie in the line of duty. She is survived by her 16-year-old son and 16-\nmonth-old daughter.\n  On behalf of the U.S. Senate, I wish to express my condolences to her\nfamily, friends, brothers and sisters in fire departments across the\nCommonwealth of Pennsylvania. May she rest in peace.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6920-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SMSGHOUSE", "S6920", "S6920", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"83\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2338\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"2591\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3008\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5859\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6920", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6920]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE\n\n                         Enrolled Bills Signed\n\n  At 4:20 p.m., a message from the House of Representatives, delivered\nby Mr. Novotny, one of its reading clerks, announced that the Speaker\npro tempore (Mr. Harris) has signed the following enrolled bills:\n\n       S. 2338. An act to reauthorize the United States Anti-\n     Doping Agency, and for other purposes.\n       S. 3008. An act to extend temporarily the extended period\n     of protection for members of uniformed services relating to\n     mortgages, mortgage foreclosure, and eviction, and for other\n     purposes.\n       H.R. 83. An act making consolidated appropriations for the\n     fiscal year ending September 30, 2015, and for other\n     purposes.\n       H.R. 2591. An act to amend certain provisions of the FAA\n     Modernization and Reform Act of 2012.\n       H.R. 5859. An act to impose sanctions with respect to the\n     Russian Federation, to provide additional assistance to\n     Ukraine, and for other purposes.\n\n  The enrolled bills were subsequently signed by the President pro\ntempore (Mr. Leahy).\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6920-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SPETANDMEM", "S6920", "S6921", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"189\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"189\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"192\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"192\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6920", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6920-S6921]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                        PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS\n\n  The following petitions and memorials were laid before the Senate and\nwere referred or ordered to lie on the table as indicated:\n\n       POM-364. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of\n     Michigan requesting the Congress of the United States to\n     prohibit the U.S. Postal Service from closing or\n     consolidating the mail processing and distribution center in\n     Lansing, Michigan; to the Committee on Homeland Security and\n     Governmental Affairs.\n\n                       Senate Resolution No. 189\n\n       Whereas, On January 5, 2015, the United States Postal\n     Service plans to close or consolidate the mail processing and\n     distribution center (P&DC) on Collins Road in Lansing; and\n\n[[Page S6921]]\n\n       Whereas, This plan would severely delay mail delivery; and\n       Whereas, The delay of mail would negatively affect\n     residents and local businesses and harm the community; and\n       Whereas, The closure is not in the public's best interest\n     and depends on a degradation of service standards that would\n     result in the virtual elimination of overnight mail delivery\n     throughout the country; and\n       Whereas, According to 39 USC 101(a), federal law\n     stipulates: ``The Postal Service shall have as its basic\n     function the obligation to provide postal services to bind\n     the Nation together through personal, educational, literary,\n     and business correspondence of the people. It shall provide\n     prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons to all\n     areas and shall render postal services to all communities.''.\n     Now, therefore, be it\n       Resolved by the Senate, That we hereby urge congressional\n     intervention to stop the proposal to close or consolidate the\n     Lansing mail processing and distribution center which will\n     cause the delay of mail and elimination of overnight delivery\n     of first-class mail; and be it further\n       Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to\n     the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the\n     United States House of Representatives, and the members of\n     the Michigan congressional delegation.\n                                  ____\n\n       POM-365. A resolution adopted by the Senate of the State of\n     Michigan memorializing the Congress of the United States to\n     stop the U.S. Postal Service from closing and consolidating\n     the mail processing and distribution center in Kingsford,\n     Michigan; to the Committee on Homeland Security and\n     Governmental Affairs.\n\n                       Senate Resolution No. 192\n\n       Whereas, The United States Postal Service plans to close\n     the mail processing center in Kingsford, Michigan, and\n     consolidate services 100 miles away in Green Bay, Wisconsin.\n     The closure is scheduled to take effect on January 5, 2015;\n     and\n       Whereas, The consolidation will severely delay mail\n     delivery and result in a degradation of postal service\n     standards by virtually eliminating overnight first-class mail\n     delivery in large portions of Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The\n     Kingsford mail processing center is the only center serving\n     the entire Upper Peninsula. The consolidation will require\n     mail to travel up to 230 miles simply for processing and slow\n     current one-day, first-class mail service to two- or three-\n     day service in the Upper Peninsula; and\n       Whereas, This consolidation is not in the public's best\n     interest. For the past four years, the state of Michigan has\n     looked to the Upper Peninsula and its natural resources as a\n     means for sparking economic growth. This degradation of mail\n     service sends a negative message to developers and investors.\n     In addition, current Upper Peninsula business owners rely\n     greatly on the U.S. Postal Service for their mail and\n     shipping needs. The expected delays will negatively affect\n     these local businesses, particularly small businesses, and\n     residents; and\n       Whereas, The inevitable delays in mail service run directly\n     counter to federal postal policy established by the U.S.\n     Congress. Section 101 of the Postal Reorganization Act of\n     1970 stipulates:\n       ``The Postal Service shall have as its basic function the\n     obligation to provide postal services to bind the Nation\n     together through personal, educational, literary, and\n     business correspondence of the people. It shall provide\n     prompt, reliable, and efficient services to patrons in all\n     areas and shall render postal services to all communities.''\n       It is difficult to conceive how this closure meets the U.S.\n     Postal Service's obligation to provide ``prompt, reliable,\n     and efficient services to patrons in all areas''. Now,\n     therefore, be it\n       Resolved by the Senate, That we memorialize the Congress of\n     the United States to stop the U.S. Postal Service from\n     closing and consolidating the mail processing center in\n     Kingsford, Michigan; and be it further\n       Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to\n     the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the\n     United States House of Representatives, the members of the\n     Michigan congressional delegation, the Postmaster General of\n     the United States, and the Office of the Governor.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6921-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SCOSPONSORS", "S6921", "S6921", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"83\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1463\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1463\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1463\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1695\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1695\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2644\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2644\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2971\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"2971\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3015\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3015\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6921", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6921]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                         ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS\n\n                                S. 1463\n\n  At the request of Ms. Hirono, her name was added as a cosponsor of S.\n1463, a bill to amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to prohibit\nimportation, exportation, transportation, sale, receipt, acquisition,\nand purchase in interstate or foreign commerce, or in a manner\nsubstantially affecting interstate or foreign commerce, of any live\nanimal of any prohibited wildlife species.\n\n                                S. 1695\n\n  At the request of Ms. Cantwell, the name of the Senator from\nMinnesota (Ms. Klobuchar) was added as a cosponsor of S. 1695, a bill\nto designate a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as\nwilderness.\n\n                                S. 2644\n\n  At the request of Mr. Paul, the name of the Senator from Maine (Mr.\nKing) was added as a cosponsor of S. 2644, a bill to restore the\nintegrity of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United\nStates, and for other purposes.\n\n                                S. 2971\n\n  At the request of Mrs. Shaheen, the names of the Senator from\nDelaware (Mr. Coons), the Senator from Virginia (Mr. Warner), the\nSenator from Minnesota (Mr. Franken), the Senator from West Virginia\n(Mr. Manchin) and the Senator from Louisiana (Ms. Landrieu) were added\nas cosponsors of S. 2971, a bill to promote energy efficiency, and for\nother purposes.\n\n                                S. 3015\n\n  At the request of Ms. Ayotte, her name was added as a cosponsor of S.\n3015, a bill to establish a rule of construction clarifying the\nlimitations on executive authority to provide certain forms of\nimmigration relief.\n\n                           AMENDMENT NO. 4117\n\n  At the request of Mr. Durbin, his name was added as a cosponsor of\namendment No. 4117 intended to be proposed to H.R. 83, to require the\nSecretary of the Interior to assemble a team of technical, policy, and\nfinancial experts to address the energy needs of the insular areas of\nthe United States and the Freely Associated States through the\ndevelopment of energy action plans aimed at promoting access to\naffordable, reliable energy, including increasing use of indigenous\nclean-energy resources, and for other purposes.\n\n                           AMENDMENT NO. 4118\n\n  At the request of Ms. Warren, the name of the Senator from Illinois\n(Mr. Durbin) was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 4118 intended to\nbe proposed to H.R. 83, to require the Secretary of the Interior to\nassemble a team of technical, policy, and financial experts to address\nthe energy needs of the insular areas of the United States and the\nFreely Associated States through the development of energy action plans\naimed at promoting access to affordable, reliable energy, including\nincreasing use of indigenous clean-energy resources, and for other\npurposes.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6921-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SSTATEMENTS", "S6921", "S6924", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}, {\"name\": \"Tom Harkin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3018\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3018\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3019\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3020\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6921", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6921-S6924]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n          STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS\n\n      By Mr. LEVIN:\n  S. 3018. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform\nthe rules relating to partnership audits and adjustments; to the\nCommittee on Finance.\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Partnership\nAuditing Fairness Act, a bill designed to improve and streamline the\naudit procedures for large partnerships. This bill would ensure that\nlarge for-profit partnerships, like other large profitable businesses,\nare subject to routine audits by the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, and\neliminate audit red tape that currently impedes IRS oversight. This\nlegislation mirrors a provision in the Tax Reform Act of 2014,\nintroduced earlier this year by Congressman David Camp.\n  This legislation would fix a problem that has gained only more\nurgency with time and the explosion in growth of large partnerships,\nincluding hedge funds, private equity funds, and publicly traded\npartnerships. In a September 2014 report, the Government Accountability\nOffice, GAO, determined that the number of large partnerships, defined\nby GAO as those with at least 100 partners and $100 million in assets,\nhas tripled since 2002, to over 10,000, while the number of so-called C\ncorporations being created, which include our largest public companies,\n\n[[Page S6922]]\n\nfell by 22 percent. According to the GAO report, some of those\npartnerships have revenues totaling billions of dollars per year and\nnow collectively hold more than $7.5 trillion in assets, but the IRS is\nauditing only a tiny fraction of them. According to GAO, in 2012, the\nIRS audited less than 1 percent of large partnerships compared to 27\npercent of C corporations. Put another way, a C corporation is 33 times\nmore likely to face audit than partnership.\n  A recent hearing by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,\nwhich I chair, demonstrated the critical need to audit large\npartnerships for tax compliance and abusive tax schemes. Our July 2014\nhearing presented a detailed case study of how two financial\ninstitutions developed a structured financial product known as a basket\noption and sold the product to 13 hedge funds that used the options to\navoid billions of dollars in Federal taxes. The trading by those hedge\nfunds was mostly made up of short term transactions, many of which\nlasted only seconds. However, the hedge funds recast their short-term\ntrading profits as long-term option profits, and claimed the profits\nwere subject to the long-term capital gains tax rate rather than the\nordinary income tax rate that would otherwise apply to hedge fund\ninvestors engaged in daily trading. One hedge fund used its basket\noptions to avoid an estimated $6 billion in taxes. Those types of\nabusive tax practices illustrate why large partnerships like hedge\nfunds need to be audited by the IRS just as much as large corporations.\n  During its review, GAO found that large partnerships are often so\ncomplex that the IRS can't audit them effectively. GAO reported that\nsome partnerships have 100,000 or more partners arranged in multiple\ntiers, and some of those partners may not be people or corporate\nentities but pass-through entities--essentially, partnerships within\npartnerships. Some are publicly traded partnerships, which means their\npartners can change on a daily basis. One IRS official told GAO that\nthere were more than 1,000 partnerships with more than a million\npartners in 2012.\n  GAO also found obstacles in the law. The Tax Equity and Fiscal\nResponsibility Act, TEFRA, now 3-decades-old, was enacted at a time\nwhen many partnerships had 30-50 partners; it does not adequately deal\nwith current realities. That is why I am introducing legislation to\nrepeal some of its provisions and streamline the audit and adjustment\nprocedures used for large partnerships so that the IRS can exercise\neffective oversight to detect and deter tax noncompliance or tax abuse\nschemes.\n  Three technical aspects of TEFRA create particularly difficult\nobstacles to IRS audits and tax collection efforts for large\npartnerships. The first requires the IRS to identify a ``tax matters\npartner'' to represent the partnership on tax issues, but many\npartnerships do not designate such a partner, and simply identifying\none in a complex partnership can take months. Second, notifying\nindividual partners prior to commencing an audit costs time and money,\nyet produces few if any benefits. Third, TEFRA requires that any tax\nadjustments called for by an audit be passed through to the\npartnership's taxable partners, but the IRS's process for identifying,\nassessing, and collecting from those partners is a manual rather than\nby electronic process, which makes it laborious, time consuming,\ncostly, and subject to error. For example, if a partnership with\n100,000 partners under-reported the tax liability of its partners by $1\nmillion, the IRS would have to manually link each of the partners'\nreturns to the partnership return. Then, assuming each partner had an\nequal interest in the partnership, the IRS would have to find, assess,\nand collect $10 from each partner. That collection effort is not\npractical nor is it cost effective. In addition, under TEFRA, any tax\nadjustments have to be applied to past tax years, using complicated and\nexpensive filing requirements, instead of to the year in which the\naudit was performed and the adjustment made.\n  Fixing the technical flaws in TEFRA is critical to ensuring that the\naudit playing field is level for all taxpayers. An essential element of\nany system of taxation is that it be fair--that is, that all those who\npay taxes have a reasonable expectation that they are being treated in\nthe same fashion as other taxpayers. Without fairness, not only does a\ntax system violate ethical principles, but the system itself fails to\ncollect taxes owed, arouses resentment and complaints, and can even\nspark widespread noncompliance. The current situation in which large\ncorporations are audited 33 times more than large partnerships is\nneither fair nor sustainable.\n  The Partnership Auditing Fairness Act would eliminate the existing\naudit disparity by streamlining the audit process for large\npartnerships. It would simplify audit notification and administrative\nprocedures. It would no longer require the IRS to waste audit time\ntrying to find a tax matters partner. It would allow the IRS to audit,\nassess, and collect tax from the partnership, rather than passing the\nadjustments through to and collecting from each taxable partner. It\nwould apply any tax adjustments to the tax year in which the\nadjustments were finalized, rather than past tax years under audit.\n  The enormous discrepancy in audit rates between partnerships and\nother business forms raises a fundamental question of fairness. If one\ntype of entity can be nearly free of IRS audits, businesses that do pay\ntheir taxes and are subject to the audit process rightly feel\ndisadvantaged. That lack of fairness is something we simply can't\ntolerate.\n  For these reasons, in the next Congress, I urge my colleagues to\nconsider supporting this legislation to fix the large partnership audit\nproblem.\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a bill summary be printed\nin the Record.\n  There being being no objection, the material was ordered to be\nprinted in the Record, as follows:\n\n            Summary of the Partnership Auditing Fairness Act\n\n       The Partnership Auditing Fairness Act would ensure that\n     large for-profit partnerships, like other large profitable\n     businesses, are subject to routine audits by the IRS and\n     eliminate audit red tape that currently impedes IRS\n     oversight. Specifically, it would reform audit procedures\n     imposed by the 1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act,\n     TEFRA, which are now outdated and contribute to the low audit\n     rate for large partnerships. The bill mirrors the same\n     provision addressing this issue in the larger tax reform bill\n     developed by Congressman David Camp. Key provisions of the\n     bill would:\n       Apply streamlined audit rules to all partnerships, but\n     allow partnerships with 100 or fewer partners, other than\n     partners that are pass-through entities, to opt out of the\n     bill's audit procedures and elect instead to be audited under\n     the rules for individual taxpayers.\n       Simplify partnership audit participation by having\n     partnerships act through a designated partnership\n     representative.\n       Simplify audit notification and administrative procedures\n     by repealing the TEFRA and Electing Large Partnership\n     requirement that the IRS notify all partners prior to\n     initiating an audit.\n       Streamline audit adjustments by authorizing the IRS to make\n     adjustments at the partnership level and apply the\n     adjustments to the tax year in which the adjustments are\n     finalized, rather than to the tax years under audit.\n       Streamline tax return filing by enabling partnerships to\n     include audit adjustments on their current tax returns for\n     the year in which the adjustments are finalized, instead of\n     having to amend prior-year returns.\n       Eliminate the TEFRA problem of having to find and\n     separately collect any tax due from each affected partner by\n     instead collecting the tax at the partnership level.\n       Enable partnerships to use administrative procedures to\n     request reconsideration of a proposed under payment of tax by\n     submitting tax returns for individual partners and paying any\n     tax due, while retaining the ability to contest all audit\n     results in court.\n                                 ______\n\n      By Mr. LEVIN:\n  S. 3019. A bill to amend the War Powers Resolution to provide for the\nuse of military force against non-state actors; to the Committee on\nForeign Relations.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, when the War Powers Resolution was passed\nover a Presidential veto in 1973, its supporters expected that the War\nPowers Resolution would ensure that a national dialogue takes place\nbefore the employment of the U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities. The\nPresident--then President Nixon--was concerned that the War Powers\nResolution's termination of certain authorities after 60 days unless\nextended by Congress would create unpredictably in U.S. foreign policy.\n  The War Powers Resolution, as a practical matter, has not been\neffective. Every subsequent President since\n\n[[Page S6923]]\n\nPresident Nixon has viewed the War Powers Resolution as an\nunconstitutional impingement on the President's powers as Commander in\nChief. So the 60-day trigger in the act has never been used to\nterminate hostilities, and the national dialogue envisioned by the\nauthors of the resolution has failed to come about.\n  I have a proposal to amend the War Powers Act in those instances\nwhere nonstate actors are the target. We are the target of them. They\nmust become and should become the target for us to try to deter and\nrespond to them when they attack us and try to terrorize us.\n  I have introduced a bill today with a suggested amendment to the War\nPowers Act. When the War Powers Resolution was passed over a\nPresidential veto in 1973, its supporters expected that the War Powers\nResolution would ensure that a national dialogue takes place before the\nemployment of the U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities.\n\n  The President, on the other hand, argued that the enactment of the\nlegislation ``would seriously undermine this Nation's ability to act\ndecisively and convincingly in times of international crisis.'' In his\nveto message, President Nixon argued that: ``As a result, the\nconfidence of our allies in our ability to assist them could be\ndiminished and the respect of our adversaries for our deterrent posture\ncould decline. A permanent and substantial element of unpredictability\nwould be injected into the world's assessment of American behavior,\nfurther increasing the likelihood of miscalculation and war.''\n  The President was particularly concerned that the War Powers\nResolution's termination of certain authorities after 60 days unless\nextended by Congress would create unpredictability in U.S. foreign\npolicy. The War Powers Resolution requires the President to consult\n``in every possible instance'' prior to introducing U.S. Armed Forces\ninto hostilities and to report to Congress within 48 hours when, absent\na declaration of war, U.S. Armed Forces are introduced into\n``hostilities or . . . situations where imminent involvement in\nhostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances.'' After this\nreport is submitted, the resolution requires that U.S. troops be\nwithdrawn at the end of 60 days, unless Congress authorizes continued\ninvolvement by passing a declaration of war or some other specific\nauthorization for continued U.S. involvement in such hostilities.\n  Every subsequent President has viewed the War Powers Resolution as an\nunconstitutional impingement on the President's powers as Commander in\nChief. As a result, the 60-day trigger in the Act has never been used\nto terminate hostilities, and the national dialogue envisioned by the\nauthors of the Resolution has failed to come about.\n  At this very moment, our troops have been engaged in hostilities in\nIraq and Syria for more than 60 days, without the enactment of an\nauthorizing resolution by Congress. Some believe that the continuing\nhostilities are a violation of the War Powers Resolution. Others argue\nthat the War Powers Resolution has not been triggered, because our\nmilitary actions can be justified under earlier authorizations. Either\nway, it is clear that the 60-day limitation in the resolution has had\nno more force and effect in the case of the battle against ISIS than it\ndid in earlier actions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and elsewhere.\n  I believe that the War Powers Resolution needs to be modernized to\nmake it more relevant to the situations our military is likely to face\nin the 21st century--in particular, the ongoing struggle against new\nand evolving terrorist groups.\n  Today, I filed a bill that would amend the War Powers Resolution to\nauthorize the President to act against non-state actors like ISIS,\nwhere he judges it necessary to address a continuing and imminent\nthreat to the United States, subject to a resolution of disapproval by\nCongress under the War Powers Resolution. This approach would allow the\nPresident to take decisive action to address imminent terrorist\nthreats, while reserving a clear role for Congress through a resolution\nof disapproval. I believe that this approach would provide for a\nnational dialogue on the use of military force with respect to non-\nstate actors like ISIS, while avoiding the dead end provided unworkable\nrequirement of the current War Powers Resolution, under which\ncongressional inaction could require U.S. troops to suddenly disengage\nfrom the enemy while in harm's way.\n  My amendment would provide that the authority to use U.S. Armed\nForces against non-state actors would terminate after 60 days unless\neither: 1, the President's actions are based on a law providing for the\nuse of military force against a non-state actor; or 2, the President\nnotifies Congress that continued use of military force is necessary\nbecause the non-state actor poses a ``continuing and imminent threat''\nto the United States or U.S. persons, and Congress does not enact a\njoint resolution of disapproval under expedited procedures.\n  Expedited procedures under the War Powers Resolution would ensure\nthat Congress considers the issue. Under these procedures, if a\nresolution of disapproval is filed in a timely manner by any Senator,\nthe Senate Foreign Relations Committee would have 15 calendar days to\nreport the resolution or be discharged. The Senate would then have 3\ndays to consider the Resolution, with time equally divided between\nproponents and opponents of the measure. As with any joint resolution,\nthe measure could be vetoed, and such a veto would be subject to an\noverride vote in Congress.\n  I believe this approach would provide greater clarity for the\nExecutive and Legislative branches and I hope a future Senate will\nconsider it.\n                                 ______\n\n      By Mr. HARKIN:\n  S. 3020. A bill to establish the composition known as America the\nBeautiful as the national anthem; to the Committee on the Judiciary.\n  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing one last bill as a\nUnited States Senator. It is on an issue I have long wanted to tackle,\nchanging our national anthem to one I believe is more representative of\nthe amazing country and people that make up our United States of\nAmerica. I believe that from its very first line, ``Oh beautiful for\nspacious skies'' America the Beautiful captures the spirit of our\ndemocracy and our shared commitment to liberty and freedom far better\nthan our current anthem.\n  Now some might say but the Star Spangled Banner has always been our\nnational anthem, but that's not true. In fact its only been the anthem\nsince 1931 and its only been in popular use during the last 100 years.\nIt first became popular with the military, particularly the Navy.\n  But the bottom line is that the Star Spangled banner commemorates a\nsingle battle, just one of the many historic battles and wars that we\nhave fought to create and protect our great country. I think to me the\nthing that best captures my concern with the Star Spangled Banner, in\naddition to the fact that it is hard as heck for a layperson to sing,\nis that it doesn't actually mention the word ``America.''\n  In contrast, America the Beautiful celebrates not just the amazing\ngeography and wonder of our country--from amber waves of grain to\npurple mountains--from sea to shining sea, but also captures something\nof our national spirit when we sing ``A thoroughfare of freedom beat,\nacross the wilderness.''\n  Moreover, unlike the Star Spangled banner, America the Beautiful,\nlike our coins, like our daily invocation here in the Senate\nacknowledges a higher power and calls upon god to guide us, to shed\ngrace upon us, while also celebrating the heroism of those who have\nsacrificed their lives to create and preserve our democracy.\n  I am well aware that this legislation to redesignate the national\nanthem to ``America the Beautiful'' is not going to pass today, one of\nmy final days in the Senate, but I would ask those who follow me to\nkeep in mind the importance of symbols like the national anthem in\nreminding us what is great about this country--equality of opportunity,\ngeographic diversity and majesty, shared commitment to individual\nliberty--and give serious thought to this proposal.\n  America the Beautiful is an anthem that far better embodies both the\nland and the principles that are the unifying beliefs of our democracy\nand for which we all stand together: freedom, liberty, and progress.\nFor these reasons I believe that ``America the Beautiful'' should\nreplace ``The Star Spangled Banner'' as the national anthem and I hope\nthat my colleagues will come to share this view.\n\n[[Page S6924]]\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6921-4", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Introductory Statement on S. 3018", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SSTATEMENTSIND", "S6921", "S6922", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3018\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6921", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6921-S6922]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n      By Mr. LEVIN:\n  S. 3018. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reform\nthe rules relating to partnership audits and adjustments; to the\nCommittee on Finance.\n\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, today, I am introducing the Partnership\nAuditing Fairness Act, a bill designed to improve and streamline the\naudit procedures for large partnerships. This bill would ensure that\nlarge for-profit partnerships, like other large profitable businesses,\nare subject to routine audits by the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, and\neliminate audit red tape that currently impedes IRS oversight. This\nlegislation mirrors a provision in the Tax Reform Act of 2014,\nintroduced earlier this year by Congressman David Camp.\n  This legislation would fix a problem that has gained only more\nurgency with time and the explosion in growth of large partnerships,\nincluding hedge funds, private equity funds, and publicly traded\npartnerships. In a September 2014 report, the Government Accountability\nOffice, GAO, determined that the number of large partnerships, defined\nby GAO as those with at least 100 partners and $100 million in assets,\nhas tripled since 2002, to over 10,000, while the number of so-called C\ncorporations being created, which include our largest public companies,\n\n[[Page S6922]]\n\nfell by 22 percent. According to the GAO report, some of those\npartnerships have revenues totaling billions of dollars per year and\nnow collectively hold more than $7.5 trillion in assets, but the IRS is\nauditing only a tiny fraction of them. According to GAO, in 2012, the\nIRS audited less than 1 percent of large partnerships compared to 27\npercent of C corporations. Put another way, a C corporation is 33 times\nmore likely to face audit than partnership.\n  A recent hearing by the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,\nwhich I chair, demonstrated the critical need to audit large\npartnerships for tax compliance and abusive tax schemes. Our July 2014\nhearing presented a detailed case study of how two financial\ninstitutions developed a structured financial product known as a basket\noption and sold the product to 13 hedge funds that used the options to\navoid billions of dollars in Federal taxes. The trading by those hedge\nfunds was mostly made up of short term transactions, many of which\nlasted only seconds. However, the hedge funds recast their short-term\ntrading profits as long-term option profits, and claimed the profits\nwere subject to the long-term capital gains tax rate rather than the\nordinary income tax rate that would otherwise apply to hedge fund\ninvestors engaged in daily trading. One hedge fund used its basket\noptions to avoid an estimated $6 billion in taxes. Those types of\nabusive tax practices illustrate why large partnerships like hedge\nfunds need to be audited by the IRS just as much as large corporations.\n  During its review, GAO found that large partnerships are often so\ncomplex that the IRS can't audit them effectively. GAO reported that\nsome partnerships have 100,000 or more partners arranged in multiple\ntiers, and some of those partners may not be people or corporate\nentities but pass-through entities--essentially, partnerships within\npartnerships. Some are publicly traded partnerships, which means their\npartners can change on a daily basis. One IRS official told GAO that\nthere were more than 1,000 partnerships with more than a million\npartners in 2012.\n  GAO also found obstacles in the law. The Tax Equity and Fiscal\nResponsibility Act, TEFRA, now 3-decades-old, was enacted at a time\nwhen many partnerships had 30-50 partners; it does not adequately deal\nwith current realities. That is why I am introducing legislation to\nrepeal some of its provisions and streamline the audit and adjustment\nprocedures used for large partnerships so that the IRS can exercise\neffective oversight to detect and deter tax noncompliance or tax abuse\nschemes.\n  Three technical aspects of TEFRA create particularly difficult\nobstacles to IRS audits and tax collection efforts for large\npartnerships. The first requires the IRS to identify a ``tax matters\npartner'' to represent the partnership on tax issues, but many\npartnerships do not designate such a partner, and simply identifying\none in a complex partnership can take months. Second, notifying\nindividual partners prior to commencing an audit costs time and money,\nyet produces few if any benefits. Third, TEFRA requires that any tax\nadjustments called for by an audit be passed through to the\npartnership's taxable partners, but the IRS's process for identifying,\nassessing, and collecting from those partners is a manual rather than\nby electronic process, which makes it laborious, time consuming,\ncostly, and subject to error. For example, if a partnership with\n100,000 partners under-reported the tax liability of its partners by $1\nmillion, the IRS would have to manually link each of the partners'\nreturns to the partnership return. Then, assuming each partner had an\nequal interest in the partnership, the IRS would have to find, assess,\nand collect $10 from each partner. That collection effort is not\npractical nor is it cost effective. In addition, under TEFRA, any tax\nadjustments have to be applied to past tax years, using complicated and\nexpensive filing requirements, instead of to the year in which the\naudit was performed and the adjustment made.\n  Fixing the technical flaws in TEFRA is critical to ensuring that the\naudit playing field is level for all taxpayers. An essential element of\nany system of taxation is that it be fair--that is, that all those who\npay taxes have a reasonable expectation that they are being treated in\nthe same fashion as other taxpayers. Without fairness, not only does a\ntax system violate ethical principles, but the system itself fails to\ncollect taxes owed, arouses resentment and complaints, and can even\nspark widespread noncompliance. The current situation in which large\ncorporations are audited 33 times more than large partnerships is\nneither fair nor sustainable.\n  The Partnership Auditing Fairness Act would eliminate the existing\naudit disparity by streamlining the audit process for large\npartnerships. It would simplify audit notification and administrative\nprocedures. It would no longer require the IRS to waste audit time\ntrying to find a tax matters partner. It would allow the IRS to audit,\nassess, and collect tax from the partnership, rather than passing the\nadjustments through to and collecting from each taxable partner. It\nwould apply any tax adjustments to the tax year in which the\nadjustments were finalized, rather than past tax years under audit.\n  The enormous discrepancy in audit rates between partnerships and\nother business forms raises a fundamental question of fairness. If one\ntype of entity can be nearly free of IRS audits, businesses that do pay\ntheir taxes and are subject to the audit process rightly feel\ndisadvantaged. That lack of fairness is something we simply can't\ntolerate.\n  For these reasons, in the next Congress, I urge my colleagues to\nconsider supporting this legislation to fix the large partnership audit\nproblem.\n  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a bill summary be printed\nin the Record.\n  There being being no objection, the material was ordered to be\nprinted in the Record, as follows:\n\n            Summary of the Partnership Auditing Fairness Act\n\n       The Partnership Auditing Fairness Act would ensure that\n     large for-profit partnerships, like other large profitable\n     businesses, are subject to routine audits by the IRS and\n     eliminate audit red tape that currently impedes IRS\n     oversight. Specifically, it would reform audit procedures\n     imposed by the 1982 Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act,\n     TEFRA, which are now outdated and contribute to the low audit\n     rate for large partnerships. The bill mirrors the same\n     provision addressing this issue in the larger tax reform bill\n     developed by Congressman David Camp. Key provisions of the\n     bill would:\n       Apply streamlined audit rules to all partnerships, but\n     allow partnerships with 100 or fewer partners, other than\n     partners that are pass-through entities, to opt out of the\n     bill's audit procedures and elect instead to be audited under\n     the rules for individual taxpayers.\n       Simplify partnership audit participation by having\n     partnerships act through a designated partnership\n     representative.\n       Simplify audit notification and administrative procedures\n     by repealing the TEFRA and Electing Large Partnership\n     requirement that the IRS notify all partners prior to\n     initiating an audit.\n       Streamline audit adjustments by authorizing the IRS to make\n     adjustments at the partnership level and apply the\n     adjustments to the tax year in which the adjustments are\n     finalized, rather than to the tax years under audit.\n       Streamline tax return filing by enabling partnerships to\n     include audit adjustments on their current tax returns for\n     the year in which the adjustments are finalized, instead of\n     having to amend prior-year returns.\n       Eliminate the TEFRA problem of having to find and\n     separately collect any tax due from each affected partner by\n     instead collecting the tax at the partnership level.\n       Enable partnerships to use administrative procedures to\n     request reconsideration of a proposed under payment of tax by\n     submitting tax returns for individual partners and paying any\n     tax due, while retaining the ability to contest all audit\n     results in court.\n                                 ______"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6921", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SINTROBILLS", "S6921", "S6921", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3018\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3019\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3020\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6921", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6921]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n              INTRODUCTION OF BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS\n\n  The following bills and joint resolutions were introduced, read the\nfirst and second times by unanimous consent, and referred as indicated:\n\n           By Mr. LEVIN:\n       S. 3018. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986\n     to reform the rules relating to partnership audits and\n     adjustments; to the Committee on Finance.\n           By Mr. LEVIN:\n       S. 3019. A bill to amend the War Powers Resolution to\n     provide for the use of military force against non-state\n     actors; to the Committee on Foreign Relations.\n           By Mr. HARKIN:\n       S. 3020. A bill to establish the composition known as\n     America the Beautiful as the national anthem; to the\n     Committee on the Judiciary.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6922", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Introductory Statement on S. 3019", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SSTATEMENTSIND", "S6922", "S6923", "[{\"name\": \"Carl Levin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3019\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6922", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6922-S6923]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n      By Mr. LEVIN:\n  S. 3019. A bill to amend the War Powers Resolution to provide for the\nuse of military force against non-state actors; to the Committee on\nForeign Relations.\n  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, when the War Powers Resolution was passed\nover a Presidential veto in 1973, its supporters expected that the War\nPowers Resolution would ensure that a national dialogue takes place\nbefore the employment of the U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities. The\nPresident--then President Nixon--was concerned that the War Powers\nResolution's termination of certain authorities after 60 days unless\nextended by Congress would create unpredictably in U.S. foreign policy.\n  The War Powers Resolution, as a practical matter, has not been\neffective. Every subsequent President since\n\n[[Page S6923]]\n\nPresident Nixon has viewed the War Powers Resolution as an\nunconstitutional impingement on the President's powers as Commander in\nChief. So the 60-day trigger in the act has never been used to\nterminate hostilities, and the national dialogue envisioned by the\nauthors of the resolution has failed to come about.\n  I have a proposal to amend the War Powers Act in those instances\nwhere nonstate actors are the target. We are the target of them. They\nmust become and should become the target for us to try to deter and\nrespond to them when they attack us and try to terrorize us.\n  I have introduced a bill today with a suggested amendment to the War\nPowers Act. When the War Powers Resolution was passed over a\nPresidential veto in 1973, its supporters expected that the War Powers\nResolution would ensure that a national dialogue takes place before the\nemployment of the U.S. Armed Forces in hostilities.\n\n  The President, on the other hand, argued that the enactment of the\nlegislation ``would seriously undermine this Nation's ability to act\ndecisively and convincingly in times of international crisis.'' In his\nveto message, President Nixon argued that: ``As a result, the\nconfidence of our allies in our ability to assist them could be\ndiminished and the respect of our adversaries for our deterrent posture\ncould decline. A permanent and substantial element of unpredictability\nwould be injected into the world's assessment of American behavior,\nfurther increasing the likelihood of miscalculation and war.''\n  The President was particularly concerned that the War Powers\nResolution's termination of certain authorities after 60 days unless\nextended by Congress would create unpredictability in U.S. foreign\npolicy. The War Powers Resolution requires the President to consult\n``in every possible instance'' prior to introducing U.S. Armed Forces\ninto hostilities and to report to Congress within 48 hours when, absent\na declaration of war, U.S. Armed Forces are introduced into\n``hostilities or . . . situations where imminent involvement in\nhostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances.'' After this\nreport is submitted, the resolution requires that U.S. troops be\nwithdrawn at the end of 60 days, unless Congress authorizes continued\ninvolvement by passing a declaration of war or some other specific\nauthorization for continued U.S. involvement in such hostilities.\n  Every subsequent President has viewed the War Powers Resolution as an\nunconstitutional impingement on the President's powers as Commander in\nChief. As a result, the 60-day trigger in the Act has never been used\nto terminate hostilities, and the national dialogue envisioned by the\nauthors of the Resolution has failed to come about.\n  At this very moment, our troops have been engaged in hostilities in\nIraq and Syria for more than 60 days, without the enactment of an\nauthorizing resolution by Congress. Some believe that the continuing\nhostilities are a violation of the War Powers Resolution. Others argue\nthat the War Powers Resolution has not been triggered, because our\nmilitary actions can be justified under earlier authorizations. Either\nway, it is clear that the 60-day limitation in the resolution has had\nno more force and effect in the case of the battle against ISIS than it\ndid in earlier actions in Bosnia, Kosovo, and elsewhere.\n  I believe that the War Powers Resolution needs to be modernized to\nmake it more relevant to the situations our military is likely to face\nin the 21st century--in particular, the ongoing struggle against new\nand evolving terrorist groups.\n  Today, I filed a bill that would amend the War Powers Resolution to\nauthorize the President to act against non-state actors like ISIS,\nwhere he judges it necessary to address a continuing and imminent\nthreat to the United States, subject to a resolution of disapproval by\nCongress under the War Powers Resolution. This approach would allow the\nPresident to take decisive action to address imminent terrorist\nthreats, while reserving a clear role for Congress through a resolution\nof disapproval. I believe that this approach would provide for a\nnational dialogue on the use of military force with respect to non-\nstate actors like ISIS, while avoiding the dead end provided unworkable\nrequirement of the current War Powers Resolution, under which\ncongressional inaction could require U.S. troops to suddenly disengage\nfrom the enemy while in harm's way.\n  My amendment would provide that the authority to use U.S. Armed\nForces against non-state actors would terminate after 60 days unless\neither: 1, the President's actions are based on a law providing for the\nuse of military force against a non-state actor; or 2, the President\nnotifies Congress that continued use of military force is necessary\nbecause the non-state actor poses a ``continuing and imminent threat''\nto the United States or U.S. persons, and Congress does not enact a\njoint resolution of disapproval under expedited procedures.\n  Expedited procedures under the War Powers Resolution would ensure\nthat Congress considers the issue. Under these procedures, if a\nresolution of disapproval is filed in a timely manner by any Senator,\nthe Senate Foreign Relations Committee would have 15 calendar days to\nreport the resolution or be discharged. The Senate would then have 3\ndays to consider the Resolution, with time equally divided between\nproponents and opponents of the measure. As with any joint resolution,\nthe measure could be vetoed, and such a veto would be subject to an\noverride vote in Congress.\n  I believe this approach would provide greater clarity for the\nExecutive and Legislative branches and I hope a future Senate will\nconsider it.\n                                 ______"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6923", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Introductory Statement on S. 3020", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SSTATEMENTSIND", "S6923", "S6924", "[{\"name\": \"Tom Harkin\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"3020\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6923", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6923-S6924]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n      By Mr. HARKIN:\n  S. 3020. A bill to establish the composition known as America the\nBeautiful as the national anthem; to the Committee on the Judiciary.\n  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, today I am introducing one last bill as a\nUnited States Senator. It is on an issue I have long wanted to tackle,\nchanging our national anthem to one I believe is more representative of\nthe amazing country and people that make up our United States of\nAmerica. I believe that from its very first line, ``Oh beautiful for\nspacious skies'' America the Beautiful captures the spirit of our\ndemocracy and our shared commitment to liberty and freedom far better\nthan our current anthem.\n  Now some might say but the Star Spangled Banner has always been our\nnational anthem, but that's not true. In fact its only been the anthem\nsince 1931 and its only been in popular use during the last 100 years.\nIt first became popular with the military, particularly the Navy.\n  But the bottom line is that the Star Spangled banner commemorates a\nsingle battle, just one of the many historic battles and wars that we\nhave fought to create and protect our great country. I think to me the\nthing that best captures my concern with the Star Spangled Banner, in\naddition to the fact that it is hard as heck for a layperson to sing,\nis that it doesn't actually mention the word ``America.''\n  In contrast, America the Beautiful celebrates not just the amazing\ngeography and wonder of our country--from amber waves of grain to\npurple mountains--from sea to shining sea, but also captures something\nof our national spirit when we sing ``A thoroughfare of freedom beat,\nacross the wilderness.''\n  Moreover, unlike the Star Spangled banner, America the Beautiful,\nlike our coins, like our daily invocation here in the Senate\nacknowledges a higher power and calls upon god to guide us, to shed\ngrace upon us, while also celebrating the heroism of those who have\nsacrificed their lives to create and preserve our democracy.\n  I am well aware that this legislation to redesignate the national\nanthem to ``America the Beautiful'' is not going to pass today, one of\nmy final days in the Senate, but I would ask those who follow me to\nkeep in mind the importance of symbols like the national anthem in\nreminding us what is great about this country--equality of opportunity,\ngeographic diversity and majesty, shared commitment to individual\nliberty--and give serious thought to this proposal.\n  America the Beautiful is an anthem that far better embodies both the\nland and the principles that are the unifying beliefs of our democracy\nand for which we all stand together: freedom, liberty, and progress.\nFor these reasons I believe that ``America the Beautiful'' should\nreplace ``The Star Spangled Banner'' as the national anthem and I hope\nthat my colleagues will come to share this view.\n\n[[Page S6924]]\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-10", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "FATHER RICHARD MARQUESS-BARRY POST OFFICE BUILDING", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6924", "S6924", "[{\"name\": \"Mark L. Pryor\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4030\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"4030\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6924", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6924]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n           FATHER RICHARD MARQUESS-BARRY POST OFFICE BUILDING\n\n  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to the consideration of H.R. 4030.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bill by title.\n  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A bill (H.R. 4030) to designate the facility of the United\n     States Postal Service located at 18640 NW 2nd Avenue in\n     Miami, Florida, as the ``Father Richard Marquess-Barry Post\n     Office Building.''\n\n  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill.\n  Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the bill be read a third time\nand passed and the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid\nupon the table with no intervening action or debate.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The bill (H.R. 4030) was ordered to a third reading, was read the\nthird time, and passed.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-11", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "MNI WICONI PROJECT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2013", "SENATE", "SENATE", "ALLOTHER", "S6924", "S6929", "[{\"name\": \"Mark L. Pryor\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"684\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"684\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1800\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1800\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6924", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Pages S6924-S6929]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n               MNI WICONI PROJECT ACT AMENDMENTS OF 2013\n\n                                 ______\n\n                 BUREAU OF RECLAMATION TRANSPARENCY ACT\n\n  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate\nproceed to the consideration of the following bills en bloc: Calendar\nNo. 131, S. 684; and Calendar No. 513, S. 1800.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the bills by title en\nbloc.\n  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:\n\n       A bill (S. 684) to amend the Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988\n     to facilitate completion of the Mni Wiconi Rural Water Supply\n     System, and for other purposes.\n\n  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,\nwhich had been reported from the Committee on Energy and Natural\nResources, with amendments, as follows:\n  (The parts of the bill intended to be stricken are shown in boldface\nbrackets and the parts of the bill intended to be inserted are shown in\nitalic.)\n\n                                 S. 684\n\n       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of\n     the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\n[[Page S6925]]\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n\n       This Act may be cited as the ``Mni Wiconi Project Act\n     Amendments of 2013''.\n\n     SEC. 2. OTHER AGENCY ASSISTANCE.\n\n       The Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102\n     Stat. 2566; 108 Stat. 4543) is amended by inserting after\n     section 3B the following:\n\n     ``SEC. 3C. PLANS FOR COMPLETING THE OGLALA SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SUPPLY SYSTEM, ROSEBUD SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SYSTEM, AND LOWER BRULE SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SYSTEM.\n\n       ``(a) Plans for Completion.--\n       ``(1) In general.--In consultation with the Oglala Sioux\n     Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Tribe, as applicable, and the Federal agency heads listed in\n     subsection (b)(1), the Secretary shall develop plans to\n     complete the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System, the\n     Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Rural Water System.\n       ``(2) Contents.--The plan for each water supply system\n     described in paragraph (1) shall require--\n       ``(A) the completion of remaining components of the\n     applicable system in accordance with the Final Engineering\n     Report dated May 1993;\n       ``(B) the improvement, repair, and replacement of existing\n     water systems; and\n       ``(C) the transfer of those existing water systems to the\n     United States, to be held in trust for the Oglala Sioux\n     Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Tribe, as applicable, and made part of the applicable rural\n     water system.\n       ``(3) Submission to congress.--Not later than 2 years after\n     the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall\n     submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of\n     the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the\n     House of Representatives--\n       ``(A) a copy of each plan developed under this subsection,\n     including a schedule for full implementation of the plan that\n     shall not exceed a period of 15 years after the date of\n     enactment of this section;\n       ``(B) a report that includes--\n       ``(i) a description of the roles and responsibilities of\n     each of the heads of the Federal agencies listed in\n     subsection (b)(1) (including the Commissioner of the Bureau\n     of Reclamation) relating to the completion of the water\n     supply systems, including with respect to the improvement,\n     repair, and replacement of the existing water systems before\n     and after transfer;\n       ``(ii) the program authorities of each Federal agency\n     listed in subsection (b)(1) and a description of how the\n     heads of the Federal agencies will work together to complete\n     and implement the plans; and\n       ``(iii) the amount of funding and any other need the\n     Secretary determines to be necessary to complete and\n     implement the plans; and\n       ``(C) as applicable, a description of the roles and\n     responsibilities of the heads of other Federal agencies that\n     have existing authorities to provide assistance to the Oglala\n     Sioux Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule\n     Sioux Tribe.\n       ``(b) Interagency Agreements.--\n       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of\n     law, the Secretary shall enter into agreements with the\n     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the\n     Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health and Human\n     Services, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban\n     Development--\n       ``(A) to fulfill the trust responsibility of the United\n     States; and\n       ``(B) to complete the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply\n     System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower\n     Brule Sioux Rural Water System in accordance with the Final\n     Engineering Report dated May 1993, including the transfer of\n     existing water systems, as set forth in the plans for\n     completion developed under subsection (a).\n       ``(2) Cooperation.--\n       ``(A) In general.--The heads of the Federal agencies\n     described in paragraph (1) shall assist the Secretary in\n     completing the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System, the\n     Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Rural Water System pursuant to sections 3(a), 3A(a), and\n     3B(a), respectively, including by--\n       ``(i) improving, repairing, and replacing existing water\n     systems as set forth in the plans developed under subsection\n     (a); and\n       ``(ii) constructing new rural water facilities, service\n     lines, and other necessary features.\n       ``(B) Administrator of the environmental protection\n     agency.--The Administrator of the Environmental Protection\n     Agency shall assist the Secretary in meeting the\n     environmental and safe drinking water needs of the Pine Ridge\n     Indian Reservation, the Rosebud Indian Reservation, and the\n     Lower Brule Indian Reservation, including through compliance\n     with the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.).\n       ``(C) Secretary of health and human services.--The\n     Secretary of Health and Human Services shall assist the\n     Secretary in meeting the water supply and public health needs\n     of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the Rosebud Indian\n     Reservation, and the Lower Brule Indian Reservation,\n     including through compliance with the Act of August 5, 1954\n     (commonly known as the `Indian Sanitation Facilities Act')\n     (42 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.).\n       ``(D) Secretary of housing and urban development.--The\n     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall assist the\n     Secretary by carrying out projects to connect houses that are\n     eligible for funding from the Department of Housing and Urban\n     Development on the reservations of the Oglala Sioux Tribe,\n     the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe,\n     through plumbing, water pipes, appurtenances, and\n     interconnections to the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply\n     System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower\n     Brule Sioux Rural Water System, respectively, to meet the\n     water conservation standards of those water supply systems.\n       ``(3) Livestock distribution systems.--\n       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary and the Secretary of\n     Agriculture shall, through the use of authorities of the\n     Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of Agriculture,\n     respectively, complete, during a period not to exceed 15\n     years after the date of enactment of this section, the\n     livestock distribution system for the Oglala Sioux Rural\n     Water Supply System and the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System,\n     consistent with the Final Engineering Report dated May 1993.\n       ``(B) Administration.--For each water supply system\n     described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall enter into\n     agreements with the Secretary of Agriculture and the Director\n     of the Bureau of Indian Affairs that set forth the specific\n     responsibilities of each agency concerning the construction\n     of the livestock distribution systems.\n       ``(4) Lead agency.--The Department of the Interior, acting\n     through the Bureau of Reclamation, shall act as the lead\n     agency in carrying out this section.\n       ``(5) Administration.--\n       ``(A) In general.--Each agency head shall carry out the\n     duties of the agency head under this subsection out of\n     amounts made available to the agency head under annual\n     appropriations and existing [authority] authorities.\n       ``(B) Authorization of use of other federal agency funds.--\n     Amounts made available to agencies other than the Bureau of\n     Reclamation may also be used to carry out this Act.\n       ``(C) Additional funding requests.--Nothing in this\n     subsection prohibits the Oglala Sioux Tribe, the Rosebud\n     Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe from applying\n     for, seeking, or obtaining amounts from the Federal agencies\n     referred to in paragraph (1) for any other purpose.\n       ``(c) Upgrading Standards for Connecting Homes.--The\n     Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall, through the\n     use of existing programs and annual appropriations, assist\n     the Secretary in completing the Oglala Sioux Rural Water\n     Supply System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the\n     Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water System by constructing,\n     repairing, and upgrading plumbing fixtures, skirting, and\n     other necessary features, such as septic tanks and\n     drainfields, to ensure that houses within the service areas\n     are able to meet the standards for connecting to those water\n     systems.''.\n\n     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.\n\n       (a) Planning, Design, and Construction.--Section 10(a) of\n     the Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102\n     Stat. 2571; 108 Stat. 4545; 116 Stat. 3033; 121 Stat. 1954)\n     is amended--\n       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``and $58,800,000\n     (based on October 1, 1997 price levels)'' and inserting ``,\n     $58,800,000 (based on October 1, 1997 price levels), and\n     $14,308,000 (based on October 1, 2011 price levels)'';\n       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``2013'' and\n     inserting ``2016''; and\n       (3) in the third sentence, by striking ``and October 1,\n     1997 (with respect to the $58,800,000)'' and inserting ``,\n     October 1, 1997 (with respect to the $58,800,000), and\n     October 1, 2011 (with respect to the $14,308,000)''.\n       (b) Operation and Maintenance of Oglala Sioux Rural Water\n     Supply System, Rosebud Sioux Rural Water Supply System, and\n     Lower Brule Sioux Water Supply System.--Section 10(b) of the\n     Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102 Stat.\n     2571; 108 Stat. 4545) is amended--\n       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``There are'' and\n     inserting the following:\n       ``(1) Operation and maintenance.--\n       ``(A) In general.--There are'';\n       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``The operation''\n     and inserting the following:\n       ``(B) West river and lyman-jones rural water systems.--\n       ``(i) In general.--The operation'';\n       (3) in the third sentence, by striking ``Such fee'' and\n     inserting the following:\n       ``(ii) Fee basis.--The fee described in clause (i)'';\n       (4) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``Such operation\n     and maintenance payments'' and inserting the following:\n       ``(iii) Adjustment of payments.--The operation and\n     maintenance payments under this subparagraph''; and\n       (5) by adding after paragraph (1) (as so designated) the\n     following:\n       ``(2) Community water systems upgrades.--\n       [``(A) In general.--Not later than 5 years after the date\n     of enactment of the Mni Wiconi Project Act Amendments of\n     2013, each public or tribal water system that is in existence\n     on the date of enactment of this paragraph shall be\n     transferred to the applicable rural water supply system, to\n     be held in trust by the United States for the benefit of the\n     applicable Indian tribe, on the request of the Oglala Sioux\n     Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Tribe, as applicable, and the owner of the water system.]\n       ``(A) In general.--After the date on which public or tribal\n     water systems on the Pine Ridge\n\n[[Page S6926]]\n\n     Indian Reservation, the Rosebud Indian Reservation, and the\n     Lower Brule Indian Reservation that are in existence on the\n     date of enactment of this paragraph have been brought up to\n     the standards for the water systems established in the plans\n     developed under section 3C(a), but not later than 15 years\n     after the date of enactment of this paragraph, title to each\n     of the water systems shall be transferred to the United\n     States, to be held in trust for the benefit of the applicable\n     Indian tribe, on the request of the Oglala Sioux Tribe, the\n     Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe, as\n     applicable, and the owner of the water system.\n       ``(B) Improvements and repairs and replacement.--The\n     Secretary shall use amounts authorized to be appropriated\n     under paragraph (1) for the improvement, repair, and\n     replacement of any water system that is transferred or\n     [proposed to be transferred] proposed, by request of the\n     owner of the water system, to be transferred and improved\n     under subparagraph (A).''.\n\n       A bill (S. 1800) to require the Secretary of the Interior\n     to submit to Congress a report on the efforts of the Bureau\n     of Reclamation to manage its infrastructure assets.\n\n  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,\nwhich had been reported from the Committee on Energy and Natural\nResources, with an amendment to strike all after the enacting clause\nand insert in lieu thereof the following:\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n\n       This Act may be cited as the ``Bureau of Reclamation\n     Transparency Act''.\n\n     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.\n\n       Congress finds that--\n       (1) the water resources infrastructure of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation provides important benefits related to irrigated\n     agriculture, municipal and industrial water, hydropower,\n     flood control, fish and wildlife, and recreation in the 17\n     Reclamation States;\n       (2) as of 2013, the combined replacement value of the\n     infrastructure assets of the Bureau of Reclamation was\n     $94,500,000,000;\n       (3) the majority of the water resources infrastructure\n     facilities of the Bureau of Reclamation are at least 60 years\n     old;\n       (4) the Bureau of Reclamation has previously undertaken\n     efforts to better manage the assets of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation, including an annual review of asset maintenance\n     activities of the Bureau of Reclamation known as the ``Asset\n     Management Plan''; and\n       (5) actionable information on infrastructure conditions at\n     the asset level, including information on maintenance needs\n     at individual assets due to aging infrastructure, is needed\n     for Congress to conduct oversight of Reclamation facilities\n     and meet the needs of the public.\n\n     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.\n\n       In this Act:\n       (1) Asset.--\n       (A) In general.--The term ``asset'' means any of the\n     following assets that are used to achieve the mission of the\n     Bureau of Reclamation to manage, develop, and protect water\n     and related resources in an environmentally and economically\n     sound manner in the interest of the people of the United\n     States:\n       (i) Capitalized facilities, buildings, structures, project\n     features, power production equipment, recreation facilities,\n     or quarters.\n       (ii) Capitalized and noncapitalized heavy equipment and\n     other installed equipment.\n       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``asset'' includes assets\n     described in subparagraph (A) that are considered to be\n     mission critical.\n       (2) Asset management report.--The term ``Asset Management\n     Report'' means--\n       (A) the annual plan prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation\n     known as the ``Asset Management Plan''; and\n       (B) any publicly available information relating to the plan\n     described in subparagraph (A) that summarizes the efforts of\n     the Bureau of Reclamation to evaluate and manage\n     infrastructure assets of the Bureau of Reclamation.\n       (3) Major repair and rehabilitation need.--The term ``major\n     repair and rehabilitation need'' means major nonrecurring\n     maintenance at a Reclamation facility, including maintenance\n     related to the safety of dams, extraordinary maintenance of\n     dams, deferred major maintenance activities, and all other\n     significant repairs and extraordinary maintenance.\n       (4) Reclamation facility.--The term ``Reclamation\n     facility'' means each of the infrastructure assets that are\n     owned by the Bureau of Reclamation at a Reclamation project.\n       (5) Reclamation project.--The term ``Reclamation project''\n     means a project that is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation,\n     including all reserved works and transferred works owned by\n     the Bureau of Reclamation.\n       (6) Reserved works.--The term ``reserved works'' means\n     buildings, structures, facilities, or equipment that are\n     owned by the Bureau of Reclamation for which operations and\n     maintenance are performed by employees of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation or through a contract entered into by the Bureau\n     of Reclamation, regardless of the source of funding for the\n     operations and maintenance.\n       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary\n     of the Interior.\n       (8) Transferred works.--The term ``transferred works''\n     means a Reclamation facility at which operations and\n     maintenance of the facility is carried out by a non-Federal\n     entity under the provisions of a formal operations and\n     maintenance transfer contract or other legal agreement with\n     the Bureau of Reclamation.\n\n     SEC. 4. ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORT ENHANCEMENTS FOR RESERVED\n                   WORKS.\n\n       (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of\n     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress\n     an Asset Management Report that--\n       (1) describes the efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation--\n       (A) to maintain in a reliable manner all reserved works at\n     Reclamation facilities; and\n       (B) to standardize and streamline data reporting and\n     processes across regions and areas for the purpose of\n     maintaining reserved works at Reclamation facilities; and\n       (2) expands on the information otherwise provided in an\n     Asset Management Report, in accordance with subsection (b).\n       (b) Infrastructure Maintenance Needs Assessment.--\n       (1) In general.--The Asset Management Report submitted\n     under subsection (a) shall include--\n       (A) a detailed assessment of major repair and\n     rehabilitation needs for all reserved works at all\n     Reclamation projects; and\n       (B) to the extent practicable, an itemized list of major\n     repair and rehabilitation needs of individual Reclamation\n     facilities at each Reclamation project.\n       (2) Inclusions.--To the extent practicable, the itemized\n     list of major repair and rehabilitation needs under paragraph\n     (1)(B) shall include--\n       (A) a budget level cost estimate of the appropriations\n     needed to complete each item; and\n       (B) an assignment of a categorical rating for each item,\n     consistent with paragraph (3).\n       (3) Rating requirements.--\n       (A) In general.--The system for assigning ratings under\n     paragraph (2)(B) shall be--\n       (i) consistent with existing uniform categorization systems\n     to inform the annual budget process and agency requirements;\n     and\n       (ii) subject to the guidance and instructions issued under\n     subparagraph (B).\n       (B) Guidance.--As soon as practicable after the date of\n     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidance\n     that describes the applicability of the rating system\n     applicable under paragraph (2)(B) to Reclamation facilities.\n       (4) Public availability.--Except as provided in paragraph\n     (5), the Secretary shall make publically available, including\n     on the Internet, the Asset Management Report required under\n     subsection (a).\n       (5) Confidentiality.--Subject to the discretion of the\n     Secretary, the Secretary may exclude from the public version\n     of the Asset Management Report made available under paragraph\n     (4) any information that the Secretary identifies as\n     sensitive or classified, but shall make available to the\n     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and\n     the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of\n     Representatives a version of the report containing the\n     sensitive or classified information.\n       (c) Updates.--Not later than 2 years after the date on\n     which the Asset Management Report is submitted under\n     subsection (a) and biennially thereafter, the Secretary shall\n     update the Asset Management Report, subject to the\n     requirements of section 5(b)(2).\n       (d) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with the\n     Secretary of the Army (acting through the Chief of Engineers)\n     to the extent that the consultation would assist the\n     Secretary in preparing the Asset Management Report under\n     subsection (a) and updates to the Asset Management Report\n     under subsection (c).\n\n     SEC. 5. ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORT ENHANCEMENTS FOR TRANSFERRED\n                   WORKS.\n\n       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall coordinate with the\n     non-Federal entities responsible for the operation and\n     maintenance of transferred works in developing reporting\n     requirements for Asset Management Reports with respect to the\n     condition of, and planned maintenance for, transferred works\n     that are similar to the reporting requirements described in\n     section 4(b)\n       (b) Guidance.--\n       (1) In general.--After considering input from water and\n     power contractors of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Secretary\n     shall develop and implement a rating system for transferred\n     works that incorporates, to the maximum extent practicable,\n     the rating system for reserved works developed under section\n     4(b)(3).\n       (2) Updates.--The ratings system developed under paragraph\n     (1) shall be included in the updated Asset Management Reports\n     under section 4(c).\n\n  Mr. PRYOR. I ask unanimous consent that the committee-reported\namendments be considered; that the Johnson amendment relative to S. 684\nand the Barrasso amendment relative to S. 1800, which are at the desk,\nbe agreed to; that the committee-reported amendments, as amended, be\nagreed to, and the bills, as amended, be read a third time and passed\nen bloc.\n  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.\n  The amendment (No. 4122) was agreed to, as follows:\n\n                    (Purpose: To provide an offset)\n\n       At the end of the bill, add the following:\n\n     SEC. __. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by section 1617 of the Reclamation\n     Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C.\n     390h-12c), the maximum amount of the Federal share of the\n     cost of the project under section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43\n     U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1)) otherwise available as of the date of\n     enactment of this Act shall be reduced by $15,000,000.\n\n  The committee-reported amendments, as amended, were agreed to.\n  The bill (S. 684), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a\nthird reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows:\n\n[[Page S6927]]\n\n                                 S. 684\n\n       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of\n     the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n\n       This Act may be cited as the ``Mni Wiconi Project Act\n     Amendments of 2013''.\n\n     SEC. 2. OTHER AGENCY ASSISTANCE.\n\n       The Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102\n     Stat. 2566; 108 Stat. 4543) is amended by inserting after\n     section 3B the following:\n\n     ``SEC. 3C. PLANS FOR COMPLETING THE OGLALA SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SUPPLY SYSTEM, ROSEBUD SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SYSTEM, AND LOWER BRULE SIOUX RURAL WATER\n                   SYSTEM.\n\n       ``(a) Plans for Completion.--\n       ``(1) In general.--In consultation with the Oglala Sioux\n     Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Tribe, as applicable, and the Federal agency heads listed in\n     subsection (b)(1), the Secretary shall develop plans to\n     complete the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System, the\n     Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Rural Water System.\n       ``(2) Contents.--The plan for each water supply system\n     described in paragraph (1) shall require--\n       ``(A) the completion of remaining components of the\n     applicable system in accordance with the Final Engineering\n     Report dated May 1993;\n       ``(B) the improvement, repair, and replacement of existing\n     water systems; and\n       ``(C) the transfer of those existing water systems to the\n     United States, to be held in trust for the Oglala Sioux\n     Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Tribe, as applicable, and made part of the applicable rural\n     water system.\n       ``(3) Submission to congress.--Not later than 2 years after\n     the date of enactment of this section, the Secretary shall\n     submit to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of\n     the Senate and the Committee on Natural Resources of the\n     House of Representatives--\n       ``(A) a copy of each plan developed under this subsection,\n     including a schedule for full implementation of the plan that\n     shall not exceed a period of 15 years after the date of\n     enactment of this section;\n       ``(B) a report that includes--\n       ``(i) a description of the roles and responsibilities of\n     each of the heads of the Federal agencies listed in\n     subsection (b)(1) (including the Commissioner of the Bureau\n     of Reclamation) relating to the completion of the water\n     supply systems, including with respect to the improvement,\n     repair, and replacement of the existing water systems before\n     and after transfer;\n       ``(ii) the program authorities of each Federal agency\n     listed in subsection (b)(1) and a description of how the\n     heads of the Federal agencies will work together to complete\n     and implement the plans; and\n       ``(iii) the amount of funding and any other need the\n     Secretary determines to be necessary to complete and\n     implement the plans; and\n       ``(C) as applicable, a description of the roles and\n     responsibilities of the heads of other Federal agencies that\n     have existing authorities to provide assistance to the Oglala\n     Sioux Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule\n     Sioux Tribe.\n       ``(b) Interagency Agreements.--\n       ``(1) In general.--Notwithstanding any other provision of\n     law, the Secretary shall enter into agreements with the\n     Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the\n     Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Health and Human\n     Services, and the Secretary of Housing and Urban\n     Development--\n       ``(A) to fulfill the trust responsibility of the United\n     States; and\n       ``(B) to complete the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply\n     System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower\n     Brule Sioux Rural Water System in accordance with the Final\n     Engineering Report dated May 1993, including the transfer of\n     existing water systems, as set forth in the plans for\n     completion developed under subsection (a).\n       ``(2) Cooperation.--\n       ``(A) In general.--The heads of the Federal agencies\n     described in paragraph (1) shall assist the Secretary in\n     completing the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply System, the\n     Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower Brule Sioux\n     Rural Water System pursuant to sections 3(a), 3A(a), and\n     3B(a), respectively, including by--\n       ``(i) improving, repairing, and replacing existing water\n     systems as set forth in the plans developed under subsection\n     (a); and\n       ``(ii) constructing new rural water facilities, service\n     lines, and other necessary features.\n       ``(B) Administrator of the environmental protection\n     agency.--The Administrator of the Environmental Protection\n     Agency shall assist the Secretary in meeting the\n     environmental and safe drinking water needs of the Pine Ridge\n     Indian Reservation, the Rosebud Indian Reservation, and the\n     Lower Brule Indian Reservation, including through compliance\n     with the Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. 300f et seq.).\n       ``(C) Secretary of health and human services.--The\n     Secretary of Health and Human Services shall assist the\n     Secretary in meeting the water supply and public health needs\n     of the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the Rosebud Indian\n     Reservation, and the Lower Brule Indian Reservation,\n     including through compliance with the Act of August 5, 1954\n     (commonly known as the `Indian Sanitation Facilities Act')\n     (42 U.S.C. 2001 et seq.).\n       ``(D) Secretary of housing and urban development.--The\n     Secretary of Housing and Urban Development shall assist the\n     Secretary by carrying out projects to connect houses that are\n     eligible for funding from the Department of Housing and Urban\n     Development on the reservations of the Oglala Sioux Tribe,\n     the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, and the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe,\n     through plumbing, water pipes, appurtenances, and\n     interconnections to the Oglala Sioux Rural Water Supply\n     System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the Lower\n     Brule Sioux Rural Water System, respectively, to meet the\n     water conservation standards of those water supply systems.\n       ``(3) Livestock distribution systems.--\n       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary and the Secretary of\n     Agriculture shall, through the use of authorities of the\n     Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Department of Agriculture,\n     respectively, complete, during a period not to exceed 15\n     years after the date of enactment of this section, the\n     livestock distribution system for the Oglala Sioux Rural\n     Water Supply System and the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System,\n     consistent with the Final Engineering Report dated May 1993.\n       ``(B) Administration.--For each water supply system\n     described in subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall enter into\n     agreements with the Secretary of Agriculture and the Director\n     of the Bureau of Indian Affairs that set forth the specific\n     responsibilities of each agency concerning the construction\n     of the livestock distribution systems.\n       ``(4) Lead agency.--The Department of the Interior, acting\n     through the Bureau of Reclamation, shall act as the lead\n     agency in carrying out this section.\n       ``(5) Administration.--\n       ``(A) In general.--Each agency head shall carry out the\n     duties of the agency head under this subsection out of\n     amounts made available to the agency head under annual\n     appropriations and existing authorities.\n       ``(B) Authorization of use of other federal agency funds.--\n     Amounts made available to agencies other than the Bureau of\n     Reclamation may also be used to carry out this Act.\n       ``(C) Additional funding requests.--Nothing in this\n     subsection prohibits the Oglala Sioux Tribe, the Rosebud\n     Sioux Tribe, or the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe from applying\n     for, seeking, or obtaining amounts from the Federal agencies\n     referred to in paragraph (1) for any other purpose.\n       ``(c) Upgrading Standards for Connecting Homes.--The\n     Director of the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall, through the\n     use of existing programs and annual appropriations, assist\n     the Secretary in completing the Oglala Sioux Rural Water\n     Supply System, the Rosebud Sioux Rural Water System, and the\n     Lower Brule Sioux Rural Water System by constructing,\n     repairing, and upgrading plumbing fixtures, skirting, and\n     other necessary features, such as septic tanks and\n     drainfields, to ensure that houses within the service areas\n     are able to meet the standards for connecting to those water\n     systems.''.\n\n     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.\n\n       (a) Planning, Design, and Construction.--Section 10(a) of\n     the Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102\n     Stat. 2571; 108 Stat. 4545; 116 Stat. 3033; 121 Stat. 1954)\n     is amended--\n       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``and $58,800,000\n     (based on October 1, 1997 price levels)'' and inserting ``,\n     $58,800,000 (based on October 1, 1997 price levels), and\n     $14,308,000 (based on October 1, 2011 price levels)'';\n       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``2013'' and\n     inserting ``2016''; and\n       (3) in the third sentence, by striking ``and October 1,\n     1997 (with respect to the $58,800,000)'' and inserting ``,\n     October 1, 1997 (with respect to the $58,800,000), and\n     October 1, 2011 (with respect to the $14,308,000)''.\n       (b) Operation and Maintenance of Oglala Sioux Rural Water\n     Supply System, Rosebud Sioux Rural Water Supply System, and\n     Lower Brule Sioux Water Supply System.--Section 10(b) of the\n     Mni Wiconi Project Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-516; 102 Stat.\n     2571; 108 Stat. 4545) is amended--\n       (1) in the first sentence, by striking ``There are'' and\n     inserting the following:\n       ``(1) Operation and maintenance.--\n       ``(A) In general.--There are'';\n       (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``The operation''\n     and inserting the following:\n       ``(B) West river and lyman-jones rural water systems.--\n       ``(i) In general.--The operation'';\n       (3) in the third sentence, by striking ``Such fee'' and\n     inserting the following:\n       ``(ii) Fee basis.--The fee described in clause (i)'';\n       (4) in the fourth sentence, by striking ``Such operation\n     and maintenance payments'' and inserting the following:\n       ``(iii) Adjustment of payments.--The operation and\n     maintenance payments under this subparagraph''; and\n       (5) by adding after paragraph (1) (as so designated) the\n     following:\n       ``(2) Community water systems upgrades.--\n       ``(A) In general.--After the date on which public or tribal\n     water systems on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, the\n     Rosebud Indian Reservation, and the Lower Brule Indian\n     Reservation that are in existence on the date of enactment of\n     this paragraph have been brought up to the standards for the\n     water systems established in the plans developed under\n     section 3C(a), but not later than 15 years after the date of\n     enactment of this\n\n[[Page S6928]]\n\n     paragraph, title to each of the water systems shall be\n     transferred to the United States, to be held in trust for the\n     benefit of the applicable Indian tribe, on the request of the\n     Oglala Sioux Tribe, the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, or the Lower\n     Brule Sioux Tribe, as applicable, and the owner of the water\n     system.\n       ``(B) Improvements and repairs and replacement.--The\n     Secretary shall use amounts authorized to be appropriated\n     under paragraph (1) for the improvement, repair, and\n     replacement of any water system that is transferred or\n     proposed, by request of the owner of the water system, to be\n     transferred and improved under subparagraph (A).''.\n\n     SEC. 4. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by section 1617 of the Reclamation\n     Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C.\n     390h-12c), the maximum amount of the Federal share of the\n     cost of the project under section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43\n     U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1)) otherwise available as of the date of\n     enactment of this Act shall be reduced by $15,000,000.\n\n  The amendment (No. 4123) was agreed to, as follows:\n\n                    (Purpose: To provide an offset)\n\n       At the end of the bill, add the following:\n\n     SEC. __. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by section 1617 of the Reclamation\n     Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C.\n     390h-12c), the maximum amount of the Federal share of the\n     cost of the project under section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43\n     U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1)) otherwise available as of the date of\n     enactment of this Act shall be reduced by $2,000,000.\n\n  The committee-reported amendment in the nature of a substitute, as\namended, was agreed to.\n  The bill (S. 1800), as amended, was ordered to be engrossed for a\nthird reading, was read the third time, and passed, as follows:\n\n                                S. 1800\n\n       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of\n     the United States of America in Congress assembled,\n\n     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.\n\n       This Act may be cited as the ``Bureau of Reclamation\n     Transparency Act''.\n\n     SEC. 2. FINDINGS.\n\n       Congress finds that--\n       (1) the water resources infrastructure of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation provides important benefits related to irrigated\n     agriculture, municipal and industrial water, hydropower,\n     flood control, fish and wildlife, and recreation in the 17\n     Reclamation States;\n       (2) as of 2013, the combined replacement value of the\n     infrastructure assets of the Bureau of Reclamation was\n     $94,500,000,000;\n       (3) the majority of the water resources infrastructure\n     facilities of the Bureau of Reclamation are at least 60 years\n     old;\n       (4) the Bureau of Reclamation has previously undertaken\n     efforts to better manage the assets of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation, including an annual review of asset maintenance\n     activities of the Bureau of Reclamation known as the ``Asset\n     Management Plan''; and\n       (5) actionable information on infrastructure conditions at\n     the asset level, including information on maintenance needs\n     at individual assets due to aging infrastructure, is needed\n     for Congress to conduct oversight of Reclamation facilities\n     and meet the needs of the public.\n\n     SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.\n\n       In this Act:\n       (1) Asset.--\n       (A) In general.--The term ``asset'' means any of the\n     following assets that are used to achieve the mission of the\n     Bureau of Reclamation to manage, develop, and protect water\n     and related resources in an environmentally and economically\n     sound manner in the interest of the people of the United\n     States:\n       (i) Capitalized facilities, buildings, structures, project\n     features, power production equipment, recreation facilities,\n     or quarters.\n       (ii) Capitalized and noncapitalized heavy equipment and\n     other installed equipment.\n       (B) Inclusions.--The term ``asset'' includes assets\n     described in subparagraph (A) that are considered to be\n     mission critical.\n       (2) Asset management report.--The term ``Asset Management\n     Report'' means--\n       (A) the annual plan prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation\n     known as the ``Asset Management Plan''; and\n       (B) any publicly available information relating to the plan\n     described in subparagraph (A) that summarizes the efforts of\n     the Bureau of Reclamation to evaluate and manage\n     infrastructure assets of the Bureau of Reclamation.\n       (3) Major repair and rehabilitation need.--The term ``major\n     repair and rehabilitation need'' means major nonrecurring\n     maintenance at a Reclamation facility, including maintenance\n     related to the safety of dams, extraordinary maintenance of\n     dams, deferred major maintenance activities, and all other\n     significant repairs and extraordinary maintenance.\n       (4) Reclamation facility.--The term ``Reclamation\n     facility'' means each of the infrastructure assets that are\n     owned by the Bureau of Reclamation at a Reclamation project.\n       (5) Reclamation project.--The term ``Reclamation project''\n     means a project that is owned by the Bureau of Reclamation,\n     including all reserved works and transferred works owned by\n     the Bureau of Reclamation.\n       (6) Reserved works.--The term ``reserved works'' means\n     buildings, structures, facilities, or equipment that are\n     owned by the Bureau of Reclamation for which operations and\n     maintenance are performed by employees of the Bureau of\n     Reclamation or through a contract entered into by the Bureau\n     of Reclamation, regardless of the source of funding for the\n     operations and maintenance.\n       (7) Secretary.--The term ``Secretary'' means the Secretary\n     of the Interior.\n       (8) Transferred works.--The term ``transferred works''\n     means a Reclamation facility at which operations and\n     maintenance of the facility is carried out by a non-Federal\n     entity under the provisions of a formal operations and\n     maintenance transfer contract or other legal agreement with\n     the Bureau of Reclamation.\n\n     SEC. 4. ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORT ENHANCEMENTS FOR RESERVED\n                   WORKS.\n\n       (a) In General.--Not later than 2 years after the date of\n     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress\n     an Asset Management Report that--\n       (1) describes the efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation--\n       (A) to maintain in a reliable manner all reserved works at\n     Reclamation facilities; and\n       (B) to standardize and streamline data reporting and\n     processes across regions and areas for the purpose of\n     maintaining reserved works at Reclamation facilities; and\n       (2) expands on the information otherwise provided in an\n     Asset Management Report, in accordance with subsection (b).\n       (b) Infrastructure Maintenance Needs Assessment.--\n       (1) In general.--The Asset Management Report submitted\n     under subsection (a) shall include--\n       (A) a detailed assessment of major repair and\n     rehabilitation needs for all reserved works at all\n     Reclamation projects; and\n       (B) to the extent practicable, an itemized list of major\n     repair and rehabilitation needs of individual Reclamation\n     facilities at each Reclamation project.\n       (2) Inclusions.--To the extent practicable, the itemized\n     list of major repair and rehabilitation needs under paragraph\n     (1)(B) shall include--\n       (A) a budget level cost estimate of the appropriations\n     needed to complete each item; and\n       (B) an assignment of a categorical rating for each item,\n     consistent with paragraph (3).\n       (3) Rating requirements.--\n       (A) In general.--The system for assigning ratings under\n     paragraph (2)(B) shall be--\n       (i) consistent with existing uniform categorization systems\n     to inform the annual budget process and agency requirements;\n     and\n       (ii) subject to the guidance and instructions issued under\n     subparagraph (B).\n       (B) Guidance.--As soon as practicable after the date of\n     enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall issue guidance\n     that describes the applicability of the rating system\n     applicable under paragraph (2)(B) to Reclamation facilities.\n       (4) Public availability.--Except as provided in paragraph\n     (5), the Secretary shall make publically available, including\n     on the Internet, the Asset Management Report required under\n     subsection (a).\n       (5) Confidentiality.--Subject to the discretion of the\n     Secretary, the Secretary may exclude from the public version\n     of the Asset Management Report made available under paragraph\n     (4) any information that the Secretary identifies as\n     sensitive or classified, but shall make available to the\n     Committee on Energy and Natural Resources of the Senate and\n     the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of\n     Representatives a version of the report containing the\n     sensitive or classified information.\n       (c) Updates.--Not later than 2 years after the date on\n     which the Asset Management Report is submitted under\n     subsection (a) and biennially thereafter, the Secretary shall\n     update the Asset Management Report, subject to the\n     requirements of section 5(b)(2).\n       (d) Consultation.--The Secretary shall consult with the\n     Secretary of the Army (acting through the Chief of Engineers)\n     to the extent that the consultation would assist the\n     Secretary in preparing the Asset Management Report under\n     subsection (a) and updates to the Asset Management Report\n     under subsection (c).\n\n     SEC. 5. ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORT ENHANCEMENTS FOR TRANSFERRED\n                   WORKS.\n\n       (a) In General.--The Secretary shall coordinate with the\n     non-Federal entities responsible for the operation and\n     maintenance of transferred works in developing reporting\n     requirements for Asset Management Reports with respect to the\n     condition of, and planned maintenance for, transferred works\n     that are similar to the reporting requirements described in\n     section 4(b).\n       (b) Guidance.--\n       (1) In general.--After considering input from water and\n     power contractors of the Bureau of Reclamation, the Secretary\n     shall develop and implement a rating system for transferred\n     works that incorporates, to the maximum extent practicable,\n     the rating system for reserved works developed under section\n     4(b)(3).\n       (2) Updates.--The ratings system developed under paragraph\n     (1) shall be included in the updated Asset Management Reports\n     under section 4(c).\n\n     SEC. 6. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by\n\n[[Page S6929]]\n\n     section 1617 of the Reclamation Projects Authorization and\n     Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C. 390h-12c), the maximum\n     amount of the Federal share of the cost of the project under\n     section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43 U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1))\n     otherwise available as of the date of enactment of this Act\n     shall be reduced by $2,000,000.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-2", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "TEXT OF AMENDMENTS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SAMENDMENTTEXT", "S6924", "S6924", null, "[{\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"226\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"SRES\", \"number\": \"564\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"684\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"S\", \"number\": \"1800\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}, {\"congress\": \"113\", \"type\": \"HR\", \"number\": \"5771\"}]", "160 Cong. Rec. S6924", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6924]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n                           TEXT OF AMENDMENTS\n\n  SA 4121. Mr. FLAKE (for himself, Mr. Alexander, Mr. McCain, and Mr.\nToomey) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the\nbill H.R. 5771, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend\ncertain expiring provisions and make technical corrections, to amend\nthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of\nABLE accounts established under State programs for the care of family\nmembers with disabilities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to\nlie on the table; as follows:\n\n       Strike section 155.\n                                 ______\n\n  SA 4122. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Johnson of South Dakota) proposed an\namendment to the bill S. 684, to amend the Mni Wiconi Project Act of\n1988 to facilitate completion of the Mni Wiconi Rural Water Supply\nSystem, and for other purposes; as follows:\n\n       At the end of the bill, add the following:\n\n     SEC. __. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by section 1617 of the Reclamation\n     Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C.\n     390h-12c), the maximum amount of the Federal share of the\n     cost of the project under section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43\n     U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1)) otherwise available as of the date of\n     enactment of this Act shall be reduced by $15,000,000.\n                                 ______\n\n  SA 4123. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Barrasso) proposed an amendment to the\nbill S. 1800, to require the Secretary of the Interior to submit to\nCongress a report on the efforts of the Bureau of Reclamation to manage\nits infrastructure assets; as follows:\n\n       At the end of the bill, add the following:\n\n     SEC. __. OFFSET.\n\n       Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the case of\n     the project authorized by section 1617 of the Reclamation\n     Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992 (43 U.S.C.\n     390h-12c), the maximum amount of the Federal share of the\n     cost of the project under section 1631(d)(1) of that Act (43\n     U.S.C. 390h-13(d)(1)) otherwise available as of the date of\n     enactment of this Act shall be reduced by $2,000,000.\n                                 ______\n\n  SA 4124. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Brown (for himself and Mr. Portman))\nproposed an amendment to the resolution S. Res. 564, honoring\nconservation on the centennial of the passenger pigeon extinction; as\nfollows:\n\n       In the resolving clause, insert ``balanced and\n     responsible'' before ``conservation''.\n                                 ______\n\n  SA 4125. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Brown (for himself and Mr. Portman))\nproposed an amendment to the resolution S. Res. 564, honoring\nconservation on the centennial of the passenger pigeon extinction; as\nfollows:\n\n       Strike the first whereas clause of the preamble.\n\n       In the third whereas clause of the preamble, strike ``as a\n     cautionary tale and raise awareness of current issues related\n     to human-caused extinction,'' and insert ``to encourage\n     communities to''.\n                                 ______\n\n  SA 4126. Mr. PRYOR (for Mr. Brown) proposed an amendment to the\nresolution S. Res. 226, celebrating the 100th anniversary of the birth\nof James Cleveland ``Jesse'' Owens and honoring him for his\naccomplishments and steadfast commitment to promoting the civil rights\nof all people; as follows:\n\n       In the 12th whereas clause of the preamble, strike\n     ``President Franklin D. Roosevelt'' and all that follows\n     through ``President Dwight D. Eisenhower'' and insert ``the\n     32nd President of the United States or the 33rd President of\n     the United States, but was later recognized in 1955 by the\n     34th President of the United States''.\n\n       In the 15th whereas clause of the preamble, strike\n     ``President Gerald R. Ford'' and all that follows through\n     ``President George H.W. Bush'' and insert ``the 38th\n     President of the United States in 1976 and the Living Legend\n     Award by the 39th President of the United States in 1979, and\n     was posthumously awarded the Congressional Gold Medal by the\n     41st President of the United States''.\n\n                          ____________________"], ["CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-3", "2014-12-16", 113, 2, null, null, "Text of Senate Amendment 4121", "SENATE", "SENATE", "SAMENDMENTTEXTIND", "S6924", "S6924", "[{\"name\": \"Jeff Flake\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "160 Cong. Rec. S6924", "Congressional Record, Volume 160 Issue 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 155 (Tuesday, December 16, 2014)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S6924]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n  SA 4121. Mr. FLAKE (for himself, Mr. Alexander, Mr. McCain, and Mr.\nToomey) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the\nbill H.R. 5771, to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend\ncertain expiring provisions and make technical corrections, to amend\nthe Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment of\nABLE accounts established under State programs for the care of family\nmembers with disabilities, and for other purposes; which was ordered to\nlie on the table; as follows:\n\n       Strike section 155.\n                                 ______"]], "truncated": false, "filtered_table_rows_count": 54422, "expanded_columns": [], "expandable_columns": [], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "units": {}, "query": {"sql": "select granule_id, date, congress, session, volume, issue, title, chamber, granule_class, sub_granule_class, page_start, page_end, speakers, bills, citation, full_text from congressional_record where \"congress\" = :p0 order by date desc limit 101", "params": {"p0": "113"}}, "facet_results": {"chamber": {"name": "chamber", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113", "results": [{"value": "HOUSE", "label": "HOUSE", "count": 33873, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&chamber=HOUSE", "selected": false}, {"value": "SENATE", "label": "SENATE", "count": 20201, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&chamber=SENATE", "selected": false}, {"value": "", "label": "", "count": 348, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&chamber=", "selected": false}], "truncated": false}, "granule_class": {"name": "granule_class", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113", "results": [{"value": "HOUSE", "label": "HOUSE", "count": 21339, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&granule_class=HOUSE", "selected": false}, {"value": "SENATE", "label": "SENATE", "count": 18969, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&granule_class=SENATE", "selected": false}, {"value": "EXTENSIONS", "label": "EXTENSIONS", "count": 11942, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&granule_class=EXTENSIONS", "selected": false}, {"value": "DAILYDIGEST", "label": "DAILYDIGEST", "count": 2172, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&granule_class=DAILYDIGEST", "selected": false}], "truncated": false}, "congress": {"name": "congress", "type": "column", "hideable": false, "toggle_url": "/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113", "results": [{"value": 113, "label": 113, "count": 54422, "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json", "selected": true}], "truncated": false}}, "suggested_facets": [{"name": "session", "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&_facet=session"}, {"name": "date", "type": "date", "toggle_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&_facet_date=date"}], "next": "2014-12-16,CREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-3", "next_url": "https://www.pawtectors.org/openregs/congressional_record.json?congress=113&_next=2014-12-16%2CCREC-2014-12-16-pt1-PgS6924-3&_sort_desc=date", "private": false, "allow_execute_sql": true, "query_ms": 2965.245486004278, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}