Barbara Boxer

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. The request would be to strip the rider out. My colleagues look perplexed. We have been talking about a 98-page rider that was added to the WRDA bill, and we have filed an amendment to do that.

Mrs. BOXER. Yes, I have. I wish to say, since our friend is here--I am not doing anything, an attack on anything, and I never would. It is not my way. I am going to ask unanimous consent right now, Senator Cantwell, without losing my right to the floor and making sure I get the floor back; is that correct? After I make a unanimous consent request, I assume I would still have the floor under the rules.

Mrs. BOXER. OK, I will just hold the floor forever. That is fine. I say to my friend, you have been through these kinds of wars before when you were standing alone trying to stop drilling in the Arctic. I remember all of our colleagues saying: Oh, my God, this is terrible. This drilling in the Arctic is on the military bill. Imagine--drilling in the Arctic. They put it on the national defense bill. My friend was approached, and she was told: Senator, you are going to bring down the entire defense of this country if you don't back off. My friend said: I don't think so. All you have to do is strip this Arctic rider, and we are done. Am I right in my recollection of that?

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, since we are kind of reversing things, I ask unanimous consent that my friend control the time right now.

Mrs. BOXER. Right. I would say this: I did hear, along with my colleague, Elizabeth Warren describe it. She described it a little bit like this. You take a beautiful bill like WRDA. For the most part, it is not perfect, but it is a pretty darn good bill. Then you put a pile of dirt on top of it, which I call the McCarthy rider, and then you stick a little Maraschino cherry on top, which is Flint, and a couple of other good things, and you say: OK, eat the dirt. That is another way of explaining it. My friend is right. What is the message if we don't fight this darn thing, perhaps defeat it, and get it stripped out. We have an amendment to strip it out if we could get to it. What we are essentially saying to all the people, the stakeholders in the water wars, is this: You know, what is important is to your clout. Give enough money to this person, agribusiness and maybe you can control him, or give enough money to this person and maybe you control her. The bottom line is we need to bring everybody to the table because my friend and I understand a couple of things. The water wars are not going to be solved unless everyone buys in. There are ways we can do this. We have done this work before. We can reach agreement, because if we don't, what happens? Lawsuits. Let me just be clear. There are going to be lawsuits and lawsuits and lawsuits because this is a clear violation of the Endangered Species Act. Some colleagues say: Oh, no, it isn't. It says in there it is not. Well, very good, let's say we loaded a weapon and we dropped it on another country, and they said: This is war; you just dropped a bomb on us. We said: No, it isn't. We said we weren't declaring war on you. It is the action that counts, not what you say. A rose is a rose, as William Shakespeare once said--call it any other name. This is an earmark. This is wrong. This is painful. This violates the Endangered Species Act. This is going to lead to the courthouse door. That is why my friend and I are not very popular right now around this joint because we are standing here and people want to go home. They are annoyed. Why is she still talking? Well, I am still talking. I don't want to. I say to my colleague, I ask her a question on my time, which is this: Does she think it is really painful for me to have to filibuster my own bill?

Mrs. BOXER. So we could ask for that by unanimous consent--to have such an amendment, and I want to make sure that after I make that, I would not lose the right to the floor.

Mrs. BOXER. Well, not only is it this whole notion of moving water from one interest. I would call the salmon fishery a critical interest--not only in my State. That is why I hate that it is called the California drought. It impacts not only California's fishing industry, but it impacts Washington's and Oregon's. This is why--save one--all of our Senators on the west coast are strongly opposed to this. Don't call it California water. But the fact of the matter is that this has not been looked at in any way. Whether it is the money, whether it is what it does to the fishery, no one has really looked. There hasn't even been a hearing about this specific bill. I know your committee has looked at a lot of ways to help with the drought. I compliment my friend from Washington, Senator Cantwell, and Senator Murkowski. You have come up with real ways to work with every stakeholder and not continue these absurd water wars where we take money away from a fishing industry--that is a noble, historic fishing industry and tens of thousands of fishermen who support their families--and giving it over to big agribusiness. That is not the way you want to approach the drought, I say to the Senator. It is not the way I want to approach the drought. I would never be party to picking a winner and a loser. That is not our job. Our job is A, to make sure there are ways through technology to get more water to the State that needs it--mostly California at this point--and for all of us to work together to preserve that salmon fishery. The salmon doesn't know when it is in California, when it is in Washington, when it is in Oregon. Let's be clear. We need to protect it. I am just so grateful to you for being on this floor today because your reasons for being here, first and foremost, are that you are protecting jobs in your State. Second, you are protecting the environment in your State. Third, you are protecting the rights of the States, the tribes, and the municipalities to have something to say over this. You are protecting the Endangered Species Act, which--as I pointed out before you came--was signed by President Richard Nixon, for God's sake. This is not a partisan thing. These are God's creatures. I will quickly show you this and then take another question. I showed the bald eagle and several other species. If there had been shenanigans like this, Senator Cantwell--oh, well, we are not going to listen to the science; we are just going to do what we want to do--we wouldn't have the bald eagle. We wouldn't have these creatures I showed. Senator, the fact is that what you are fighting for is not only your State, not only for jobs, but you are fighting for the larger point-- that in the dead of night, you don't do a sneak attack on one of the landmark laws that you and I so strongly support.

Mrs. BOXER. That is right.

Mrs. BOXER. Senator, I was just talking about it briefly, and I actually misstated it, so I am glad I was corrected. This rider, dropped at midnight, going on a bill that is a beautiful bill that I worked on for so long and that the Senator from Washington has worked on--and there are a lot of wonderful things in there. This rider went through the wrong committee. The issue you talk about, the ability of the President of the United States to, by himself, authorize dams in the Western States for the next 5 years anywhere in those States is unheard of, and it is in your committee's jurisdiction. It is in the jurisdiction of the Energy Committee. I hope Senator Murkowski is outraged as well. The fact is, the Senator is absolutely right. We have a Senator and a Congressman getting together and saying that the Congress should be bypassed and have no say in where dams should be put, whether dams should be built at all, and it is in the jurisdiction of the Energy Committee. It is not in the jurisdiction of Environment and Public Works.

Mrs. BOXER. Absolutely not, my friend. As you know, it is in the jurisdiction of your committee. It has absolutely nothing to do with mine. I would say there are two pieces added that we have a little jurisdiction on, funding for desal, but that is already in the base WRDA bill. So I can honestly say to my friend that this is a horrible rider in and of itself. One of the other problems with it is it has gone through the wrong committee. That is right. It belongs in the jurisdiction of the committee which is yours and Senator Murkowski's.

Mrs. BOXER. Yes.

Mrs. BOXER. Of course I will.

Mrs. BOXER. So I will continue to speak, and when I am done, I am done. It may be soon because I am getting a little tired, but I will keep talking for a while. I say to everybody that I am sorry, but don't drop a midnight rider on a beautiful bill that I worked on for 2 years with my colleague Senator Inhofe, and then say: I am really annoyed because she is talking too much. I am sorry. I apologize, but I am going to talk until I am done, and the Senator from Washington is going to talk until she is done. Don't drop a midnight rider and destroy the fishing industry and say that Congress will no longer have the ability to authorize the building of dams.

Mrs. BOXER. I know it is a holiday. God knows I know that. This year Hanukkah and Christmas come at the same time, and my grandkids celebrate both. I want to go home, but the people who depend on the water to support the salmon fishing industry may not be able to celebrate this year because someone over there named Kevin McCarthy dropped--in the dead of night--a rider on a beautiful bill called WRDA and wrecked it. He never once thought about the people who rely on fishing. It is a disgrace. Who is signing the letter, saying, ``Don't do this, don't do this, don't do this''? The Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, the Golden Gate Salmon Association, the Southern California Trawlers Association of Santa Barbara, the Commercial Fishermen of Santa Barbara, the Port San Luis Fishermen's Marketing Association, the Morro Bay Commercial Fishermen's Organization, the Monterey Fishermen's Marketing Association, the Moss Landing Commercial Fishermen's Association, the Santa Cruz Fishermen's Marketing Association, the Half Moon Bay Fishermen's Marketing Association, the San Francisco Crab Boat Owner's Association, the Small Boat Salmon Fishermen's Association, the Fishermen's Marketing Association of Bodega Bay, the Salmon Trollers Marketing Association, the Humboldt Fishermen's Marketing Association, the Coastal Trollers Association. I am putting those in the Record. In all of my lifetime serving, I have never seen such an outcry from one industry. There is no disagreement. The water will be taken away for agribusiness regardless of what the scientists think. You may say: Senator, what was controlling this before this power grab? It is a law. It is a law called the Endangered Species Act. You may then ask: What liberal politician or President signed that? Let me give you the answer. It was a Republican named Richard Nixon. What breaks my heart more than anything else--and I have said it before--is how the environment has become such a hot-button issue. I want to talk about the Endangered Species Act. We have landmark laws in our Nation. It makes our Nation great. We have the Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Endangered Species Act, the Toxic Control Substances Act, and the Brownfields Law. These are landmark laws beloved by the people. If you went out on the street or if I asked up in the gallery how many people think we should protect our endangered species, I would be surprised if more than a few disagreed with that. Let me show you why. What has been saved by the Endangered Species Act? How about nothing less than the American bald eagle. This species was on its way to extinction, but because of the Endangered Species Act, we learned that there were only enough left for a few years, and so the endangered species law said: No, no, no, no. We have to change what we do and protect this species. The American eagle was protected because Richard Nixon, as well as Democrats and Republicans, believed we needed an Endangered Species Act. That was in the 1960s. Now we have a frontal assault on the Endangered Species Act. Let me show you what else we have saved under the Endangered Species Act. This is the California condor. It is a magnificent species. It is God's creation. We talk about our faith here, and I never ever doubt anybody's faith, but I am saying if you are truly a believer, then you work to protect God's creations. It is part of our responsibility. Here it is. What would have happened if this Endangered Species Act had been changed to say, ``Don't worry about the science, do whatever you want, and if it is bothering the hunters or fishermen, just throw it out the window''? We wouldn't have saved these creatures. I will show some others. This is the Peregrine falcon. Just looking at this magnificent thing makes you smile. Again, it is endangered. If there had been legislation like what was dropped at midnight from Kevin McCarthy on the Endangered Species Act, we might have lost this magnificent creature. So to say that we should just go home to our families, children, and grandchildren without calling attention to what is on the WRDA bill that I love--let me be clear. Personally, I win either way. One way I win is if we stop this bill and take off this horrible rider and pass it clean. That would be the most amazing thing. And if we don't, I bring home 26 incredible projects to my people. It is not about me. We have one more to show you. This is the great sea turtle. This beautiful creature was saved by the Endangered Species Act. If we had similar legislation about this magnificent creature and it said that 7 out of 10 people believe it is harming their business, let's just forget about it, we don't really need it, we would not have saved this. So when you drop this--I call it a midnight rider--on a beautiful bill and say we are going to violate the Endangered Species Act unless somebody can prove it is really bad, you are destroying the Endangered Species Act. What right does anybody have to do that in the middle of the night, in the darkness, before Christmas, days before government funding runs out? I say nobody should have the right to do it. Since they did it, I am going to make noise about it. Believe me, I am on the way out the door. Did I want to do this? No. I did my speech. I was so thrilled to do it. My family was up there. I am in the middle of a battle now. Well, I guess that is how it is. You come in fighting, you go out fighting. That is just the way it goes. A lot of people say: Oh, Barbara, why do you want to do this? You had such a beautiful speech. It was a high note. I can't. I am alive. I know what is going on. I am going to tell the truth. The truth is, Kevin McCarthy has been trying to get more water for big agribusiness in his--water in my State is very contentious. My view about water is that everybody comes to the table. We work it out together. I don't like the water war. He has launched another water war battle for big agribusiness against the salmon fishery. It is ugly. It is wrong. It is going to wind up at the courthouse door anyway. Why are we doing this? It is not right. We don't need to fight about water. All the stakeholders just have to sit down and work together. I love the fact that my State produces more fruit and vegetables and nuts--it is the breadbasket of the world. Under most measurements, farmers use 80 percent of the water--80 percent of the water. In a drought situation, why would you then hurt the other stakeholders because an almond grower wants to do more almond growing? It takes 1 gallon to produce one almond. I love almonds. Believe me, they are a fabulous food. There is a recent study that they are really healthy for you. I want everyone to eat almonds. But they export a ton of them. We have to preserve the environment in our State and not run these fishermen out. What has really been interesting is the editorials that have come about as a result of this midnight rider. I would like to highlight an editorial by the Sacramento Bee on December 7, 2016, titled ``Feinstein, McCarthy strike water deal, but war goes on.'' This is it. This is what I am reading from. ``The Federal legislation almost surely will result in increased water exports, its basic point, and contains unfortunate language that would allow Federal authorities to override scientists and order water exports that could further damage the delta and fisheries.'' What is the delta? The delta is a series of islands through which the natural rainwater runs. The water gets purified. It runs into our rivers and streams. It supports the salmon fishery, and it supports clean drinking water, but if you rip away that water, you are going to have more salt in the water that remains. It is going to be more expensive for the people to get it to drinking quality. So what you have is a circumstance where you are not only running the salmon fishery out, but you are also destroying the water quality--the drinking water quality--for many users in the area who rely on the delta water and making it far more expensive to clean up the water because it has so much salt in it. Here is the Sacramento Bee saying that ``the unfortunate language would allow Federal authorities to override scientists and order water exports that could further damage the Delta and fisheries.'' I think I have explained to you what that means. It destroys and harms not only the salmon fishery, but it also destroys and harms drinking water. Now, the bill, it says--this is the rider that is on my beautiful WRDA bill that I love so much, that I wrote with Jim Inhofe. ``The bill authorizes additional pumping unless fishery scientists can prove there will be damage to fish, virtually an impossible standard.'' So when those who support this say: Oh, don't worry, Barbara, yes, they will pump at the maximum ability constantly, but there has to be a report. Well, by the time they finish their report, there will be a lot of dead fish or no fish. It goes on to say: ``But no one should kid themselves. This bill will result in damage to the environment. And it won't end California's water wars.'' Let me say that again. This is the Sacramento Bee. This is not known for any type of liberal editorializing. ``But no one should kid themselves. This bill will result in damage to the environment. And it won't end California's water wars.'' So we put that in the Record along with all of the different fishing groups that strongly oppose this. So we are here, and everyone is calling me: Oh, let's go home. Let's go home. I want to go home. I really want to go home because this is the end of my last term, but I can't. Let the clock go. It will run out. But the fact remains, we have to take a stand against these midnight riders that drop from the ceiling that attack Richard Nixon's Endangered Species Act that we all supported forever until now. I guess it is easy to say, I support the Endangered Species Act until someone says: Oh, there is an endangered species. Then you say: Oh, never mind. No. No. No. You support it because you want to protect God's creatures, and then you keep supporting it. You don't attack it on a rider that was dropped at midnight, never had a hearing on a bill that has nothing to do with the subject matter. What they did belongs in the Energy bill, but they did not want to put it in there. They wanted to put it in WRDA because WRDA is so popular. WRDA is a beautiful bill, a beautiful bill that I worked on that is going to be my legacy bill. So here I am standing up making a big fuss on my own bill and saying vote no on it. That is really hard. I hope no one in this body ever has to do this. It is a very difficult thing. Now, you may ask: Who really cares about the salmon fishery? Who really cares about the Endangered Species Act? Well, how about every environmental organization that I know of in the country. So who are they? They are the Natural Resources Defense Council, that has clearly stated this is a violation of the Endangered Species Act; the League of Conservation Voters, an organization that follows this. They are scoring this vote. They are scoring this vote; Defenders of Wildlife, who are committed to protecting God's creatures; Earth Justice; the Sierra Club; National Audubon Society; Clean Water Action; Greenpeace; Trout Unlimited--that has a huge participation of fishermen, recreational fishermen; Environmental Entrepreneurs. These are actually business leaders in this country who care about what we do. I will read a little bit of the Trout Unlimited letter. Trout Unlimited is opposed to the drought provision that has been added to the WRDA bill being considered by the House as it undermines an otherwise salutary Water Resources Development Act bill developed in a bipartisan manner by the House and Senate. What a beautiful opening sentence. They get it. Trout Unlimited--they are not liberals or conservatives. They just like to go and have a good time with recreational fishing. There will not be a fishery left because of the bill that was dropped from the ceiling at midnight, because someone wanted to take water away from the salmon fishery and give it to agribusiness, disgraceful. Why don't we work together on getting more water? This is not a drought bill. It is called the California drought bill. It is ridiculous. It has nothing to do with increasing the water. All it does is move water from one place to another, and the additional authorizations on it--on the rider--are already in the underlying WRDA bill. We don't need this. It calls for desal. It calls for water recharging. It calls for recycling. So this is a phony name of the bill, California drought bill. It does zero, zero, zero to help with the drought. All it does is it attacks the fishing industry. That is it. Thousands of jobs, because one Congressman over there represents a little district, and he is delivering to agribusiness. It is shameful. We stand here and we decry the fact that the widows of the miners are getting the shaft--and they are. I stand with them. I ask my colleagues to vote no on a bill that contains language that will undo the salmon fisheries on the entire West Coast. I speak for Maria Cantwell, who will also be down here to speak, I speak for Ron Wyden, I speak for Jeff Merkley, I speak for Patty Murray. We are apoplectic about this. You want to do in the salmon fishery, have the guts to have a hearing on it. Have the guts to look in the faces of those salmon fishery people, have the guts to tell it to their faces. Don't drop this thing at the last minute, Christmastime, and we are all going to be good little girls and boys and say: Oh, we are going to go home. No, we are not. We are not. It is not right. You know, I grew up, there was right and there was wrong. You can't turn away from wrong, even if it is inconvenient. It is inconvenient. I have stood alone on this floor. I am not standing alone on this, but I would if I had to. Let's see what some of these environmentalists have said. How about E2, the environmental business leaders--what do they say? ``As business leaders focused on policies that promote a growing economy and healthy environment, we ask that you vote no on the cloture on Water Resources Development Act if it contains the added language regarding California water.'' They say they are a nonpartisan group of business leaders, and they have funded venture capital and companies. They said that WRDA is critical and that this language will not solve any drought issues. Its shortsighted provisions could damage the large salmon industry that is fed from the Central Valley and hurt thousands of fishing and recreational jobs up and down the west coast. What I am telling you is the truth. Here is a bill that is called the California drought bill, and it does nothing--nothing at all--to bring water in because all of the language that would deal with desalinization and high technology is already in the WRDA bill. That is a phony bill, and there is no mandatory funding in it for those purposes. But what is mandatory is that, regardless of the situation, water will be pumped away from the salmon fisheries and toward big agribusiness. There are some who say: Oh, why don't we do this? It will be worse next year. Really? The agribusiness people have already said that this is just a start. So if we allow this to go on without people paying attention, we are opening up the door to more and more attacks. Mr. President, I would like to discuss an editorial in the San Jose Mercury News on December 8, 2016, titled, ``As Boxer retires, Feinstein sells out the Delta.'' This editorial is very strong in favor of the salmon fisheries. They say that this rider sells out to Central Valley water interests. It guts environmental protections. We will have devastating long-term effects on the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta ecosystem. They talk about my stand on this, and they note that I will not be here, and that I am taking a stand on this. They call this rider, the one that takes the water away from the salmon fisheries and gives it to agribusiness, an ``80-page document negotiated behind closed doors [which] allows maximum pumping of water from the Delta to the Central Valley and eliminates''--I am going to talk about this-- ``important congressional oversight over building dams.'' I am going to take a minute on this. I forgot to mention this. This bill--this rider that was added is called the California drought bill. It is way more than that; it is how to kill the salmon fisheries in the west coast bill because it doesn't only kill them in California, it kills them in Oregon and Washington. It kills thousands and thousands of jobs. That is why we put in the Record all the people in the salmon industry who oppose this rider. It also says--and this is amazing--that in 11 Western States over the next 5 years, the administration coming in will be able to singlehandedly authorize the building of dams, which, as you know, wreak havoc with the natural environment in our rivers and are very expensive. Congress has always been involved in the authorization of dams because we hold hearings. We ask questions. Why should we do it? Why shouldn't we do it? We bring together all the parties, and we make a decision. This rider takes away the authority from Congress to authorize dams in the 11 Western States. So I say rhetorically to Mr. McCarthy: Do you really distrust your colleagues so much that you no longer trust them to have anything to say about whether a dam should be built or not? Do you really want to take away the authority from your colleagues to call experts together to ask why this dam is needed? What would the pluses be if this is built? What would the minuses be? What would happen to wildlife? What would happen to the environment if it is being built on an earthquake fault? You may laugh at that, but there was a proposal in Northern California to build enormous dams on earthquake faults. The only reason it was stopped was congressional hearings. Now President-Elect Trump will be able to determine in the 11 Western States that have BLM land whether or not dams can be built, and Congress will have no say. But the answer to that is: Oh, but they still have to fund it. Well, I have been in that dance before, and I know how that works. Allow just a few dollars in it, and it is on the books. This bill is awful. It is awful, and I am so grateful to these newspapers in California that have called them out on it. Mr. President, I have a Republican Senator complaining that I am talking too long. What is the situation on the floor? Can Senators speak as long as they wish?

Mrs. BOXER. I wish to say to my friend that I was aware of the provision, but I did not know the details of what you just said. My staff confirms that you are absolutely right. Are you saying to me that water contractors will be relieved of certain payments and the Federal Government will be on the hook--Federal taxpayers? Is that what you were saying?

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Cochran for his courtesy in getting the time for me. Coal Miner Health Care Benefits and WRDA Mr. President, some people may wonder why on a Friday we are still here and we are still arguing and we are still debating. There are several issues that are troubling to many people in the Senate and in the country, and a couple of them have a focus on them today. How this all ends remains to be seen, but I feel it is important for the American people to understand that there are some people here who are willing to take the time to explain why we can't just go home right now. We are no different from any other American. We don't want to have to work on the weekend. We don't want to have to be here when we don't have to be, giving speeches that we don't have to give. I also want to give a shout-out to my friends who are calling attention to the plight of widows of miners--miners who went into the coal mines knowing full well they risked their lives every day. They knew that if something happened to them, their widows would be taken care of. If we can't take care of widows and children who are left behind because a coal miner risked his or her life, who are we fighting for and what are we doing here? Senator Manchin, Senator Heitkamp, Senator Casey, Senator Schumer, Senator Warner--several of my colleagues--have been very clear. They have been taking to this floor warning the majority, the Republicans, that we want to take care of these widows. The money is there. It is there for them. Instead, my Republican friends want to take it away. You know what? That is not happening without a fight. That is not happening without a fight. If we can't defend widows and orphans, I have news for you, we don't deserve to be here. Two days ago, I gave what was to be my final major speech on the floor of the Senate. Believe me, I don't want to be here. I don't want to talk on the floor. I wanted to go out with a great big smile on my face after working in politics for 40 years, but instead I am here to explain an issue that is very troubling. If you asked the average person what troubles them about Congress-- they hate Congress. I think we get a 17-, 18- maybe 12-percent rating. It is bad. It is hurtful. One of the things they hate about Congress is when we have a special interest rider dropped on a bill. No one has looked at it, there have been no hearings, and it has nothing to do with the bill. People are then forced into a situation where either they swallow that garbage or they can't vote for the underlying bill, which may be very important to their State, their constituents, and their country. That is what is happening on the continuing resolution to keep the government open. There is a paltry 4-month extension on the health care for the widows of coal miners. What good does that do? They are going to be frightened to death. What if they go to the doctor in that first month and the doctor says: I am watching a lump. It may be cancerous. Come back in 3 months. They don't know if they will even have health care. It is a disgrace. The widows are not protected in the continuing resolution. What are we facing? Either we shut down the government or fight for the widows. OK. This is what people hate about Congress, and we don't have to do it--not at all. If you believe you have great legislation, then go through the channels, introduce the bill, and have a hearing. If you think the miners' widows deserve only 4 months, let's have a discussion about it. We have another situation on another bill. The bill is called WRDA. You may have heard about it. What does it stand for? It stands for the Water Resources Development Act. This WRDA bill is a beautiful bill. My committee has worked on it for more than a year. I am proud to be the ranking member on that committee. I was the chairman, but when Republicans took the Senate back, Senator Inhofe became the chairman. We worked hand in glove. We set aside our differences, we set aside poison pills, and we said we are going to put together a great bill, and we did. It is a great bill. It deals with flood control, ensures there is environmental restoration and that our ports are dredged and can, in fact, support the kind of commerce we need in the greatest country in the world. We have authorization for funding in there for desalination because we know we have droughts in the western States, and we need to work on that. We have authorization for ways to use technology to ensure we can increase our water supply, so we have authorization in there for water recharging and water recycling. It is quite a bill. It has authorization in there to move forward with all of the Army Corps projects that have been looked at up and down and inside out. What we have in there for my State is incredible. I don't think I have ever had a bill that did more for my State. We have projects in Sacramento, Los Angeles, and the San Francisco area. We have projects from north to south, east to west. We have levee fixes and the Lake Tahoe restoration that Senator Feinstein and I worked on. We have very important ecosystem restoration. We have projects in Orange County and all over the State. Why do I say this? I say this to make the following point: If Senator Boxer has all of those great things for her State in the WRDA bill, why is she standing here saying, ``Vote no''? It isn't easy. It breaks my heart, but I will tell you why. In the middle of the night, coming from the ceiling and airdropped into this bill was a dangerous 98-page rider which will become law with the WRDA bill. What does it do? It attacks the Endangered Species Act head-on. It gives operational instructions on how to move water in my State away from the salmon fisheries and to big agribusiness, regardless of what the science says. If somebody says ``Oh, my God, this is terrible; we will lose the salmon fishery,'' it will take a very long time to have that study, and it will be too late to save the fishery. This isn't just about the salmon; it is about the people who fish. They are distressed about this issue. They represent tens of thousands of families who rely on having enough water for the fishery. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the letter signed by this vast array of fishermen and some letters from all of those who rely on salmon fishery be printed in the Record.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Reserving the right to object, I am not going to object, but you said 80 minutes. Who has the other--the reason I am asking is, I didn't know if I needed to yield time to the other side, which I prefer not to since you have your own time, right? That is fine with me.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Police Officer Jose Gilbert Vega, a beloved husband, father, grandfather, and uncle who was tragically killed in the line of duty on October 8, 2016. Jose ``Gil'' Vega was born in Texas to a family of migrant farm workers. When Gil was 6 years old his family relocated to Coachella, CA, where he graduated from Indio High School. In 1979, Gil began his career in law enforcement by serving as a reserve police officer for the Indio Police Department. He was hired as a community service officer by the Palm Springs Police Department in 1982, and the following year, he accepted additional responsibilities as a jail and reserve field training officer. Gil's hard work and dedication was recognized in 1985 when the city of Palm Springs hired him as a police officer trainee. Upon completion of his program at the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Academy, Gil was promoted to police officer. Officer Vega worked on various assignments throughout his career, including serving as a detective for the Riverside Auto Theft Interdiction Detail, RAID, and the Palm Springs Crimes Against Property Unit. Over the course of three decades, Officer Vega mentored over 30 police officers and was consistently recognized for his commitment to his job and the community. He was awarded a lifesaving medal for performing CPR on an infant in 2010 and received the Medal of Merit in 2013. He is also the only officer in the history of the Palm Springs Police Department to have been selected twice by his peers as ``Officer of the Year,'' in 1992 and 2011. Officer Vega truly embodied the very best of law enforcement and his courageous service will be forever remembered. On behalf of the people of California whom Officer Vega served so bravely, I extend my heartfelt condolences to his wife, Susana; his eight children; and his entire extended family.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I wish to pay tribute to four servicemembers from California or based in California who have died while serving our country in Operation Freedom's Sentinel and in Operation Inherent Resolve since I last entered names into the record. Staff Sergeant John W. Perry SSG John W. Perry, 30, of Stockton, CA, died November 12, 2016, of injuries sustained from an improvised explosive device in Bagram, Afghanistan. Staff Sergeant Perry was assigned to the Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 1st Special Troops Battalion, 1st Sustainment Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX. Chief Petty Officer Jason C. Finan CPO Jason C. Finan, 34, of Anaheim, CA, died October 20, 2016, in northern Iraq, of wounds sustained in an improvised explosive device blast. Chief Petty Officer Finan was assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit Three. Staff Sergeant Matthew V. Thompson SSG Matthew V. Thompson, 28, of Irvine, CA, died August 23, 2016, in Helmand Province, Afghanistan, of injuries caused by an improvised explosive device that detonated near his patrol while conducting dismounted operations. Staff Sergeant Thompson was assigned to the 3rd Battalion, 1st Special Forces Group (Airborne), Joint Base Lewis- McChord, WA. Petty Officer First Class Charles H. Keating IV PO1 Charles H. Keating IV, 31, of San Diego, CA, died May 3, 2016, in Tall Usquf, Iraq, of combat related causes. Petty Officer First Class Keating was assigned to a West Coast-based Navy SEAL Team.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, Senator Harry Reid and I were both elected to the House in 1982, and over the last 34 years, Harry has become more than a colleague to me. He is like family. I call him the ``brother I never had,'' and he calls me the ``sister he never had.'' Only a brother can hang up on you like Harry does. And because a sister's job is to embarrass her brother, I want to talk today about Harry's incredible, extraordinary career and how much he means to me. Harry, his wife, Landra, my husband, Stewart, and I have all grown to be dear friends and enjoy quiet dinners together. Stew and I even invited them to stay with us in our California desert home once--where I cooked, much to Harry's disbelief. Theirs is a truly beautiful love story. They met in high school and have been together ever since. There was one incident early on that could have derailed them. When Harry went to pick Landra up for a date, her father, a Jewish immigrant, was opposed to his daughter dating a man with no religion. But that wasn't going to stop Harry. He actually got into a fistfight with his future father-in-law and punched him in the face. As Harry simply said, ``It wasn't the greatest beginning.'' But love always prevails. Harry and Landra eloped during college, and Landra's parents eventually came around to supporting them. And throughout Harry's career--throughout every campaign, every election, every bump in the road--Landra has been by Harry's side, and he by hers. Though he has risen to the highest levels of success, Harry has never forgotten where he came from and has always fought like hell for his State. He was born in what he calls a ``flyspeck on the map''-- Searchlight, NV in 1939, a year before me. To say he grew up poor is an understatement. His childhood home had no toilet or running water, and in order to attend high school, he had to move in with relatives 40 miles away. Nothing came easy for Harry, but he never let that deter him. In high school, he wanted to buy a car, so he took a job at a bakery that required him to wake up at 4 a.m. during the week--3 a.m. on weekends. In his spare time, he took up boxing, which earned him a college scholarship. His very humble beginnings taught him the value of hard work. We have all heard Harry tell the story of working six days a week as a U.S. Capitol Police Officer while putting himself through law school full- time at George Washington University. For years, he proudly displayed his badge here in his D.C. office. Upon graduation from law school, he returned to Nevada as an attorney specializing in what he called, ``the cases nobody would take'' before starting his career in elected office: First, as the Henderson city attorney, then as an assemblyman, Lieutenant Governor, and chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission, before winning election to the House of Representatives. After two terms in the House, Harry won a seat in the Senate, where he gained a reputation for integrity and fairness. He was elected as our leader in 2004, and I believe he will go down in history as one of the best. Harry is a workhorse, not a show horse. He is soft-spoken and a wonderful listener, but is not afraid to speak up. He doesn't seek the spotlight--in fact, he often avoids it at all costs--but he also knows how to use it to fight for those without a voice. And, he takes the time to know every member of his caucus--what makes us tick, what our core issues are, and where we each draw the line. I want to relate one particular story that truly exemplifies the leader Harry is. One December night in 2009, I got a call from Harry and Senator Chuck Schumer. They were trying to negotiate the final issue on the Affordable Care Act, and this was our last chance to get the bill passed. We needed every single Democrat in order to end the Republican filibuster, but we had reached a stumbling block: Senator Ben Nelson believed the Federal subsidy in the ACA should not go towards abortion. If he voted against the bill, Obamacare would be gone. So Harry trusted Senator Patty Murray and me with the crucial responsibility of finding a solution. For 13 grueling hours, my team and I would come up with an idea, Senator Schumer would run it over to Senator Nelson, and we would volley back and forth until we finally landed on a compromise. The bill was saved, and today, more than 20 million Americans have health care--many for the first time ever--thanks, in large part, to Harry Reid. He never gave up, and he trusted members of his caucus to help get this bill--one of the most important health care bills in a generation--across the finish line. Harry has perfected the art of strategy and negotiation. He knows when to compromise and when to stand up and fight--especially when it comes to his beloved Nevada. He has accomplished far too many things to mention, but I want to quickly talk about a few issues. No one fought harder against the plan to dump nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, which would have threatened the health and safety of Nevadans. Since he was first elected to Congress 34 years ago, Harry fought proposal after proposal until the plan was finally scrapped-- almost entirely because of him. He has been instrumental in the fight to protect and restore Lake Tahoe--which is shared between our two States. Harry created the Lake Tahoe Summit and worked across party lines to help keep Tahoe blue. He has protected more than three million acres of wilderness, established Great Basin National Park, and has fought to protect our landmark environmental laws. And when we were in the throes of the worst economic crisis in a generation, Harry fought tooth and nail to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs and help Americans keep their homes--especially in Nevada, which was one of the hardest hit States. Harry worked tirelessly to shepherd the Recovery Act through Congress--a monumental task in our political environment. At every turn, the right wing threw everything they had at us, but Harry took it all on the chin with his strength, stamina, and fortitude. He stepped up and helped us avoid Armageddon, and I give a great deal of credit to Senator Reid and President Obama for that. At his core, that is who Harry Reid is: When he believes something to be right, he doesn't think twice about putting the gloves on, hopping in the ring and fighting for what he believes in. He just does it. For this, and for so many other reasons, Harry has made the Democratic Party better. He has made Nevada better. He has made our country better. And on a personal level, Harry has made me better. I will forever be grateful for his leadership, his mentorship, and most of all, his friendship. In closing, I would like to read the words I wrote about him. Harry . . . thank you for the strength you give to us. Harry . . . thank you for the way you make them cuss. So you're not a TV star, We just take you as you are. Harry, blue and true, No one like you. Harry . . . working from the day until the night. Harry . . . never turns away when there's a fight. Good thing there are no Senate duels! Harry, blue and true, No one like you.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the tremendous accomplishments of the city of Santa Barbara, a community that has pioneered efforts in sustainability and environmental preservation for many years. For over four decades, the city of Santa Barbara has been a leader in protecting and enhancing the local environment. In 1969, a devastating oil spill released an estimated 80,000 to 100,000 barrels of oil into the Santa Barbara Channel, resulting in public outcry over the significant damage to the ocean waters and wildlife. Local residents and civic leaders immediately began advocating for environmental reforms, and a few months later, Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act, one of the first laws to establish a national framework for protecting our environment. Soon after, the California Coastal Commission was created in 1972 as an independent State agency committed to preserving California's beautiful coastline. As the Santa Barbara community grew and the effects of global climate change became more apparent, local leaders developed innovative initiatives to reduce waste, decrease emissions, and conserve natural resources. Specifically, the city imposed stormwater requirements for development projects to prevent runoff and implemented a shared-use vehicle program to reduce fuel costs and the number of vehicles in the city's fleet. These efforts helped cut water consumption by 15 to 20 percent and reduce emissions by 10 percent, respectively. Next year, Santa Barbara will begin using a state-of-the-art water desalination facility that will reduce electrical demand and environmental impacts while supplying roughly 30 percent of the city's water. I want to congratulate the city of Santa Barbara for its dedicated efforts to preserve our precious natural resources. Santa Barbara's leadership will continue to make a profound difference for generations to come.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring to the life of Police Officer Lesley Zerebny, a beloved wife, devoted mother, and esteemed colleague who was tragically killed in the line of duty on October 8, 2016. Officer Zerebny was born in Hemet, CA, to David and Luanne Kling. She was raised in a law enforcement family and expressed a desire to become a police officer from a young age. In 2014, Officer Zerebny joined the Palm Springs Police Department as a police officer trainee and was promoted to police officer after graduating from the Riverside County Sheriff's Academy. Her positive attitude and commitment to the job helped Officer Zerebny stand out at the Palm Springs Police Department. She consistently accepted additional assignments and always offered a helping hand to her colleagues. She was described as ``small in stature, but fearless'' and ``fiery, creative, full of life and tough as nails.'' Hard-working, dedicated, and compassionate, Officer Zerebny courageously served her community with distinction. Officer Zerebny took enormous pride in everything she set out to do-- especially in her service as a police officer--but her proudest accomplishment was her family. On behalf of the people of California whom Officer Zerebny served so bravely, I extend my heartfelt condolences to her husband, Zach; daughter, Cora; and her parents, David and Luanne.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, today I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring the life of Sergeant Steven C. Owen, a beloved husband and father who tragically lost his life in the line of duty on October 5, 2016. Sergeant Owen was born in Encino, CA, and proudly joined the Los Angeles County Sheriff's department almost three decades ago. He spent most of his career at the Lancaster Sheriff's station, patrolling the streets of his Antelope Valley community with pride. Well known for his courage as well as kindness, Sergeant Owen received a Meritorious Conduct Medal in 2014 after safely rescuing a hostage held at gunpoint, devising the rescue plan and ensuring that his deputies were kept out of harm's way. Colleagues fondly remembered Sergeant Owen's tireless work ethic, selfless nature, and deep commitment to the community he served. ``Sergeant Owen had the qualities of a religious man--maybe a priest, a minister or a rabbi, or someone who took vows to serve mankind,'' said Los Angeles County Sheriff Jim McDonnell. ``He fed the hungry, he clothed those who needed it, and Steve Owen comforted the traumatized.'' Outside of work, Sergeant Owen spent most of his time volunteering, coaching youth football, and mentoring young students. He also taught landlords and businessowners how to reduce crime on their properties. A skilled water-skier and equestrian, Sergeant Owen also enjoyed camping and gardening in his free time. Above all else, Sergeant Owen was devoted to his family and his faith. On behalf of the people of California, whom Sergeant Owen served so bravely, I extended my gratitude and deepest sympathies to his wife, Tania; children, Branden, Chadd, and Shannon; and his entire extended family.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, for more than 30 years, Vice President Joe Biden has held a big place in my heart. Through thick and thin, he trusted me to be his partner in so many fights, and I will be forever grateful to him. Joe first impressed me after he took a stand against the Reagan administration's support of South Africa when it was still in the depths of apartheid. So when he asked me to help organize women for his 1988 Presidential campaign, I was all in. While that race wasn't meant to be, I fell in love with Joe's vision of ``reclaiming the idea of America as a community'' and his beautiful, persistent optimism and hope--qualities we all still love him for today. I cherished our time serving in Congress together, and I was so honored that he asked me to carry the Violence against Women Act in the House. Joe was determined to put the spotlight on this quiet epidemic-- and he has been doing just that ever since. I took 5 years, but President Bill Clinton finally signed VAWA into law in 1994. It was one of Joe's many monumental achievements. By then, I had won election to the U.S. Senate where Joe played a major role in one of my own biggest personal accomplishments: the Dolphin-Safe tuna label law. Well, if I am being honest, it was his then 8-year-old daughter, Ashley, who got him involved. Schoolchildren across the country were boycotting their tuna fish sandwiches after learning that dolphins could be killed as tuna was caught, and Ashley was begging her father to take action. I was so proud that Joe chose to partner with me on a bill that required companies that sell dolphin-safe tuna to prove that dolphins were not hurt in the fishing process. Like any good father, Joe wanted to show Ashley that he would come through for her--and he did. Our bill became law in 1992, and it is estimated that it saves tens of thousands of dolphins every year. Joe also served as an extraordinary chairman on the Foreign Relations Committee, where I am a member. He was gracious and respectful, listening to every viewpoint, but he also wasn't afraid to speak up and take charge. I thought he was very courageous to point out a better way to solve the civil war in Iraq, and I was so proud to stand with him. For all of these reasons, and so many more, it is no surprise that President Barack Obama chose Joe Biden to serve as his Vice President. And it is no surprise that Joe will go down as one of the most effective Vice Presidents in history because of his warm, open relationship with President Obama. They have spent a great deal of time together, exchanging thoughts and ideas, and Joe was one of the key advisors who influenced President Obama as he successfully confronted horrific challenges, such as: two wars; the worst recession since the Great Depression; and rising violence in our communities. Who could ever forget Joe Biden's immense respect and gratitude for our men and women in uniform and their families and his determined fight to bring them home safely? Who could ever forget how he shepherded the Recovery Act through Congress--a near impossible feat in this polarized political climate? Who could ever forget his long history of fighting for community policing and to strengthen the bonds between police officers and their communities? No one has fought harder for the things he believes in than Joe Biden--no one--and there is nothing that he will not do for the country he so deeply loves. Love of country is second only to the love Joe has for his beautiful family. When he talks about his incredible wife, children, and grandchildren, you know they are his guiding star. It is because of this love that we have all come to know and adore Joe, and for that same reason, it is why our hearts broke for him over the profound, unspeakable loss of his son, Beau. All of America mourned with Joe. He had every right to stay down, but Joe is as resilient as they come. He likes to tell the advice that his father gave him as a child: ``Champ, when you get knocked down get up. Get up.'' Well, Joe always gets up. He gets up again and again and again. And we are all so fortunate that he does because, from the U.S. Senate to the Office of the Vice President, Joe has never stopped fighting for the things he believes in--for civil rights, women's rights, worker's rights, economic fairness, a world-class education for our kids, health care for all, and a safe and peaceful world. Joe has taught me so much, and I am so proud to call him my forever friend. Many of you know that I love to rewrite song lyrics. This is what I wrote for Joe: Joe is a many splendored thing. He is tough and smart and strong and wise. Winter, fall and spring. He's for kids and health and child care. Our Joe will always be there. A smile, a glow, It's not for show, it's true. Joe worked with us for years and years, And there is no sleep for our busy Veep. He has hope not fears. Whether guy or gal, Joe is our pal. And this we know is true, Joe Biden, colleagues, All love you.

Mrs. BOXER

Mrs. BOXER. I like ``gentlelady.''