Tammy Baldwin

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise this evening to help deliver a message from American families to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. The American people have sent a clear message to Washington. The message is that they do not want us to go forward with this partisan--and mean--healthcare repeal bill. But, incredibly, we are today about to embark on a vote to do the exact opposite. What is happening in Washington this week is that we are completely ignoring the message that Wisconsinites and the hard-working American families across this country have sent for us to hear. Haven't you been listening? To my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, have you been listening to the calls pouring in from families in your States? Have you been listening to the voices of parents and their children, the schoolteachers and doctors, and the working people who are daily struggling to get ahead? These messages have been sent to Washington. They have been sent loudly and for too many months--in fact, for too many months for you to possibly not have heard them. The American people don't want to pay more for less care. They don't want the age tax or the higher premiums this plan is offering. People with preexisting conditions don't want to be thrown into a high-risk pool or priced out of the coverage they have today. They don't want bare-bones insurance that doesn't cover the essential services and lifesaving care they may need. They don't want their loved ones who depend on Medicare for nursing home care or their disabled children who rely on Medicaid funding at school to have their care put at risk through caps and cuts. The American people don't want a plan that will make things worse. It is hard for me to believe that Washington hasn't heard this message because I have been listening. I have been listening to people like Jean. Jean is from Baraboo, WI. She told me that she is scared because her Crohn's disease would cost her a fortune if her preexisting conditions were not covered. She told me that she needs the healthcare she has today because ``my husband ruptured a disk in his back that prevented him from getting a job that promised us coverage. So now he works multiple jobs.'' I have been listening to Mary from Kenosha, WI. I met with Mary recently, and she told me about her son Kyle. Kyle, at a young age, was diagnosed on the autism spectrum and was never expected to learn to even speak. When Kyle was 7, medical professionals spoke with Mary and said that Kyle might have to be removed from his home and left to be cared for in an institution. But Mary had hope, and thanks to Medicaid, Kyle was able to receive some very specialized medical therapy for his autism, and he was able to remain at home. He was able to receive an education. He was able to get his driver's license, and now Kyle is attending college. Mary is terrified, nonetheless, that this bill's drastic cuts to Medicaid would rob Kyle of the care he needs to achieve the independence that he has worked so hard for during his entire life. Mary told me about her concern for so many other families with similar situations. I have been listening to Greg. Greg is from Stoddard, WI. He has no idea how he and other older Wisconsinites will be able to afford higher costs for healthcare. Greg's sons, both of whom have diabetes, are already struggling with skyrocketing insulin prices. I have been listening to the Schaumberg family in Seymour, WI. Their daughter Zoe was born with a congenital heart defect. She had to have open heart surgery at 5 days of age. Now, Zoe is guaranteed coverage without being denied or charged more, but Zoe's parents are scared that this repeal plan will make things worse. When Zoe's mom, Chelsey Schaumberg, was told about how this plan would weaken the guaranteed protections and care that people have today, she said this in her letter to me: ``To me, it's like they're taking the American Dream from her . . . kids in Wisconsin with preexisting conditions . . . are counting on you to protect that right.'' This isn't right. This isn't fair. It is not who we are. If my colleagues who have been drafting this plan behind closed doors have not been listening to the messages of fear and anxiety from the American people, maybe they will listen to why this proposal is very personal to me. When I was 9 years old, I got sick. I got really sick. I was in the hospital for 3 months. Following getting out of the hospital, I required significant followup care for nearly a year before I regained my full strength and fully recovered. But when it came to health insurance, it was like I had a scarlet letter. My grandparents, who raised me, couldn't find a policy that would cover me, not from any insurer and not at any price. They had to pay for my care out of pocket, and I can tell you they made some major sacrifices to do so, all because I was a child who had been branded with those terrifying words ``preexisting condition.'' So what are we doing here? It is time to stop the partisan nonsense. The people of Wisconsin did not send me to Washington to take away people's healthcare. They sent me to fight for people like Zoe, Kyle, and Jean. What I hear from people in Wisconsin is that they want us working together to protect the care people have and to make it more affordable. We should be working together to lower costs like skyrocketing prescription drug prices. We should be working together to strengthen the insurance market and give people more options. But we should not be working on partisan repeal legislation that will make things worse, that will leave millions uninsured, that will make healthcare more expensive, and that will price families out of the care they have today. It is time we listened to the messages that are being sent to Washington. It is time we worked together across the partisan aisle to do our jobs--the jobs the American people sent us here to do on their behalf. I hope the congressional majority will join me and my colleagues to work together to strengthen healthcare and to move our country forward. I thank the body. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, in the spirit of the ``Decade of Vision,'' I am pleased to recognize July as Dry Eye Awareness Month. In 2009, while serving in the House of Representatives, I was proud to sponsor the successfully passed H. Res. 366, which recognized the 40th anniversary of the National Eye Institute and designated 2010-2020 as the ``Decade of Vision.'' This resolution sought to bring awareness to our Nation's challenges in vision health, especially as our population ages and the incidence of chronic diseases that may cause vision impairment grows. Dry eye is one of these growing vision health challenges that affects more than 30 million people in the United States. It occurs when the eye does not produce tears properly or they are not of the correct consistency and evaporate too quickly. It can range from discomfort to a painful chronic and progressive condition that leads to blurred vision or even vision loss. Dry eye is one of the most frequent causes of patient visits to eyecare providers. It is a particularly burdensome issue for our brave soldiers who were engaged in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. The Veterans Administration reports that upwards of 70 percent of traumatic brain injury-exposed veterans have dry eye symptoms. Research supported by the National Institutes of Health and its National Eye Institute has improved our understanding of this condition. Dry eye can have many causes, including environmental exposure, side-effects from medications, eye surgery, eyelid disorders, immune system disorders, contact lens wear, cosmetic use, aesthetic procedures, and an increasingly common cause: staring at computer or video screens for too long without blinking, which may have a disproportionate impact on our younger generations. I want to recognize an important educational opportunity during Dry Eye Awareness Month this year. The Tear Film & Ocular Surface Society's ``Dry Eye Workshop II Report'' will be published in ``The Ocular Surface Journal,'' updating the definition of dry eye and addressing its greater impact on vision health--the first such reexamination since 2007. Report highlights were presented at a July 12, 2017, congressional briefing, accompanied by a ``Test Your Tears'' screening and presentation of research posters. The vision community and its coalition partners are uniting to recognize this growing vision health problem, and I stand in support of these awareness and educational efforts.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and legacy of Ted Shannon, whose passing marks the end of an extraordinary life spent in service to country, community, and family. Ted committed his life to the pursuit of justice and equality. Ted and his late wife Dorothy were incredible pillars who had a great influence on me as I entered a life of public service. Ted Shannon showed up. In service to his country, he became a civil affairs officer in July of 1941 during WW II, attached to the British 8th Army during the occupation of Italy. In his subsequent post, he served as executive officer for the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force in Paris. He showed up as a leader in education, whether it was in his role as a Ford Foundation higher education adviser for five Middle Eastern countries in Lebanon--the nation of his ancestors--or as a highly regarded UW-Extension faculty member and dean for more than three decades. Ted Shannon showed up. Along with Dorothy and fellow travelers from the New Deal era, Ted supported progressive causes at all levels of government for more than half a century. I cannot recall an event, large or small, for a progressive organization where I did not see Ted and Dorothy pitching in, providing leadership and encouragement no matter how challenging the cause. He showed up as a beloved husband, father, grandfather, and friend. Ted met and married the former Dorothy Judge while at Yale pursuing his Ph.D. on the GI bill and shared his life with her until her passing in 2003. Ted was father to Tad, Sara, and Pam. Ted showed up as a hunting and fishing companion to son, Tad, and sage adviser on matters of food, music, languages, and world travel to Sara and Pam. He enjoyed outdoor adventures with his dear friend, Bill Threinen. Ted, Dorothy, Bill and Connie Threinen were friends and compatriots in advancing beloved ideals and forward-thinking causes for decades. A few years after Dorothy's passing, Ted married second wife, Kate Foster, of Eau Claire and continued his life of service for another 9 years. Ted showed up. He was a doer. He walked the talk. Ted's multifaceted legacy is perhaps best illustrated by the words of Cuban poet Jose Marti: ``Men of Action, above all those whose actions are guided by love, live forever.'' The life of Ted Shannon serves as inspiration for anyone who seeks to create a world of peace, dignity, and opportunity for all. I miss him dearly.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the 100th anniversary of a great Wisconsin company: Oshkosh Corporation. Oshkosh Corporation began ten decades ago when cofounders William Besserdich and Bernard Mosling believed they had created something that would change transportation in America. Their new technology would improve vehicle steering and drive capacity, two factors that were essential for navigating unfinished roads. While the engineering was groundbreaking, they could not find a manufacturer who would purchase and build their designs. Faced with possible failure, William and Bernard moved on to plan B: manufacturing and launching their own vehicle. On May 1, 1917, they founded the Wisconsin Duplex Auto Company that soon issued its four- wheel drive truck prototype, known as Old Betsy, using the duo's innovative technology. The company's rapid growth led them to move the production facility from Clintonville to Oshkosh, where it was renamed the Oshkosh Motor Truck Manufacturing Company. Over the next 3 years, the Oshkosh Motor Truck Manufacturing Company grew exponentially as a defense supplier for the U.S. military. In 1945, the U.S. Army and U.S. Navy presented Oshkosh with the ``E'' award for excellence in wartime production. Throughout the 1940s, companies like Auto Body Works, Inc., and Kewaunee Shipbuilding and Engineering, which would later become part of the larger Oshkosh Corporation, made their marks on the military industry. The success of these companies built the foundation for Oshkosh Corporation's current success. The escalation of the Cold War led to Oshkosh's first major defense contract. They produced 1,000 WT-2206 snow removal vehicles that allowed the Air Force to remove snow for bomber planes. Throughout the 1950s, the company continued to produce high-quality, technologically advanced trucks for various branches of the military. As our country transitioned out of a wartime economy, the company's focus shifted, resulting in the 1967 name change from Oshkosh Motor Truck Company to Oshkosh Truck Corporation. Over the next several decades, Oshkosh continued to grow, as did its subsidiaries. Whether it was defense or construction, Oshkosh is known for its consistency, advanced technology, and efficient designs. In the area of defense, the Oshkosh name has become synonymous in the minds of U.S. servicemembers with quality, durability, and safety. From heavy- duty trucks, to the lifesaving MRAP--which was rapidly produced by skilled and patriotic Wisconsin workers in order to accelerate the safer vehicle's deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan--to the current production of the joint light tactical vehicle, Oshkosh boasts an unparalleled track record of delivering leading capability to our men and women in uniform. That is a record I have been honored to support throughout my time in Congress. As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I have worked to secure the funding required by the Armed Services to meet their need for tactical vehicles. I have also been proud to represent Oshkosh in the Senate because the company has a steadfast commitment to its employees. Whether it was 1917 with two employees, 1972 with 500 employees, or present day with over 12,000 employees across the world, Oshkosh provides for its employees with scholarships, employee safety, and support. On the production floor or in the office, Oshkosh Corporation employees' remarkable dedication can be seen throughout the organization. I have been honored to meet many of these talented workers, including speaking with hundreds at a recent all-hands call at the Oshkosh Defense facility in Wisconsin. Oshkosh's success has also lifted the fortunes of hundreds of Wisconsin companies throughout its various supply chains. Oshkosh is a true linchpin of my home State's manufacturing economy, and both its commercial and government programs support thousands of good-paying, skilled jobs. Just last year, I had the opportunity to partner with Oshkosh Defense and the Wisconsin Procurement Institute to strengthen this vibrant network by convening an event to build relationship's between Wisconsin suppliers and Federal agencies. I would also like to commend the company's current leadership, including president and CEO Wilson Jones, and John Bryant, the president of Oshkosh's defense unit, both of whom I have had the pleasure of working with over the years. Similarly, I want to recognize the tremendous contributions made by their immediate predecessors, Charles Szews and John Urias, respectively. The steady hand provided by these leaders will ensure that the company is an integral part of Wisconsin's economy for another 100 years. Now, 100 years after the creation of ``Old Betsy,'' Oshkosh Corporation and its brands continue to lead the industry; yet the company has remained firmly committed to its strong ethics and employee-centric culture. For the last ten decades, Oshkosh Corporation has cemented its international reputation for innovation and excellence. I know Oshkosh leadership and frontline employees will continue to hold themselves to this high standard, as they continue to grow and contribute to our great Wisconsin economy. I am so pleased to add my voice in celebrating this monumental anniversary.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise tonight to join my colleagues in our fight to protect the health and economic security of the American people. I am here to express my deep concern, anguish, and disgust with the fact that instead of working across party lines, working together to protect healthcare, instead, the majority is writing secret legislation behind closed doors--legislation that is going to make the American people pay more for less care and take healthcare coverage away from millions of American families. I am disgusted because this issue is very personal to me. When I was 9 years old, I got sick. I got very sick. I was hospitalized for 3 months. I eventually recovered, but when it came to health insurance, it was as if I had a scarlet letter. My grandparents who raised me couldn't find a policy that would cover me, not from any insurer and not at any price. They had to pay for my healthcare out of their pockets, and they made incredible sacrifices to do so--all because I was a child who had been branded with those words ``preexisting condition.'' No parents or grandparents should have to lie awake at night worried that if their child has an illness or an injury, they will have no way to pay to cover their care. No child should have to lie awake at night hearing the whispered tones of their parents wondering how they might pay the bills to care for an ill child. It is not right, it is not fair, and it is not fundamentally who we are, but that is exactly what people were wondering last night in America, and they will do so again tonight. Families across this country will go to bed anxious and scared because of the partisan politics happening right here in Washington-- the politics that is moving forward with a plan that will make things worse and not better for the American people. This isn't just personal for me, it is personal for the Wisconsin families I work for. I have listened to them, and I am here to give them a voice. This is personal for Jim from Appleton, WI, and for Jim's daughter who has multiple sclerosis. Jim told me that his family needs strong protections for people with preexisting conditions so that his daughter can continue to receive treatment that her family can afford. This is personal for Greg from Stoddard, WI, who has no idea how he and other older Wisconsinites will be able to afford higher costs for their healthcare and for Greg's two sons, both of whom have diabetes and are already struggling with skyrocketing prices for insulin. This is personal for Barbara from Madison, who is deeply concerned about cuts to Medicaid because her son has a disability and he relies on Medicaid to work and to live independently. This is personal for Chelsey from Shelby, WI, whose daughter Zoe was born with a congenital heart defect. Right now, Zoe is guaranteed access to coverage without being denied or charged more because of her preexisting condition. Chelsey wrote to me and said: ``I'm pleading to you as a mother to fight for the . . . kids in Wisconsin with preexisting conditions that are counting on you to protect that right.'' Does the congressional majority really care more about finding 50 votes for a secret plan than it does about the health and well-being of Zoe? Sadly, it appears they do. It appears they are more concerned with finding 50 votes for any legislation, no matter how harmful it is, just so they can notch up another partisan victory and so that they can move on to other things on their political agenda. They are not listening to American families or Wisconsin families, who will be left behind. I want to tell you what the consequences are going to be when Washington does not listen to Wisconsinites like Jim and his daughter, from Appleton, or Greg and his two sons, from Stoddard, or moms like Barbara, from Madison, and Chelsey, from Shelby. The consequences are that things are going to get worse, like they do under the House-passed Republican plan. If you are older, you are going to pay an age tax. A 64-year-old in Wisconsin might have to pay increases in excess of $10,000 more in premiums. If you have a preexisting condition, like I do or like almost 2.5 million Wisconsinites do, the guaranteed protections and care that you have today may not be here tomorrow. If you live in rural Wisconsin, this plan will only make it harder to access affordable, quality healthcare. For some living in northern Wisconsin, this plan could cost them up to $6,000 more a year than they pay today. Our rural hospitals are already struggling to keep their doors open, and this plan could make those challenges even worse. By the way, rural hospitals are often the lifeblood of their communities, the largest employers in many counties in which they exist. So if rural hospitals-- even a few of them--are forced to close, it will not only make it harder for people to gain healthcare, it will also mean that people will lose their jobs. If you rely on Medicaid for nursing home care or if, like Barbara, you have a disabled child who relies on Medicaid to live independently in the community, the House-passed bill cuts Medicaid and puts that care at risk. If you are one of the 35,000 veterans in Wisconsin or nearly 2 million veterans across the country who rely on Medicaid for healthcare coverage, your care will be at risk. The House Republican proposal will both dramatically increase and shift healthcare costs to Wisconsin taxpayers and onto the shoulders of families for things like substance abuse treatment and mental health services. It will make it harder in our State's fight and America's fight against the opioid crisis and could make the epidemic our country is facing even worse. Put simply, this plan will hand over more control to insurance companies, weaken health insurance protections, raise costs, and provide less care for the American people. The American people cannot afford to sell a home or take out a second mortgage or home equity loan or spend their life savings or max out their credit cards or go bankrupt just to get the healthcare they need. It is not right. It is not fair. It is not who we are. It is time to stop this partisan nonsense. The people of Wisconsin did not send me to the Senate to take away people's healthcare. They sent me to fight for people like Jim and Greg and Barbara and Chelsey and their children. Let's listen to these Wisconsinites. Let's take repeal off the table, and let's work in a bipartisan way. Let's work together to improve the healthcare people have today and make it more affordable, not more costly. Let's work in a bipartisan way. Let's work together to make things better, not pursue partisan plans to make things worse. I call on my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to come out from behind their closed doors to join us in this fight to stop leaving people behind and start helping them get ahead. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise to recognize the first anniversary of a horrific tragedy that shook this Nation. One year ago, in the early morning hours of June 12, 2016, we all witnessed an unthinkable act of hatred and terror at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando, FL. It was Pride Month and Latin night, and dozens of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender people, along with friends and family, were gathered simply to have fun in what should have been a place of acceptance, affirmation, and safety. In a matter of moments, what should have been a celebration turned into one of the worst mass shootings in American history--a targeted act of terror and hate, an attack on the freedoms we all hold dear. These 49 innocent people lost their lives in this attack, and 53 others were wounded. Many, many others bear the emotional scars. This was not only a deadly act of domestic terrorism; it was a hate crime--a crime that targeted victims because of who they were and was designed not just to harm its victims but to terrorize everyone in the community. Last year, I came to the floor to read the names and tell the stories of the victims of this massacre in Orlando, because we cannot and we must not forget these men and women. Their stories need a voice. Today, I rise again to remember the victims. As I did 1 year ago, I come to the floor to ask my colleagues to find the courage to stand up, speak out, and act to confront the rising tide of hate crimes and discrimination in America. We must never forget the victims of this hate crime, and we must honor them with action. While the Pulse shooting was an unimaginable horror, it is, sadly, far from the only act of violence that has been perpetrated out of hatred. Even before June 12 of last year, we had seen an alarming increase in reports of hate crimes against LGBTQ people but also against racial and religious minorities and immigrants. In the aftermath of a divisive election, we saw hundreds of documented instances of discrimination, harassment, and even violence against members of minority communities as well as increased hostility within our Nation's schools. In this year alone, at least 11 transgender people have been murdered, most of them women of color. The fact is that many members of racial, ethnic, disability, and religious minority communities, as well as LGBT people, live in very real fear for their safety. They are scared, and it is incumbent upon President Trump as our Nation's leader to demonstrate to them and to all Americans that discrimination and violence against any individual because of who he is, whom he loves, and how he worships will not be tolerated in this country. When I stood here last year, I called for a greater investment in the Federal Government's effort to both try to prevent hate crimes and fully investigate and prosecute them whenever they happen. After President Trump took office, I was joined by a number of my Senate colleagues in urging him and the Attorney General to support robust funding for the Department of Justice's programs that combat bias- motivated crimes. I believe a documented increase in hate crimes demands an increase in the resources that are committed to fighting this problem. Yet the budget put forward by President Trump and Attorney General Sessions seeks no increases. In fact, it proposes cutting more than 100 staff from the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division. This administration has failed to step up and speak out against this disturbing trend across our country or to commit the resources necessary to fight it. Instead of showing the moral leadership our Nation needs in the face of increasing hatred and division, President Trump and his administration have taken steps to roll back our Nation's progress in many areas, including progress for the LGBT community. Rather than issue a proclamation recognizing Pride Month and committing to address the many challenges still facing LGBT Americans, President Trump recently issued an Executive order that could open the door to discrimination with Federal taxpayer dollars. Rather than stand up for transgender students facing bullying, harassment, and discrimination, this administration rescinded guidance to schools about the rights of those vulnerable young people under Federal law. Rather than building on the steps taken to better understand the needs of LGBT people by simply counting us, the Trump administration has walked back efforts to ask about LGBT Americans in Federal surveys at the Department of Health and Human Services and the Census Bureau. Simply put, President Trump has not lived up to his vow to be a President for all Americans. But where I come from, in Wisconsin, our State motto consists of one word: ``Forward.'' I believe that no matter who is in the Oval Office, our country must move in only one direction--forward. Remember, while Pride Month is, of course, about celebration--of who we are and of how far we have come--it is just as much about bravely standing up and speaking out so that others will not feel compelled to live in silence. To the survivors of the Pulse shooting and the families and friends of those who were murdered and who feel the wounds of this tragedy most deeply, we hear your voices and we are inspired by your strength. As a community, we have never been deterred by tragedy and will not be now. One of the early leaders in our fight for equality was Harvey Milk, and he was also struck down by violent hatred. Harvey Milk famously said: ``Hope will never be silent.'' So today I rise to remind us of the power of hope in the face of tragedy. We must continue to work to pass on to the next generation a country that is more equal, not less. We must remain strong in fighting any rollback of progress, large or small. There is more work to be done to ensure that all Americans are protected from hatred and discrimination, and the work toward full equality for LGBTQ people and their families remains far from complete. For myself and those who stand united this Pride Month, we are guided by our uniquely American values. It is about freedom--the freedom to realize our founding belief that all Americans are created equal under the law. It is about fairness--whether gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender Americans deserve to be treated just like their family members, their friends, their neighbors, their fellow workers. It is about opportunity--about whether every American gets to dream the same dreams, chase the same ambitions, and have the same shot at success. This is the promise of America, and we must fight to make sure we keep it. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life and legacy of Cecilia Zarate-Laun. Her passing leaves Wisconsin without one of its greatest advocates for justice and peace, and I am proud to pay tribute to this extraordinary woman. Cecilia was born in Santander Province of Colombia. She was the oldest of five sisters and attended school in Bucaramanga and at the National University of Colombia. Following the completion of her studies, she took a position as a professor of nutrition, a job that led to her arrival in Madison, WI for graduate school. Cecilia received a scholarship to attend the University of Wisconsin- Madison for her master's degree. While studying in Madison, Cecilia met her beloved husband, Jack. After completion of graduate school, Cecilia returned to Colombia, working as a nutritionist for the Colombian Government's National Nutrition Plan. In 1976, she married John ``Jack'' Laun and the following year returned to the United States. In 1987, extended civil war in Colombia inspired Cecilia and Jack to cofound the Colombia Support Network CSN, a grassroots human rights organization based in Madison, WI. Cecilia's work with CSN was her pride and joy. As CSN program director, Cecilia worked tirelessly to connect Americans to Colombian communities affected by the war. She was inspired to help establish new chapters of CSN in locations ranging from the University of Wisconsin-Madison to central New York, connecting these communities through a ``sister cities'' program to rural Colombian communities facing violence during the Colombian civil war. She led over 50 delegations of citizens, journalists, and public officials to Colombia so they could fully understand the effect of the civil war. After working with Cecilia and CSN to establish a sister community relationship between Dane County, WI and San Jose de Apartado, Colombia, I had the honor to accompany her on one of those delegations in 1993. In addition to her public service through CSN, Cecilia was a member of the national board of directors of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. She was also a member of the Latin American Subcommittee of the American Friends Service Committee--Quakers--served on the board of directors of the Wisconsin Network for Peace and Justice, and, in October of 2015, received the Global Citizen of the Year Award from the Madison Chapter of the United Nations Association. Regardless of the cause or project, Cecilia approached everything with unparalleled strength, courage, and a sense of selflessness. She approached her battle with cancer with the same attitude. Over the last 4 years, while Cecilia fought against her disease, she continued to fight for others. Her strength was truly amazing. While Cecilia is greatly missed by her family, friends, and community, she leaves behind a legacy for future leaders to emulate. She will always be remembered for her courageous effort to fight for those who could not fight for themselves. Cecilia had an incredibly big heart and an unwavering commitment to others. I am fortunate to have been able to call her my friend.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to celebrate the 175th anniversary of Case IH Agriculture and Farm Equipment and to recognize its outstanding commitment and contribution to Wisconsin's economy. Mr. Jerome Increase Case, born in 1819 in western New York, was well acquainted with agricultural equipment even as a young man. Case provided threshing services to local farms and realized at the young age of 16 that farming techniques needed improvement after witnessing a demonstration of an early threshing machine that could thresh more in one hour than a man could all day. After settling in Wisconsin in the early 1840s, Case build his first thresher-separator in Rochester, WI, but when the town refused to let Case draw electricity from the local mill, Case loaded his invention into a wagon and headed to Racine, WI. The J.I. Case Threshing Machine Company was founded in 1842 at a time when Racine's tallest building was the local grain elevator. By 1848, the company was Racine's largest employer. As a true pioneer in the field of agricultural equipment, J.I. Case manufactured the first steam engine tractor in 1869. The Old No. 1 is still on display at the Smithsonian Institution. Although it was mounted on wheels, it was still drawn by horses. The first self-propelled steam engine followed in 1876. Case machines were first transported beyond U.S. borders in 1871 and won first prize at the Paris Exposition. By 1886, Case became the largest producer of steam engines in the world. During World War II, the company's plants manufactured aircraft wings, aircraft towing tractors, artillery shells, and doors for the Sherman tank. In fact, the company's 1942 centennial was celebrated 7 years late because of the war. In 1985, Case IH became the Nation's second-largest farm equipment manufacturer after J.I. Case purchased the agricultural division of International Harvest and the business legacies of two major equipment companies were united under one company. In 1999, Case IH merged with New Holland Ag to form a parent company, CNH Global, although equipment was still produced under the Case IH name. Since the merger, Case has remained at the forefront of the farming industry, seeking new ways to adapt to the changing trends. In 2010, Case IH created the world's first tractor to meet the tier 4 emissions requirements of the Environmental Protection Agency. Case IH Agriculture and Farm Equipment currently works with more than 4,900 dealers and distributes products in more than 160 countries. As one of Wisconsin's founding manufacturers, Case has been a major contributor to Wisconsin's farming legacy. Over the past 175 years, this proud company has provided jobs for countless Wisconsin families and economic growth for the State I am so proud to represent. I offer my sincere congratulations to Case leadership and workers as they celebrate 175 years of business, and I wish them the very best for many more years of success in Racine and around the world.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, instead of focusing on bipartisan reforms to improve access to healthcare for the American people, Republicans are again pursuing divisive policies that jeopardize women's health and put politics, politicians, and the government between a woman and her doctor. This measure that we are debating this afternoon attacks a critical healthcare program known as the Title X Family Planning Program. The Title X Family Planning Program provides basic healthcare, like cancer screenings, contraception, and HIV testing to more than 4 million women and men. This politically motivated provision that we have before us today would allow States to discriminate against trusted health providers like Planned Parenthood. In eight counties in Wisconsin, Planned Parenthood is the only health clinic that provides the full range of publicly funded contraceptive services. I met with Laurie from Bristol, WI, who told me that as a young teacher, she went to Planned Parenthood and they discovered that she had cysts and tumors in her ovaries. The providers immediately helped her get the care she needed. She had quick surgery and was able to recover, which allowed her to eventually have a family. Republicans are playing doctor and telling women they can't access basic primary and preventive healthcare services at the health center of their choice. This would cut off access to care for millions of men and women, prohibiting access to high-quality, preventive services just because of the sign on the door. They would prevent women like Laurie from accessing lifesaving services when they need it the most. We have already seen too many States enact record numbers of laws and regulations that restrict a woman's access to reproductive health services and the freedom to make her own healthcare decisions. In my home State of Wisconsin, our Republican Governor has signed a number of laws that target healthcare providers and simply have left far too many Wisconsin women out in the cold. He signed a law that forces women to undergo unnecessary and invasive medical procedures, and he has imposed unreasonable requirements on the doctors that deliver care to women. He has worked to close health clinics, including several Planned Parenthood clinics. But he hasn't stopped there. He also signed two laws that would effectively defund Wisconsin Planned Parenthood, which could leave thousands of Wisconsinites without access to critical health services. The threat in Wisconsin and in States across the country--and right here in Congress--is clear: Politicians across the country are playing doctor, and this is a dangerous game for women and their families. The millions of Americans who rely on title X for primary care and their trusted providers are being held hostage. They are being used as a political punching bag by congressional Republicans. Their agenda is to attack women's health. Women's access to comprehensive healthcare--the healthcare they need and deserve--should never depend upon their ZIP Code. So I urge my colleagues to oppose this dangerous measure and to protect title X programs for all of our families. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor John Medinger on his retirement from Federal and public service. John has dedicated his career to improving the lives of individuals in the La Crosse community and across the State of Wisconsin, most recently as my southwestern Wisconsin regional representative. I am so pleased to celebrate John's legacy of dedicated public service and positive social change. John was born in La Crosse, WI, and has been the community's strongest advocate ever since. He graduated from Aquinas High School and went on to receive his bachelor's and master's degrees from the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. John's public service career began in 1972 with his work at Volunteers in Service to America, VISTA to combat poverty and racial inequality in Virginia. During his time in Virginia, John developed a passion for social justice that guided his future work as a public servant. In 1976, John was elected to represent the 95th district in the Wisconsin State Legislature, where he ultimately served as assistant majority leader of the assembly. As a State representative, John became known for fighting domestic abuse. He authored one of Wisconsin's first domestic violence bills to create safe houses for victims and worked with Wisconsin police departments to make combating domestic abuse a top priority. He was also known for his early leadership on gay rights issues, fighting for marriage equality, and proudly participating in La Crosse's first PRIDE Fest. I have known few public servants as dedicated as John in serving the people he represents. He embodies the true meaning of public service. No request was too small for his devoted attention. In fact, John was famous for coming to work on Monday after a weekend of local events with a fist full of paper scraps covered in scribbled notes from people he ran into, describing their concerns. John remembered every one of those concerns as he advocated for his constituents on the assembly floor. During a time of increasing partisanship, he had a knack for bringing opposing sides together in the interest of bettering the lives of Wisconsinites. After 16 years, John left the State legislature. Although he claimed his departure was to get away from long legislative speeches, it was clear he wanted to be closer to the people he cared so much about in his hometown. Unable to stay out of public service for long, John announced his campaign for mayor in the Spring of 1997. As mayor of La Crosse, John adhered to his fundamental belief that he was there to serve all residents of La Crosse--not just those who supported him. Guided by his VISTA experience, John created the city's first anti- racism task force and encouraged people of color to run for local office. He is especially well-loved by the African-American and Hmong communities in La Crosse. Three U.S. Senators, myself included, had the privilege of having John represent us in southwestern Wisconsin. Although times have changed and technology has advanced--much to John's chagrin--his knowledge, dedication, and connections are irreplaceable. John has taught those lucky enough to have worked with him what it means to be a true representative of the people: take your work--but not yourself--seriously, don't hold a grudge, keep your word, and, above all, put constituents first. I will miss John a great deal, but I am delighted to wish him and his wife Dee the very best in this new chapter.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the life of my friend Edward ``Ed'' Garvey. Ed spent his lifetime fighting for equality, justice, and fairness for all Wisconsinites and Americans and did so with passion, joy, and a great Irish wit. Ed was born in 1940 in Burlington, WI, to Edward and June Garvey. His legacy of leadership and service began at a young age. He emerged as a young leader in Wisconsin through Badger Boys State and as student body president at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Ed's lifelong commitment to social justice and racial equality began in college. As a member of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Council, Ed traveled to the South to join the African American civil rights movement. Following 2 years serving our Nation in the Army, Ed attended the University of Wisconsin Law School, graduating in 1969. Thereafter, Ed joined the Minneapolis law firm Lindquist and Vennum and worked for the newly formed National Football League Players Association--NFLPA. For 12 years, Ed fought for labor rights for NFL players and workers, first as the NFLPA's attorney and eventually as its first executive director. He won greater freedom and economic fairness for the players, securing a fair share of profits for players who at the time needed second jobs to supplement their $35,000 salaries. Ed was never shy or deferential. He spoke truth to power and challenged the system anywhere he found an injustice. He loved a good fight, and he took great pleasure in the battles, but he was always respectful and driven by the progressive values that guided him. In moments of the greatest conflict, Ed would often use humor to disarm others while making a point. Even his greatest adversaries appreciated his principled positions and enjoyed his wit and intellect. After more than a decade with the NFL, Ed returned home and was named Wisconsin Deputy Attorney General, where he took on big polluters and fought for environmental protections. He ran for the Senate twice, and in his bid for Governor in 1998, Ed not only fought for campaign finance reform, he led by example because he has always been deeply committed to changing a system where powerful interests have too much influence over public policy. While Ed came up short in his campaigns, he never gave up his fight for the ``little guy'' as a respected lawyer and as a leading progressive voice in our State. Ed understood how important it is to pass on to the next generation our proud, progressive tradition in Wisconsin. He founded ``Fighting Bob Fest'' to honor the legacy of former progressive Wisconsin Governor and U.S. Senator Robert ``Fighting Bob'' LaFollette. Each year, Ed brought progressives together from across the country to share this tradition and give people a voice. Ed's list of accomplishments and successes is long and has one thing common: He was committed to something bigger than he was. If you asked him, he would say his greatest accomplishment was his family. He spent more than five wonderful decades filled with adventures with his wife, Betty, and their three daughters, Pam, Kathleen, and Lizzy. In recent years, his four grandchildren were his greatest joy. I know that their wonderful memories of him will stay with them always. I feel so privileged to have known and worked with Ed since my early years in public service. Ed lived his life and pursued his work with persistence and purpose. He loved Wisconsin and stood up for people from different walks of life because he wanted to make a difference in people's lives. Perhaps most important, Ed inspired generations of young people to enter politics and law, to engage in our democracy, to let their voices be heard, and to never be intimidated by those of wealth, power, and privilege. I am a better person for having fought with him in support of a more progressive Wisconsin, and I am honored to work to continue his important legacy. ``Forward!''

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the confirmation of Congressman Tom Price to be Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. Congressman Price has a long political record in Washington of siding with Big Business and not American families. He has led efforts that would force families to lose their health care coverage, that would end Medicare as we know it, and increase costs for our seniors, and that would let politicians choose what health care is best for women and their doctors. Perhaps most troubling, though, are recent revelations about Congressman Price's deep and ethically questionable financial ties to health companies that are looking to turn a profit. The people of Wisconsin elected me to the United States Senate to stand up to powerful interests, to stand up for the working people of my State. They surely did not send me to the Senate to take away people's health care. That is why I simply cannot vote for a nominee whose financial activities with health companies raise such serious ethical questions and who has repeatedly opposed measures that would improve the health of our hard-working middle-class families in America. During his time in Congress, reports show that Congressman Price traded more than $300,000 in shares of health companies while he was advancing health-related legislation which could directly impact these companies' profitability. Congressman Price's financial disclosures show that he has purchased stock in medical device companies, leading pharmaceutical companies, and medical equipment companies. He also led a number of legislative efforts to restrict or delay implementation of several Medicare programs that would have impacted reimbursement for these very industries. I don't know who Congressman Price is working for. Is he working for the American people or is he working for the powerful corporations to help advance his financial interests and his investments in them? This ethically questionable activity raises too many unanswered questions about his professional judgment and his ability to fairly lead a department that is charged with protecting the health of all Americans. Even more troubling are reports that he had access to a special private deal to buy discounted stock in an Australian biomedical firm, Innate Immunotherapeutics. Reports show he received this special deal from his colleague in the House, Congressman Chris Collins, who sits on the company's board and is their largest investor. I sent a letter asking Congressman Price to explain his relationship, his involvement with Innate Immuno, and how his relationship with Congressman Collins influenced those purchasing decisions, but he hasn't responded. His financial dealings raise serious concerns about potential STOCK Act and insider trading law violations. That is why I have called on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to investigate his stock market trading activities. These questions must be answered and his stock trading should be fully investigated before the Senate is able to adequately consider his nomination. Yet we are probably hours from the vote without all the information. While there are so many unanswered questions about Congressman Price's ethical judgment, there is a lot we do know about his record as a politician that is deeply concerning. We know Congressman Price wants to end Medicare as we know it and raise costs for our senior citizens. Medicare is a promise, a promise to current and future generations that guaranteed health care will be there for them when they need it. Congressman Price wants to break that promise, that promise to millions of seniors across this country. He has spearheaded proposals that would convert Medicare into a voucher system, essentially privatizing Medicare. He also supports raising the eligibility age for participation in Medicare, forcing hard-working Americans to wait to receive the benefits they have already earned. His dangerous proposals would force seniors to pay more and would jeopardize guaranteed access to the Medicare benefits they have today, but we don't need to take my word for it. Listen to the thousands of Wisconsinites who have written to me just since the start of this year, urging me to oppose Congressman Price's confirmation and to fight against any efforts that would take away their Medicare benefits. Richard from Fond du Lac, WI, is just one of those Wisconsinites. Richard and his wife are now retired and on Medicare. He wrote to say: We both spent decades in teaching and while we knew we would never get rich, we believed we were doing important work with our students. Both of us felt secure in knowing that Medicare would be there for us when we left the profession and moved on to our retirement years. Richard cannot understand why politicians like Congressman Price are proposing to fundamentally change a system that has worked well for decades. He told me: ``Now we feel as if our world is being turned upside down.'' Congressman Price's views are not only out of touch with America's seniors, but they are also, interestingly, in conflict with President Trump's promise not to cut Medicare. Price's legislative record also conflicts with President Trump's public commitments to improve this program by allowing Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices for our seniors. Just this week, the White House confirmed the President's support for this proposal again. Yet, during his hearing before the Senate Health Committee, Congressman Price refused to answer my questions when I repeatedly asked him if he would commit to standing with the President and with American seniors by supporting Medicare negotiation of better prescription drug prices. We don't know where he stands on this issue, but we do know Congressman Price does not stand with seniors, and he does not stand for protecting the guarantee of Medicare coverage that our families rely on. We also know that Congressman Price does not stand for the millions of Americans who rely on the health care coverage and protections available under the Affordable Care Act. Congressman Price almost personifies the Republican agenda and battle to repeal the Affordable Care Act and all of its benefits and protections, which would force 30 million Americans to lose their current insurance through participation in the program. He has led the effort in the House to take away guaranteed health care coverage and has championed dangerous measures that would put insurance companies back in charge of health care and lead to higher costs and more uncertainty for American families. Congressman Price's agenda is putting the health care coverage of over 200,000 Wisconsinites at risk. I wish to share the story of Sheila from Neenah, WI. She is a small business owner and relies on the premium tax credits that helped her purchase her health plan through the marketplace. She wrote: I just wanted to let you know how devastating it would be for my family if the Affordable Care Act is repealed. To take away the subsidies would pretty much turn the plan into the Unaffordable Care Act. Sheila said that premium tax credits under the law have made it possible for her to buy decent insurance for the first time in her whole career. I am listening to Chelsea from Shelby, WI. Her daughter Zoe was born with a congenital heart defect. At just 5 days old, Zoe needed to have open heart surgery. Chelsea said: The Affordable Health Care Act protects my daughter. . . . I'm pleading to you as a mother to fight for that and follow through on that promise. There are so many kids in Wisconsin with heart defects (as well as other kids with pre-existing conditions) that are counting on you to protect that right. I am listening to Maggie, who attends college in DePere, WI. Maggie was diagnosed with cancer in 2015. Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, she was able to stay on her parents' health insurance, which covered most of her care. The Affordable Care Act also ensured that Maggie did not face lifetime limits on coverage for her multiple rounds of chemotherapy and radiation. Thankfully, Maggie is now cancer-free, but Maggie is terrified--terrified that if the law's benefits are repealed, she could face a situation where her chemo isn't covered if she ever needs it again. She also fears being denied coverage because of her preexisting condition or not being able to stay on her parents' plan. During my time serving in the House of Representatives, I championed the provision in the Affordable Care Act that allows young adults like Maggie to remain on their parents' health care plan until age 26. Congressman Price would take that away, as well as other protections that Maggie relies on, and instead go back to letting the insurance companies decide what to do. During his HELP Committee hearing, I asked him directly if he supports the current requirement that insurance companies cover young adults until age 26. Essentially, he refused to answer my question but instead said that he trusts insurance companies to do this on their own. He said: ``I think it's baked into insurance programs.'' Our future leaders like Maggie can't afford to take his word for it that insurance companies will choose to protect their care. The stakes are too high when it comes to accessing the lifesaving health care for cancer or other serious conditions. As I travel my State, I listen and I hear the voices of people who are struggling. Too many people feel that Washington is broken and it isn't working for them. People are scared because they can't make ends meet and provide a better future for their children. We need to change that. Our work here should be focused on making a difference in people's everyday lives. I am concerned that if confirmed as Secretary of Health and Human Services, Congressman Price would make it harder for people to get ahead. I am concerned that he will work with special interests who already have too much power here in Washington instead of working for the Wisconsin families I was sent here to serve. For all these reasons, Congressman Price is not the right choice for Secretary of Health and Human Services, and I urge my colleagues to oppose his confirmation. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the nomination of Betsy DeVos to be Secretary of Education. Simply put, Betsy DeVos is completely unqualified to serve as Secretary of Education in this great Nation. Many others share this view. I have heard from thousands of parents, teachers, and other citizens of Wisconsin who are concerned about the future of our education system urging me to oppose Mrs. DeVos and certainly opposing her vision for America's students. As of today, over 20,000 Wisconsinites have emailed me, and we have had over 7,000 phone calls opposing the confirmation of Mrs. DeVos, and Senate Democrats are unified in our opposition to Mrs. DeVos serving in this capacity. Even two Senate Republicans have announced that they cannot support Betsy DeVos. If just one more of my Republican colleagues were to announce their opposition and were to vote no, we could do the right thing and tell President Trump that he really needs to find a new candidate, a new candidate for Secretary of Education who is qualified to run that Department. While Betsy DeVos has spent decades advocating for a particular vision for education, she has never actually worked as a teacher or as an administrator. Her career has involved investing hers and her family's considerable wealth and using those resources to advance the privatization of our K- 12 education system. She did not attend a public school either for grade school, high school, or college, and nor did her children. She has never worked as a teacher, principal, professor, counselor, or in any other formal role in our education system. Her confirmation hearing before the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee clearly demonstrated how little she knows about Federal education law and policy. It was startling to see her ignorance about critical measures like the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act or the debate over growth versus proficiency as a measure of student achievement. Betsy DeVos has demonstrated that she has neither the knowledge nor the experience in education that would allow her to be a successful leader of the Department of Education. Mrs. DeVos has worked to advance a vision of K-12 education that is fundamentally hostile to our public education system. My home State of Wisconsin has a long and very proud tradition of support for public education. Back at the founding of our State, we wrote the guarantee that every child should receive a free public education into our very founding document, our State Constitution. Wisconsin had the first kindergarten in the United States. Wisconsin is proud of something that we actually call the Wisconsin idea in higher education; that the walls of the classroom should be the borders of the State, if not the borders of this Nation or the entire world. Mrs. DeVos's experience in education, however, has been a decades- long effort to privatize it. Her record of support for vouchers as well as charter schools that lack adequate accountability and oversight is very troubling and could lead to diversion of public dollars in even greater amounts out of public education. Regardless of any vision or experience on education, Mrs. DeVos is a nominee with, let's say, complex and opaque finances. She has a very opaque record of financial dealings and political giving, including on matters directly related to the work that the Department does which she seeks to lead. Given her and her family's investments in companies that benefit directly from Federal education programs, I remain very concerned about what we simply still don't know. I am also troubled by Mrs. DeVos's and her family's long history of contributing to organizations that have been hostile to the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community, even promoting the discredited idea that sexual orientation or gender identity can be changed through conversion therapy. While she told me and several of my colleagues at her hearing that she believes all students should be treated equally, I really remain concerned about how this long history of support for these anti-LGBTQ organizations will influence a Department which, over the last 8 years, has shown some tremendous leadership in supporting LGBTQ students and parents in the education system. The Federal Government's primary role in elementary and secondary education is to promote equity. I am not convinced that Mrs. DeVos will be the leader the Department needs to do just that. Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1965 as a civil rights measure. It was designed to ensure that every student, regardless of ZIP Code or parents' income, has access to a quality public education. We continued that important tradition in reauthorizing this law, which is now in the form of a very strongly bipartisan bill, the Every Student Succeeds Act. The next Secretary of Education will have to implement that act. I fear that Mrs. DeVos, as a vocal proponent of State and local control, will not be the strong voice we need to hold States accountable for serving all students, particularly those who have been historically left behind. When we passed the Every Student Succeeds Act, we made sure there were strong Federal guardrails to assure that we never forget why there is a Federal role in education to begin with, for equity and civil rights and to make sure that every child can succeed. Furthermore, I am very concerned that Mrs. DeVos would not commit to robustly supporting the Department's Office for Civil Rights or enforcing the very guidance that protects transgender students from discrimination. Betsy DeVos lacks knowledge about and commitment to the Federal laws that ensure students with disabilities have access to the various supports that they need to receive and benefit from a quality public education. As I noted, she has demonstrated a complete lack of understanding about our Federal obligations to these students. I have heard from numerous parents in Wisconsin, parents of students with disabilities who were appalled by her inadequate answers to questions at our education panel hearing. She was unprepared to answer questions about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and these parents have written to express their distress about what her filling the role of Secretary of Education could mean for their children if she were to be confirmed. One Wisconsin mother of three special needs children wrote to me about how this Federal law provided the legal rights that she needed to advocate for them, to advocate for the best possible educational environment for her three sons with special needs. I heard from another mother, Melissa from Beloit, who detailed how the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act makes it possible for her daughter, Rowenna, who has Down Syndrome and autism, to actually thrive in a public education setting, along with her peers. Finally, as a strong proponent of making college more accessible and affordable, I do not believe that Mrs. DeVos has the experience or vision that will allow her to successfully lead the Department in supporting higher learning. There is a student debt crisis in this country, but Mrs. DeVos doesn't have a plan to address it and has even expressed skepticism about a Federal role. While she has acknowledged that there are some bad actors in higher education, she has also refused to commit to enforcing regulations that help students who are defrauded by dishonest schools like Corinthian Colleges. We need a Secretary of Education who is an advocate for those students, not one who is looking for ways to shirk that responsibility. Despite the fact that the Department oversees billions of dollars in grants and loans that allow students to pursue higher education, she has expressed skepticism about any Federal role in making college more affordable. She has even refused to oppose cuts to a program that helps students who commit to a career in public service or to support efforts to ensure that the value of the Pell grant keeps pace with the cost of college. For all of these reasons and many others, Betsy DeVos is not the right choice for Secretary of Education. I call on my colleagues to defeat her on the question of confirmation and to afford this new President the chance to send us a nominee who is prepared to be an advocate for all students and public education in this country.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam President, I rise to urge my colleagues to join me in opposing the confirmation of our colleague Jeff Sessions to be Attorney General of the United States. I have great respect for Senator Sessions' long history of public service, and I am pleased to have had the opportunity to work with him where we have found common ground. However, Senator Sessions and I have frequently and sometimes vehemently disagreed on important issues, including matters like civil rights and voting rights, hate crimes laws, immigration, and criminal justice reform. I want to acknowledge that Senator Sessions' nomination is supported by many, including many in the law enforcement community in my home State of Wisconsin. It is vital that the Attorney General have a good working relationship with the law enforcement community, and I have no doubt that Senator Sessions will be a strong voice for law enforcement, if he is confirmed. But the role and the responsibility of our Attorney General is bigger than any one group. Our Attorney General must work on behalf of all Americans. The Department of Justice has a broad jurisdiction. So I have also heard from over 16,000 Wisconsinites who are opposed to his confirmation, many of whom expressed profound concerns about what it would mean for racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants, including DREAMers, and others, were he to become our Attorney General. Hundreds of national civil and human rights organizations have expressed their opposition on similar grounds. After reviewing his record, getting a chance to meet with him in my office, and considering everything that I have heard from my constituents, I simply do not believe that Senator Sessions is the right choice to be Attorney General of the United States. I have that belief for a number of reasons. First, I am concerned that Senator Sessions will not be the independent champion for the rule of law that we need with Donald Trump in the White House. In any administration, the Attorney General's first duty is to the Constitution and to the people of the United States. This President has already issued a number of orders--legally questionable orders--including one affecting our visa and refugee programs that a number of Federal courts have already temporarily blocked. We need an Attorney General who will ensure that the President's actions do not run roughshod over protections guaranteed by our Nation's laws and Constitution. I am not convinced that Senator Sessions will be that kind of Attorney General. Second, I do not believe that Senator Sessions will be the champion of the civil rights of all Americans that an Attorney General must be. The Department of Justice plays a central role in enforcing our Nation's civil rights laws, from investigating hate crimes to safeguarding the right to vote, to fighting discrimination against women, racial and religious minorities, and people with disabilities. At a time when there has been a disturbing increase in hate-motivated crimes, discrimination, and harassment, including, particularly, against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people, and people of the Muslim faith, it is even more important that the Department of Justice be strong and proactive. I have heard from constituents in Wisconsin who have faced bigotry and hate-motivated speech in the wake of the election of Donald Trump. Among them is a family from Fitchburg, WI, with 11 adopted children, including children from Ghana and China. This family received an anonymous letter proclaiming ``Trump won'' and calling them race traitors and telling them to go home. This and other reports from Wisconsinites and, frankly, from people throughout the United States breaks our hearts. Senator Sessions fought against efforts to strengthen and make more inclusive Federal hate crimes laws and criticized voting rights laws as ``intrusive.'' He has shown hostility to the rights of LGBT individuals and attacked the reproductive health care rights of women. Now more than ever we need a Justice Department that places a priority on enforcing our civil rights and voting rights laws, proactively combatting hate violence and fighting for the equality of all Americans. I am simply not convinced that Senator Sessions will be the champion vulnerable Americans need as Attorney General with an unflagging commitment to make our country a fairer and more equal place. Third, I believe Senator Sessions will not take a fair or humane approach as Attorney General with regard to immigration. I was deeply troubled by candidate Trump's ugly and divisive rhetoric on immigration, and I am appalled by the actions that he has taken thus far as President. Senator Sessions was one of his campaign's key advisers on immigration and has been a vocal opponent of bipartisan, comprehensive reforms that would address our broken immigration system. The Department of Justice is responsible for adjudicating immigration cases and ensuring fairness and due process in the treatment of undocumented individuals and refugees. The Department also plays a key role in our national security apparatus, helping to fight terrorism, and keeping the homeland safe. The President's recent orders on immigration have furthered divisions, created chaos and confusion, proven to be legally and constitutionally questionable, and are inconsistent with core American values. In the opinion of many national security experts, they will make our Nation less safe, not more. I simply do not believe that Senator Sessions, with his history of hostility to immigration and support for this President's approach, is the right person to lead the Department of Justice, as it discharges its critical duties on immigration and national security. America has made great progress over the last 8 years with an administration that has taken seriously a shared responsibility to pass on to the next generation a country that is more equal, not less. All Americans deserve a strong commitment from America's top law enforcement official to act on violence born out of hatred based on race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or any other characteristic. At a time when voting rights and the constitutional right of women to make their own health care decisions are under attack across our country, we need an Attorney General who will stay true to these constitutional freedoms and not be driven by politics. For me, the vote on Senator Sessions' confirmation is a moral choice. I am guided by my strong belief that all Americans deserve equal opportunity and freedom to pursue their hopes and dreams. I cannot support this nomination for Senator Sessions to be Attorney General, and I urge my colleagues to oppose him. Now I would like to take a moment to discuss what happened last night here on the Senate floor. Last night, the Republican leadership of this Chamber stopped one of my colleagues from reading the words of Coretta Scott King. Coretta Scott King wrote a letter and a statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 1986, expressing her opposition to Jeff Sessions' nomination to serve as a Federal judge. Coretta Scott King believed, as I do, that the right to vote is a fundamental right afforded to every American. It is a right that people have lost their lives seeking and defending. Mrs. King wrote in her testimony regarding Jeff Sessions' record: Blacks still fall far short of having equal participation in the electoral process. Particularly in the South, efforts continue to be made to deny Blacks access to the polls, even where Blacks constitute the majority of the voters. It has been a long up-hill struggle to keep alive the vital legislation that protects the most fundamental right to vote. A person who has exhibited so much hostility to the enforcement of those laws, and thus, to the exercise of those rights by Black people should not be elevated to the Federal bench. Mrs. King's words matter. They matter to me, and they matter to millions of Americans. Mrs. King's words should matter in this debate, and they deserve to be heard. I believe it is simply wrong to silence legitimate questions about a nominee for U.S. Attorney General, and I hope that her words can be heard as this debate continues. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak about the nomination of Rex Tillerson to serve as Secretary of State. Shortly after President Trump's election, I wrote to him about what I thought was a mutual interest, taking on a rigged system in Washington where powerful interests call the shots. For too long, I have heard from Wisconsinites who feel that Washington's economic and political system is broken. People are angry because they feel that our government institutions seem to work for Big Banks or Big Oil but not for them. President Trump clearly tapped into this widely held dissatisfaction when he announced his plan to reduce the influence of special interests in government by draining the swamp. Yet with appointment after appointment, it has been made clear that President Trump is not interested in ridding the government of powerful interests. In fact, he continues to appoint and nominate foxes to guard the henhouse. We don't need to look back very far to know what can happen when we let industry insiders run our government. The 2008 financial crisis was a result of years of deregulation pushed by Wall Street from both inside and outside the government. Last Congress, I introduced legislation to slow the revolving door and ensure that our public servants are working for the public interest, not their former--or future, for that matter--employers. I was inspired to introduce this legislation when I saw several Obama administration appointees receive multimillion-dollar bonuses for leaving their private sector jobs to join the government. These government service golden parachutes, as they are known, demonstrate how valuable some companies believe it is to have friends in high places. Rex Tillerson, the President's nominee to serve as Secretary of State, received a $180 million payout from ExxonMobil that he would have to forfeit had he taken a job elsewhere. What is more, reports indicate that the deal he struck allows him to defer paying 71 million in taxes. It is hard to imagine that our Nation's top diplomat will forget such an incredible favor, but Rex Tillerson isn't the only Trump appointee who will be rewarded with a golden parachute as he enters government. Gary Cohn, the President's pick to run the National Economic Council, will receive over 100 million from his former employer, Goldman Sachs, before he starts to coordinate an administration-wide economic policy. I remain as opposed to this practice under the Trump administration as I was during the Obama administration. Wisconsin families cannot afford to have corporate insiders running our government to rig the rules on behalf of their former corporations. That is why I am reintroducing the Financial Services Conflict of Interest Act, to ensure that our government is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people of the United States, to ensure that President Trump's Cabinet officials are working in the national interests instead of their own interests, to ensure that they are working for their current employers, the American people, instead of their former bosses. In the case of Mr. Tillerson, whose nomination the Senate is voting on this week, these questions of influence, of favoritism and priorities are particularly troubling, troubling because during his tenure leading Exxon, Mr. Tillerson showed a disregard, if not outright contempt at times, for putting U.S. policy first. Whether in the Middle East, Africa or Russia, Exxon's bottom line was his overriding priority. Now, with 180 million of Exxon's money in his pocket--and after 40 years with the company--should we take it on faith that his priorities will suddenly change? Should we blindly accept that the 180 million will not ever influence his decisionmaking or should we continue to ask questions, questions that Rex Tillerson has yet to answer? For example, how will Exxon and Big Business influence U.S. policy in strategically important but democratically fragile oil-producing African states? How about U.S. international commitments to combatting climate change, one of our greatest national security challenges but also a challenge that Big Oil has dismissed as a hoax. Perhaps most concerning, what influence will Exxon have in matters relating to Russia, where its long record of doing business at the expense of U.S. national security interests seems to be right at home in the Trump administration? We also need to hear what Rex Tillerson thinks about President Trump's actions this weekend. On Friday, President Trump issued anti- refugee and anti-immigrant Executive orders. I am outraged by the way these orders were hastily thrown together late Friday. The President's sloppy actions created chaos, disorder, and confusion at our airports, and it left families, including permanent legal residents, wondering what it meant for them. There have been media reports that relevant agencies, including the State Department, were not consulted before this order was signed by President Trump. President Trump says we need extreme vetting of refugees fleeing war-torn nations. The refugees--the vast majority of whom are women and children--already go through an extremely strict screening process before they are allowed to enter the country. What we really need extreme vetting of is President Trump's Executive orders before he signs them. With the stroke of a pen, President Trump's orders will make ISIS stronger, weaken America's counterterrorism efforts, and likely cost lives. It is wrong to turn our back on our American values and the rest of the world. We are better than this. President Trump and Republicans in Congress should reverse these shameful actions immediately. I am proud to be cosponsoring legislation that would do just that. We need to know where Rex Tillerson stands on those very same issues. Does he oppose welcoming refugees into the country, which strengthens America's connection with freedom, the foundation of who we are as a people? Was Mr. Tillerson consulted by the President before these orders were issued? Mr. Tillerson owes it to the American people to answer those questions before the Senate votes on his confirmation. What happened the day after President Trump issued these Executive orders? On Saturday, President Trump called Vladimir Putin to discuss a more cozy relationship with Russia. What does Mr. Tillerson think about this call? According to reports, it was a warm conversation and resulted in preparations for a meeting between President Trump and Vladimir Putin, the same Vladimir Putin who illegally invaded Ukraine and actively seeks to divide and destroy NATO, our most important security alliance; the same Vladimir Putin who is responsible for directing cyber attacks meant to influence and undermine our elections and our Democratic process; the same Vladimir Putin who fights alongside the murderous Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad, and is responsible for war crimes, indiscriminately bombing innocent civilians in Aleppo; the same Vladimir Putin who gave Rex Tillerson the Order of Friendship following his business dealings in Russia. We need a Secretary of State who understands the threats posed by nations like Russia, not someone who is cozy with Vladimir Putin. We need a nominee with experience in foreign affairs and foreign policy, not a billionaire oil tycoon who has spent his career fighting to ensure that government policies help the oil industry. Rex Tillerson is not this nominee. For all these reasons, I oppose the nomination of Rex Tillerson to serve as U.S. Secretary of State. I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do the same. I yield back.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN.--the people of Wisconsin did not send me here to take away their health care.

Ms. BALDWIN. I vote no because--

Ms. BALDWIN. Madam Clerk, how am I recorded?

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, pursuant to section 904 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, I move to waive section 305(b)(2) of that act for the purposes of the pending amendment, and I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, my amendment protects the Affordable Care Act benefits for young people, including the provision that allows young adults to remain on their parents' health plan until age 26. It will safeguard our future generations by blocking Republican efforts that would weaken dependent coverage, increase premiums or out-of- pocket costs, including the premium tax credits, or reduce the number of young adults who are currently insured. As someone who didn't have access to quality health insurance until I was in my 20s, I championed the provision that allows young people to stay on their parents' health insurance during my time in the House of Representatives. Before we passed health care reform, I heard from countless young adults and college-age students in Wisconsin who are just starting out in the workforce, many of them in jobs that had no health care.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, if Members of this body care about insurance coverage for young people, young adults up to age 26, then they should vote no on the Heller side-by-side and take the opportunity to support my amendment that we will vote on immediately following the disposal of this amendment. In this Nation, we had an uninsurance crisis among young people before the Affordable Care Act was passed--one of the most uninsured demographics in America, and we have an opportunity to protect those young people through my amendment later this evening, but I urge a ``no'' vote on an amendment that would do nothing to protect these young people.

Ms. BALDWIN. I urge my colleagues to stand with me and vote in support of this amendment to protect our future generations with health care coverage.

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I would like to divide the time, claim 30 seconds, and then yield to Senator Sanders.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise this evening to join my colleagues--Democrats, Independents--to fight together to protect the health and economic security of the American people. In 2012, when I was elected to the Senate, I can assure you that the people of Wisconsin did not send me here to take their health care away. We are barely into the second week of the new Congress, and the Republican establishment is already wielding its power to accomplish just one thing, making America sick again. The budget resolution that we are considering this week will repeal the Affordable Care Act, put insurance companies back in charge of people's health care, strip health care away from millions of Americans, and raise premiums. It will take us from affordable coverage to chaos. This is the first step toward higher costs, fewer people with health insurance, and more uncertainty for American families. In short, the Republicans believe they have a mandate to make America sick. By repealing the law and taking away the health care that families already have, Republicans are forcing 30 million Americans to lose their insurance. Republicans are putting the health care coverage of over 200,000 Wisconsinites at risk, and they are raising taxes on more than 190,000 Wisconsinites who rely on and receive premium tax credits to help them afford high quality health insurance. Instead, they are giving tax breaks to big corporations and handing over control to the insurance companies, which will be free, once again, to deny coverage if you have a preexisting condition, to jack up premiums simply because you are a woman, and to drop your coverage if you get sick or have a baby. I could continue to list some very disturbing facts and statistics of what this Republican repeal of health care reform will do to our working class and what it will mean to rip away protections from families struggling with cancer or other serious illnesses, but these facts seem to fall flat on the other side of the aisle. So, instead, I am demanding that my Republican colleagues listen--not to me but to the calls from the real people who we are here to represent and fight for, our constituents back home. I demand that they listen to Randy. Randy is from Rhinelander, WI. Randy told me that the Affordable Care Act has been a ``savior'' for his wife, who was diagnosed with kidney failure more than 2 years ago as a result of an autoimmune disease. She has to have dialysis three times a week. The law eliminated her lifetime maximum limit, and that helps them afford her lifesaving care, and it prevents her from being denied coverage because of her preexisting condition. Randy said that repealing the law will force them to face the harsh reality of not only losing insurance but also declaring bankruptcy. I also heard from Sheila, from Neenah, WI. Sheila is a small business owner who relies on the premium tax credits that helped her purchase her health plan through the marketplace. She writes: I just wanted to let you know how devastating it will be for my family if the Affordable Care Act is repealed. To take away the subsidies would pretty much turn the plan into the Unaffordable Care Act. Sheila has owned a small hair salon for 35 years and said that the premium tax credits under the law have made it possible for her to buy decent health insurance for the first time in her whole career. I want my Republican colleagues to listen to Joel. Joel is a physician from Milwaukee. He is on the frontlines of delivering high quality health care, and he told me that he had witnessed tremendous good that has occurred as a result of the health care law. He has been able to provide his patients with better care because they have increased coverage. He is especially aware of the positive impact of allowing children to stay on their parents' health plans until age 26. But Joel remembers the days before the Affordable Care Act. He said that he has seen firsthand the insurance companies callously denying or dropping coverage for families with preexisting conditions or those struggling with a new diagnosis. He doesn't want to go back to the days when insurance companies were in charge and literally dictated his patients' health. I want my Republican colleagues to listen to Chelsea from Shelby, WI. When Chelsea was pregnant with her daughter Zoe, she learned that Zoe would be born with a congenital heart defect. At just 5 days old, Zoe had to have open heart surgery. She had it at Children's Hospital in Wauwatosa, WI, and was fighting for her life. Thankfully, she is recovering, and she is living a healthy life. Chelsea wrote to me: The Affordable Care Act protects my daughter, it allows her to have health care access and not be denied. I'm pleading to you as a mother to fight for that and follow through on that promise. There are so many kids in Wisconsin with heart defects (as well as other kids with pre-existing conditions) that are counting on you to protect that right. So for Zoe, I want to call on my Republican colleagues to stand with me--with all of us--to protect these health care rights and benefits for all of our families. These are our families who are benefitting right now from the protections in the law and the quality, affordable health care options it provides. They are calling on Congress, calling on the Republican majority to stop their plot that is going to take this all away. I could continue to share stories of real Wisconsinites whose coverage is at risk today, but I want to take a moment to illustrate what life was like before the Affordable Care Act was the law of the land, before these sweeping reforms and protections had been put in place. Now, during my time in the House of Representatives, Sue from Beloit, WI, reached out to me. She told me: My husband was diagnosed with lung cancer. After treatment began, we found out that the insurance company had a small loophole. Under our insurance, they have a $13,000 limit per year on radiation and chemotherapy. That amount did not even cover the first treatment of either radiation or chemo. I was not going to have my husband die for lack of treatment, so we started to use our savings and our available credit to pay for medical expenses. My husband later died. She told me: After having completely depleted our savings and facing insurmountable credit card debt, I had no choice but to file bankruptcy. . . . Sue's devastating ordeal was a common story all across our country, almost 8 years ago, before health care reform was enacted to prohibit lifetime caps and to restrict annual limits on care. Before the health law, I heard from too many working Wisconsin families that went bankrupt, sold their homes, and even spent their entire life's savings just to get the health care that they needed. This was when America was sick and when lawmakers prioritized the health of insurance companies over the health of the American people. Republicans will take us back to those days when they vote to make America sick again. I want to share one last story about life before the Affordable Care Act, and that is my own. As many of you may know, I was raised by my maternal grandparents in Madison, WI. When I was just 9 years old, I was diagnosed with a serious childhood illness similar to spinal meningitis, and I spent 3 months at the age of 9 years old in the hospital. My grandparents had health insurance but learned that their plan didn't cover me. Since their insurance didn't cover me, they made incredible sacrifices to pay for the care that I needed. When I got better, my grandparents did what any responsible parent or grandparent would do: They looked for an insurance policy that would cover me into the future, but look as they might, they discovered that because of my previous illness, they couldn't find a policy. They couldn't find it from any insurer at any price, and at 9 years old I had been branded with those magic words: preexisting condition. Well, thanks to the Affordable Care Act, children today have new protections, and no one can be denied insurance coverage because of a preexisting condition. My family experience helped inspire me to enter public service and to fight to ensure that every American has quality, affordable health care as a right, not a privilege. This is what I fought for and will continue to fight with my colleagues to protect, these vital benefits that the health care law guarantees to all Wisconsinites and families across this great country. But we cannot fight alone. Republicans are hard at work making America sick again, taking us back from affordable care to chaos, handing over the reins to insurance companies and driving up health care costs for all Americans. I call on them to stand accountable to our families. It is the American people that we are charged to represent. I call on them to join us to fight for Sue who was forced into medical bankruptcy. I call on them to fight to protect Zoe from predatory insurance companies who want to deny her coverage because of her heart condition, to fight for Sheila and other entrepreneurs like her, and to fight for our health care professionals, nurse's aides, occupational therapists, physical therapists like Joel, and to fight for Randy and his wife as they battle her kidney failure. We have been ready for over 6 years to work together to keep all that works with the Affordable Care Act and to fix what doesn't, but instead of working on bipartisan reforms to improve the Affordable Care Act, this Republican plan to repeal historic health care reforms will create nothing short of chaos. I know I speak for my colleagues, my Democratic colleagues and Independent colleagues, in saying that we are here and we will stay here on the floor because we are ready. We are ready to work across the aisle to protect coverage and to improve the Affordable Care Act, but we will not help you make America sick again and we will not help you take away people's health care. I yield the floor.

Ms. BALDWIN

Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I have come to the floor to address a very important choice for this Senate and, frankly, for President-Elect Trump. The time is now for Donald Trump to take a stand in support of American workers by calling on Republican leadership in Congress to support strong ``Buy American'' requirements in the Water Resources Development Act, also known as the Water Infrastructure Improvement Act. Just 1 week ago in Cincinnati, OH, President-Elect Trump said his infrastructure plan would follow two simple rules: ``Buy American and hire American.'' I support that position, strongly, but unfortunately the Republican establishment in Washington didn't hear him. They have removed my ``Buy American'' standard from this very important water infrastructure legislation, and Trump Tower has gone silent on this topic since last Thursday. I believe the iron and steel used in water infrastructure projects should be made in America and that taxpayer dollars should go to support American jobs and manufacturers, not be spent on Chinese or Russian iron and steel. My provision to require this was included in the version of the bill that passed the Senate with strong bipartisan support on a vote of 95 to 3. However, Speaker Ryan and House Republicans removed this ``Buy American'' reform from the Water Infrastructure Improvements Act, and there hasn't been a peep or a tweet from President-Elect Trump. It is clear to me, and it should be clear to President-Elect Trump as well, that congressional Republicans are allowing corporate lobbyists, working on behalf of companies who import steel from Russia and China, to write the rules in Washington. Importers of cheap foreign steel from China and Russia have sought to eliminate or loosen these rules for their own benefit. According to media reports, including the Wall Street Journal, the importers and their foreign suppliers have hired the Washington, DC, lobbying firm Squire Patton Boggs to lobby the Republican leadership in the House against my ``Buy American'' standard, which would provide a long-term and solid commitment to American workers. The firm's strategy relies upon, oh, that old revolving door--the firm employs former House Speaker John Boehner and several former top Republican aides--to gain access and influence over Congress. These reports suggest that corporate lobbyists are using their influence over Congress to support clients that do business with Russian and Chinese steel companies at the expense of American workers. That is why I am calling on President-Elect Trump to turn his words in Cincinnati, spoken just a week ago, into action and to join me in demanding that Republican leaders in Congress restore our strong ``Buy American'' standard in the final water infrastructure bill. Together, with Senators Brown and Casey, we offered an amendment to restore this ``Buy American'' reform, and today we are demanding a vote. I come to the floor today to ask Majority Leader McConnell for that vote. American manufacturers and steelworkers, like the men and women at Neenah Foundry in Wisconsin who helped build our Nation's water infrastructure, support our amendment, and they deserve a vote and a solid commitment from us on a strong ``Buy American'' standard. Many people in the United States have seen this iconic symbol. Neenah Foundry--which supports the strong ``Buy American'' amendment-- manufactures, among other things, these manhole covers that we see all over. Let us not ever see this. President-Elect Trump has said that we need to ``drain the swamp,'' and that he will take on lobbyists and special interests that are writing the rules and rigging the game in Washington against American workers. If he is serious about ``draining the swamp'' and supporting American workers, it is time for him to end his silence and speak out publicly supporting and restoring this ``Buy American'' standard to the water infrastructure bill that is before the Senate today. It is time for a vote on a ``Buy American'' standard that respects and rewards American manufacturers and American workers. Mr. President, I yield the floor.