John Barrasso

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today as the 2020 Democratic Presidential candidates prepare to debate this evening. We are sure to hear once again about their proposals for massive taxing and spending. At the top of the list is their $34 trillion Medicare for All, which is really a one-size-fits-all healthcare scheme for the people of our country. Here is the key point. Democrats will dramatically raise taxes on all Americans. One candidate plans to increase taxes on working families by $26 trillion over the next year-- that is new taxes--new taxes--of $26 trillion. This candidate also proposes an additional $2 trillion on top of the $26 trillion by hiring an army of IRS agents to crack down on hard-working Americans who this one candidate, as a Member of this body, says can actually pay more and are not paying their full share. So Americans will pay $28 trillion more in taxes over a decade. Do not be deceived. These taxes will hit all Americans. Democrats know they can't win this election on policy. Specifically, they are dangerous Democratic socialist policies that they are going to be promoting in the debate tonight. So what are they doing? Well, they are counting on their totally partisan impeachment process. We have been hearing all about it now for months--actually, for years. Democrats have been obsessed with impeaching--impeaching--President Trump since day one, the day he was elected. Then fast forward to his inauguration in 2017. The campaign to impeach President Trump, starting from the day he was elected, really took force the day he was sworn into office. Democrats want to overturn the last election, and they want to interfere with the upcoming election. Election day 2020 is now less than a year away. Still, Democrats' impeachment obsession continues to burn on. This is an unfair, bitterly partisan process. I will tell you, the Americans I talk to at home in Wyoming see right through it. When I talk to my colleagues around the country, their constituents at home see right through it as well. Recent polling shows that the public wants the voters--not House Democrats and not Speaker Pelosi--to make their own call on election day. The Democrats, meanwhile, seem to prefer impeachment to doing the work of the American people--the work all of us were elected to do. Republicans prefer to work on the issues we were elected to address: jobs, the economy, and our Nation's security. We are going to continue to work for the people who elected us.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, on a different topic, I come to the floor today to discuss the Democrats' partisan campaign against President Trump. The Democrats have been obsessed with impeaching him since day one of his Presidency, and I absolutely mean day one. As the President was taking the oath of office, sworn in to the Presidency, the Washington Post ran this headline: ``The campaign to impeach President Trump has begun.'' It was posted, actually, at 12:18, the day he took the oath of office. The minute he took the oath of office, that headline was posted. So 3 years have passed, and impeachment is still taking up all the Democrats' time, all their efforts, and all their energy. They are fixated on it, and they are obsessed with it. As a doctor, in my opinion, the Democrats have a bad case of impeachment fever, and it seems that there is no cure for them. We all know that Democrats deeply dislike this President. They have from the moment he was elected in November 2016. Let me ask you: Does that mean they get to overturn the last election? That is what they are trying to do, not to mention interfere with the upcoming election. That is really what it is--a bitterly partisan process. Remember, it is being controlled by one political party. This is totally partisan, and up to now, at least it has been conducted, prior to today, in total secret, in the cellar, behind closed doors, and in the shadows. That is the way they have done it. It is not a fair process--no transparency and no accountability. I think President Trump has a right to be treated fairly, yet his rights have been completely ignored. The process, in my opinion, is rigged against the President. The outcome is predetermined and fixed. The Democratic House wins; the American public loses. Democrats are so obsessed, they can't work. The people elected them to do a job, to work for them, and they are nowhere to be found. The Democrats, for example, will not pass defense funding, funding our military, protecting our borders, protecting our Nation, and they will not approve trade deals or lower drug costs. They will not even help fix our aging roads and bridges. Well, that is all bad news for the American people. All of this is tied up in the impeachment obsession that is grinding the Democrats in the House to a halt. The good news is, Republicans are highly resistant to this fever, and so are most Americans. We are not going to join the Democrats' impeachment campaign. Republicans prefer to work on the issues we were elected to address-- jobs, the economy, national security--and we are going to continue to work for the people who elected us. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to shine a spotlight on our strong, healthy, and growing economy. Specifically, my focus is on how this record-setting economy is helping and could continue to help all Americans. Since Republicans took over and passed tax relief, there has been no end to the boon in jobs in our country. Republicans have put the U.S. worker in the driver's seat. The October jobs report again beat all expectations. U.S. employers added a solid 128,000 jobs last month alone. Even better, American workers are noting that their wallets are thicker and fatter. Wages are up 3 percent year over year. It is the fastest growth--faster than inflation. We also continue to see record-low unemployment across the country. At 3.6 percent, the U.S. jobless rate is near a 50-year low. African- American unemployment is at a 50-year low. In fact, 3 years of Republican pro-growth policies have produced more than 6 million new jobs--actually, 6,700,000 new jobs. Today, the United States has nearly 160 million people working. That is another record high. Median household income is the highest in 20 years. No wonder a new poll by Gallup shows Americans are planning to spend more than ever this holiday season because they have the money. They have earned it, and they have kept more of their hard-earned money as a result of tax relief. The U.S. stock market continues to set new highs, and that is welcome news for people when they look at their pensions, their retirements, and their 401(k)s. Notably, trade optimism has been a major factor in the stock market's climb to record highs, which brings me to my next point: How do we start the next chapter of the United States in terms of our success story? I believe it is through America-first trade victories. Without question, the most important trade deal we need to pass right now is USMCA--the United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement. In my view, it is vital to continuing our American prosperity. The U.S.- Mexico-Canada trade agreement was signed by all three countries' leaders more than a year ago, so you would think, well, it should be in place. But it takes more than that. Mexico gave its final approval to USMCA in June. Canada is waiting for us--for the House and the Senate-- to give the approval as well. Without a doubt, USMCA is the best trade upgrade in 25 years. It is going to expand market access for a host of U.S. products, and it is going to sharpen U.S. exporters' competitive edge. Above all, USMCA is a big benefit for American workers. It will protect and produce millions of U.S. jobs, and that is critical. I predict it will pass the Senate with strong bipartisan support. So it has to get here. Yet we have not crossed the finish line. There is a roadblock, and the roadblock is at the other end of this building. The roadblock is Speaker Nancy Pelosi. She has not and will not yet allow a vote in the House of Representatives. It seems to me the Speaker is too obsessed with impeaching the President instead of being focused on fighting for American workers. She stopped all progress on USMCA in its tracks. The stakes, meanwhile, could not be higher. Passing USMCA will save American jobs. Twelve million current American jobs are on the line. The deal will create 180,000 new U.S. jobs. USMCA is a boon for the entire economy. It will boost our economy by $70 billion. So what exactly is the Speaker waiting for? Canada and Mexico are our top trading partners. U.S. producers don't need impeachment chaos or an impeachment circus; what we need is trade certainty. Not only is the deal essential for U.S. manufacturers, our ranchers and farmers are counting on it as well. Canada and Mexico are the top export markets for American farmers. Last year, U.S. agriculture exports to the two countries totaled $40 billion. For the past 5 years, Mexico has consistently ranked second or third for U.S. wheat imports. USMCA is a huge win for Wyoming wheat growers. My State is going to reap enormous benefits from this deal. Wyoming foreign trade has increased nearly 20 percent in recent years. Wyoming farmers--the Presiding Officer knows this, coming from an agriculture State--play a key role in our economy. This Friday, I will be honored to attend the 100th annual meeting of the Wyoming Farm Bureau. It will be in Laramie. Our farmers add billions to the State economy every year, and trade is a big part of it. Wyoming's annual agriculture exports total $300 million. The export market supports 2,600 jobs in our State. Our State not only produces livestock, seeds, and crops, but we are exporting essential chemicals that farmers everywhere need to grow their crops. Wyoming farmers and ranchers are counting on expanded export markets for future growth. New markets mean new opportunities, and Wyoming is poised to seize them. In coming years, we plan to add to our high-quality beef, our grain, and our hay exports. Future State exports will include gluten-free products, as well as craft beer and distilled spirits, just to name a few. That is why the USMCA agreement is so essential for the people, not just in Wyoming but for people all across America. To keep our record- setting economy on track, we need to pass this ``America First'' trade deal, and we need to do it now. It is time to put partisan politics aside. It is time to pass USMCA.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor to talk about the work we have been doing in the Senate this week and the work we have been doing in the Senate the last 3 years, and that is the work of confirming a record number of judicial nominees. I want to specifically focus on our record on circuit court judges. As you know, these are the courts just one layer below the Supreme Court, and their decisions have enormous consequences for the country. We have confirmed 45 highly qualified circuit court judges. We have done it across all 12 appeals courts nationwide. These judges will decide 99 percent of the Federal cases in America. President Trump has nominated each of these judges. Senate Republicans confirmed each of these judges. These judges now hold a full one-quarter--one out of every four--circuit court seats in America. All of these judges have lifetime appointments. These circuit court judges are ruling right now, and they are doing it on major cases all across the country. How are they making a difference in people's lives? No. 1, by protecting Americans' constitutional rights, by upholding our individual freedoms, by putting a check on government power, and above all, these judges are applying the law as written, not legislating from the bench. Based on the 45 circuit court judges we have seated and the judges we will continue to seat, Senate Republicans have delivered conservative judges who will serve our Nation for decades to come. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today to discuss the global fight to end poverty and specifically the problem of energy poverty. The numbers paint a very grim picture. Worldwide, 840 million people are living without electricity. They can't cook or heat their homes safely or reliably. In fact, nearly 3 billion people--3 billion people worldwide--still rely on wood and waste for household energy. What should the United States do to help? First and foremost, I believe we should push multilateral development banks, like the World Bank, to invest in affordable energy projects, which will help these people. The World Bank's mission is to lift people out of poverty--to help lift people out of poverty. That is their mission. Specifically, it seeks to end extreme poverty while promoting shared prosperity. For 75 years, the United States has been working with the World Bank to help developing countries grow. The United States remains the World Bank's largest contributor. Every U.S. dollar at the World Bank should make a difference for people in the developing world. The World Bank's new policies, however, lead me to call for a review by the United States of how U.S. dollars are being used. Several years ago, the World Bank decided to stop financing certain projects-- specifically, oil, gas, and coal projects. I am concerned the World Bank is now blocking affordable energy development--energy that is needed to make a positive difference for so many people in the developing world. Traditional fuels are a vital tool for escaping energy poverty. Yet, with the policy change in the World Bank, only renewable energy projects qualify for funding. It seems that the World Bank is putting its liberal political agenda ahead of our anti-poverty mission. The question is, Does the World Bank still want to help the people living in poor nations today? That is the question. If so, they should be helping with the use of abundant and affordable energy resources. If not, then I think the United States must reevaluate our support for the World Bank. Here is a case in point: The Bank restricts the financing of high- efficiency power stations fueled by coal. Last fall, for example, the World Bank failed to honor its commitment to the country of Kosovo. The Bank pulled its funding from Kosovo's state-of-the-art, coal-fired powerplant--state of the art--needed in Kosovo. Kosovo faces an energy security barrier to grow. They don't have enough energy to grow the way they are prepared to. Kosovo has the fifth largest coal reserves in the world. Kosovo desperately needs to retire its older facility. I saw this firsthand last month when I was visiting members of the Wyoming National Guard stationed in northern Kosovo. This decision by the World Bank is simply unacceptable. What are other countries doing? China and Russia, meanwhile, are dramatically increasing their global investment in identical carbon- based energy projects. The World Bank is saying: Go ask China. Go ask Russia. South Africa, for example, is now working with China's development bank on its coal-fired powerplant. There are serious concerns when our allies work with China and Russia. These include lower standards, dependence on these countries, and undue political influence. A number of Members in the Senate share my concern. On Thursday, I led a group of a dozen Senators in urging the World Bank to immediately lift these harmful restrictions. My letter to the President of the World Bank, President David Malpass, was cosigned by Senators Boozman, Capito, Cotton, Cramer, Cruz, Enzi, Hoeven, Johnson, Kennedy, Murkowski, and Thune. Together, we are pressing the World Bank to recommit to an ``all of the above'' energy strategy. Developing countries desperately need affordable, reliable energy. We say in our letter: People living in poor and developing nations want and need a stable energy supply. They are looking for power generation that provides energy security, helps create jobs, and improves their lives. People back home in Wyoming know firsthand the benefits of developing abundant energy resources. The United States is a top global energy producer. Wyoming has played a key role in this success. We have produced our way to a booming U.S. economy, and we have created millions of new jobs along the way. People who are struggling worldwide to survive and thrive in developing countries deserve that same opportunity. As an energy powerhouse, America can help empower our allies and our energy exports. Global philanthropist Bill Gates said: ``Increasing access to electricity is critical to lifting the world's poor out of poverty. Let me repeat. ``Increasing access to electricity is critical to lifting the world's poor out of poverty.'' Ultimately, the solution to energy poverty doesn't lie in limiting options but in using all available options. In pursuit of its mission, the World Bank must embrace, not exclude, abundant, affordable energy resources. Let's work together to end energy poverty now for the 840 million people on the planet living without electricity. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today to support the funding bill for the defense of our Nation. This funding package provides a well-earned, well-deserved pay raise for our troops--the men and women in uniform, the men and women I had the privilege of visiting earlier this month, part of the Wyoming National Guard deployments in multiple places around the world. Yet Democrats have blocked a key vote. They did it last month. I want to make sure they don't do it again. It seems they are doing it for purely political reasons. It is a partisan blockade of our Nation's troops' pay raise. It is hard to believe they are doing it, but they did it, and it seems they want to do it again. Both parties agreed to support our military, and they support our military families as well. They made that promise 3 months ago. Then they went back on the promise. It was part of that bipartisan budget deal that was signed in August. By moving this defense funding measure, Republicans are keeping our promises; the Democrats are breaking theirs. Now it is time once again to vote. It is time for Democrats to stop blocking the bill. It is time to stop playing politics, especially with our troops' paychecks. We need to pass this bill to fully fund the Defense Department. It honors our commitment to our troops. It delivers critical resources our military needs to keep us safe, to keep us strong, to keep us prosperous. The bill protects America's standing among our allies and our adversaries. We need to get this done. It also funds Health and Human Services. That is what we are looking at as well. It includes our Nation's medical research. It is time for the Democrats to get to yes. It is time to keep our promises to the military; it is time to honor our commitment to our troops; and it is time to get on with the business of our Nation. It is time to pass the bill. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I rise today to recognize a significant anniversary for the Wyoming Weed and Pest Council. When they meet in a few short weeks, the council will celebrate 75 years of service to Wyoming ecosystems and communities. While the council is partially funded by the State of Wyoming, the council's success lies in dedication of staff, volunteers, seasonal employees, and partners who dedicate themselves to eradicating invasive species and noxious weeds. Invasive species threaten the delicate balance in nearly every ecosystem. Around the world, invasive species cause billions of dollars in damage to the environment and to economies each year. They threaten watersheds, forests, and grasslands. They crowd out important native species, increase the risk of catastrophic wildfires, introduce disease, and fundamentally undermine the natural cycle of life. Dedicated experts work each day to stem the tide of new introductions. Each of the 23 counties in Wyoming has a Weed and Pest District, run by staff and an elected board. The districts set policy, monitor existing infestations, work with the public to develop a comprehensive list of risks, and act quickly when new species are detected. Often, Weed and Pest supervisors wear many hats; depending on the hour, they are grant writers, weed sprayers, staff managers, and policy experts. Wyoming Weed and Pest coordinator, Slade Franklin, detailed the important work of the council when I invited him to testify before the Environment and Public Works Committee earlier this year. In his testimony, Slade shared the coordination that is required to ensure invasive species are not able to gain an advantage in States where lands are managed by multiple jurisdictions. Slade knows that invasive species do not respect fence lines, and during his decade-long leadership of the Wyoming Weed and Pest Council, he has forged important relationships with local, State, and Federal agencies. His leadership has been integral in many of the State's successes. It is without hesitation that I say Wyoming's forests and plains would look much different today if the Wyoming Weed and Pest Council had not unified in 1973. While the State has struggled with cheatgrass and Russian olive, they have been hugely successful in preventing new infestations of invasive mussels and limiting spread of other grasses, like ventenata. Each municipal water manager, rancher, hiker, forester, hunter, and miner owes a debt of gratitude for the good work of the Wyoming Weed and Pest Council. Whether they work from horseback, ATV, the air, or a desk, I rise today to honor the dedicated professionals to work to keep our ecosystems healthy. My wife, Bobbi, joins me in thanking them and wishing the Wyoming Weed and Pest Council another 75 years of success.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, the letter proves that all patients will be protected. Section 1332 simply gives States some leeway--a little wiggle room for following the law and how to use and apply the law best in their own States. All State waivers must meet the following conditions: They must provide coverage at least as broad as is currently offered under the healthcare law; they must provide coverage and cost-sharing at least as affordable as under the healthcare law; they must provide coverage to at least as many people as under the healthcare law; and they must not increase the Federal deficit. The section 1332 waivers leave protections for preexisting conditions unharmed. They are not just popular with Republican Governors. It is interesting that the people applying for these 1332 waivers are Democratic Governors from around the country. They are at odds with what the Democrats in the Senate are trying to do. They are pursuing waivers. They are asking the Trump administration for waivers for their States as well. Why would these Democratic Governors come to the Trump administration and ask for waivers? It is because they work. The reason the Democratic Governors are coming to the Trump administration asking for waivers is that they work. In fact, a number of States are using these waivers today to help lower the cost of health insurance. Let's look at the States whose section 1332 waivers have been approved since the Trump administration guidance was issued. Let's look at just the States that have applied for waivers since the new Trump administration guidance was issued. Again, these waivers were approved using the very same guidance that the Democrats in the Senate now want to have repealed. It is astonishing. The States with 1332 waivers since the Trump administration came out with its guidance are Colorado, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, and Rhode Island. Nearly all have Democratic Governors--four out of the five do--and have Democratic Senators in many cases or they have both. Take a look at what has happened for the proposed premiums for 2020-- what they are expected to be in States under the leadership of Democratic Governors who have asked for and have been granted waivers from the Trump administration and what the impact is on insurance premiums in these States. In Colorado, with a Democratic Governor and one Democratic Senator, the rates are going to fall this next year by about 16 percent. In Delaware, with a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators, the rates will fall about 13 percent. In Montana, with one Democratic Governor and one Democratic Senator, one Republican Senator, rates will fall by 8 percent. In Rhode Island, with a Democratic Governor and two Democratic Senators, rates will fall by about 6 percent. So in State after State where Democratic Governors applied for and were granted a waiver, they have seen rates go down. Yet Democratic Senators on the other side of the aisle are offering a resolution to remove these waivers, to remove the guidance from the Trump administration that is resulting in rates of insurance and the costs going down. Of course we need to fix healthcare in this country, but we need to take a scalpel to our healthcare problems, not a meat cleaver, which is what we see the Democrats doing. The Obama healthcare law was a train wreck. Republicans opposed it all the way. We are still treating the victims of this wreck, and we want to help them for years into the future by changing and coming out with guidance that will make it easier and give flexibility to the States, whether their legislature is Republican or Democratic, to help lower the high cost of ObamaCare insurance. I find it outrageous that Senate Democrats are wasting precious healthcare debate time. They should be working with us to find solutions to lower the cost of care, to lower the cost of prescription drugs, to provide more accountability and more transparency so that patients can make more informed decisions. Even as we address this issue and vote on this joint resolution tomorrow, it is time to really take a look at what the Democrats are saying in the Senate as opposed to what the Democrats who are in the statehouses are doing across the country. I say, let's make sure the States can keep the relief they are asking for and are getting by rejecting what the Democrats in the Senate are proposing. Let's keep working to give patients what they need, which is the care they need from a doctor they choose at lower costs. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today to once again discuss healthcare in America and, specifically, to oppose S.J. Res. 52, which is the latest congressional disapproval resolution. What is happening here is that the Democrats are trying to block the efforts Republicans are making to actually lower the cost of health insurance. We are working on ways to lower the cost of health insurance for American families, and the Democrats are trying to block it. Let me explain. People certainly understand that after the Obama healthcare law was passed, healthcare insurance premiums all across the country went way up. I strongly oppose the passage of this resolution, and I strongly opposed the passage of this law, which many of the Democrats running for President are now willing to admit has failed. It is interesting that the Democrats now just say: Scrap the whole thing, and go with a one-size-fits-all, government-run healthcare program in which people will pay more to wait longer for worse care. Ironically, it is the Republicans who, today, are delivering on so many of the Democrats' empty promises about ObamaCare because Republicans are actually doing things to lower the cost of care and the cost of health insurance for American families. I like to think of Republicans as EMTs arriving on the scene of the ObamaCare train wreck. We didn't cause the accident. We are trying to help the victims, and the victims live in States all across this country. For nearly 3 years, Republicans have tried to treat the victims of ObamaCare and tried to help people who have been hit by skyrocketing health insurance premiums. Last week we saw a major breakthrough. For the second year in a row, on average, we saw insurance premiums on the ObamaCare exchanges actually come down. They have actually come down. Well, it is very welcome news for people who have to pay these premiums. Yet, what we see is that the 2020 Democratic candidates, when you listen to them, don't seem to be concerned about lowering the costs. They are too busy pushing this astronomically expensive $34 trillion Medicare for All health insurance healthcare scheme--one that by Republicans and Democrats alike has been called a pipe dream. To put the cost into perspective, this total dollar figure has been estimated by people on the Republican side of the aisle, the Democratic side of the aisle, folks who looked at what promises are being made, and all have come to the conclusion that the cost will be greater than what we spend right now in this country on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security combined. Add it all up, and it does not even reach the point of what the Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren Medicare for All plan would cost. Interestingly, when taking a look at the proposal, they actually want to take away from the American people--the 180 million people who have earned health insurance through work--they want to take that away from 180 million Americans and put them all on a one-size-fits-all, government-run program. Even union workers, who, as part of their contract negotiations, negotiated the health insurance they want, would lose their hard-fought healthcare benefits if it were ever to become law. We see Democrats backing what I believe is a very foolish resolution of disapproval. They are attacking part of President Obama's healthcare law. We are talking about ObamaCare section 1332. This section of the law helps give States more flexibility. The Presiding Officer's State and mine like to have flexibility to provide better coverage and to bring premium costs down. We need to set the record straight on one key point. Section 1332 never can be used to waive protections for the American people, such as for people with preexisting conditions. They can never waive those. It is not happening. My wife is a breast cancer survivor. She has had three operations, chemotherapy twice, and dozens of radiation treatments. I know, as a doctor and as a husband, how important it is for patients to have protections of their preexisting conditions. Republicans remain 100 percent committed to protecting people with preexisting conditions. We will protect them today, tomorrow, and always. The House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman, Greg Walden, asked the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for clarification regarding this section 1332. Administrator Seema Verma responded: ``To be very clear, the 2018 guidance does nothing to erode the [healthcare law's] pre-existing condition provisions, which cannot be waived under section 1332.'' Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the full text of the CMS Administrator's letter be printed in the Record.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, in just a few weeks, the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation will hold their annual meeting in Laramie, WY. This year is unique, as the organization marks their 100th meeting and celebrates ten decades of service to farmers and ranchers across the State. Without question, the agriculture industry in the State, and in the region, has seen immense benefit from the important work the Federation employees do every day. Today, the Wyoming Farm Bureau is integral in gathering public opinion and disseminating information to farmers and ranchers across the state. Officially, their mission identifies ``The primary goal of WYFB is to take appropriate actions to protect private property rights and help members achieve an equitable return on their investment.'' Just as they did in 1920, the organization brings individuals together to identify common threats to their way of life. Wyoming Farm Bureau worked closely with the national organization during the 2015 waters of the United States rulemaking process to effectively communicate the negative impacts the rule would have on those who are the primary caretakers of our Nation's natural resources. As chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I invited the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation president, Todd Fornstrom, to share his story. Todd emphasized the need to protect clean, plentiful water sources while providing predictability for States, counties, and communities. Through his testimony, Todd skillfully shared the undeniable link between agricultural production and the Wyoming way of life and Wyoming's commitment to protecting our precious resources. I believe you can tell the strength of an organization by the dedication shown by its members and staff. Todd Fornstrom is serving his third elected term as president. Executive Vice President Ken Hamilton recently celebrated his 36th anniversary with the organization, Media and Member Relations Director Kerin Clark just passed 25 years, and Brett Moline has served Farm Bureau for 13 years. Every one of the 23 counties in Wyoming has a local Farm Bureau organization to build policy and address local issues. The county committees are key parts of the communities they serve. Without question, farmers and ranchers faced many challenges when the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation was founded in 1920. Just as they did 100 years ago, farmers and ranchers continue to work together today to produce abundant, high-quality food and fiber for their neighbors and communities around the world. I can only imagine the challenging discussions that prompted the first meeting in 1920, but I am certain early members left that meeting with the same confidence they will leave the 100th meeting. Working in agriculture is not simply a job. It is a calling, and sometimes, a challenging way of life. I rise today with great appreciation for the work Wyoming farmers and ranchers have done, and continue to do, for our great State. My wife, Bobbi, joins me in congratulating each member of the Wyoming Farm Bureau Federation on their 100th anniversary.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I echo what my colleague said about S.J. Res. 50, a congressional resolution of disapproval we are being asked to vote on this afternoon. I agree with the Senator from Texas. It is a mistake. It is wrong. I think he used the words ``ironic,'' ``mistaken,'' and ``duplicitous.'' I would call this Democratic proposal the height of hypocrisy. That is what we are looking at right here, and I am planning to oppose it. Two years ago, the Republicans passed major tax reform for this country. What we wanted to do was to make the Tax Code simpler, make it fairer, and have people pay less, and that is what we have seen. To do it, we have also eliminated some tax deductions for the wealthy. One was the State and local tax deduction that was specifically aimed at the wealthy. We eliminated it. That is what our goal was--to eliminate those sorts of deductions so that people all across the country could see the benefits of tax reform. Let's be clear about who will be benefiting by the Congressional Review Act that is being proposed to be voted on today. There will be 94 percent of the benefits going to those with incomes over $200,000. Those aren't the people who need tax relief in this country. We made choices when passing tax reform. We wanted to provide tax relief for the middle class, and we wanted to double the child tax credit. It worked. We wanted to double the standard deduction, and that worked. We wanted to lower the tax rates as well. The results are that a great majority of American households are actually paying less in taxes today than they were before. We have also had this great boost to the economy. We have more people working and one of the lowest unemployment rates we have seen. We have seen wages and incomes grow. We have seen the unemployment rate drop to a 50-year low. We have also seen economic growth beat all previous predictions. That is what we have gotten with the tax reform--the tax relief--that the Republicans have passed and that President Trump has signed into law. The Republicans are going to continue to focus on keeping taxes low for all Americans. The best description I have heard of this proposal is that it seems to be an effort to give tax breaks to rich people in blue States. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor to discuss last Tuesday's 2020 Democratic Presidential debate and specifically to discuss the topic of healthcare. Despite all of the political posturing, here are the key takeaways: No. 1, the Democrats still want to take work-earned health insurance away from 180 million Americans. No. 2, the Democrats want to raise taxes on the middle class and on all Americans to pay for it. Under the Democrats' plan, people will lose forever the health coverage they have earned at work. That means union workers' hard- fought health benefits will disappear. It means that Nevada's food service workers and Michigan's autoworkers will all lose their earned healthcare. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders want to replace work-based insurance with a one-size-fits-all, government-run scheme. At the same time, the 2020 Democrats want to give free, taxpayer-funded health insurance to illegal immigrants. It is hard to believe, but that is a matter of fact. That is the Democrats' so-called Medicare for All plan. Really, it is one-size-fits-all, government-controlled healthcare, and it is extremely expensive, even more expensive than I mentioned before on the floor, which is according to a new study that has come out by something called the Urban Institute. This liberal group has just reported that the cost of Medicare for All would be $34 trillion--that is 34 with a ``t.'' Let's put that into perspective. How much money is that? Over the next 10 years, that will be more money than we will spend on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security combined. It will be an astronomically large number. The Washington Post recently published a story with the headline ``Will Medicare for-all hurt the middle class?'' The subheadline reads ``Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders struggle with questions about its impact.'' We have seen them struggle with the impact of this very expensive, one-size-fits-all plan. The story notes that Senators Warren and Sanders are scrambling to ease concerns over middle-class costs, because that is what people are concerned about in this country--the cost of healthcare. Working families back home in Wyoming--and I talked with many this past weekend at our University of Wyoming's homecoming football game-- and people from all around the State are not fooled by what is being offered by the Democrats in their debates. They know they will have to pay dearly if the Democrats' scheme is adopted and ever signed into law. The Washington Post's story quotes and cites Ken Thorpe, who is Emory University's health policy chair. He says: ``The plan is, by design, incredibly disruptive.'' He goes on to say: ``You create enormous winners and losers,'' and he adds: ``There is no question it hits the middle class.'' For the middle class, it is a double punch in the gut, and here is why. Not only will those in the middle class lose their insurance, but their taxes will also go up. Senator Warren will not answer the middle-class tax increase question. She will not talk about it. She dodged the question again and again. As the Post reports, the Senator writes she will release a plan to pay for her proposal in the next few weeks, but at the same time, she continues to duck the tax question. Last Tuesday, she repeatedly tap-danced around the issue on the debate stage. In fact, Senator Warren's debate performance reminded me of the Artful Dodger in the Dickens novel ``Oliver Twist.'' She said out-of-pocket healthcare costs will go down, but she failed to mention that much, much more will be taken out of middle-class pockets in huge tax hikes. It is interesting when you see how this is covered around the world. The British publication The Economist knows a lot about socialized medicine, as they have been living with the British healthcare system for many, many years. It points out that Elizabeth Warren repeatedly refused to say how she would pay for the plan. They write that she ducked the question six times. During the debate, it was Senator Sanders who jumped in to set the record straight. Bernie Sanders said: ``I do think it is appropriate to acknowledge that taxes will go up.'' He has even promised to raise taxes for lower income Americans. He said: ``If you're making more than $29,000 a year''--and he is not talking about an individual; he is talking about a family here--``you will be paying more in taxes'' under the plan that is promoted by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. Then there is this warning from University of Chicago's economist Katherine Baicker, who says: These are going to be big tax increases. The tax brackets may have to shift. In last week's Wall Street Journal editorial, headlined ``Warren's Middle-Class Tax Dodge,'' it explains: ``The only way to pay for this [plan] is to raise taxes on the middle class, which is where the real money is.'' To sum up, while Senator Warren continues to dodge the tax issue, Senator Sanders admits that Medicare for All will raise taxes on just about everyone. Under the Warren-Sanders plan, middle-class taxes will rise. Taxes even rise for lower income families. We are talking about those with a family income of $29,000. Here is the bottom line. Americans will not tolerate having insurance go away and will not tolerate having taxes go up. They want to keep their healthcare plans, and they want them at lower costs. So we have a choice to make. We can work together to lower costs without lowering standards, or we can follow the 2020 Democrats who are pushing for their $34 trillion, one-size-fits-all plan. Don't let this Artful Dodger act fool you. Senator Warren and Senator Sanders support the same plan. They will not lower healthcare costs, but they will raise everybody's taxes. They will not improve care, but they will take coverage away from 180 million Americans who now get it through work. As a doctor, I want to improve patient care. I want to make healthcare more affordable. The Republicans are 100 percent committed to protecting patients who have preexisting conditions. We continue to work on bipartisan solutions and real reforms to lower the costs of everyone's care. Meanwhile, the solution we heard last week on the debate stage, the 2020 Democrats' solution, will force all of us to pay more and wait longer for worse care. That is what they have seen in Canada, what they have seen in England, and what we will see in the United States if this one-size-fits-all plan ever goes into effect. Let's give patients what they want, which is the care they need from the doctors they choose and at lower costs. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today to discuss the current partisan blockade. It is a blockade of critical military funding for our troops at home and abroad. Last month, Senate Democrats blocked a key vote on the defense spending bill. We need to pass this bill to fully fund the Defense Department. By blocking the bill, Democrats are denying America's troops the pay raises that they have earned and that they deserve. To add insult to injury, both parties in both Houses agreed a couple of months ago to give the troops this raise. We did it more than 2 months ago. In fact, it was part of the bipartisan budget deal that was signed in August. By moving the Defense spending bill, Republicans are keeping their promises to our all-volunteer American force. Still, Democrats have broken their promise to the troops. Why on Earth would the Democrats want to play political games with the paychecks of our troops? Under the harshest conditions, these brave men and women defend our cherished freedoms 365 days a year. America's servicemembers--our servicemembers--help keep us safe. They keep us strong, and they keep us, as a Nation, prosperous. Without question, they deserve our full support, and that support should be bipartisan. Why it isn't right now is beyond me. Recently, I had the privilege of visiting Wyoming troops, our Wyoming National Guard. We have a very large deployment, our largest in 10 years. They are serving in Kuwait, in the United Arab Emirates, and in Kosovo. We have troop members serving, as well, in Afghanistan. We have about 1,500 members in the Wyoming National Guard, and, right now, about 400 of them are serving overseas. They are from towns like Casper, Cheyenne, Guernsey, Laramie, Sheridan, Lovell, Moorcroft, Wheatland, and brothers from Sheridan and Casper. I met with all of them. Some 370 Wyoming Guard members are currently serving in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and in Europe. It is our largest deployment in a decade. I was honored to spend time with these dedicated servicemembers from my home State. First, I visited the 115th Field Artillery Brigade Forward in the United Arab Emirates. It is in the desert across from the Strait of Hormuz. From there, I traveled to Kuwait to meet with our 2nd Battalion, 300th Field Artillery. My father-in-law, Bob Brown, was a member of this group during Korea. He had also served in World War II, as I know, Mr. President, your father was part of the D-day invasion. I finished visiting with the troops in Kosovo, the C Company, 1st Battalion, 297th Infantry Regiment in Kosovo, up near the Serbian border. In service to our country, these soldiers now find themselves far from home, and we owe it to them to give them the raise that they have earned and that they deserve. You know, before I left, I gave every one of our soldiers a challenge coin. It is a challenge coin for me, as a Senator, and it is something I learned about through the military. It is something you give to somebody for camaraderie and a job well done. The coin shows the Wyoming iconic cowboy sitting on a bucking bronco. I gave it to each one of them saying: You are from Wyoming, you are a cowboy, and cowboys never quit and never complain, and neither will the U.S. military. So when it comes to a raise, they are not quitting, and they are not complaining. It seems to me that it is the Democrats who have quit. The Democrats have quit. They have gone back on their word to approve the pay raise that they approved a couple of months ago and now are blocking us moving forward with this piece of legislation. You know, the troops I met invited the cowboy spirit. They love to see it. They don't need to see it for long because they have a lot to do. They are working 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, and 365 days a year. They wanted to talk about what is happening at home. They wanted to talk about Wyoming football. They wanted to talk about the hunting season. They wanted to talk about the weather at home, where we have already had snow. The day I was in one of the locations, it was 108 degrees, and the heat index was higher than that, and they are, of course, in full uniform. They are there doing the job of keeping us safe and keeping us free, and they deserve the pay raise that they have earned. They are on the frontlines. They are defending our freedoms. They are doing it every day. I had a meal with them, as you see here right now, visiting with these men and women. It is a time for camaraderie. We talked about the challenges they are facing overseas. I toured each of their bases. They know that the world is a very dangerous place in which they are living and serving, and they know what is happening in the threats to Iran, which to this group was only a little over 100 miles away, across the Strait of Hormuz. Look, clearly, the best way to protect Americans at home is to keep up the pressure on our enemies abroad. Our presence there is restraining evil in the region. That is why our troops need our full support, and they need it right now. They shouldn't be placed at a point where they have to tolerate and wait for the Democrats to come back to the table and come to an agreement that they had reached and made promises on earlier this year. With growing threats from abroad, the Defense funding bill delivers critical resources that our military needs to keep us safe. One thing is crystal clear from my visit: The best way to honor our troops is to honor our commitments to them. So let's give these men and women in uniform the raise that they have earned, that they deserve, that they are entitled to, and let's give our troops the state-of-the-art tools they need to protect the American people in a dangerous world. It is time for Democrats to lift their hold on this blockade that they have had on our Defense funding bill. We must work together, in a bipartisan way, to complete the regular Defense appropriations process and fully fund our military, as our Nation demands and our troops certainly deserve. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise in strong opposition to the Congressional Review Act resolution that has been put forward by the Democrats on which we will soon be voting. The Democrats' resolution would eliminate President Trump's affordable clean energy rule. The President's rule is commonsense policy. It protects our air, and it allows our economy to grow at the same time. The affordable clean energy rule would replace the Obama administration's so-called Clean Power Plan. The punishing plan would have damaged our economy, and what I have here is a map to go over some of that. It would have closed powerplants. It would have put energy workers on unemployment. It would have reduced the reliability of our electricity. It would have increased energy bills for American families and for small businesses. The results would have been dramatic. There would have been dramatic increases in electricity bills all across the country. The plan would have devastated communities, certainly in my home State of Wyoming. It would have raised electricity bills by 42 percent in the State of Wyoming, and they would have gone up in every State. Wyoming is America's leading producer of coal. It supports thousands of good-paying jobs all across the State. Across Wyoming, the punishing power plan would put hard-working men and women out of work. The rule would be a massive roadblock for States. Instead of working collaboratively with State governments, it would put the EPA in the driver's seat of setting a national energy policy. States would be told what energy sources were allowed within their borders and how to regulate them. Worst of all, the so-called Clean Power Plan would have barely reduced carbon emissions, it would have crippled our economy, and done very little, if anything, to help the environment. President Obama's plan wasn't just bad policy, it was illegal. Twenty-seven States, including Wyoming, filed a lawsuit to stop the regulation. The Supreme Court ruled that Obama's EPA went way beyond its legal authority. The Court blocked the overreaching rule. Now President Trump has put forward a commonsense replacement to protect America's air. The affordable clean energy rule follows the law, and it is good news for the people of Wyoming and the rest of the country. It recognizes that the EPA is not supposed to pick winners and losers. Under the new rule, powerplants can make reasonable changes like improving efficiency. The rule promotes the use of new cleaner technologies to generate electricity so energy companies can modernize their powerplants without having to shut them down completely. The rule also respects the role of States under the Clean Air Act. It gets rid of ``Washington knows best,'' which is an approach we deal with--a top-down approach of unelected, unaccountable, heavyhanded bureaucrats. States understand how to protect the air their citizens breathe. They know it is an important thing to do. The end result will be cleaner air and more affordable energy for America's households. Now Senate Democrats want to play politics once again and uproot the affordable clean energy rule. Democrats want to resurrect a rule that the Supreme Court took unprecedented action to stop. That would be bad for our environment, bad for our economy, and bad for our country. Under the Congressional Review Act, if Congress repeals the affordable clean energy rule, the administration couldn't replace it with a similar rule. The administration put forward a commonsense rule to protect our air quality, and now Democrats want to kill it. That is the proposal on the floor today. Democrats have become hostages to the far-left agenda, even when it doesn't make any sense. It is not good policy, and we have seen this before. The Environment and Public Works Committee, which I chair, recently passed legislation to help reduce the amount of plastic pollution in our oceans. The bipartisan bill follows up on the previous bipartisan Save Our Seas Act that passed and was signed into law last Congress. Instead of supporting the legislation, extreme environmentalists oppose the bill--a bipartisan bill we got passed last Congress. We are going on to the next level now. Now the extreme environmentalists, of course, oppose the bill because we are not banning all plastics. Can you imagine something so ridiculous? But that is what they want. Working together in a bipartisan way--even when we are doing things that to me make sense, to others make sense, to bipartisan Senators make sense, to the House make sense, the extreme environmentalists say it is still not enough for them and their extreme measures and approaches. These extreme activists want to do the same thing with our air. Instead of finding common ground, their goal seems to be to shut down our economy because that is what they are promoting. Democrats in the House of Representatives, regrettably, have followed a similar pattern. House Democrats refuse to work with Republicans to pass commonsense bills to protect our air and address climate change, which we are promoting--an effort to actually address it. Apparently, it is not going far enough for the extreme Democratic environmentalists. Bipartisan legislation to support carbon capture technologies, which we passed in this body, sits in the House of Representatives waiting for a vote. The USE IT Act--which I introduced along with Senator Whitehouse, who gives speeches each week on climate change on the floor of the Senate. We have worked together. It has passed our committee unanimously. It has passed the Senate unanimously. Yet, with overwhelming bipartisan support in the Senate, it is still being blocked in the House. The bill has bipartisan support in the House as well, but it hasn't gone anywhere. It is being stopped because Democratic leaders in the House refuse to move a commonsense bill that would lower carbon emissions and help address carbon climate change. They are climate alarmists. They want things done drastically, unilaterally, immediately, when we are trying to take commonsense steps in the right direction. Killing commonsense policies, like the affordable clean energy rule and the USE IT Act, makes no sense to me. President Trump's rule respects the law, and it helps the environment. It is a win-win for our country. Americans deserve clean air. They also deserve clear rules, and the affordable clean energy rule gives us both. I urge every Senator to oppose the resolution that is coming up to the floor. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to complete my remarks prior to the vote.

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, today I wish to celebrate the St. Anthony Tri-Parish Catholic School Foundation's 2019 honoree, Dr. Gail Zimmerman. The foundation supports the wonderful work of the St. Anthony Tri- Parish Catholic School in Casper, WY. The school is dedicated to achieving academic excellence in a faith-filled community and living a life committed to Christian service. Since 1927, the school and staff have provided a high standard of academic achievement while instilling Christian values. The schools strong religious and educational leadership to Casper students from preschool through eighth grade. On October 10, 2019, the foundation will host their annual Joy Breakfast. The foundation honors individuals who make outstanding contributions to St. Anthony School and provide exceptional support to the Casper community. Dr. Gail Zimmerman is the perfect choice for this honor. Gail, with his late wife Anne, has a long history of personal beneficence and public service. The community looks forward to this breakfast and recognizing the annual honoree's invaluable contribution and dedication to the St. Anthony's Tri-Parish Catholic School Foundation. Gail is an accomplished academic, a selfless servant, and an avid sportsman. His father was a farmer and pastor, contributing greatly to Gail's work ethic and Christian values. Gail attended high school in Nebraska, then served in the U.S. Army. While serving, Gail met his wife, Lois. The ceasefire in Korea occurred while he was in training, enabling him to return to Nebraska for his undergraduate education. Gail received his master's at the University of Montana while teaching in Torrington, WY, and earned his Ph.D. in physiology and microbiology at the University of Wyoming while teaching in Casper, WY. He taught nurses and premedical students at Casper College for 23 years before furthering his education and becoming a broker. Dr. Zimmerman was elected to the Wyoming House of Representatives in 1985, then to the Wyoming Senate in 1989. He served a total of 14 years in our State legislature. In 1975, Lois passed away. Together they had four children: Rhonda, Mitchell, Michael, and Renee. Five years later, Gail married Anne Templeton, a surgeon with whom I worked. They spent 24 happy years until her passing in 2004. Gail's community involvement, philanthropic engagements, and hobby interests are extensive. He has been influential with the Casper Petroleum Club, Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation, National Rifle Association, Safari Club International, Polestar Outdoors, the Dallas Safari Club Wyoming Chapter, and the Wyoming Water Quality and Pollution Control Association. He also served as the Director of the Werner Wildlife Museum and Wyoming State Wastewater Training Center, Chairman and CEO of the Wyoming Employee Resource Capital & Service, and Trustee of the John Templeton Foundation as well as the Zimmerman Family Foundation. He somehow finds time to attend collector car shows and Alaskan fishing trips. Gail is also a member of the Casper Rotary Club. Gail and his wife Anne generously contributed their time and resources to Wyoming's schools and spiritual growth. They promoted human rights and supported fellow Christians around the world. The Zimmerman Science Awards and Zimmerman Family Foundation helped countless Wyoming students and people in need to further their education. They provided a much needed lift to those seeking to unlock their true potential. Gail is a pillar of the Casper community. He exemplifies Christian values and is a testament to the Code of the West. Madam President, it is with great honor that I recognize this outstanding member of our Wyoming community. My wife, Bobbi, joins me in extending our congratulations to Dr. Gail Zimmerman upon his selection for this special award.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today to discuss the need to bolster our Nation's energy security following the recent attacks on Saudi Arabian oil. Having read the classified briefing in full, I am convinced that Iran is absolutely behind the attacks. Now, Iran wants to drive up world oil prices to hopefully, in their mind, increase the amount of revenue they would get from selling their oil. Basically, they need the money, and that is because the sanctions that the United States has imposed on Iran have worked. They have been punishing. That is why President Trump, I believe, made the right call in adding even tougher sanctions. The sanctions have been biting, and Iran's currency has been significantly devalued. Now is the time to step up our own American energy production. Since my Senate arrival in 2007, I have worked to advance pro-growth energy policies throughout that entire time. My goal has always been to promote American energy, to safeguard U.S. workers, and to protect this great Nation. Today, the United States is the world's top energy producer. We are a global leader in oil, as well as in natural gas. In fact, the United States is poised to become the world's top energy exporter, as well, and my home State of Wyoming has been a key driver in all of this success. To reach this goal, we are going to need to leverage our energy sources. This includes zero-emission nuclear power, as well as renewable energy. We need it all. In the Senate, I believe both parties want Americans to use more carbon-free energy. So both parties should embrace sensible, scientific solutions. Yet Democrats, once again, are pushing more of their radical proposals. That is what we have to deal with. Two weeks ago, House Democrats passed several anti-energy bills. These measures would lock up key offshore and Alaskan oil reserves. The majority of House Democrats have cosponsored these scary schemes that would damage our economy. If the House Democrats' anti-energy bills ever were to become law-- and I assure you that the Republican Senate and President Trump will never allow that to happen--they would be a real gift to our foreign enemies and to our adversaries, like Russia, because Russia routinely uses natural gas as a geopolitical weapon. Still, 2020 Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, a Member of our Senate, recently unveiled a plan to ban hydraulic fracturing. This revolutionary technique has led to a renaissance for American energy production, and she wants to ban it. Last year, Senator Warren's home State of Massachusetts imported Russian natural gas. Where did they import it from? People all across the country and the world saw the Russian natural gas tanker in Boston Harbor. Let me repeat. Let me be very clear. Last year, Senator Warren's home State of Massachusetts imported Russian natural gas through the Boston Harbor. At the same time, the Senator has denounced U.S. pipelines and other U.S. energy infrastructure projects--this, as her own State pays one of highest utility rates anywhere in the country. Not only do the Democrats' politicized policies dramatically increase Americans' energy costs, but they are also a threat to our national security. No matter, Senator Warren also wants to ban nuclear power. She doesn't like fracking. She doesn't like natural gas. She now wants to ban nuclear power. Has she forgotten that nuclear energy is America's chief carbon-free power source? Twenty percent of U.S. electricity comes from nuclear power. These reckless Democrat proposals would make the United States more dependent on unstable foreign energy markets. Working families here in the United States should never overpay on their energy bills due to foolish policies--and that is what they are, foolish policies that make us all vulnerable. The American public is not going to stand for it. According to a recent Washington Post-Kaiser Foundation poll, more than 70 percent of Americans have said they don't want to pay even $10 more on their monthly electric bills to lower carbon emissions. We want to lower carbon emissions. How much are families willing to pay? Seventy percent say not $10 a month. How about $2 a month? A majority said, no, that is too much to pay. So we need to pursue a commonsense energy strategy--one that keeps working families' costs down, one that keeps the economy strong, and one that helps keep our Nation safe. Republicans are committed to protecting and advancing America's energy independence. President Trump understands how important this is. In the wake of the attacks on Saudi Arabia, not only is the President working to expand sanctions, but he is moving to approve major pipeline projects as well. One of the energy issues I am addressing now in the Senate is reforming the permit process for American energy exploration. Earlier this Congress, I introduced a piece of legislation called the ONSHORE Act. It stands for Opportunities for the Nation and States to Harness Onshore Resources for Energy. The ONSHORE Act will simplify the process for Federal onshore oil and gas permits. Whether we are talking about promoting energy exploration, utilities, carbon capturing, or nuclear power, we must engineer our way to American energy solutions. Republicans recognize our Nation's unique ability to fill in the gaps from global supply disruptions. So our focus needs to be on promoting American energy independence. It is time to reject the Democrats' extreme schemes once and for all. What the Democrats are proposing is a real threat to our U.S. energy security, and they are offering a gift to American enemies. We need to continue our America-first energy policy. That is what we are going to continue to do to keep us strong, to keep us safe, and to keep us prosperous as a nation. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, for the information of Senators, the cloture vote on the compound motion to go to conference on S. 1790 will occur at this time. I ask unanimous consent that if the compound motion is agreed to, it be in order for the following motions to instruct, which are at the desk--Van Hollen, Cotton, Jones, Schatz, Peters, McSally, McConnell or designee--to be considered at a time to be determined by the majority leader in consultation with the Democratic leader, but prior to September 26, in the form of Senate resolutions taken up and considered on the same day with no amendments in order.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today we mark the 18th anniversary of the September 11th attacks. We remember the nearly-3,000 people who lost their lives. We pray for all of the 9/11 victims and their families. We honor our 9/11 heroes. They were the brightest lights that day in the dark sky--our brave firefighters, police, service men and women. So many Americans gave their lives to save lives that day, and we pay tribute to them today. Congress has passed new laws to care for 9/11 first responders. We recently made the 9/11 Victim Compensation Fund permanent. This ensures that all those who responded to the terror attacks and their families have peace of mind and first-rate healthcare.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, each year, I come to the floor to recognize someone from Wyoming whose commitment and service have made a real and lasting difference to the State's agricultural community. This year, I would like to tell you about Jim Wilson. Many people know Jim as a rancher. Together with his wife Terry and his daughter Billie Jo and her family, Jim raises high-quality Wyoming beef in Hot Springs County. If you ask Jim, however, he will tell you he works to grow better grass to grow better beef. Like his mother and father, Willard and Maycle, before him, Jim and his wife have built a thriving operation that sets the bar high for other Wyoming producers. Most people know that Jim wears many other hats too. After developing a strong herd of Saler-cross beef cattle, Jim went on to lead the national breed association. He served for a decade on the Hot Springs County Hospital Board, was part of the Wyoming Livestock board at a pivotal time for the State, and has spent countless hours leading meetings for local agricultural and conservation district groups. His work has not gone unnoticed. The list of awards recognizing the Wilson family and their incredible stewardship of Wyoming's precious natural resources is long, and the awards are widely varied. Jim has spent his life improving water, soil, forage, and genetics for the future. Not all of the accolades, however, belong solely to Jim. For many years, Jim has supported and mentored young people across the State to learn, live, and grow in their agricultural pursuits. He has inspired many and has watched them achieve great success. Like his father, Willard, Jim volunteers to judge at county fairs and encourages young producers to be engaged in State associations. Put simply, Jim is a mentor who leads by example. When he served as president of the Wyoming Stock Growers Association, Jim kept his sights set firmly on the future. As the association approached its 150-year anniversary, Jim knew the association would soon be in the hands of the next generation of producers. He worked to draw younger producers in to build an association that combines experience and innovation to make the association stronger. When Jim's presidency concluded, he became chairman of the 150th anniversary campaign that sought to raise $1.5 million before 2022. We all know that, when Jim Wilson sets his sights on something, he cultivates and leads an unstoppable team to get the job done. Working in agriculture is not simply a job. It is a vocation, a way of life, a calling for which Jim, his wife Terry, their daughter and her family are incredibly effective ambassadors. They share their struggles and their victories, they look for creative solutions, and they inspire others to act purposefully. They know there is a better future ahead, as long as good people are willing to put in the work to make it happen. There is no question Jim has put in the work. In a few short days, Jim Wilson will be honored as one of the 2019 inductees to the Wyoming Agriculture Hall of Fame. He joins the elite ranks of other incredible individuals who have forever changed the future of this way of life in the great State of Wyoming. Thea Nuckolls said it best when she said her late husband JW ``saw Jim as a model of integrity, having a spirit of generosity, the heart of humility, and a devoted family man.'' It is with great appreciation and honor that I rise today to recognize the incredible contributions of Jim Wilson. My wife Bobbi joins me in congratulating Jim and his family on this well-deserved honor.