Richard Blumenthal

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in morning business for debate only until 3:15; that the majority leader be recognized at 3:15, with all other provisions of the previous order remaining in effect.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, many of us have come back from a couple of wonderful weeks in our home States, traveling and visiting with families, and had the privilege of spending time with loved ones and sharing our hopes and plans for the new year. Not everyone was so fortunate. I rise today to honor the memory of yet another tragic victim of gun violence in Connecticut and our country. On December 28, in New Haven, shortly before the beginning of this new year, one family's time together with their son was cut short when Javier Martinez was shot and killed. I have his picture here in the Chamber. His memory is with us today, as I ask this body to honor him, along with other victims of gun violence who have died since Newtown, and those who have died before Newtown, and now I ask them to be remembered not only in words but also in action by this body, so that Javier shall not have died in vain. He was only 18 years old. He was a senior at Common Ground High School in New Haven, one of the really extraordinary educational institutions in our State. His teachers and classmates describe him as a kind, intelligent young man who was becoming a leader in the school and in his community. He had a bright future. In fact, he had the whole world, his whole life ahead of him. At Common Ground, a charter school that focuses on sustainability and connecting students with natural resources in their own communities, he was absolutely thriving. I have heard that some of his classmates and teachers at Common Ground are perhaps watching right now or will watch at some point, and I want to thank them for joining in honoring his memory and continuing his work to make our planet, our world, our Nation, and the community of New Haven better, and keeping faith with his memory. Javier cared about his community and the environment and the issues of sustainability and clean air and clean water, and he took action to improve the world around him. Last summer he participated in a highly competitive internship at the Nature Conservancy, where he worked to protect endangered species. A director of this program regarded Javier as one of the most outstanding participants that the program ever had. He spent last spring planting trees--planting trees--with the New Haven Urban Resources Initiative. He planted trees that he will never sit under, but the world will be better for all that he did--one small act, one small part of what Javier did to make New Haven and the world better. This past fall he joined a crew of West River Stewards, identifying and documenting sources of pollution along the West River in the New Haven area. Not only did he have a bright future ahead of him, but he knew what he wanted. He was pursuing the American dream. He was seeking and working to make America a better place for him and for his fellow students at Common Ground. By all accounts he was not only dedicated and hard working, but he had a good heart. He had a great sense of himself. He stayed out of trouble. He had no criminal record whatsoever, it goes without saying. He worked hard at his studies. He was loved in New Haven by his classmates, by his teachers, and by all who knew him. He had a growing dedication to protecting that world. Unfortunately, our society failed to protect him, failed to protect him during the simple act of walking home, failed to protect him from gun violence, failed to protect him in a neighborhood where he thought he would be safe as he walked. On that early morning of December 28, shortly before 1 a.m., he was found shot to death on the streets of New Haven. In fact, he was walking from his house to a friend's house. He did not have a car, so his only choice was to walk. He sustained multiple gunshot wounds and was pronounced dead at the scene. The police are continuing to investigate. Have no doubt that they are working hard. The New Haven Police have been extraordinarily responsive and responsible in combating gun violence, so I know they are going to get answers. Whether they will ever get enough answers to prosecute someone remains to be seen. But I know they are dedicated to finding out what happened on that night. The death of Javier Martinez is a tragedy, heartbreaking. It is heartbreaking, as are many of the random deaths in America resulting from gun violence. This young man is a testament to our continuing responsibility, our obligation, and our opportunity to combat and prevent gun violence on the streets and in the neighborhoods across our country. Just a few weeks ago I spoke on this floor, in this very place, about another promising young person from Connecticut who was killed by a person with a gun whose name was Erika Robinson. The victim of that crime, Erika Robinson, just like Javier, was killed because she was at the wrong place at the wrong time. We ought to remember some of the other victims. We should keep in mind all of the now tens of thousands, just since Newtown, who maybe survived but who are changed and challenged in ways they never could have envisioned. Their lives have been changed forever. Amber Smith, who worked as a manager in a New Haven Burger King restaurant, was shot on September 15, 2013, when two robbers entered that Burger King. The robbers demanded that she open a safe in the business, and one of them shot her in the upper hip and through her leg. She was just 19 years old at the time on September 15, 2013. She remembers thinking that she was going to die and wondering who would take care of her two small children. She almost bled to death but was saved, fortunately, by receiving surgery in the emergency room. So she survived the shooting, but she lives with the psychological and the physical trauma of that shooting every day. These random acts of violence may not always make the national news, they may not always take a life, but they change lives, and they take lives one or two at a time. Those shooting deaths of Javier Martinez and Erika Robinson have become all too often the mundane evil of our time. The banality of evil is found in gun violence, and we seem to accept it all too often with indifference as another news item. Yet it should be as repugnant and abhorrent and unacceptable as the deaths of 20 innocent children in Newtown and 6 great educators because every act of gun violence diminishes us as a nation and as a community. Our country has come to the point that gun violence can happen anywhere. If your life has not been touched by it, there is a near certainty that it will be at some point--tragically, unfortunately-- because far too often communities suffer in silence. We need to end that silence. We need to end the inaction and the acceptance of this mundane and banal evil that lives among us. While we have failed to act in this Chamber, even though we had a majority of 55 Senators ready to approve very simple, commonsense measures to stop gun violence, the President has done what he can through executive action, most recently on mental health. I commend him for those actions. He has done what he can to strengthen Federal background checks for firearms purchases. I thank him for that action. These changes are incremental, but they are steps in the right direction. States have taken the leadership on this issue as well, maybe even more so than the Federal Government. My own State of Connecticut, laudably, has passed laws to effectively ban, for example, the sale of assault weapons. But this body and this government need to act. The Federal Government has a responsibility that only it can address, because we know that guns are trafficked across State lines. Stolen and illegally bought guns are trafficked across State lines. No single State can put a stop to it. We know that without action in this body, mental health will remain an unmet need in this country. We know that without action in this country, background checks for people who buy firearms will be incomplete and inadequate. So Javier's death should be a reminder and a call to action. As the people of his family and New Haven mourn his death, we should celebrate his contributions in making our planet better, in protecting the precious resources that, unfortunately, he was unable to enjoy, and resolve to protect better the innocent people, particularly our children, who at any moment, at any place, may become victims of gun violence.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

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

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am very proud to follow my colleague from New Hampshire and thank her for her leadership in offering the Military Retirement Restoration Act, which I am very pleased to support as an amendment to the unemployment insurance extension bill. For all the reasons I have stated, and others have expressed even more powerfully than I, this bill makes sense. We must extend unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless. The merits of this bill are absolutely indisputable and undeniable. This bill offers a critically important opportunity, and we ought to seize it to correct and fix a defect in the budget agreement that was reached by the very excellent work of our colleague Senator Murray and Congressman Ryan, and that was passed overwhelmingly by a bipartisan majority in this body. It was an agreement that advanced and enhanced economic certainty. It had many advantages, but it also was far from perfect. Its flaws included a cut in military retiree benefits. These benefits were cut by provisions to that agreement that was approved by this body, with many reservations and regrets, and now we ought to seize this opportunity to correct that defect as this measure offers us through an amendment. We can pay for it. It can be budget neutral, if we simply close a certain egregious corporate tax loophole as Senator Shaheen has suggested. I want to emphasize again what Senator Shaheen said so well. We can think of a lot of different ways to pay for the $6.5 billion that is necessary to correct these cuts in military retiree benefits. What is beyond question is the need to fix this flaw. It is a flaw that not only diminishes in monetary terms the benefits these retirees need and deserve, it also dishonors the service and sacrifice they have made. What better opportunity than now, as we deal with the extension of unemployment benefits in a measure that deserves overwhelming support just as the budget deal received, to correct this flaw. There has been a lot of misinformation and confusion about exactly what the Murray-Ryan agreement did to military retirement benefits, and there is a need to address in the longer term the system that provides for retiree benefits, to make it serve better the interests of our retirees, our veterans, our patriots who have given so much to our Nation. But right now, in these next few days, beyond any kind of question or doubt, is the need to correct this defect and to follow through on the understanding that many of us had, including myself, that in fact we would correct this defect. I supported the budget agreement with the understanding, as Chairman Levin of Michigan made clear, the Senate would work this year, as soon as possible, to stop the 1-percent reduction in the cost of living adjustments for military retirees until the age of 62 that would take effect in December of 2015. December, 2015 of that year is a long way off. There may be other opportunities to correct this flaw--the reduction in retiree benefits--but let's do it now. Let's not delay in restoring the benefits that these retirees need and deserve. So I urge my colleagues to join in this effort, paying for this change by making sure companies managed and controlled in the United States can't avoid U.S. taxes simply by claiming foreign status. Many of us have long advocated closing this loophole. It seems to me a reasonable approach, far better than taking away the child tax credit for poor migrant families. Ultimately, the pay-for issue, the offset question, should be resolved, and I believe it will be, if not in this act then in the Omnibus appropriations bill we will address next and then make sure we keep faith. We must assure that we will keep faith with these retirees who have given and served so much. As Senator Shaheen has said, most Americans would agree this kind of tax avoidance is unfair, and we ought to close this tax loophole rather than reducing military retiree benefits. What all Americans would agree with is that we should keep faith and leave no veteran behind, making sure this amendment is voted on and approved and given legal force and effect so we correct and fix the flaw in the budget agreement that has disallowed and dishonored the obligation we owe these retirees. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, the Chair and I earlier today were part of a historic majority--a very bipartisan majority--that voted 60 to 37 to extend unemployment insurance for millions of Americans across this country who are struggling to make ends meet, to keep their families together, to keep a roof over their heads--basic essentials not only to continue living but to continue searching for work. These Americans are not without a work ethic. In fact, they are devastated by being out of work for so long with such destructive results for their sense of self-worth and their family. This measure is limited in its scope and significance. It is only a procedural vote on a temporary measure for 3 months, and only a partial solution to the grave and pressing issue of putting Americans back to work, restoring employment for Americans who want to work and keep their families together, but it is profoundly important. I want to thank my colleagues, Senators Reed of Rhode Island and Heller of Nevada, as well as all of our colleagues who voted for it, and even many of my colleagues who may have voted against it but were torn and, hopefully, will vote for it on final passage. I urge all my colleagues to get this job done so we can send it to the House of Representatives and make sure it is approved there. What is significant about this measure is in fact it was bipartisan. It was overwhelming. It shows Congress is listening; that it is heeding the calls for action from those 4 million Americans, including over 60,000 of them in my home State of Connecticut, who need this measure so they can continue seeking work, hopefully successfully. It is a temporary fix, but it is a measure with profound significance for those men and women who courageously are facing the searing facts of life during long-term joblessness. One of those individuals, in fact, from Connecticut, very courageously appeared with the President earlier today. Katherine Hackett of Moodus, CT, is the parent of two sons in the military, who herself is struggling to keep the heat on and put food on her table. She described her situation in introducing President Obama when he spoke about this problem earlier today. I am proud she is at the forefront of this fight, and I am proud to be fighting with her so that Americans have the benefit of unemployment insurance when they are unemployed for longer than the 26 weeks that is recognized under the statute. This story is one of numbers. We can't deny the statistics. The great recession may have ended for a lot of Americans, but it continues for the unemployed, the jobless, particularly long-term jobless. Those numbers have become almost mind-numbing, but they are very significant. According to a report recently released by the Joint Economic Committee, 3 years after the recession ending in 1991, long-term unemployment was at 1.3 percent. Three years after the recession ending in 2001, long-term unemployment was also at 1.3 percent. Today, long- term unemployment is double those numbers, at 2.6 percent. Here we are, 4 years after the supposed end of the recession in 2009 with double the percentage of long-term unemployed that we had in previous recessions. Our economy simply is not growing fast enough or creating enough jobs to end that persistently high rate of long-term unemployment. About 4 million Americans, more than one-third of unemployed Americans, have been looking for work for 6 months or more. In my home State of Connecticut, long-term unemployment has become even more prevalent among those who have lost their jobs. In fact, 43.6 percent, or almost half of Connecticut's overall unemployed population, are long-term unemployed. That means over 60,000 people. But those numbers are less convincing and compelling than the human stories. I was proud and moved to sit with a number of my fellow Connecticut citizens--hard-working, dedicated people of all ages, some of whom have spent lifetimes working for a single employer only to find themselves rejected and released. Many of them told me they expected to find work right away, within a couple of weeks, and here they are--more than 6 months later, many of them--still struggling to find work and working to improve their skills so they can match the job opportunities that may exist. Rosa Dicker, who has been out of work for almost a year, is a former health insurance project manager who also has experience with health care reform implementation in Massachusetts, our neighboring State. Rosa has sent out 500 job applications in the past year. I almost misstated that figure. I thought it was 50. It is 500 job applications in the past year. And she has been granted how many interviews? She has interviewed three times. Nyrsa Cruz, an experienced social worker with a master's degree, has also been unemployed since early 2013. Despite hours and hours she has devoted to countless job applications, she has been unable to find work. Michael Kubica, unemployed after years of experience in the insurance and publishing industries, went back to school to pursue an MBA. Yet despite his educational experience, despite his degrees, despite his dedication, he has been unable to secure more than temporary holiday season work. Anyone who suggests the long-term unemployed are somehow content or have decided to stay out of work or have abandoned the search ought to talk to people in their own communities--people such as Rosa, Nyrsa, or Michael, who have struggled and worked to find suitable jobs. They are driven, passionate, and absolutely dedicated. One woman I met, Erin London, described it this way: My whole family is impacted. My son asks, ``Am I going to be able to go to college?'' I don't know how to answer. I don't want him to know I am scared. Imagine yourself as a parent thinking--and we have all thought it--I don't want him or her to know I am scared. Another Connecticut woman, Alicia Nesbitt, was proud to be working and to have worked continuously since the age of 16, until she was unemployed. Now she depends on food stamps and heating assistance. These stories are powerful and compelling, even more so than the numbers and statistics, shocking as they are. I hope we will heed those human stories when we come back tomorrow and the next day to vote on this bill. In the long term we need measures such as targeted tax credits and skills training so people can be matched with jobs and so they can prepare for the jobs of the future. Pathways Back to Work is a bill I have introduced that supports creation of new jobs as well as training for the ones that exist. I have introduced it with my colleagues Senators Murphy and Gillibrand, and I think it would do a great deal to address the fundamental underlying challenges that are keeping unemployed people from reconnecting with the world of work. But these measures are for next week or the week after. Right now, the urgency of this week is passing a measure that is fundamentally important to keep people moving forward, searching for work, and to keep our economy moving forward. Those folks who receive unemployment insurance use it to buy clothes or food or a car that drives the economy, provides for the kinds of consumer demand we need to enable our economy to continue moving forward. So we are helping these folks avoid the precipice of poverty and homelessness, which makes their job search even more difficult, but we are also helping our economy. All of us who want job creation and economic progress want it to be our Nation's priority and success. I am proud to stand and join Senators Reed and Heller, and thank also our majority leader Senator Reid for their leadership, because our most urgent task is to move our economy forward, provide these unemployment benefits as soon as possible, and then look toward more permanent measures--skills training, the Pathways Back to Work Act, veterans programs that will enable all Americans to enjoy more equally the benefits of the greatest nation in the history of the world. The challenge of our growing inequality is also our growing inequity. This measure is a start--a temporary, limited start--in the right direction toward making America fulfill its great promise for the future. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, today I wish to commemorate the dedication of Bataan Corregidor Memorial Bridge in Weatogue, CT, earlier this month. Crossing over the Farmington River in Connecticut, this bridge will now honor the patriotism and courage of the brave men from Connecticut and across the nation who fought in the Battles of Bataan and Corregidor in 1942 in the Pacific during World War II. From January to April 1942, American and Filipino forces fought Japanese soldiers along the Bataan Peninsula and the island of Corregidor in the Philippines. When both fell to the Japanese, an estimated 10,000 American and Filipino troops were killed and 20,000 wounded. Another 15,000 American and 60,000 Filipino troops were taken prisoner and forced to endure the Bataan Death March. Dan Crowley of Simsbury and Darrel Stark of Stafford Springs, who were there in combat, are the last two surviving residents of Connecticut who fought in these historic battles in the United States Army following the attack on Pearl Harbor. After Mr. Crowley fought in the Battle of Bataan, he refused to surrender and swam to the island of Corregidor where he was later taken prisoner by the Japanese and endured 42 months in Japanese prison camps. His story is one of many heroic accounts from this theater during World War II. The moving dedication ceremony included a flyover, musical performances, blessing of the bridge, ribbon cutting, and a stirring, closing bugle taps. I deeply appreciate the work of Mr. Crowley, State Senator Kevin Witkos, and the Connecticut Department of Transportation in creating this important symbol of our Nation's stalwart gratitude for the tremendous sacrifices of countless men during this series of battles. The Bataan Corregidor Memorial Bridge is vivid in its simplicity and elemental strength. It is not a grand structure, but like the men whose unimaginable courage we celebrate, it is there in its simple, physical strength. We can never forget the service of the Greatest Generation, who protected our freedom and liberty--all who lost their lives and those who lived to pay tribute to their fellow comrades. This bridge will always be a memorial--a living memorial--used every day by all of us who will continue to remember and thank the brave patriots who fought so gallantly at Bataan and Corregidor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I support the compromise National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014 (NDAA). Though this bill has shortcomings, it will be good for our country and for Connecticut, and it will allow us to keep faith with the brave men and women who serve and sacrifice each day in our military. As a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, I have the privilege and the important responsibility to honor our men and women in uniform by providing for them while they are training, when they are deployed, and if they are wounded. I voted for the NDAA in committee this year, and I will vote for it on the Senate floor because I know that it will support our servicemembers throughout their time in uniform and beyond. This bill funds the training and equipment our troops need to go into battle. It funds the critical weapons systems that they need to protect our Nation. And it provides for them after they return home--albeit less robustly than it should--through medical care and opportunities to build skill sets for civilian careers. This bill is good for Connecticut as it supports both our Connecticut National Guard and Reserve and our State's hard-working defense manufacturers. Specifically, it funds two submarines a year. The NDAA maintains robust funding for the Ohio Replacement Program, the Virginia Class Submarine, the Heavy Lift Replacement Helicopter Program, and the Joint Strike Fighter. It funds advanced procurement for the Army's UH- 60 Blackhawk M Model that will be used by the Connecticut National Guard, and it rightly does not authorize a costly and unnecessary round of base realignments and closures. The NDAA will strengthen our commitment to eliminating the scourge of sexual assault from our military. It includes provisions from my bill to provide victims of an offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice with the same rights to counsel and other protection afforded victims in civilian courts. It rightly eliminates the ability of a commander to dismiss a court martial or reduce a sentence, and it establishes minimum sentencing guidelines in cases of sexual assault. The bill also strengthens rights for victims of sexual assault at pretrial article 32 proceedings and ensures that they will have counsel present when interviewed. I have been very concerned with properly providing for those wounded warriors who suffer the so-called signature wounds of these recent wars: post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury. Just this year, I was saddened by the loss of Connecticut veterans who fought long battles with these illnesses. Though I believe that more efforts are needed, the NDAA will help to provide improved outreach on suicide prevention to Reservists in Connecticut and across the country to hopefully reach additional wounded warriors in need of help. I have also been very concerned with the lack of interoperability between Department of Defense and VA medical records. Right now, when someone separates from the military, the VA has no complete, automatic access to veterans' service-related medical records, even though the Department of Defense has those records. Defects in interoperability have contributed to the unconscionable backlog of veterans' claims. I have worked with Senator Nelson on a bill to mandate interoperable medical records between the Department of Defense and the VA, and I am pleased that provisions on this subject are in the NDAA. These provisions require the SecDef and the Secretary of VA to ensure the Departments' electronic health record systems are interoperable with integrated display of data, or a single electronic health record, and that each is compliant with national standards. Additionally, I am pleased that the NDAA includes provision-enhancing mechanisms to correlate skills and training for military occupational specialties with skills and training required for civilian certifications and licenses or IT credentialing. By prioritizing training and certification, not only do we ensure that our military personnel have the appropriate skills to carry out their duties, but we also ensure that our veterans have a path to translate these skills to civilian life and find work that fits their skills once they leave the service. Finally, this bill strengthens our commitment to ensuring that we do not contract with the enemy. It includes provisions I championed giving combatant commanders greater authority to terminate or void a contract with anyone supporting our enemies, and it prohibits funding to enter into contracts with Rosoboronexport-- a Russian company financing Assad's cruel war against the Syrian people. Overall, I am pleased to support this bill to keep our country safe and our military strong. I look forward to voting for this bill and to continuing to work with my colleagues in a bipartisan manner to support our national defense.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. I echo my colleague's recommendations. Overall, so long as we manage the transition appropriately, my friend and fellow Senator from Connecticut and I believe the new system will save hundreds of millions of dollars and also protect the identities of millions of Americans.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, I am pleased and honored to join my colleagues this morning, Senators Blunt, Whitehouse, and Graham. They have been leaders on issues involving national security and defense and particularly in the intelligence and cyber area. Senator Blunt has a long record of bipartisan leadership in this body, as well as in the House of Representatives and in government generally, in addressing issues without regard to partisan predilections or biases. He has not only led but produced results. Senator Whitehouse has tirelessly pursued this area of cyber security. To his great credit, he has been with the movement for making our Nation more secure and also making the public more aware about the need for action in this area. In truth, there is a saying that ignorance is bliss, but in truth, in areas of national security, that is rarely the case. In this instance, ignorance can do great harm and it is a source of peril. Our Nation is largely ignorant about the threats posed by national security and, more importantly, about the potential responses that must be mobilized to secure our infrastructure, our critical innovative information, and many other areas where we are at risk from a diverse source of threats. It is not only foreign governments, such as China; it is teenage hackers in eastern European countries, it is terrorists around the world who mean to do us harm and put their own movements at an advantage, and it is also competitors in the private world who seek competitive advantage against our own private enterprise companies that have intellectual information and assets. As a result of these cyber attacks, intellectual property is lost, identities are stolen, and America is made less safe. Every day, the United States is under attack--literally every minute of every day--by individuals wishing to steal sensitive information from our government, from our Department of Defense, and from corporate information systems as well as home networks of individual Internet users. The cyber threat has become almost conventional wisdom in some quarters because we know that our military and intelligence communities are certain that this threat must be met. In fact, the next Pearl Harbor will come not from the sky but from a computer network that links to essential sources of intellectual assets and information in this country and degrades or, in fact, destroys them. Senator Whitehouse and I, along with Senators Graham and Blunt, have introduced legislation that would institute new reporting requirements. These requirements apply to Federal agencies charged with reviewing and responding to cyber attacks. In effect, the Federal Government would lead by example. Leadership is important not only for State and local governments but also for the private sector. The legislation would help us better protect our country from hackers wishing to do harm, and it is based on the simple premise that we need to know about the threats we face. The President has taken action--and I credit him--with the Executive order he has instituted, but that Executive order leaves great gaps. The legislation introduced by Senator Whitehouse and me--along with Senators Graham and Blunt--will institute new reporting requirements to us by our Federal agencies. This bill will require that information to be submitted from a variety of agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, the Justice Department, the FBI, and--in my view, most critically of all--the Securities and Exchange Commission. Most Americans have very little idea about what the Securities and Exchange Commission collects by way of information, but, in fact, it is a treasure trove, a panorama and window into the workings of corporate America. Very importantly in this area, they can tell us what corporations--big and small around the country--are doing to protect themselves. It can tell shareholders what they should know. The shareholders, after all, are the owners of these companies, and they will ultimately bear the financial burden of failures by corporate America if they fail in their duties to protect their critical infrastructure. Not only are shareholders affected but neighbors living near powerplants, as well as customers--banking customers, for example, whose critical financial information is entrusted to financial institutions. A vast variety of clients, customers, owners, and others affected by these corporations have a right to know from the Securities and Exchange Commission what is being done to protect against cyber attacks. Senator Whitehouse and Senator Blunt have described in very powerful terms the advantages of this legislation, but let me say that equally important is what it does not do. We need to be mindful that 90 percent of our Nation's critical infrastructure--that is right, 90 percent of it--is owned by private companies, and those private entities have a responsibility to our Nation to ensure that their security standards meet the task of fending off cyber attacks. This legislation should not be the only action Congress takes. In fact, Senator Rockefeller has championed legislation that is essential, and I am proud to be a supporter of it. I supported it in the Commerce Committee, and I am very grateful to him for allowing me to partner with him in helping to move it to the floor of the Senate. This legislation is a very strong complement and supplement to that measure. In fact, that measure would require industry-driven voluntary cyber security standards for critical infrastructure. It would strengthen cyber research and development. It would improve the cyber workforce through development and education. It would increase public awareness of cyber risks and cyber security. I think the measure approved by the Commerce Committee is vital, and this measure very appropriately complements it. America can't fully address a threat that it doesn't fully understand, and this legislation that Senator Whitehouse, Senator Blunt, Senator Graham, and I have introduced would increase public understanding of an issue critical not only to the Federal Government but to all the American people, and it would ensure that Americans know how they are safer or less safe as a result of the extraordinarily dangerous menace posed by a potential cyber attack. I will yield the floor with a question to Senator Whitehouse regarding the Executive order issued by the President and ask, in light of that Executive order, does Senator Whitehouse still feel this legislation will perform a service to protect our Nation?

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I offer my own concluding remarks by saying that Senator Whitehouse earlier referred to our failure. He characterized it as a failure to accomplish legislation during the last session of Congress. Senators Blunt and Graham were very instrumental in that effort, and I was proud to work with them. But that failure had consequences in alerting the executive branch and galvanizing their will to act. So I would not say it was completely without consequence or benefit. I hope we will actually be successful during this session in passing legislation that is so important to moving the Federal Government even further in a direction where it should be going.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I join my colleague from Connecticut to address a specific provision in the Bipartisan Budget Act. Overall, while this deal is flawed, we are heartened to see both sides coming together to put in place a workable fiscal foundation for the next 2 years. But we want to make sure to clarify what we are intending to do with a particular provision in this bill. Specifically, section 203 of the act institutes new reforms to the Social Security Death Master File, which keeps an authoritative record of deaths in this country. These important reforms include a new certification process that will ensure only those properly authorized and able to maintain the information under significant safeguards can access the information on this master file on a current basis, helping prevent identity theft and other abuses. Release of the information to all others would be delayed by 3 years after an individual's death. We would like to emphasize, though, that this provision was not intended to interrupt in any way the legitimate use of the Death Master File in the interim. I will turn to my colleague to explain why we think this is so important and how we think we can avoid this situation.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. I thank Senator Whitehouse for that question. I would observe, in fact, that the executive branch, very importantly, followed a number of the leading ideas Senator Whitehouse and our group fashioned. Of course, we take no pride of authorship or ownership in those ideas, and many of them came from some of the best minds in the administration, who are, in fact, thinking seriously about this problem. So I think it really has to be a partnership--not only a bipartisan partnership in the Senate and the Congress, but also a partnership between the executive and legislative branches. I conclude with this thought: In many of the briefings we had as Senators, off the record or classified, I was struck by how horrified and at least alarmed most Americans would be if they heard some of the stories of how close America has come to the next Pearl Harbor, how close we have come to cyber catastrophe, and how vulnerable the Nation still is, despite the growing awareness in both the corporate and military sectors of our country about this threat. So when we talk about creating awareness, we are talking literally about spreading information that is vital for Americans to know. I will close with the thought that I hope the leaders of this country who have control over classifying information would seek ways to inform the American public about the risks and the dangers posed from cyber attack. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

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

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I asked my colleague from Rhode Island to stay on the floor for a couple of minutes because I wanted to thank him for the erudite and eloquent explanation he has just given for why our focus should be so aggressively and unrelentingly on the tremendous opportunities for saving health care costs and raising health care quality at the same time. I am very proud to have joined him and other colleagues in a task force that is seeking commonsense solutions to lower the costs of health care and at the same time increase its efficiency and quality. The two go together. The phenomenon he just discussed of reducing readmissions to hospitals once patients are discharged also means that the quality of those discharges, the rehabilitation plans and hand-offs to primary physicians, and the suffering and pain for those patients is reduced, and that is just a microcosm of one example of how this goal can be accomplished. We are late in this year, and we have no real time remaining before the end of this year to do the kinds of reforms legislatively that will help advance this ball. But the attention we need to devote to this issue is clearly beyond this year and beyond the next year. We are making progress, and the graphs show it, but there is so much progress to be made in extending lifespans and quality of life as well as reducing the cost of health care. We need to make sure we seize this historic moment to show the rest of the world that we can do better and we will do better in providing health care delivery. The cause of health care delivery reform is one that cries out for a focused effort involving both branches of our government, executive and legislative, and both parties, as well as both Houses of this legislature. The kind of focus given by Senators Cantwell and Whitehouse so penetratingly and powerfully today is the kind of focus we should maintain. I hope in the days or months ahead we will devote more attention by coming to the floor, doing events in our States, and making sure the administration is aware of our concern in meetings. I look forward to continuing that effort in the time ahead. Again, I thank my colleague Senator Whitehouse, as well as others, such as Senator Schumer and my colleague from Connecticut Senator Murphy, as well as Senator Cantwell, for their devoted efforts. I am very proud to be working with them. I see my colleagues are on the Senate floor. It is late in the day, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, over the weekend, the State of Connecticut and the country and the world commemorated with grief and continued pain the first year anniversary of the tragic massacre in Newtown. On the morning of Saturday--1 year after the Newtown tragedy--I attended a church service, a beautiful, moving, powerful celebration of faith at the St. Rose of Lima Church, whose pastor, Monsignor Robert Weiss, has been such a great friend to so many in the community and such a source of strength and comfort. Later in the weekend, I visited with the family of Erika Robinson of West Haven, Connecticut, who was shot and killed at a nightclub in New Haven on October 26. This seemingly random act of violence left Erika dead and five other individuals injured by gunfire. I have spent months and have been grateful for the experience with the families of those victims in Newtown. I was equally grateful to spend this time with Erika's family--Celeste and Greg Fulcher--at their home, and I want to thank them for welcoming me to their home on that day. Erika Robinson was only 26 years old when she became a victim of gun violence. She clearly was a person full of joy and life and goodness for all of her 26 years and including the day she perished. She was building a business, a clothing line. As her business grew, a local store started selling that line of clothing. Those who knew her described her as hard working and driven. She was compassionate. Most recently, she released a special collection in honor of Breast Cancer Awareness Month. She had enormous potential. She did everything right. She played by the rules. She stayed out of trouble, and she had the support of her two loving parents. She was on track to fulfill the American dream, and now her life, tragically, has been reduced to a statistic, unless we make sure it is more than a statistic and that we work and fight to make her legacy one of helping to protect others, helping to prevent gun violence that takes victims like her who are simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, as she was that night in New Haven, when a shooter who was illegally in possession of a firearm--in fact, apparently on bail-- turned to take as a victim someone else in the crowd that evening in the nightclub, and she became a victim that night inadvertently, unintentionally, and five others were wounded. I have her picture here. Erika was more than a statistic. She was a person. Part of her clothing line was this small card she fashioned herself: It's so regular for us to say ``You only live once'', but do you deeply understand that it's real. What I'm trying to say is be fearless. Do things you always wanted to do. Never let anyone hold you back. Enjoy this thing we call life while we can. People going to talk regardless, so be you! Forever, Erika Robinson. May that legacy be forever. May that legacy be with us forever and inspire us to work as we have done on behalf of the families of Newtown and as we should be doing on behalf of the 10,000 other victims of gun violence since Newtown. The victims are not only the victims who perished among those 10,000, they are others who have been injured, such as the 5 who were injured that night when the shooter at that nightclub in New Haven was aiming for someone else and sprayed gunfire that killed Erika, took her as a casualty but also injured others severely and traumatized countless others who saw or watched or heard what went on in that nightclub that night, an establishment that was legally licensed by the State of Connecticut, legally licensed to entertain people and charge for them being there, an establishment that was the last place Erika Robinson knew. Such a promising young woman at the wrong place at the wrong time, a woman who could have contributed so much to New Haven, to Connecticut, to our country. This was a tragic loss for her family that continues to honor her life with courage and strength and a tragic loss for all of us and for the thousands of people who came to her funeral because she had already, in those young 26 years, touched so many lives. We owe it to her and to her family that her legacy will be one of protecting others such as she, protecting others across America regardless of the neighborhood or the place in that neighborhood, whether it is downtown New Haven, an urban area, or Newtown, a suburban neighborhood. It should not matter where gun violence is a threat. We should eradicate it everywhere. It should not matter who may be the victim of gun violence, what her background may be, her race, religion, anything about her. Every human being, every person in the United States of America is deserving of protection that our society failed to give this young woman. We do a great disservice to our Nation when we fail to honor those individuals who may not be in the headlines, who may not be from neighborhoods that we know but others that are unfamiliar to us. We owe it to ourselves, not just to Erika and her family but to ourselves as a nation to do better and to make America safer. She deserved better from the greatest country in the history of the world. We as citizens of that country deserve better and have an obligation to do better. So we will, I hope, leave a legacy for her in her name that speaks to a safer, better America. I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to speak for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, many words have been spoken since Newtown, including the very powerful words of my colleague just now. But the plain, simple fact is no words can capture what I feel about that day. No words ever will capture that day or the days and weeks and months afterwards, when we have grieved and healed and resolved that we will do everything within our power to make sure that kind of massacre never happens again. But equally important is that the deaths by gunfire are reduced or prevented--those 26 senseless, unspeakable deaths of 20 beautiful children and 6 great educators but also the 194 children who have been killed by gunfire since Newtown, and the 10,000 or more deaths caused by gunfire, person by person, a tragic river of senseless deaths that we have the power to prevent, the power in this body and the power in this Nation. As much as we should be shamed and embarrassed by the failure to act, we also must have hope and resolve that we will act. History is on our side. The example of courage and strength provided by those families ought to give us the resolve and the determination to act; likewise, the examples of courage and resolve by Father Bob Weiss, who had a service in St. Rose of Lima on the evening of December 14, one of the most moving public experiences I will ever have. As I said then, the world is watching Newtown. The world has watched Newtown. It has watched First Selectman Pat Llodra, who has led Newtown with her own courage and strength and determination, including coming here as my guest on the night of the State of the Union to be an example for all of us about what a public official can do by her own example, leading by her own example. We will mark, this Saturday morning, at St. Rose of Lima the 1-year anniversary at a service Senator Murphy and I will attend. I have worn since virtually that day a bracelet. I wear it now. It says, ``We are Newtown. We choose love.'' If there is a message for all of us in this Chamber, it is that we continue to choose love. We are all Newtown. Our town is Newtown. All of our towns are Newtown. I see this bracelet literally from the time I wake in the morning to when I go to bed. It will always be an inspiration for me, inescapably our hearts and minds go back to that moment when we first learned about this horrific, unspeakable tragedy. Of course, I went to the Newtown firehouse that day. The sights and sounds of grief and pain are seared in my memory. They will be with me forever. So will be the story of the children whom we lost: Grace McDonnell and Allison Wyatt, who loved to draw pictures for their families and planned to be artists; Chase Kowalski, a Cub Scout who loved playing baseball with his father; Jessica Rekos, who wanted to research orca whales and become a cowgirl. We will never forget the heroism and the bravery of the educators such as Vicki Soto and Anne Marie Murphy. Vicki Soto is in this picture. Her brother Carlos came to a service today here in Washington. He has continued, and so have his sisters, to come to events that provide impetus and movement and momentum to the effort to stop gun violence. Vicki Soto and Anne Marie Murphy literally shielded their students, sought to save them with their own bodies. Dawn Hochsprunk and Mary Sherlach ran unhesitatingly toward the danger entering their school and perished doing so. There are heroes in this story. It is not only about bad people who used guns improperly and illegally; it is not only about evil; it is also about good. The good includes the first responders and police who stopped the shooting when they came to the school and ran toward danger and toward gunfire and thereby ended it, when the shooter took his own life. It is also about Ana Marquez-Greene, a beautiful girl who loved music and flowers, loved to wear flowers in her hair. She was described by Bishop Leroy Bailey as a beautiful, adoring child. That picture evokes the stories of all of those children: beautiful, adoring, a future and a life ahead of them. For all of those stories and the tears, and the teddy bears and tributes that were outside of the firehouse, Newtown has refused to be defined simply by tragedy; refused to be locked in its past. It has moved forward, because Newtown is not just a moment, it is a movement. It is not just a moment in history defined by tragedy, it is a movement to make the world better. It is a movement to make America safer. That is the movement we have articulated and sought to advance. Those families, including Neil Heslin, who has come here numerous times for his son Jesse, have been an example of courage. Indeed, they have been profiles in courage. When Neil Heslin dropped Jesse off at school on the morning of December 14, Jesse gave him a hug and said: ``It's going to be all right. Everything's going to be OK, Dad,'' because Jesse was that kind of kid, Neil told the Senate Judiciary Committee in his testimony. His pride in Jesse, as well as his grief, brought tears to all of our eyes. Jesse was just that kind of kid. He never wanted to leave a baby crying. He never wanted to leave anybody feeling hurt. Jesse and Neil used to talk about coming to Washington, about meeting with the President. Neil met with the President but Jesse was not there, at least physically he was not there. He was with all of us as we worked with Neil to make America safer and make sure Newtown is not a moment but a movement toward a better, safer America. I thank my colleagues for the outpouring of feeling and support on the eve of that tragedy. It was a rare moment of bipartisan unison and feeling as well as words. I wish to thank them as well for meeting with many of those families because they demonstrated a graciousness and generosity regardless of their views on any of the issues relating to gun violence and any of the bills on the floor. That graciousness and generosity I hope will prevail on this issue and again move us forward. The acts of kindness and generosity that followed have been inspiring as well. College students and firefighters have come together to build playgrounds in honor of the Sandy Hook victims. Bill Lavin of New Jersey, on behalf of the New Jersey firefighter system, has done yeoman's work. There are now new playgrounds in their memory in Norwalk, New London, Fairfield, Ansonia, Westport, and Stratford. I have visited many of them. They are distinct, reflecting the character of those children such as Ana Marquez-Greene. The Newtown High School football team took time away from celebrating a perfect winning season to devote their efforts to the children and educators we have lost. The Sandy Hook Run for the Families not only raised more than $450,000 for the Sandy Hook Support Fund, but it also broke the world record for attendance. In millions of actions, large or small, in Connecticut, all around the country, the people of Newtown, the State of Connecticut, and the country showed what compassion, giving, and kindness truly means in action. They chose to honor them by action. Often the compassion and kindness unleashed by the Newtown tragedy took many other forms that were unheralded, unreported, and unspoken. These were acts of kindness that were not in the newspapers or in the public view but simply acts that meant something to the recipient and to the giver. These fundraisers and vigils, emails and postcards, small and large signs of recognition and love from our colleagues, from people across the country, are a form of giving back. They give me hope that eventually we will prevail in this effort to make a difference. Scarlett Lewis, Jesse's mom, is also a hero. She heard about the Cruz family who had lost two of their children to a drunk driver. Scarlett responded with that same resilience and strength by offering to give a fundraiser for the Cruz family. When she was asked about her family and about what she had done, she explained: What brings meaning to the suffering is doing something for someone else. . . . In doing something for them I'm also helping my own healing. Nearly 90 percent of Americans support commonsense measures such as background checks, a number that is virtually unchanged since the issue soared to the forefront of our political discourse in the wake of Sandy Hook. Even in gun-owning households the support is virtually identical, 88 percent. That figure hasn't changed. A mountain of public support has failed to produce measures, but our resolve is unchanged because those memories of Sandy Hook, those examples of kindness and compassion, will drive us forward, as will the more than 10,000 other victims including at least 14 children under the age of 12 in 43 different States. Congress has shamefully and disgracefully failed to act, but that is not the end of the story. There has been one vote, and we lost, but that vote is not the end of this movement. Newtown is not a moment. It is a movement. Surrender is unacceptable; the status quo is inexcusable. The families and Newtown community have refused to surrender to personal despair, and we cannot surrender to political dismay or difficulty. I was moved the other day when I saw a clip of Ronald Reagan endorsing the Brady bill. Ronald Reagan, as President, was a victim of gun violence, as was Jim Brady, who was paralyzed by the same hail of bullets that struck the President of the United States when they were fired by a deranged person, John Hinckley. Twelve years passed before the Brady bill was passed. It was 12 years of struggle, work, resolve, and courage by Sarah and Jim Brady, with eventually an endorsement by Ronald Reagan. The sadness and anger I feel today, prompted by the memory of that tragedy and this body's failure to respond, is mitigated by the knowledge that history is on our side, that America is better than the oath we took in April. The people of Newtown have not failed. The people of America have not failed, and this body has not yet failed. We can and we will do better because Newtown and that vote will be with us. Newtown is more than a moment. It is a movement that eventually will prevail. I yield the floor.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I want to, first of all, thank the chairman of the Armed Services Committee and the ranking member, Senator Levin and Senator Inhofe, for the leadership they have provided to this body and to our Nation in fashioning a bill, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, that truly serves our national security and preserves and enhances our national defense. I want to thank my colleague Senator McCaskill for the leadership she has provided, along with others, such as Senator Reed and Senator Gillibrand, all who have focused on the issues that are raised by the Military Justice Improvement Act--the need to reform and strengthen our system of prosecuting and providing justice to the survivors of sexual assault. I have joined with Senator Gillibrand in supporting the Military Justice Improvement Act because I think it embodies the kind of major reform that is necessary to provide enhanced confidence and trust in this system of military justice--major change that is needed to drive out the scourge of military sexual assault from our Armed Forces and provide the men and women of our military--the strongest and best military in the world now and in the history of the United States--with a system of military justice that matches their excellence. The legislation before us, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, provides much-needed equipment and training needed by our warfighters. It keeps us dominant across the globe and all of the domains that are necessary for our national defense. It authorizes two new attack submarines for the coming fiscal year, and it keeps us on track for developing the next generation of ballistic missile submarines. These weapon systems, these weapon platforms, and all that is contained in this act, are vitally important for the defense of our Nation. The debate about the Military Justice Improvement Act should in no way distract us from that mission to maintain and enhance the defense of the United States. This bill enables the Air Force to move forward with a new combat rescue helicopter that will take injured airmen and others to safety. In June I wrote with five of my colleagues to Gen. Mark Welsh, the Air Force Chief of Staff, to support the Air Force in its efforts to replace the current fleet of HH-60G Pave Hawks with helicopters that can carry more and go further, all the while keeping the fuel efficiency and value that the H-60 aircraft provides. This legislation keeps our progress underway in the development and fielding of the Joint Strike Fighter that will assure that our Air Force, Navy, and Marines are ready to respond. This bill has so many critical and valuable elements that should be at the forefront of this debate and evoke appreciation for Senator Levin and Senator Inhofe and the work done by my colleagues on the Armed Services Committee. So I am proud to support this bill. At the same time, Congress has a responsibility to transform the time-worn slogan of ``zero tolerance for military sexual assault'' into a real plan and strategy that will achieve that goal. For years and years the military has promised zero tolerance toward sexual assault. Yet the actual achievement has fallen short. That is why reporting has been so low and why the crime of military sexual assault is not only underreported but underprosecuted. The goal of the Military Justice Improvement Act is to improve reporting because without reporting there cannot be investigating and there cannot be prosecution, which means there can be no punishment and no prevention and protection. Those are the goals of this major reform: better reporting and enhanced prosecution to deter this horrific crime, and to make sure that victims are better protected and the crime itself prevented. This bill requires the Secretary of Defense to afford rights to victims of crimes prosecuted under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, such as protections from unreasonable delay and the right to be heard. This bill gives those protections even without the Military Justice Improvement Act. It also obligates the Secretary of Defense to ensure these rights are enforceable and affords every victim a special victim's counsel--again, measures on which there is consensus provided in the bill right now. I am pleased that in response to my request to the defense appropriations committee, when this provision is authorized in this legislation, there will be $25 million appropriated to stand up this program systemwide and defensewide. So the legislation before us has many good things even without the Military Justice Improvement Act. I am proud of the reforms that are accomplished in this bill on which we agree. Where we disagree is on the proposal to take prosecutorial decisions out of the chain of command. That is a narrower change that many people appreciate because the rest of the system, which is required for the present command and control authority, would be essentially maintained. What is taken out of the chain of command is simply the prosecutorial decision so that an experienced, trained, objective professional can make those decisions. I really believe this measure, if adopted, as I hope it will be, will lead the military at some point--those commanders who may resist it now--to actually thank the Senate and the Congress for taking these decisions out of their hands so that they can focus on the incredible challenges of military readiness and preparedness, so they can do what they are trained to do, which is to train their men and women and maintain and enhance their readiness so that they can do professionally what is their prime mission, which is to fight wars and defend our Nation. These decisions about prosecuting sexual assault cases can be better made by trained, experienced prosecutors who have the expertise in their field that our military commanders have in their field. I think it will serve the entire interests of our military to make sure that these decisions are made by those military professionals in JAG offices, just as they are trained in other areas of expertise that require that kind of training. I am listening to the voices of the victims as to what will enhance their reporting and eliminate their fear of reprisal and retaliation. On Monday I was joined by four survivors of military sexual assault to discuss the need for reforming military justice. I wish to express my appreciation for Army SST Sandra Lee, Army SGT Cheryl E. Berg, Air Force SSgt Pattie Dumin, and Marine Corps Cpl Maureen Friedly. Each demonstrated that day that their shared experiences of military justice warrant the reforms contained in the Military Justice Improvement Act. I would like to share just one--Marine Corps Cpl Maureen Friedly, who was sexually assaulted by a fellow marine in 2006 while attending the Navy School of Music. She pressed charges against her attacker and requested an unrestricted investigation. I will now read her words into the Record: I went to an NCIS investigator who questioned me about the day I was attacked and, after hearing my testimony, told me that I would have to take a lie detector test to insure I was not filing falsely. I agreed to it but was never asked anything by my investigator again. My chain of command made it very clear that they preferred my attacker, who was a platoon leader, over me and supported him through everything. When I graduated from the school and went to my duty station in San Diego, CA, my new chain of command tried to help me find out what had happened to my case as I had not heard about it for several months. A few weeks passed before we found that my paperwork had been mishandled, and I was told that nothing could be done and my attacker would go out to the fleet. Eventually it was found that he had sexually assaulted several other women and he was administratively separated from the Corps, not charged, and not given a dishonorable discharge. Her remarks say more than I ever could about the need for enacting the Military Justice Improvement Act. The reforms contained in the measure already are a vitally important step in the right direction. Taking these decisions out of the chain of command is important to good order and discipline because eliminating the crime of sexual assault and providing for greater reporting is vital to good order and discipline. Our experience shows that it has worked when our allies implemented it. Whatever the claims about numbers of cases reported in those allies' armies, clearly they are satisfied with the way it has worked there. Finally, let me just say that I appreciate the bipartisan efforts on this bill on both sides. I think that eventually we will see this kind of reform. Whether or not it is approved today, history is moving in this direction, demanded and driven by the brave men and women who have suffered from this crime, the survivors and victims whose voices we have heard, and the commanders and veterans who have come forward to us, all of the major veterans organizations that have made their voice heard to us and who wholeheartedly have said: This kind of reform is necessary to vindicate and support the brave men and women who put their lives on the line for our Nation day in and day out, whose excellence should be matched by a military justice system that truly and really looks for zero tolerance and achieves zero tolerance in sexual assault. I yield the floor. The PRESIDING OFFICER (Ms. Baldwin.) The Senator from Oregon.

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

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be permitted to join the resolution which has been submitted by Senator Durbin, and also a separate resolution submitted by Senators Collins and Klobuchar, relating to the fight against Alzheimer's disease.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, all of us have been touched by this dread and pernicious disease. Alzheimer's strikes families, loved ones, colleagues, coworkers, friends, acquaintances--literally all of us-- increasingly so because the numbers are multiplying almost epidemic- like across the country. Of course, classifying it as an epidemic is difficult to do because we scarcely understand this disease. We are only beginning to comprehend the cause and modus operandi of this pernicious ailment. I am joining on these resolutions because of the need to express and call attention to the deadly and insidious spread of Alzheimer's and the Nation's failure to effectively address it. We know that the numbers of people suffering from Alzheimer's are increasing drastically and this resolution rightly calls attention to the dimensions of the problem. But as important as those numbers are, even more so are the numbers of dollars that reflect the Nation's failure to take action that is so desperately needed. As my colleague from Maine highlighted earlier, we spend $500 million in research for Alzheimer's compared to $6 billion for cancer, $3 billion for HIV, and $2 billion for cardiovascular efforts. These numbers do not reflect any excess spending on cardiovascular or cancer or other kinds of medical problems for which the National Institutes of Health does such great work, as well as others in the private sector, and philanthropic donations as well. If anything, perhaps we should be considering expanding those efforts. But the numbers do reflect the disproportion and inadequacy of what we as a nation are spending on the research of Alzheimer's. The estimate, according to the National Alzheimer's Project Act and its representatives, is in the neighborhood of $2 billion a year, as a minimum, that we should be spending to develop diagnoses, cures, and treatment. We should be doubling or tripling funding. Yet even this minimal funding is in danger due to the sequester, which has also jeopardized many other research projects supported by the National Institutes of Health. This abdication of responsibility is a tragedy for us as a generation who will suffer from it in untold numbers, and for the next generation that could be saved from this disease. I am proud to join in this effort to match the severity of the challenge with public consciousness and awareness and, even more importantly, public dollars and resources that are vitally important to ensure we conquer and cure as many Alzheimer's patients as we can as quickly as possible. We owe it to ourselves and our children. There are many ways in life to feel alone. There are many forms of isolation. Even in this body, surrounded by people, Members can be alone at points--alone in championing causes or alone in thought, but there are few conditions that match the aloneness of an Alzheimer's patient. They are often cut off from the world by an inability to communicate, and we must reach out to those patients who cannot let us know and describe, as they might want to do, their aloneness and their resolve. So for them and all of our loved ones--friends, family, and coworkers--who now and in the future will suffer from the disease, let us resolve to do more through this resolution, and as a nation we will confront this challenge. I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

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

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I thank my colleagues who led this effort. Well before I became involved, Senator Udall and Senator Wyden have helped to lead this effort before there was any real disclosure about some of the excesses that have been so dramatically revealed over the recent past. As a colleague in this effort, I thank them for their relentless courage in blowing the whistle, quite bluntly, telling America there was something wrong, even when they could not reveal exactly what was wrong, saying the American people would be outraged if they knew, if only they could be told. That kind of bravery and strength has given energy and momentum to this debate. I am chagrined that we will not be debating and acting on it in connection with the National Defense Authorization Act if the present circumstances prevail and amendments are limited. I do believe it is past time to be talking about and acting on those issues, to move for greater accountability and transparency. One of the amendments I have sponsored would call for a more adversarial process, to expose more of the truth before the judges who make these decisions through the appointment of a constitutional advocate. The hour is late today. I hope at another time to talk about these issues in greater detail. But the time now is more urgent than ever to confront and address these shortcomings in the present system. I think the intelligence community itself will help us greatly and it has recognized this and all of America will benefit greatly, including their work. I salute the talented and dedicated members of that intelligence community who have done their work literally in secret for so long, helping to save Americans around the globe from terrorism and other threats. I think we need to change the system in ways that are worthy of the challenges they confront everyday, while at the same time making sure we have trust and confidence in America, trust and confidence in the system, trust and confidence in both the need for and the tools and weapons we use to further American intelligence in the combat against terrorism. I again thank my two colleagues who are on the floor and tell them I look forward to working with them in the next few days. If it is possible to achieve these reforms, so be it; if not, we will continue to work.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, my purpose in being here today is to support the Military Justice Improvement Act and the very urgent need to include its worthwhile and comprehensive provisions in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2014, either by way of amendment or whatever measure may be appropriate, and to support the very eloquent remarks made by the Senator from New York. She has been a steadfast and strong advocate of necessary changes in the Military Code of Justice and has acted as chairman of the Subcommittee on Personnel of the Senate Armed Services Committee to approach this issue--a very difficult issue--in strengthening the system of justice for our men and women in uniform with care and caution as well as vigor and bravery. I know how different the views may be in this body among our colleagues, and I have listened to people on both sides of this argument very carefully before reaching my own conclusion. One statistic that strikes me as perhaps paramount in importance is the gap between the number of victims, which is estimated to be close to 30,000, or perhaps more. We don't have a precise number, but the estimates from the military indicate that there are tens of thousands, and very likely more than 30,000. The number of reported cases is around 3,000, or perhaps 2,500, who have sought justice for sexual assault in the military. By the way, only about 300 go to trial every year. At least that was the number for last year. My view is that we must remove any concerns about undue command influence on the process so that more victims will seek justice. The only way to deter this heinous, horrific crime is to encourage more reporting so there can be more prosecution and enable more deterrents through strong and swift justice. The goal is justice. The goal is not necessarily punishment for its own sake but justice. I have listened to my colleagues who feel that the act as written or as amended should keep prosecuting authority with the commander. I have listened carefully to them, and I believe their sincerity and respect for victims is unquestionable. This is not about who respects victims or cares for them the most, it is about what system will best seek justice and deter the epidemic--the spreading numbers of these horrific crimes. I have also listened to military professionals who have come before Senator Gillibrand's subcommittee, as well as the committee as a whole. I have questioned them repeatedly in public and in private, and I am convinced beyond any doubt that they are as outraged and find this crime as abhorrent and antithetical to their profession as anyone in this body. Yet, for years and years, we have heard that the military has zero tolerance. Their renewed vigor is welcomed but in my view has to be matched by reforms in the process which will make sure that that commitment is real and realized in real life. Most importantly, I have listened to the victims who have come, both publicly and privately, to the Armed Services Committee, where I serve, and have told their stories. They have told their stories also in writing and in documentaries, such as ``The Invisible War''--a very powerful and compelling argument for reform. I have listened to them as they have expressed to me that what matters to them is the fear of retaliation and adverse effect on their careers from the present structure of prosecuting authority. I believe that prosecuting authority should be made the responsibility of an independent, experienced, objective, and trained professional. I recognize and I understand that there is immense power in the present system given to any commander who sends men and women under his power potentially to give their lives for their country. Their argument and feeling is that they should hold the same power over punishment for crimes that those men and women may commit under their command. Good order and discipline, I recognize, is a profoundly important goal, and a paramount, irreplaceable, and undeniable goal. Good order and discipline is hardly well served by acts of sexual assault in the military, which is why those professionals say they have zero tolerance for this heinous crime. I have listened to them about why they feel the present system should be continued. We need a military justice system that works as well in Camp Leatherneck as it does in Camp Pendleton or Camp Lejeune, and we need a justice system that works well not just in one season or another, politically, but in all seasons at all times for all men and women. I think the approach best suited to reach that goal is the one that embodies legislation that has been introduced by the Senator from New York, Mrs. Gillibrand. Of course, in listening to all of those sources of insight and perspective on this issue, I have also utilized my own experience as a prosecutor. I would say the most difficult decisions I made as a U.S. Attorney prosecuting under Federal law, and as State attorney general, largely with civil authority, was whether to charge and what violations of law to charge, because, as a practical matter, the charge can ruin a life, and often does. It can ruin a career, ruin a family, and ruin an individual's standing in society. Even if that individual is eventually found not guilty at trial, the charge stands forever. I found that the decision of whether to charge was often the most difficult decision I had to make not only because of the consequences to the individual, but the difficulty of making a decision about whether a fact finder--whether a court or a jury--would conclude that every element of the crime as charged was proved beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the responsibility of the jury or the judge, depending on who is trying the case and who the fact finder is. There are instances where these decisions are air tight and easy, but in many cases, and most particularly in cases involving sexual assault, they are sometimes difficult to make. There is forensic evidence, there are metrics, there are precise scientific measures, but there is also a judgment to be made about whom to believe when there are conflicting versions of an incident. That is why I believe these decisions should be made by professionals who have experience, who know how to prove cases, how to try them and how to bring them to court, and who are capable of making decisions that will not only be fair and objective but will be seen as fair and objective, because in the criminal justice process often perception is as important as reality when it comes to a victim coming forward to put his or her life on the line and complain, particularly in a system such as the military, but often in society in general. Sexual assault as a crime in society is often underreported and underprosecuted because of the fears, correctly and understandably, on the part of victims. We have made progress in encouraging victims to come forward in civilian life and in the military, but there is much more to be done. I believe the reforms offered by the Military Justice Improvement Act are important and essential to that goal. The National Defense Authorization Act in title V has 14 specific revisions to our military justice system that will help ensure a more just process and a more just outcome for cases involving sexual assault. These changes to our current system were drafted in a bipartisan manner that defines so often--in fact, almost uniformly--the work of the Armed Services Committee under the leadership of Chairman Levin and Ranking Member Inhofe, and I wish to express my appreciation for their leadership. Those reforms are important to ensure a crime victim's rights are acknowledged under the Uniform Code of Military Justice and that victims receive a special victims advocate, and that those found guilty of sexual assault will receive a mandatory discharge. These reforms, which were initially proposed by myself and others, will help improve this system. They are a telling refutation of anyone who says, in testimony before our committee or otherwise, that the UCMJ is serving its intended purpose of justice when it previously dealt with cases of military assault. These reforms are necessary and necessary now, and I support them. Yet, as I look at the totality of what is now contained in this bill, it seems insufficient. I am left with the conclusion--it is an uneasy conclusion but a very strong one--that we have not yet achieved what we need to accomplish, namely, a system of justice that has the full confidence and trust of victims and all parties, that has the confidence and trust of survivors. They are indeed survivors. It is vital to encourage reporting of this crime and building the evidence that is necessary for those trained and experienced prosecutors to decide whether to pursue charges, against whom, and what kind of charges. I believe we can strike a balance and achieve justice and not only maintain good order and discipline but, in fact, enhance them. I think, if this reform is adopted, future military commanders will thank the Senate and the Congress for enabling them to pursue what they know best professionally--what is their calling and their mission--which is to make this Nation's national security and defense the best in the world, as it has always been. They are to be thanked, and we all thank them for their commitment and their professionalism in the service of that goal. I am joined in supporting these reforms in the Military Justice Improvement Act by the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service, which last month recommended that ``decisions to prosecute, to determine the kind of court martial to convene, to detail the judges and members of the court martial, and to decide the extent of the punishment, should be placed in the hands of military personnel with legal expertise and experience and who are outside the chain of command of the victim and the accused.'' That is also the view of Jeh Johnson, the President's nominee to head the Department of Homeland Security and former Pentagon general counsel who was asked whether there are shortcomings in the military justice system, and he replied, ``I have recently come to the conclusion that the answer to that question is yes.'' He went on to say: Last year Secretary Panetta raised the initial disposition authority for how these cases should be handled to the 06 colonel captain level, and the problem, I believe, has become so pervasive, the bad behavior is so pervasive, we need to look at fundamental change in the military justice system itself. We are joined in this view also by the Vietnam Veterans of America, an organization that stands in favor of the Military Justice Improvement Act because ``far too many victims fail to report or choose restricted reporting primarily for two reasons: Retaliation and total lack of faith in fair just treatment within the chain of command.'' So despite my deference to our military leaders and my respect for them and my feeling that they are entitled to deference in issues that affect good order and discipline, I believe we have a responsibility in this Congress to fix this system, to repair it and reform it, and do it in ways that vindicate the rights of victims, survivors, as well as the accused, to make sure we do justice. Our responsibility under article I, section 4, clause 14 of the Constitution is ``[t]o make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces.'' That is why the Uniform Code of Military Justice was adopted by Congress, and we will be held rightfully responsible and accountable if we fail to act and make effective reforms and if we fail to put an end to sexual assault in the military. Our military system has some of the most dedicated, our best and our bravest, of this generation, just as has been true in past generations. I am proud to say two of my sons currently serve in the military. We need a system of justice that matches their excellence, that keeps faith with their dedication and sense of duty, that is as fair and just as they are strong and capable in protecting this country. We owe our freedom, we owe our own justice system in this country, and all of our rights and liberties to the defense they have provided decade after decade, war after war, to this Nation. So I urge my colleagues to come together--and I know they are working on a bipartisan basis--to finish the work of reforming our system of military justice. I look forward to the day of realizing a very simple ideal--that every servicemember who is a survivor, a victim of sexual assault, is entitled to an independent arbiter and an objective prosecutor with the knowledge that the victim will be embraced and supported by the system, and welcomed back into the ranks, even as they face the grueling and painful task of being involved in a prosecution. I look forward to the day also when any perpetrator knows, without question, that they will be separated from service and punished if they are found guilty. These ideals are as much engrained in our military as the ideals of valor, honor, and tradition. These changes will help our bravest and finest members who contribute and put their lives on the line to reach those ideals. These changes are necessary and I look forward to accomplishing them, working with my colleagues. Mr. President, I thank the Chair, and I yield the floor. I note the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BLUMENTHAL

Mr. BLUMENTHAL. Mr. President, I am here to talk about the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act of 2013, which I am very proud to introduce today, with bipartisan support, joined by my colleagues Senators Ayotte, Cornyn, and Casey. This bill is a comprehensive effort to update our existing system of sanctions and to reflect the reality that President Bashar al-Assad and his murderous regime continue to engage in a horrible civil war against the Syrian people. This bill builds upon the longstanding U.S. sanctions regime against Syria begun in 2004 to deal with that government's policies supporting terrorism, continuing its occupation of Lebanon, pursuing weapons of mass destruction and missile programs, and undermining U.S. and international efforts to stabilize Iraq. Following events in Syria beginning in March of 2011, a series of executive orders have been issued to address the ongoing violence and human rights abuses that have been supported and perpetrated relentlessly by the Assad regime. Fortunately, Congress has come together on a bipartisan basis to sanction many people who are committing terrible atrocities. Now is the time to add to those sanctions, to enhance and enforce them, and ensure they encompass everyone who is enabling Assad to continue his massacres against his own people. I have seen some of the effects of this cruel war in person. Earlier this year, I traveled to the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan, with Senator McCain and Senator Graham, where I saw firsthand how the Assad regime has torn families and lives apart. I returned home from that trip convinced, along with my colleagues, that the United States cannot stand idle while this war rages on and over 1 million Syrians are displaced from their country--a substantial part--the estimates are 30 percent of its entire population displaced from their homes. I remain convinced the United States should take action not only with sanctions but with more effective humanitarian relief. Sanctions are an effective way to cut off Assad's financing and therefore his source of power. Humanitarian relief is necessary to aid the Syrian people who have become refugees in such enormous numbers, even as we pursue those sanctions. Thankfully, most of the world has come together to denounce and isolate Assad for his horrible abuses. Appallingly, though, a few--most notably Russian banks--finance Assad and enable his continued atrocities. In September, Senators Ayotte, Cornyn, Shaheen, and I urged the Treasury Department to sanction those Russian banks that are perpetrating war in Syria. They are enabling that war as well as the atrocities it has spawned, and there is significant evidence that some Russian banks, including VTB, VEB, and Gazprombank, have given financial cover to Assad and may still be hiding his assets. This bill, the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act, would ensure that those actors do not go unpunished. It would sanction financial institutions doing business with Assad and his senior officials, and it would also provide for a full accounting of all Assad's assets. If Assad is hiding money in Russian banks or elsewhere, we need to know where that money is, because it rightly belongs to the people of Syria, not to its murderous dictator. But our actions against Assad must be wider in scope than simply the financial sector. Therefore, the Syria Sanctions Enhancement Act looks at all the perpetrators of horrific violence who empower Assad and it creates sanctions against them. This bill codifies existing executive orders that sanction senior Syrian officials and people who sell or invest in the Syrian Government. It sanctions anyone who helps the Assad government develop weapons of mass destruction or provides them with conventional weapons. They are responsible for the majority of killings in Syria. They are complicit, and knowingly, purposefully-- they are not merely the enablers, they are the providers of those assets used by Assad against his own people. We have seen how some unscrupulous arms dealers continue to provide arms to the Assad regime that enable his killing. Just yesterday, I was pleased to announce that the Defense Department will stop doing business with Rosoboronexport, the arms dealer that is selling weapons to Assad. Think of it: The U.S. Government was financing, with U.S. taxpayer money, purchases of helicopters for the Afghan Government, to go to the Afghans with the knowledge that that same Russian export agency was selling weapons to Assad. It was stopped, but it is just one example of a company that allows Assad to continue killing his own people. This bill also requires the President to submit a list of people responsible for human rights abuses committed against the people of Syria. The President must submit a list of those culpable individuals who should be held accountable for human rights abuses committed by Assad against his own people, and the bill will sanction anyone who has provided goods, services or support to enable human rights abuses. As my colleagues can see, this bill would do quite a few things, but there are a number of important things it will not do. It will not prevent the United States from supporting the moderates who are fighting against the Assad regime, and it would not jeopardize our ongoing efforts to destroy Syria's chemical weapons stockpile; rather, it creates a strategic framework to ensure that the prolonged dismantling of chemical weapons does not serve as a cover for the international community to ignore the brutal reality of these slaughters throughout Syria. The bill is carefully crafted to ensure that the sanctions do not target the people of Syria themselves who are just trying to survive during a difficult time. That is why humanitarian relief from this country is of such paramount importance. Over the past few months, there has been a lot of debate over what the United States should or should not do in Syria. Over these past months, the debate has focused on military force and many have been hesitant to use such military force in Syria. But that does not mean the United States can or should stand idle on the sidelines as hundreds of thousands of people are dying and the war threatens to create a wider conflict in the Middle East. I think we can all agree, on both sides of the aisle, that we should be strengthening sanctions against the human rights abusers and supporters of Assad and his military that is tirelessly, relentlessly, and purposefully murdering his own people. This bill is a bipartisan attempt to move forward around the common concerns of helping the Syrian people. In the coming days, I look forward to a debate on this bill and the way forward in Syria as we consider Iran's nuclear program and other important factors. There will be a meeting in Geneva upcoming. I view this bill as a means of strengthening our government's hand as we seek peace in Syria and seek to strengthen those forces in Syria that seek to protect their own people. I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important effort to ensure that the United States continues to stand up and speak out strongly on the side of the people of Syria against a regime that is striving solely and single-mindedly to keep itself in power at all costs, in fact, whatever the cost in the slaughter and displacement of its own people.