Cory Booker

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to introduce the Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act, a common sense bill that would fix a loophole in Federal law that denies many Federal law enforcement officers Federal benefits. This week, as our Nation pauses to honor the sacrifices and services of our men and women in law enforcement, I am glad to introduce legislation to accord them with the benefits they so deeply deserve. This legislation has been introduced in past Congresses by my friend and colleague, Senator Barbara Mikulski. I am grateful to her for allowing me to introduce this bill, and I am glad to have her support as an original cosponsor of this legislation. Law enforcement officers have one of the toughest jobs in America. Twenty-four hours a day and 365 days a year, they work to keep our communities safe and uphold the rule of law. During my tenure as mayor of Newark, I spent countless hours with police officers patrolling the streets, and I saw firsthand how difficult and dangerous their jobs can be. These brave men and women apprehend violent criminals and arrest drug kingpins, which carries with it immense pressure and stress. The legislation I am introducing today would fix a loophole in our Federal law. Due to the level of training required and greater danger present in their profession, Congress determined years ago that individuals in Federal law enforcement should receive higher salaries and enhanced retirement benefits compared to other Federal employees. Unfortunately, approximately 30,000 Federal law enforcement officers are classified in a way that precludes them for receiving the enhanced retirement benefits they deserve. As a result of this loophole, certain officers who work for Federal agencies--such as the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, U.S. Postal Service, U.S. Mint, National Institute of Health, and many more--receive lower pensions as compared to other law enforcement officers with similar duties and responsibilities. This problem must be fixed. Correcting this error is not only dictated by fairness, but it is a matter of public safety because of the value of recruiting and retaining experienced and highly trained law enforcement officers is immeasurable. The Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act would expand the definition of ``law enforcement office'' for retirement purposes to include all Federal law enforcement officers. The change would grant law enforcement officer status to the follow individuals: employees who are authorized to carry a firearm and whose duties include the investigation and/or apprehension of suspected criminals; employees of the Internal Revenue Service whose duties are primarily the collection of delinquent taxes and securing delinquent returns; employees of the U.S Postal Inspection Service; and employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs who are Department police offices. These officers face the same risks and challenges as the men and women currenly classified properly under Federal law as law enforcement officers, and they deserve the same benefits. The Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act would allow incumbent law enforcement officers' Federal service after the enactment of the act to be considered service performed as a law enforcement officer for retirement purposes. This legislation has the support of numerous law enforcement groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, Postal Police Officers Association, National Association of Police Officers, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers' Association, and the National Treasury Employees Union. According to the Postal Police Officers Association, ``These officers face the same risks and challenges as their federal law enforcement colleagues who currently receive [law enforcement officer] retirement status. This bill will ensure that officers across the country, who put their lives on the line each and every day to protect us, earn the benefits that they deserve.'' And the National Association of Police Organizations has said, ``This bill will ensure that officers across the country, who put their lives on the line each and every day to protect us, earn the benefits that they deserve.'' Fundamental fairness demands that we close this loophole in Federal law and give all Federal law enforcement officers the retirement benefits they deserve. I ask my colleagues to support the Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act, and I urge its speedy passage.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to introduce the Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act, a common sense bill that would fix a loophole in Federal law that denies many Federal law enforcement officers Federal benefits. This week, as our Nation pauses to honor the sacrifices and services of our men and women in law enforcement, I am glad to introduce legislation to accord them with the benefits they so deeply deserve. This legislation has been introduced in past Congresses by my friend and colleague, Senator Barbara Mikulski. I am grateful to her for allowing me to introduce this bill, and I am glad to have her support as an original cosponsor of this legislation. Law enforcement officers have one of the toughest jobs in America. Twenty-four hours a day and 365 days a year, they work to keep our communities safe and uphold the rule of law. During my tenure as mayor of Newark, I spent countless hours with police officers patrolling the streets, and I saw firsthand how difficult and dangerous their jobs can be. These brave men and women apprehend violent criminals and arrest drug kingpins, which carries with it immense pressure and stress. The legislation I am introducing today would fix a loophole in our Federal law. Due to the level of training required and greater danger present in their profession, Congress determined years ago that individuals in Federal law enforcement should receive higher salaries and enhanced retirement benefits compared to other Federal employees. Unfortunately, approximately 30,000 Federal law enforcement officers are classified in a way that precludes them for receiving the enhanced retirement benefits they deserve. As a result of this loophole, certain officers who work for Federal agencies--such as the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, U.S. Postal Service, U.S. Mint, National Institute of Health, and many more--receive lower pensions as compared to other law enforcement officers with similar duties and responsibilities. This problem must be fixed. Correcting this error is not only dictated by fairness, but it is a matter of public safety because of the value of recruiting and retaining experienced and highly trained law enforcement officers is immeasurable. The Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act would expand the definition of ``law enforcement office'' for retirement purposes to include all Federal law enforcement officers. The change would grant law enforcement officer status to the follow individuals: employees who are authorized to carry a firearm and whose duties include the investigation and/or apprehension of suspected criminals; employees of the Internal Revenue Service whose duties are primarily the collection of delinquent taxes and securing delinquent returns; employees of the U.S Postal Inspection Service; and employees of the Department of Veterans Affairs who are Department police offices. These officers face the same risks and challenges as the men and women currenly classified properly under Federal law as law enforcement officers, and they deserve the same benefits. The Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act would allow incumbent law enforcement officers' Federal service after the enactment of the act to be considered service performed as a law enforcement officer for retirement purposes. This legislation has the support of numerous law enforcement groups, including the Fraternal Order of Police, Postal Police Officers Association, National Association of Police Officers, the Federal Law Enforcement Officers' Association, and the National Treasury Employees Union. According to the Postal Police Officers Association, ``These officers face the same risks and challenges as their federal law enforcement colleagues who currently receive [law enforcement officer] retirement status. This bill will ensure that officers across the country, who put their lives on the line each and every day to protect us, earn the benefits that they deserve.'' And the National Association of Police Organizations has said, ``This bill will ensure that officers across the country, who put their lives on the line each and every day to protect us, earn the benefits that they deserve.'' Fundamental fairness demands that we close this loophole in Federal law and give all Federal law enforcement officers the retirement benefits they deserve. I ask my colleagues to support the Law Enforcement Officers' Equity Act, and I urge its speedy passage.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Madam President, I rise to discuss--along with my friends and colleagues on the Senate floor--what is a momentous anniversary for our country, the 62nd anniversary of the Brown v. Board of Education decision, its legacy, and the work that still remains before us. I thank my colleagues for standing and speaking on this anniversary and understanding that it was 62 years ago today the Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that separate could never be equal, that under the law--at the very least--every child born in America, regardless of the color of their skin, had the right to pursue a quality education. The Court found that separate schooling of children based on their race was in direct violation of the 14th amendment of the Constitution. The Court's finding is perhaps best summarized by this excerpt from Justice Warren's opinion when he said: We come then to the question presented: Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race, even though the physical facilities and other ``tangible'' factors may be equal, deprive the children of the minority group of equal educational opportunities? We believe that it does. Those were historical words. This not only made clear at the time that the deep and profound illegality of segregation was real, but it set a legal standard for generations in posterity that reflects our deepest held American values, that we as a nation believe in equality. We as a nation believe in our interdependency to one another. In the decades since the Brown ruling, the implementation of the Court's decision has contributed to a lot of progress. Frankly, I stand here today because of the progress and momentum that was exhibited by that decision. Right before Brown v. Board of Education, only about one in seven African Americans, then compared with more than one in three Whites, held a high school degree. Today we have come so far the Census Bureau reports that 87 percent of Black adults have a high school degree, nearly equal to that of Whites, which are at 89 percent. Before Brown, only about 1 in 40 Blacks earned a college degree. Now, more than one in five Black students are going to college. This is extraordinary progress we have seen in our country, something we should all celebrate. Under the law, at the very least, the Supreme Court clearly affirmed all Americans' right to a quality education and in doing so affirmed equal value, dignity, and worth of our kids. However, it is also worth reflecting on the anniversary of Brown that our Nation has struggled to live up to these standards in full. Brown advanced a civil rights movement that helped desegregate many parts of American society, but we still have work to do. Let us take this anniversary to recognize not just our progress, to celebrate not just that milestone, but to understand that the work of equality, the work of recognizing the value, the worth, and how much we need each other as a community still goes on. In fact, just yesterday, six decades after the Supreme Court in Brown struck down the doctrine of ``separate but equal,'' a Federal judge ruled that a school district in Mississippi was continuing to operate a segregated, dual secondary school system: one set of schools for Whites and one set of schools for Blacks. Across the country right now, about 40 percent of Black and Latino students attend intensely segregated schools--meaning more than 90 percent minority student body--and White students are similarly segregated from their peers of color. Only 14 percent of Whites attend schools that one would consider multicultural, multiracial, and reflecting the diversity of our country, and too many of our schools continue to fall short of our low-income and minority students. In other words, too many of our students of color and of low-income students are concentrated in poor-performing schools. More than 1.1 million American students are attending over 1,200 high schools in our Nation that fail to graduate one-third of their students. To me, this is an outrage. It is an immoral affront to whom we are. We still have work to do. Our Nation is still struggling to live up to the ideals and, indeed, the judicial standards set by Brown in the realm of education in many ways because of our failure to live up to this standard in so many other areas of our American life. There still exists, in the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, that ``Other America.'' Dr. King spoke of this in the year before I was born--in 1968--about the ``Other America.'' He spoke of the duality that persisted, the disparities in housing, education, employment, and in income. He spoke of what he referred to very pointedly as the myth of time, the misguided idea that only time can solve the problem of racial injustice, the idea that things will work out for themselves. As happy as I am about the progress we have made as a country, I have to say that we still have so much work to do almost 50 years after King spoke those words. Time has not solved the problem. There remain challenges in our country. This duality is more subtle in some ways than it was in 1954, but there still exists injustice in America. From housing to education, de facto segregation along socioeconomic and racial lines has blended together, in many ways replacing what was then de jure segregation. Census data has shown that residential segregation by race has declined very slowly but that Whites still live largely in neighborhoods with low minority density. People of color still live in neighborhoods with high minority density. Many of these neighborhoods were designed through policies that were discriminatory against minorities. We still are seeing the legacies of those policies from redlining to FHA policies, to HUD policies that were designed to create segregation. The legacy of that still exists in segregated neighborhoods today. While poverty rates among African Americans has fallen over the past half century--something we should be proud of--Black poverty rates are still more than double that of Whites. That means the same for kids today. Children of color are often twice as likely to be poor as White children. In fact, one out of the three Hispanic children growing up today are growing up in poverty. One in six African-American children live in what is called extreme poverty on less than $8 a day. This is not who we are as a nation. Our children are our greatest natural resource. In a global, knowledge-based economy, when we are competing against other nations from Germany to Japan, in this kind of economy, the most valuable natural resource a nation has is not oil or coal or gas, it is the genius of our children. Many people think Brown was about achieving greater justice for Black people, but what we really understand--especially in retrospect--as we see African Americans now contributing in every area of life, the reality is this was about bringing justice to all of America. Brown was saying that, hey, we as a country cannot stand if we are apart because a house divided does fall. Brown was saying the truth is, we do better when we are together, like the old African saying that says: If you want to go fast, go alone. But if you want to go far, go together--because we as a country need each other. It is like those words on the Jefferson Memorial, written in our Declaration of Independence, when we knew--to make this country work--we needed one another, so much so that those Founders pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. In this competitive nature, we cannot afford to waste things. Worse than the gulf coast oilspill, we are wasting the potential of our children when we leave so many floundering in poverty and lack of educational opportunities. Children growing up in poverty right now have dramatically negative life outcomes compared to people who are not growing up in poverty. In fact, right now in America, where 20 percent of children live in poverty, only 9 out of every 100 kids born in poverty will make it to college, often an index of being able to be successful, manifesting your genius, finding greater ways to contribute to the whole. We have work to do. In particular, we have work to do in an area that drives so much of the injustice in our country. One of the great ways we are seeing injustice in my generation that was not the case in my parents' generation, that was not a reality in the 1950s, has been the criminal justice system. Something has happened and exploded. Injustice in our country is growing like a cancer on the soul of our country. The same Supreme Court where that great case was decided, where written above the wall is ``Equal Justice Under Law,'' we now see a nation that has a criminal justice system that is not affording equal justice to all Americans. Unfortunately, we see that often falling among racial lines. We have this explosive drug war, which has not been a War on Drugs, but it has been a war on people, particularly the most vulnerable people in our society, from people who are addicted to substances, from people who have mental illnesses, from people who are poor, and, yes, disproportionately directed toward minorities. We now see a criminal justice system where we know, based upon data analysis, there is no difference between Blacks and Whites in usage of drugs. In fact, there is no difference in selling drugs between Blacks and Whites, but the reality is, if you are African American in this country, you are 3.7 times more likely to be arrested for those drug crimes. If you are churned into the criminal justice system as a result of those arrests, just one arrest for a nonviolent drug offense--something that the last two Presidents have admitted to doing--and you are arrested for that, then you find yourself in a world where, as the American Bar Association says, you have literally 40,000-plus collateral consequences, where you find it exceptionally difficult to find employment when you finish with your sentence. You find it incredibly difficult to get a loan to perhaps start a business, to even attempt to get a business license or a Pell grant. If you can't feed yourself, in many cases, you find it hard to even get food stamps or to find public housing assistance. We now live in a nation where we have so overincarcerated disproportionately some areas of our country, that today 1 in 13 Africa Americans are prevented by law from even voting. They have lost their right to vote because of a felony conviction. In some States, the overincarceration for drug crimes is so great that we see, in places such as Florida, that one out of every five African Americans has lost their right to vote. This isn't just affecting those people who are churned into the system, it is affecting their children as well. Today in America, one in nine Black kids are growing up with a parent behind bars, which means it affects their financial well-being and it affects their ability to rise up out of poverty because they are being thrust down into it. In fact, a recent study has shown that we as a country--as a whole--would have 20 percent less poverty if we had incarceration rates similar to those in other industrial nations. So here we celebrate the anniversary of this momentous decision that took a huge step for our Nation in the march toward justice and equality, but because of staggering injustices like we see in our broken criminal justice system, kids often struggle more in school and are poorer and have fewer opportunities for success. So 62 years after Brown, we know our schools don't exist in vacuums. They exist because of the communities around them. When communities of privilege have the same amount of violations of drug crimes as communities of poverty, yet the communities of poverty experience a criminal justice system that has so much more incarceration, we are often condemning children to having greater hills to climb and greater mountains of injustice in front of them. I stand here on this day to celebrate so much this great decision but also to remind us that we have work to do in this country until we can begin to live up to this ideal of patriotism, which is love of country and which to me necessitates that we love each other. We don't always have to agree with one other. We don't always have to get along. But we have to recognize that every one of us in this Nation has value, has worth. We need each other, and we need our children to do well because if my neighbor's child loses, I lose. If they go to prison, I pay. But if they succeed--if they become a teacher, an artist, a biologist, an inventor, a businesswoman--then they contribute to this country and my children benefit because your children succeeded. That is the story of America. We cannot afford to leave people behind as we, as a nation, strive for excellence and greatness. We cannot be a nation that is truly reaching its potential if we are wasting so much of that potential on the sidelines. I would be remiss if I did not also speak to a process issue. While we are still working to fulfill the vision of Brown, it is more urgent now than ever that we have a fully functioning Supreme Court. We were fortunate to have had a functioning Supreme Court in 1954. There were nine Justices doing their job, a President willing to do his job, and a Senate--all working in a time of great tumultuous change in our Nation. People were focused and steadfast--in both parties--toward creating greater justice. With people in their seats, in their jobs, I have faith in America and in our ability to get it right. We need to make sure that today we give every opportunity to get the job done, to do the work that is necessary. It is important that we fill positions and vacancies, and the one on the Supreme Court now is clearly needed. So today is an important day of remembrance, but history shows that we cannot simply get stuck applauding our past. The glory and greatness of ancestry is truly worthy of our reverence. But if we are to honor those who struggled before, if we are to honor those milestones, if we are to celebrate the history that shows us at our best when we came together--Black American, White American, Latino American, Indian American, Asian American--if we are to celebrate those great days of the past, we must celebrate them not just with cheers and remembrances but by redoubling our work in accordance with those values. We must have a sense of urgency. Time is not neutral. We must use it. We cannot just count the great days of the past. We must make this day count as we continue the work of our Nation, as we continue to be the country that we say we are--a nation of liberty and justice for all. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I was unable to vote on the motion to invoke cloture on the substitute to H.R. 2028, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill, due to a funeral I attended for a neighbor in Newark, NJ. Had I been present in the Senate today, I would have voted against cloture.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today the Senate approved legislation to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration--FAA--for 18 months. I applaud the work of my colleagues, Senators Thune and Nelson, and their staff who worked tirelessly to get this important legislation over the finish line. I hope leaders in the House of Representatives see what we passed here in the Senate and ensure smooth passage of the bill. This legislation truly represents bipartisan compromise. While it takes important steps forward, more work remains to be done to ensure the United States remains a global leader in aviation, safety, and innovation. This legislation advanced many key priorities that I was proud to fight for. Aviation is a critical means of travel for people in my State and across the country, and I am confident that this legislation takes strides to improve the status quo for travelers. I worked to advance provisions that help improve accessibility for persons with disabilities traveling through our Nation's commercial air system. The increased and improved data collected as a result of this legislation and the new advisory committee put in place will help fuel effective policies that enhance the traveling experience for persons with disabilities and remove barriers to accessibility. The legislation will help improve the use of disadvantaged business enterprises in aviation infrastructure. I authored an amendment to align the size standard used by the Department of Transportation--DOT-- to identify small businesses, with the metric used by the Small Business Administration--SBA. This small update will enable more minority and women-owned businesses to compete for infrastructure work. This amendment had widespread support in the aviation construction industry including from the U.S. Women's Chamber of Commerce, the Airport Minority Advisory Council, the National Association of Minority Contractors, and I was pleased to see it unanimously supported in this legislation. I also joined colleagues on the floor and through my role on the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation to move the legislation forward on policies that embrace innovation and help the United States maintain global leadership when it comes to embracing new technology and integrating UAS into the national airspace. From a floor amendment with Senator Inhofe that will improve the safe use of UAS to examine and maintain our critical infrastructure to amendments I championed in committee that will move the United States forward on new applications of micro-UAS, we took important strides forward. This technology has the power to enhance search and rescue, deliver humanitarian aid, improve agriculture practices, and news- gathering. I introduced the Commercial UAS Modernization Act to help advance this technology and was pleased to see many of our ideas incorporated in this reauthorization. This legislation also includes provisions to bolster the use of test sites and further important research initiatives that will benefit safety, infrastructure, and aviation technology. New Jersey is home to the FAA's William J. Hughes Technical Center in Atlantic City and a UAS test site in Cape May. These sites play a key role in advancing aviation research and technology, and this legislation includes important provisions that ensure New Jersey will remain a leader in advancing aviation safety and R&D. Lastly, I would like to discuss an area that is ripe for further congressional action: the Transportation Security Administration--TSA. The FAA reauthorization takes some steps towards stronger security, but more work needs to be done to advance our Nation's security, and TSA plays a critical role to these endeavors. I will continue to fight for accountability and further resources to this important entity that plays such an important role in keeping travelers safe and secure. We must ensure there are adequate resources and top-notch technologies deployed to our airports and our surface transportation systems. Again, I thank my esteemed colleagues in Senate leadership and Senators Thune and Nelson for their efforts on this important legislation. I know this will make a difference to my constituents in New Jersey and to people across the country. Thank you.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation approved legislation to reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration. I applaud the work of my colleagues Senators Thune and Nelson. Their leadership on this important legislation was critical. I would like to make clear that, while we took important steps forward with this legislation, more work remains to be done to ensure the United States remains a global leader in aviation, safety, and innovation. Going into this year, many on the Commerce Committee, along with Department of Transportation Secretary Foxx and FAA Administrator Huerta and key stakeholders, aimed high on FAA reauthorization. We aimed high because there are big ideas we need to address when it comes to aviation in this country. From the current state and financing of our airport infrastructure, to completing NextGen implementation, to accelerating commercial use of UAS technology, to new proposals about our Air Traffic Control system, there were a lot of innovative ideas on the table, and while we made strides on some, more work remains to be done. There is widespread agreement that the status quo is not acceptable, and I was pleased to join my colleagues in taking this initial step forward to reauthorize the FAA for the upcoming 18 months. Furthermore, I am pleased that I was able to put forth amendments that were included in this bill to ensure adequate staffing levels at the Newark air traffic control tower. In addition, we were able to secure a much-needed study of the New York and New Jersey airports, which cover the busiest airspace in the country. Findings from this study will enable us to make informed decisions about how best to address this staffing problem in the future. I am also concerned about staffing levels at the Transportation Security Administration, TSA. There have been incredibly long delays at Newark airport because of inadequate staffing of TSA agents at our airport. Safety is absolutely paramount in our airports. It is my hope that we can achieve both topnotch security and an efficient, reliable process for travelers using our airports. Increased staffing should help us achieve that goal. In this reauthorization, I was pleased to work with Senator Cantwell to increase competition in the Newark airport with the hope that increased competition and opening up more flight slots at the airport may yield more options and price points for consumers. But I must stress that these changes cannot move forward without ensuring the airport is equipped to handle more traffic and passengers. I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues on this issue and am excited by the opportunities this could bring for my constituents. We also made progress on furthering the integration of unmanned aerial systems, UAS, or drones into our airspace in our legislation. This technology is literally taking off around the world. It has the power to enhance search and rescue, deliver humanitarian aid, improve agriculture practices, and newsgathering. I introduced the Commercial UAS Modernization Act to help advance this technology and was pleased to see many of our ideas incorporated in this legislation. I worked with committee leadership to further advance a microUAS rule, which would allow U.S. businesses to fly micro-drones under 4.4 pounds responsibly and safely. Advancing microUAS use will bring tremendous innovations and new efficiencies across the country and will keep the United States on par with other developed nations who have been making great strides ahead of us in utilizing this technology. From improving research to providing unmanned bridge inspections, the benefits of this technology are truly limitless. UAS has the power to save lives and create new efficiencies across industries. I am excited to see what the innovators and entrepreneurs come up with as a result of our rule which sets forth clear safety guidelines for responsible operation. Finally, I want to address a couple of amendments that I put forth that were not included in this legislation and express my sincere hope that the chairman and ranking member will work with me before this bill gets to floor. I introduced two amendments to the bill that would address disadvantaged business enterprise, or DBE, projects. The goal of this program, of course, is to promote equity and inclusion in federally financed transportation projects. While neither of these amendments were incorporated into this legislation as of yet, I am confident that we can work together to advance this important policy goal. One amendment would ensure conformance of the DOT size standard for small businesses to the metric defined by the Small Business Administration. This update will enable more minority and women-owned businesses to compete for infrastructure work. The second amendment sets goals for minority and women-owned businesses on projects financed only by passenger facility charges, or PFCs. I ask the chairman and ranking member to continue to work with me as this bill goes to the floor to advance these two important goals. Thank you.

Mr. BOOKER

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

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I rise today to address what I believe is the urgency of the moment, really the test of the time. We have a Constitution that was designed for three coequal branches of government. We know the importance of each of those branches of government and the roles they have are spelled out in the Constitution. A fully functioning Supreme Court--one of the coequal branches--is of the utmost importance to the proper function of our democracy. Justices decide cases that shape the daily lives of all Americans. Even one Justice can deeply affect the rights and liberties of the American people for generations to come. Yesterday, the President nominated Chief Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court of the United States. A clear and plain reading of the text of the Constitution says explicitly in article II, section 2, that it is the duty of the Senate to provide ``advice and consent'' to the President on key nominations, particularly Justices to the Supreme Court. I, along with my 99 colleagues, took an oath of office. We swore to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and to faithfully discharge the duties of the offices we hold. There was no addendum to that oath that excused us from our responsibilities during a Presidential election year. The people of New Jersey elected me to serve a full 6-year term. That means my duties and obligations as a Senator--or the duties and obligations of each of the 100 Senators in this body--should not be interrupted by a Presidential year. That is especially true when those duties are explicitly laid out in the Constitution and when the duties impact a coequal branch of government, such as the Supreme Court. I have only served in the Senate since October of 2013. This is my first Supreme Court nominee to consider, and I look forward to thoroughly reviewing Chief Judge Garland's record, to meeting with him face to face, and hopefully, I believe rightfully, taking an up-or-down vote on his confirmation. That is what all of us swore an oath and signed up to do when a vacancy occurs on the Supreme Court. That is the duty the American people expect of us--to abide by the Constitution and provide our advice and consent regarding a Presidential nomination of this significance--a lifetime appointment--to the Supreme Court, a coequal branch of government. We may not ultimately agree on whether Chief Judge Garland should be confirmed. The Senate can vote no. Senators have that independent choice. It happens almost every day here where we disagree on issues. There is no guarantee in the Constitution that the President's nominee should get confirmed. But we should agree at least to do the job we were elected to do and to allow the confirmation process to move forward. That is bigger than any one party. Now, as I understand it, Chief Judge Garland is highly respected, experienced, and is considered by many to be a deliberate jurist whom the Senate overwhelmingly confirmed in 1997 to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, which is known as the second highest court in the land. His nomination to be an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court is certainly deserving of our consideration. Chief Judge Garland, in fact, has more Federal judiciary experience than any other Supreme Court nominee in history. He currently serves as Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit Court, a court where he has served for almost 19 years. Previously, he has served under both Democratic and Republican Presidents at the U.S. Department of Justice. He first worked as Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division of DOJ and later served as the Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General. In those posts, he supervised high- profile cases at the Department of Justice such as the prosecution of the Oklahoma City bomber, which ultimately brought Timothy McVeigh to justice. To call his qualifications impressive is an understatement. Chief Judge Garland has dedicated his life to public service, and his lengthy career reflects his commitment to the high ideals etched on the Supreme Courts itself, ``Equal justice under law.'' He has said, ``The role of the court is to apply the law to the facts of the case before it--not to legislate, not to arrogate to itself the executive power, not to hand down advisory opinions on the issues of the day.'' No wonder he is known in legal circles and around Capitol Hill for his careful opinions and lack of overt ideological bias. Chief Judge Garland is so well admired, so highly regarded, and so accomplished that his appeal transcends the typical partisan divisions that we too often see in Washington. There is no possible justification--based on this nominee's reputation, his experience, his dedication, his service, and his work-- to ignore, blockade, or stonewall Chief Judge Garland's nomination or to deny him a hearing and a vote. There is no reason for that. There is certainly no historical or constitutional precedent behind such a blockade. Since committee hearings began in 1916, every pending Supreme Court nominee has received a hearing, except for nine nominees who were confirmed within 11 days. So what is being suggested--to not even meet with this nominee or to not even give this nominee a hearing in committee--is unprecedented in our Nation's history. The Senate has previously confirmed Supreme Court nominees during a Presidential election year. History shows us that the Senate has previously confirmed a Supreme Court nominee at least 17 separate times during the Presidencies of liberals and conservatives, Republicans and Democrats, alike. We have even held confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominees at least five times in Presidential election years since the hearing process began in 1916. Thus, the excuse that we should not move forward with the confirmation process for Chief Judge Garland because this is a political election season simply falls flat in the face of our history. In fact, President Franklin D. Roosevelt and, more recently, President Ronald Reagan saw their Supreme Court nominees confirmed in a Presidential election year. Since 1975, it has taken, on average, a little over 2 months for the full Senate to consider a nomination before voting. It is only March, so there is plenty of time to consider and confirm a nominee. There is no reason why Chief Judge Garland cannot be confirmed by even the end of May, given the average time of recent Supreme Court confirmations, which is more than ample time for the next Justice to be on the Court before the next Supreme Court term begins in October. When the Supreme Court, that coequal branch of government, has a body of work to do, for the Senate to deny this nominee a hearing and a vote we would also deny that coequal branch of government its full, functioning complement of members. This is a historic time and a critical test for this distinguished body. It is a time that will test how dignified our confirmation process will be for future Supreme Court nominees. It provides us an opportunity, amidst all of the partisanship, amidst all of the delays that are going on, amidst all of the partisan rhetoric, for this body to rise above the fray. We can show that the Senate, at its best, treats nominees to our highest court with a level of dignity, honor, and respect. Indeed, we can show a greater fidelity to the Constitution than to party, and show that we are not susceptible to the partisan winds of the time. I believe Chief Judge Merrick Garland deserves a dignified confirmation process. It is up to each and every Senator to decide whether he should be a Supreme Court Justice. For me, this moment in time is not just about the individual; it is also about how we as a body, the Senate, will do business and whether we will do our jobs even in Presidential election years. I have heard some of my colleagues say simply: Let the people decide. That sentiment appears to resonate at first, especially since a first principle of any democracy is to let the voters decide important issues. But in reality the people have already decided. They decided when they voted for each of the 100 Members of this distinguished body, which tells us that we should do our duty. The people decided when they voted for President Barack Obama for a second consecutive 4-year term. The people did not decide that the President should be a 1-year President or a 2-year President, but that he should serve a full 4-year term and conduct his duties--his sworn duties--accordingly. No Senator nor the President should shirk from fulfilling their Constitutional obligations. The people in this democracy decided when they elected us. We should do our job and give Chief Judge Garland a hearing and a vote. Our country has a deep history of fights, which have taken place not only in this body but in our larger democracy. There have been divisions and factions in this country. The Federalist Papers literally acknowledged that there would be divisions and fights, but the Constitution was designed to call us to a higher purpose, to overcome our petty divisions, and to unite us. Our Nation is mighty and strong, and I am so proud of that because, as much as our differences matter, we always seem to understand that our country matters more. The people who founded our Nation understood that we would have differences of opinion and ideology. They understood that our differences and diversity of thought would make our country great, but they also understood that, in order for our Nation to succeed and endure, we must be loyal to our ideals and principles. Those ideals and principles are enshrined in the Constitution itself and reflected in our democracy, and that is what brings us together. In fact, it harkens to the very hallmark ideal of our country: ``E Pluribus Unum,'' out of many, one. It is written into the culture of our country. There is an old African saying: If you want to go fast, go alone, but if you want to go far, go together. When our Founders drafted the Declaration of Independence, they enshrined for all time the ideal that we are individuals endowed by our creator with inalienable rights. The Founders ended that national charter by pledging their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to each other. There has been no greater honor in my life than when I stood in this well before the Vice President and swore my oath to uphold the Constitution. In fact, if I ever have to, I will sacrifice myself for my country. These are the ideals and this is the honor that I believe has helped our great country persevere. Now we are faced with a test where two conflicting ideals have been put forth: whether a President and a Senate should fulfill their obligations all the way to the end of their sworn terms or whether we should begin to truncate the powers of a Presidency and the powers of individual Senators and suspend our constitutional obligations because it is an election year. To me, that undermines the purpose and the spirit of our constitutional institution. As I said, the nomination of Chief Judge Garland to the Supreme Court will be a greater test for the Senate and the constitutional values we hold dear. I worry we will fail this test and descend deeper into the kind of divisiveness that undermines our Constitution. I believe this is a time that calls for an honorable stance. We have an extremely competent Supreme Court Justice nominee before us. I am not going to blockade his nomination. I am not going to avoid meeting with this distinguished nominee. I hope we will hold hearings and a vote so that Senators may decide whether this nominee is worthy of sitting on the Nation's highest Court. I hope that each individual Senator will honor the precedent that has been continuous for years and years and years and then allow this nominee an up-or-down vote. The purpose of our sacred Constitution, as spelled out and written in article II, section 2, is to allow the President to put forward a nominee and the Senate to give its ``advice and consent,'' which I believe means an up-or-down vote on a nomination. Again, we are here because greater Americans made a pledge to each other. As different as they were, they came together and wrote a Constitution and a Declaration of Independence. We are here because people greater than we are pledged to each other their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. Let us harken back to that honor. Let us put forth our sacred honor now and not allow this country to lurch even deeper into divisiveness. Let us unify and show that, yes, there are differences; yes, there are divisions; yes, there is partisanship, but in the end, we will unite around those bonds that hold this Nation together and ensure that our democracy functions for years, decades, and generations to come. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to honor the 40th anniversary of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Incorporated, CBCF. It is fitting that during the month we celebrate Black history, we commemorate the decades of service CBCF has rendered to the Nation by advancing policy issues that impact the global Black community. Black History Month is an ideal time to reflect on the ways the law has shaped the African-American experience. Our Nation has come a long way since the time when schools were segregated by law. No longer does the law bar African Americans from the voting booth. Today we have African-American Members of Congress who help craft the law; Yet the important work of civil rights remains unfinished. Since 1976, CBCF has been a critical partner with Congress in the fight for equal rights. As a nonpartisan nonprofit institute dedicated to eliminating racial disparities, CBCF has served as an inspiration to not just African Americans, but to people across the globe. However, its legacy and impact have been far from symbolic. From helping to make the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a Federal holiday, to rebuilding communities impacted by Hurricane Katrina, to working on major legislation like the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, to building a virtual library project to shed a spotlight on the work of Black-elected officials, CBCF has stood alongside African-American elected leaders on some of the most critical policy issues of our time. As we move in 2016, the work of CBCF is more important than ever. Today people of color face disparities in the areas of criminal justice reform, voting rights, and economic development both at home and abroad. Its founders--Nira Hardon Long, Albert Nellum, and Congresswoman Yvonne Burke--envisioned CBCF as an important contributor in the quest for racial equality. The need remains. The vision lives on. And we have more work to do. I am confident CBCF will continue to serve our country admirably and protect African Americans vigorously. I salute CBCF for their service and celebrate their 40th anniversary. This year also marks the 45th anniversary of the founding of the Congressional Black Caucus, CBC. I express my appreciation to the 13 founding members of the CBC in 1971 and the 17 members of the CBC class of 1976 for paving the way for African-American Members of Congress, like me, to follow in their footsteps. Their dedication to ensuring America fulfills the promise of equal justice for all serves as a constant inspiration. I stand on the shoulders of giants in CBC, and I salute their sacrifice. (At the request of Mr. Reid, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the Rutgers University-Newark debate team for celebrating its victory at the National Debate Tournament at the University of Missouri Kansas City, UMKC. The Rutgers University-Newark debate team, founded in 2008, is sponsored by the School of Public Affairs and Administration and the Office of the Chancellor, Newark. They have competed in tournaments hosted by Harvard, the U.S. Military Academy, the U.S. Naval Academy, and James Madison University and outranked schools such as Boston College, Dartmouth, and New York University. Director of debate, Christopher Kozak, has led the team to 3 consecutive years as the 1st- ranked team in the Northeast; and in the 2014-2015 year, the team was the 14th-ranked team nationally. Since 2011, the Rutgers University-Newark debate team has hosted an ever-growing collegiate tournament every year and a high school tournament in collaboration with the Newark Debate Academy. They support debate from the elementary to high school level by offering internships as assistant coaches at many local schools. RU-N debate team has also participated in a series of public debates, including a debate I participated in about student debt hosted at Rutgers University-Newark. From September 11 to 15, the Rutgers University-Newark debate team sent two teams to the Baby Jo Memorial Debate Tournament at UMKC, the first national-level debate tournament of the season. Programs from the University of Texas, University of Kansas, Oklahoma University, the University of Iowa, and others participated in the tournament as well. The team of Nicole Nave and Devane Murphy won six of eight of their preliminary debates and were awarded 6th-place speaker and 11th-place speaker, respectively. The Rutgers University-Newark debate team entered the elimination rounds as the seventh-ranked team and continued to the final round to face the first-ranked team in the Nation, UC Berkeley. By a 2-to-1 decision, the RU-N team defeated UC Berkeley to be crowned champion. Going into the 2015-2016 season, this means the Rutgers University- Newark team will be ranked the No. 1 team in the Nation. I am proud to acknowledge this landmark achievement in the Rutgers University-Newark Debate Team's history and its efforts to support debate at all age levels. Thank you.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. I thank my colleague, and Senator Shaheen as well, for emphasizing what I think needs to be emphasized, which is that we have in the IAEA an ability to do the most intrusive inspections ever before seen on the planet Earth. That agency--an important point Senator Shaheen was making--needs to be funded and funded well. We need to make sure the international community is standing there, and America needs to lead in that way. I anticipate hearing Senator Shaheen also make the point, though, that it is the height of malfeasance for us here in this country not to have people in the right places to do the other things necessary to hold Iran accountable. We can't sound like a hawk around the debate over the JCPOA and then sound like a chicken when it comes to putting the funding forward necessary to prevent them from engaging in destabilizing activities in the region. I am grateful Senator Shaheen will make that point further, but I just want to review again what has been accomplished come implementation date because it is still an extraordinary victory for diplomacy, taking the spectre of a nuclear- armed Iran and evaporating, eviscerating, pushing it back at least for 15 years. In that region, we now have the spectre of a nuclear-armed Iran pulled back, and we have the ability of moving forward with greater diplomacy. In order to get there, some pretty extraordinary things have happened. We have now effectively blocked Iran's uranium pathway to a bomb, with 12 tons of enriched stockpile--virtually all of its stockpile--shipped out of its country, and two-third of Iran's centrifuges have been taken offline. So there has been a significant removal of Iran's pathway. In addition, we have blocked the plutonium pathway. The heavy water reactor in Iran has been filled with concrete. It is no longer operational. It has been permanently disabled. This makes sure that pathway to producing weapons-grade plutonium has been eliminated for the foreseeable years in the future. Again, it has established unprecedented monitoring. The IAEA has gained unprecedented 24/7 access to all of Iran's nuclear facilities, including the pathway toward a weapon. Now we have intrusive monitoring and intelligence-gathering capabilities we never had before. Most recently, Secretary Kerry was able to call upon his Iranian counterpart to secure the release of sailors. The reason why I say that is the quick turnaround of the sailors being released shows that these historic steps of the JCPOA have put us in an environment where diplomacy works in other critical areas. Now, let's be clear, and these are important points I want to make. We must remain vigilant as a Congress and we must be vigilant in this body to make sure that other areas of Iran's activities are being watched in every single way and that there are repercussions for any Iranian violations of its nuclear agreements. This first step is impressive and historic and has really done a lot of good in removing that nuclear threat for at least 10 to 15 years, but it must come with real repercussions for any violations. The only way to ensure that the path of diplomacy is validated is to hold Iran accountable. It must meet all of the commitments--not just those for implementation day but during the whole process of the JCPOA for the many years ahead. Again, the oversight and engagement of Congress on monitoring provisions of this agreement are absolutely vital. That is in many ways a chorus of conviction amongst my colleagues speaking here tonight to make unmistakably clear that we have eyes and ears on this agreement. All of my colleagues are saying on the floor today that we expect Iran to test the bounds of the JCPOA, but if there are signs that Iran is not abiding by the terms of the agreement, we are firm in our conviction that Congress must not hesitate to levy new economic sanctions, isolate Iran diplomatically and financially, and use security and military measures if that is what it takes to keep them from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran's obligations under the JCPOA are ongoing and must be continually verified. It is one thing for Iran to cooperate sufficiently to achieve the transfer of frozen assets and the dismantling of the international sanctions regime; it is quite another for it to cooperate in an ongoing basis after these aims have been achieved. That is the responsibility of the administration and this Congress. The JCPOA must serve as one part of a larger strategy with Iran. This is about the nuclear agreement and pushing back the spectre of a nuclear-armed Iran. But this is just one part--it must be just one part of a larger strategy with Iran. The diplomatic success with the JCPOA is commendable, but tensions between our closest partners in the region and Iran remain high. I was just there, and we saw the concerns of the Israelis, of Saudi Arabia, of Turkey. Iran is continuing its destabilizing activities, testing ballistic missiles, and further flaming tensions in the region. These events demand that we be even more attentive and engaged so that our allies and others know that the United States will not hesitate in the face of Iran's continued defiance of international rules. The implementation of the JCPOA is again an important step, but as a stand-alone strategy, it is just not enough. In addition, Iran has been a bad actor in nonnuclear areas, and the United States needs to hold it responsible. Therefore, in addition to the accountability measures we are taking with the nuclear regime, there must be an understanding that we cannot allow the Iranians to grow the shadow of this agreement to cover all their other nonnuclear destabilizing activities. Congress and the administration must be prepared and must be willing to levy appropriate economic sanctions needed to respond robustly to these destabilizing activities. I believe it is unacceptable for us to move forward in any way that allows Iran to flaunt international law to violate any of the balance of the agreements we have made. We need to make sure we meet them. Iran could try to use the additional funds they receive through this deal to do things that undermine regional security. That cannot be allowed. We must continue to work closely with our allies and respond to every single bit of Iranian aggression that undermines international order and violates international regions. With that, I turn back to Senator Coons to continue this dialogue.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to support the nomination of John Michael Vazquez, whom the President nominated for a lifetime appointment as a United States district judge for the district of New Jersey. I thank Majority Leader McConnell and Minority Leader Reid for giving Mr. Vazquez a vote on the Senate floor. I appreciate Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Leahy and their respective staffs for all their hard work on moving this well-qualified judicial nominee through the Judiciary Committee. I also want to thank Senator Menendez, New Jersey's senior Senator, for his hard work on this judicial appointment. The district of New Jersey currently has four judicial vacancies, all of which are judicial emergencies. This means that a very heavy caseload exists in that judicial district which, if left unremedied, undermines the quality and pace of access to justice for the people of New Jersey. According to the Administrative Office of the Courts, each judgeship in the district of New Jersey has over 650 weighted filings. That is unacceptable. Senator Menendez and I are committed to breaking the logjam and ensuring New Jerseyans gain more access to justice. Mr. Vazquez is a well-qualified nominee. He has worked in both public service and private practice and has experience in both criminal and civil cases. His time in public service includes stints as a Federal prosecutor in the U.S. attorney's office for the district of New Jersey and attorney in the New Jersey State attorney general's office where he rose up the ranks to become the first assistant attorney general. He is now a partner in private practice at a Roseland, NJ, law firm. Mr. Vazquez has litigated both criminal and civil cases, which I am confident will make him a fine and well-balanced jurist. As a Federal prosecutor, he handled a wide variety of Federal criminal cases, including major narcotics prosecutions, as well as securities and health care fraud cases. In the state attorney general's office, he focused on criminal matters, including public corruption and financial fraud. In private practice, he specialized in criminal and civil law. He has excellent credentials. He graduated summa cum laude from Seton Hall University School of Law and earned his undergraduate degree from Rutgers University--two prominent New Jersey educational institutions. He also clerked for a well-respected judge on the New Jersey Superior Court bench, appellate division. Mr. Vazquez has also given back to his community. He won numerous awards for his dedication to his community and to law enforcement, including the Latino Legal Community Award from Seton Hall University School of Law's Latin American Law Students Association; the Excellence in Hispanic Leadership Award from the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs' Center for Hispanic Policy; and recognition from the New Jersey County Prosecutor's Association and the New Jersey State Police. The American Bar Association Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary has unanimously rated Mr. Vazquez well-qualified to be a district court judge, the highest possible rating. Last September, he was favorably reported out of the Judiciary Committee by a unanimous voice vote. I am confident this well-qualified nominee will serve honorably on the Federal bench. I urge my fellow Senators today to confirm Mr. Vasquez as a United States district judge to the district of New Jersey. I look forward to continue working with Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Leahy and Senate leadership to confirm more judicial nominees to fill vacancies in the district of New Jersey so that we can eliminate existing judicial emergencies.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize the life and legacy of New Jerseyan and proud Newarker Carl Sharif, who passed away on September 30 at the age of 72. Carl was a dear friend and mentor to me at the dawn of my career in public service. He will be greatly missed by the city of Newark and by all who knew him. A son of Newark, Carl began his career as an aide to Mayor Hugh Addonizio in the 1960s, and he remained a dedicated public servant for the rest of his life. During times of great tumult and change, Carl was a steady presence in Newark, working from within its government to strengthen the city's spirit and foundation. In 1970, Carl helped to lead the campaign to elect Kenneth Gibson, the first Black mayor of Newark. He served as an aide to Mayor Gibson and as a member of Newark's school board, quickly becoming its president. Carl was incredibly generous with his time and with his tremendous political and institutional knowledge. He served as one of my earliest mentors in professional politics, and he led me through my first campaign for city council and my second campaign for mayor. It was Carl who insisted that the key to significant and lasting change in our city was through walking every street, knocking on every door, and talking with every Newarker. Carl reminded all of us that we were never to forget the people we were elected to serve, and I will be forever grateful for his wisdom, support, and advice through the years. I cherish all that he taught me, and I will do everything I can to honor his legacy through my work and life. Carl was committed to ensuring the best for Newark and all of its people. He devoted himself wholly to our city and its people, and they loved him in return. For his family, friends, our city, and our State, Carl leaves a legacy of public service and unwavering faith in the goodness of our community. As we reflect on this inheritance, I ask that my colleagues join me in honoring Carl Sharif's love for and service to his city and its people and in remembering his extraordinary life.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Will the Senator yield for a question?

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, first, I echo the concerns of my colleagues here. It was extremely valuable to be able to travel with Senators Heitkamp, Kaine, and Coons as part of the eight-Member delegation to the IAEA, and meet with the individuals in charge of the inspections, as well as to go to Israel, and meet with Benjamin Netanyahu in a private setting about the concerns Senator Kaine articulated. In addition to that, we visited with other allies: Saudi Arabia, as well as Turkey. Let's be clear. As has been said already, we are seeing important steps being taken that, in the immediate term, reduce the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran. The steps they are taking are definitive, measurable, and specifically aligned with the JCPOA. It is important to understand--whether it is moving uranium out, blocking their plutonium pathway, and setting up the inspections regime along the entire supply chain--that these are all important steps toward implementing the JCPOA. But I want to make two very clear points. The first point is that last summer, as I and many of my colleagues were immersed in evaluating the JCPOA, the Administration promised clear and firm responses to even the smallest violation. Like many of my colleagues, this played a role in my decision to support the nuclear agreement. We expect to see a follow-through on that promise of accountability. We expect enforcement. If we allow Iran--as this agreement goes on--to push the bounds and cross the lines laid out in this deal without a response, we are undermining the strength of this agreement and, I believe, actually putting in jeopardy the security of the region. The second point I want to make relates to the provocative behavior Iran is engaging in right now. Separate and apart from the nuclear sanctions that will be lifted, there are other sanctions in place for other issues related to Iran's behavior. Iran is a dangerous actor and has proven so throughout that region. They are a state sponsor of terrorism and other destabilizing activities in that region. While the immediate threat of the nuclear issue might be off the table, they are still a regional threat. So when we have clear transgressions that are measurable, that have been done in violation of international law--such as two separate instances of ballistic missile testing--there must be a response. I am calling on the administration not to hesitate any longer. We must respond with sanctions appropriate to these violations of international law. To not do so, to me, is unacceptable. The U.S. must make the consequences for Iranian regional aggression clear and follow with robust response, if necessary. We cannot lose sight of Iran's use of surrogates and proxies in Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, and Yemen to further undermine the security of the region. Let's not lose sight of the fact that there are Americans being held in Iran right now, such as Siamak Namazi, a graduate of Rutgers University in New Jersey, arrested in October, and being held by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard for, as of yet, unspecified reasons. Let's not forget about Jason Rezaian, who continues to languish in jail without a clear and justifiable rationale for his imprisonment, as well as Saeed Abedini, Amir Hekmati, and Robert Levinson. These Americans are being held by a regime for no justifiable reason. These are particularly egregious violations. In my opinion, Iran should be held accountable. So I repeat, the Senate should collectively call on the administration to take action against Iran and to sanction Iran for their violation of Security Council Resolution 1929. I want to finally say that my colleagues and I observed in our meetings with Israeli officials, as Senator Kaine mentioned, an Israeli administration that understands the nuclear deal will go into effect. Let's make sure it is enforced. Let's make sure we have the eyes and ears in place so we can make sure the nuclear threat is removed. But let's stay united with Israel and our other allies in holding this dangerous actor to account if they violate international law, if they threaten their neighbors, if they engage in destabilizing activities, if they support terrorism. We must share intelligence. We must double down our efforts to interdict the movement of arms. And we must work together for a larger piece in that region. With that, I will turn it back to Senator Coons.

Mr. BOOKER. I was with the Senator when you heard from Prime Minister Netanyahu about the priorities and the partnership between our two nations, including support for the Iron Dome and David's Sling. What was also critical, was our cooperation to prevent terror tunnels. One of the other challenges we had before this deal was even executed, was Hezbollah's vast arsenal of rockets that could be fired toward Israel. Those missiles are getting more sophisticated and their range is getting longer. I don't think people put the connection together between the importance of us doing the work of the Treasury Department to stop the flow of money that can purchase those weapons and have Israeli citizens scrambling for bomb shelters. When we say a name like Adam Szubin, most folks in America have no idea who he is and the work that he is doing. Now that the Senator has been to Israel, I wonder if she can make the connection as to why the work he is doing is so important to stop the growing sophistication and source of those missiles.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, today I wish to support the nomination of Judge Luis F. Restrepo, the President's nominee for appointment on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Filling a vacancy on the third circuit is important to New Jerseyans. Because only a handful of cases each year reach the Supreme Court, circuit courts often have the final word in the vast majority of Federal cases. That means, for most of my constituents who bring cases in Federal courts, the buck stops with the third circuit. The third circuit currently has two judicial vacancies. The vacant seat that President nominated Judge Restrepo to fill has been declared a judicial emergency. That means it has a very heavy caseload. In fact the third circuit has more than 900 weighted filings per judgeship. Filling a vacancy on that important Federal appellate court will lower the caseload burden and ensure access to justice for more Americans. Judge Restrepo is a well-qualified individual. There is no question about that. He has over 10 years of experience on the Federal bench. In fact the Senate unanimously confirmed him to serve as a Federal district judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Prior to that, he served as a Federal magistrate judge. As a member of the Federal bench, he has presided over 56 trials that have gone to verdict or judgement. He has a wealth of experience in both public service and private practice. He was a founding member of a Philadelphia law firm, where he practiced both criminal defense and civil rights litigation. He served as an assistant Federal defender with the Community Federal Defender for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and an assistant defender for the Defender Association of Philadelphia. He has relevant experience in both criminal and civil law, which will serve him well as a Federal appellate judge. Judge Restrepo has excellent legal credentials. He earned his undergraduate degree from the University of Pennsylvania and his law degree from Tulane University Law School. The work of a Federal appellate judge can often be academic as the job requires a judge to address legal issues of first impression. Judge Restrepo has more than two decades of teaching experience at both the University of Pennsylvania Law School and Temple University James E. Beasley School of Law. He also taught with the National Institute for Trial Advocacy. In addition, he has written numerous articles appearing in a variety of national legal publications. He has dedicated his time to public service and to bettering his community. He is the former president of the Hispanic Bar Association of Pennsylvania. He served on the board of directors for the Defender Association of Philadelphia and the Make-A-Wish Foundation of Philadelphia and Susquehanna Valley. As a Federal judge, he has also participated in a reentry program to assist people recently released from federal custody to reenter the community and become productive citizens. I believe he has a wealth of relevant experience and a strong legal background. Other Senators share my confidence in Judge Restrepo. He has the bipartisan support from both Pennsylvania Senators and was voted out of the Judiciary Committee by a unanimous voice vote. Judge Restrepo's confirmation is also historic. He will be the first Latino judge from Pennsylvania to serve on the third circuit and only the second Latino to sit on that court. He also has the strong endorsement of the Hispanic National Bar Association. According to that distinguished organization, Judge Restrepo's ``integrity, knowledge of the law, breadth of professional experience, and intellectual capacity make him well suited to sit as a federal appellate judge.'' I could not agree more. I urge my colleagues to confirm Judge Restrepo to the third circuit today. Thank you.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. The provision requires EPA to allow States to regulate hazardous chemicals while EPA assesses a chemical for safety if the proposed state regulation meets three basic criteria: A, consistent with the dormant commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution, compliance with the proposed regulation will not unduly burden interstate commerce in the manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, or use of a chemical substance; B, compliance with the proposed regulation would not cause a violation of any applicable Federal law, rule, or order; and C, the State or political subdivision of a State has a concern about the chemical substance or use of the chemical substance based in peer-reviewed science. Given the importance of this provision and the role EPA will play in reviewing waiver applications, we asked EPA for its interpretation. EPA agrees that States will be exempted from preemption by meeting three criteria. The following are the relevant excerpts from EPA's response: Based on the bill reported on June 18, 2015, S. Rep. 114-67, the following is a summary of how EPA understands the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, FRL21, would operate with respect to the preemption of state law. Required waivers under section 18(f)(2). These would be State requests for an exemption from preemption under section 18(b). EPA must grant this kind of waiver request if the State law for which waiver is sought would not unduly burden interstate commerce; the State law for which waiver is sought would not cause a violation of Federal law; and the State has a concern about the chemical substance or use of the chemical substance based in peer-reviewed science.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I want to say in conclusion that there is that story about the little engine that could and that did not give up and worked through trials and tribulations. Senator Wicker represented the values in that story. I am grateful to have worked with him on this project, and I look forward to working with him again to move our country forward.

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I would first say thank you. I do share that enthusiasm. I appreciate the way the Senator began his remarks. This is a tradition of bipartisanship that goes beyond the Senator and me, but I want to say this about Senator Wicker because I am new to the Senate. I am here about 25 months now. But this last full year when I have been working on this passenger rail bill as the ranking member of that subcommittee, I have found him to be tough, to be balanced, to be strong and thoughtful about what is best for America, thinking about our country first, thinking about his great State, our country, how we are going to create jobs and how we are going to improve in an increasingly globally competitive environment. It has been an honor to work with him. I think what we accomplished together is extraordinary, and it is going to have a profound impact. This bill makes critical investments in our rail infrastructure. It makes important safety reforms, and it helps to move our country forward, literally and figuratively. Rail efficiency and safety is critical to our national success. It is a priority. This idea of protecting Americans is a priority of both Senator Wicker and me, and it is critical that we have rail safety, especially as we go forward. I have seen, unfortunately, in the past some very challenging accidents. For me and my constituents in New Jersey, rail is incredibly important. We are part of the Northeast Corridor, which is probably the busiest rail corridor in the country. It is one of the most productive regions of our Nation, and, unfortunately, it has an inadequate infrastructure. More people use rail than fly in that corridor. The challenge is that the corridor itself has become a choke hold right around the New York-New Jersey region. One of the reasons is because the Hudson River crossing--the busiest river crossing in the United States of America--has tunnels that are inadequate and ineffective at this point. These tunnels were built back in 1910. Nobody in this body remembers those years, personally, but the tunnel began construction 1 year after the famous flights at Kitty Hawk were just getting off the ground in air travel. These tunnels were completed less than a decade before the start of the First World War. So today, these tunnels are in horrible condition. The whole region is suffering as a result of it. I hear time and again from constituents about the urgency for investment in rail. Residents now, because of the delays, because of the challenges with New Jersey Transit, have to leave earlier for work, miss time with their families, miss dropping off their kids at school, lose out on productivity. The productivity losses in this region amount to hundreds of millions of dollars. So this is an urgent cause for us. That is why I was so grateful, really celebrating the fact that we have a partnership in the Senate that can actually get something done when it comes to rail travel. For us in this region, we know the challenges. We have tunnels under the Hudson River that are clearly in a state of significant decay and disrepair that some engineers say have less than a decade on them. One single day of missing access to those tunnels for that artery could hurt our regional economy by about $100 million for one single day in wasted productivity. So this spring Senator Wicker and I joined together to introduce this legislation, the Railroad Enhancement and Efficiency Act. That bill is making critical investments. The bill very critically would allow the Northeast Corridor to reinvest its profits into that region, which is going to be significant for helping to give us a 21st century competitive infrastructure. That is something I cannot understate the urgency of. The bill adds critical safety provisions that will help with positive train control. Earlier, as was mentioned by Senator Wicker, the Chamber passed the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, or FAST Act, a 5-year, $305 billion transportation compromise bill that, for the first time, includes the rail provisions that I am proud to say were in our Railroad Enhancement and Efficiency Act. So this bill that passed the Senate will enable critical projects, such as the Hudson Tunnel plan. It is going to achieve incredible safety for our communities. I just want to again thank Senator Wicker for his noble service. I am sure he and I would both like to thank Senators Thune and Nelson, the ranking members on the overall committee, who worked to ensure that our bill was part of the massive highway transportation bill. There is our long-term economic competitiveness as a country. We talked about national security. Well, our economy fuels our strength at home and abroad. Investing in infrastructure, which has a long history of being a bipartisan priority, is something on which I am proud to join with Senator Wicker and continue that great American tradition of investing in our communities, creating more growth, creating more jobs, and creating a strong economy, which makes for a strong nation.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, just a brief moment. First and foremost, I want to thank the group of Senators who went over to Paris on the codel. It was very important that the United States of America was well represented there and that this body was well represented there. I especially thank Senator Cardin for leading that codel. His leadership was critical. As the ranking member of Foreign Relations, to have him lead and understand that this is a critical issue not just in regard to the climate in general but also to our national defense, to our strength as a Nation, and to our economy--it was good to have him leading and understanding the breadth of these issues. When I was over there, I was moved to see virtually all of the globe represented by leaders, heads of state, members of Parliament, NGOs, corporations--major, global, dominant corporations. Everyone was there. There was an array of the planet coming together, focused on this issue of the impacts of climate change. Conversations ranged from focusing on us being innovative and how we are dealing with renewable technology so that technology can be a great pathway toward sustainability in the future, all the way to resiliency and making sure we were doing the things to protect populations from the effect of climate change, especially when it comes to poor populations who are disproportionately affected. I had the chance, the honor while I was there of leading a bilateral conversation with Bangladesh, talking to peer leaders--the United States sitting down at a table with and across the table from Ministry and Parliamentary members from Bangladesh. By many estimates, Bangladesh is the most vulnerable country on the globe to climate change--the most vulnerable large country to climate change. It is about the size of Iowa. It faces serious challenges with melting off the Himalayas as well as rising sea levels. Due to climate change, right now Bangladesh is losing 1 percent of its arable land each year, and it is projected over the next decade or so--leading into 2030--to lose a large percentage of its land, displacing millions of Bangladeshis, literally creating climate refugees. The sea level rising is predicted to inundate about 15 percent of the land area and create refugees, making it a reality for them that is so urgent that they went there with a large degree of mission to join with other global actors. I was proud to be able to sit with them and talk to them about New Jersey--not only a State that has 75,000 people who are Bangladeshis but also a State that knows that our economy and our strength as a State will be affected by climate change as well. We are already seeing what is happening with the warming of our oceans, the acidification of our oceans, how it is affecting the many jobs related to our fishing industry. We are already seeing the challenges with our climate in terms of increased weather activity and severe storms. This is an issue that affects America that we cannot solve without joining with the rest of the globe. We know that the injustices that are happening to our Nation in terms of increased fires, in terms of despoliation of our seas, the challenges being faced with weather activity internally in our country--we know these issues cannot be solved locally unless we deal with them globally. That is why I am grateful for all of those who understand that American leadership is incredibly needed. I am proud to stand here with colleagues of mine and continue to send a strong message to the rest of the globe that we are here in the United States strongly supporting the ambitious commitments of President Obama, the ones that he is making, and that we will defend those communities that are facing this crisis in the immediate and long term. We will be leaders. One of my colleagues and someone whom I have come to respect quite a bit was an incredibly strong voice in Paris, someone who is committed to these issues not only in her home State but, as an American, across our country. I wish to now engage and acknowledge Senator Jeanne Shaheen.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, I wish to speak about the Every Student Succeeds Act that the President signed into law today. I want to first congratulate my colleagues Senator Patty Murray and Senator Lamar Alexander, who have effectively been able to guide this bill through the Senate. It has been an honor to watch and participate in this process--a process that has served as a great example of the way the Senate is supposed to work. When the original Senate version of the Every Child Achieves Act came to the floor for a vote on July 22, 2015, I could not support it because, while it made necessary changes to the No Child Left Behind law, I could not in good conscience support a bill that fell short of investing in the potential and promise of all of our children, especially New Jersey's most vulnerable students. I stood resolute in the belief that if Congress was truly going to invest in our children and grandchildren's future, it was vital that any legislation passed provide support, access, and opportunity to equip the next generation to succeed, regardless of their socioeconomic status. These needs were particularly poignant given the historic context of the original Elementary and Secondary Education Act as a civil rights bill. Created the same year as the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and just 11 years after the landmark Brown v. Board of Education decision, President Lyndon B. Johnson's original piece of legislation intended to address the gaping gulf in the quality of education received by low- income students in an intensely segregated country. Indeed, this piece of legislation was a vital tool in President Johnson's arsenal on the War on Poverty. It is undeniable that education is a cornerstone of the American Dream to achieve success and financial security. We do our Nation and our children a disservice if we do not do everything in our power to ensure that President Johnson's arsenal is not only maintained, but honed and replenished with robust provisions to fight an evolving battle for educational equity in our schools. Although I did not vote for the original Senate version of ESEA that passed the Senate in July, I am glad to see a conference report, the Every Student Succeeds Act, ESSA, that takes elements from both the House and Senate bill and ultimately is a better bill for all children, teachers, and parents in our country. Chief among provisions that I believed were problematic was the lack of accountability measures to ensure America's most vulnerable students have access to a quality education. With regards to accountability, it was critical not to be overly prescriptive while still acknowledging an intense need to identify and ask schools and districts to figure out specific plans to turn things around in the lowest performing schools and high schools who fail to graduate one-third of their students. It is also critical to identify where there are groups of students who are consistently performing worse than their peers. I do not believe these changes should come from Washington. Local teachers, principals, and parents are best equipped to know how best to turn around a failing school, and this bill gives them the arsenal to do so. I believe the new accountability provisions empower local leaders, with State and Federal guidance, to pursue the improvement strategies best suited to their local needs. These accountability measures are vital if we are to guarantee that the ideals our students pledge allegiance to every day, justice and liberty for all, are manifest in the education we provide for our youngest Americans. With this goal in mind, I am also pleased that ESSA includes my amendment to support homeless and foster youth, by ensuring educators and the public are aware of how foster and homeless children and youth are performing on critical elements compared to their peers by adding reporting for these groups on graduation rates to the State and school district report cards. The role of teachers is also prioritized in ESSA, and I was especially proud to see the amendment I authored that helps support teachers by asking school districts to identify opportunities to make working conditions better and more sustainable. With these improvements made and the spirit of the bill as an important piece of civil rights legislation maintained, I wholeheartedly support the reconciled version that has passed the House and Senate and that was signed by the President today.

Mr. BOOKER

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

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, 14 years ago on November 17, 2001, families across New Jersey were still struggling with the grief of empty seats at dinner tables and closets full of clothes never to be worn again. It was 14 years ago that the news headlines were reflecting on one of the greatest tragedies our country had ever witnessed, which were the attacks on 9/11 of the World Trade Center, at the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania. Today, the trauma for that is no longer as raw as it once was, yet we are still affected forever, and much still tries the soul of our Nation. While the Sun still rises, the seasons still change, the wounds of that day may never heal. There are so many families across New Jersey who are still struggling with the aftermath of this terror, with the illnesses of loved ones who survived and who served as first responders in the 9/11 attacks. While the debris has long been cleared and new towers now stand at the World Trade Center site, many of the thousands of brave first responders who sacrificed their safety for the good of our country are still battling very serious health issues. The exposure to debris, to dust, to other hazardous materials and chemicals on September 11 and the weeks and months that followed have caused countless chronic medical problems for tens of thousands of Americans, including many New Jerseyans. They and their families are still burdened every single day with the physical, emotional, and financial costs of the attacks on 9/ 11. For too long in the wake of the attacks, there were significant gaps in the access and quality of care for survivors. One such survivor, James Zadroga, an NYPD officer and former Ocean County, NJ, resident, struggled with accessing care to treat his severe and chronic respiratory problems after serving as first responder in the wake of September 11, where we believe he acquired those serious health problems. James passed away just over 4 years after the attacks at the age of 34. Thanks to the advocacy of the Zadroga family and the State and Federal lawmakers--people like Senator Lautenberg and Senator Menendez--a bill was passed into law to provide health care, treatment, and compensation for survivors like James Zadroga who are dealing with the aftermath and effects of the 9/11 attacks. Because of the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, over 70,000 first responders and survivors are now enrolled in the World Trade Center Health Program and receiving quality care. Over 5,000 survivors and first responders still require medical treatment because of their exposure and/or their service as first responders and because of the Zadroga act, they have had access. Because Congress failed to act, the World Trade Center Health Program expired in September 2015, and without congressional action, funding for the program will run out by next year. Additionally, funding for the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund will likely expire around the same time next year as well. Earlier this month, the editorial board of one New Jersey newspaper, the Star-Ledger, had this to say about this body's failure to act: The bill has overwhelming support from both parties. They understand this is an American problem, with victims from all 50 states, and they know this legislative solution is not radical. We take care of workers with dangerous jobs . . . especially heroes who risked their lives to help humanity while most of us watched from home, paralyzed by grief. We have not just a patriotic responsibility but a moral obligation to ensure that the Americans who sacrificed so much for the good of our country in the wake of September 11, 2001, are treated with the respect and care they deserve. They are our heroes. They are our champions. They stood up and worked when many ran. It is incumbent upon this Congress to follow the lead of Senator Gillibrand and heed the calls coming from our constituents to pass the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Reauthorization Act. I am proud to stand with Senator Gillibrand and our colleagues in the Senate and in the House, advocates, and first responders who are urgently calling for the passage of this necessary legislation that reflects our values and our ideals. I wish to close with the words of a courageous Newark Fire Department captain who responded to the 9/11 attacks at great personal risk and had the following to share with my office about the renewal of the Zadroga act: As a member of New Jersey Task Force I, I responded on 9/ 11. This volunteer State Police team, participated in numerous search and rescue operations on that day. The thousands of firefighters that worked that day, developed medical issues thereafter, including myself. I have had three surgeries for thyroid cancer. I also developed the 9/11 cough, and have developed side effects from radiation treatment. . . . We are not looking to get rich. We just want to be able to continue serving as firefighters, without worrying about our health because of 9/11. Those in this Chamber who somehow, remarkably, oppose this bill need to hear this man's words and my own as well. We cannot fail to act. By what we do here now, we not only take care of those heroes from 9/11 but we send a message to all Americans about how we stand up for those who stood for us, who fought for us. When the most perilous times came to be, they were there for us. This country is a nation that takes care of its heroes. What we do here with this legislation will forever highlight this ideal and celebrate its truth or it will cast a dark shadow over it. I hope today and in the coming days that we move this legislation forward and be the light upon the great men and women who are so patriotically dedicated to our Nation. Mr. President, before I yield the floor, I would like to also talk briefly about the Transportation appropriations bill this Chamber is considering. I truly appreciate the hard work that Senator Reed and Senator Collins have done to get this bill to a place that makes critical investments in transportation and housing and, in particular, for some of our most vulnerable citizens. Their work has been tireless, and I am happy to see much of the progress they are making. However, this appropriations bill as it currently stands includes some provisions that would weaken highway safety. At a time when 4,000 people are losing their lives annually on American highways and 100,000 are injured due to large truck crashes, it is paramount that Congress do more to improve safety, not remove evidence-based safety policies. New Jersey alone has some 38,000 miles of public roads that connect people of our State and get them where they need to be. It drives much of the commerce and economy of our State every day. New Jersey is strategically placed, which makes it a very important path through the State and for goods up and down the east coast as well. These roads also see a tremendous amount of truck traffic at all times of the day and night. If you have ever driven on the New Jersey Turnpike, you know what I mean. I am concerned that we saw an increase in truck accidents from 2009 to 2012, an increase in crash injuries by 40 percent, and truck crash fatalities during this time have increased 16 percent. This is data. These are numbers. But they are also human lives; they are fellow Americans who have had their lives shattered by horrific accidents. Truckdriver fatigue is a leading cause of these major truck accidents. These drivers who work extremely long days delivering the goods we depend upon deserve basic protections allowing them to get sufficient rest to do their job. I filed an amendment on the hours of service rules, which were put in place to prevent truckdriver fatigue and ensure that the rules put in place after years of study and robust stakeholder feedback would still be enforceable. Some people believe we should suspend these rules, these commonsense policies, by calling for even more study. My amendment ensures the rules will remain enforceable while further study is conducted so that we don't see more lives put at risk as a result of these delay tactics. What we should be doing is ensuring that safety is first. If it proves not necessary, then pull back. There are other provisions in this bill that I believe could jeopardize highway safety as well. I am pleased, though, that earlier today we were able to work together and pass an amendment to further study a proposal to allow heavier trucks, longer trucks on the road. Heavier trucks could cause greater damage and destruction to human life and property when these accidents occur. I am grateful to my colleagues for working together on this. A final example of a commonsense provision we in Congress should address as we work to improve highway safety is the minimum level of insurance required by truckdrivers. When truck crashes do occur and the insurance doesn't cover the cost of these accidents, taxpayers are left to front the bill. We should look to the decades-old minimum levels of insurance and assess whether those minimum insurance standards need to be raised so that families torn apart by truck crashes aren't then thrust into debt because of medical bills. I have met with some of these families. I have sat with them and heard their stories about how low levels of minimum insurance have left them in dire straits. As taxpayers, we should not be left without the funding to rebuild damaged roads and bridges in the aftermath of such significant crashes. It is time to modernize a minimum level of insurance for truckdrivers so that we are all better equipped in the aftermath of an accident. Again, I have sat with far too many survivors and their family members. I have seen, talked, and engaged with them, hearing the truth of their stories. We cannot sit silently while truck accidents are increasing in our country and allow commonsense safety to be rolled back in these spending bills. Where there are meaningful and practical solutions to pressing highway safety challenges, these are discussions we need to have. This is a fight worth having, and I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues to improve the safety on our Nation's highways. We have the capability, we have the know-how, and we have the science to help us to begin to reduce these tragic accidents and fatalities on our highways. I believe we should show greater urgency in protecting human life and protecting Americans as they ride along our roads. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.

Mr. BOOKER

Mr. BOOKER. Mr. President, as the Senate votes today on a short-term extension of the highway trust fund and an extension of the deadline for positive train control, I rise to discuss the importance of transportation safety and the need for vigorous oversight as both passenger and freight railroads strive to implement this life-saving technology. Congress passed legislation 7 years ago that gave our Nation's rail carriers until December 31 of this year to fully deploy and implement positive train control, or PTC, on all rail lines that carry passengers or toxic substances. Some railroads have made the investments necessary to make significant progress in meeting this deadline, and others have been slower for a number of reasons, ranging from the costs to the complexity of the technology. The necessity of quickly implementing PTC took on a renewed urgency in May of this year when Amtrak train 188 derailed in Philadelphia, taking the lives of eight passengers and injuring hundreds more. PTC could have prevented this accident, and I am grateful the Federal Railroad Administration took swift action with Amtrak to improve safety in certain high-risk sections of the Northeast corridor. But more must be done across the country and as soon as possible. In recent months, with a deadline looming, Members on both sides of the aisle have heard from railroads as well as downstream producers, shippers, and manufacturers who rely on transporting goods by rail. All stakeholders seem to recognize the importance of using new technology to make our railways safer. What has not had equal consensus is how long it should take for this new technology to be installed and utilized. Recent legislative proposals, including in the Senate-passed DRIVE Act, would have created enforcement loopholes that weaken the tools of Federal safety regulators. The bipartisan PTC language considered today closes these loopholes and sets a new implementation deadline of December 31, 2018. Railroads will be required to set up implementation plans with clear benchmarks and timelines that will be enforceable by the Department of Transportation. In what I hope will be very rare cases in which railroads may need an extension beyond that deadline, a limited period, not to exceed 24 months in total, may be applied should the railroad meet strict criteria. These criteria include having PTC already implemented in the majority of its territories, acquisition of all needed spectrum for implementation, installation of all necessary hardware components, completion of employee trainings, and any additional criteria established by the Secretary. While railroads and commuter authorities face an immense challenge in implementing PTC, now and always, we must place the safety of our citizens above the fear of difficulties incurred by necessary technological change. As Congress extends the deadline for this lifesaving technology, we must also extend our oversight and commit to meticulous and thorough review of the ongoing implementation process. We should confirm outstanding nominees, including the nominee for FRA Administrator, who has direct oversight responsibilities over PTC. Congress must also invest more in our Nation's infrastructure and enable railroads to access grants and various funding sources to help implement this technology, as well as other critical safety and state-of-good-repair needs. We should remain diligent in ensuring that critical benchmarks and good-faith efforts to install the technology are being made by industry and, if necessary, take actions to ensure compliance. I urge my colleagues to stand with me in calling for reasonable and commonsense conditions as we work to ensure every train hauling people and toxic materials in this Nation can operate as safely as possible with new technology.