Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, American historian and author Wallace Stegner called our national parks ``the best idea we ever had. Absolutely American, absolutely democratic, they reflect us at our best rather than our worst.'' The National Park Service turned 100 on August 25, 2016. I wish to celebrate a century of recreation, conservation, and historic preservation programs. Congress created the agency in 1916 for the specific purpose of caring for America's special places. The National Park Service was given the responsibility not only to conserve and protect parks, but also to leave them ``unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations.'' The job got bigger as parks expanded in number and type. In the 1930s, military parks and national monuments were added. Then came national parkways and seashores, followed by urban parks in the 1960s. During the next decade, the National Park System nearly doubled with the addition of 47 million acres in Alaska. I am proud of the national parks and programs in Maryland's backyard. Maryland is home to 18 national parks, which attract 6,443,376 visitors every year. This national park tourism generates $216,700,000 in economic benefit. I am proud of the range of parks in the State, from national battlefields such as Antietam and Monocacy in western Maryland to Assateague Island National Seashore, which offers visitors sandy beaches, salt marshes, maritime forests, and coastal bays on the edge of the continent. I am especially proud of the recently established Harriet Tubman Underground Railroad National Historic Park in Maryland's Dorchester, Caroline, and Talbot Counties. The vision for the Tubman National Historical Park is to preserve the places significant to the life of Harriet Tubman and tell her story through interpretive activities, while continuing to discover aspects of her life and the experiences of those who traveled on the Underground Railroad through continued historical and archaeological research and discovery. Unfortunately, few of the structures associated with the early years of Harriet Tubman's life remain standing today. The landscape of the Eastern Shore of Maryland, however, is still evocative of the time when Harriet Tubman lived there. Farm fields and loblolly pine forests dot the lowland landscape, which is also notable for its extensive network of tidal rivers and wetlands that Tubman and the people she guided to freedom used under cover of night. If she were alive today, Ms. Tubman would recognize much of the landscape that she knew intimately as she secretly led freedom-seekers of all ages to the North. This park helps connect people today to America's history while establishing an important destination for tourists to come visit, learn, and experience Maryland's Eastern Shore. For 7 years I worked with my colleagues, Senator Mikulski, Senator Schumer, Senator Gillibrand, and Senator Clinton to establish the first national historical park to honor an African American woman. Harriet Tubman is an extraordinary American, and Marylanders are extremely proud to have her as a native daughter. In 2014, I was so proud to finally get our legislation enacted, and I am pleased that development and planning for this park is well underway. Only recently has the National Park Service begun establishing units dedicated to the lives of African Americans. Places such as Booker T. Washington National Monument on the campus of Tuskegee University in Alabama, the George Washington Carver National Monument in Missouri, the National Historic Trail commemorating the march for voting rights from Selma to Montgomery, and, most recently, the Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial on the National Mall are all important monuments and places of historical significance that help tell the story of the African-American experience. In a similar, overdue spirit, the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture will be opening this Saturday. I attended the grand opening weekend of this extraordinary addition to the National Mall. The National Museum of African American History and Culture is the only national museum devoted exclusively to documenting African American life, history, and culture. On August 25, 2006, the 90th anniversary of the National Park Service, then-Secretary of the Interior--and former Senator--Dirk Kempthorne launched the National Park Centennial Initiative to prepare national parks for another century of conservation, preservation, and enjoyment. Since then, the National Park Service asked citizens, park partners, experts, and other stakeholders what they envisioned for a second century of national parks. A nationwide series of more than 40 listening sessions produced more than 6,000 comments that helped to shape five centennial goals. The goals and overarching vision were presented to President Bush and to the American people in May 2007 in a report, ``The Future of America's National Parks.'' Continued and better stewardship was one of the five goals. We must be better stewards of national parks when it comes to clean water. More than one-half of our 407 national parks have waterways deemed ``impaired'' under the Clean Water Act and in need of attention. These are parks whose local domestic water supply and protected natural resources are dependent upon and often affected by the quality of surface water flowing into and through their respective designated boundaries. As stewards, we must carry out our responsibilities with respect to clean water. I am particularly sensitive to this responsibility. One hundred thousand streams and rivers, as well as thousands of acres of wetlands, provide the freshwater that flows into the Chesapeake Bay. Restoration of the Chesapeake Bay watershed is managed by the Chesapeake Bay Program, in which the National Park Service serves as a Federal agency partner. In order for our restoration efforts to succeed, we must ensure clean water flows in the streams that lead into the Chesapeake Bay. Our national parks are our legacy to the next generation; conserving them is our shared responsibility. The 2016 centennial of our parks is a prime opportunity for renewing this commitment.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, a fellow Baltimorean and dear friend of mine, Wanda Queen Draper, is retiring today from WBAL-TV, where she has worked for the past 25 years. In a sense, Wanda and I grew up together professionally in a city we both love so much. But Wanda is not the ``retiring'' type so she is becoming the executive director of the Reginald F. Lewis Museum of Maryland African American History & Culture, an important part of Baltimore's history and culture that she helped to found. Wanda joined the Hearst Corp. as a student correspondent at the Baltimore News American in 1968. She worked on the Sunday paper until 1973, when she graduated from the University of Maryland. Wanda spent the next 10 years as a reporter and local editor at the Baltimore Sun. She subsequently worked as an assignment manager and local show host at WJZ-TV, director of public affairs for the Governor's office, and director of community affairs for the National Aquarium in Baltimore. In 1991, she joined WBAL-TV as public affairs manager and was ultimately promoted to director of programming and public affairs, making her responsible for all of the station's programming. Wanda has won numerous local and national awards over the years and has been cited by the National Association of Broadcasters for her outstanding achievements. In short, she has had a stellar career. But she is also very active in several community endeavors, and this is what I would like to highlight: her tireless dedication to the people of Baltimore, especially those who are less fortunate. Wanda serves on the boards of the WBAL Kids Campaign, St. Timothy's School, the Brigance Brigade Foundation, and Journey Home. The WBAL Kids Campaign is involved in many community events, the largest of which is the Coats for Kids program each fall. Wanda was able to partner with Burlington Coat Factory and has provided over 300,000 children with coats over the past 13 years. Over the last 3 years, with Wanda's help, the Brigance Brigade has provided services to more than 40,000 ALS survivors and has raised over $1.5 million. The Journey Home campaign supports the mayor's 10-year plan to end homelessness in Baltimore. Over the past 6 years, the campaign has assisted 2,000 people, and Wanda has helped to raise $6 million. For the past 8 years, she has been active in the St. Vincent DePaul Empty Bowls program, which has helped to feed 440,000 people and raised more than $2 million. Ralph Waldo Emerson wrote: ``To laugh often and much; To win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; To earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; To appreciate beauty, to find the best in others; To leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch, or a redeemed social condition; To know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded.'' By these measures, Wanda has been wildly successful. Wanda is married to Dr. Robert Draper and is surrounded by her wonderful family each and every day. But it seems that the residents of Baltimore are a part of her extended family, and she is determined that they will all ``breathe easier'' because of her efforts on their behalf. I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in thanking Wanda Draper for her extraordinary professional and personal commitment to the people and city of Baltimore and congratulating her as she moves on to her next great endeavor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate Baltimore Gas and Electric, BGE, which celebrated its 200th anniversary earlier this year. BGE, headquartered in Baltimore, is Maryland's largest natural gas and electric utility, delivering power to more than 1.25 million electric customers and more than 650,000 natural gas customers in central Maryland. BGE's electric service territory is approximately 2,300 square miles, including Baltimore city and all or part of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Calvert, Carroll, Harford, Howard, Montgomery, and Prince George's Counties. BGE's gas service territory is approximately 800 square miles, including Baltimore city and all or part of Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Cecil, Frederick, Harford, Howard, Montgomery, and Prince George's Counties. The company employs approximately 3,200 people. BGE was founded on June 17, 1816, and has the distinction of being the Nation's first and oldest gas distribution company. BGE's rich heritage is intertwined with the city of Baltimore, dating back to the days of acclaimed American portrait painter and museum keeper Rembrandt Peale when he lit the first gas lamps at his museum on Holiday Street, which made quite an impression. Peale envisioned lighting the streets of Baltimore and held an important gas lighting patent. With some business associates, he incorporated BGE, originally known as the Gas and Light Company of Baltimore. Baltimore's first gas street lamps were lit on February 1817, which was 64 years before Baltimore's first electric companies appeared in the city. In 1906, the Consolidated Gas and Electric Light and Power Company was formed through a series of mergers, operating until 1955 when it was renamed Baltimore Gas and Electric; today it is proudly known as BGE and supports 10,000 direct and indirect jobs in Maryland and contributes almost $4 billion to the region's economy each year. The company and its employees have a long history of investing in the community and continue to strengthen that commitment by supporting more than 260 nonprofit organizations each year through charitable contributions and volunteer hours. The company also is a leader in promoting energy efficiency through a variety of means. I was proud to help secure a ``smart grid'' stimulus grant in 2009, which was instrumental in helping BGE install 2 million electric and gas smart meter devices throughout central Maryland. Today the company continues to help its customers take more control of their energy supply and management, and it will keep working with its customers and communities to promote clean energy resources while delivering energy in a safe, reliable, and clean manner. I would like to ask my Senate colleagues to join me in congratulating BGE on its 200th anniversary and thanking the dedicated employees, customers, businesses, and communities who helped BGE to achieve this milestone.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I want to applaud Senate passage of H.R. 1475, the Korean War Veterans Memorial Act, which is the House companion to the bill I introduced with Senator Boozman, S. 1982. This legislation honors Americans who died during the Korean war by adding a wall of remembrance to the Korean War Veterans Memorial without the use of public funds. The Korean war, often referred to as the Forgotten War, began on June 25, 1950, when the Democratic People's Republic of Korea launched a surprise attack on the neighboring Republic of Korea. Against the expectations of the North Koreans and the Soviet Union, the United States immediately provided military support to South Korea, and the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution, UNSC resolution 82, demanding a North Korean withdrawal to the 38th Parallel. The conflict ended with the signing of an armistice on July 27, 1953. By the time this armistice was signed, 36,575 Americans had sacrificed their lives, 103,284 were wounded, 7,140 were captured, and 664 were missing. To honor the Americans who served during the Korean war, Congress passed a law on October 28, 1986, authorizing the construction of a Korean War Veterans Memorial. This Korean War Veterans Memorial, however, does not honor the Americans who died during the war by displaying the names of the fallen. The wall of remembrance H.R. 1475 authorizes will list the names of members of the Armed Forces of the United States who died in theater in the Korean war, as well as the number of servicemembers who were wounded in action, are listed as missing in action, or who were prisoners of war during the Korean war. The wall may also list the number of members of the Korean Augmentation to the U.S. Army, the Republic of Korean Armed Forces, and other nations of the United Nations Command who were killed in action, wounded in action, are listed as missing in action, or were prisoners of war. Building a wall of remembrance to honor the 36,575 Americans who died in the Korean war would not deviate from the norm: many countries who fought in the war also honor their fallen, and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall contains the name of Americans who died during that war. Korean war veterans' memorials that display the names of a nation's fallen soldiers can be found across the globe in the 22 UN coalition countries. The Republic of Korea even displays the personal names of the 36,575 Americans who died during the war. These names are etched on bronze tablets and listed by home State. The Vietnam Veterans Memorial's wall also lists the names of those who died in the theater of its respective war. It has also been augmented with the additions of the three-soldier sculpture and Nurse Memorial. The addition of the wall of remembrance would also not cost any taxpayer dollars. Korean war veterans who have campaigned for this wall have also been raising money for the wall's construction. This legislation would not allow any Federal funds to be used for the construction of this wall. Construction, therefore, would be privately financed. I want to thank Senator Boozman and the other Senators who cosponsored S. 1982 and have helped me to pass this legislation. I also want to thank my colleagues in the House of Representatives--especially Representatives Sam Johnson, Charlie Rangel, and John Conyers--for their service to our Nation during the Korean war and for their tireless efforts to honor their fellow servicemen and women. And finally, I want to thank the Korean War Veterans Memorial Foundation, Inc., for its support, on behalf of all Korean war veterans, to build this wall. Authorizing the construction of a wall of remembrance is just one way we can help ensure that those who died while serving our country in the ``Forgotten War'' are no longer forgotten.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I join with Senator Wyden in my deep disappointment that the Republicans have objected to the continuation of a policy that has voluntarily been done for 40 years; that is, those who are running for President of the United States release their tax returns. I want to underscore a couple of points that were made by Senator Wyden. I thank him very much for his leadership on this issue. I just came from a hearing at the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--where I have the privilege of being the ranking Democrat--on Afghanistan. A large part of that hearing dealt with transparency, good governance, corruption, and anti-corruption. That is a key fundamental for Afghans' success. This morning I also had a chance to meet with the new leader of Burma. She has tremendous challenges in that emerging country. Transparency and anti-corruption are critically important to the success of that democracy. When the United States stands internationally for good governance, anti-corruption, and transparency, we first have to deal with our issues at home. It is hard for us to demand transparency globally when we ourselves fall victim to the failure to make information available to the public that they desperately need. Let me tell you why that is important. This is not theoretical. The Panama Papers indicate that heads of state--current heads of state and former heads of state--have used ways to avoid public disclosure of the gains of their office, the connections they have had. There is a reason why for 40 years we have seen the release of tax returns by those running for President. Before they vote, the public has a right to know about the potential conflicts that individual brings to the Office of the Presidency, the highest office in the land. Senator Wyden pointed out accurately that that tax return could very well show international contacts, international business, and offshore activity that the public has a right to have debated during the course of the campaign. It may show a Presidential candidate's use of the provisions within our Tax Code to pay a different tax rate or no taxes at all. The public has a right to know that before they cast their vote so they can ask questions about that. The tax return may show that certain statements made in regard to the use of charities are either appropriate or not appropriate. They have the right to debate that before they cast their vote. Senator Wyden's bill carries out current practice. I don't think anyone thought 6 months ago that someone would step forward to run for the Presidency of the United States and accept the nomination of a major political party without disclosing their tax returns. I don't think any of us thought that was at issue. Senator Wyden has been very patient with this bill. We have given all the Presidential candidates that opportunity. Secretary Clinton has disclosed her tax returns. Secretary Clinton has made available her emails through appropriate channels. That has been done. That transparency has been made. But there is a person running on the Republican side who has refused to disclose his tax returns. That is wrong. That denies the American people the transparency they need to judge the candidates and to engage in political discourse during the campaign, which is critically important to their decision as to who the next President of the United States should be. I am extremely disappointed that there has been an objection to Senator Wyden's request that we require those who want to be President of the United States--the highest office in this land, the highest office in the free world--to disclose their tax returns. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to ask my Senate colleagues to join me in designating the week of September 12, 2016, as National Direct Support Professionals Recognition Week. Direct support professionals--also known as DSPs--provide an invaluable service by caring for the most vulnerable among us, including seniors, people living with disabilities, and the chronically ill. Through the efforts of this essential health care workforce, these individuals are able to live, work, and fully participate in their communities. As our population continues to grow and age, the demand for DSPs and other home- and community-based services will increase commensurately to address evolving health care needs. Studies show that approximately 12 million Americans currently need long-term services and supports LTSS, and about half of these individuals are over the age of 65. It is reasonable to expect that about one-half of seniors 65 years and older will develop a serious disability which requires LTSS. Although many will require care for an average of 2 years, one in seven seniors is expected to have care needs lasting for 5 years or more. During this time, most individuals prefer to be cared for in the comfort of their own homes, with the assistance of family caregivers and a multidisciplinary health care team. Direct support professionals are often considered to be the backbone of the health care provider team, ensuring that patients adhere to treatment plans and attend doctors' appointments and helping them navigate daily life. In our country, we are incredibly fortunate to have millions of service-oriented Americans who are willing to rise to the task of becoming a direct support professional. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the employment of DSPs is projected to grow by an average of 26 percent from 2014 to 2024, compared to a 7 percent average growth rate for all occupations during that period. Unfortunately, direct support professionals are often forced to leave the jobs they love due to low wages and excessive, difficult work hours. Now, more than ever, it is imperative that we work to ensure that these hard-working individuals have the income and emotional support they need and deserve. For these reasons, I am proud my colleagues Senators Collins, Portman, Brown, Blumenthal, Menendez, Grassley, Markey, King, Warren, and Ayotte have joined me in introducing a resolution designating the week of September 12 as National Direct Support Professionals Recognition Week. This time allows us the opportunity to celebrate DSPs' important work and renew our commitment to support this vital workforce. All Americans are entitled to equality, access, and choice, particularly in regards to comprehensive health care for underserved communities. Any concerted effort to improve care for our Nation's seniors, the disabled, and chronically ill must fully engage direct support professionals, community-based organizations, and every level of government. DSPs are highly skilled, knowledgeable, and compassionate. The quality of home- and community-based services and overall patient experience truly lies in their hands. As we consider this year's National Direct Support Professionals Recognition Week, let us continue this bipartisan momentum to enhance our health care workforce and advance comprehensive health care for those in need.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time on the floor to first express my appreciation to the leadership for bringing forward the Water Resources Development Act. I know we are going to have a chance to vote on cloture on Monday, and I just want to thank the leadership for making the bill available for floor time. I also congratulate Senator Inhofe, the chairman of our committee, and Senator Boxer, the ranking Democrat, because I am a proud member of the Environment and Public Works Committee that has recommended the Water Resources Development Act to the full Senate. The process that was used by Chairman Inhofe and Ranking Member Boxer is the way the legislative process should work in the U.S. Senate. We had a very open process, where many Members--all of the members of our committee and many other Members of the Senate--participated in one of the most important bills that we consider during the congressional session. It deals with the conservation and development of our water resources and authorizes the construction projects for the improvement of rivers and harbors. In other words, this bill very much affects every State in the Nation because it affects our economy, our environment, clean water, and public health. It is an extremely important piece of legislation. When we look at the content of this bill, we see that the leaders of our committee were able to work out the right types of compromises so that we don't have a contentious bill before the U.S. Senate. We have a bill that is focused on the purposes of WRDA, to conserve and develop our water resources and to authorize the construction projects for our rivers and harbors. For Maryland this bill is particularly important. When we look at the WRDA bill, so many projects and so many opportunities in my State are involved. In Maryland we have the Port of Baltimore, which is the economic hub. I was there last week visiting the Port of Baltimore. I am there frequently. There are tens of thousands of jobs there. It is one of the most active ports in our country. It depends on the WRDA bill for the authorizations of the projects to keep the Port of Baltimore competitive and able to do the important economic work of our region. So for the economic impact that our ports have on America, and certainly the Port of Baltimore and Maryland, this bill is particularly important. I make a point of being in Ocean City, MD, during the Association of County Conferences and had a chance to see firsthand the impact of these renourishing programs that are impacted by the WRDA bill. The protection of the Chesapeake Bay in my State, the largest estuary in our hemisphere, is very much impacted by this bill. The public health of the people of Maryland and indeed our Nation are very much impacted by the Water Resources Development Act. So let me talk specifically about what is included in this bill that will help the people of Maryland and the people of our country. First, to the economic impact--as I said earlier, the passage of this bill will provide for job growth and economic growth in our country. It also will protect our public health. The dredging and maintenance of our rivers and harbors are paramount to this. As a result of the previous WRDA bills and continuing to this WRDA bill, we in our region are able to maintain our channels. We also have been able to find locations where we can put the dredge material. For example, in Maryland we had a national model for what we did at Poplar Island. Poplar Island was a disappearing island in the Chesapeake Bay that was basically all submerged. It was an environmental negative. It was a liability. Through the use of deposits of dredge material, Poplar Island has been converted not just to a dredge site but an environmental restoration site and has helped very much in dealing with the diversity of species that we find in the Chesapeake Bay region. Through WRDA authorizations and appropriations, we have been able to convert a negative on our environment to a positive and at the same time find a way to use dredge materials to keep our harbors open. That is a win-win-win situation, and it is those types of projects that are included in the Water Resources Development Act. But there are many other communities. In Maryland we have the Port of Baltimore--I talked about that--but we have a lot of smaller ports and harbors in Maryland. During the break I visited Salisbury, MD. They have a port. They want to expand their port so they can not only import products as they do, but use it as an export location. In Salisbury, they have Chesapeake Shipbuilding, which is one of the premier shipbuilding facilities we have, and they benefit from what is done in Salisbury Harbor. By way of example, I want to point out to the people I represent in Maryland the important economic projects that are very much impacted by the passage of the Water Resources Development Act. The economic impact goes beyond just what we do in our harbors; it also involves our shoreline protection. While I was in Ocean City, I visited with Mayor Meehan, the mayor of Ocean City, who pointed out to me what happened during the last storm. We get storms along the East Coast; we always get storms. But he pointed out to me the impact that the beach renourishment programs have had in minimizing damage to property and to the shoreline. We invest in beach renourishment as basically an insurance policy against damage that could be much greater. We could have our money back and much more through the investments we make in beach renourishment in the Water Resources Development Act. I can state that people who have their homes and businesses in Ocean City, MD, very much appreciate the fact that this Congress is paying attention to this issue. Then I can go to Smith Island. Smith Island is the last habitable island in Maryland on the Chesapeake Bay. It is eroding, and it has serious issues about its sustainability. For the people who live on Smith Island, it is not only their homes but part of the history of our State and Nation that they are preserving. We have provided in the WRDA bill a way that we can do living shorelines so a community like Smith Island continues to be safe from the devastation we are seeing with erosion. I am proud of all those provisions that are in this WRDA bill that will help us deal with those issues. As I pointed out earlier, the WRDA bill is important for our Chesapeake Bay. The Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in our hemisphere. I talk about it frequently on the floor of the U.S. Senate. It has been declared by many presidents as a national treasure. It is a national treasure. We have a comprehensive program in partnership with the Federal Government and with the State governments of five States and the District of Columbia. We have a partnership with local governments, with the private sector, and we are making progress. In this bill, to give one example, we increased the authorization for oyster recovery programs. I was proud to offer this amendment from $60 million to $100 million, almost doubling the dollars that are going to be available for oyster recovery programs. Why is that important? I think most Members understand that oysters are cash crops. It is nice to be able to harvest oysters and be able to serve them and to use them as watermen do. So we are increasing dramatically the number of oysters that can be harvested, using new methods, including ways in which we can seed oysters off the bottom, as well as on the bottom of the river, and it is taking. We are seeing our oyster crops increase dramatically, which is helping the economy of the watermen of Maryland in our region. Oysters are also a filtering agent for the Chesapeake Bay. They cleanse the water. They give us a better quality water in the Chesapeake Bay, which helps all species and the future of the Chesapeake Bay. We were down to a small percentage of the historic crop of oysters when we started the recovery program. Now that we have been in the recovery program, we are recovering a significant number of oysters. We are not there yet; we have got a lot more to do. But this extra Federal help in oyster recovery will certainly help in that regard. Oysters also, by the way, build the infrastructure for the different species within the Bay. They actually become what the living organisms can live on and produce the type of food chain necessary for a healthy diversity within the Chesapeake Bay. So I was particularly pleased that the committee recommended my amendment to increase our programs for oyster recovery. This bill also deals with clean water. In the 111th Congress, when I was chair of the Water Subcommittee of the Environment and Public Works Committee, I filed S. 1005, which deals with our State revolving funds. Let me explain for my colleagues--I think most know--that the State revolving funds are the major Federal partnership to help local governments deal with safe drinking water and clean water. Wastewater treatment is done through State revolving funds. We have taken some actions in order to modernize this program. In this WRDA bill, we incorporate many of the elements of the legislation that I filed that will update and improve the revolving loan programs. It makes it much more predictable and flexible for our States, so they can plan their projects accordingly, which is critically important for safe drinking water and economic growth. We expand the eligibility to include preconstruction, to deal with replacement and rehab, and for the first time allow these funds to be used for source water protection plans so that we actually can make sure we are getting safe water into our water supply. We also allow for the prioritization of sustainability, and we provide incentives for water efficiency that is cost saving and uses better technology, so that the way we handle our water can be done with less leakage, less waste, less energy, and more efficiency, which saves money. There is $900 million authorized for the Water Resources Research Act, and I was pleased to offer that to the committee, and I was pleased it was included in the final bill that is before the committee. Let me talk for a moment about public health. The WRDA bill also deals with public health, which is very important. I know every Member is aware of what happened in Flint, MI, on lead poisoning. We know how tragic that was. We know how many families and children were directly impacted by decisions that were made there. This bill does much to deal with the tragedies in Flint, but Flint is not unique in the risk factors to our children on the exposures to lead. I can give Baltimore City as an example. The schools in Baltimore City have turned off their water fountains because it would not be safe for the children in schools to use the water fountains that are there. The pipes that lead into the schools are contaminated by lead. The city doesn't have the resources to replace those pipes that come in and therefore have closed the water fountains and use bottled water instead. So we have problems in our water infrastructure in America as it relates to the vulnerability of exposure to excessive lead. I think the Presiding Officer is aware that there is no acceptable level of lead in a child's blood. We know that lead in the blood of children has an impact on their capacity to grow. I will give one example. Freddie Gray, who was tragically killed over a year ago in a police incident that caused a disturbance in Baltimore, had high levels of lead from his youth in his blood. These are matters we could take steps to correct, and this WRDA bill does exactly that. First, it takes many of the provisions of the bill that I filed working with many of my colleagues. It called for true leadership. We put together many of our ideas on what we can do to combat lead poisoning. I put that bill together with my colleagues and filed that bill with Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer's leadership. We were able to incorporate many of those provisions--most of those provisions into this WRDA bill that is now before the U.S. Senate so that we will be able to give public notice and transparency when public officials discover an unacceptably high level of lead in the water system. The public will know, and they can avoid the risks. We are providing money for testing of schools, testing of childcare centers, and individual children. In Maryland every child between 1 and 2 years of age will be tested to see whether they have excessive lead levels in their blood. There is truly an all-out effort. There is one provision I want to underscore. There is $300 million in this bill so we can secure the last line of pipe coming from the main sources into homes. There are a lot of individuals, families, and low- income families who live in homes where the water system itself is safe but the pipes that lead into their home produce lead and subject their families to lead poisoning. They don't have the resources to correct it, and this bill provides a program where low-income families can get help in correcting the pipes that feed into their house to make sure they are lead-free so their children aren't susceptible to lead poisoning. These are all good-news issues. I appreciate the time and attention given to this, but I wanted to emphasize that this bill is a very important bill. It contains issues, as I said, from protecting our environment to our public health, to our economy. It is a bill that deserves the strong support of the Members of the Senate. I hope my colleagues in the House will also approve this bill. It reflects the hard work and leadership of Senator Inhofe and Senator Boxer and the Environment and Public Works Committee and many Members of the Senate. I am very proud to support this legislation. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, this Sunday we will solemnly observe the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks that killed 2,977 people from 93 different nations and injured more than 6,000 others at the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and a field near Shanksville, PA. For those of us old enough to remember, the events of that horrific day are seared into our memories as if they just happened yesterday. Over 3,000 children lost at least one parent on 9/11. Many of these children were too young at the time to comprehend what was happening or to remember it today, even though they suffered such a devastating personal loss. According to the Census Bureau, nearly 59 million Americans have been born since 9/11. Most of these young people learn about 9/11 in school, much the same way an earlier generation of Americans learned about Pearl Harbor. For those younger Americans who don't remember 9/11, I think it is important for them to understand that the attacks did not just test our character; they revealed it. The worst attack in American history brought out the best in the American people. Americans responded with courage and self-sacrifice, with charity and compassion and volunteerism and with resolve. There were incredible acts of individual heroism. ``Numerous civilians in all stairwells, numerous burn [victims] are coming down. We're trying to send them down first . . . We're still heading up.'' So said New York City Fire Department Captain Patrick ``Paddy'' Brown, Ladder 3, as he and 11 of his men climbed an emergency stairwell in the North Tower, making it to the 40th floor before the Tower collapsed. His remains were recovered 3 months later. Three hundred and forty- three members of the New York City Fire Department and 71 law enforcement officers gave their lives while helping evacuate 25,000 people to safety. ``Are you guys ready? Let's roll.''--so said 32-year Todd Beamer as he and other passengers aboard United Airlines flight 93 rushed the cockpit in an attempt to regain control of the jet, which the four al- Qaeda hijackers apparently intended to crash into the White House or the U.S. Capitol. The heroism of the flight 93 passengers undoubtedly saved thousands of lives here in Washington. Todd's wife, Lisa, was one of at least 17 pregnant women who became widows on 9/11; Morgan Kay Beamer was born on January 9, 2002. There were incredible acts of charity and compassion and volunteerism. The National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center has documented some of them. Ada Rosario Dolch was the principal of a high school located just two blocks from the World Trade Center. On 9/11, she helped to evacuate 600 students safely; meanwhile, Ada's sister Wendy Wakeford was killed. To honor Wendy's memory, Ada helped to build a school in Afghanistan that opened in 2005. In 2006, Tad Millinger started the ``Walk to Raise'' campaign with high school friends Brandon Reinhard, Chad Coulter, and Dustin Dean. They walked 650 miles from their hometown of Rossford, OH, to New York City to raise money for the National September 11 Memorial & Museum at the World Trade Center and the Flight 93 National Memorial in Pennsylvania. Tad is now a volunteer firefighter and emergency medical technician in his hometown. Sonali Beaven was 5 years old when her father, Alan, was killed on Flight 93. ``My loss is central to my identity,'' Sonali has said. ``In a sense, each choice I've made since that day has been crafted by my experience. But, because of my loss and the nature of my loss, I choose love and life every day. Because of my father and the other passengers, I can't let fear limit me. I have to take today and every day and try to improve the world we live in and spread the ideology of love.'' There has been resolve. We resolved as a nation to bring to justice the people responsible for 9/11. Roughly 2.5 million Americans have served in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; despite the horrors of war and multiple deployments, 89 percent of those veterans say they would join the military again. On May 2, 2011, Navy SEAL Team Six located and killed Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad, Pakistan, in Operation Neptune Spear. The global war on terror is far from over, but I am confident we will prevail. As President Franklin Delano Roosevelt said in his May 26, 1940 fireside chat, ``We defend and we build a way of life, not for America alone, but for all mankind.'' What I hope our young people--those who don't have a personal memory of 9/11--will understand is that, out of many, we are truly one. That was evident on 9/11, and it is still true. Our partisan, political, philosophical, and regional differences come to the fore during a Presidential campaign. But these differences ultimately are dwarfed by what binds us together as Americans: our hopes for our families, our communities, our Nation, and the world. The best way for all of us to honor those who died on 9/11 is to remember that and act accordingly-- courageously, generously, compassionately, and with resolve to defend and promote justice, freedom, and peace at home and abroad. (At the request of Mr. Reid, the following statement was ordered to be printed in the Record.)

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, the first order of business in this return to session is for us to pass an appropriations bill to keep the government open on October 1. I know that people are physically at work in order to make that a reality. I was on the floor yesterday talking about the need to fund Zika. To me, that is urgent. We have to get that done now. I explained then that there are real risks to the general population of Maryland and Colorado and every State in this country from the Zika virus. Today I am going to talk about two episodes--two disasters--that occurred in Maryland during the recess. I mention that in this context because we need our Federal agencies fully functioning and fully funded in order to deal with the things that just happen in America. In my own State we had two horrible disasters during the recess, and I would like to talk a little bit about that. Marylanders are heartbroken by the devastation that has hit our community in Ellicott City. My condolences go out to the family and friends who lost loved ones in the tragedy. I want to especially thank the first responders who worked tirelessly to save lives and property after the historic flooding in Ellicott City. Ellicott City is a historic Maryland treasure, founded in 1772 and known for its vibrant business community and its culture of kindness and resilience. It suffered significant flooding throughout the intense rainfall on the evening of July 30, 2016. The National Weather Service predicts that a rainfall of this magnitude should statistically occur once in every 1,000 years. Six inches of rain poured down on Ellicott City--an amount of rain that normally falls over the course of one month--in the period of only 90 minutes. Shortly after the storm hit, I toured Ellicott City with Howard County Executive Allan Kittleman, officials from the Maryland Emergency Management Agency, MEMA, and other Federal, State, and local officials. The devastation is truly frightening in terms of damage to property, businesses, homes, vehicles, and infrastructure in Ellicott City. As the Baltimore Sun reported, Saturday, July 30, began unremarkably for a summer day in the mid-Atlantic, with thunderstorms expected. Joseph Anthony Blevins was out on a date night with his girlfriend Heather Owens, and he suggested they stop at Main Street in Ellicott City. They had just left a matinee at a movie theater in Laurel and were heading home to Windsor Mill. With a roll of her eyes, she agreed to stop in the city's historic district. Let me continue with the Baltimore Sun's reporting of this story: It was raining when [Heather Owens and Joe Blevins] pulled into a parking lot off Main Street around 7:30 p.m., and they sat in the car to wait out what they expected to be a short downpour. They didn't know that the weather service had issued a flash flood warning for much of central Maryland about 12 minutes earlier. When they realized the rain was not going to let up, they decided to go home. They pulled back on to Main Street, but within five minutes, their car began floating. The car struck a guardrail and plunged into the swollen Patapsco River. Owens was able to get out of the passenger side window, and thinks she grabbed something, perhaps a branch of a tree on the river bank, as the current pulled her downstream. She looked for Blevins and saw him in the river, gasping for air and reaching in vain for something to hold on to. She scrambled up the rocky bank onto nearby railroad tracks, heading toward houses on higher ground to get help. The rushing waters had torn her pants and shoes off, but she survived with a fractured jaw. . . . Residents and first responders later looked unsuccessfully for Blevins. Blevins, 38, died during the flooding, leaving behind Owens and his three children. A confluence of meteorological and geographical factors turned this hard summer rain into a destructive torrent. In less than 2 hours the river rose 14 feet above its normal flow. Shops and restaurants that line Main Street were swamped and flooded as water rushed down the street and rose underneath it. The Tiber, usually just an inch or two of water running through a reinforced channel below some of the buildings, swelled during the storm. You can see a little bit here of the damage that we are talking about in this photograph. I had a chance to see this firsthand, and it was incredible that buildings had been completely washed away. The river normally flowed underneath that and has for a long time, but because of construction and because of the amount of water that fell, the water was funneled into Main Street, and it became a force of itself going down Main Street, as well as the river rising below it, causing major destruction. Jessica Lynn Watsula also died in the flood. Again, as the Baltimore Sun reports, she was a 35-year-old mother who lived in Lebanon, PA, and had gone to Portalli's in Ellicott City that night with three women for a girls' night out. Watsula dropped off her 10-year-old daughter at her brother's home and drove two hours from Pennsylvania for dinner and painting Saturday in Ellicott City--a chance to share an evening with her sister-in-law and two other relatives. As the four women left Portalli's Italian restaurant on Main Street in the historic district, a wave of flood water began to sweep their car away. They got out and clung to a telephone pole as waist-high water rushed over them. Watsula was swept away and died in the flood. As we mourn the loss of Joseph Blevins and Jessica Watsula, let me thank the citizens of Ellicott City who undoubtedly saved many lives with their heroic actions during this historic and deadly flood. I am pleased that our congressional delegation has moved quickly to facilitate the emergency help for families, communities, homeowners, and small businesses to recover from this disaster. I want to recognize and praise the Federal agencies who stepped up to the plate and worked hand-in-hand with our State and local officials. Let me start by thanking the Small Business Administration and specifically SBA Administrator Maria Contreras-Sweet for her tremendous help to the people of Ellicott City. The SBA's survey of Ellicott City found more than the 25 structures--with 40 percent or more of uninsured damage--required to recommend an SBA physical declaration. At least 60 homeowners, renters, and businesses in Ellicott City and surrounding areas sustained major damage or were destroyed. More than 80 structures sustained minor damage as well. In this case, the Federal disaster declaration from the SBA was necessary to ensure Howard County business owners got the physical disaster loan assistance and economic injury disaster loan assistance they need to repair or replace real estate, personal property, equipment, or inventory damaged or destroyed in the disturbance. I know many of these shopowners. These are not chains; these are small business people who have set up their own unique businesses providing retail services in a way that reminds us of how retail used to be in this country. Main Street in Ellicott City is Main Street America. These people are very resilient, but when you have this type of damage and you know how long it is going to be before you can return the structure to its use, it requires a helping hand. I was pleased that the SBA came through for the citizens of Ellicott City by approving a formal disaster declaration which will allow the homeowners, businesses, and nonprofit organizations impacted by this epic storm and resultant floodwaters to apply for economic injury disaster loans, which provide low-interest assistance to help businesses meet their financial obligations and pay ordinary and necessary operating expenses. The SBA has repeatedly proven its willingness and ability to help Marylanders struck by crisis. I express my sincere thanks to the SBA for the assistance extended to our neighbors in need, and I will continue to work with Team Maryland, including Senator Mikulski and Congressman Cummings, to identify additional resources to aid Ellicott City. The Maryland delegation has come together to support the State's request for a Federal disaster declaration for Howard County after the deadly and devastating flood in Ellicott City. Given the massive impact this flooding had on our State and our local resources, I have joined my colleagues in the Maryland delegation in writing a letter to the President urging him to approve the Federal disaster declaration at the request of our Governor, Larry Hogan. I also acknowledge the extraordinary help from officials from Region III of the Federal Emergency Management Agency and in particular MaryAnn Tierney. Region III offices are headquartered in Philadelphia but include the State of Maryland. So I appreciate Administrator Tierney coming down for a site visit to oversee the joint preliminary assessment. She was there immediately. I met with her. She understood the urgency and the importance of being on the ground. I was pleased to have the opportunity to meet with her and others during her site visit to Ellicott City. I thank her for her coordination with State and local officials in responding to this disaster. Flower Branch Apartments Explosion and fire in Silver Spring, Maryland Mr. President, I also want to share with my colleagues another major disaster that occurred in Maryland over the Senate recess. On August 10, a massive explosion and fire took place at the Flower Branch Apartments in Silver Spring, MD. Seven individuals died in the catastrophe, which caused dozens of injuries and displaced over 100 residents. I was at this scene also. We lost life. People lost their lives, and I am going to mention their names. I was surprised to find that there were survivors when I took a look at the amount of damage that was done by this explosion. The first responders showed me parts of the building that were found hundreds of yards away, mangled by the force of the explosion. There was immediately a fire that consumed the rest of the premises. As the Washington Post reported, the destruction was so devastating that authorities were unable to immediately determine how many people died. There was difficulty in making identifications. Among the victims were two little boys, Deibi Morales and Fernando Hernandez, who had become friends as their mothers undertook new lives in the United States; a couple, Augusto Jimenez and Maria Castellon, who built a house-cleaning business; and a retired painter, Saul Paniagua, who doted on his grandchildren. We mourn all their lives, and we extend our deepest condolences to their families. I toured this site recently with Montgomery County Executive Ike Leggett and other Federal, State, and local officials, including officials from the Montgomery County, MD, Fire and Rescue Service. Our hearts go out to the families who have been impacted by this horrible tragedy in Montgomery County. I want to thank the first responders, State and local officials, as well as a wide range of nonprofit, faith-based and community groups who have answered the call to help victims, families, and loved ones begin to put their pieces back together as best they can. It was heartwarming to see the community outpouring to help those who were homeless immediately as a result of this disaster and to provide whatever they could. They provided help to the first responders. The temperature was over 100 degrees during the period of time this occurred. There were oppressive temperatures and very difficult working conditions. The community came together to help the first responders. We had a team come in from out of town who is expert in this type of accident to help us in dealing with this tragedy. I thank everybody for their help in trying to do what we could to help those who are fighting and helping to locate the survivors and to those who were victimized by this explosion. At the Federal level, I commend the work of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in helping with the investigation of this massive explosion and fire. I am pleased that the National Transportation Safety Board has launched a formal investigation into this incident, and that is because there is an expected gas line issue involved in the explosion. I am hopeful that the National Transportation Safety Board investigation will uncover the causes of the explosion and fire and hold individuals accountable for any wrongdoing, as well as lead to additional safety recommendations as to how to help prevent these types of devastating explosions in the future. We should also examine our outreach and education efforts to the immigrant community to make sure that all residents are aware of the rights and government services available to them. This community is an immigrant community. For many, English is not their first language. It was an additional challenge to make sure they understood that we were there to help and that we wanted to make sure we did everything we could to make sure they were properly taken care of. Again, I thank the Federal, State, and local government agencies that helped the citizens of Ellicott City and Silver Spring respond to these terrible disasters. Working with our nonprofits and faith-based communities, we can recover and rebuild from these tragedies. As I said in the beginning, this is just another example of why it is critically important that we do our job here and that we pass the necessary appropriations bills so that our Federal partners can help our State and local governments help those who are victimized by these types of disasters, that they knew they have the Federal agencies fully tooled, fully budgeted to help them respond to these tragedies. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, first, I want to thank my colleague from Florida, Senator Nelson, for his comments in regard to the Zika funding. As the Senator from Florida, he knows firsthand of the locally acquired Zika virus in his own State. This is not just a matter of individuals traveling to other countries and obtaining the Zika virus and coming back to the United States; we have a locally acquired Zika virus here in the United States, and Senator Nelson has been an outspoken leader in the Senate and in the Congress for doing the right thing. He was absolutely right when he said that 3 months ago we passed a compromise bill that would have funded the NIH, USAID, and the other agencies and what they need for the remainder of the year. It would have done it in a way that was not all the money I thought or he thought should be provided, but it was a fair compromise. Instead, of course, we got a conference report that contained less funds, poison pills, and issues that are not related to the Zika funding to try to move forward a pretty extreme agenda. That is not what we should be doing with the health of the people of this country. So I take this time to support what Senator Nelson has said, and I rise to talk about the urgent need for us to provide full funding--full funding--for our response to the Zika virus. More than 6 months ago, President Obama submitted a request to Congress for $1.9 billion in emergency supplemental funding to address the virus. The request included $1.5 billion for the Department of Health and Human Services, $335 million for the U.S. Agency for International Development, $41 million for the Department of State, and support for several other Federal agencies. The administration's plan, which had the full weight of the scientific community behind it, represents a coordinated, well-funded, whole-of-government approach to combating the virus, with a focus on prevention, treatment, and research. But instead of listening to the experts, Republicans offered a Zika conference report that underfunded critical Federal, State, and global response efforts by more than $800 million and included poisonous policy riders and pay-fors. The Senate rightly rejected the Zika conference report. We will have another opportunity, and I just urge my colleagues: Let's stop playing politics with this and let's bring forward clean funding for the Zika virus. Many Senators, including myself, were extremely disappointed that we adjourned for the summer recess before dealing with this public health emergency. One thing is clear. Zika will not simply disappear on its own. When we left town in July, there were approximately 1,100 travel-associated Zika cases reported in the continental United States, including 31 in my home State of Maryland and 2,474 locally acquired cases across U.S. territories. As has been pointed out, people travel and they bring the virus back here to the United States. It can be transmitted via mosquitoes here, and it can be locally acquired here. Just 6 weeks later, the number of travel-associated Zika infections has more than doubled to 2,500 cases, including 77 cases in Maryland. The number of locally acquired cases across the U.S. territories has jumped fourfold in the last 6 weeks to more than 9,000 cases, and, perhaps most alarmingly, as Senator Nelson pointed out, it is documented here in the United States. Florida has documented approximately 30 locally acquired Zika cases. Zika isn't just a threat to us at home. It also threatens American service men and women and their families and other personnel who are serving abroad. Earlier this month, the Department of Defense officially confirmed that 33 U.S. servicemembers have contracted the virus abroad. Just last week, officials in Singapore--a country we haven't even considered in the context of Zika--announced that it had 82 confirmed cases of the virus and had detected local transmission. We cannot play partisan politics with this virus. Because of Zika, babies are being born in the United States and throughout Central and South America with horrible birth defects. A recent study found that microcephaly is not the only birth defect resulting from this virus. To date, more than 1,300 pregnant women in the continental United States and territories are being monitored following laboratory evidence of possible Zika virus infection. This is according to the Zika Pregnancy Registry. Without congressional action to fund our response to the Zika epidemic adequately, the efforts to better understand and combat this terrible disease are in danger of being derailed. Let me quote from Dr. Tony Fauci, the Nation's leading infectious disease expert and the Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. He is well known by all of us on both sides of the aisle, and he is frequently used by Democrats and Republicans here as the expert. This is what he said: ``The vaccine effort will be blunted if not aborted if we don't have the funding.'' Dr. Fauci also emphasized that other vital HHS and National Institutes of Health programs will suffer if the agency is forced to focus funding primarily on vaccine development. Already, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases has diverted funds from tuberculosis and malaria research to fund Zika efforts. These funds have not been paid back. Those programs are now suffering. While Congress has been away, the administration has been forced to rob vital research programs focusing on Ebola, kidney disease, and cancer. Earlier this month, Secretary Burwell announced that HHS will transfer another $81 million from other research programs to NIH and Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority to continue Zika vaccine development. It is unconscionable that we are forcing our public health officials to make these kinds of decisions. Funding of NIH has always been a bipartisan priority, yet here we are not making the money available, requiring money to be diverted from other important NIH projects and inadequately funding a response to the public health emergency of Zika. Even with those additional funds that were made available, Dr. Fauci will still need $196 million to fully fund NIH's research of Zika. If Congress doesn't approve emergency funding for Zika research, NIH's Zika vaccine trials will once again be interrupted and treatments will be further delayed. How do we explain this to the millions of Americans at risk for contracting Zika here at home? Let me just point out that on August 30, just a couple of days ago, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control announced that the agency will run out of funding to fight Zika. We don't have the money there. It is up to Congress to provide those funds. As we know, from mosquitoes is how this virus is contracted. The peak mosquito season in the United States typically lasts through October. If local transmission spreads in other areas, the CDC is unlikely to have the resources to respond and send teams to support local and State health departments. That is what is at risk. Millions of Americans are at risk. State and local health departments also bear the brunt of the consequences of not fully funding Zika response efforts. Our Nation's health departments are on the front line, fighting the disease while working on grassroots levels to expand and enhance prevention efforts, including mosquito surveillance and control, promoting culturally conscious education programs to raise public awareness, and equipping our public health care workforce with the most medically accurate guidelines to help patients make informed decisions about their health care. The first order of business for this Congress should be to pass an adequate and clean Zika funding bill. Neglecting to pass an appropriate Zika response bill is a failure to expectant mothers who are growing concerned about the lasting impact that mosquito bites this summer could have on the health of their unborn children, and it is a failure to the millions of Americans who trust us to do everything in our power to safeguard their health and well-being. If we expect to make adequate progress on combating this virus this year, if we want to protect the health and welfare of all Americans, Congress must pass a clean, well- resourced funding bill without delay. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to talk about the urgent need to provide full funding for our response to the Zika virus. Nearly 5 months ago, on February 22, President Obama submitted a request to Congress for $1.9 billion in emergency supplemental funding to address the growing Zika epidemic. The request included $1.509 billion for the Department of Health and Human Services, HHS; $335 million for the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID; $41 million for the Department of State; and support for several other Federal agencies. The administration's plan--which has the full weight of the scientific community behind it--represents a coordinated and well- funded, whole-of-government approach to combating the virus with a focus on prevention, treatment, and research. But instead of listening to the experts, Republicans choose instead to abide by a partisan agenda: offering a Zika conference report that underfunded critical Federal, State, and global response efforts by more than $800 million, and included poisonous policy riders and pay- fors that gratuitously attacked the Affordable Care Act, the safety of our Nation's drinking water, and women's reproductive rights. The Senate rejected the Zika conference report and rightfully so. The Republican leadership particularly in the House seem to be forgetting that the Zika virus is a mosquito-borne disease that has a real, devastating impacts on women and their babies. There have been over 1,100 travel-associated Zika cases reported in the continental United States, including 31 in my home State of Maryland and 2,474 locally acquired cases across the U.S. territories. Because of Zika, babies are being born in the United States and throughout Central and South America with horrible birth defects. To date, more than 600 pregnant women in the continental U.S. and the territories are being monitored following laboratory evidence of possible Zika virus infection, according to the U.S. Zika Pregnancy Registry. Without congressional action to fund our response to the Zika epidemic adequately, the efforts to better understand and combat this disease will be derailed. According to Dr. Tony Fauci, the Nation's leading infectious disease expert and Director of the National Institute of Allergy & Infectious Diseases, NIAID, ``The vaccine effort will be blunted if not aborted if we don't have the funding.'' Dr. Fauci also emphasized that other vital HHS and NIH programs will suffer if the agency is forced to focus funding primarily on vaccine development. The NIAID has already diverted funds from malaria and tuberculosis research to fund Zika efforts. It is unconscionable that the Republican leadership is forcing our public health officials to make these kinds of decisions. State and local health departments also bear the brunt of the consequences of not fully funding our Zika response efforts. Our Nation's health departments are on the front lines of combating this disease, working on a grassroots level to expand and enhance prevention efforts, including mosquito surveillance and control; promoting culturally conscious education campaigns to raise public awareness; and equipping our health care workforce with the most medically accurate guidelines to help patients make informed decisions about their health care. Zika will not simply disappear without adequate funding. Congress must pass an adequate and clean Zika funding bill. Leaving Washington, DC, for the summer recess without sufficiently funding Zika response efforts is irresponsible and does an incredible disservice to the American people. Neglecting to pass an appropriate Zika response bill is a failure to expectant mothers who have growing concerns about the lasting impact a mosquito bite this summer could have on the health of their unborn children; it is a failure to the ambitious U.S. athletes who are considering sidelining their dreams of Olympic glory over the fear of contracting the virus; and it is a failure to the millions of Americans who entrust us to do everything in our power to safeguard their health and well-being. Although we should not incite panic about Zika, the seriousness of this problem is too great to be ignored. If we expect to make adequate progress on combating this virus this year--and if we want to protect the health and welfare of all Americans--Congress must pass a clean, well-resourced Zika funding bill without delay.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, there is growing recognition in the United States, and around the world, that corruption is a serious threat to international security and stability. We have all seen the headlines-- from scandals in Brazil and Malaysia, to the doping by Russian athletes and their subsequent ban from the Summer Olympics, to the Panama Papers. It is becoming clear that where there are high levels of corruption we find fragile states, or states suffering from internal or external conflict--in places such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Nigeria, and Sudan. The problem of corruption, and the dysfunction that follows it, can be difficult to address because it is like a hydra, with many corrupt actors that can include government officials, businessmen, law enforcement, military personnel, and organized criminal groups. Corruption is a system that operates via extensive, entrenched networks in both the public and private sectors. But we must address it. We can't throw up our hands and accept corruption as the status quo, because the costs of not addressing and rooting it out are too great. Corruption fuels violent extremism, pushing young people toward violence, because they lose faith in the institutions that are supposed to protect and serve them. Corruption feeds the destructive fire of criminal networks and transnational crime. Citizens lose faith in the social compact between governments and the people. Terrorist groups use corruption to recruit followers to their hateful cause. It's a vicious cycle. The human cost of corruption is substantial. Across the globe, millions of men, women and children are victims of modern day slavery. Corruption enables their trafficking within and among countries. Corruption is a constant companion to modern day slavery and the suffering that it brings. We also have seen this play out in the refugee and migrant crisis, with thousands drowning in the Mediterranean, victims of trafficking networks and corrupt government officials who facilitate this illicit business. Make no mistake, corruption is big business--one news report estimates that traffickers made 5 to 6 billion dollars in 2015 alone in bringing approximately one million refugees and migrants to Europe. Let's be clear-eyed--any fight against corruption will be long-term and difficult. It's a fight against powerful people, powerful companies, and powerful interests. It is about changing a mindset and a culture as much as it is about establishing and enforcing laws. As my colleagues and constituents know, my attention has long been focused on fighting corruption. I introduced S. 284, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, to target human rights abusers and corrupt individuals around the globe who threaten the rule of law and deny fundamental freedoms. But the problem is so big--we simply have to do more. This is why I am introducing the Combating Global Corruption and Accountability Act. We must meet the scale of the problem of corruption with greater resolve and commitment. To do that, I believe we must focus on four things. First, we must institutionalize the fight against corruption as a national security priority. In my bill, the State Department will produce an annual report, similar to the Trafficking in Persons Report, which takes a close look at each country's efforts to combat corruption. That model, which has effectively advanced the effort to combat modern day slavery, will similarly embed the issue of corruption in our collective work, so that we hold governments to account. This bill establishes minimum standards for combating corruption--standards that should be part and parcel of every government's commitment to its citizens. These include whether a country has laws that recognize corrupt acts for the crimes they are--violations of the people's trust--along with appropriate penalties for breaking that trust. Whether a country has an independent judiciary for deciding corruption cases, free from influence and abuse. Whether there is support for civil society organizations that are the watchdogs of integrity against would-be thieves of the state. This bill, hopefully, will build anticorruption DNA into the foundations of government action. Second, in the United States, our whole-of-government effort must be better coordinated. Right now, we work across multiple agencies and in multiple offices to combat corruption. There is much information and many best practices that can be shared--we've got to do better at that and take advantage of those areas where we have been successful. The State Department and the United States Agency for International Development have done great work, but the vast nature of the problem requires that we improve our ability to tackle it. In this bill, agencies and bureaus and our missions overseas will have to prioritize corruption into their strategic planning as an essential part of our foreign policy work--a step that I believe will foster greater cooperation. Third, we must improve oversight of our own foreign assistance and promote transparency. The U.S. taxpayer has a right to know how our foreign assistance is being spent, and also should feel confident that we are doing the kind of risk assessments, analysis, and oversight that ensure our assistance to other countries is having the effect we want it to have. My bill consolidates information and puts it online, where citizens can see the numbers and the programs. That kind of transparency is in and of itself good, but in my experience it has the effect of making us better at self-policing our work. We can use the data to capture redundancies and analyze trends, which I believe will make our decision-making better. The bill embeds oversight into our foreign assistance programs overseas, maintaining the flexibility we need to meet our goals rapidly while also holding government to account. In fact, it is a natural complement to the Foreign Assistance Transparency and Accountability Act, a bill Senator Rubio and I co- sponsored that looks at our foreign aid and ensures that our foreign assistance programs are tracked and evaluated adequately and appropriately. I am a believer in the power of example. This ``one-two'' punch of the Combating Global Corruption Act and the Foreign Assistance Transparency Act strengthens our foreign assistance policy, demonstrates that we hold ourselves to the highest standards, and shows other countries that we are committed to this fight. Finally, we have to find ways to resource anti-corruption work. Corruption is big business and big money. We should look for ways to use seized assets and ill-gotten proceeds to build civil society capacity to fight corruption, and make it easier to transfer these assets to the appropriate effort. The Obama administration has built on the efforts of those before it to improve our ability to go after the big players, and there have been some great successes by the Treasury and Justice Departments in winning judgments and recovering assets. So we will look at the resources and the training and the intelligence needs, and we will make sure we have the tools and skills to continue those kinds of successes. I want to close with a few words about something that is hard to capture in legislation. It is something that I grappled with when drafting this bill. It is something that perhaps, more than anything, will dictate if we win this struggle against corruption. And that is political will. At the end of June, after six long years, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued a final rule to implement Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act, known as the ``Cardin-Lugar provision''. This provision requires that all foreign and domestic companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges and involved in oil, gas, and mineral resource extraction must publish the project-level payments they make to the foreign countries in which they operate. This was a watershed moment in which the United States reclaimed its position as a leader in the effort to increase global accountability and transparency. Six years. That is the length of a term of a U.S. Senator. It is college and a Master's degree. It is the length of the horrific conflict in Syria. Six years for the United States to achieve greater revenue transparency in the extractives sector because we know secrecy breeds corruption and corruption can breed instability and perpetuate poverty in resource- rich countries. It took that long because some people believed that less transparency is a good thing. Some groups believed that accountability should take a back seat to profitability. I am under no illusion that this global fight against corruption will be easy. It will make the work of our government agencies more challenging. It will make our diplomacy more challenging. It will require political will. But political will finds its source and its strength in our values. Political will is created when we embrace those values. Political will endures in good governance, accountability, and transparency and those values that are at the core of the compact between the government and the governed. As this bill moves forward, I urge my colleagues to find the political will to combat global corruption, ensure accountability, and keep our commitment to the best of American values.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, there is growing recognition in the United States, and around the world, that corruption is a serious threat to international security and stability. We have all seen the headlines-- from scandals in Brazil and Malaysia, to the doping by Russian athletes and their subsequent ban from the Summer Olympics, to the Panama Papers. It is becoming clear that where there are high levels of corruption we find fragile states, or states suffering from internal or external conflict--in places such as Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Nigeria, and Sudan. The problem of corruption, and the dysfunction that follows it, can be difficult to address because it is like a hydra, with many corrupt actors that can include government officials, businessmen, law enforcement, military personnel, and organized criminal groups. Corruption is a system that operates via extensive, entrenched networks in both the public and private sectors. But we must address it. We can't throw up our hands and accept corruption as the status quo, because the costs of not addressing and rooting it out are too great. Corruption fuels violent extremism, pushing young people toward violence, because they lose faith in the institutions that are supposed to protect and serve them. Corruption feeds the destructive fire of criminal networks and transnational crime. Citizens lose faith in the social compact between governments and the people. Terrorist groups use corruption to recruit followers to their hateful cause. It's a vicious cycle. The human cost of corruption is substantial. Across the globe, millions of men, women and children are victims of modern day slavery. Corruption enables their trafficking within and among countries. Corruption is a constant companion to modern day slavery and the suffering that it brings. We also have seen this play out in the refugee and migrant crisis, with thousands drowning in the Mediterranean, victims of trafficking networks and corrupt government officials who facilitate this illicit business. Make no mistake, corruption is big business--one news report estimates that traffickers made 5 to 6 billion dollars in 2015 alone in bringing approximately one million refugees and migrants to Europe. Let's be clear-eyed--any fight against corruption will be long-term and difficult. It's a fight against powerful people, powerful companies, and powerful interests. It is about changing a mindset and a culture as much as it is about establishing and enforcing laws. As my colleagues and constituents know, my attention has long been focused on fighting corruption. I introduced S. 284, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act, to target human rights abusers and corrupt individuals around the globe who threaten the rule of law and deny fundamental freedoms. But the problem is so big--we simply have to do more. This is why I am introducing the Combating Global Corruption and Accountability Act. We must meet the scale of the problem of corruption with greater resolve and commitment. To do that, I believe we must focus on four things. First, we must institutionalize the fight against corruption as a national security priority. In my bill, the State Department will produce an annual report, similar to the Trafficking in Persons Report, which takes a close look at each country's efforts to combat corruption. That model, which has effectively advanced the effort to combat modern day slavery, will similarly embed the issue of corruption in our collective work, so that we hold governments to account. This bill establishes minimum standards for combating corruption--standards that should be part and parcel of every government's commitment to its citizens. These include whether a country has laws that recognize corrupt acts for the crimes they are--violations of the people's trust--along with appropriate penalties for breaking that trust. Whether a country has an independent judiciary for deciding corruption cases, free from influence and abuse. Whether there is support for civil society organizations that are the watchdogs of integrity against would-be thieves of the state. This bill, hopefully, will build anticorruption DNA into the foundations of government action. Second, in the United States, our whole-of-government effort must be better coordinated. Right now, we work across multiple agencies and in multiple offices to combat corruption. There is much information and many best practices that can be shared--we've got to do better at that and take advantage of those areas where we have been successful. The State Department and the United States Agency for International Development have done great work, but the vast nature of the problem requires that we improve our ability to tackle it. In this bill, agencies and bureaus and our missions overseas will have to prioritize corruption into their strategic planning as an essential part of our foreign policy work--a step that I believe will foster greater cooperation. Third, we must improve oversight of our own foreign assistance and promote transparency. The U.S. taxpayer has a right to know how our foreign assistance is being spent, and also should feel confident that we are doing the kind of risk assessments, analysis, and oversight that ensure our assistance to other countries is having the effect we want it to have. My bill consolidates information and puts it online, where citizens can see the numbers and the programs. That kind of transparency is in and of itself good, but in my experience it has the effect of making us better at self-policing our work. We can use the data to capture redundancies and analyze trends, which I believe will make our decision-making better. The bill embeds oversight into our foreign assistance programs overseas, maintaining the flexibility we need to meet our goals rapidly while also holding government to account. In fact, it is a natural complement to the Foreign Assistance Transparency and Accountability Act, a bill Senator Rubio and I co- sponsored that looks at our foreign aid and ensures that our foreign assistance programs are tracked and evaluated adequately and appropriately. I am a believer in the power of example. This ``one-two'' punch of the Combating Global Corruption Act and the Foreign Assistance Transparency Act strengthens our foreign assistance policy, demonstrates that we hold ourselves to the highest standards, and shows other countries that we are committed to this fight. Finally, we have to find ways to resource anti-corruption work. Corruption is big business and big money. We should look for ways to use seized assets and ill-gotten proceeds to build civil society capacity to fight corruption, and make it easier to transfer these assets to the appropriate effort. The Obama administration has built on the efforts of those before it to improve our ability to go after the big players, and there have been some great successes by the Treasury and Justice Departments in winning judgments and recovering assets. So we will look at the resources and the training and the intelligence needs, and we will make sure we have the tools and skills to continue those kinds of successes. I want to close with a few words about something that is hard to capture in legislation. It is something that I grappled with when drafting this bill. It is something that perhaps, more than anything, will dictate if we win this struggle against corruption. And that is political will. At the end of June, after six long years, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued a final rule to implement Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Act, known as the ``Cardin-Lugar provision''. This provision requires that all foreign and domestic companies listed on U.S. stock exchanges and involved in oil, gas, and mineral resource extraction must publish the project-level payments they make to the foreign countries in which they operate. This was a watershed moment in which the United States reclaimed its position as a leader in the effort to increase global accountability and transparency. Six years. That is the length of a term of a U.S. Senator. It is college and a Master's degree. It is the length of the horrific conflict in Syria. Six years for the United States to achieve greater revenue transparency in the extractives sector because we know secrecy breeds corruption and corruption can breed instability and perpetuate poverty in resource- rich countries. It took that long because some people believed that less transparency is a good thing. Some groups believed that accountability should take a back seat to profitability. I am under no illusion that this global fight against corruption will be easy. It will make the work of our government agencies more challenging. It will make our diplomacy more challenging. It will require political will. But political will finds its source and its strength in our values. Political will is created when we embrace those values. Political will endures in good governance, accountability, and transparency and those values that are at the core of the compact between the government and the governed. As this bill moves forward, I urge my colleagues to find the political will to combat global corruption, ensure accountability, and keep our commitment to the best of American values.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Blunt for his leadership and for bringing this nomination to the floor. I wish also to thank Senator Schumer and the manner in which it was handled by the Rules Committee. The staff did a lot of work, and I thank all who were involved in bringing this nomination forward. We have heard from my colleagues, Senator Mikulski and Senator Blunt, about the extraordinary qualifications of Dr. Hayden. She has the academic credentials, experience, and proven leadership, as we saw with the Enoch Pratt Free Library in Baltimore and what she was able to do. I wish to add one more dimension to this, if I might, and that is the person she is. She is admired by all. She knows how to bring people together. She has incredible people skills in addition to having the technical skills to be an extraordinary CEO and to manage a complex operation. The Library of Congress is a complex operation. It takes a great deal of management skills. She has received many acknowledgements and awards during her career, but the one that I think perhaps speaks to her character the most was when the Daily Record gave her the award for the most admired CEO 2 years ago. That is a hard award to get, and it just shows that she knows how to lead--but to lead in an effective way. Quite frankly, the Library of Congress, I think, will benefit from those skills and use those skills very effectively. I also want to share with my colleagues that, in addition to her credentials in her profession, which we have already gone through-- including being president of the American Library Association and also serving on the accreditation committee--she has done a lot of the nuts and bolts with regard to libraries both locally and nationally. She has also been involved in many community activities. I know that locally she served on the Goucher College board, the Baltimore Gas and Electric board, and the Baltimore Leadership School for Young Women. I could mention a lot more activities. She has been an extremely engaged individual in our community. I know she will do a great job in this capacity, and I know she will make us proud. We know the Library of Congress is the envy of the world, and I think we have a world-class leader to lead the Library of Congress. I urge my colleagues to support this confirmation. If there is no one else who seeks recognition, I suggest that we yield back all time and move toward a vote.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, first I thank Senator Whitehouse for his extraordinary work on an issue that affects the United States and the global community, and that is the reality of climate change and the impact it is having on the United States and on the global community. Senator Whitehouse and I, along with eight other Members of this Senate, represented the United States at the COP21 conference in Paris in which over 190 nations came together on an action plan to deal with climate and climate change. That would not have happened but for U.S. leadership. I am proud of the work that was done by the United States in setting up a blueprint so we can deal with the impact of climate change in the international community. We can talk about the specific aspects of climate change and the impact it is having on the security of America. We can talk about the number of climate refugees--people who are going to be forced to leave their lands because of the rising sea level. We can talk about the impact of famine by droughts and floods that are occurring as a result of climate change. We can listen to our generals talk about the impact it has on our national security. I start by saying that this is an issue of international concern that affects America's security. We can do something about it, and we have done something about it. U.S. leadership has brought about a game plan to deal with this issue. So it is particularly frustrating to see special interest groups that have a direct financial interest in maintaining the status quo by continuing to use high-carbon productions in order to produce their products, and they finance groups that produce documents to justify the science deniers. That is a particularly frustrating aspect, particularly since we recognize how much we need U.S. leadership. I thank Senator Whitehouse for bringing to our attention the different special interest groups interested in high-carbon emissions and maintaining the status quo of our climate. They have financed these groups to come up with studies that are really phony in order to justify their opposition to responsible legislation here in the United States and around the world that will lead us to a safer course on climate change. This is particularly important for us in America. I will get a little parochial for one moment, if I might. The Chesapeake Bay is one of the most vulnerable regions in the Nation to the effects of climate change. According to a report from the Chesapeake Bay Program's Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee, some of these effects, including rising water temperatures and sea levels, have been observed in the watershed, and the region is expected to experience further shifts in its environmental conditions. As water levels rise, so will coastal flooding and erosion. Marshes and wetlands will be inundated with saltwater and will disappear faster than wetland plants can populate higher ground. There was an article in our local paper talking about the islands in the Chesapeake Bay--Tangier and Smith. They are disappearing. These islands won't be there in the future. And we already have islands that used to be inhabited in the Chesapeake Bay that don't exist. A loss of marshes and wetlands will mean a loss of the habitat that traps pollution and provides food and shelter to fish, shellfish, and birds, and a loss of livelihood to Maryland's men and women who earn a living by fishing, crabbing, and oystering in the Chesapeake Bay. It has a direct economic impact in addition to the safety issue. Strong rain and snowstorms can damage crops, erode soil, and increase flooding. Floods can damage ports, marinas, and historical monuments, and threaten buildings, sewer systems, roads, and tunnels. Meanwhile, a network of groups purporting to be unbiased has misled the public about the scientific certainty of climate change. In Maryland, junk science is a thing of the past. I take the time to point that out. The now-defunct Annapolis Center for Science-Based Public Policy was founded in 1993 by a former vice president of the National Association of Manufacturers. In its own words, the center was a ``national, non-profit educational organization that supports and promotes responsible energy, environmental, and health and safety policy-making through the use of sound science.'' Nothing could be further from the truth. In 1997, the Annapolis Center hosted a workshop discussing both the scientific and economic uncertainty of climate change and that a ``firm, unqualified conclusion on the direction and rate of climate change'' will come ``many decades in the future.'' That was their finding. For reference, Dr. James Hansen, who was then a scientist at NASA and is still one of the most world-renowned climate scientists, testified before Congress nearly a decade earlier as to the certainty of climate science. Fortunately, the Annapolis Center is not sending out this kind of misinformation any longer. They are no longer in existence. They closed their doors, thank goodness. They were funded by special interest to produce a document that they could use to try to prevent the progress that was being made on climate change with our policymakers, including Congress. Accelerating the transition to a low-carbon economy will produce many benefits with regard to sustainable economic growth, public health, resiliency to natural disasters, and the health of the global community. My colleague in the House, Congressman Delaney, and I have filed resolutions in the House and Senate affirming the establishment of a national goal of more than 50 percent of America's electricity production coming from clean and carbon-free electricity by 2030. This is doable. Despite the misinformation that has been put out by these special interest-funded groups, we can do much better on the use of noncarbon sources to produce our electricity. Our ``50x30'' resolutions are cosponsored by 30 Senators and 103 House Members. The resolutions are also endorsed by the Union of Concerned Scientists, Green Latinos, Green for All, Climate Hawks, and the House Sustainable Energy and Environmental Caucus. I am proud of the legitimate, science-based work of groups like the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. I applaud its hard work and the positive news of an improved score on the Chesapeake Bay report card for 2015. We are making progress. Why? Because we are following science-based solutions to deal with reducing carbon emissions. I am proud of recent efforts to divest in fossil fuels in Maryland. The foundation that oversees the Maryland State university system's $1 billion endowment announced June 28 that it will stop investing directly in coal, oil, and natural gas companies--a victory for a student-led movement to direct more of the portfolio clean energy. The University System of Maryland Foundation, which helps fund scholarships, endowed professorships, and more, said it would sign on to a United Nations pledge to be more socially aware of its investments and appoint a staff person to identify opportunities in renewable energy. I am also proud of the work of the Maryland board members of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. They have adopted proactive climate policies or practices. This should not be controversial. This is good for business, not bad. For example, board member Xerox Corporation, headquartered in Germantown, MD, is doing its part to reduce the financial risk of climate change. It signed the American Business Act on Climate Pledge and pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption by 20 percent by 2020. It is good for the environment, it is good for dealing with the impacts I have mentioned, and it is also good for business. This pledge is sponsored by the White House, and 154 businesses signed, voicing support for a strong outcome in the Paris climate negotiations. Another example is the Maryland State Retirement and Pension System. It is a proud member of the Ceres Investor Network on Climate Risk, a voluntary network of companies that have committed to improve their environmental and social performance and to publicly report their sustainable strategies. These and many other examples across Maryland demonstrate--contrary to what the chamber of commerce has said--that there is a business and economic case to be made to take steps to fight climate change. Unless we all act, we will continue on a trajectory that leads to a grim future for us and our children. The first step that must be taken is the recognition that climate change is real and that it is happening right now so we can work cooperatively to come up with creative solutions rather than continuing unproductive arguments about whether everyone agrees the science is settled. The types of activities we have seen should have no place in American politics. It is one thing to have disagreements on how we can resolve problems; it is another thing to say that the science points in an opposite direction than it does, particularly when it is funded by special interests that have a financial reward for trying to prevent science from dictating the policies--or leading us to the policies--in this country. I am proud to be part of the effort Senator Whitehouse has brought to the floor to expose these types of organizations. I am pleased that the organization that existed in Maryland no longer exists. I am proud of the great work that is being done. Tribute to Michael Wolfe Madam President, before I yield the floor, I wish to point out the incredible help I have had in my office from a detailee, Michael Wolfe. Michael is a Brookings fellow who has worked in my office. His home agency is the EPA, where he is the senior program analyst in the Office of Air and Radiation. He has worked at the EPA since 2004, dedicating most of his professional career to serving the American people. I know how fortunate my colleagues and I are when we get detailees from the executive branch to work in our offices. They provide extremely valuable help. Michael Wolfe has been an incredible resource to our office. He has been part of my team, and he is a civil engineer by training, which is something we desperately could use in my office. He was instrumental in my work on water infrastructure this year. He has also worked tirelessly to protect the clean water rule, the Chesapeake Bay agreement, and increase access to public lands in Maryland. While Michael is incredibly smart, the first thing one notices about Mike is that he nearly always smiles. Even on tough days, he brightens up our office. It has been a pleasure to know him. He will be leaving our office next week, and I wanted to take this time to personally thank him for his service to the Senate. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I come to the floor today as the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to discuss the importance of treaties to the United States and to express my strong support for the ratification of a number of treaties whose consistency with current U.S. law, coupled with the tangible and material benefits they would deliver to U.S. citizens, businesses, and law enforcement authorities, should make their ratification noncontroversial. Treaties enhance and increase stability in an uncertain world. They offer a framework for U.S. global engagement in which we can work to promote American values such as equal rights, freedom of navigation, and the promotion of global commerce. Yet, with the 114th Congress drawing to a close, the Senate has not yet ratified a single treaty--a situation I consider to be an extraordinary state of affairs for this body, and I hope we can change this shortly. The value and importance of treaties to the interests of the United States and its citizens can be seen in the seven treaties the Senate Foreign Relations Committee recently reported out. I thank Senator Corker and the members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for reporting these treaties to the floor of the Senate for its consideration. These treaties include the Convention on the Law Applicable to Certain Rights in Respect of Securities Held with an Intermediary, known as the Hague Securities Convention, the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, two extradition treaties with the Dominican Republic and Chile, and three mutual legal assistance treaties with Jordan, Algeria, and Kazakhstan. Let me talk about these treaties. I am sure they are not getting the headlines of many other actions, but they are important to U.S. interests. The Hague Securities Convention was negotiated to address uncertainty as to what law governs cross-border transactions in stocks, bonds, and other securities. That legal uncertainty has imposed friction costs on securities transactions and increased risks for investors. The convention provides voluntary choice-of-law rules for securities that are held by an intermediary. It was drafted with close attention to the relevant passages of U.S. law on secure transactions, articles 8 and 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. The result modernizes these transactions and greatly enhances their predictability. It is totally consistent with current U.S. law. U.S. ratification of the Hague Securities Convention would be the deciding vote in bringing the convention into force, which will encourage other countries to sign on to this treaty that promotes global commerce and legal certainty with a system patterned on longstanding U.S. commercial law. The benefit of this treaty to U.S. business is obvious, which is why the convention is unanimously supported by the relevant stakeholders in the United States, including the Uniform Law Commission, which drafted the Uniform Commercial Code on which the convention is based, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Commercial Finance Association and Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the Financial Services Forum, the Emerging Markets Traders Association, the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation, and numerous other securities clearance and banking entities. The stakeholders who understand the importance to U.S. business interests all support the ratification of this treaty. The second treaty the Foreign Relations Committee just reported is the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources. This treaty has been in force for 12 years and already has 139 contracting partners. The U.S. ratification of the plant genetics treaty will benefit U.S. farmers as well as U.S. agricultural and research institutions. Plant breeders, farmers, and researchers need access to raw plant materials to develop improved plants that are more productive and nutritious. The plant genetics treaty aims to address this need through the creation of a formal global network for banking and sharing seeds. The treaty establishes a stable legal framework for international germ plasm exchanges of 64 different crops, including wheat, rice, potatoes, oats, maize, rye, strawberries, and apples. The sharing of these crops benefits both research and commercial interests in the United States through the development of new crop varieties that are more nutritious, more resistant to pests and diseases, show improved yields, and can better tolerate environmental stresses such as drought. The treaty is also unanimously supported by relevant U.S. stakeholders. I ask unanimous consent to have the full list printed in the Record.

Mr. CARDIN. The list includes the American Seed Trade Association, the National Farmers Union, the Biotechnology Industry Organization, the National Association of Wheat Growers, the National Corn Growers Association, the American Soybean Association, numerous universities, and nearly 100 other farm, agricultural, and research groups. This agreement again is supported by all these stakeholders that understand the importance to American farmers, American commercial interests, and American consumers. I am deeply grateful to Chairman Corker and my colleagues on the Foreign Relations Committee who worked hard to advance these treaties to the Senate floor. My only regret is that I hoped we would have considered these two worthy, uncontroversial treaties earlier. Both the Hague Securities Convention and the plant genetic treaty provide tangible benefits to the United States and its stakeholders. Neither requires changes to U.S. law. Let me repeat that. Neither of these treaties would require us to change U.S. law. The Hague convention was signed by the United States in 2006 and has been awaiting ratification in this body since 2012. The plant genetics treaty was submitted to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2008, received a hearing on November 10, 2009, and was reported by the committee in December 2010. Almost 6 years later, it still has not been considered by the full Senate. We can do better. I am hopeful the Senate will soon act to ratify these two treaties. However, I fear the long delay in their consideration speaks to a larger problem. I am dismayed some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle do not see the value of treaties and the benefits they accrue to U.S. citizens and businesses. As the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I call attention to my colleagues that we also have eight tax treaties pending on the floor of the Senate: tax conventions with Poland, Hungary, and Chile; protocols amending existing tax conventions with Japan, Switzerland, Spain, and Luxembourg; and a protocol amending the Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters. With the exception of the Japan treaty, which was sent to the Senate relatively recently, each of these treaties has been considered and reported multiple times by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in recent years. They reflect the practices and procedures consistent with the tax treaties and protocols passed by the Senate since 1973. Since then, 68 tax treaties have been passed by this body by unanimous consent. Yet, because of the opposition of a single Member, the Senate has not ratified these vital treaties. Like the Hague Securities Convention and the plant genetics treaty, there are material benefits to U.S. ratification of these tax treaties. They establish a common framework with facilitating trade and investment and can reduce the taxes assessed on U.S. companies and individuals who have interests or work overseas. The seven countries with pending tax treaties have invested approximately $700 billion in the United States, with hundreds of thousands of U.S. jobs and businesses tied to these investments. Ratification of these treaties would provide increased certainty and facilitate further investment in the United States and its people. The sole declared opponent of these tax treaties has raised privacy concerns regarding the collection of financial records. So let me be absolutely clear. These tax treaties are entirely consistent with the Fourth Amendment protections ensuring that American citizens are protected against unreasonable searches and seizures. As stated so eloquently by Chairman Corker, tax information exchanges with another country under any tax treaty are subject to stringent controls, are forbidden from so-called fishing expeditions, and are explicitly prohibited from information exchange requests for nontax purposes. That is protected in the treaty. The exchange of information standards in the pending treaty is in fact already being used in 56 tax treaties currently in force. The proposed threshold of these treaties would apply the same statutory standards to Americans with bank accounts abroad as already applies to Americans with bank accounts in the United States. We are not imposing any additional burdens on these accounts that are outside the United States. It is identical to what we impose on Americans in the United States. There is no reason people with foreign bank accounts should be able to hide their money from the IRS in a way that the average hard-working American cannot. Continued obstruction and indefinite delay of these eight tax treaties is an unacceptable state of affairs that does harm both to U.S. businesses and individuals who invest and work overseas and to U.S. businesses and citizens whose livelihoods remain linked to continued foreign investment in the United States. The Senate should act as soon as possible to give these treaties the long-awaited up-or- down vote they deserve. There are other vital treaties that are pending before the Senate that are critical to American security and law enforcement interests. I hope the Senate will move forward in an expeditious fashion to ratify these treaties. In particular, I want to highlight five pending law enforcement treaties--two extradition treaties with the Dominican Republic and Chile and three mutual legal assistance treaties with Jordan, Algeria, and Kazakhstan. The extradition treaties update century-old treaties with the Dominion Republic and Chile, replacing outmoded lists of offenses with a modern dual criminality approach, in which instead of a long treaty list of extraditable offenses, offenders can be extradited if the offense is a crime in both the United States and the other country. The treaties incorporate a series of procedural improvements to streamline and speed up the extradition process. Mutual legal assistance treaties are agreements between countries for the purpose of gathering and exchanging information in an effort to cooperate on law enforcement issues. America can provide some assistance without these treaties, but ratification makes this process much clearer and much more streamlined. Ratification of these enforcement treaties will be of great benefit to the United States. To give but one example of how beneficial these treaties are to the United States, it has been estimated that for every person extradited from the United States to the Dominion Republic, 10 are extradited here to face charges for crimes they have committed against the laws of the United States. So these treaties are very much in the U.S. interest. Of the 15 treaties I have discussed thus far, all should be entirely uncontroversial and capable of being passed without delay. Indeed, until very recently, tax and law enforcement treaties were passed routinely by unanimous consent, but there are other treaties the Senate has considered in recent years where ratification would also bring tangible benefits to the United States and its citizens. I want to highlight two in particular--the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and the Law of the Sea Treaty. The Senate owes a great deal to former Senator Kerry and Senator Menendez for their work on the disabilities convention. Through multiple hearings across the 112th and 113th Congresses, it was established, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the treaties' principles are firmly based on American values. From the U.S. Constitution, the treaty borrows principles of equality and the protection of minorities; from the Declaration of Independence, it borrows the unalienable right to pursue happiness; and from the Americans with Disabilities Act, the gold standard for disability rights, the treaty borrows the concept of reasonable accommodation. U.S. ratification of the disability treaty would deliver material and palpable benefits to the 58 million Americans who have one or more disabilities, including 5.5 million American veterans. Ratification would impose no additional obligations on the United States but would give the United States a leadership position on the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, from which we could effectively promote human rights and equal rights for those with disabilities and lend our expertise to other nations as they work to implement the treaty. Friendly countries would be able to rely on proven U.S. standards in crafting disability and accommodation policies that would not only positively affect their citizens but also U.S. students, tourists, servicemembers, and veterans who travel abroad. The disabilities treaty was overwhelmingly supported by veterans and disabilities groups. Unfortunately, and to the great dismay of so many, the Senate fell five votes short of ratification of the disabilities treaty in December of 2012. In July 2014, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee again advanced the disabilities treaty out of committee. I was proud to vote in favor, and it is my hope the United States will ratify this valuable treaty so we can give the United States a say with how people with disabilities, including our own citizens, are treated around the world. It has now been over 2 years since the committee has acted on this, and I would hope the Senate would act on this in a responsible manner and that the United States would join with the other nations in support of the disability community. The failure to pass the Law of the Sea Treaty has been a failure of many Congresses. The United States played a critical role in developing the treaty in the 1970s, and we have the most to gain from being a part of this treaty. We shaped the construct of the treaty to be very favorable to the United States, including giving the United States the only permanent seat on the international council that would oversee and make decisions about deep seabed mining. Unfortunately, the permanent seat remains vacant and decisions are being made about seabed mining in international waters without U.S. participation. The estimated area of the territorial expansion over which the United States could claim sovereignty under the continental shelf expansion conventions of the treaty is an area estimated to be about 291,000 square miles, or roughly 1.5 times the size of the State of Texas. Though the Senate's failure to ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty is a longstanding one, recent events have brought the viability and wisdom of U.S. nonparty status even further into question. For example--and we talked about this before on the floor of the Senate--the disappearance of the Arctic sea ice, coupled with increased access to mineral resources in the Arctic seabed, is influencing the territorial claims our Arctic neighbors--Canada, Russia, Denmark, Greenland, Iceland, and Norway--are making, and all of these countries are making legal claims under the Law of the Sea Treaty. The United States is the only Arctic nation not staking any expanded claims in the Arctic, nor are we challenging the actions of our neighbors who may be encroaching on waters to which we could have a claim. The State Department cannot be blamed for not making claims or challenging our neighbors. It is the Senate that has failed to give the State Department the ability to rightfully stake claims and challenge the legality of our competitors' claims--purely out of an unfounded and ideologically partisan opposition to the United States being a party to the Law of the Sea Treaty. The situation in the Arctic is just one reason to reconsider ratification of the Law of the Sea Treaty. Our failure to be a party of the treaty framework means we lack the ability to fully work with our allies and partners in the South China Sea region to address the ongoing maritime security issues. A broad set of stakeholders--ranging from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the environmental organizations and our Nation's military to industry-specific trade groups representing commercial fishing, freight shipping, and mineral extractions--all support U.S. accession to the treaty. I remember the hearing in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where we had our generals testifying before us that it is in our U.S. national security interests to be a member of the Law of the Sea and to ratify that treaty. In particular, our naval leaders have made it clear that the United States' participation in the Law of the Sea will help them maintain navigational rights more effectively and with less risk to the men and women they command. I can only hope that the Senate will soon ratify the Law of the Sea Treaty, which will secure U.S. interests and reaffirm the principles of freedom of operations and freedom of navigation in international waters and airspace, in accordance with established principles and practices of international law. I must note that for many of the treaties whose benefits I have just described, there is a disturbing pattern to the continued obstruction and delaying their consideration. Regardless of how many hearings are held by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to examine the treaties, regardless of how many benefits would accrue to the United States, and no matter how many stakeholders weigh in in favor of ratification, even the most inoffensive treaties can languish for years without advancing and sometimes be scuttled by one lone objector whose reasoning has nothing to do with the facts about the treaty in question but has everything to do with partisan politics and ideology. Continued delay on treaty ratification only hinders the interests of the United States and its citizens. I welcome the recent movement of the Hague Security Convention and the plant genetics treaty and the five law enforcement treaties by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee reported out last week. But I believe it is time for the Senate to do more--much more--to ratify additional treaties that deliver tangible, material benefits to the United States and its citizens. It is time to ratify these treaties. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I wish to celebrate Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender, LGBT, Pride Month. Reaching back to Stonewall, June carries a special significance for LGBT individuals across the Nation. For more than 40 years LGBT Pride month has been a time for all Americans to celebrate the immeasurable contributions LGBT individuals have made to our great Nation, the progress the LGBT community has made in the U.S. and abroad, and the challenges faced in the fight for equality. America's never-ending effort to become a ``more perfect union'' involves the long quest to secure equal rights and justice for the LGBT community by, as I just said, changing hearts, minds, and policy. The last year has seen hard-fought progress for the LGBT Americans. With the Supreme Court's decision last June in Obergefell v. Hodges, same-sex marriage is now a fundamental right in every State in the Union. After years of legal battles and families being told that the government would not recognize their love and mutual commitment in the same way it might view their neighbors, the Supreme Court finally ruled that equality is an inherently American value that should not be denied or taken away from anyone. And just this past Friday, President Obama designated the historic site of the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in New York City as our Nation's newest national monument. This designation will create the first official National Park Service unit dedicated to telling the story of LGBT Americans. The LGBT community has made strides in righting past wrongs. I commend Defense Secretary Ash Carter for adding sexual orientation to the U.S. military's equal opportunity program. Roughly a year after that historic decision, Eric Fanning, an eminently qualified public servant, with a long track record of working on behalf of the men, women, and families of our Armed Forces, finally was confirmed by the Senate to become the Secretary of the Army. Secretary Fanning is openly gay, and his confirmation reflects a long overdue but commonsense understanding that sexual orientation and gender identity are not relevant to one's ability to serve this nation. Our military was not alone in taking steps to ensure that all who wish to serve their country and community are able to do so without discrimination. The Boy Scouts of America announced that, ``the national executive board ratified a resolution removing the national restriction on openly gay leaders and employees.'' I think this move by the Boy Scouts is worth noting because it impacts two issues that I find very important to the future of this country: the welfare of our children and encouraging civic involvement. The Boy Scouts of America are one of our most venerated civic organizations serving young people. I believe that no individual should be prevented from serving their country or enriching their community based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. The Boy Scouts' decision not to discriminate will lead to more well-rounded scouts. For as much progress as we have seen in the last year, there have been several recent events that show our need to recommit to building a more perfect union for all Americans. The shooting on June 12 in Orlando and attacks on LGBT individuals across the country and abroad show that in far too many places across the world, being openly LGBT still carries great risk. That an attacker would target this venue, especially during Gay Pride Month, is a horrific tragedy and a senseless loss of human lives. My deepest sympathies are with those killed and injured in this terror attack and hate crime, along with their families and loved ones. My thanks go out to the first responders who saved lives in the midst of such danger. There is no simple solution to preventing this type of tragedy. But one step that would help is for Congress to enact commonsense gun safety legislation in the coming days. American values of tolerance, compassion, freedom, and love for thy neighbor must win out over hate, intolerance, and homophobia. No one should fear for their lives simply because of who they are. This moral truism extends beyond the LGBT community. And so it is disturbing that State legislatures have recently taken steps to breathe new life into the defunct and deplorable practice of separate but equal facilities. Attempts to restrict the use of public facilities by transgender people is unsettling to say the least. As a ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and Special Representative on Anti-Semitism, Racism, and Intolerance for the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, OSCE, Parliamentary Assembly, I take special note when foreign legislatures take steps to codify discrimination. When we see discrimination happening in our own society, we must take action. In our democracy, state-sponsored discrimination sends two strong messages. First, it tells those who are being discriminated against that the government does not fully recognize you as an equal member of the society. Secondly, it sends a not-so-subtle wink and a nod to private citizens and businesses that further discrimination and abuse will be tolerated. Thankfully, Americans of every gender sexual orientation, and gender identity have spoken out against these laws. In the U.S. Senate, I have been a proud ally of the LGBT community and will continue to oppose efforts to return to a time when our government-sanctioned discrimination. This struggle for equal rights continues not only in our States, but here in the Congress. The House of Representatives, for example, recently considered a provision to prevent businesses that contract with the U.S. Government from discriminating against LGBT employees. It is shameful that, in 2016, the Congress of the United States of America cannot agree that discriminating against Americans based on a core identifying characteristic is wrong, just as it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race or religion. Congress should take up and pass the Equality Act, which I am proud to cosponsor, which would provide comprehensive antidiscrimination protection for LGBT individuals in areas such as housing, education, employment, credit, and public accommodations. Congress should take up and pass my End Racial Profiling Act, which prohibits discriminatory profiling by law enforcement officers, including profiling based on gender, gender identity, or sexual orientation. As ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, I have worked to put international human rights at the forefront of U.S. foreign policy, whenever possible. The international community has made notable strides in ensuring that LGBT individuals are treated with the respect and dignity that all people deserve. Nepal took the commendable step of including LGBT protections in their new constitution. Malta, Ireland, Thailand, Bolivia, and Vietnam all passed laws protecting transgender individuals. Ukraine outlawed LGBT workplace discrimination, Kazakhstan struck down a dangerous anti-LGBT law, and Mozambique decriminalized homosexuality. These are small but important steps. But as much as we can and should celebrate global progress on these matters, we have also seen troubling setbacks. In too many countries, being LGBT still is criminalized or met with violence, most recently with the brutal murder of Xulhaz Mannan, a USAID employee at the U.S. Embassy in Bangladesh and editor of Bangladesh's first and only LGBT magazine. Tragically, what happened to Mr. Mannan in Bangladesh is seen over and over again around the world. LGBT rights are human rights, and as we engage with the international community on human rights, we must prioritize LGBT rights. As I said at the beginning of my remarks, the American experience is about individuals working together to build a more perfect union by changing hearts, minds, and policy. Since our founding, the U.S. Senate has played a key role in achieving this goal. It is very clear that ensuing LGBT Americans are afforded all the same rights and protections as their neighbors is central to building that more perfect union. The Senate should stand as a bulwark against intolerance and guardian of civil rights for LGBT individuals everywhere. Before I conclude my remarks, I would like to recognize the Baltimore Pride Celebration. Baltimore Pride will be held for the 41st time on July 19-24. Baltimore has a strong LGBT community with a long history of activism and civic engagement. The Baltimore Pride Celebration is a chance to celebrate all the amazing contributions LGBT Baltimoreans make to my hometown.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, on June 27th, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg appointed Under Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller to become the next Deputy Secretary General of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. I am pleased to see such a well-respected and qualified individual take up a critically important post within NATO. Rose Gottemoeller has distinguished herself at the State Department as the consummate public servant. Her work in the State Department has focused on pragmatically confronting some of the most critical international security issues the United States faces, including nonproliferation, arms control, and nuclear security. She is best known for her role in the New START Treaty, when she represented the United States as its chief negotiator. She has been confirmed by the Senate for two different positions at State, first as Assistant Secretary of State for Verification and Compliance and currently as Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security. In these roles, Rose has been integral to ensuring that American national security priorities are realized, and I personally could not think of a more competent individual who has the requisite experience and expertise to be the next Deputy Secretary General. Under Secretary Gottemoeller will be taking up her post at a critical time for Europe. NATO's core mission is safeguarding the freedom and security of its 28 members. The freedom and security of Europe today is threatened by Russian aggression on its eastern flank and from the instability and violence emanating from the Middle East and North Africa. The United States and our NATO allies must stand together as one in order to achieve national and international security against these threats. I would like to conclude my remarks by saying, for the record, that I myself have had numerous opportunities to interact with Rose Gottemoeller during my time on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and have come away impressed. She has been forthright when questioned during hearings and briefings. She has been pleasant, upfront, and informative during meetings. I know from my own experiences that she will continue to serve the United States well in her capacity as Deputy Secretary General of NATO.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I take this time to continue the discussion as to the tragedy that occurred on June 12 in Orlando, FL. The shooting occurred at a popular LGBT club, Pulse. The club owner, Barbara Poma, lost her brother to the AIDS epidemic. The club was named to remember a pulse that faded from this world far too early. Pulse was not just a place to socialize, it was a refuge and a place of acceptance and solidarity where members of the Orlando LGBT community could be themselves without judgment. The fact that an attacker would target this venue, especially during Gay Pride Month, is a horrific tragedy and a senseless loss of human life. My deepest sympathies are with those killed and injured in this terrorist attack, along with their families and loved ones. My thanks go out to the first responders who saved lives in the midst of such danger. This attack, and others like it in recent years, tears at our hearts and leaves us angry, frustrated, and confused. We, as a nation, must resolve to stop those who wish to do harm to Americans from committing and encouraging acts of terror. The Orlando shooter apparently subscribed to an extreme system of beliefs that led him to carry out this heinous attack. No religion condones or encourages such violence and killing. We must reject any ideology that leaves room for discrimination and dehumanization to a point where someone can commit these types of acts. No one should ever fear for their life simply for being themselves or expressing who they are as an individual. America's values of tolerance, compassion, freedom, and love for thy neighbor must win out over hate, intolerance, homophobia, and xenophobia. The time for talk is over. We, as a nation, as a community, and as an American family, must take actions to change minds, hearts, and, finally, change policies. The attack in Orlando was a terror attack and a hate crime. We can stop others and save lives by taking immediate action. I was disappointed we missed opportunities to do that yesterday with sensible gun safety amendments. I cosponsored the Murphy amendment, which would have created a system of universal background checks for individuals trying to buy a gun. The amendment would have ensured that all individuals who should be prohibited from buying a firearm are listed in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System and would require a background check for every firearm sale. We know there are loopholes today. Why do we allow those loopholes to continue? It should not matter whether you buy a gun at a local gun store or at a gun show or on the Internet, you should have to pass a background check so we can make sure guns are kept out of the hands of people who should never have one. This amendment would have helped keep guns out of the hands of convicted felons, domestic abusers, and the seriously mentally ill, who have no business buying a gun. Studies have shown that nearly half of all current gun sales are made by private sellers who are exempt from conducting background checks. It makes no sense that felons, fugitives, and others who are legally prohibited from having a gun can easily use a loophole to buy a gun. Once again, the use of a universal background check will have no impact on the legitimate needs of people who are entitled to have a weapon, but universal background checks could and would help us keep our communities safe by helping us keep weapons out of the hands of criminals and those who have serious mental illness and domestic abusers. We need to stop their ability to easily be able to obtain a weapon. Universal background checks are strongly supported by the American people. Most background checks can be completed very quickly and do not inconvenience a purchaser at all. To my colleagues who have reservations about this legislation, let me cite the Heller decision. In June 2008 the Supreme Court decided the case of District of Columbia v. Heller. The Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms rather than a collective right to possess a firearm. The Court also held that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited, and it is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner and for any purpose. Justice Scalia wrote for the Court in that case: Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on the longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of firearms. That was Justice Scalia for the Court. Justice Scalia recognized Congress's right to make sure those who are not qualified to own a firearm do not get that firearm. We have an obligation to make sure that background checks are effective so as to keep out of the hands of criminals and those who have serious mental illness the opportunity to easily be able to obtain a firearm. The legislation pending before us in the Senate is fully consistent with the Heller decision. That amendment would have been fully consistent with the Heller decision and Justice Scalia's opinion. I know we can protect innocent Americans while still protecting the constitutional rights of legitimate hunters and existing gun owners. We should take that action on behalf of the American people. There was a second amendment I cosponsored that unfortunately was rejected yesterday--the Feinstein amendment--that would close the terror gap. If you are not safe enough to fly on an airplane, you shouldn't be able to buy a gun. The Feinstein amendment would give the Attorney General the authority to block the sale of guns to known or suspected terrorists if the Attorney General has reason to believe the weapons would be used in connection with terrorism. The amendment would have ensured that anyone who had been subject to a Federal terrorism investigation in the past 5 years would have been automatically flagged with the existing background check system for further review by the Department of Justice. Note that under this amendment, being included on a terrorist watch list is not by itself a sufficient justification to deny a person the right to buy a firearm. The Attorney General may deny that weapon transfer only if she determines that the purchaser represents a threat to public safety based on a reasonable suspicion that the purchaser is engaged or has engaged in conduct related to terrorism. So there is a standard there. A recent GAO report concluded that approximately 90 percent of individuals who were known or suspected terrorists were able to pass background gun checks. This amendment would have closed this loophole and would have reduced the risk of a terrorist being able to legally acquire a firearm. Under current law, individuals who are known or suspected terrorists and do not fall into one of the nine prohibited purchaser categories can legally purchase a weapon. While the FBI is notified when individuals on the terrorist watch list apply for a background check through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System, it does not have the authority to block the sale. The Feinstein amendment contains remedial procedures so that individuals get the reason for denial, the right to correct the record, and the right to bring action to challenge the denial. In other words, there is due process in the Feinstein amendment. So I was disappointed that the two amendment chances we had yesterday were not approved by the Senate. I think both would have helped in making our communities safer. Congress has an obligation to act. As I have indicated before, we need to act. Inaction is not an option. The President of the United States has already acted to the extent he is permitted using his Executive authority. Many of our States have acted as well, including my own State of Maryland, but we need a national law that applies to all 50 States to stop criminals, terrorists, domestic abusers, and others who should not get their hands on a gun from simply driving to a nearby State with less restrictive gun laws and being able to legally acquire a weapon. I encourage my colleagues to continue to work on compromise legislation on the issue of universal background checks and terror watch lists. Congress should also act to ban assault-type weapons, which have no legitimate civilian use, and we should ban the sale of high-capacity magazines which only increase the level of carnage in a mass shooting. The time for action is now. We cannot wait. Mr. President, with that, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I submit a resolution to mark World Refugee Day, June 20, and to address the unprecedented humanitarian crisis of millions of men, women, and children who are forced to flee from their homes due to conflict, violence, persecution, or human rights violations. According to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, UNHCR, the numbers of refugees and internally displaced people in 2015 uprooted from their home outstripped even the catastrophic levels of displacement following World War II. By the end of last year, 65.3 million people were forcibly displaced worldwide. Fifty percent of the displaced are children. These individuals and families have been uprooted by violence and persecution in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Somalia, Burundi, South Sudan, Ukraine, and Afghanistan. These brutal conflicts churning through entire regions are shattering nations, and scattering an unprecedented number of people. Yet, we cannot allow these suffering people to become an abstraction or mere grim statistics. We cannot allow the wearying repetition of the horrors to numb our ability to think of each individual and each family as people just like ourselves, struggling to cope with unbearable circumstances. Closer to home, rising numbers of people fleeing gang and other violence in Central America have contributed wider displacement across the wider region. Nearly 110,000 refugees and asylum seekers have come from El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras to Mexico and the United States, representing a more than five-fold increase over three years. The relentless, horrifying violence of the Syrian conflict is perhaps the most shocking. By the end of 2015, there were close to 5 million Syrian refugees worldwide, an increase of 1 million men, women, and children within one year. After 5 years of war, the situation is increasingly desperate for both the refugees and host countries such as Jordan, Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq. It is hard to comprehend the demographic, economic, and social impact of millions of refugees on these host countries. The number of refugees in Lebanon, for instance, would be equivalent to 88 million new refugees arriving in the United States. The futures of millions of Syrian children are being stolen because they have no access to education. In the tiny country of Lebanon alone, there are over 300,000 Syrian refugee children who have no access to school. Over 2 million Syrian women are in the neighboring countries trying to survive. Dangerous coping mechanisms are on the rise. More and more families are forced to send their children to work or marry off their young daughters. While contributing generously to humanitarian funding, the United States has only accepted about 2,850 Syrian refugees to date. Because Syrians are finding it increasingly difficult to find safety, they are being forced to move further afield. Hundreds of thousands of people, most from Syria, have crossed the Mediterranean in boats in search of protection in Europe. Since January 2015, almost 5,000 mothers, fathers, and children lost their lives in their desperate bid to escape violence. We know that the Syrian humanitarian disaster, which has destabilized an entire region, is not the accidental byproduct of conflict. It is, rather, one result of the strategy pursued by the Assad regime. The UN's Commission of Inquiry on Syria has documented that the Assad regime intentionally engages in the indiscriminate bombardments of homes, hospitals, schools, and water and electrical facilities to terrorize the civilian population. The terrorist groups Islamic State of Iraq & the Levant, ISIL, and Al-Nusra have also deliberately shelled areas with high concentrations of civilians. There is also a grave and escalating humanitarian crisis in Yemen. That country was particularly vulnerable even before the current conflict, and now civilians throughout the country are facing alarming levels of suffering and violence. By the end of 2015, almost 200,000 people had fled to other countries, and about 2.5 million people were forced from their homes and live in empty schools, and other public buildings, or along highways. We are also witnessing violent conflict that has pushed millions of people out of regions in Sub-Saharan Africa. The outbreak of violence in Burundi forced over 200,000 people to flee their country last year. In Libya, smuggling and trafficking networks thrive as the country has become a major transit route for sub-Saharan Africans seeking safety and security in Europe. Most of these refugees are fleeing Boko Haram in Nigeria, and decades of armed conflict and al-Shabaab in Somalia and Eritrea, where the government carries out extrajudicial killings, torture, and other serious human rights violations. In the Lake Chad Basin region, more than 2.4 million people--1.5 million of them children--have fled their homes due to violence and attacks by the terrorist group Boko Haram. The conflict has forced more than 200,000 Nigerians to flee to Cameroon, Chad, and Niger following attacks on their villages. While violence persists in Somalia, I am deeply concerned about the recent announcement by the government of Kenya that it would seek to close Dadaab, the largest refugee camp in the world and home to almost 400,000 Somali refugees. Shutting down the camp will mean increased protection risks for the thousands of refugees, the majority of who are women, children and unaccompanied minors. Moreover, Somalia is faced with a severe drought and other security risks which will increase the vulnerability of its displaced people. The international community must get serious about protecting the most vulnerable refugees--women and children. Women are facing ferocious threats in conflicts across the globe where rape and sexual assault are being used as weapons of war, and as vulnerable refugees they continue to be targets of gender-based violence. Children now make up one-half of all refugees worldwide. We must do more to protect them from sexual exploitation and abuse, from recruitment as child soldiers, and from being forced into early marriage. Organizations such as the United Nations Population Fund, UNFPA, Mercy Corps, Catholic Relief Services, and others know how to provide targeted support and protection to women and children refugees. But we in the international community must fund them adequately to help them do the job. The United States has lead in terms of humanitarian assistance, but we must encourage other nations to do more. Against this tragic backdrop, we have all listened recently to divisive political rhetoric and hate speech on refugee and migration issues which is feeding rising levels of xenophobia. Instead of burden- sharing, we see borders closing; instead of political will, there is political paralysis. Humanitarian organizations and their field staff, overstretched and exhausted, are left to deal with consequences while, at the same time, they are trying to save lives on shrinking budgets. As the UN High Commissioner for Refugees has noted, ``Yet, there is cause for hope. In contrast to the toxic narrative repeatedly played out in the media we have often witnessed an outpouring of generosity; by host communities, by individuals, and by families opening their homes. These ordinary people see refugees not as beggars, competitors for jobs, or terrorists--but as people like you or me whose lives have been disrupted by war.'' In closing, we must recognize that as these conflicts proliferate, no corner of the world will be left unaffected. Today, on World Refugee Day, we recognize that every person fleeing his or her home deserves compassion and help; displaced people should be able to live their lives in safety and dignity. We must recommit ourselves to work smarter and harder to assist the world's most vulnerable people. Next year, on this day, I want to stand before the Senate to speak of the progress we have made and the lives we have saved by our collective efforts.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, through the Chair, I would like to inquire of my friend from Connecticut with regard to the relationship between the tragedies we have seen far too often in this country--most recently in Orlando but, as Senator Murphy and Senator Blumenthal know all too well, in Newtown and at Virginia Tech and the list goes on and on--and the work we have done in order to protect our homeland from radicalization. I would like to ask my colleague because he has been one of the leaders on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and he has worked very hard to make sure we have the very best intelligence information to keep our country safe, to support law enforcement against terrorists, and that we do everything we can to make sure we identify those who would commit terrorist actions and take law enforcement action against those individuals. With regard to the Orlando episode, although we don't know all about it yet, we are still learning information about the perpetrator, we do know the LGBT community feels particularly threatened by what happened. They were victimized at this particular spot. Senator Murphy, Senator Booker, Senator Blumenthal, and Senator Markey--all who are on the floor--have worked very hard to deal with the root causes of hate in our society, which is another factor concerning safety in our communities. I would like to get the connection here on the gun issues, but I think it is important to point out that we have worked very hard to support the LGBT community, to make it clear that the rights of all people in this country are going to be protected. We celebrated the Supreme Court decision that recognized marriage. We celebrated some actions within our military to open up full participation by the LGBT community, and we were particularly pleased with the recent confirmation of Eric Fanning that we saw take place in our military. We have seen some progress in America. Globally, we have seen some progress in regard to the LGBT community. We have seen in several countries--and I mention this specifically in asking the question of Senator Murphy because of his work on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--such as Malta, Ireland, Thailand, Libya, and Vietnam, that laws have been passed to protect transgenders. That is all work we have done to try to keep all of our communities safe. Ukraine passed a law that repealed one of the workforce discrimination laws against the LGBT community. These are all important steps we have taken to try to keep not only our community but the global community safe from these types of hate acts. So we have taken some positive steps in trying to isolate terrorists, in trying to make sure law enforcement has all the tools they need, and we have done a lot of work to protect vulnerable communities to make sure we stand for the rights of all people. I applaud my colleagues for being here on the floor to talk about the relationship here--this is what I want to ask Senator Murphy about-- why, in the week following Orlando, he is here on the floor talking about gun safety. I noticed in the Orlando tragedy that one of the weapons used was an assault weapon, a military-style weapon. I must say that in my observations in Maryland, I don't know too many people who need to have that type of weapon in order to do hunting in my State or to keep themselves safe. It seems to be a weapon of choice by those who want to commit crimes. My colleague talked at great length about terrorists and those on the terrorist watch list and that loophole that exists. We can talk about what happened in my colleague's State with a high-volume ammunition clip that certainly added to the numbers of victims before law enforcement could deal with the perpetrator. So my question is, As we are looking at ways to keep Americans safe, how does my colleague see these issues coming together? How can we have a coordinated strategy, and why haven't we acted?