Benjamin Cardin

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I join Senator Corker. Senator Johnson is a very valued member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I enjoy working with him on U.N. issues. The two of us are the Senate representatives to the United Nations this year and I know his passion on these issues, but I just want to underscore a couple points. Right now, as of last night, there were 66 amendments that had been filed to this bill that came out of the committee 19 to 0. The number of Republican amendments were 66; the number of Democratic amendments were zero. I point that out because we are trying to maintain the bipartisan cooperation we have had through this process so the Senate can speak with a united voice, because that gives us the strongest possible message as to the congressional role. I must state, this is a delicate balance how we brought this bill forward. I don't think I am underestimating the surprise we received from our colleagues when they heard there was a 19-to-0 vote in our committee. There are so many Members who are working with us who have filed amendments--and I thank each one of them--trying to find areas where we, as we worked in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, can find a common spot to be able to advance those amendments. I am optimistic and Senator Corker is optimistic that we are going to be able to deal with many of the issues the Republican Members have brought up and the amendments they have filed. But in direct response to Senator Johnson, let me point out, the sanctions were imposed by the U.S. Congress, by votes of the House and the Senate, and the signature of the President. What is being negotiated between our negotiating partners, the United States, and Iran, is an agreement--if they are successful, if the deal is struck-- that will prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state and will provide, over time, relief from Iran from the international and U.S. sanctions that have been imposed. That is the framework. We know the sanctions brought them to the table. We all understand that, and we are very proud of the role we played, but it is Congress, and only Congress, that can permanently change or modify that sanctions regime. We are going to have to act. So I just take exception with Senator Johnson's view that we are not going to act. We are going to act because only we can permanently change the regime. But what this bill gives us is an orderly way to consider the congressional review of this agreement or deal when it is finally reached. I just wish my colleagues would not prejudge this. I have heard so many people say something is going to happen. We don't know what the agreement is going to be. We don't even know if they are going to be able to come in with an agreement, but I will say this about the Obama administration. When they came out with the framework agreement, there were many Members of this Chamber who said Iran will never live up to the commitments in the framework agreement; that they would break out, they would not pull back, as they are committed to doing, and the sanctions regime would not be able to stay in effect. And guess what. A year later they have complied with the framework agreement, and they have in fact--the sanction regime has held tight during this period of time with our negotiating partners. Do I share many of the concerns of my friend from Wisconsin? I do. I do share those concerns. I am concerned as to whether the agreement will, in fact, be strong enough to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. That is what we are going to look at in our committee, if we can pass this bill in the same bipartisan manner in which we did in committee--if we can do that, the Senator from Wisconsin, the chairman, the ranking member, all of us in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee are going to get all the documents, we are going to have time to review it and be able to answer those questions. The vote we are having on the floor this week is whether we are going to have that opportunity. I know these amendments are well intended. I understand that. I understand the deep feelings each Member has. But the bottom line, if the amendment my friend is talking about got on the bill, we are not going to get that review, we are not going to have that orderly process. That is the fact. So I think the debate on the floor is critically important. We have been debating this bill for a week. We started last Thursday, 19-to-0 vote in committee, not a single Democratic amendment. We think it is time to move this bill forward to the United States House of Representatives. And, yes, Senator Corker and I are going to accommodate the suggestions that have been made by Members. We are finding a way to do that, and we are going to continue to work that path. But at the end of the day, this is a very serious issue, and I agree completely with Senator Graham and the comments he has made. This is an extremely important issue. It has to rise above our individual desires so, collectively, we can achieve something for the American people. That is what they want us to do. We have it in our grasps. I applaud the leadership of Senator Corker. He has to work with all the Republican amendments that have been filed. Believe me, there is a lot of frustration on the Democratic caucus, also as to why this bill is still on the floor and hasn't passed by now. But if we get everybody's patience, I am confident Senator Corker and I will be able to work together so we can accommodate the reasonable requests of our Members and get this bill moving to the United States House of Representatives. But let us maintain the balance that the Senator Foreign Relations Committee did, and let us do what the American people want us to do and that is to listen to each other. We have different views. I understand that. But the way we can reach common ground is to listen to each other and reach a reasonable compromise that doesn't compromise the principles of what we are trying to achieve. That is exactly what the Senate Foreign Relations Committee bill does. I urge my colleagues to exercise some restraint. Let's get this bill to the House of Representatives. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, let me point out a couple things. There are now 67 amendments, all of which have been filed by Republicans, none by Democrats. This bill passed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee 19 to 0. Senator Corker and I have been working with Republicans who have filed amendments to try to accommodate them, and we have been making progress. We have been trying to schedule additional votes. I thank Senator Corker and those who are cooperating with us in a way that we can try to move this bill forward. We are prepared to have votes, but I think some of the tactics that are now being deployed are going to make it much more difficult for us to be able to proceed in an orderly way. It is every Member's right to take whatever actions they want to take, but I want to tell you that for those of us who want to get this bill to the finish line, it gets a little frustrating. We will continue to focus on a way forward on this legislation. But I want to make it clear that we have been prepared to find an orderly way to proceed with votes and to deal with the issues Members have been concerned about, but at times it becomes difficult with the procedures that are being used. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, today I commemorate World Press Freedom Day 2015 on May 3, 2015--a day reserved to celebrate the value of freedom of press and the critical role it serves in creating a more free and open society. In its highest forms, the press does not simply inform, but brings attention to atrocities around the world, provides checks on authoritarian governments, and catalyzes better governance. The United States has recognized the great value of freedom of the press from its inception and in its Declaration of Universal Rights, the United Nations acknowledged the profound role of this fundamental right. On May 3, 1991, in the Windhoek Declaration, the U.N. recommitted itself to this important cause with a call to arms to protect the right of the press ``to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.'' A pluralistic and free press is essential to the development and maintenance of democracy as well as economic development. According to Freedom House's 2014 Freedom of the Press Index, only 14 percent of the world's citizens live in countries that enjoy a free press. In every other corner of the world, freedom of the press is threatened by governments that want to restrict freedom of expression and association by harassing and intimidating journalists. According to Reporters Without Borders, 69 journalists and 19 citizen journalists were killed in 2014 in connection with their collection and dissemination of news and information, and the Committee to Protect Journalists, found that in that same year the 3 deadliest countries for journalists on assignment were Syria, Ukraine, and Iraq. Today we honor all journalists who have been imprisoned or killed while seeking to tell a story that deserves to be told and needs to be heard. The weekend of April 25 marked the 1-year anniversary of the arrest of three independent journalists and six bloggers in Ethiopia known as the ``Zone 9 bloggers.'' The reporters, who published articles criticizing the government, have been charged under Ethiopia's Anti- Terrorism Proclamation, seemingly in connection with their writings. They remain in jail to this day, their trial once again postponed until after the Ethiopian elections. Unfortunately, this sort of imprisonment is not an isolated incident in Ethiopia. According to Human Rights Watch, Ethiopia has the second largest number of journalists in exile and the largest number of imprisoned journalists and bloggers in all of sub-Saharan Africa. I and a number of my colleagues wrote Secretary Kerry in March about our ongoing concern with efforts by the Ethiopian government to restrict freedom of speech and association in Ethiopia. In recent months numerous media publications have closed amid widespread harassment, and the Ethiopian government continues to control most television and radio broadcasting content. Today, I again urge the Ethiopian government to respect freedom of expression and freedom of the press--especially in advance of the May 24 elections. Anti-terrorism laws must not be used for political gain or to stifle the expression of dissenting political views. The continued imprisonment of Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian, who remains in Iran on alleged espionage charges, is another example of the immense duress that journalists around the world endure. Mr. Rezaian, an esteemed and respected professional journalist, has been imprisoned in Tehran since July 22. As the United States and Iran continue to negotiate a nuclear agreement, it is important that we not forget about Jason Rezaian, an Iranian-American who deserves to be free. And, finally, the world will never forget the brutal and barbaric murder of American reporter James Foley by the Islamic State this past summer. His death reminds us that it is not only oppressive governments that threaten journalists, but terrorist organizations as well. Foley's life's work chronicling the war torn countries of Afghanistan and Syria speaks to a deep commitment to the truth, a desire to tell the story of the world's most vulnerable and the right to freedom of the press even in the gravest of circumstances. This is what freedom of the press is all about. As witnesses to the good that free press provides to society and the threat that it faces, we have a responsibility to stand against injustice, to tell the stories of these brave journalists and others in the hopes of securing their freedom and preventing future tragedies from occurring. As George Mason said in 1776, ``The freedom of the press is one of the greatest bulwarks of liberty, and can never be restrained but by despotic governments.'' On World Press Freedom Day 2015, the United States and governments around the world must recommit themselves to protecting press freedom in order to enable democracy to flourish and good governance to prevail.

Mr. CARDIN

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I thought I would take this time--I know Senator Corker is at a lunch with some of our colleagues and is going over some of the issues concerning how we are going to move forward, but I thought I would take this time to at least tell our Members that we are working very hard to try to resolve some of the amendments Members want to offer. I must point out that there have been no requests for amendments on the Democratic side. I know Senator Corker is a little bit more busy than I am. He is trying to work with the number of amendments that have been filed by Republican colleagues. But we are trying to go through those amendments and see if there is a way consistent with the purpose of the bill that we can work out language that would accomplish what the author of the amendment is attempting to accomplish but consistent with the purpose of the bill--to make sure that we have an orderly way to review any agreement reached between the United States and our negotiating partners and Iran on its nuclear weapon program and that we get timely notice from the administration in regard to material breaches so that we can take action to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state. There are also provisions in the bill that provide notification by the administration and important information so that we can do our work. We are taking a look at these amendments and trying to see whether we can work our way forward in order to move this bill in the same method that it moved through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. As the Presiding Officer knows, we worked together to try to get that accomplished. We started the debate yesterday, and we are going to continue it today. Senator Barrasso brought an amendment forward, which he wants to have pending, that would change the certification requirements. We are trying to work out a way in which we will be able to take that issue up before the full Senate. Senator Corker and I are trying to resolve that issue as to how we can bring that forward. I talked about this issue yesterday and explained the certification requirement to all the Members of the Senate. The President has to certify on a regular basis that Iran is basically in compliance with the agreement. If they can't do that, then we get into an expedited process for imposing sanctions or to take action against Iran. There are a lot of amendments that have been filed--they are not pending--that would require additional certifications by the administration, and if the administration cannot make those certifications, there is an expedited process. The problem with going beyond the terms of the nuclear agreement on any of those certifications is that it affects the bill itself, and that is why we call them poison pills. I will try to explain that. Senator Barrasso's amendment dealt with a certification that Iran will not be involved in terrorism against the United States or any of our citizens. But there are several other amendments that have been filed that would change the certification requirements so that the President would have to make those certifications or it could trigger expedited procedures. Why do we call those poison pills? First of all, it changes the balance of what we are trying to do, and it is highly unlikely that we are going to be able to get that bill to the President for his signature. It will compromise what we are trying to do, and we are not going to be able to get the bill done. We will end up losing the bill. We will lose the opportunity for the committee to get the information and consider it. The committee needs to have a period of time in order to go through the review process. And the administration will not be able to exercise its waiver power for additional sanctions relief. All of that hard work will be lost. It is really counterproductive to what the authors of these amendments are trying to do. The second consequence that could happen, if this is in the bill, is that the President would not be able to make the certification and we would very likely never get an agreement. Therefore, what will happen is that the United States will be accused of walking away from trying to negotiate an agreement with Iran. We would be isolated, and our chances of preventing Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state becomes that much less likely to happen. The third reason why these amendments are problematic and are poison pills has to do with the fact that it becomes a negotiating objective for the United States. These are good objectives. We don't want Iran to be able to sponsor terrorism. It is certainly something that is part of our policy. But if we make it a negotiating objective, then the administration has to achieve that in order to prevent sanctions from going into effect in order to achieve our objective. That makes it much more difficult to achieve the primary objective, and the primary objective is to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. Although these amendments are well intended, they have the consequence of just the opposite. These amendments will make it less likely that we will prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. The same is true on any certification. One of the amendments that have been filed says that we have to certify that Iran recognizes Israel's right to its own sovereignty. I want Iran to recognize Israel's sovereignty. We put very strong language into this bill and made it clear that Israel's security is of prime concern to us. It is in the bill. If we make it a certification requirement--think about this for a moment--it means our negotiators will have to figure out a way to negotiate with Iran something they don't want to do. And what will we have to give up in order to get that? What will they put on the table in regards to international recognition? It distracts us from objective to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state, which is critically important to the security of Israel. These amendments do just the opposite of what they are intended to do. I mentioned that because we are trying to move forward with this legislation. I hope that we can do it very quickly and we can find a path forward. We are going to try to accommodate the fair considerations of these amendments. But I urge my colleagues to take a look at their amendments, to work with Senator Corker, to work with me, and let's see whether we can accommodate, within the framework of the legislation, any concerns that the sponsors of the amendments may have. Then we can do what the Senate Foreign Relations Committee was able to do on a 19-to-0 vote. It makes the Senate much stronger, and it makes the United States much stronger when we can come together on these amendments. Our objective is to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state, and the best way for us to do that is to speak with a united voice and the type of work we did in a bipartisan manner. The people of Maryland and the people of this country want us to work together. They want us to resolve issues. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee was able to do that. I urge Members who have filed amendments to work with us so we can find a way forward to make sure this bill remains intact and gives Congress the best chance for an orderly review of the process and gives us the tools we need to make America's position even stronger to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, before Senator Graham leaves the floor, I wish to concur with Senator Corker's observations. It was several months ago that Senator Graham grabbed me on the floor of the Senate to talk about this being the most important responsibility we have--to have an orderly way to oversight any potential agreement. So I really thank Senator Graham for his attention to this issue. We wouldn't be here today if it weren't for his leadership on this issue, and I thank him for the manner in which he brought this issue forward so that we could find a way to get this done in a constructive manner.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, let me explain to my friend from Florida--a very valued member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee--that we have two pending amendments. We have also been working to get a vote on Senator Barrasso's amendment dealing with terrorism. Senator Corker and I are trying to work through many amendments that we can clear that Members have brought forward. They are working with us to get those amendments where we can consider them. For an orderly process, since so many amendments have been filed-- and, I might say, they have all been filed by Republican Members of the Senate--we need to make sure we have an orderly way to consider these amendments and vote on these amendments. For those reasons, I do object.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, as Senator Rubio pointed out, we had no discussions about this. I don't know what Senators he is referring to, but let me just talk briefly about some of the points Senator Rubio mentioned because I think it is important that we respond to them. First, the bill we are considering, S. 615, is a bill that doesn't deal with the merits of a potential deal. It deals with the right way for Congress to review a potential deal that is reached between the United States and our trading partners and Iran concerning its nuclear weapon program. That is what this bill does. It doesn't say whether the President's agreement is a good one, a bad one, et cetera. It is a process for us to review it and take appropriate action because we are the ones who impose the sanctions. Only the Congress can permanently change or eliminate the sanctions. Therefore, it is important that we have an orderly way to review the potential deal. That is what it does--nothing more, nothing less. It also, by the way, gives us the opportunity to get notice of material breaches and be able to take action to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state if they, in fact, breach the agreement. So the two points Senator Rubio mentioned--the first is that there are different interpretations being given, one by the United States and one by the Iranians. Well, we think the first amendment we filed is going to help deal with that. It is pending right now. It requires us to get every official document of a potential deal in the language in which it is agreed to. So that amendment is pending--it is followed by Senator Corker and me--for the reasons Senator Rubio mentioned, and that is, we want to see the original text. We don't want to have the interpretation by the Iranians; we want to know what the language says. That is our responsibility. We are going to get that once we take up this first amendment--I hope it is approved--that will give us the original language text of every agreement and exhibit that is agreed to between the parties. The second issue Senator Rubio mentioned is Israel's right to exist and Iran acknowledging Israel's right to exist. I fully agree with Senator Rubio. I don't think there is a Member of this body who doesn't want Israel legitimated by every country in the world. It is our key ally in the Middle East. It is a country that shares our values, that has a strategic relationship with the United States, and I could go on and on. Since 1948, the United States and Israel have enjoyed a very close and important relationship, and we have taken so many actions in this body in order to protect Israel's right to exist. That is why we included your language and Senator Boxer's language in this bill where we say, ``The President should determine that the agreement in no way compromises the commitment of the United States to Israel's security or its support for Israel's right to exist.'' We have that in the bill. What Senator Rubio's amendment would have us do--and let me explain this. What his amendment would have us do is require that the President certify to us before he could submit any agreement--enter into any agreement--that Iran has recognized Israel's right to exist. This agreement we are negotiating with our negotiating partners and Iran is to deal with Iran's nuclear weapon program. I know from my conversations with the Israeli Government that they think that is the most important thing for their existence--the most important thing-- that Iran not become a nuclear weapons state. That is what Israel needs, and that is what we are trying to get. The Rubio amendment, although it is not intended to do that, would say: No, that is not the most important thing. The most important thing is to negotiate the language, what Iran says about Israel, not their nuclear weapons program, and that the President must achieve that. When you are negotiating, the more things you put on the table, the weaker position you are in in achieving the most important point, and that is making sure we have a strong agreement that Iran can never become a nuclear weapons state. That is why this amendment will accomplish just the opposite as far as Israel's security is concerned. Yes, it is a poison pill. Yes, it will defeat this bill. That also happens to be true. And, yes, it will mean it will be almost impossible for the President to negotiate a nuclear agreement with Iran. I think most people in this body and most people in America believe that the best course is a negotiated agreement with Iran. The unintended consequences of this amendment would make it virtually impossible to have that agreement completed. So, yes, we could get into debate on the specifics of your amendment. I am more than happy to do that. But we have an orderly process here, and there are a lot of amendments that have been filed, and we are trying to work out a way to do this. Senator Corker and I have been on the floor now for 4 or 5 days debating this issue, and we will debate any Member who wants to come by because we want do make sure we do have an open debate. But we are going to follow an orderly process. And this amendment, as well- intended as it is, is an amendment that would very much compromise what we have tried to do in a bipartisan way, and that is to make sure that this Senate and the House have an orderly way to consider any deal struck between our negotiating partners and the United States and Iran. That is our responsibility, and we are going to stay focused on that, and we are going to end with a bipartisan product that is in I think the best traditions of the United States Senate. So I respect very deeply my colleague's commitment to Israel. I do. All of us are committed to Israel, but let's think about what is the most important thing for Israel, and that is having a strong agreement that prevents Iran from becoming a nuclear weapon state. Let's focus on that because that, I think, this bill helps us achieve. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARDIN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, first, let me thank Senator Barrasso for the way he has worked with our committee, the way he has worked with us on the floor to get this amendment pending. We had a chance to debate this amendment yesterday, and today we have debated it. So I think the issue has been well debated. I certainly agree with the intent of the sponsor of the amendment. As a result of his work in our committee, we have strengthened the reporting requirements on Iran's terrorist activities, which I have read into the Record before. It is very strong, and it has been strengthened as a result of the managers' amendment that Senator Corker and I worked on. We also have an assessment on Iran's human rights violations. We make it clear that nothing in an agreement would affect the sanctions imposed against Iran for its terrorist activities, its ballistic missiles or its human rights violations. So all those tools are available to us. I object to this amendment because it affects the underlying bill itself. It jeopardizes the bill because it requires the President to make a certification that, in fact, he will probably not be able to make. Therefore, it not only jeopardizes the bill, it jeopardizes the ability to have a negotiated agreement and it weakens our position internationally and makes it less likely we can get Iran to give up its nuclear weapons program. For all those reasons, I urge my colleagues to vote no on the amendment. We have already covered this in the notice requirements that have been provided in S. 615. It is an issue we all care about. This amendment, though well intended, would not advance it, and I urge my colleagues to defeat the amendment. I yield back all of our time.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, too often we forget or take for granted just how important teachers are. I try not to do that because I married one. But the positive impact teachers have on our youth and on society is incalculable. Today, I would like to take a moment to acknowledge one outstanding teacher who is retiring after a distinguished 40-year career--the last 34 years of which have been spent at Eleanor Roosevelt High School, ERHS, in Greenbelt, MD--Ms. Sally S. Wagner. Ms. Wagner is the chair of the Instrumental Music Department at ERHS. In 2005, a Washington Post article took note of Ms. Wagner's extraordinary achievements as an educator noting, ``The school [ERHS] has several legendary teachers, including band director Sally Wagner . . . and a 750-student musical juggernaut with so many ensembles and bands that one can barely keep count.'' For the past several years, we have been properly involved in an effort to improve so-called STEM education in this country. That acronym stands for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Bolstering STEM education is important for economic competitiveness, national security, and keeping America at the forefront of the technological changes that will make life better for all of humanity. But too many schools, grappling with budget cuts, have scaled back or even eliminated their arts and music curricula. Fortunately, there is burgeoning awareness of the importance of these courses, too. And now people are talking about STEAM, where the ``A'' stands for arts and music. All of these subjects are interrelated and complementary. After all, it was Albert Einstein who said, ``The greatest scientists are artists as well'' and who would play the violin or piano for intuition or inspiration when he became ``stuck'' on one of his formulas or equations. Fortunately for the students at ERHS, which is an outstanding science and technology school, by the way, the music program has always been robust, too, and Ms. Wagner has been in charge. Her career in music began when she was a child, with piano lessons. In the sixth grade, she started learning how to play the trombone. She ultimately earned her degrees from Michigan State University and the University of Delaware. Teaching and bands are her passion. In 2001, Ms. Wagner was cited in School Band and Orchestra Magazine as one of ``50 Directors Who Make a Difference'' and she received the Maryland Music Educators Association Outstanding Music Teacher Award. In 2006, Ms. Wagner received the National Honor Society Outstanding Teacher Award and the Claes Nobel Educator of Distinction Award. Claes Nobel--the grand-nephew of Alfred Nobel--established the National Society of High School Scholars, which made the award. Ms. Wagner is a Music Educators National Conference, MENC--now known as the National Association for Music Education, or NAfME, Nationally Registered Music Educator. She received the Prince George's County Chamber of Commerce Outstanding Educator Award, Excellence in Teaching Awards from Prince George's County Public Schools, the County Council, the Maryland House of Delegates and the Governor of Maryland, and was recognized in 1994 by the University of Maryland Center for Teaching Excellence. Ms. Wagner is a member of MENC/NAfME, the Women Band Directors International, the Maryland Music Educators Association, and the Maryland Band Directors Association. She is active as an adjudicator, clinician, and guest conductor, and she writes articles for The Woman Conductor and BandWorld Magazine. These are numerous accolades and tremendous accomplishments, to be sure. But what is most important is the love that Ms. Wagner has for her students--at least one of whom is a second generation ERHS band musician--and the love and respect and admiration they have for her in return. She built the ERHS instrumental music program with incomparable care for every one of her students. Her love of music, teaching, and performing is evident in each and every interaction she has with her students, their parents, colleagues, and others in the community. She has touched and inspired thousands of students over her career with her talent, hard work, joy, dedication, sense of humor, intellect, leadership, kindness, and--above all--love. She has taught her students about responsibility, dedication, teamwork, and the pursuit of excellence. Of course, these lessons aren't just about music; they are important lessons about life. Just a couple of comments posted by students on the ERHS Facebook page tell the story. One student wrote, ``She is totally awesome. I swear, she is the most amazing teacher ever. She makes my day, every day. I'm just crossing my fingers and praying that she won't retire before I graduate!'' Another student wrote, ``Ms. Wagner inspired me to do my absolute best in music and helped me discover how important music is in my life. She is my hero.'' Another wrote, ``Instrument rentals: $25. Uniform fee: $20. Being in her class: priceless.'' Another student wrote, ``She always encouraged me to excel. She pushed me and believed in me. I learned more from her than anyone. She was the greatest teacher! Her love for music shines through.'' Finally, from an alumnus, ``I had Ms. Wagner way back in 1985--she was great back then, and it is great to see that she is still well-loved.'' In 2004, the ERHS band community of students, parents, and alumni commissioned the score ``Under the Magical Wing'' as a tribute to Ms. Wagner in appreciation and recognition of her dedication to the ERHS music program. Now the ERHS community has established the ``Sally Wagner Performing Arts Space,'' a new black box theatre at ERHS. U2's Bono has said, ``Music can change the world because it can change people.'' If that is true, and I believe it is, think of the world-changing impact Ms. Wagner has had over the course of her career. Think of the joy she has brought to so many people. I would ask my colleagues here in the Senate to join me in thanking Ms. Sally Wagner for her extraordinary contributions and congratulate her on her retirement. Strike up the band.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Corker on this first amendment being offered. We have used the same process we used in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. There are several Members who have brought this to our attention; that it is important, in reviewing the agreement--assuming agreement is reached by Congress--that we have at our disposal the documents being used. We expect we will have certainly an English version, but there could be information in other languages, including Farsi. So it is important we have the original documents being used so we can review and determine ourselves all the details of the agreement. So that is the purpose of this. This is a bipartisan amendment. We believe it strengthens the underlying purpose of this bill, which is to set up an orderly way for Congress to review a potential agreement reached between the United States and our negotiating partners and Iran--have an opportunity to review and have the options of either taking no action or dealing with an approval or disapproval or dealing with the sanctions, since we imposed the sanctions. So I think it strengthens the underlying bill, but more importantly it is a process we should use. If I might, the bill now is open for amendment, but I would urge my colleagues to understand how the Senate Foreign Relations Committee has brought forward a bill that got a 19-to-0 vote in the committee-- because we recognize stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state is so important, we cannot be distracted by other issues. So we focused on that issue. As I said earlier, we have a lot of other problems with Iran. Iran sponsors terrorism. Iran has interfered with its neighbors and is continuing to do that. Iran has a horrible record on human rights. So as I started to look through the amendments that were filed--they haven't been made pending but have been filed--I see a whole host of amendments that deal with issues that aren't really involved in this bill in stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. They would add certification requirements on Iran not participating in terrorism or its ballistic missile program or its human rights record or its interference with the sovereignty of other countries or the return of U.S. citizens who are improperly being held. Every Member of this body agrees that Iran needs to respond to those issues, and we have tools available to deal with that. We have sanctions, regimes that deal with human rights violations, sponsoring terrorism, ballistic missile programs. This bill deals with stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. Now what would happen if any of those amendments were approved, if we had to have a certification. The President could not make that certification. So one of two things happens: It is a poison pill that kills this bill, so we lose our opportunity to review or it blows up negotiations, and then the United States is alone, without any international support, because we blew it up in stopping Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state, making it much less likely that we will stop Iran from becoming a nuclear weapons state. That is why Senator Graham said the only people who will celebrate a poison pill getting on this bill will be Iran. So I urge my colleagues to understand what is at stake. This is a very important bill. What Senator Corker and I urge Senators to do is, if they have amendments to file, talk to us. That is how we did it in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Talk to us. Let's see whether we can work out an amendment, in an orderly way, to consider those amendments. That is what we want to do, so we can use our time on the floor in consideration of amendments in the most constructive way, that will lead to a bill being approved by the same large vote we had in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, so we use the process for amendments similar to what this bill, S. 615, does for a congressional review of an agreement and the way the Senate Foreign Relations Committee did its work to get a 19-to-0 vote. I thank my chairman for his extraordinary leadership. I thank the Presiding Officer who was very helpful in this process. I hope we will be able to proceed in that direction.

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

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I first want to thank Senator Coats for the manner in which he has presented his views. We may not agree on every issue he raised in his remarks, but I fully agree that we have a responsibility to continue to work in a bipartisan manner in order to achieve this review statute so Congress can have an orderly way to express its review. I thank him for the thoughtful presentation he has made in regard to the legislation that is before us. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to proceed as in morning business for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, I know everyone in this body, this country, has been focused on the events in Baltimore. I live in Baltimore. It has affected all of us in our city. We love Baltimore. It is heartbreaking to see the violence that has taken place over the last several days, particularly yesterday. Baltimore is known for its neighborhoods. Neighborhoods are our strength. People take great pride in their neighborhood. There is a lot of ethnic pride in Baltimore. We have a proud tradition. We have a proud tradition of blue-collar workers who helped build this great country in steelmaking and shipbuilding and automaking. We have government workers who have helped provide the services to the people of this country. We have a high-tech workforce that is the future of Baltimore. Baltimore is a great destination for tourists--our Inner Harbor. I could go on and on. But Baltimore is known for its people, its friendliness, and its real pride in strong neighborhoods. That was shaken very badly during the events of yesterday as we saw violence. What happened to Freddie Gray is something that needs to be fully investigated. We want justice. All of us want justice. I was pleased we will have that independent investigation done by the Department of Justice. Thousands of protesters were out in the streets in Baltimore exercising their First Amendment rights, expressing their frustration. They did it in an orderly way, in the way I would think we would want to see people express their views about matters of importance, including justice for Freddie Gray. There were a small number who decided to take to the streets in violence. It was counterproductive to the message. The family of Freddie Gray urged yesterday, particularly the day of his funeral, to be a day without protests. But these individuals decided they would take matters into their own hands. What they did was hurt their community, hurt the neighborhoods, and hurt the city I love. Senator Mikulski and Congressman Cummings, Congressman Sarbanes, and others have been in touch with the mayor of Baltimore, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, with Governor Hogan, with the White House. We are taking all steps in order to preserve public safety in Baltimore and to make sure justice is provided in regard to the tragic death of Freddie Gray. I would just urge all people to exercise restraint so we can provide safe communities for the people of Baltimore, that we will rebuild from this episode, and we will move forward. I thank many of my colleagues who have contacted Senator Mikulski and myself to express their concerns. We know these are very challenging times. We urge all citizens of Baltimore to exercise restraint but to continue their passion for justice, as certainly Senator Mikulski and I and our congressional delegation will insist upon. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I wish to thank Senator Shaheen. She talked about the bipartisan way the committee operated. She played a large part in bringing us together in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and working over the recess. I want to thank the Senator for her input and the manner in which we were able to strengthen our negotiators and maintain the proper role for the Congress.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Gardner for his leadership as chair of the East Asia and Pacific subcommittee. I am still technically the ranking member of that subcommittee, but under my new responsibilities I have not had the same amount of time. I want to thank the Senator for the work he is doing, for doing the rebalanced Asia. We know how important Asia is to the United States. With the Prime Minister of Japan, Mr. Abe, being here this week, it is an opportunity to underscore the important relationship between Japan and the United States. I really wish to thank the Senator for the way he has led the subcommittee and how he has worked to point out the important issues we have on maritime security and how we have to work together to make sure responsible action takes place and that we don't have a circumstance that could get out of control and could affect not only the security of some of our allies but also the maritime shipping areas. There are so many issues we are working on with our ally Japan, and this week we have a chance really to strengthen those relationships. We will have an opportunity to talk to the Prime Minister, and I look forward to continuing to work with the Senator from Colorado in this very important part of the world, Japan. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CARDIN

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object, I just want to know which amendment the Senator is calling up. Is this the amendment that would change this into a treaty obligation?

Mr. CARDIN. I have no objection.

Mr. CARDIN. Madam President, reserving the right to object, is this the amendment that deals with the report date?

Mr. CARDIN. I have no objection.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, reserving the right to object.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, Senator Corker and I have been working very hard to get amendments considered in a very orderly way. We have three amendments that are pending. We are attempting to get to those amendments in a way that we can have votes. We do not want a lot of amendments pending while we are debating certain amendments. For that reason, I must object.

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.