Thomas Carper

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague Chris Coons for allowing me to join him and together offer this tribute to Chris Leach and Jerry Fickes. Earlier today, the floor was busy with activity--and really joyful activity--as Democrats and Republicans tried to work together to come to an agreement on a spending plan to fund our government past the end of this fiscal year and into the beginning of the coming fiscal year. We worked out some difficult compromises. There was actually a lot of joy here as we said goodbye to one another and headed for our respective States until after the election. So on the heels of what was really a rather joyous afternoon comes a far more serious one, and that is the opportunity to say goodbye and to say thank you to a couple of Delawareans who were really true public servants who tragically lost their lives this past weekend in trying to save the lives of others--Chris Leach and Jerry Fickes. I am going to talk about Jerry, since Senator Coons has shared with us some wonderful words about Lieutenant Chris Leach. On Saturday, Jerry Fickes, a 13-year veteran of the Wilmington Fire Department, rushed into a burning home along with his colleague, Chris and others, when a member of the team believed to be Chris became trapped in the blaze. They were told, I understand from those who were present at the fire, that when the Wilmington Fire Department showed up, they were led to believe that there were people inside the house; the house was on fire, and they needed to be saved. Once inside the building, I think they went into the basement, but the floor above them apparently gave way, and their lives were lost in that fire. Two other firefighters were critically burned, and, hopefully, they are going to live, but one was burned on 70 percent of her body. Our hopes and prayers are with her and with her fellow colleague who also received very serious burn damage. Jerry Fickes was a husband, a father, a U.S. Army veteran, and a beloved member of Delaware's firefighter family. That is a strong family, as Senator Coons knows--a strong family and strong bond. We are very proud of them all. He was born not in Delaware but in Evanston, IL, to his mom Jo Ann who sadly predeceased him, and to his father Jerry after whom Jerry Fickes, Jr., is named. Jerry grew up in Illinois and later moved to Overland Park, KS, a suburb of Kansas City. Jerry's early life was full of innocent mischief and football games outside with his neighbors and his five brothers and sisters: Karen, Jeri, Kimberly, Steven, and David. The neighborhood kids played together so much--constantly crossing through each other's yards, I am told, to get to different houses--that the neighbors were unsuccessful at keeping shrubs along their proper line. It reminds me of growing up in Danville, VA. When Jerry started his freshman year at Washburn University in Topeka, KS, his grades were less than stellar, but in reality Jerry was just bored. Once he joined the Army ROTC, things turned around. The Army ROTC gave him structure, and he became very driven and goal oriented. By the time he reached his junior year in college, during which he would meet his future wife Laura while she was working the phone in their dorm's office, Jerry had it all together. Jerry was a serious student, but he was also known to be a fun-loving guy. He graduated with a degree in computer science and mathematics but also had a lot of gym credits because he made being active a priority. His motto became ``Mind, Body, Spirit: If you have all three, then you're sound.'' College and the ROTC taught Jerry there is lot more to learning than just memorizing facts, and that is when everything started to click for Jerry. He took actuarial exams before graduating college and started his obligation to the Army with officer training in Fort Benning. He took a test and scored so well that the Army asked him what he would like to do. That doesn't happen every day. Jerry told them he wanted to join the infantry because he wanted to make a difference, and that is where we felt he could best do it. I think that tells us a lot about the kind of man Jerry Fickes was. His wife Laura recalls the first time she met Jerry--in a tiny office in his dorm building where she answered the phones. When people would call for him, everyone would say his name differently--Fix, Ficks--and Laura could never find his name in the directory until finally one day she met him in person. She asked him: How do you say your name? He just replied: You can say whatever you want to say, and walked away. Little did she or he know that someday she would take that name, just a few years later, as her own. Once married, Jerry had the opportunity to become an actuary with Alico in Wilmington, DE, a company with which Senator Coons and I are well familiar, and the newlyweds with their hard-to-pronounce last name came to the East Coast. Jerry worked at Alico for a while and then later became a consultant for Ernst and Young in Philadelphia. But something always nagged at Jerry. Jerry had the heart of a servant, and when the first gulf war came around, he knew he could use his training in chemical warfare to be an asset to the Army. He called his reserve unit in Kansas to be put on the activation list, but at the time, and much to his wife's relief, he was not called up. But Jerry wanted to do more, so it didn't surprise Laura one bit when Jerry decided to join the Aetna Hose Hook and Ladder Company in Newark, DE, as a volunteer firefighter. For over a decade, he selflessly juggled his firefighting duties with a full-time career in financial services and a new family that would eventually include two young sons, Ben and Josh. It also didn't surprise Laura when, after 12 years of volunteering, Jerry could no longer ignore his true calling. He gave up his job at financial services to work full-time with the Wilmington fire company. From day one, Jerry jumped at the chance to take every call that came in on his shift. Because of this, his fellow firefighters called Jerry a dynamo. Sometimes his determination to get the job done right would leave Jerry covered in melted roof shingles or draped in insulation from an attic, while everyone else's gear was nearly clean. Those mischievous days running around the neighborhood in Kansas weren't far off. Around the firehouse, Jerry was known, very much like Chris Leach, as a prolific prankster. His friends recall that he would often pull a prank and then sit back, watching and waiting as everyone tried to figure out who was responsible for this latest joke. Jerry lived a full life, but perhaps no job was more important to him than helping to raise two sons, Ben and Josh. He was also interested in hearing about his sons and even about their friends, their interests, their goals, and their projects. He was the first to help them research a science project, chaperone big gatherings, or teach Sunday school at Grace Lutheran Church in Hockessin. Even though Jerry didn't care much for running, he knew how much his son Ben did. Jerry was so interested in his son's passion that Jerry did the first few triathlons with Ben, and this past May they both ran a marathon. Imagine that: son and father. And they were both getting excited to run the next race. In fact, just last week Jerry was thrilled to learn that his son had qualified for the Boston Marathon, a huge point of pride for him. Ben, a Charter School of Wilmington graduate and now a freshman at Northeastern in Boston, and Josh, a junior at Charter, both learned from their dad what is really important in life; that is, to serve others. To shake adults' hands and look them right in the eye, to give up your seat on the subway or the bus or the train for somebody else. That is the way Jerry lived his life, and that is what he passed down to his children. Jerry was a true public servant. He devoted his entire adult life to others. He was also a man of deep faith. His service, and ultimately his sacrifice, reminds me--and I know Senator Coons--of a passage from the Book of John: ``Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.'' While no words can ease the suffering of Jerry's family, we seek solace in the memory of a life lived for others and a life given to others by a brave and selfless man. I pray and will continue to pray for Jerry's wife of 26 years, Laura; their two sons, Ben and Josh; Jerry's dad, Jerry, Sr.; his brothers, Steven and David; his sisters, Karen, Jeri, and Kimberly; and many, many nieces and nephews and his brothers and sisters in the Wilmington fire service. Words can never express the pride we have in our hearts for our firefighters in Delaware, the City of Wilmington, and throughout our State. How grateful we are for their sacrifice and for that of their families because the work they do every day and the work Jerry did and really gave up his life for is unlike any other. From the moment he and his fellow firefighters put on that uniform every morning, they answered a call that they knew could put their lives at risk in just a moment. I am reminded of the words of the firefighters' prayer that goes something like this: ``When I am called to duty, God, wherever flames may race, give me the strength to save some life, whatever be its age . . . and if, according to our fate, I have to lose my life, please bless with Your protecting hand my children and my wife.'' The prayer embodies the selflessness that Jerry Fickes displayed every single day. He took an oath to serve, knowing that one day he might not come home but feeling even more strongly that he had to help others. Now it is my hope that our community of Delaware can be a part of protecting him and looking after Jerry's family, his wife, and children, helping to comfort them in their time of need and looking out for them in the days to come. To all of Delaware's firefighters who are in mourning, who continue to put on their gear every day to go to work to protect our communities, we salute you. We say thank you. And thank you for your unwavering commitment to lives lived in service to others. You are an inspiration to us all. So was Jerry. God bless each and every one of you, and may God bless Jerry Fickes. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER. I thank Senator Coons for those beautiful, heartfelt words. A few years ago, the Senator who would have joined me and who would have joined Bill Roth before me would have been Joe Biden, who served here for six terms. He was someone who loved the fire service in Delaware and is still beloved by them. I have heard Joe say a number of times--and I know Senator Coons has as well--these words when talking to people who had a serious loss in their life. He would say something such as this: May soon come the day when the memory of the one you have loved and lost brings a smile to your face before it brings a tear to your eye. That would be my prayer for these families, the Leach family and the Fickes family. Thank you. I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, as some of my colleagues know, nearly every month for more than 1 year now, I have come to the Senate floor regularly to highlight the diverse and difficult work performed by the men and women at the Department of Homeland Security. I have been privileged to be at times in recent years the chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and today serve as the senior Democrat, the ranking member of that committee. The Department of Homeland Security is part of the government that we have direct jurisdiction over, and it is one that I have had a great privilege to work with and have had an opportunity to oversee the operation of that Department. The Department of Homeland Security has more than 230,000 employees stationed around our country at our ports of entry, major transit hubs, and in major cities and small communities alike. Each day the Department of Homeland Security performs some of the most challenging jobs in the Federal Government. From securing radiological material to protecting our cyber networks to responding to natural disasters such as floods, fires, and tornadoes, the Department of Homeland Security employees work around-the-clock to stay ahead of threats to our communities, our homes, and our families. I commend Secretary Jeh Johnson, Deputy Secretary Mayorkas, and their entire leadership team for their continued efforts to bring the entire department together and make the Department of Homeland Security more than just the sum of its parts. Last week, the 2016 Federal Employee Viewpoint survey was released with some good news. The annual survey is provided to hundreds of thousands of Federal employees every year to gauge their satisfaction with their jobs and their engagement with their agency as a whole. After 6 years of declining morale numbers, the tide has begun to turn at the Department of Homeland Security. That is a good thing. Since last year, morale has increased throughout the Department by some 3 percent. I think that is probably more than any other Department in the Federal Government--over the last year, a significant one-year improvement and a better result than the Federal Government average over the same period. Like turning an aircraft carrier, improving morale over a large Federal agency takes time. You can turn an aircraft carrier's course, but it takes a little while, and so does changing and improving the morale of a department with a quarter of a million people spread out all over the world. I believe this latest survey shows that the hard work done by Secretary Johnson and Deputy Secretary Mayorkas and their team has begun to put this ship on a better course for the future. While more work needs to be done to improve morale at the Department of Homeland Security, this effort does not fall on Secretary Johnson alone. Each Member of Congress and every American can help support the Department and its employees by simply acknowledging the good work that the employees do there every day. Whether we simply say thank you to a TSA agent or TSO officer the next time we pass through an airport or give an occasional speech on the Senate floor as I am doing tonight and have done on other occasions, our support makes a difference. Mr. President, each September, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which we affectionately call FEMA, marks National Preparedness Month. Throughout the month, FEMA encourages all Americans to prepare for natural disasters and emergencies. To continue highlighting National Preparedness Month and to continue to highlight the important work done by FEMA and its people, I want to take a moment tonight to thank just a few of the employees of FEMA, one of the 22 component agencies all told that make up the Department of Homeland Security. As my colleagues may know, just last month, historic flooding inundated much of the State of Louisiana. What some may not know is that even before the floodwaters had peaked, FEMA employees and personnel were on the ground there. They were setting up Incident Support Bases to provide supplies, coordinating with State and local officials, and supporting first responders in rescue efforts. FEMA also set up Disaster Recovery Centers to assist residents seeking Federal aid to get back on their feet in the aftermath of the storms. One of the first FEMA employees on the ground there more than a month ago was Justo Hernandez, and Justo's picture is right here. Justo goes by the nickname Tito and is a Team Leader of the East II National Incident Management Assistance Team. With 28 years' experience with FEMA, Tito leads his team in immediate response efforts to natural and manmade disasters whenever and wherever they occur. Ready at a moment's notice, Tito and his team are experts in disaster response, specializing in operations, logistics, planning, and recovery. They put their experience to use by supporting State and local officials as they work through the most trying of situations. Members of Tito's team say that he is by far the best manager and supervisor they have ever worked for. As a leader, Tito leads by example, not afraid to get his hands dirty and never turning down a task, large or small. With their team expected to be deployed nearly 9 months out of the year, Tito has a deep respect for his team members' personal time. When Tito does get some time back at home, I know he enjoys spending every moment with his wife and three children. His family is incredibly generous, and we are grateful to them for lending our Nation their husband and father so he may undertake this important work in many parts of America on behalf of all Americans. As a FEMA employee, Tito embodies the spirit of dedication and caring, shaking hands with each individual he comes into contact with, asking them, ``How are you doing?'' As with most of the men and women at FEMA, Tito doesn't stop there. He does all he can do to help people. Last month, I visited FEMA headquarters here in Washington, DC. I met a number of the thousands of dedicated employees who work there. This is a picture from FEMA. These are some of the exceptional people who help us in some of our darkest hours. While many of these men and women were not directly involved in the response effort in Louisiana, they felt obligated to do all they could for their colleagues who were on the ground in Louisiana or coordinating from around the country. In fact, FEMA headquarters established a backup call center in their offices, and dozens of FEMA employees volunteered--during or after their regular working hours--to man the phones and talk to people through some of the toughest situations imaginable. One FEMA employee who asked how she could help is Melissa Forbes. Melissa has a Ph.D. in public policy and serves as Director of Enterprise Resource Planning in FEMA's Office of Policy and Program Analysis. Melissa's day job is to ensure that FEMA has the resources needed for the challenges it expects to face in the months and years ahead. For 27 hours over the course of 5 days--that is more than five hours each day--Melissa put her regular work on hold and came to the call center. In those 27 hours, Melissa took countless calls, answering questions and connecting people with her colleagues at FEMA who could get them immediate help. In the Navy, when someone does a truly remarkable job, we say these words: ``Bravo Zulu.'' So, to Melissa and to all who worked and volunteered at FEMA headquarters, I would say a great big ``Bravo Zulu.'' As I mentioned earlier, FEMA is made up of thousands of men and women who ask every day: How are you? How are you doing? How can we help? While Tito, his team, and others from FEMA were on the ground in Louisiana, Melissa felt compelled to do all she could do to support them. More than a year ago, Secretary Johnson launched his Unity of Effort initiative to bring the Department of Homeland Security employees closer together in their shared mission. Last month, Melissa and Tito were reunited from a thousand miles away in their efforts to help the people of Louisiana. Every month I come to the Senate floor and highlight the amazing dedication of two or three people, in some cases entire teams of men and women who are united in their shared goal of keeping Americans safe. In closing, let me say that I don't think the results from this year's Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey are a fluke. I believe the improvement in morale that has been reported by the thousands of employees at the Department of Homeland Security represents the growing unity within the Department of Homeland Security, the youngest and third largest Cabinet Department in the Federal Government. I, for one, look forward to next year's viewpoint survey, as well as those in the years to come, because I believe they will continue to put on display an ever more united and effective department. So to Tito, to the East II team, to Melissa and the volunteers at FEMA headquarters, as well as to everyone at FEMA, we say a great big thank you. Thank you for coming together, not only by asking ``How are you doing?'' but by going to work to make things better for all of us. Keep up the great work that you are doing, and God bless you. I have been joined on the floor by the majority leader. Before I yield the floor, let me say to another person who has joined us, my colleague from New Hampshire, who is the ranking member Democrat on the Appropriations Subcommittee for Homeland Security that she and the chairman, former Governor Hoeven, Senator Hoeven now, do a wonderful job that is important to Homeland Security. On behalf of Melissa and Tito and all the hundreds of thousands of people who work with them in Homeland Security, thank you for being there for them.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Eric Hanson, a detailee to the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, be granted privileges of the floor for the remainder of the second session of the 114th Congress.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I stand before my colleagues this evening as a veteran of the Vietnam War who returned to this country after a third tour in Southeast Asia. I moved from California to Delaware and enrolled there at the University of Delaware in their business school, in their MBA program. I was fortunate enough, along with many other Vietnam-era veterans, to receive a GI bill benefit; it was about $250 a month. College tuition was a lot less in those days. I was happy to have every penny of it. But today we offer a GI bill benefit that is far more robust and far more needed than it was when I came back from Southeast Asia. Today, veterans return often throughout the course of the year in Delaware. The Governor and our congressional delegation--Senator Coons, Congressman Carney, and I--will either send National Guard men and women off to deployments around the world or we might welcome them home. Whenever we welcome them home, I say to the returning National Guard men and women, the Army Guard and Air Guard: Welcome home to the best GI bill benefits in the history of the country. If they want to go to the University of Delaware, tuition is paid for; at Delaware State University or Delaware Community College, tuition is paid for. If they need books--they probably do--they are paid for, and fees are paid for. If they need tutoring, it is paid for, and they also receive roughly a $1,500-a-month housing allowance. That is a great benefit, and folks who go to those schools generally get a very good education, and they get a lot of help in job placement after they have completed their education. That is not always the case in some of our for-profit colleges and universities. Some of them do a good job; some of them don't. One of them that hasn't done a good job is called ITT Tech. We heard it talked about this evening on the Senate floor. There were about 7,000 veterans using the Post-9/11 GI bill benefits that ITT Tech took from them when the school suddenly collapsed earlier this month. This provided $22,000 a year in educational assistance to private nonprofit and private for-profit colleges. The Post-9/11 GI bill provides a housing allowance that our veterans depend on to support their families while they attend class. When ITT Tech closed its doors, it also meant that this housing allowance came to an abrupt halt. I urged the Department of Veterans Affairs to work closely with the Department of Education to ensure that ITT Tech student veterans had the same resources and guidance they need to transfer and continue their education at high quality institutions of learning. But some veterans will not be able to transfer to another school this month or next month. We want them to make smart decisions about their educational future. That is why passing this bipartisan bill or some similar bipartisan bill to restore lost educational benefits and temporarily--underline temporarily--extend the housing allowance for students who attend schools like ITT Tech that suddenly close is so critical to our Nation's veterans and their families. We want to make sure that the student veterans have enough time--not an endless period, but enough time--to decide whether it is best to transfer to another school, to discharge their student loans, or start over at another school, such as a community college. This legislation is really about making sure the veterans continue to receive benefits they have earned in service to our country. Our Nation's veterans did not cause ITT Tech to collapse. Our Nation's veterans and our Nation's taxpayers deserve better than they have received at the hands of ITT Tech. The least we can do is provide some very modest relief during this tough period of transition. I think passing this bill or something similar to this legislation is the least we can do. My hope is that after we return from the recess after the election we can start talking across the aisle about more help to our student veterans and folks on the Post-9/11 GI bill. It is ironic that folks who are not veterans but recipients of Federal aid for education are in a similar situation, and they essentially would be made whole, but that is not the case with our veterans. I am not comfortable with that situation, and I suspect a lot of my colleagues are not either. I will close this part of my remarks. I think most of us ascribe to the Golden Rule--treat other people the way you want to be treated. I have been a veteran myself. I got a great education, graduate school at the University of Delaware, but I know how I would want to be treated if I were in the shoes of these thousands of veterans who have been mistreated at the hands of ITT Tech. We need to do something about it, and I hope that when we return, we will.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, you oftentimes draw the short straw and have to preside while I am speaking, and you can probably give some of these talks as well as I can, but I am going to go back and talk about something I have discussed every couple of weeks--not so much during our 7-week recess but certainly before and subsequent to that as well. What I have been doing is providing an update for our colleagues on what is going on in a part of the world we have a lot of interest in, including Iraq, here; Kurdistan, here, which is part of Iraq; Turkey in the north; Syria, which is right here to the west of Iraq; and Iran is over here. We have the Mediterranean Sea right here. I just want to hearken back to 2 years ago when the folks from ISIS were rolling through this part of the world hellbent on getting to Baghdad. Baghdad is right here, right down here, not too far from Iran. They had made extraordinary progress, killing a lot of people along the way, taking a lot of prisoners, a lot of them women as sex prisoners, and slaughtering a lot of people, with mass graves and a large amount of carnage. They were able to scare off the Iraqi Army. In many cases, the Iraqis turned tail and ran. Their leadership ran too. In fact, their leadership may have actually run before the rank-and-file troops, heading this way, back toward Baghdad. Finally, when the folks of ISIS were sort of knocking on the door just west of Baghdad, they were slowed and stopped. What has happened in the last several months? There has been a big change in the momentum of the battle. Now it is not just Iraq on its own in this fight; Iraq is joined by a coalition of roughly 60 nations, of which the United States is the leader. Our job is not to provide boots on the ground in Iraq or in Syria; for the most part, our job is to provide intelligence support. Our job is to provide air support-- fixed-wing, rotary-wing, unpiloted aircraft, drones--and our job is to provide training, support, and advice to the folks who are doing the fighting. This is a province just west of Baghdad called Anbar Province. We have all heard of it. This area right here--west of this whole area is considered the Sunni Triangle because the lion's share of the folks who live in this part of Iraq are Sunni. There are particular cities they live in. One is called Fallujah. A member of my staff was wounded and almost killed in Fallujah a few years ago. There is Ramadi and a place called Tikrit. Tikrit, right up here, is where Saddam Hussein was from. All these areas were taken over by ISIS a couple of years ago. They have been driven out of those cities and out of this part of Iraq. The folks who have been doing most of the fighting on the ground-- their abbreviation is CTS, which, as I recall, stands for Counter Terrorism Service. We are providing support for them, but they are actually the boots on the ground. The next province here in this country is to the northeast. It is on the border here with Kurdistan, and it is a town called Mosul. It is not a town, it is a city, and there are about 2 million people living there. That is the second largest city, right behind Baghdad, that is still in the hands of ISIS. Sometime later this year or early next year, we expect to see a full- scale movement by the coalition--led again by the Iraqi forces themselves--to move on Mosul. There is a town here--there is actually a base here about 50 miles southwest of Mosul called Qayyarah, and it is a big Air Force base, and that was taken maybe a month or so ago by the Iraqi forces with our support. There is not only a base there, there is a town that goes with it called Qayyarah, and that town is now in the hands of the Iraqis, and the folks from ISIS have been driven out of Qayyarah. It was really the last major city or town between Baghdad and Mosul that was in the hands of ISIS. Now we come across the northern part of Iraq over into Syria again to a place called Manbij. This is a pretty good size city. It is very close to the Turkish border. There is another town here on the Turkish border with Syria called Jarabulus. These two places were in the hands of ISIS until very recently. They served almost as a gateway, almost a free flow of ISIS troops, soldiers, or reinforcements coming across the border with Turkey and through Jarabulus and down by Manbij. Both those cities are now in the hands of forces that are in alliance with our coalition. There is a place here--not as big as Mosul--called Raqqa that is still in the hands of ISIS. They think of it as the spiritual center of their caliphate. My guess is that sometime next year, after Mosul has been taken, full attention will turn to Raqqa. There will be coalition forces coming in from the southwest and folks who we are fighting with in the northeast, and that will be the next big battle. In the meantime, since the last time I spoke on the Senate floor, a lot of land that ISIS had taken has been retaken. It was less than 50 percent, and now 50 percent or more of the land that ISIS previously held has been retaken. Again, this is not just the United States. We are playing a constructive role, but the coalition and the Iraqis themselves--some who ran from ISIS--don't run anymore. We were very much encouraged by the courage they have shown. Among the other things that ISIS took, aside from land, was oil--oil reserves--and they turned that into money. They captured banks. They went right into the treasuries of the banks and safes and vaults and stole a lot of money--hundreds of millions of dollars. A fair amount of that money has actually been destroyed by airstrikes--literally, cash on fire. I don't know if it is half, but it is a lot of the money, and ISIS's ability to realize more revenues by virtue of oil and by selling oil on the black market has been significantly reduced. The idea there is to starve them and reduce the ability for reinforcements to come in from the north and at the same time to take away their ability to make money and use that money to pay their troops and buy things that they and their forces need to wage a successful war. So that is a little bit about what is going on in that part of the world. I will mention a couple of other pieces. I don't think we have Libya on this map. Libya is over here, a little to the west and to the south. Imagine it is somewhere over here--probably over here, but we get the drift. When ISIS is being driven out of this part of the world--out of Iraq and Syria--where do they go? About 50,000 have been killed, over 100 to 200 of their top leaders, including the No. 2 guy who was killed I think last week. Frankly, some are packing up and going home. They see the writing on the wall. Others are going to different countries. Libya is one of the places ISIS has headed. They settled into a place called Sirte, a big seaport town. We have had a heavy focus working with the Libyan forces to take back Sirte, and a week or two ago the last portion of Sirte was recaptured. I think that is another positive development. We have terrorist groups in the Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf. And through the air and with aircraft assigned to the carriers, we have been providing that support. The Turks have been good about giving us access to one or more of their bases, so we have the ability to fly aircraft out of there and provide air support for the coalition forces that we have. One of the other ways that ISIS has been very effective in waging this war, aside from the actual fighting on the battlefield, is fighting that does not occur on a battlefield and is not the kind of battle that you win with guns and bullets and rockets and missiles, but it is the kind of fight that goes on through the Internet and through social media. These guys are pretty good at that. They are not 12 feet tall on the battlefield, as it turns out. We are capable of degrading and destroying them, as the President likes to say. But the ability to actually take them down on the Internet through social media has been more challenging. Before I get into that, though, I think the last time I spoke here, I mentioned that 2 years ago some 2,000 foreign fighters per month were coming in to this part of the world to be part of the ISIS team--2,000 a month. The last time I reported, I said that number was down to 200 a month. Today, we know that number is down to 50 a month. Part of it is because Jarabulus and Manbij and other towns have pretty much cut off access to the Turkish border. That is an encouragement. I think I mentioned the last time I was on the floor that 2 years ago maybe 10 Americans a month were coming to this part of the world to join ISIS and to fight. Today, that number is probably down to one per month, one every 2 months. We are encouraged by that. In cyberspace, I understand there are over 360,000 pro-ISIS twitter accounts that have been taken offline this year. Let me say that again. In cyberspace, over 360,000 ISIS twitter accounts have been taken offline over the past 12 months. For every pro-ISIS twitter account, there are now six anti-ISIS accounts criticizing and challenging ISIS's twisted theology. For a while, the ISIS fighters continued to take their hits on the battlefield and had a good spanking applied to them, but they were still doing well on social media. Not so much anymore. As it turns out, as they move over to places like Libya and try to set up a minicaliphate, we have shown that isn't going to work either. So on balance, this is going in the right direction. It is not time to spike the football. It is a pretty good coalition working together, and we are starting to hit on all eight cylinders. I would just say to our troops and to those who are part of the coalition, as we say in the Navy when people do a good job, ``Bravo Zulu.'' We are not going to spike the football yet, but things are very much encouraging. We are grateful for everybody who has helped to make that possible. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I like to tell the story about a Senate Finance Committee hearing about 2 years ago when we had a bunch of very smart people who came in to talk to us about this: What are we going to do about reducing the deficit? We continue to reduce the deficit. We peaked out at $1.4 trillion about 6 or 7 years ago. We are down to about $400 billion now; it is still way to high. But the hearing was designed to ask: What are some things we can do to further reduce our budget deficit? One of our witnesses was a fellow who used to be Vice Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Alan Blinder. At the time he testified 2 years ago, he was back at Princeton teaching economics. As a witness before our committee on reducing Federal budgets, he said: The 800-pound gorilla in the room on health care, on deficit reduction, is health care costs. That is what he said. That is the biggest one--Medicare, Medicaid, the VA system, and so forth. He said that is where the money lies; that is where we have to focus. When it came time to ask questions of our witnesses, I asked Dr. Blinder: You mentioned that health care is the 800-pound gorilla in the room on deficit reduction. What do you think we ought to do? He sat there for a while, he sat there for a while, and he sat there for a while. Finally, he said these words: I am not an expert on health care. I am not a health economist, but if I were in your shoes, here is what I would do. I would find what works and do more of that. That is all he said. I said: Do you mean to find out what doesn't work and do less of that? He said: Yes. If you go back--oh, Lord, this is 2016. If you go back about 22 years in our Nation's history, there was a big debate on Capitol Hill on an idea actually proposed and put forward by the First Lady of our country, Hillary Clinton. She proposed--not ObamaCare; she worked on something that was called HillaryCare. But the idea we had--like a lot of people in this country who were not covered by health insurance-- millions, tens of millions of them--we spent way more money in America on health care costs than just about any other developed Nation. We didn't get better results. Every President since Truman has basically said that we have to do something about extending health care coverage to people who don't have it and trying to make sure it is affordable. Nobody really came up with anything. So the First Lady of this country, of all people, said: Well, I am going to work on this. And she went to work on it. She came up with a proposal called HillaryCare. It was ultimately not adopted, but our Republican friends, as they should have, came up with an alternative to HillaryCare. One of the key components of their proposal was something that actually looks a lot like ObamaCare. What they came up with was this idea of creating health care exchanges or purchasing pools, large purchasing pools, that people who don't have health care coverage could elect to join. As with thousands, maybe tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands of people from their States, these State-by-State purchasing pools or exchanges could provide the opportunity for people who don't get health care coverage, are not part of a large purchasing pool, and don't work for a big employer who provides health care coverage--they could derive the same advantages as those who do have that kind of employment opportunity. That was the Republican alternative. At the end of the day, it didn't go anywhere. But at the time I thought that was a good idea. I wasn't here at that time. I was Governor of my State and very active in the National Governors Association. I said: I think these Republicans have a good idea, creating these exchanges, these large purchasing pools, and maybe providing a tax credit from the Federal Government to buy down the cost of premium coverage. But neither idea ended up flying. HillaryCare ended up going away. The Republican alternative, which was a lot like ObamaCare today, was not enacted. Fast forward to 2009, with a new President who wanted to finally do something about reining in health care costs, covering people who didn't have coverage--tens of millions of people--and trying to figure out: How do we bring down not only the cost of health care, but how do we get better results? At the end of the day, a white paper was issued for those of us on the Finance Committee to consider as we took up our debate in 2009. The way negotiations ended up proceeding, in order to try to find a starting point, was to work from the white paper on health care reform but then have three Democrats and three Republicans who would join one another. These were senior members of our committee who were very good at finding the middle, very good at finding consensus. The idea was for them to try to negotiate an agreement, a bill. They tried not just for days, not just for weeks, but for months. I am a pretty bipartisan guy around here, but I am not sure there was a real bipartisan intent to get to a compromise. I would not cast aspersions, but I think there is probably a little more blame to lie on the other side of the aisle than on this one. As Democrats, we pretty much decided to put something together, and we took two good Republican ideas. One of those is these large purchasing pools, these exchanges. We said every State should have one and give the opportunity for people to be part of a larger purchasing pool if they don't have health care coverage--if they don't work for an employer that provides health care coverage--to get the advantage of buying health care coverage in bulk, if you will, and having a stronger negotiating position, more leverage. That was the Republican idea. I thought it was a good idea in 1994, and, frankly, as a member of the Finance Committee, I thought it was a good idea in 1999. Another good Republican idea that was put forward at the time was the individual mandate. That is not a Democratic idea; that was an idea that came from Governor Romney in Massachusetts, where they put in place their own RomneyCare plan, which has actually worked pretty well. They have purchasing pools just as we do in States across the country--these exchanges. But they also have something in place that is an individual mandate if somebody didn't get coverage. They want everybody in Massachusetts to be covered. But if they elected not to be covered, after 1 year or 2 years or 3 years, people just said: I am not going to get coverage. I am young, I am invincible, and I don't need health care coverage. I can't afford it--even with the tax credit they received through RomneyCare. They said: You are going to have to pay a tax or a fee if you don't get coverage, if you will not sign up. You can't just get away with it. You are going to have to pay something. The idea was to have an escalating fee so that eventually people would say: You know, it is one thing to be fined or taxed a $100 tax if I don't sign up for health care coverage, but how about when it is $300, $500, $700, $800 a year? So eventually people signed up. In this country, as well, we have the exchanges, which actually were a gift from our Republican friends. I think it was a good idea then and now. We also have the individual mandate, which is gradually ramping up so that the young invincibles, the young people who are not getting health care coverage, will get coverage. As more younger, healthier people join the purchasing pools, the idea will be that it will bring down the cost of health care coverage overall so it is not just the sick, the elderly, but it is a healthier group of people. That is sort of where we are today. The idea of pulling the plug on the Affordable Care Act or significant parts of it because a principal component of it--and that is the purchasing pools, these exchanges--is not working as advertised would be a mistake. If it isn't perfect, make it better. We had a chance in 2009 to negotiate a real bipartisan health care reform plan. Unfortunately, we didn't do that. We are going to have a chance again in the early part of next year with a new President and a new Congress to again take up that which is flawed, which is imperfect, and that is the Affordable Care Act, to make it better--not to get rid of it, but to make it better. Senator Alexander is a very wise and highly regarded colleague. He may have a very good idea. I just heard about it here on the fly today. But my hope is that Lamar and the rest of us who want to get things done, to do our job, will seriously take this challenge that is before us and take that original good Republican idea from 1994 on the exchanges, create purchasing pools, and make it better. We should take a look at the individual mandate that Governor Romney adopted in Massachusetts and see how that is working and look at other exchanges as well. The long-and-short story is that when we took up the Affordable Care Act in 2009, here is where we were as a country: We were spending 18 percent of GDP for health care costs. In Japan they spent 8 percent. We were spending 18 percent of GDP; they were spending 8 percent. They were getting better results, longer life, longevity, lower infant- mortality rates, and they covered everybody. They covered everybody in 2009. Where were we? We were spending 18 percent of our GDP. We didn't cover--we had 40 million people going to bed at night without any health care coverage at all. One of the reasons the cost of coverage has gone pretty high right now for people in these new exchanges and purchasing pools is that a lot of the people who are signing up--not all of them, but a lot of them--haven't had health care coverage for years. They have been sick, and they have just not had access to doctors or nurses, except for going to an emergency room doctor. This is not a time to just throw up our hands and walk away. This is a problem. This is a problem we can fix. I would say we can fix it by embracing what I call the three Cs: communicate, compromise, and collaborate. We need to embrace those when this Congress is over.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I thank the Senator from Tennessee. As he knows, I am a huge fan of his. I have been for a long time. I respect him as a colleague, I respected him as a Governor, and I respected him long before that when he was a principal aide to Howard Baker, who was one of the greatest Senators who served in this body in the last century. He and I agree on a lot. We work on a lot of things together, and it has been a source of real joy for me.

Mr. CARPER. That will be fine. I have absolutely no objection.

Mr. CARPER. I am not sure what the Senator from Tennessee is saying.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak, I suppose out of turn. I understand the Republicans, the majority, have control of the floor. I ask unanimous consent to speak for 10 minutes, since there are no other majority Senators.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Let me just add a P.S. on Zika funding, which was discussed here earlier today. We had a bipartisan roundtable in the Homeland Security Committee on Zika funding not long ago. Two reasons we need to resolve this funding issue are, No. 1, that we would have money to continue development of a vaccine--that is the single most important thing--and, No. 2, to provide for contraception and family planning. Those are two of the most important things for us to do as we try to avoid this endemic. I thank my Republican friends for allowing me to speak on their time. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. CARPER

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

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, today we have made important progress on a piece of legislation that we refer to with another one of those funny sounding names. In this case, it is WRDA. It is spelled W-R-D-A. That stands for the Water Resources Development Act. The average American who might tune into C-SPAN today probably has no idea what it means when we use its nickname. Frankly, they are likely confused with a lot of the other strange acronyms we use in Washington as well, but the truth is, the things this WRDA bill will accomplish will have a big effect on the everyday lives of a lot of Americans. Many of them will be things that happen behind the scenes. There are many important functions of the Federal Government that require years of planning and action by Congress. We as private citizens oftentimes sort of take them for granted. Hearing your local Senator or Member of Congress talk about critical dredging projects might sound boring, but if ships carrying groceries into our country's ports can't reach their destination, the prices continue to rise; in some cases, by a whole lot. That means families struggling to put food on their tables must figure out how to stretch their strained budget even further. For the neediest among us, that ship reaching its port isn't just a policy decision made in our Nation's capital, it is the difference between a hungry child and a healthy one, but it takes a lot more work to keep our children healthy. In April of 2014, news broke of a horrendous drinking water crisis in Flint, MI. Our networks and our newspapers were flooded with images of families holding up jugs of discolored water that came from their kitchen sinks and from their bathtubs. It was like we were watching a nightmare unfold overnight, but in reality it was years in the making. For decades, cities across this country have struggled to fund proper maintenance of their drinking water infrastructure. In Flint, officials repeatedly cut corners, with little regard for public health concerns, in order to avoid investing in a high-quality water system. Let's think about this. Really, what is more important than an investment in making sure our kids aren't drinking water that slowly stunts the growth of their brains and the development of their brains? Unfortunately, while the national spotlight has focused on Flint, aging water infrastructure is a growing problem faced by way too many of our communities across this country. This year, the Guardian newspaper found that over the past decade, water departments in at least 33 large cities have chosen to test their water with methods that would underestimate the lead levels in their drinking water-- underestimate. Philadelphia, which is half an hour up the road from my home State and hometown of Wilmington, DE, has been accused of having some of the worst testing procedures of any city in the United States. Congress banned lead water pipes some 30 years ago, but many of our pipes are older than that. In fact, we don't even know the full extent of the problem. Estimates of lead pipes still in use range from 3 to 10 million. That means some parts of our drinking water infrastructure are poisoning unsuspecting families across this Nation of ours. We are doing good bipartisan work today by moving forward on authorizing programs that will begin to tackle not all but many of these issues, but in truth this is only the tip of the iceberg. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates it must spend nearly $400 billion between now and 2030. Think about that, $400 billion between now and 2030 in order to keep our drinking water safe. It is not only pipes that we have to maintain to ensure that our water supply is clean and that we have enough of it. For example, the Delaware River Basin supplies drinking water for more than 15 million people. People don't just depend on this water for drinking. This river houses the catches our fishermen and fisherwomen depend on for their livelihood. This river serves as a shipping route to direct goods to and from our local businesses. It facilitates tourism that ripples through local economies up and down the eastern seaboard. Today we have made important strides toward improving coordinated protection and restoration of the Delaware River Basin on which so many rely. With this legislation, we are also taking important steps to strengthen our coastal areas, which are the first line of defense against extreme weather and sea level rise. For communities near the ocean in Delaware, a severe storm isn't just a day off from work or from school. It has the potential to wreak havoc on our cities and our towns, potentially destroying local businesses and causing irreparable damage to families' homes, as well as to our transportation infrastructure or water and wastewater treatment systems as well. State and local governments that are already strapped for resources are then forced to scramble to help their residents rebuild. Instead of trying to patch the damage after every storm, maybe we ought to prepare ahead of time to make our coastlines more resilient. That will keep people safer and also save us a lot of money in the long term. I learned this from my grandmother: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure, and no place is this saying truer than with regard to maintaining our local critical infrastructure. Too often we in Congress neglect our responsibility to invest in the things that make life possible and better. We shy away from reminding people that things worth having are worth paying for. We weren't elected to take the easy way out. That isn't what we come here for. We were elected to make the tough choices required of leaders. I am proud of the bipartisan work that has been done today to help make sure parents can feel confident about the glass of water they will give their kids to drink at the supper table tomorrow or the week after that. I am proud we are taking action to address some of the often ignored businesses of running a nation like ours. I hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle will join me to continue this good work. Let's remind the American people that with a little determination, with a little more dedication, we can accomplish the responsibilities which they entrust to us. Mr. President, I see we have been joined by a friend from Arkansas. I am going to yield the floor to him.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, here in this Chamber and in this country of ours, we often talk about the dream of a college education. A college education opens doors, leads to a higher quality of life. A college education can boost our wages and our incomes. A college education is a first-class ticket to the middle class. We often talk about the young people in our communities who have made that dream a reality, and they may not have come from much. Their parents saved what they could. In many cases, they are the first in their family to go to college. They took out loans, they worked nights in many cases and on weekends, they hit the books. In many cases, they graduated with honors. They got good-paying jobs. They raised a family, and they planned to send their kids to college too. That is the dream we talk about, but for too many students across our country today, the dream of a college education has turned into a nightmare. I learned this week that 45,000 college students who were enrolled at a school called ITT Tech awoke and learned that their college was closed--not for a snow day, not for a holiday; ITT Tech closed its doors for good after years of questionable business practices and financial woes. Many of these 45,000 students are living a nightmare this week. They are scrambling to transfer to another school. They are hoping their credits will count elsewhere so they don't have to start over again. They are scrambling to find out if they are eligible for debt forgiveness on their student loans. I rise today, though, to talk about a particular group of students who have been harmed by the sudden closure of ITT Tech--our Nation's veterans and their families. Until this week, there were nearly 7,000 veterans enrolled at ITT Tech, using the post-9/11 GI bill to help finance their education. As a veteran myself of the Vietnam war, I know what it is to be eligible for the GI bill, which I and my generation were. While it was not as generous as this one today, nonetheless, it was a great lifesaver for me and a lot of other folks with whom I served. But the post-9/11 GI bill, while generous, is a finite benefit. It provides up to 36 months of tuition and housing benefits for veterans as well as members of their family. If the veteran doesn't use their benefit, their spouse can. If their spouse doesn't use the benefit, their dependent children may. It is an incredible benefit. But veteran students at ITT Tech have no recourse to get those GI tuition benefits back to put toward their studies at another college. The housing allowance that our veterans' families have spent will come to an abrupt halt because they are no longer enrolled in classes. They have been robbed of their time and their hard-earned benefits, and, frankly, taxpayers have been robbed of their tax dollars. When I think about the men and women who volunteer to serve our country during a time of war, it is unfathomable that this is the position in which we could leave them--at a defunct college, without a plan to help them get their benefits back, and without a way to pay their rent or their mortgage next month. I think it is shameful. I also think enough is enough. Congress must act to protect our veterans in this instance, as we do in so many others. I don't believe that all for-profit schools are bad actors. They aren't. Some do a good job. But the poor educational employment outcomes for students across this sector are undeniable. The damage ITT Tech has inflicted upon students and taxpayers is undeniable. Let's take a moment and look at the facts. ITT Tech is facing lawsuits by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and multiple State attorneys general for illegal loan schemes, deceiving shareholders, and for deceptive recruiting. ITT Tech's accreditor recently found that the school ``is not in compliance, and is unlikely to become in compliance'' with accrediting standards. ITT Tech's closure leaves taxpayers on the hook for a half billion dollars in closed school loan discharges--half a billion dollars. ITT Tech is one of the top recipients of post-9/11 GI bill dollars since 2009. ITT Tech did not use this massive taxpayer investment to provide a high-quality education to too many veterans. They used it for recruitment, they used those dollars for advertising and ultimately for profit. ITT Tech failed veterans and taxpayers for years. When they closed their doors this week, they left taxpayers and veterans and their families in the lurch. It is shameful. Again, enough is enough. The Department of Veterans Affairs must now work closely with the Department of Education to ensure that ITT Tech's student veterans have the resources and guidance they need to transfer and continue their studies at a high-quality institution of higher learning. We in Congress have work to do too. I believe we have a particular responsibility to hold bad actors accountable and increase protection for veterans who plan on enrolling at for-profit schools that are under investigation and heading for bankruptcy. For-profit schools, such as ITT Tech and Corinthian Colleges, which also suddenly collapsed last year, target veterans for their generous benefits that we as taxpayers provide for them, and those schools exploit something called the 90-10 loophole that allows for-profit schools to be 100 percent reliant on Federal taxpayer dollars--100 percent. Congress can take meaningful steps to protect veterans and their families, and chief among them would be closing this loophole. The 90- 10 loophole has directly led to this ongoing nightmare for the student veterans at Corinthian, at ITT Tech, and at countless other schools failing to deliver on the promise of a higher quality education. In conclusion, Congress must act. We must act to restore the dream of a high-quality college education for our Nation's veterans. It is well past time to address this situation. Enough is enough. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

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

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I would like thank the senior Senator from South Carolina for his support and thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, in both Chambers, that are working so hard to get this issue resolved as soon as possible this year. I thank the Senator.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I wish to enter into a colloquy with the senior Senator from South Carolina in regards to the bipartisan efforts to extend the investment tax credits for advanced energy technologies. As you know, the investment tax credit incentives for fuel cells and other small alternative-power technologies--including microturbines, combined heat and power, small wind, and thermal energy--in section 48 of the Tax Code expires at the end of this year. These advanced energy technologies are finally transitioning from development to commercialization and are playing a critical role in making energy in this country more resilient, reliable, and less vulnerable to fuel price hikes. For example, fuel cells, which I know well from being produced in my home State of Delaware, are already being used to provide reliable power to first responders, manufacturers, and retail companies. Fuel cells ensure critical facilities continue to have electricity, even when grid power is unavailable. Fuel cells are U.S. invented, U.S. manufactured, and run on U.S. natural gas. This technology is a win-win for energy security, job growth, and the economy. As you can imagine, these emerging alternative-energy companies require predictable tax credits beyond the end of 2016 for R&D, capitalization, and cash flow reasons. Delays in extending these tax credits could put hundreds of manufacturing jobs in my State, in my friend from South Carolina's State, and thousands of jobs across the country at risk. At the end of last year, it seemed our message about the urgency of extending all of these section 48 tax credits was heard loud and clear. During negotiations on the year-end tax extenders package last December, there was bipartisan agreement to extend all of the section 48 tax credits through the end of 2021. Unfortunately, due to a simple case of human error, the extension of these tax credits was accidentally excluded during the final drafting of the tax legislation. Solar and wind were extended as part of the agreement, but five other small alternative-power technologies were inadvertently excluded. This mistake was identified within hours of the bill text being released, but unfortunately, due to time constraints and the desire to move expeditiously, House and Senate leaders determined that modifications to correct this mistake were not possible at the time. Instead, there was a bipartisan agreement to work together to address this mistake early in 2016. Let me say to my colleague, I know we have missed some opportunities to get this issue resolved, but I would welcome the opportunity to work with him, his staff, and other colleagues to find ways to get these advanced energy credits extended. I believe we still have opportunities to get this done, but we cannot afford further delays. Would the Senator be willing to work with my staff and me?

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, for more than a year now, I have come again and again to the Senate floor to highlight some of the remarkable work that is being done by the men and women who work at the Department of Homeland Security for our country. The Department of Homeland Security--created in the wake of the attack on 9/11--today has over 200,000 employees. It was created by combining some 22 Federal agencies, including the Coast Guard, FEMA, and others. The Department's employees are stationed all over this country. In fact, you can find them all over the world. From keeping drugs from crossing our borders to screening passengers at airports, to safeguarding critical cyber security networks, the men and women at the Department of Homeland Security take on some of the most diverse and challenging jobs of any Federal employee. Last month I spoke on this floor to highlight the work being done by a small group of folks who work at the Department of Homeland Security and an agency called the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office. With just 125 employees, this office tracks and detects radiological and nuclear materials. They protect Americans from some of the most dangerous materials that are known to humankind. Another office within the Department of Homeland Security, charged with tracking dangerous yet nearly invisible threats, is the Office of Health Affairs. The Office of Health Affairs leads the Department of Homeland Security's efforts to track and to coordinate the response to potential biological threats from infectious diseases. In 2014, with the outbreak of Ebola in Africa, the Office of Health Affairs was charged with tracking this deadly virus and studying the potential threat it posed to Americans here at home. This office has had to disseminate that threat information to other Federal agencies and to State and local health officials, as well, as part of our efforts to coordinate and be ready if this disease does make it to our shores. The Office of Health Affairs also worked with Customs and Border Protection to establish a screening protocol for passengers arriving here from Ebola-impacted countries. The Office of Health Affairs continues to monitor and to keep us prepared for any remaining threats we might face from Ebola. This summer, as we heard, we have yet another challenge on their plates. As we discussed in this Chamber as recently as a few minutes ago, over the past couple of months, the Zika virus has spread explosively throughout Central and South America and the Caribbean. Here at home, we have confirmed more than 1,100 travel- related cases, including more than 320 affected women. Given the potentially devastating effects that Zika can have, Americans are understandably concerned about how best to protect themselves, their families, or their future families from this previously little-known virus. That is why we are lucky to have the hard-working men and women at the Office of Health Affairs of the Department of Homeland Security. As we speak, the Office of Health Affairs, through its National Biosurveillance Integration Center, is coordinating closely with the Department of Health and Human Services and the Centers for Disease Control to track the spread of the disease of the Zika virus. They are also communicating prevention and detection information to help officials across our country and our partners overseas. Already, the office has produced several Zika-related safety advisories on everything from Zika transmission and prevention to mosquito abatement, to Zika screening procedures. As we reach the height of mosquito season here in the United States, the Office of Health Affairs is actively coordinating response activities with agencies across the Federal Government and with State and local partners. Two exceptional employees within the Department and the Office of Health Affairs who are helping to coordinate the Department's Zika preparedness and response activities are LCDR Tiana Garrett and Ingrid Hope. Here she is to my left, LCDR Tiana Garrett. I am an old Navy guy. People look at this, and in the Navy or in the Coast Guard, this indicates that you are a lieutenant commander, and this indicates what her rank is. She is a lieutenant commander. We call lieutenant commanders in the Navy ``commanders,'' just to give them a compliment. So if I call her Commander Garrett, then I am not messing up. It is the way we do things in the Navy and the way we do things here. Commander Garrett is an officer in the U.S. Public Health Service-- not in the Navy, not in the Coast Guard. She serves in a vitally important agency called the U.S. Public Health Service. As a biosurveillance operations analyst, Commander Garrett is responsible for tracking and providing updates to Federal, State, and local partners on the spread of the Zika virus and other disease outbreaks. Through her work at the National Biosurveillance Integration Center, Commander Garrett provides regular updates to thousands of government officials, representing the Office of Health Affairs in interagency calls and presentations and ensuring that others know that the Department of Homeland Security and its Office of Health Affairs is there to help. Commander Garrett also uses her master's degree in epidemiology and her Ph.D. in cell biology to help develop health advisories to inform the Department of Homeland Security's workforce about Zika virus exposure and how to prevent it. Commander Garrett's colleagues describe her as a true public servant who has dedicated her career and much of her life to ensuring the health and well-being of others. Another Office of Health Affairs employee within the Department of Homeland Security who is focusing on the Zika virus is this lady right here, and her name is Ingrid Hope. Ingrid is the Acting Deputy Division Director for the Workforce Health and Medical Support Division. Miss Hope is charged with making sure that the Department of Homeland Security's policies protect its own employees from the threats posed by the Zika virus and other infectious diseases. Given the potential for frontline DHS employees to come into contact with this virus and other viruses, it is vitally important that they have the guidance they need to reduce their own risk of exposure. Just like families in Delaware and around the country, Department of Homeland Security employees have been hearing about the Zika virus on the news. We have heard about it here on the floor today. While you and I can make changes to our schedule or change our travel plans to limit our exposure, the Department of Homeland Security employees at our ports of entry and along our boarders cannot do that. Their jobs put them in harm's way to protect us against any number of threats to our homeland. The Zika virus is no different. Miss Hope does invaluable work by informing the Department of Homeland Security employees on how to limit their exposure while on the job. She also makes sure that the workforce knows how to detect the virus and how to keep themselves and their families as safe as possible. Without her important work, our officers on the frontlines will be far less prepared to deal with the potential public health crisis. As we continue to debate supplemental funding to combat the Zika virus, we cannot forget the hard work needed to turn this funding into results. It is my hope that Congress can reach a bipartisan agreement to provide the Zika funding that is needed. Once that funding is approved, we must all keep in mind that the Zika virus will not simply disappear. Countless man-hours and woman-hours are put into collecting information, analyzing this relatively unknown virus, developing tests, treatments, vaccines, and protecting the most vulnerable among us. So we say thank you. We say thank you to the men and today especially to the women at the Office of Health Affairs of the Department of Homeland Security. I urge my colleagues in the Senate to think about how much work is done each day--every day--in an effort to make it safer for the rest of us on this planet and also to enable us to stay several steps ahead of this virus and eventually to overcome it. We cannot let our differences here hinder the work of our dedicated public servants. So to Miss Hope, to Lieutenant Commander Garrett, and to all the men and women at the Office of Health Affairs and the Department of Homeland Security, we say thank you today and every day. Thank you for your selfless and tireless efforts to keep Americans safe and secure from the many threats we face. While you continue to track and keep us informed about these threats and viruses and other organisms that would otherwise go unnoticed, know that your efforts behind-the-scenes have not gone unnoticed. We have noticed. They know they have not gone unappreciated. We appreciate them. I am not the only Senator who appreciates your hard work. I know I speak for all of my colleagues as well. Thank you and God bless you. Zika Virus Funding Mr. President, I wish to take a moment before I say a word about the battle against ISIS in other parts of the world. I want to talk about Zika funding for a moment. The administration has asked for $1.9 billion to combat this disease. I think there has been a disagreement as to whether it should be that amount, $1.9 billion or something less. We held a roundtable several weeks ago on the Zika virus, and we had folks with medical backgrounds and other backgrounds to talk about some of the smartest things we can do to reduce the threat and spread of the Zika virus in this country. I believe there was unanimous agreement that one of the best things we can do is improve access to contraception. They told us about the cost of providing care for an infant who is born with this dreaded disease. We have heard a lot stories about babies being born with distorted heads and damaged brains. One witness told us the cost of raising that child from birth to the end of their life can be as high as $10 million per child. If we, through our efforts, can reduce a total of 190 births, the likelihood that some child will be born with this terrible deformity and condition--190 times $10 million is $1.9 billion. I think we can avoid even more pregnancies if we find a way to narrow and eliminate our differences and provide the funding that has been requested by the President. Again, what I think Democrats object to, in terms of paying for the funding for the Zika virus, is this pay-for actually reduces funding for family planning and reduces funding for contraception. What we heard at our roundtable a week or two ago was that is where we should be putting our emphasis and our dollars. I wanted to leave that thought, if I may.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. I request 1 more minute, Mr. President.

Mr. CARPER. Just as the Vietnamese have finalized a large deal--the purchase of American jets--the Iranians announced about 2 weeks ago that they will be purchasing a number of 747 jumbo jets built by Boeing, 737s, 777s. The value of the deal is worth about $17 billion over the next 4, 5, 6 years. I would suggest to our colleagues who say we can't trust these guys that we still have problems with what they are doing with some of their missile testing. We have problems with support of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups like that. For the most part, they have kept their word on the joint deal we signed, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. We are starting to see some commerce transact between both countries that actually inure to our bottom line to strengthen the economy of this Nation. I just want to say--is it time for us to spike the football? Is everything fine? No. Eyes wide open. That is important. Eyes wide open. Having said that, I think most fairminded people would say: So far, so good. Let's continue to be vigilant, and hopefully a year from now, the second anniversary of the signing of this joint agreement will have even better news not just for us but for the rest of the world. With that, I thank you, Mr. President, for that extra minute. I yield to the Senator from Massachusetts.

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, before I talk a bit about the 1-year anniversary of the signing of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action between the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, plus Germany, with Iran, I want to take a moment to say to the Senator from Wisconsin that I am privileged to serve with her on the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. I have had a chance to see and witness her sincerity, her commitment, and her dedication on this front, and I commend her. I serve with the Senator from West Virginia--not on Homeland Security but on Environment and Public Works. I commend her for her bipartisan spirit that we see here and I commend the leadership they have both shown to ensure that the right thing is done. Iran Mr. President, I thank Senator Coons, my colleague from Delaware, for organizing a floor colloquy of Members to take place this afternoon to discuss the 1-year anniversary of something we call the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action--or the Iran nuclear deal--that was signed literally a year ago tomorrow by the five permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, plus Germany, with Iran. At this time a year ago, there were a lot of skeptics as to whether Iran would keep its part of the bargain and not go forward with developing nuclear weapons. We heard arguments that they would evade inspection and that Iran would never live up to their obligations under the agreement that we signed a year ago tomorrow. We heard that they couldn't be trusted. We heard that they would not keep their word. We heard any number of accusations and speculation. We heard that the people of Iran wished death upon America and wished to continue the antagonistic relationship with the United States that dominated U.S.- Iranian relations after the Iranian revolution. I just want to say a year later that I believe there is good reason to believe the critics were proved wrong when Iran took those irreversible steps to dismantle its nuclear weapons program--steps that were certified by the nuclear watchdogs at the International Atomic Energy Agency. For example, national inspectors certified that Iran had reduced its stockpile of enriched uranium by 98 percent and that the remaining enriched uranium was only enriched at levels consistent with peaceful energy uses. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency certified that the nearly 15,000 centrifuges for enriching uranium have been dismantled, leaving Iran with only its least sophisticated centrifuges that can be used solely for peaceful purposes. The inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency have also certified that the special heavy water reactor that could produce the kind of plutonium needed for a nuclear bomb will produce no more. Inspectors saw firsthand that the core of that reactor had been filled with concrete, rendering it incapable of ever producing plutonium again. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency continue to assess that Iran is keeping up with its commitments in the nuclear agreement. I have never been to Iran. I hope to go someday. But a place I have been to is Southeast Asia. I served 3 years in a war in that part of the world, with a country with which we were at war--in some cases, almost a proxy war but at war for many years, the Vietnam war. The names of 55,000 men and women are on a granite wall about 2 miles from where we are standing here today, close to the Lincoln Memorial. When the war was over--the war was winding down--my Active-Duty tour with the U.S. Navy as a naval flight officer came to an end, and I resigned from my regular commission and assumed a Reserve commission and continued to fly with the Navy as a P-3 aircraft mission commander in the Naval Reserve for another 18 years. The month after I retired from the Navy as captain, I was a member of the House of Representatives. I led a delegation of six of us--all Vietnam members of U.S. House of Representatives--back to Vietnam in August of 1991. We went at a time when, even though we were not at war with Iran, there was still great animosity between our two countries. Some of that was spurred by the fact that we never found out what happened to thousands of American MIAs. They disappeared, in some cases almost without a trace. We had very little cooperation from Vietnam to try to find out the truth of their demise. There is a lot of speculation that they are being held as POWs in Vietnam, Cambodia, or Laos, and there were actually photographs of people alleged to be our MIAs who were being held in captivity--we didn't know where but the assertion was in Vietnam or Cambodia or Laos. During our congressional delegation trip in August of 1991, it turned out that the pictures that were shown on the cover of Newsweek and TIME magazine and on the front pages of newspapers across the country were not Americans; they were Soviet nationals. There was an effort by people in Cambodia--bad people--to try to extort money from the families of the American MIAs who never came home. The people in those pictures were actually Soviet nationals, not missing Americans. During the midst of all of this back-and-forth about the MIAs from America from that war, six of us participated in a congressional delegation. We went to Vietnam. We met with the new leader of Vietnam, a fellow named Do Muoi, who became the leader in August of 1991 of the Communist Party, making him the top leader of Vietnam. We presented to him from the George Herbert Walker Bush administration a roadmap to normalize relations. This was the deal: Vietnam, if you will open up your archives, open up your war museums, allow us to explore, excavate crash sites, have free movement around your country to see if Americans respond or people believed to be Americans respond--if you will do all those things, we will reciprocate, and we will move toward normalized relations with your country. There was a lot of lack of faith on the sides of both countries, Vietnam and us. The Vietnamese were fearful that we would move the goalposts, that even if they did all the things they were required to do under the roadmap to normalize relations, we would move the goalposts and still not normalize relations. For our part, there was concern that they would never do those things anyway, so why should we bother. At the end of the day, we engaged with the Vietnamese, and they engaged with us. They did the things they were supposed to do, and we did as well. We normalized relations about 4 years later. John Kerry and John McCain did good work in the Senate. Our delegation did good work in the House. The George Herbert Walker Bush administration passed the baton to President Clinton, and normalized relations were established about 4 years later. The first U.S. Ambassador to Vietnam was a member of our delegation, former POW and former Air Force pilot Pete Peterson. Fast-forward about 25 years later, a month and a half ago, President Obama was nice enough to invite me to join him on a trip to Vietnam, along with a couple of Congressmen. A lot changed in those 25 years. Today the United States of America is Vietnam's top export market. Today Vietnam is part of the 12-member transpacific trade partnership we are endeavoring to establish and get approved here and in 11 other countries. While we were over there a month and a half ago, the Vietnamese announced an $11 billion deal with Boeing. They are going to buy 100 737 jets valued at $11.3 billion from Boeing. They announced that they are going to buy from Pratt & Whitney--a big aircraft engine company-- another $3 billion worth of engines to put in 63 Airbuses. The President lifted the ban on arms sales to Vietnam, and a lot of other announcements were made. While we were over there, we learned that a survey of the Vietnamese people done earlier that year indicated that 84 percent of the Vietnamese people had a favorable opinion of the United States. Another survey indicated that 95 percent of the Vietnamese people have a favorable opinion of the United States. They like us more in Vietnam than we like us. Meanwhile in Iran, Iran is not unlike Vietnam--a young nation. There are about 78 million people who live in Iran. More than half of them are under the age of 25, and they have a great affection for our country. Some of the leaders do not, but many of the people do, particularly the younger people. They want a better life with us and a better relationship with us. They have had elections since the joint agreement was agreed to, elections in their Parliament and in the Council of Experts, which elects the next Supreme Leader. The moderates, the reformers made great strides in those elections earlier this year. There were very encouraging results. A year later, among other things that have happened, the Iranians decided they have had a hard time accessing capital to be able to purchase things---- The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Perdue. The Senator's time has expired.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, today I wish to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the Farm Credit System and to recognize the important contributions of the Mid Atlantic Farm Credit to Delaware's farmers and communities. When President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Farm Loan Act of 1916, he created a robust and reliable source of credit for American farmers and ranchers that would come to serve our rural communities for a century. Since its founding, the Farm Credit has supported farming operations large and small and served as a lifeline for farmers in the face of tremendous hardships--including the Great Depression, the Second World War, and the farm crisis of the 1980s. Today, the Farm Credit System supports farmers and ranchers with a wide variety of financial services, including crop insurance, appraisal service, life insurance, and the leasing of farm-related vehicles. By providing farm operations with the financial trust and support they need to get up and running or survive and thrive through difficult times, the Farm Credit System has been crucial to the ongoing success of our farmers, rural communities, local economies, and national agriculture sector. The partnership of the Farm Credit System with communities across the Nation throughout the last century has helped to build our country's vibrant and thriving agriculture sector. Across the country, the Farm Credit System continues to do a great deal of good for the farmers and farm families who need help the most, ensuring that farmers who are young, beginners, or own a small plot have the financial footing they need to embark on the difficult yet rewarding experience of starting their own farm operation. By supporting organizations such as 4-H and the Future Farmers of America, the Farm Credit System is working to make a brighter future for our farmers in the generations to come. In Delaware, farms and communities rely on the Mid Atlantic Farm Credit for those essential services. With 17 branches across Delaware and our neighboring States of Maryland, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, the Mid Atlantic Farm Credit supports over 11,000 members and today has more than $2.5 billion in outstanding trust. The folks there have made a great impact on the communities they serve, providing scholarships, sponsorships, and their own interactive educational learning system to continuously support the families and businesses they work with. The Mid Atlantic Farm Credit's dedication and commitment to their customers goes above and beyond their responsibilities in agriculture credit and funding. I am delighted and honored to recognize the Mid Atlantic Farm Credit and the Farm Credit System, which for the past 100 years has helped meet the credit and financial service needs of rural communities and allowed American agriculture to flourish in Delaware and across these United States of America.

Mr. CARPER

Mr. CARPER. Mr. President, I am pleased that it looks like we are going to be voting this afternoon on a measure that would, for the first time, give American families access to GMO information about the food they buy. As my colleague from Kansas prepares to leave the Chamber, I just want to express my thanks to him, to his staff, to Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan and her staff, and a lot of others, including members of my own staff, and the administration--especially Tom Vilsack, the Secretary of Agriculture--for the work that they and many others have done to bring us to this point in this important debate. I was with the Aspen Institute seminar visit to Tanzania about a year ago. We got into a discussion with a lot of young African leaders and scholars, and a number of Democratic and Republican House Members and Senate Members. The debate ended up going into an area I never expected it to go. We ended up talking about drought in Africa. We ended up talking about what is going on with climate change that exacerbates their problems with raising crops. We talked about how it might be possible for them to use genetically modified seeds to better endure and survive drought and to enable them to maybe raise some crops that would be healthier for their constituents. We ended up in an interesting debate on sound science with respect to sea level rise and climate change. The message from our Democrats who happened to be present at that seminar was this: Our Republican friends should be guided by sound science when it comes to climate change and sea level rise. Delaware is the lowest lying State in the country. We are especially mindful of this issue. Republicans, after we had reminded them of the need to rely on good science with respect to climate change and sea level rise, had this rejoinder for us Democrats. They said: Well, maybe if we were to agree to that, you guys--Democrats present--should agree to be guided by good science with respect to genetically modified organisms. As it turns out, close to 98 or 99 percent of scientists around the world believe that climate change is real, sea level rise is real, and we human beings are directly contributing to that. I am told that 98 or 99 percent of the scientists on the other side of the issue with respect to genetically modified organisms have concluded--again, we have had recently, just in the last several weeks, additional confirmation of this--that most of the scientists in the world who follow this think we ought to be guided by sound science with respect to genetically modified organisms, and that food is safe for us to eat. I don't know if this is the home stretch yet. I hope, as we come down on the debate on this important issue of genetically modified organisms and the safety of our food, that we will keep in mind the debate that took place almost a year ago on the other side of the world. I have said to my colleagues around here any number of times that people ask me what is one of the proudest things that I have done in my life. I have discussed this issue. I don't know if the Presiding Officer remembers it. I am proudest of all of raising two--actually, three--boys who are now all grown up and off into the world on their own. My wife and I wanted to make sure they grew up healthy, sound, and strong. They had nutritious food to eat. As Governor of Delaware and chairman of the National Governors Association, I felt we did well, and I want to make sure that kids--not just my own kids but young people all over the world--and not so young people have the benefit of eating healthy and nutritious food. I understand the calls from parents who want to know more about the food they are putting on their tables in this country and other countries as well. I believe the Stabenow-Roberts compromise for GMO labeling will help all consumers make more informed choices no matter where they live in America. Part of our job in Congress is to ensure that our Federal regulations set forth a reasonable framework for American businesses, too, so they can grow and thrive. A week ago, our country's first human labeling law took effect in one State, Vermont, but that law regulates only food being sold within that State's lines. Again, I call myself a recovering Governor, but as a former Governor, I know a patchwork approach to regulations that apply to interstate commerce is very problematic. Businesses want and need certain predictability. For food businesses, large and small, waiting for each State to produce its own labeling laws, its own rules, would create a haphazard and totally unmanageable regulatory landscape. I believe it is absolutely critical that we act on the Federal level to create labeling requirements that give consumers the information they need and deserve without creating a logistical nightmare that would stifle American businesses. The question is, Can we have both or are they mutually exclusive of one another? I think we can have both. Under the Stabenow-Roberts compromise, in the next 2 years, all foods that contain GMOs will be labeled with a QR code that sends consumers directly to the producer's Web site and outlines clear information about what is in the product that consumers are about to buy or considering buying. That means consumers in the dozens of States that haven't yet acted to require GMO labeling will have better information about their food, no matter where they buy it. Sometimes a little common sense goes a long way, and this is a commonsense solution to an issue our constituents asked us to address. Not only am I pleased by the agreement that we have reached, but I am also pleased by the way that we got here. My wife says I am an eternal optimist--maybe too optimistic some days, but I hope the bipartisan work we have done to get here, led by Senator Stabenow and Senator Roberts, reminds our constituents that they, too, can be optimistic about the ability of Congress to get things done. This comes on the heels of the bipartisan work done on the Toxic Substances Control Act, where Democrats and Republicans worked together with the administration to pass one of the best environmental laws that we have done maybe in decades in this country. Finally, I would like to address some of the critics of this compromise who assert that we didn't go far enough to protect Americans from GMOs. We talk often about the overwhelming scientific data that proves our climate is changing at a troubling rate and that humans are the primary drivers of that. On GMOs, the scientific data is also overwhelming. I mentioned earlier in my remarks that at a seminar at the African institute in Tanzania last year, both the Democrats and the Republicans exchanged ideas that both of us should be guided by sound science on GMOs or sea level rise climate change. More recently, in May of this year, the National Academy of Sciences released an independent report that determined genetically engineered crops are just as safe to eat as conventional crops. I will say it again. In May of this year, the National Academy of Sciences released an independent report that determined genetically engineered crops are just as safe to eat as conventional crops. More recently, more than 100 Nobel laureates sent a letter to Greenpeace, the United Nations, and governments around the world. What did the 100 Nobel laureates have to say? They urged all the folks that they wrote to end opposition to GMOs. I think our Federal Government should take a reasonable, principled, and science-based approach to addressing the issue of GMO labeling. That is exactly what this bipartisan bill seeks to do. I believe that is what it does. I thank our colleagues, Senators Roberts and Stabenow, and their staff for working so hard with ours and others to achieve a compromise that I think is a win for consumers, companies, and farmers. It shows the country that Congress can work together across the aisle to get things done. Mr. President, I want to change gears here for a moment if I could.