Susan Collins

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am delighted to join my friend and colleague from Alabama, Senator Jones, to urge support for the final passage of the National Defense Authorization Act, which finally-- finally--contains repeal of what is commonly called the military widow's tax. I want to commend Chairman Inhofe and Ranking Member Reed for including this important provision in the bill and for their excellent job in crafting the legislation overall. This significant bill contains numerous provisions critical to our national security and important to the great State of Maine, but right now I want to join my colleague Senator Jones in celebrating and highlighting one long-fought-for provision, and that is the repeal of the Survivor Benefit Plan and Dependency and Indemnity Compensation offset, commonly referred to as the military widow's tax. Let me explain exactly what the problem is. Many military retirees purchase, with their own money, a form of insurance called the Survivor Benefit Plan. If they subsequently die of a military-connected illness, their surviving spouse qualifies for a dependency and indemnity compensation benefit from the VA. Unfortunately, these two programs are offset dollar for dollar for our military families. This makes no sense. The retirees are paying for this extra insurance with their own money. The NDAA will finally remedy this inequity, this burdensome unfairness, and it will permit as many as 67,000 surviving spouses, including more than 260 in Maine, to begin collecting the full survivor benefits they are entitled to once it is fully phased in. The average offset to the SBP amounts to more than $11,000 per year. That is a significant amount of money that a widow or widower needs to help support their families and themselves. I would like to again recommend and thank Senator Jones for his strong advocacy and unceasing leadership, as well as the countless military spouses and veteran advocates, the veteran service organizations that helped push this effort over the finish line this year. This year, these dedicated advocates helped Senator Jones and I secure a record number of cosponsors to our bill to repeal the widow's tax--78 Senators and 383 House Members. As Senator Jones was mentioning, that is phenomenal and shows the strong bipartisan support to correct this unfairness. Often I am reminded by military commanders of the saying that you recruit the soldier, but you retain the family. We have an obligation to make sure we are taking care of our military families who have sacrificed so much. I urge all of our colleagues to support final passage of the NDAA and to finally put an end to the military widow's tax.

Ms. COLLINS

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

Ms. COLLINS. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, there is a great deal of activity going on as we seek to conclude the negotiations on so many important issues. However, I don't want us to lose sight of the expiration of the authorization of the Older Americans Act--a very important law that makes a big difference for many of our seniors all across our country-- so I rise today to introduce a reauthorization of that important law called the Modernization of the Older Americans Act. I am pleased to sponsor this reauthorization with Senator Bob Casey, who serves as the ranking member of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, of which I am the chair. Since 1965, the Older Americans Act has ensured that seniors receive the support they need to grow older independently and with dignity. The OAA programs provide nutritious food, transportation, assistance to caregivers, and in-home services for older adults. Our investments foster a sense of community for older adults and save taxpayers money by reducing hospitalizations and the need for long-term residential care. I know the Presiding Officer would agree that most seniors would prefer to remain in the comfort, security, and privacy of their own homes if they possibly can. It is the programs of the Older Americans Act that help to make that possible. As our population grows older, the demand for Older American Act services has grown as well. For example, Meals on Wheels--perhaps the best known of all the OAA programs--provided seniors with 358 million meals last year. In many States, the need is soaring. In Maine, which is the oldest State by median age in the country, there is a waiting list of 400 to 1,500 seniors, depending on the time of the year and the location within our State. This reauthorization helps to ensure that more seniors in need of nutritious food can be served. At $11 a day, a meal is far cheaper than a $2,400 average cost of a daily hospital stay. Let me give an example of what I mean by that. Using Older Americans Act dollars, the Southern Maine Agency on Aging conducted a pilot study that provided seniors discharged from hospitals with 4 weeks' worth of prepared meals. The results were astounding. Hospital readmissions were reduced by 38 percent--a 387-percent return on investment. If you scaled that nationwide, the savings would be an astronomical $51 billion annually-- just ensuring that a senior who is discharged from the hospital has 4 weeks' worth of prepared meals available to him or her. We have also included several provisions in the reauthorization to combat social isolation, which can have devastating health effects. In fact, estimates are that prolonged isolation and loneliness have an impact on health that is comparable to smoking 15 cigarettes a day. Just think of that. My State is already on the forefront of combating this epidemic of isolation. Using Older Americans Act funding, the Maine Eastern Area Agency on Aging has partnered with the University of Maine to implement Project Generations, which brings student volunteers into the homes of local seniors for visits. Our reauthorization includes an increased focus on the detrimental effects of social isolation and would provide States with more resources to develop programs like Project Generations. What a wonderful program this is. It not only gives some company that an older American might not have, but also it is great for those students to have the interaction with our seniors. It truly is a win-win program. Flexibility and innovation have always been at the heart of the Older Americans Act. What may be needed in the Presiding Officer's home State may be different from what is needed in the State of Maine. Our reauthorization would help communities continue to find creative solutions to meet the needs of our seniors. For example, the Southern Maine Agency on Aging restructured its congregate meals program by hosting meals in multigenerational settings, such as hospital and college cafeterias and small local restaurants. Since then, the program has grown by 55 percent and boosted the local economy by increasing the number of diners from rural areas by 61 percent in the first 5 years. It is much more interesting for our seniors to go out to a local restaurant for a congregate meal than in some cases going to a senior center. It may be more interesting for them to go to a college cafeteria and have that interaction with younger people. Whatever works, that is the answer. In some areas, it may work to do a college or hospital cafeteria; in another, it is a senior center; and in still others, it may be the local diner that is providing the meal. The core of the Older Americans Act is protecting the most vulnerable of our older Americans. One critical program is the Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program. This provides advocacy for residents in long-term care facilities, assisting with discharge and also protecting their rights. There was a disturbing story in one of the weekend newspapers in Maine about a nursing home that was not living up to the quality standards that we need, and that is where the ombudsman program can be absolutely critical because a lot of times, the relatives of residents are very cautious about complaining. They are fearful that their loved one may have nowhere else to go. So the ombudsman program is an important quality control program. At an Aging Committee hearing this May, the executive director of Maine's Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program, Brenda Gallant, shared the story of a 94-year-old woman whom she was able to help transition from a nursing home back to her own home after recovering from a fractured hip. Brenda connected the woman with the resources and the technologies to make the transition a smooth one and to help her live successfully back in her own home, just where she wanted to be. The Older Americans Act is a shining example of a Federal policy that works. Every dollar invested into the Older Americans Act generates $3 by helping seniors stay at home through highly effective and lower cost community-based services. I thank the dozens of stakeholders we have worked with over the past several months. We have gotten lots of input in preparing this reauthorization, including from the Leadership Council of Aging Organizations, AARP, the National Association of Area Agencies on Aging, Advancing States, the National Alliance for Caregiving, Meals on Wheels America, and the Alzheimer's Association. I ask unanimous consent to print these many letters of support in the Record.

Ms. COLLINS. I urge my colleagues to take a look at this bipartisan bill. We are overdue to reauthorize the Older Americans Act. This is our opportunity not only to reauthorize it but to make it even better and more responsive to the needs of America's older Americans. Thank you very much.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Asylum Seeker Work Authorization Act of 2019, which is similar to a bill introduced by Representative Pingree in the House. My bill would allow asylum seekers to seek employment 30 days after applying for asylum, provided their applications are not frivolous, their identities have been verified, and their names run through the Federal government's terrorist watch lists. This change would allow asylum applicants to work and contribute to society without being dependent on assistance from local governments while their claims are being adjudicated. Under current law, asylum seekers must wait 180 days after filing their applications before they are allowed to work. The 180-day requirement was adopted by the Clinton Administration in 1994 out of concern that some asylum seekers might apply for asylum primarily as a means of getting a work authorization. Clearly, this change has only transferred the burden of care for these asylum seekers onto communities across the Nation. One such community is Portland, Maine. Earlier this year, over the span of several weeks, a surge of asylum seekers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Angola arrived in Portland after crossing our southern border. These asylum seekers could have given a much-needed boost to Maine's very tight labor market--our unemployment rate is just 2.8 percent--but the lengthy work-authorization process prevents these asylum seekers from getting jobs even to support themselves. Thankfully, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Humanitarian Assistance and Security at the Southern Border Act of 2019 made funds available to assist local communities dealing with a sudden influx of asylum seekers. The City of Portland and private organizations in southern Maine received $892,586 from that Act. While I am pleased that these funds have been provided to Portland and other communities around our country, it would be a better solution if those seeking asylum were able to join the workforce and achieve self- sufficiency as quickly as possible while awaiting the outcome of their cases. It is my hope that the change proposed by my bill will lessen the burden on the budgets of communities hosting asylum seekers while allowing these individuals and their families to support themselves as they want to do, bringing needed skills to the cities and towns in which they settle. I encourage my colleagues to support it.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Asylum Seeker Work Authorization Act of 2019, which is similar to a bill introduced by Representative Pingree in the House. My bill would allow asylum seekers to seek employment 30 days after applying for asylum, provided their applications are not frivolous, their identities have been verified, and their names run through the Federal government's terrorist watch lists. This change would allow asylum applicants to work and contribute to society without being dependent on assistance from local governments while their claims are being adjudicated. Under current law, asylum seekers must wait 180 days after filing their applications before they are allowed to work. The 180-day requirement was adopted by the Clinton Administration in 1994 out of concern that some asylum seekers might apply for asylum primarily as a means of getting a work authorization. Clearly, this change has only transferred the burden of care for these asylum seekers onto communities across the Nation. One such community is Portland, Maine. Earlier this year, over the span of several weeks, a surge of asylum seekers from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Angola arrived in Portland after crossing our southern border. These asylum seekers could have given a much-needed boost to Maine's very tight labor market--our unemployment rate is just 2.8 percent--but the lengthy work-authorization process prevents these asylum seekers from getting jobs even to support themselves. Thankfully, the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations for Humanitarian Assistance and Security at the Southern Border Act of 2019 made funds available to assist local communities dealing with a sudden influx of asylum seekers. The City of Portland and private organizations in southern Maine received $892,586 from that Act. While I am pleased that these funds have been provided to Portland and other communities around our country, it would be a better solution if those seeking asylum were able to join the workforce and achieve self- sufficiency as quickly as possible while awaiting the outcome of their cases. It is my hope that the change proposed by my bill will lessen the burden on the budgets of communities hosting asylum seekers while allowing these individuals and their families to support themselves as they want to do, bringing needed skills to the cities and towns in which they settle. I encourage my colleagues to support it.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, the State motto of Georgia is ``Wisdom, Justice, and Moderation.'' Those three words aptly describe Senator Johnny Isakson's more than four decades of service to the people of Georgia and to our Nation. He has indeed served with wisdom, justice, and moderation, setting an example for all of us. I would add to that description that Johnny is extraordinarily effective and beloved on both sides of the aisle. His life of public service is characterized not only by his extraordinary integrity, intelligence, and statesmanship but also by his kindness to everyone. As was mentioned several times at our luncheon honoring Johnny today, if ever there were a poll held in the Senate to determine the most popular Senator, he would win, hands down. It has been such a pleasure and honor to serve with this remarkable leader on issues ranging from supporting research and cures for rare pediatric diseases to improving education. Johnny is always thoughtful, informed, and determined to achieve a result to make a difference. As a veteran himself, and as chairman of the Veterans' Affairs Committee, Johnny has led the way in reforming veterans' healthcare to make the VA more responsive to those who have served. What a wonderful legacy to leave, to know that you have been responsible for improving healthcare for those who have worn the uniform of our country. Johnny, as we have heard today, has always sought common ground rather than partisan advantage. I thought it was so telling, as I listened to his farewell remarks today, that Johnny did not take the time to list his own legislative accomplishments, even though they are so impressive and so numerous. Instead, he posed a challenge to us. He called on us to put aside the petty bickering that has prevented progress in America. He called upon us to work together. He reminded us that we achieve the best legislation when we sit down and negotiate with one another, when we listen with respect to each other. Those were his final words to us as a U.S. Senator. I have had so many wonderful experiences with Johnny, whether it was working on legislation or having an informal dinner, but perhaps the most memorable experience occurred this past June on a bipartisan codel that Johnny led to France to commemorate the 75th anniversary of D-day. It was a privilege to join him in honoring the American heroes who began the liberation of Europe from Nazi tyranny. Johnny, I thank you for your service but, most of all, for your friendship. You have indeed set an example of civility and bipartisanship that everyone who serves in this great institution should emulate. I wish you and your wonderful wife Dianne, whom I enjoy so much, all the best, and I want to tell you that I will always miss your friendly greeting, your big smile, and your even bigger heart. Thank you for all you have done.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to join my colleague, the senior Senator from Vermont, in introducing the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act. This bill would update and reauthorize the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs, which have provided life- saving services and housing for America's homeless youth for more than forty years. Homelessness is affecting youth in unprecedented numbers. According to a recent study by Voices of Youth Count, an estimated 4.2 million young people experience homelessness at some point each year. Some of these youth may stay away from home for a few nights, while others have been living on the streets for years. Approximately 73 percent experienced homelessness lasting more than one month. The study also found that homelessness is just as prevalent in rural communities as it is in urban communities. And sadly, these statistics likely underestimate the scale of this problem. This month, I met with teachers and specialists from Lewiston, Maine, who work directly with young people in Lewiston High School whose families experience homelessness. We talked about the pressures that student homelessness places on teachers, school administrators, and their already strapped resources, and, of course, on the children and teens themselves. Although schools often serve as a first stop for assistance, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act would reauthorize and strengthen the programs that help homeless youth meet their immediate needs, and it would help secure long-term residential services for those who cannot be reunified with their families safely. The three Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs--the Basic Center Program, the Street Outreach Program, and the Transitional Living Program--help community-based organizations reach these young people when they need support the most. These programs help runaway and homeless youth avoid the juvenile justice system, and early intervention can help them to escape victimization and trafficking. As Chairman of the Senate Housing Appropriations Subcommittee, working to end the scourge of homelessness--among both youth and adults--has been one of my top priorities. Along with Senator Jack Reed, I created a grant program to reduce youth homelessness. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, there has been a 15 percent drop in chronic homelessness since 2007. We must build on this success. Homeless youth should have the same opportunities to succeed as their peers, and this bill is an important step in that direction. In Maine, our homeless shelters are critical partners in the fight to end human trafficking. Earlier this year, I hosted U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson in Lewiston. We visited New Beginnings, where we saw firsthand how Runaway and Homeless Youth Act resources are providing essential safety nets for young people in need. Staff at New Beginnings help young people with case management, find referrals to local and State agencies, assist with housing needs and access to shelter, and connect them to local educational and employment programs. These programs produce results. In 2015, I held a hearing during which Brittany Dixon, a former homeless youth from Auburn, Maine, testified about her personal experience with New Beginnings. After becoming homeless as a teenager, New Beginnings gave her the help and support she needed to develop critical life skills and become self- sufficient. She went on to earn a college degree and obtain a full-time job as an education technician at an elementary school. Mr. President, teens run away and become homeless for many reasons. They are also at high risk of victimization, abuse, criminal activity, and even death. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that, in 2017, one in seven of nearly 25,000 youth reported to them as runaways were sex trafficking victims. In Maine, recent reports show that of the more than 10,000 reported human trafficking cases last year, 26 percent involved minors. Several hundreds of these victims identified as runaway or homeless youth. This population is at greater risk of suicide, unintended pregnancy, and substance abuse. Many are unable to continue with school and are more likely to enter our juvenile justice system. Our bill focuses on this tragic problem by supporting wrap-around services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation. Congress has passed legislation in recent years to combat these horrific crimes and support survivors, and the policies and tools included in the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act are important pieces of the Federal response to human trafficking. The data also show that a growing number of homeless youth identify as LGBT. According to the Voices of Youth Count report, LGBT young people are twice as likely to be homeless. Our bill would ensure that those seeking services through these Federal programs are not denied assistance based on their race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Mr. President, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act will support those young people who run away, are kicked out, or are disconnected from families. A caring and safe place to sleep, eat, grow, study, and develop is critical for all young people. The programs reauthorized through this legislation help extend those basic services to the most vulnerable youth in our communities. I thank Senator Leahy for his leadership on this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to join my colleague, the senior Senator from Vermont, in introducing the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act. This bill would update and reauthorize the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs, which have provided life- saving services and housing for America's homeless youth for more than forty years. Homelessness is affecting youth in unprecedented numbers. According to a recent study by Voices of Youth Count, an estimated 4.2 million young people experience homelessness at some point each year. Some of these youth may stay away from home for a few nights, while others have been living on the streets for years. Approximately 73 percent experienced homelessness lasting more than one month. The study also found that homelessness is just as prevalent in rural communities as it is in urban communities. And sadly, these statistics likely underestimate the scale of this problem. This month, I met with teachers and specialists from Lewiston, Maine, who work directly with young people in Lewiston High School whose families experience homelessness. We talked about the pressures that student homelessness places on teachers, school administrators, and their already strapped resources, and, of course, on the children and teens themselves. Although schools often serve as a first stop for assistance, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act would reauthorize and strengthen the programs that help homeless youth meet their immediate needs, and it would help secure long-term residential services for those who cannot be reunified with their families safely. The three Runaway and Homeless Youth Act programs--the Basic Center Program, the Street Outreach Program, and the Transitional Living Program--help community-based organizations reach these young people when they need support the most. These programs help runaway and homeless youth avoid the juvenile justice system, and early intervention can help them to escape victimization and trafficking. As Chairman of the Senate Housing Appropriations Subcommittee, working to end the scourge of homelessness--among both youth and adults--has been one of my top priorities. Along with Senator Jack Reed, I created a grant program to reduce youth homelessness. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, there has been a 15 percent drop in chronic homelessness since 2007. We must build on this success. Homeless youth should have the same opportunities to succeed as their peers, and this bill is an important step in that direction. In Maine, our homeless shelters are critical partners in the fight to end human trafficking. Earlier this year, I hosted U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson in Lewiston. We visited New Beginnings, where we saw firsthand how Runaway and Homeless Youth Act resources are providing essential safety nets for young people in need. Staff at New Beginnings help young people with case management, find referrals to local and State agencies, assist with housing needs and access to shelter, and connect them to local educational and employment programs. These programs produce results. In 2015, I held a hearing during which Brittany Dixon, a former homeless youth from Auburn, Maine, testified about her personal experience with New Beginnings. After becoming homeless as a teenager, New Beginnings gave her the help and support she needed to develop critical life skills and become self- sufficient. She went on to earn a college degree and obtain a full-time job as an education technician at an elementary school. Mr. President, teens run away and become homeless for many reasons. They are also at high risk of victimization, abuse, criminal activity, and even death. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children estimates that, in 2017, one in seven of nearly 25,000 youth reported to them as runaways were sex trafficking victims. In Maine, recent reports show that of the more than 10,000 reported human trafficking cases last year, 26 percent involved minors. Several hundreds of these victims identified as runaway or homeless youth. This population is at greater risk of suicide, unintended pregnancy, and substance abuse. Many are unable to continue with school and are more likely to enter our juvenile justice system. Our bill focuses on this tragic problem by supporting wrap-around services for victims of trafficking and sexual exploitation. Congress has passed legislation in recent years to combat these horrific crimes and support survivors, and the policies and tools included in the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act are important pieces of the Federal response to human trafficking. The data also show that a growing number of homeless youth identify as LGBT. According to the Voices of Youth Count report, LGBT young people are twice as likely to be homeless. Our bill would ensure that those seeking services through these Federal programs are not denied assistance based on their race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability. Mr. President, the Runaway and Homeless Youth and Trafficking Prevention Act will support those young people who run away, are kicked out, or are disconnected from families. A caring and safe place to sleep, eat, grow, study, and develop is critical for all young people. The programs reauthorized through this legislation help extend those basic services to the most vulnerable youth in our communities. I thank Senator Leahy for his leadership on this bill and urge my colleagues to support it.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with my fellow co-chair of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, which would improve access to innovative diabetes technologies. Our bill, the Improving Medicare Beneficiary Access to Innovative Diabetes Technologies Act, would create a special task force at the Department of Health and Human Services to examine and address barriers that seniors face in accessing the latest diabetes management technologies. Since I founded the bipartisan Senate Diabetes Caucus in 1997 Federal funding for diabetes research has tripled from $319 million to more than $1 billion last year, and these research dollars are yielding results. This past summer, the Aging Committee held a hearing in conjunction with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation's Children's Congress titled ``Redefining Reality: How the Special Diabetes Program is Changing the Lives of Americans with Type 1 Diabetes.'' We heard compelling testimony from Dr. Griffin P. Rodgers, Director of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, and JDRF President and CEO Dr. Aaron Kowalski on the pipeline from private- public research to commercially available products. New diabetes technologies--such as the artificial pancreas and implantable continuous glucose monitoring systems--allow diabetes patients to better manage and improve glycemic control, assess needed therapy on a timely basis, and adhere to treatment regimens. These technological advances make diabetes easier to manage. The market arrival of cutting-edge diabetes technologies, however, does not immediately benefit patients if our nation's seniors are unable to afford them. As Chairman of the Aging Committee, I have heard from numerous seniors who, when transitioning from employer-provided insurance to Medicare, were shocked to learn that the technologies they have relied upon for years to manage their diabetes are no longer covered. For example, one Mainer was unfortunately met with the reality that Medicare's coverage denial of a particular sensor he needs for his insulin pump means paying up to $8,000 out-of-pocket each year if he wants to continue with his current treatment regimen. He wrote, ``Because I am now 65, I am denied care that was available when I was 64.'' He continued, ``This approach not only puts me at risk but is quite likely not cost effective. While the sensors are expensive, the cost of ambulance calls and hospitalizations . . . is certainly more.'' I couldn't agree more. To better support adoption of these technologies, our bill would require HHS to create a special task force on coverage and payment for innovative diabetes technologies that would bring all stakeholders--from patients to device manufacturers to government officials who are making coverage decisions--to the same table. The Task Force would identify and plan for changes in Medicare coverage and payment policies to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have access to innovative diabetes technologies that are currently available, as well as those that are in the pipeline. The Task Force would also be tasked with developing strategies for supporting adoption of these technologies. This effort builds on my past advocacy with Senator Shaheen to improve the day-to-day life of individuals with diabetes by improving coverage of innovative diabetes technologies. In January 2017, in response to our bipartisan effort, CMS first approved the use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs). We also successfully urged CMS last year to support the use of smartphone apps in conjunction with CGMs. These proven, lifesaving devices are relied upon by people with diabetes to provide them with real-time measurements of their glucose levels. This information is key to preventing costly--and sometimes deadly--diabetes complications. While I am pleased our advocacy has helped spur these policy changes, I remain frustrated with the pace at which Medicare lags behind commercial insurers. Greater adoption of new diabetes technologies can literally change our country's future with regard to addressing the explosive growth in the financial and human tolls of diabetes. Diabetes accounts for an exorbitant one in three dollars in Medicare spending. It is paramount that we encourage HHS to adopt a more cost-effective approach to treating this chronic disease that affects more than 30 million Americans. The Improving Medicare Beneficiary Access to Innovative Diabetes Technologies Act encourages a proactive approach to diabetes technology coverage and payment, and I encourage my colleagues to support its adoption. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce legislation with my fellow co-chair of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Jeanne Shaheen, which would improve access to innovative diabetes technologies. Our bill, the Improving Medicare Beneficiary Access to Innovative Diabetes Technologies Act, would create a special task force at the Department of Health and Human Services to examine and address barriers that seniors face in accessing the latest diabetes management technologies. Since I founded the bipartisan Senate Diabetes Caucus in 1997 Federal funding for diabetes research has tripled from $319 million to more than $1 billion last year, and these research dollars are yielding results. This past summer, the Aging Committee held a hearing in conjunction with the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation's Children's Congress titled ``Redefining Reality: How the Special Diabetes Program is Changing the Lives of Americans with Type 1 Diabetes.'' We heard compelling testimony from Dr. Griffin P. Rodgers, Director of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, and JDRF President and CEO Dr. Aaron Kowalski on the pipeline from private- public research to commercially available products. New diabetes technologies--such as the artificial pancreas and implantable continuous glucose monitoring systems--allow diabetes patients to better manage and improve glycemic control, assess needed therapy on a timely basis, and adhere to treatment regimens. These technological advances make diabetes easier to manage. The market arrival of cutting-edge diabetes technologies, however, does not immediately benefit patients if our nation's seniors are unable to afford them. As Chairman of the Aging Committee, I have heard from numerous seniors who, when transitioning from employer-provided insurance to Medicare, were shocked to learn that the technologies they have relied upon for years to manage their diabetes are no longer covered. For example, one Mainer was unfortunately met with the reality that Medicare's coverage denial of a particular sensor he needs for his insulin pump means paying up to $8,000 out-of-pocket each year if he wants to continue with his current treatment regimen. He wrote, ``Because I am now 65, I am denied care that was available when I was 64.'' He continued, ``This approach not only puts me at risk but is quite likely not cost effective. While the sensors are expensive, the cost of ambulance calls and hospitalizations . . . is certainly more.'' I couldn't agree more. To better support adoption of these technologies, our bill would require HHS to create a special task force on coverage and payment for innovative diabetes technologies that would bring all stakeholders--from patients to device manufacturers to government officials who are making coverage decisions--to the same table. The Task Force would identify and plan for changes in Medicare coverage and payment policies to ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have access to innovative diabetes technologies that are currently available, as well as those that are in the pipeline. The Task Force would also be tasked with developing strategies for supporting adoption of these technologies. This effort builds on my past advocacy with Senator Shaheen to improve the day-to-day life of individuals with diabetes by improving coverage of innovative diabetes technologies. In January 2017, in response to our bipartisan effort, CMS first approved the use of continuous glucose monitors (CGMs). We also successfully urged CMS last year to support the use of smartphone apps in conjunction with CGMs. These proven, lifesaving devices are relied upon by people with diabetes to provide them with real-time measurements of their glucose levels. This information is key to preventing costly--and sometimes deadly--diabetes complications. While I am pleased our advocacy has helped spur these policy changes, I remain frustrated with the pace at which Medicare lags behind commercial insurers. Greater adoption of new diabetes technologies can literally change our country's future with regard to addressing the explosive growth in the financial and human tolls of diabetes. Diabetes accounts for an exorbitant one in three dollars in Medicare spending. It is paramount that we encourage HHS to adopt a more cost-effective approach to treating this chronic disease that affects more than 30 million Americans. The Improving Medicare Beneficiary Access to Innovative Diabetes Technologies Act encourages a proactive approach to diabetes technology coverage and payment, and I encourage my colleagues to support its adoption. Thank you, Mr. President.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, let me first thank and recognize Senator Grassley for his farsighted, courageous leadership on this issue of vital importance to the American people, the escalating costs of prescription drugs. Under Senator Grassley's chairmanship, the Finance Committee has held numerous hearings on drug pricing. His diligence, his persistence on this issue has produced the bipartisan Prescription Drug Price Reduction Act, a bold and effective set of proposals that I strongly endorse and look forward to seeing signed into law. This past century could well be called the age of miracle drugs, from insulin and penicillin to pharmaceuticals that treat cancer, HIV, heart disease, and so many other serious conditions, modern drugs have been proven to improve, extend, and even save lives. In our time, however, we might define a miracle drug as one that has not doubled in price since the last refill. With prescription drugs among the key factors driving up the cost of healthcare, it is essential that we approve policies that both encourage innovation and protect consumers, particularly our seniors. Demonstrating the importance of this challenge, three Senate committees--the Senate Finance Committee, ably chaired by Senator Grassley, which I mentioned earlier; the Senate HELP Committee, which is led by our friend and colleague Senator Lamar Alexander; and the Judiciary Committee, which is led by Senator Graham--have advanced bills aimed at reforming our broken drug pricing system. In addition, the Senate Aging Committee, which I chair, has held eight hearings on drug pricing since 2015 and issued a major report in 2016 on Sudden Price Spikes in Off-Patent Prescription Drugs. Our report highlighted the manipulative schemes employed by Martin Shkreli, who increased the price of a drug that was more than 63 years old--a lifesaving medication--by 5,000 percent in just 1 day. To paraphrase his words, he could drive up the price of drugs like this one on which he had not spent a dime in the research and development because he could. His price gouging caused real hardships for patients. Some of the most alarming testimony we have heard on the Aging Committee has come from patients. They describe the financial impact of their prescription drug prices, the depths they have gone to to access medications they need, and how this struggle has affected their health and their overall quality of life. They are truly choosing between paying their electric bill, buying the food they need, and filling their prescription drugs. An example is a young father from New Gloucester, ME, who discovered that the cost of a 90-day supply of insulin for his 13-year-old son who has type 1 diabetes had more than tripled to more than $900. A woman from Falmouth, ME, saw her out-of-pocket costs for the arthritis medication Enbrel that she needs soar from $10 to $3,800 per month when she transitioned from her employer-sponsored insurance to Medicare when she retired. She had no choice but to switch medications, which did not work nearly as well for her, but she simply could not afford that out-of-pocket cost. I will never forget standing in line at the pharmacy counter in Bangor, ME, where I live. The couple ahead of me received their prescription drug and the unwelcome news that their prescription copay was going to be $111. The husband turned to his wife and said ``Honey, we simply cannot afford that,'' and they walked away, leaving that needed prescription on the pharmacy counter. I asked the pharmacist: How often does this happen? His answer: Every day. The results of exorbitant increases in the price of drugs are that needed prescriptions aren't filled, doses are skipped, and pills are cut in half--all harmful to the patient's health. And why? Because the patient simply cannot afford the exorbitant costs, the skyrocketing costs of these drugs. This should not happen. We must join together to combat the exorbitant prescription costs that confront more and more Americans every day. More than half of all Americans and 90 percent of our seniors take at least one prescription drug each month. For many, access to these medicines is not only critical to their well-being, but it can literally be a matter of life and death. For children and adults with type 1 diabetes, insulin is not a luxury or something that is nice to have; insulin is essential to their ability to survive. Insulin was first isolated nearly a century ago in Canada. Yet its cost has soared in recent years. Another chairman in the Senate who has worked very hard on this issue, along with Senator Grassley, is Senator Lamar Alexander. He has made it a strong priority of the HELP Committee, on which I serve, to increase transparency and competition in the prescription drug market. I don't think there is any product that we buy in this country where there is less transparency in the price than the price of prescription drugs and where the supply chain is more rife with conflicts of interest. Last year, in response to my experience listening to this couple in Bangor, ME, I authored a bill to block pharmacy gag clauses. Under these contractual gag clauses, pharmacists were actually prohibited from volunteering to a consumer that it might well be less expensive to pay out-of-pocket rather than use their insurance. A recent study published by the Journal of the American Medicine Association found that this new law could help Americans save money in nearly one out of four prescription transactions in a pharmacy. Another bill I authored in 2017 to promote more competition from lower price but equally effective generic drugs is also showing results. To date, the FDA has granted nearly 200 application requests under the new expedited pathway established by this law, with 12 approvals. That is a much faster pace than in the past. In June, the HELP Committee reported out the Lower Healthcare Costs Act, which incorporates more than 14 measures to increase drug price competition. I am pleased to say that it includes major portions of the Biologic Patent Transparency Act that I authored with Senator Kaine, and that is cosponsored by Senators Braun, Hawley, Portman, Shaheen, Stabenow, Paul, and Murkowski. It is intended to prevent drug manufacturers from gaming the patent system. It requires earlier and greater disclosure of the web of patents held by biologic manufacturers, thus making it easier for biosimilar competitors to develop more affordable alternatives without being stymied by the filing of last-minute patents. According to former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, if all of the biosimilars that have been approved by the FDA were successfully marketed in the United States in a timely fashion, Americans would have saved more than $4.5 billion in 2017. The fact that a biosimilar version of HUMIRA--the best selling drug in the world--has been on the market in Europe for more than a year while American patients must wait until 2023 is a clear example that the biosimilar market is not working as it should. The Lower Healthcare Costs Act also includes the CREATES Act--a bill that I know Senator Grassley has been very involved in. It addresses the anti-competitive practices of companies that delay or even block access to a sufficient quantity of the brand-name drug needed to conduct the bioequivalency test required by the FDA as part of the generic drug approval process. This addresses one of the major problems identified by the Aging Committee when we looked at this issue starting in 2016, examining the explosion in prices of prescription drugs for which there is no generic equivalent. I am pleased that we are on the verge of taking action to combat and stop this unfair practice. The HELP Committee bill also requires significantly more disclosure on the costs, fees, and rebate information associated with PBM contracts; that is, prescription benefit managers. I know the Finance Committee bill does as well. As I mentioned previously, the Finance Committee passed the Prescription Drug Pricing Reduction Act--landmark legislation that would save taxpayers more than $100 billion and save seniors more than $30 billion in out-of-pocket costs for their prescriptions. I strongly support this bill because it strikes the right balance between reducing out-of-pocket costs for consumers without hindering innovation and investment in the next lifesaving medications. The Finance Committee bill also makes crucial improvements to Medicare Part D, such as protecting seniors with an out-of-pocket spending cap--another long overdue change that would ensure that patients with high-cost conditions, such as cancer, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis, can get the medications they need. Furthermore, the bill would protect taxpayers from higher than inflation increases in drug prices, while reducing government spending, premiums, and overall out-of-pocket costs. The Judiciary Committee has also advanced proposals that would empower the Federal Trade Commission to take more aggressive action on anti-competitive behaviors. These are three worthwhile pieces of legislation that should be brought to the Senate floor. The work of the Finance Committee, the HELP Committee, and the Judiciary Committee is a tremendous breakthrough that would make such a difference to the American people. As we continue to find further consensus and a path forward on each of these bipartisan bills, I hope we can also look for additional improvements. For example, as cochairs of the Senate Diabetes Caucus, Senator Shaheen and I, along with Senators Cramer and Carper, have introduced legislation to address flaws in the system that have allowed pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers to implement what are truly unscrupulous price increases on lifesaving insulin. I also support a measure introduced by Senators Klobuchar and Grassley to prohibit brand-name drug companies from compensating generic drug companies to delay the entry of a less costly but equally effective generic into the market. That is referred to as ``pay for delay.'' I am amazed that it is not already illegal under our anti-trust laws. This bill would make it clear that this tactic is no longer permitted. Congress has a tremendous opportunity to deliver a decisive victory in both lowering healthcare costs and improving healthcare for the people in my State of Maine and throughout America. If we want new medicines to reach consumers who need them, the companies that invest in research and take the risks necessary must see a fair return on their investment, but at the same time, we can no longer allow the price manipulation and the market distortions to continue at the expense of the most vulnerable Americans and their families and ultimately at the expense of every American taxpayer. We can act to make a real difference in the lives of Americans whose health depends on affordable prescription drugs. The required policy solutions will not come in the form of a miracle but through hard work and continued bipartisan cooperation. Let us come together. I urge all of my colleagues to join in supporting the measures we have worked so hard on and that the HELP Committee, the Finance Committee, and the Judiciary Committee have all reported, on a bipartisan basis, recognizing the hardships imposed on the American people. Let us bring these bills to the Senate floor expeditiously. I yield the floor.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the vote scheduled for 1:45 p.m. start at this time.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to ensure that the treatment of the State and Local Property Tax deduction, also known as the ``SALT deduction,'' does not unfairly penalize married taxpayers. The SALT Deduction Fairness Act would eliminate the marriage penalty imposed by the current $10,000 cap on SALT by doubling this amount for married filers. The SALT deduction has been in the tax code since 1913 when the income tax was first established and is intended to prevent double taxation. The original Senate tax reform bill in 2017 would have eliminated the deduction altogether. During the consideration of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, I fought to keep the SALT deduction in the Federal tax code because of the incredible tax burden a complete elimination of this deduction would have imposed on American taxpayers, many of whom pay high taxes on everything from their incomes to their vehicles. My amendment, which was adopted by the Senate, retained the SALT deduction for up to $10,000 in State and local taxes such as State income taxes, local property taxes, and vehicle excise taxes. This was especially important to families living in high-tax states like Maine, which not only has one of our Nation's highest tax burdens, but also a relatively low per household income--approximately $6,300 below the U.S average. Maintaining the deduction provided important tax relief for those hard-working Mainers who continued to itemize. But a basic unfairness still exists in the tax code that penalizes married couples. Currently, individual taxpayers can deduct up to $10,000 in State and local taxes. If two people marry, however, the deduction remains at $10,000. As a result, a couple could be financially better off not getting married when it comes to the current SALT deduction. This legislation very simply would remove the marriage penalty by doubling the SALT deduction from $10,000 to $20,000 for joint filers. This straightforward change would remove a bias against marriage from the tax code. And, most important, it would help make the dream of home ownership a reality for married couples. The National Association of Realtors recently wrote to me about the importance of eliminating this marriage penalty, stating, ``Homeownership has long been a vital part of the American Dream. Research shows that an overwhelming majority of current renters aspire to own a home, and we know that our Nation's faith in homeownership has persisted through the Great Recession. For well over a century, our tax system has helped American families in reaching this Dream.'' Mr. President, we should not unfairly penalize American taxpayers for being married. This common sense legislation will fix this undue burden who are penalized for their filing status.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise to introduce a bill to ensure that the treatment of the State and Local Property Tax deduction, also known as the ``SALT deduction,'' does not unfairly penalize married taxpayers. The SALT Deduction Fairness Act would eliminate the marriage penalty imposed by the current $10,000 cap on SALT by doubling this amount for married filers. The SALT deduction has been in the tax code since 1913 when the income tax was first established and is intended to prevent double taxation. The original Senate tax reform bill in 2017 would have eliminated the deduction altogether. During the consideration of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, I fought to keep the SALT deduction in the Federal tax code because of the incredible tax burden a complete elimination of this deduction would have imposed on American taxpayers, many of whom pay high taxes on everything from their incomes to their vehicles. My amendment, which was adopted by the Senate, retained the SALT deduction for up to $10,000 in State and local taxes such as State income taxes, local property taxes, and vehicle excise taxes. This was especially important to families living in high-tax states like Maine, which not only has one of our Nation's highest tax burdens, but also a relatively low per household income--approximately $6,300 below the U.S average. Maintaining the deduction provided important tax relief for those hard-working Mainers who continued to itemize. But a basic unfairness still exists in the tax code that penalizes married couples. Currently, individual taxpayers can deduct up to $10,000 in State and local taxes. If two people marry, however, the deduction remains at $10,000. As a result, a couple could be financially better off not getting married when it comes to the current SALT deduction. This legislation very simply would remove the marriage penalty by doubling the SALT deduction from $10,000 to $20,000 for joint filers. This straightforward change would remove a bias against marriage from the tax code. And, most important, it would help make the dream of home ownership a reality for married couples. The National Association of Realtors recently wrote to me about the importance of eliminating this marriage penalty, stating, ``Homeownership has long been a vital part of the American Dream. Research shows that an overwhelming majority of current renters aspire to own a home, and we know that our Nation's faith in homeownership has persisted through the Great Recession. For well over a century, our tax system has helped American families in reaching this Dream.'' Mr. President, we should not unfairly penalize American taxpayers for being married. This common sense legislation will fix this undue burden who are penalized for their filing status.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, to introduce the Girls Leadership, Engagement, and Advocacy in Development, or Girls LEAD, Act. Our legislation would support and expand civic engagement and political leadership of adolescent girls around the world. Despite comprising over 50 percent of the world's population, women are underrepresented at all levels of public sector decision-making. Recently, Congress has taken steps to combat this issue with new laws, including the Women, Peace, and Security Act and the Women's Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act. The Girls LEAD Act will complement these efforts by specifically addressing the civic involvement and leadership of adolescent girls, an area where there is currently a gap in U.S. foreign assistance programing. The United States can help foster a pipeline of adolescent girls who will aspire to assume leadership roles in their communities. Adolescence is a pivotal time in a girl's life that brings about significant physical, emotional, and social changes. Yet, according to UNESCO, 132 million adolescent girls between the age of 6 and 17 are not enrolled in school. As reported by UNICEF, more than 150 million girls will marry as children by 2030. It is vitally important that girls and young women in childhood are empowered, and that we invest in their leadership potential early so that they can develop pathways to positions of political leadership and civic engagement. The Girls LEAD Act would combat these terrible statistics by making it the policy of the United States to promote and ensure that all adolescents are able to fully participate in society, and are specifically able to exercise their civil and political rights in their communities and countries. We know that women's political participation results in tangible change for democracies and the United States must continue to be a leader in this arena. Specifically, our legislation would direct the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development to implement a strategy that strengthens adolescent girls' participation in democracy and governance. This strategy would include U.S. foreign assistance programs that focus on increasing adolescent girls' civic and political knowledge, advocacy, leadership, and research skills, while addressing the common barriers that can preclude their participation. The bill would require that this strategy be developed in consultation with civil society, including the participation of adolescent girls. As a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, for years I have pushed to set aside resources in the annual State Department funding bill for women's leadership and political participation programs, and I have seen first-hand the positive effects of greater political involvement on the part of women here in the United States. I believe our Nation can and must continue its leadership role in empowering women and girls worldwide, and turning more attention to the civic engagement of adolescent girls will help advance that mission. I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Cardin in supporting the Girls LEAD Act, which will help to improve and create a more secure world now and in the future.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, today I am pleased to be joined by my friend and colleague from Maryland, Senator Cardin, to introduce the Girls Leadership, Engagement, and Advocacy in Development, or Girls LEAD, Act. Our legislation would support and expand civic engagement and political leadership of adolescent girls around the world. Despite comprising over 50 percent of the world's population, women are underrepresented at all levels of public sector decision-making. Recently, Congress has taken steps to combat this issue with new laws, including the Women, Peace, and Security Act and the Women's Entrepreneurship and Economic Empowerment Act. The Girls LEAD Act will complement these efforts by specifically addressing the civic involvement and leadership of adolescent girls, an area where there is currently a gap in U.S. foreign assistance programing. The United States can help foster a pipeline of adolescent girls who will aspire to assume leadership roles in their communities. Adolescence is a pivotal time in a girl's life that brings about significant physical, emotional, and social changes. Yet, according to UNESCO, 132 million adolescent girls between the age of 6 and 17 are not enrolled in school. As reported by UNICEF, more than 150 million girls will marry as children by 2030. It is vitally important that girls and young women in childhood are empowered, and that we invest in their leadership potential early so that they can develop pathways to positions of political leadership and civic engagement. The Girls LEAD Act would combat these terrible statistics by making it the policy of the United States to promote and ensure that all adolescents are able to fully participate in society, and are specifically able to exercise their civil and political rights in their communities and countries. We know that women's political participation results in tangible change for democracies and the United States must continue to be a leader in this arena. Specifically, our legislation would direct the Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development to implement a strategy that strengthens adolescent girls' participation in democracy and governance. This strategy would include U.S. foreign assistance programs that focus on increasing adolescent girls' civic and political knowledge, advocacy, leadership, and research skills, while addressing the common barriers that can preclude their participation. The bill would require that this strategy be developed in consultation with civil society, including the participation of adolescent girls. As a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, for years I have pushed to set aside resources in the annual State Department funding bill for women's leadership and political participation programs, and I have seen first-hand the positive effects of greater political involvement on the part of women here in the United States. I believe our Nation can and must continue its leadership role in empowering women and girls worldwide, and turning more attention to the civic engagement of adolescent girls will help advance that mission. I urge my colleagues to join me and Senator Cardin in supporting the Girls LEAD Act, which will help to improve and create a more secure world now and in the future.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded and I be permitted to speak as in morning business.

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, the passing of former Senator Kay Hagan was sad news to all of us who were privileged to serve with her and counted her as a friend. In her final address to the Senate 5 years ago, Senator Kay Hagan reminded us of our obligation to work together on behalf of the American people with these words: ``To whom much is given, much is expected.'' Kay Hagan was given much. She had the energy, intelligence, dedication, and compassion, and she gave back to her home State over many years of public service. As a person of deep faith, she fully understood the New Testament ``Parable of the Talents.'' Its message that gifts must be put to use in service of others guided her life. In this time of sorrow, I offer my deep condolences to Kay's family. I hope that they will find comfort in knowing that Kay left an inspiring legacy. She left the world a better place for her service. The loss felt by the people of North Carolina and by her family, in particular, is felt by people throughout America. I was privileged to serve with Kay for 6 years. We served together on the Senate Armed Services Committee, and I always appreciated her focus on solutions rather than partisan advantage. She was passionate about many issues, particularly those affecting children. In 2011, Kay and I introduced legislation to commemorate the work at the March of Dimes by minting a coin to celebrate the 75th anniversary of this organization and directing the proceeds to the March of Dimes Prematurity Campaign. As the author of the Newborn Screening Saves Lives Reauthorization Act, Kay reaffirmed her belief that we in Congress must always remember whom we are advocating for. When Kay took office in 2009, she was very proud to be one of 17 Senators who were female. It is significant that her very first speech on the Senate floor that January was in support of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act to strengthen protections for women against wage discrimination. It was so refreshing to hear her assert that neither party had a monopoly on good ideas. Throughout her time in this Chamber, she proved the truth of that maxim. In the ``Parable of the Talents,'' the master leaves on a journey and entrusts a servant with a portion of his treasure. Upon his return, the master is delighted to find that his wealth has been wisely invested and multiplied. Kay Hagan was entrusted with the great treasure of principles, determination, and spirit. She invested that treasure wisely and multiplied its benefits for all. Like the master in the Parable, to Kay Hagan we say: ``Well done, good and faithful servant.'' May God bless her and her family and may we all keep her memory in our hearts. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

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

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I am about to offer the managers' package for the four appropriations bills currently before us: Commerce, Justice, Science, Agriculture, Interior and the Transportation, Housing, and Urban Development bill. This managers' package includes 45 amendments, many of which--indeed, most of which--have been offered on a bipartisan basis. They have been cleared by both sides. The Appropriations Committee has worked very hard with Members to accommodate as many amendments as possible. For the T-HUD appropriations bill, for example, both Senator Jack Reed and I worked to review, approve, and clear managers' amendments in our part of the bill. This package reflects a positive step forward as we move toward final passage of this appropriations bill. It is imperative that we move these bills and go to conference with the House. Therefore, I urge all Members to support this managers' package. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order to offer the following amendments: Lee amendment No. 1209 and Jones amendment No. 1141, as modified. I further ask unanimous consent that no second- degree amendments be in order to these amendments prior to the votes, and that at 11:30 a.m. on Thursday, October 31, the Senate vote in relation to these amendments in the order listed. Finally, I ask unanimous consent that upon resumption of the bill on Thursday, October 31, the following amendments be called up and agreed to en bloc, and the motions to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table: Tester amendment No. 953; Smith amendment No. 1023; Hirono amendment No. 1037; Brown amendment No. 1088, as modified; Baldwin amendment No. 1099; Whitehouse amendment No. 1121; Thune amendment No. 1133; Jones amendment No. 1143; Smith amendment No. 1149; Rosen

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that notwithstanding rule XXII, following the disposition of the Jones amendment, the postcloture time on amendment No. 948 expire, the pending McConnell amendment be withdrawn, and amendment No. 948, as amended, be agreed to; further, that the cloture motion on H.R. 3055 be withdrawn, the bill be read a third time, and there be 2 minutes of debate equally divided; and that following the use or yielding back of that time, the Senate vote on passage of the bill, as amended, with a 60-affirmative-vote threshold required for passage. Finally, I ask that the cloture vote on the motion to proceed to H.R. 2740 occur at 1:45 p.m. on Thursday.

Ms. COLLINS

Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate be in a period of morning business, with Senators permitted to speak therein for up to 10 minutes each.