John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 23, 2015, at 10 a.m., in room SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Update on the Recalls of Defective Takata Air Bags and NHTSA's Vehicle Safety Efforts.''

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Multilateral International Development, Multilateral Institutions, and International Economic, Energy and Environmental Policy be authorized to meet during the sessions of the Senate on June 23, 2015, at 2:45 p.m. to conduct a hearing entitled ``American Energy Exports: Opportunities for U.S. Allies and U.S. National Security.''

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety of the Committee on Environment and Public Works be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 23, 2015, at 1 p.m. in room SD-406 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled, ``The Impacts of EPA's proposed Carbon Regulations on Energy Costs for American Businesses, Rural Communities and Families, and a legislative hearing on S. 1324.''

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 23, 2015, at 10 a.m., to conduct a joint hearing with the Committee on the Budget entitled ``Accounting for the True Cost of Regulation: Exploring the Possibility of a Regulatory Budget.''

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 23, 2015, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Nominations.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Missouri (Mr. Blunt), the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Coats), the Senator from Tennessee (Mr. Corker), the Senator from Idaho (Mr. Crapo), the Senator from Texas (Mr. Cruz), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Hoeven), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. Kirk), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), the Senator from Alaska (Ms. Murkowski), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Rounds), the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott), the Senator from South Dakota (Mr. Thune), and the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Toomey). Further, if present and voting, the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. Hoeven) would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I come to the floor to speak for a few minutes about the disaster that is known as ObamaCare and specifically the Supreme Court's upcoming decision in King v. Burwell, which we anticipate will be handed down later this week or perhaps as late as Monday. This case will decide whether the IRS can rewrite the law, and it actually challenges the legality of the subsidies to health care policies affecting people in up to 37 States. If the Court rules against the IRS, that would be the third strike against ObamaCare in the Supreme Court. What more evidence would we possibly need of this administration's routine overreach of its authority under the Constitution? Not surprisingly, the President once again has failed to accept responsibility for this flawed law that bears his name, and he has suggested that Congress could simply fix the problem with a one- sentence provision. In other words, even though President Obama and congressional Democrats jammed this partisan monstrosity through all by themselves in 2010, somehow, after three strikes in the U.S. Supreme Court, it is now our responsibility to clean up the mess. But what is wrong with ObamaCare far exceeds the issue at hand in King v. Burwell. I hear of the disastrous effects of ObamaCare every day from folks back home in Texas. They know, as do I, that a one- sentence provision won't fix a 2,700-page legislative disaster, unless that sentence were to repeal ObamaCare in its entirety. If somehow this administration and congressional Democrats could be sued for misleading consumers under the usual legal standards, the case brought by millions of Americans against ObamaCare would be a slam dunk. The President claimed his law would help everyone--miraculously decreasing costs, increasing access, and reducing the deficit--when, in fact, time after time after time, the opposite has been shown to be the case. What we have seen instead has been great damage to the health care system in this country, leaving many Americans with their health care disrupted, their work hours cut, and higher costs for their health coverage. Although proponents of the law, including the President and Democratic Members of Congress, claimed ObamaCare would reduce the financial burden of health care for American families, this has not been the case. In fact, one study found that ObamaCare actually increased individual market premiums by an average of almost 50 percent between 2013 and 2014. So rather than make health care more affordable, what ObamaCare did is to make it less affordable and more expensive by increasing individual market premiums by an average of almost 50 percent. Recently, the administration released rate filings showing that insurers have requested double-digit premium increases for nearly 700 plans next year. So double-digit increases have been requested. We can all remember the President's repeated promises that under ObamaCare those who wanted to keep their plans would be able to do so. In fact, the Associated Press has documented that more than 4.7 million Americans had insurance plans they liked that were canceled by ObamaCare. And of course, just last week President Obama himself called the Web site platform for his trademark legislation--healthcare.gov--``a well- documented disaster.'' The fact that this failed law has hurt patients is bad enough, but the truth is it is also hurting the economy and hurting jobs. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that ObamaCare is forcing employers to cut jobs and has projected that as many as 2 million jobs could be lost by 2017. If the Court rules for King, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, millions more Americans could find their health care coverage temporarily disrupted--just one more painful consequence of this reckless piece of legislation. Clearly, ObamaCare was not the silver bullet for our health care system or our economy. Instead, what we know today is that ObamaCare really just amounted to a trail of broken promises. But you will never find the President or those who foisted this flawed legislation upon the American people taking responsibility for it. Rather, as I said earlier, somehow they think it is for somebody else to clean up their mess. I continue to believe the American people would be well served to see this entire law scrapped in favor of real patient-centered reforms that lower costs and increase access to care. I thought that was what health care reform was supposed to be about--lowering cost and improving access to care. But ObamaCare did the opposite. I am here to say that while Republicans did not create this mess, we are ready, willing, and able to do our best to protect the American people from any more harm caused by the President's flawed law. That is why we have been working hard for the last several months to provide the American people with a much needed off-ramp from ObamaCare, should the Court rule against the administration once again. But we really need to hit the reset button and start over again. First and foremost, we are prepared to help the more than 6 million Americans, including nearly 1 million people in my home State of Texas, whose costs would suddenly skyrocket as yet another consequence of this disastrous piece of legislation. In doing so, we will empower the States to opt out of ObamaCare, allowing them the flexibility to more effectively lower costs and increase choices. We will not promote command-and-control solutions emanating from here in Washington, under the philosophy that Washington knows best. We will promote market-based options without the threat of harmful, onerous, expensive mandates. Repealing these mandates will help the American people finally get the coverage they need at a price they can afford. In short, we will do everything in our power to protect the people affected by this flawed piece of legislation, but we will not protect the President's failed law. It is time to scrap it and do better. It is my hope, if the Court rules against the administration once again, that Congress will find it within themselves to work together to protect the almost 1 million Texans and millions more Americans from yet another painful consequence of ObamaCare. I know Republicans stand ready to protect the American people from this failed law while providing a path forward for better health care for our country. That health care includes more freedom, more flexibility, and more choices. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, the Senate is not in a quorum call; is that correct?

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Indiana (Mr. Coats), the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott).

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee), and the Senator from South Carolina (Mr. Scott).

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I congratulate the chairman and ranking member of the Armed Services Committee for this heroic effort, doing, as the chairman said, the most important business we can do as part of the Federal Government; that is, keeping America safe and making sure we keep our commitments to those who volunteer to serve, many in harm's way, to protect our liberties. In a couple hours, we will vote to pass the Defense authorization bill, and that is an important bipartisan accomplishment. It is just another step in a new Congress which has acted in a bipartisan way to deal with a number of challenges confronting the country. I am more optimistic today than I have been in a long time that the Senate is finally back to work and Congress is doing what the American people who elected us sent us here to do, and that is to do their work and to represent them to the best of our ability, which is one reason why I have come to the floor to express some of my concerns at what we have heard from the Democratic leadership about their intentions with regard to the next piece of legislation we turn to--the Defense appropriations bill. As we all know, the Democratic leader and some Democrats in his caucus have threatened not to move forward on this Defense appropriations bill. I want to talk about the consequences in the real world of holding up this Defense appropriations bill and particularly how it will affect my home State of Texas. Obviously, the Defense appropriations bill will provide the military with resources necessary to meet the significant demands they face and we face as a country around the world but most basically to defend our country and to keep us safe. This bill provides for training and readiness funds and makes sure our troops are well prepared to carry out any mission that might be assigned to them anywhere in the world. The appropriations bill provides the money for critical modernization of our aircraft, ships, ground vehicles, and other equipment so that our troops can fight with the best cutting-edge weapons systems at our disposal so they can accomplish their objective. Perhaps most importantly, this legislation helps make sure our troops and military families enjoy a good quality of life. We have an all- volunteer military, and the family members of those who wear the uniform serve no less than the ones who wear the uniform. So making sure the families of our military members enjoy a good quality of life is very important. We will never be able to repay our troops for all they have given us, but we can at least provide appropriate benefits to their families to help make their lives a little easier. This bill also includes funding to actually pay our troops their salary and provides them a modest, well-deserved raise. Like the Presiding Officer, I am proud of those who serve our Nation and our military and our home States. Nearly 120,000 Texans are serving on Active Duty today, as well as more than 55,000 Guardsmen and Reservists. We have 15 major military installations in Texas, which have more than 168,000 Active and Reserve component servicemembers assigned to them. These world-class bases, posts, air stations, and depots are critical facilities where our troops train for combat and learn the skills they need in order to accomplish their mission and where we maintain essential military equipment. So when I consider the possibility that for a cynical political reason some might decide to block this appropriations bill that actually literally pays the salary of the troops, I am very disappointed. I hope they will reconsider. These resources we will vote on--starting this afternoon, we will start that process--go to places such as Fort Bliss and Fort Hood, TX, homes to the finest heavy ground combat units in the world. Fort Bliss in El Paso sits on more than 1 million acres. It is an irreplaceable training range for our troops, and it is the Army's second largest installation by size. It is the proud home of the Army's famed 1st Armored Division. And Fort Hood, which serves as home to both III Corps and the storied 1st Cavalry Division, has more Army brigades than any Army installation in the country. When I think about Members of the Senate actually considering the possibility of blocking pay for our troops and support for our military, I also think about bases such as Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene, TX. This key base is home to units that have deployed time and time again in recent years in support of combat missions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, including the 317th Airlift Group. Dyess is also home to the 7th Bomb Wing, one of only two B-1 strategic bomber wings in the U.S. Air Force. The 7th has been the tip of the spear in the fight against ISIL, conducting airstrikes against the terrorist army in Iraq and in Syria. We are also proud in my State to boast the Corpus Christi Army Depot, the largest rotary wing repair facility in the world. When our Army helicopters come back from battle, many of them are pretty beat up and barely operable. They typically make a pit stop in Corpus Christi to make sure our battle-tested warfighting equipment is ready for the next challenge. Between our naval air stations at Corpus Christi and Kingsville, Texas provides the proving ground and crucible for more than 1,000 new Navy and Marine aviators each year. Shortly after they leave Texas, they find themselves in skies over Iraq or Syria or landing in rough seas, in near-zero visibility, on aircraft carriers bordering hostile shores around the globe. But these bases represent only a fraction of the U.S. military presence in Texas. All of our military installations are integral to making sure our military is prepared, trained, healthy, and ready for action. The Defense appropriations bill that some have threatened to filibuster in order to extract a negotiation about more government spending makes sure that the servicemembers assigned to those bases and countless others across our Nation have what they need. We ask a lot of our men and women in uniform. The very least we can do is pass legislation that provides for the training and equipment they need in order to accomplish their mission and to ensure them the quality of life they and their families have so richly earned. I find it very troubling and, indeed, dumbfounding that some of our colleagues from across the aisle who have already voted overwhelmingly to move forward on the Defense authorization bill would today talk about blocking the necessary appropriations bill to actually carry out that policy that we will pass shortly in the Defense authorization bill. I believe that to be consistent after such a big vote, as I anticipate we will have on the Defense authorization bill, any notion of blocking the appropriations bill that would actually pay for those policies to be carried out should simply evaporate. So I hope our colleagues across the aisle--many of whom have said they actually support the policies behind this legislation--will defy their party's leadership and their misguided advice about blocking this legislation in order to extract a negotiation on more government spending and will decide instead to move this legislation forward. The brave men and women in Texas and throughout the country who are fighting on our behalf deserve nothing less. And I hope our colleagues who are even considering for a moment the idea of blocking the funding that would actually help pay our troops will reconsider and cast their vote in support of the troops and not cast their vote in favor of some cynical political strategy which will undermine our support for our troops. Madam President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, with the bill managers' permission, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I know the bill managers are working on a final agreement, and I would defer to them at this point.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, typically I would come to the floor and talk about the business at hand before the Senate, but I think that in light of the horrific news we all woke up to this morning, I wish to touch briefly on the tragic events that unfolded overnight in Charleston, SC. Although we don't know all the facts, by all appearances, the gunman targeted worshippers while they were in church in a way that certainly shocks all of our conscience and sensibilities. I think it is the sort of act that we all find hard to understand, and it is truly unspeakable. Law enforcement is doing what it does best, which is conducting its investigation, including looking for the suspect. I think it is appropriate that we all offer our thoughts and perhaps say a private prayer for all of those who were affected by this senseless and horrific tragedy. Obviously, the Senate has some important business to do, and I will come back later and talk more specifically about the Defense authorization bill and the next business we have in line, which is to make sure that our troops get paid and that we provide them the resources they so justly deserve and are entitled to. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Utah (Mr. Lee) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, after the Senate concludes its work on the Defense authorization bill tomorrow--a very important part of our responsibility--we will then move to consider the Defense Appropriations Act. This actually is the legislation that will pay the bills for the Department of Defense and make sure our men and women in uniform get the resources they need in order to do their job, not to mention their pay, which is why it is so disturbing to see the leadership of our minority in the Senate announce in the papers here in Washington that they are going to begin what they call a filibuster summer. In other words, they are going to use the power they have as the minority to block important funding bills, beginning with the bill that pays for our national security, in what can only be called a cheap political stunt. Why they have decided to do that on this important Defense appropriations bill is, frankly, beyond me. I think I understand what their general point is, which is they don't think the Federal Government spends enough money, and so they want to spend more money, and they have no concern whatsoever for the fact that under this administration, we have raised the national debt by trillions of dollars, making sure that my generation will not end up having to pay that money back, but the next generation will unless we meet our responsibilities. So for them to pull this kind of political stunt and say ``You know what, we are not spending enough money, we are not incurring enough debt, and so we are going to force a filibuster on the Defense appropriations bill'' in order to extort more spending, more debt, more irresponsibility--the bill our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are pledging to filibuster is not controversial in itself because it would, as I said, provide for our military and would help our troops maintain their status as the greatest military in the world. It also includes simple initiatives that make a lot of sense and serve our troops well, such as giving the men and women who wear the uniform a modest pay raise. Yet the Democratic leader still plans to block this legislation and stymie this Chamber's efforts to fund our troops. We saw a little glimpse of this last week when Senate Democrats, with the exception of seven, blocked us moving an amendment to deal with cyber security. We saw that their timing could not have been worse because, of course, then it was announced that millions of records at the Office of Personnel Management had been hacked by the Chinese Government and some of the most sensitive security clearance background records were now in their hands--a dramatic act of counterintelligence and espionage. Then, when we offered an amendment to the Defense authorization bill that would deal with cyber security, would allow more information sharing, would allow lawsuit protection for those who shared information in order to protect the privacy and the information of American citizens, it was blocked by all but seven Democrats on the other side. So while I have been by and large encouraged by this new Congress and what we have been able to accomplish together in a bipartisan way, I think there are some very troubling signs on the horizon, starting with this ill-considered idea of filibuster summer, throwing a temper tantrum until you can get more money that we don't have to spend on your pet projects. But I think their decision to hold Defense appropriations bill hostage is just inexcusable. This is the essential funding for our military, for national security. I should point out, as my colleagues across the aisle use this bill as leverage to spend more taxpayer dollars on things like the IRS, not long ago they vocally opposed the obstructionist tactics they are now employing. Here are the words of the Democratic leader, Senator Harry Reid, in 2013. He said: ``It's time to get back to setting fiscal policy through the regular order . . . rather than through hostage taking.'' I agreed with his comments then, and I wish he would act consistently with those words today. The American people aren't served well by these kinds of manufactured crises and threats to cut off funding for our troops. And that is why the new Republican Senate, under Majority Leader McConnell, has prioritized and restored the kind of regular order that Senator Reid talked about in 2013. Finally, the Congress and the Senate are actually getting back to work on a bipartisan basis. As I have said, we have had some signs of progress. I know Majority Leader McConnell likes to quote Woody Hayes from Ohio State when he talks about the nature of the progress we have made. He said: ``Three yards and a cloud of dust.'' I like to think of it more as a baseball analogy of singles and an occasional double. But you get the basic point. We are actually beginning to make some progress, and that is why I find so troubling these signs of filibuster summer and this announcement by our Democratic friends. We have done our best after this last election, after the American people entrusted us with the majority of the House and the Senate, to deliver on our promises. We have held more rollcall votes on amendments in the past 5 months than the minority leader, as the Democratic leader, allowed in the entire year when they were under control--more rollcall votes on amendments in the last 5 months than Democrats allowed in an entire year when they were in control. The truth is that our Democratic colleagues, I think, like it better, too, because not only was the minority--Republicans--shut out when Senator Reid was majority leader, he shut out Members of his own party, the majority party. Now, how you explain that back home, I am not too clear. But it is not only Senator Reid who has made this commitment to restoring regular order and eschewing this idea of hostage taking, which now they are talking about doing. Here are the comments of one other member of their Senate leadership, the Senator from Washington, Ms. Murray. In 2013, she said the American people had no patience for ``politicians holding the economy and the Federal Government hostage to extract concessions or score political points.'' I agree with her, and I agreed with Senator Reid in 2013, but these are the exact same Democratic leaders who are now today threatening the same sort of hostage taking they condemned in 2013. Well, I like to point out that the legislation we are considering, the Defense appropriations bill, is not a partisan bill. In fact, it was voted out of committee last week by a vote of 27 to 3. This is not a partisan bill, so why they should decide to hold this hostage is beyond me. All but three Democrats supported the defense spending measure in committee last week. But, unfortunately--and defying logic--some Democrats have publicly admitted to supporting the text of the bill while vowing to do everything they could to keep it from advancing on the floor of the Senate. Just one example is the junior Senator from Connecticut, who hailed the bill's passage--this is the Defense appropriations bill in committee--through the committee as a ``victory for Connecticut''--I am sure there was a press release to go along with that back home--only to go on and say he would go along with the ill-fated strategy to vote no to actually block the bill from being considered on the floor. The American people are very smart, and they can identify hypocrisy when they see it. When a Senator says, ``I am going to vote for the bill in committee, but I am going to vote against it on the floor because that is what my leadership tells me I have to do in order to extract more spending and impose more debt on the American people in future generations,'' the American people get it once it is pointed out to them. So this is all about gamesmanship. This is not about responsible legislating, and it is not why the American people sent us here. I can only hope, being the optimist that I am, that our colleagues on the other side will reconsider this stated strategy of filibuster summer. What a mistake that is. What an unsustainable position when they have to go home over the Fourth of July and tell the veterans, tell the Active-Duty military in their State: Yes, I voted to kill the bill that would pay your salary and provide you the tools you need in order to succeed in your commitment to keeping America safe. I just don't know how you sustain that position. So I would encourage our colleagues from across the aisle to remember that filibuster summer is a bad idea and that it is not good for the American people. It irresponsibly signals to our troops that some Members of the Senate are not fully behind them. So let's continue to working productively. We have done it on hard pieces of legislation, most recently on the trade legislation we passed out of the Senate with a strong bipartisan vote. Let's continue to work together productively in a way that serves the American people and not resort to the sort of political maneuvers that I don't think reflect well on us and on the Senate as an institution but, more fundamentally, undermine the men and women who wear the uniform of the U.S. military. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 16, 2015, at 10 a.m., in room SD-366 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on June 16, 2015, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Federal Real Property Reform: How Cutting Red Tape and Better Management Could Achieve Billions in Savings.''

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).

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

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 10 minutes.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Florida (Mr. Rubio).