John Cornyn

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, yesterday the Senate Judiciary Committee held a very important hearing on how we can bring down prescription drug prices for American families without sacrificing the innovation that has made our country a world leader in new drug development. That is quite a challenging balance to strike. As I travel my State, I have heard from my constituents about their increasing inability to get their hands on the medications they need at a price they can afford--not because no treatment exists, not because they don't have insurance, and not even because it is a pricey, brandnew drug. Patients can't afford their prescriptions because the prices are going up at an alarming rate, with little evidence or justification to back some of the price hikes. I heard from one Texas pharmacist who was shocked by the dramatic price increase of drugs that had been available for years. She told me about one popular antibiotic that once cost $8 for 1,000 tabs. She said now it costs more than $1,200 for the same amount--$8 to $1,200. What is the justification for that? Well, we are left to wonder and speculate, and that is part of the reason for the investigation being undertaken now by the Finance Committee and other Senate committees. These costs have been so overwhelming that some of my constituents will cross the border to go to Mexico to try to buy prescription drugs there. A man from Rockport, TX, told me one of his prescriptions cost about $1,000 each month in the United States. But if he drives a few hours to Mexico, he can get what he thinks is that same medication from what he thinks is the same manufacturer for about $160--$1,000 versus $160. Of course, what we don't know is whether it is a counterfeit, whether it is not only ineffective to deal with the condition that he is taking the medicine for but whether it might poison him. So this is a challenging issue with no easy answers. I know one thing. I know my constituents are frustrated by these confusing price hikes. They don't understand the dramatic price differences from one retailer to another, and I have heard them loud and clear because I don't understand it either. We know that something needs to be done to rein in the high costs before medication becomes a luxury only for those who can afford it. Since the beginning of this new Congress, the Senate Finance Committee has held a series of hearings to examine what is behind these rising costs. We have heard from all of the major players in the supply chain and asked some long overdue questions. The Senate Judiciary Committee has begun looking into how to bring these prices down, specifically by stopping pharmaceutical companies who game the patent system. Patents play a very important role in our economy. They are recognized in the Constitution itself, and when somebody discovers something new and wonderful that helps improve all our lives, they are entitled to reap the benefits from that. Companies, we know, pour extensive time and funding into the research and development of new medications. For example, yesterday, Dr. Jim Allison from MD Anderson Hospital was in to see me. He recently got the Nobel Prize for his research in immunology and new treatments for cancer. Over the course of our history, the treatments for cancer have been almost as tough as the cancer itself, whether it is surgery or radiation or chemotherapy. What he has discovered--thanks to the grants by NIH that have helped pay for the research--is a new way to use the body to turn on the cancer itself without the patient receiving additional drugs or radiation or surgery to deal with it. It is just amazing. So I do think we need to continue to encourage that sort of innovation and research. And when companies do pour extensive time and funding into that research and a patent allows them to recover that funding once the drug hits the market, that is a good thing. We are increasingly seeing some companies abuse this system in order to retain exclusivity over a drug for much longer than the patent would ordinarily provide and preventing more affordable genetics or biosimilars from entering the market and competing. From what I have been told by some in the pharmaceutical industry, about 90 percent of the common prescriptions that we take are now generic, and they are pretty inexpensive, relatively speaking. I know that is the case for me, and I believe that is likely true. But for the 10 percent that are still branded, some of those drug prices go through the roof. Then you have an aberration like insulin that has been available for decades, which, through some sort of mystery, an opaque way of pricing, still may cost somebody as much as $1,000 or $1,200 a month for their copay. That doesn't make any sense to me because if we are trying to protect innovation, that argument no longer applies to a drug long ago discovered and essential to the life of diabetics. The chemical formula of the actual drug is not the only thing that can be patented, and that is part of the problem. Manufacturers can get additional patents for follow-on inventions or innovation, which is a new manufacturing method or a new formulation or a new application to a new and different disease. Some of that, I think, is certainly understandable and should be protected. I don't believe that each of these additional patents is inherently wrong, but the reckless abuse of the system and the way they can be structured sometimes is. I will be introducing a bill soon that aims to curb major drug companies' anti-competitive use of patents to prevent generics or biosimilars from entering the market to promote greater competition and lower prices. This legislation would properly define two terms to describe how drug companies are abusing the system and provide the Federal Trade Commission with authority to take action. The first term it would define is ``product hopping,'' which occurs when a company develops a reformulation of a product that is about to lose exclusivity and then pulls the original product off the market, preventing entry of a generic alternative. This may be just by releasing a new formulation that is extended release over time. They can patent that and pull the original drug off the market, and then it prohibits generic competition from entering the market against that original formulation and, thus, maintain their exclusivity well beyond the intended period of time. The only purpose for doing this is not to deliver more effective drugs but to prevent that generic competition. One example is the drug Namenda, which is used by patients with Alzheimer's. Near the end of the exclusivity period, the manufacturer switched from a twice-daily drug to a once-daily drug. That move prevented pharmacists from being able to switch patients to a lower cost generic, allowing the company to continue to profit as a result of their exclusive use of that patent. Secondly, the bill would define ``patent thickets,'' which occur when an innovator seeks multiple overlapping patents or patents with identical claims near when they are about to lose their right to exclusivity. Companies take advantage of our country's robust innovation protection in order to hang onto their monopolies as long as possible. One example is the drug Humira, which is one of the most widely prescribed drugs in the world. It is commonly used to treat arthritis and other autoimmune diseases. AbbVie, the manufacturer of Humira, has 136 patents and 247 patent applications on their drug, which has been available for more than 15 years--136 patents with 247 patent applications. There has to be a reason for that. This type of behavior makes it very difficult for biosimilar drugs to come to market. While the patent on the actual drug formula--the original one--may have expired, there are still in this case hundreds of other patents to sort through and, frequently, to litigate in terms of the validity of those additional patents. The artificial structuring of these multiple patents can delay the entry of generic or biosimilar competition for much longer than anybody ever would have intended-- certainly longer than Congress intended by giving patent protection. By defining product hopping and patent thickets as anti-competitive behavior, we would allow the Federal Trade Commission to bring antitrust suits against the bad actors who deliberately game the system, and we would give them injunctive authority--not money damage authority, but injunctive authority to make the system fairer and operate as Congress intended. The second bill I am going to introduce has to do with Medicare part D--one of the most successful and popular pharmaceutical programs around. Part D sponsors may voluntarily report fraud data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, but they are not required to report the number of specific instances of potential fraud, waste, and abuse they identify or the actions they took to address these issues. My bill would implement recommendations for the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General to require plan sponsors to report that fraud and improve oversight of this important program. I have learned a lot about prescription drugs during these hearings, a lot about the wonderful lifesaving innovation, the importance of preserving that period of exclusivity for people who invest in the research and develop these new lifesaving drugs, but I have also learned a little bit about some of the abuses, which I have talked about here today, and the need for us to continue to work together to find solutions to provide Texans and all Americans who are struggling to cover the cost of their prescriptions with some relief. By eliminating some of these tactics used by pharmaceutical companies to delay and deter competition, we will increase the availability of generics and give patients greater freedom to choose a drug that works at a price they can afford. By creating more accountability under Medicare part D, we can prevent taxpayers from footing the bill for a broken system. While we are still working to find a solution for the multitude of problems and challenges we face in dealing with the pharmaceutical drug industry, one thing is abundantly clear: A one-size-fits-all, government-run healthcare system is not going to work. Indeed, we need to make targeted, smart reforms that will bring down the cost of prescriptions and not the quality of the entire healthcare system. That is precisely what these two bills will do, and I hope we will be able to advance these pieces of legislation to promote more affordable medications. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, the performance of the U.S. economy is something to behold. It doesn't matter if you measure it by the unemployment rate, by the quarterly growth rates, or by wages, virtually every sign points to a growing thriving economy. Let me emphasize some of the outstanding job numbers that came out just last week. In April, there were 263,000 new jobs created-- 263,000--beating even the most optimistic estimates. The unemployment rate fell to 3.6 percent--the lowest unemployment rate in nearly half a century. The first quarter saw a 3.2 percent growth, the best in 4 years. The truth is, the United States' economy has taken off like a rocket. Today we find ourselves in what some economists refer to as a ``full employment'' economy, because there are more job openings than there are job seekers. That is a remarkable place to be, and I have no doubt that it is in significant part due to the pro-growth policies created by a Republican-led Congress and the Trump administration the last 2 years. Less than 1\1/2\ years ago we passed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. We tried to make this a bipartisan effort, but our Democratic friends wanted no part of it. This was the first major tax overhaul in a generation. This legislation removed many of the burdens from families, entrepreneurs, and job creators and let the free market take the wheel. A lot of pundits and a lot of the naysayers--the professional cynics--said it wouldn't work, but I think the results speak for themselves. Workers are bringing home more in their paychecks, and businesses are using their savings to invest in their employees. One of the most common remarks I hear from employers when I am in Texas is that they can't find enough qualified workers for the job openings that exist. That is their biggest challenge because of this booming economy. In the days and months following the signing of the tax bill, companies began announcing how they would use the money that they would save because of the legislation to invest in their employees and their business. We heard from big companies like AT&T, which is headquartered in Dallas, which provided $1,000 bonuses for more than 200,000 of its employees, including more than 32,000 who live in Texas. There was also Southwest Airlines, which gave all 550,000 of its employees a $1,000 bonus. Plus Southwest Airlines donated $5 million to charity, to boot. We saw headlines in the major newspapers about how these and countless other big companies were using their savings, but the less read stories about local businesses in small town papers are just as important. This week is National Small Business Week, an opportunity to celebrate small businesses that line Main Streets throughout America, but don't let the word ``small'' fool you. America's 30 million small businesses are an economic force unparalleled anywhere in the world. More than half of Americans either own or work for a small business-- more than half. Small businesses are responsible for about two out of every three jobs created. One of the reasons my State is doing so well economically is because we welcome small businesses with open arms. It is an ideal home for entrepreneurs because we believe in keeping taxes low and regulations at a rational minimum. According to the Small Business Administration, there are more than 2.6 million small businesses throughout the State of Texas, accounting for 99.8 percent of all Texas businesses. They employ more than 45 percent of the State's workforce and account for a massive portion of our State's economy. These are exactly the kind of folks I had in mind when I voted to pass the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, because I knew it would lower rates for small businesses and allow them to use the savings to invest in their employees and their business. After the legislation passed, just to make sure, I traveled the State and held roundtables with small businesses to learn more about how they were using the savings. One of the small business owners I heard from was Josh Agrelin, whose company, Re-Bath, specializes in bathroom remodeling. A few years ago, back in 2014, I spent a day with the crews at Re-Bath of Austin as part of the NFIB's Small Business Challenge Campaign. I got to try my hand at tiling and remodeling a bathroom, and while I will not be opening my own contracting company any time soon, I had a great time learning about this Austin franchise and getting to know its employees. When I saw Josh again at our roundtable last year, he told me he plans to use the savings from tax reform to grow the size of his workforce by adding two additional installation crews and purchasing new equipment. For big businesses that might not sound like a lot, but for small businesses like Re-Bath, it makes a world of difference. It means they can offer more services and gain more business, grow the size of their business, and pay their employees even better. It was great to see how Joshua was looking forward to opportunities to grow his business and I am glad this legislation could help make that possible. In Houston, I visited with Southland Hardware, a store that opened in 1935. This is an old-fashioned hardware store. You don't see many of those anymore. It has been a community staple, and it is appropriately dubbed ``the store that has `almost' everything.'' It is owned by Marty and Patricia O'Brien, and they were kind enough to host me and a couple of other businesses for a roundtable last spring. Marty told me that because of the tax savings, they were able to provide bonuses and raises, hire another employee, and do some improvements on their property. For Marty, being able to invest more in his business, which was originally owned by his father-in-law and will one day be run by his children, is no small thing. I also spent some time on the gulf coast, in Corpus Christi, speaking to Steve Raffaele, the president of American Bank. He told me the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act would likely provide them with $12 million of additional capital savings. He said that for each dollar of capital saved, they are able to lend approximately $10 in their market communities along the Coastal Bend region of our State. He estimated that over 5 years that equates to $120 million of additional lending and investment. Given their average loan size, that means more than 500 small businesses could be positively impacted. That is a big deal for a community like Corpus Christi, but especially for one so severely impacted by Hurricane Harvey just about 1\1/2\ years ago. Today small business optimism is at a record high. I hope that small businesses across the country feel empowered to take their businesses further because of these pro-growth policies. Small businesses are, as I said, the backbone of our economy and, of course, of each of our communities. This Small Business Week we celebrate the entrepreneurs and the job creators who had the courage to take an idea and build it into an opportunity for themselves, for their families, for their employees, and for their communities. These men and women are proof that the American dream is alive and well, and we are grateful to each of them for the contributions they make to our communities and to our country. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, it is no secret that our economy has broken some pretty amazing records lately. Last week's job report surpassed all estimates and expectations, with a whopping 263,000 jobs created in April alone. The first quarter saw 3.2 percent growth, which is the best in 4 years. I still recall, back during the previous administration, when we were told that 2 percent growth was the new normal and that we could never grow our economy the way we have seen in recent months. Obviously, 2 percent growth is not the new normal for the American economy. We all ought to be relieved and comforted by that fact. The unemployment rate has dropped to 3.6 percent--the lowest level in nearly half a century. Everybody who is able-bodied and willing to work and willing to be trained for jobs that pay well I believe has an opportunity to do so these days. There is no doubt that this is an incredible time for our economy, and I am confident that the pro-growth policies that we have brought to the table during this administration and during a Republican majority in the House and the Senate will continue to bring real benefits to families across the country. But we have also broken another record, one that has a much more negative impact, and that is especially in my State of Texas.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the remaining votes in this series be 10 minutes in length.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. I yield the floor.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, during the last break in our schedule here in Congress in Washington, I spent 2 weeks traveling across my State-- as all of us, no doubt, did--and listening and talking to my constituents about what is on their minds, what they think we ought to be doing, and what our priorities should be. In one city, I spoke with students and teachers about the need to improve college and career readiness for historically underrepresented populations and how a piece of legislation that we have introduced with colleagues called the GEAR UP for Success Act would better serve those students. It was a little bit of a revelation for me, having come from a family where my parents expected me to go to college, and they themselves went to college, that if other children are growing up and don't have that experience--many times, their parents are not prepared to help counsel them on which courses they ought to begin to take as early as seventh grade in order to be prepared with the prerequisites to advance up the educational ladder and be ready for college, to get into the college of their choice. So that was an important piece of legislation. Certainly, working together with colleagues here, I hope we can reauthorize and fund those grants so that more of our young people can get the advantage that comes from that sort of counseling and tutoring and help. I also spent a little time at Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene, TX, to talk about military readiness and the importance of the new strategic bomber--the B-21--mission that is coming to Texas and to the U.S. Air Force. I also had a chance to talk to some of my educators and other advocates about the Jenna Quinn Law, which is designed to help give caregivers and teachers training so that they can actually recognize and report signs of child sexual abuse in the children for whom they are responsible. It has been interesting to me because it actually follows on legislation that passed and has been successful in Texas to train teachers and caregivers on the signs of child sexual abuse so that they can help get those children the help they need, sometimes by asking questions they would never ask if they had not been trained to recognize those signs. Jenna Quinn herself was an example--this bill is named for her--of somebody who was asked by her sister: Jenna, has somebody hurt you? And that opened up the story and, fortunately, a prosecution and began the path to healing from that trauma. It is great to be able to talk about a number of topics as we all return home, and you can imagine, coming from Texas, with 1,200 miles of common border with Mexico, one of the things we talked about is the humanitarian crisis along the southwestern border. Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley Sector encountered several large groups of people trying to enter the United States last week. This is just in 1 week. On Thursday, agents near La Joya responded to a report of a large group of migrants and found more than 220 people in that one group, mostly families and unaccompanied children from Central America. The very next day, they came across two additional large groups, one with 145 people and another with nearly 300. On Sunday, they apprehended a group of 170. That brings the total to more than 800 people from just 4 groups in 1 week. These numbers represent a surge in the volume of people we see coming across the border historically. In fact, now almost all of them come from someplace other than Mexico. There is actually no new net migration from Mexico. But we see people being recruited and paying for the services of human smugglers to come from Central America and actually many other countries around the world where people realize that if they can get access to Central America and they can pay the fees to the human smugglers, they can make their way into the United States. That is why even President Obama said in 2014 that this is a humanitarian and security crisis. In fact, the statement that President Obama made in June of 2014 when he said that came on the heels of 2 months of record-high apprehensions of unaccompanied children. Between May and June of 2014, more than 135,000 people were apprehended at the southern border. Those numbers were absolutely mind-boggling to us at the time, but those figures pale in comparison to the level of apprehensions we are seeing today. In February and March of this year--again, a 2-month period--more than 180,000 people were apprehended at the southwestern border. So in 2014 when President Obama called it a humanitarian and security crisis, it was 135,000. Today, in February and March, it was 180,000. That is more than a 33-percent increase from the humanitarian crisis President Obama referred to in 2014. So if it was a crisis then, it has now turned into a full system failure, and all lights are blinking red. Detention centers are at over capacity. The already understaffed Border Patrol is struggling to meet their needs. Officers and agents are pulling double duty, as law enforcement officials have become caregivers for children. Customs agents are being pulled off their duty to process migrants. NGOs--the nongovernmental organizations--and community organizations that usually help the migrants process the system are unable to keep pace. Cities and counties across the border are bearing the brunt of this massive wave of humanity. But if you think the situation is bad now, and it is, it will only continue to get worse because we typically see higher apprehension rates in April and May than we do in February and March. These rapidly depleting resources are being overwhelmed, as I said, and cannot keep pace. We need to address the root of the problem, and we need to do it soon. Only Congress can pass the legislation that is needed in order to come to grips with this crisis. It is time for us to pass legislation that will provide our frontline officers and agents with the resources they need in terms of staffing, authorities, and infrastructure. It is also important for us to plug some of the holes that are being exploited by the human smugglers and others that allow them to successfully place migrants into the United States 97 percent of the time as long as they are an unaccompanied minor or come with a family. Fortunately, I found a partner and ally from the House body who happens to be a Democrat by the name of Henry Cuellar, who is willing to work with me on this issue. He has been my ally on a number of efforts to bring commonsense reform, when it comes to border security or trade, to Texas. We don't always agree, but we can agree on a number of things, and those are the things on which we like to work together. Earlier today, Henry Cuellar and I introduced the HUMANE Act, which will make important and long-overdue reforms to our immigration system, and it includes commonsense provisions that Republicans and Democrats can and should agree on. First, it closes a major loophole that is often exploited by the human smugglers when they bring families into the United States across the border illegally. This is called generically the Flores Settlement Agreement. That name comes from a 1997 agreement that determined that the Department of Homeland Security can only detain unaccompanied children for 20 days before releasing them to the Department of Health and Human Services. While this was unquestionably well-intentioned at the beginning, it has morphed into a much bigger problem because in 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals expanded the Flores holding, effectively applying the settlement not just to unaccompanied children but also to families and turning it into a pull factor for illegal immigrants hoping to game the system. I am grateful for the support of my friend and ally Congressman Cuellar because we recognize that rather than single adults arriving at the border alone, many people are now bringing children with them so they can pose as a family. They realize they can bring a child-- anybody's child--and pose as a family unit so they can be released after 20 days. Children are literally being kidnapped to serve as a free ticket into the United States. Sadly, many are abused along the way, and many arrive at our border in very ill health. We simply cannot stand by and do nothing and let this continue to occur. I know today I read in one of our newspapers that the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce said that because Customs agents are being redeployed to deal with children and families, handing out juice boxes and diapers, that there has been a huge slowdown in cross-border commerce and trade. Because of the unique nature of the supply chains that apply to manufacturing both in Mexico and the United States, they estimate that as much as $800 million a day is being lost because now our infrastructure and our staffing at our borders are being overwhelmed. So the HUMANE Act would clarify that the Flores Settlement Agreement only applies to unaccompanied children and not to families, and it would provide greater time for processing and immigration proceedings to take place before the families are released from custody. Secondly, this legislation would require that all unaccompanied children are processed the same, regardless of the country of their origin, because under current law, children from Mexico and Canada can be promptly returned home if they don't have a legitimate claim, but processes for other countries move much more slowly, if at all. Put simply, we should make every effort to safely return these children to their home countries as quickly as possible if they don't qualify for an immigration benefit, just as we do now for those from Mexico and Canada. It would also require all children to undergo biometric and DNA screening to establish family relationships and ensure that they are, in fact, traveling with relatives rather than human smugglers. To better protect children who are released to Health and Human Services, this bill would place prohibitions on certain individuals who could be serving as guardians. For example, no child should be released to the custody of a sex offender or a human trafficker. Third, the HUMANE Act would enable family units to stay together-- something, I would think, that all of us should agree on--and streamline the process for those in custody. Consistent with the recommendations from the bipartisan DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council, the bill would require DHS to establish at least four regional processing centers along the southern border to house and process families. This would literally serve as a one-stop shop, with DHS personnel from Customs and Border Protection, ICE, USCIS, and FEMA assisting migrants and working to process their claims. Under this legislation, asylum officers and immigration judges would be forward-deployed to adjudicate claims and expedite the entire process, which we hope would begin to ease the burden on our current debilitating immigration court backlog. In addition to those changes, the legislation also includes provisions to make commonsense improvements, like additional Customs and Border Patrol personnel, and training for our CBP and ICE employees who work with children. While we know this will not fix all of the problems that exist in our immigration system, we believe it is an important start to change the calculation when it comes to people who say: I know I don't qualify for asylum, but I am going to try anyway, and I am going to pay a human smuggler $5,000, $6,000, $7,000, or $8,000 to try to get me from my home in Central America into the United States because right now, 97 percent of the time, it works. This is also a huge bonanza to these cartels that are commodity agnostic. They trade in drugs. They traffic children, women, and, yes, they move migrants across the border for money. This will put a big dent in their profits, as we should want to do. It will also send a message to those who do not have valid claims: Don't even try. So it will have a deterrent value, which I think will begin to help us control the huge surge of humanity coming across now, which were, as I said, 76,000 in February and 103,000 in March. We are going to see those numbers continue to go up and up and up, further overwhelming our capacity to deal with this humanitarian crisis unless we do something, like this legislation that Congressman Cuellar and I have introduced. I am grateful for the support and cooperation of my friend and colleague from the House. I am sure there are people in his party who will say he has done too much, just as there are people in my party who will say we haven't done enough. But around here, you have to start somewhere, and where you start is where you can find common cause and agreement and begin to build consensus to solve problems. Hopefully, if we are successful in passing this legislation, this will not only address this humanitarian crisis, but it will maybe establish a downpayment of goodwill and demonstrate our ability to solve some of our other problems here in the Congress, particularly those that relate to our broken immigration system. I hope we will soon have the opportunity to consider this text in the Judiciary Committee--I talked to Chairman Graham, who seemed willing to do that--and bring more members into the debate so we can provide relief for those struggling to manage the crisis.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, during the last break in our schedule here in Congress in Washington, I spent 2 weeks traveling across my State-- as all of us, no doubt, did--and listening and talking to my constituents about what is on their minds, what they think we ought to be doing, and what our priorities should be. In one city, I spoke with students and teachers about the need to improve college and career readiness for historically underrepresented populations and how a piece of legislation that we have introduced with colleagues called the GEAR UP for Success Act would better serve those students. It was a little bit of a revelation for me, having come from a family where my parents expected me to go to college, and they themselves went to college, that if other children are growing up and don't have that experience--many times, their parents are not prepared to help counsel them on which courses they ought to begin to take as early as seventh grade in order to be prepared with the prerequisites to advance up the educational ladder and be ready for college, to get into the college of their choice. So that was an important piece of legislation. Certainly, working together with colleagues here, I hope we can reauthorize and fund those grants so that more of our young people can get the advantage that comes from that sort of counseling and tutoring and help. I also spent a little time at Dyess Air Force Base in Abilene, TX, to talk about military readiness and the importance of the new strategic bomber--the B-21--mission that is coming to Texas and to the U.S. Air Force. I also had a chance to talk to some of my educators and other advocates about the Jenna Quinn Law, which is designed to help give caregivers and teachers training so that they can actually recognize and report signs of child sexual abuse in the children for whom they are responsible. It has been interesting to me because it actually follows on legislation that passed and has been successful in Texas to train teachers and caregivers on the signs of child sexual abuse so that they can help get those children the help they need, sometimes by asking questions they would never ask if they had not been trained to recognize those signs. Jenna Quinn herself was an example--this bill is named for her--of somebody who was asked by her sister: Jenna, has somebody hurt you? And that opened up the story and, fortunately, a prosecution and began the path to healing from that trauma. It is great to be able to talk about a number of topics as we all return home, and you can imagine, coming from Texas, with 1,200 miles of common border with Mexico, one of the things we talked about is the humanitarian crisis along the southwestern border. Border Patrol agents in the Rio Grande Valley Sector encountered several large groups of people trying to enter the United States last week. This is just in 1 week. On Thursday, agents near La Joya responded to a report of a large group of migrants and found more than 220 people in that one group, mostly families and unaccompanied children from Central America. The very next day, they came across two additional large groups, one with 145 people and another with nearly 300. On Sunday, they apprehended a group of 170. That brings the total to more than 800 people from just 4 groups in 1 week. These numbers represent a surge in the volume of people we see coming across the border historically. In fact, now almost all of them come from someplace other than Mexico. There is actually no new net migration from Mexico. But we see people being recruited and paying for the services of human smugglers to come from Central America and actually many other countries around the world where people realize that if they can get access to Central America and they can pay the fees to the human smugglers, they can make their way into the United States. That is why even President Obama said in 2014 that this is a humanitarian and security crisis. In fact, the statement that President Obama made in June of 2014 when he said that came on the heels of 2 months of record-high apprehensions of unaccompanied children. Between May and June of 2014, more than 135,000 people were apprehended at the southern border. Those numbers were absolutely mind-boggling to us at the time, but those figures pale in comparison to the level of apprehensions we are seeing today. In February and March of this year--again, a 2-month period--more than 180,000 people were apprehended at the southwestern border. So in 2014 when President Obama called it a humanitarian and security crisis, it was 135,000. Today, in February and March, it was 180,000. That is more than a 33-percent increase from the humanitarian crisis President Obama referred to in 2014. So if it was a crisis then, it has now turned into a full system failure, and all lights are blinking red. Detention centers are at over capacity. The already understaffed Border Patrol is struggling to meet their needs. Officers and agents are pulling double duty, as law enforcement officials have become caregivers for children. Customs agents are being pulled off their duty to process migrants. NGOs--the nongovernmental organizations--and community organizations that usually help the migrants process the system are unable to keep pace. Cities and counties across the border are bearing the brunt of this massive wave of humanity. But if you think the situation is bad now, and it is, it will only continue to get worse because we typically see higher apprehension rates in April and May than we do in February and March. These rapidly depleting resources are being overwhelmed, as I said, and cannot keep pace. We need to address the root of the problem, and we need to do it soon. Only Congress can pass the legislation that is needed in order to come to grips with this crisis. It is time for us to pass legislation that will provide our frontline officers and agents with the resources they need in terms of staffing, authorities, and infrastructure. It is also important for us to plug some of the holes that are being exploited by the human smugglers and others that allow them to successfully place migrants into the United States 97 percent of the time as long as they are an unaccompanied minor or come with a family. Fortunately, I found a partner and ally from the House body who happens to be a Democrat by the name of Henry Cuellar, who is willing to work with me on this issue. He has been my ally on a number of efforts to bring commonsense reform, when it comes to border security or trade, to Texas. We don't always agree, but we can agree on a number of things, and those are the things on which we like to work together. Earlier today, Henry Cuellar and I introduced the HUMANE Act, which will make important and long-overdue reforms to our immigration system, and it includes commonsense provisions that Republicans and Democrats can and should agree on. First, it closes a major loophole that is often exploited by the human smugglers when they bring families into the United States across the border illegally. This is called generically the Flores Settlement Agreement. That name comes from a 1997 agreement that determined that the Department of Homeland Security can only detain unaccompanied children for 20 days before releasing them to the Department of Health and Human Services. While this was unquestionably well-intentioned at the beginning, it has morphed into a much bigger problem because in 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals expanded the Flores holding, effectively applying the settlement not just to unaccompanied children but also to families and turning it into a pull factor for illegal immigrants hoping to game the system. I am grateful for the support of my friend and ally Congressman Cuellar because we recognize that rather than single adults arriving at the border alone, many people are now bringing children with them so they can pose as a family. They realize they can bring a child-- anybody's child--and pose as a family unit so they can be released after 20 days. Children are literally being kidnapped to serve as a free ticket into the United States. Sadly, many are abused along the way, and many arrive at our border in very ill health. We simply cannot stand by and do nothing and let this continue to occur. I know today I read in one of our newspapers that the San Antonio Chamber of Commerce said that because Customs agents are being redeployed to deal with children and families, handing out juice boxes and diapers, that there has been a huge slowdown in cross-border commerce and trade. Because of the unique nature of the supply chains that apply to manufacturing both in Mexico and the United States, they estimate that as much as $800 million a day is being lost because now our infrastructure and our staffing at our borders are being overwhelmed. So the HUMANE Act would clarify that the Flores Settlement Agreement only applies to unaccompanied children and not to families, and it would provide greater time for processing and immigration proceedings to take place before the families are released from custody. Secondly, this legislation would require that all unaccompanied children are processed the same, regardless of the country of their origin, because under current law, children from Mexico and Canada can be promptly returned home if they don't have a legitimate claim, but processes for other countries move much more slowly, if at all. Put simply, we should make every effort to safely return these children to their home countries as quickly as possible if they don't qualify for an immigration benefit, just as we do now for those from Mexico and Canada. It would also require all children to undergo biometric and DNA screening to establish family relationships and ensure that they are, in fact, traveling with relatives rather than human smugglers. To better protect children who are released to Health and Human Services, this bill would place prohibitions on certain individuals who could be serving as guardians. For example, no child should be released to the custody of a sex offender or a human trafficker. Third, the HUMANE Act would enable family units to stay together-- something, I would think, that all of us should agree on--and streamline the process for those in custody. Consistent with the recommendations from the bipartisan DHS Homeland Security Advisory Council, the bill would require DHS to establish at least four regional processing centers along the southern border to house and process families. This would literally serve as a one-stop shop, with DHS personnel from Customs and Border Protection, ICE, USCIS, and FEMA assisting migrants and working to process their claims. Under this legislation, asylum officers and immigration judges would be forward-deployed to adjudicate claims and expedite the entire process, which we hope would begin to ease the burden on our current debilitating immigration court backlog. In addition to those changes, the legislation also includes provisions to make commonsense improvements, like additional Customs and Border Patrol personnel, and training for our CBP and ICE employees who work with children. While we know this will not fix all of the problems that exist in our immigration system, we believe it is an important start to change the calculation when it comes to people who say: I know I don't qualify for asylum, but I am going to try anyway, and I am going to pay a human smuggler $5,000, $6,000, $7,000, or $8,000 to try to get me from my home in Central America into the United States because right now, 97 percent of the time, it works. This is also a huge bonanza to these cartels that are commodity agnostic. They trade in drugs. They traffic children, women, and, yes, they move migrants across the border for money. This will put a big dent in their profits, as we should want to do. It will also send a message to those who do not have valid claims: Don't even try. So it will have a deterrent value, which I think will begin to help us control the huge surge of humanity coming across now, which were, as I said, 76,000 in February and 103,000 in March. We are going to see those numbers continue to go up and up and up, further overwhelming our capacity to deal with this humanitarian crisis unless we do something, like this legislation that Congressman Cuellar and I have introduced. I am grateful for the support and cooperation of my friend and colleague from the House. I am sure there are people in his party who will say he has done too much, just as there are people in my party who will say we haven't done enough. But around here, you have to start somewhere, and where you start is where you can find common cause and agreement and begin to build consensus to solve problems. Hopefully, if we are successful in passing this legislation, this will not only address this humanitarian crisis, but it will maybe establish a downpayment of goodwill and demonstrate our ability to solve some of our other problems here in the Congress, particularly those that relate to our broken immigration system. I hope we will soon have the opportunity to consider this text in the Judiciary Committee--I talked to Chairman Graham, who seemed willing to do that--and bring more members into the debate so we can provide relief for those struggling to manage the crisis.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I have 5 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 2, 2019, at 9.30 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the nomination of General James C. McConville, USA, for reappointment to the grade of general and to be Chief of Staff of the Army. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 2, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Daniel Habib Jorjani, of Kentucky, to be Solicitor, and Mark Lee Greenblatt, of Maryland, to be Inspector General, both of the Department of the Interior. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 2, 2019, at 9:30a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Humanitarian impact in the Syrian war.'' Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 2, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a business meeting and hearing on the following nominations: Jeffrey Vincent Brown, to be United States District Judge for the Southern District of Texas, Robert J. Colville, and Stephanie L. Haines, both to be a United States District Judge for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Brantley Starr, to be United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Virgil Madden, of Indiana, to be a Commissioner of the United States Parole Commission, and Jeffrey A. Rosen, of Virginia, to be Deputy Attorney General, Michael G. Bailey, to be United States Attorney for the District of Arizona, Timothy J. Downing, to be United States Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma, Brent R. Bunn, to be United States Marshal for the District of Idaho, and Eric S. Gartner, to be United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, all of the Department of Justice. Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, May 2, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I have 8 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Policy principles for a Federal data privacy framework.'' Committee on Environment and Public Works The Committee on Environment and Public Works is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Humanitarian impact in the Syrian war.'' Committee on Indian Affairs The Committee on Indian Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship The Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the nomination of Christopher Scolese, of New York, to be Director of the National Reconnaissance Office. Subcommittee on Strategic Forces The Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, from time to time, our country has listened with empathy and heartbreak as survivors of various forms of sexual abuse come forward, men and women alike, who have bravely shared their stories, reviving a national conversation about sexual violence and inviting others to share their stories after years or even decades of silence. We know that these cases aren't limited to any class, place, age, gender, or circumstance. We have heard from major public figures and close friends alike, highlighting an issue that has for too long hidden in the shadows. Some of the most disturbing allegations are those that take place against our children in school. Last month, Senator Hassan and I introduced the Jenna Quinn Law, which would help educators and caregivers identify and prevent child sexual abuse. It literally teaches people how to recognize the symptoms, what children are saying, when they are not vocalizing their plight, by the way they act. It would allow the use of grant funds for specialized training to ensure that teachers and school personnel are prepared to recognize and report child sexual abuse. This legislation is named after a brave Texan, a child abuse survivor herself, and has been modeled after successful State legislation. It is an important step in our efforts to stop sexual abuse, and I hope we can take these reforms, which have been adopted now by more than half the States, and make them nationwide. Of course, protecting students from sexual abuse doesn't end after high school, as we know. In recent years, our country has followed high-profile cases involving students even at our colleges and universities. We all remember 2011, when the now notorious Penn State football coach, Jerry Sandusky, was arrested and charged with 52 counts of sexual abuse of boys. What happened next was a combination of support for the survivors and disgust with those who knew about the allegations but did nothing. Employees, ranging from a graduate assistant to the university president himself, were aware of the allegations but remained silent. Then there is Larry Nassar, an employee at Michigan State University and a former USA Gymnastics national team doctor. He was accused of molesting hundreds of young athletes under his care, and more than 250 women shared their testimony at his sentencing last year. Despite numerous complaints about Nassar's behavior, some dating back to the 1990s, university officials kept quiet. Law enforcement was never informed, and his disgusting abuse was allowed to continue unreported for years. Sadly, these are not the only instances of university officials turning to avert their gaze from sexual misconduct. It has happened at other major universities across the country, including one in Texas. In each of these cases, university leaders did not take action against the abusers despite the fact that official title IX or external investigations had been conducted. Some of them said: ``We just simply didn't read the results of the report.'' These stories of abuse are difficult to hear, but they have led to positive changes by highlighting the ineffective and sometimes nonexistent policies to handle these types of abuse. That is why last month, along with my colleagues from Michigan, Senator Peters and Stabenow, I introduced the Accountability of Leaders in Education to Report Title IX Investigations Act, or ALERT Act for short. The purpose of this legislation is to ensure greater accountability by requiring colleges and universities to submit an annual certification to the Secretary of Education, to include the following: First, it would affirm that the university president and the board members have reviewed all title IX and Clery Act sexual offense reports of an employee involving sexual misconduct. This would compel administrators to take this matter more seriously and thoroughly examine all the allegations. Secondly, it would require that the university certify that the president or board members had not interfered with or inappropriately tried to influence an ongoing investigation. In any educational institution, especially those that receive taxpayer funds, administrators should be held accountable for their actions and place the health and well-being of their students above all else. The public conversation regarding these abuses has encouraged more victims to confront their abusers and pursue justice. Throughout my career, dating back to my time as Texas attorney general, it has been my privilege to work with advocates for victims' rights and to help provide them with the resources they need in order to heal and recover. But what if we could do more to prevent people from becoming victims in the first place? What if we could improve accountability on college campuses related to reports of sexual assault perpetrated by their employees? Well, it seems to me the answer is obvious. While there is nothing we can do to turn back the hands of time and prevent these young men and women from being taken advantage of in the first place, we can take action to hold universities accountable for employee sexual misconduct that they already know about and stop abusers from continuing to harm students. I hope this bill can work its way quickly through the regular order through Congress, the House and the Senate, and make its way to the President's desk so we can begin to improve accountability on college campuses all across our country. While we continue our work to prevent sexual abuse in all its forms, there is more we need to do to support victims. Tomorrow, the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on what I have no doubt will be a major bipartisan achievement for the 116th Congress. We see many pieces of legislation that divide Members of the Senate, and sadly those are often the ones that get the most attention. But the Debbie Smith Act is the type of bill we should be talking about and celebrating. The namesake of this legislation is an incredibly courageous woman whom I have had the pleasure of working with over the years. Debbie Smith is an ardent advocate for eliminating the rape kit backlog and expanding the DNA database to provide victims with answers and peace of mind. Sadly, her personal advocacy was borne from experience. In 1989, Debbie was home doing laundry when a stranger broke into her house. He blindfolded her, abducted her, and took her to a wooded area behind her home, where he robbed and repeatedly raped her. Debbie reported the crime to the police and went to the emergency room for a forensic exam, but because of the nationwide backlog, there were no immediate answers. Her rape kit was not even tested right away, as it should have been. Although exact numbers are difficult to estimate, experts believe that as many as 400,000 rape kits remain untested in the United States. We really don't know with any precision. Each one of them represents a story of a sexual assault victim and holds the key to identifying and apprehending a vile criminal. Like every other victim whose DNA evidence sat or still sits on a shelf, Debbie simply had to wait. In her case, it took 6\1/2\ years before she finally got the answers she had been looking for when a cold hit revealed the identity of her rapist. Debbie knows the fear and uncertainty that comes upon victims just by not knowing the answers to who did it and how we make sure justice is served. She made it her mission to eliminate the backlog. She has become a trusted voice for sexual assault victims all across this country and, of course, works the Halls of Congress on a bipartisan basis to make sure we don't lose sight of this important goal, which is to eliminate the rape kit backlog. The Debbie Smith Act was signed into law in 2004 and provides local and State crime labs with resources they need to end the backlog of unsolved crimes. So far, more than $1 billion has been provided to forensic labs because of this law and has led to some pretty incredible results. One reason it is important that the Federal Government assumes part of this responsibility is because many jurisdictions--small police departments, rural counties--simply don't have the tax base, don't have the money, and don't have the expertise to be able to solve this problem of untested rape kits. Since 2005, thanks to Debbie Smith, more than 860,000 DNA cases have been processed because of the Debbie Smith Act, accounting for 43 percent of all forensic profiles in the FBI's DNA database. Though the primary goal is to reduce the rape kit backlog and identify their assailants, processing this DNA evidence can assist investigations for nonviolent crimes as well. Similar to criminal fingerprint databases, this DNA evidence can help convict people who commit other crimes. The Debbie Smith Act of 2019 will reauthorize this important funding that supports testing of these rape kits so we can eliminate the backlog and ensure it will not grow again in the future. This law also authorizes important training for law enforcement, correctional personnel, forensic nurses, and other professionals who assist victims of sexual assault. So I am grateful to Debbie for her courage and the courage of countless other survivors who have shared their stories publicly--it can't be easy--and who continue to advocate for reforms to eliminate the backlog. Two other inspiring survivors from Texas, Lavinia Masters and Carol Bart, have also been strong advocates in my State and at the Federal level. It has been my privilege to know them and work with them on this issue. This legislation is undoubtedly stronger because of the input of these and other brave survivors who are champions for victims all across the country. I admire these women who have given their voice to the voiceless and continue to fight for these reforms. I thank Chairman Graham and Ranking Member Feinstein of the Senate Judiciary Committee for quickly moving this important legislation through the committee, and I hope we will soon be able to vote for it on the Senate floor. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the upcoming vote.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, with the 2-week hiatus we have had here in Washington, DC, so we could be back home visiting with our constituents, some things have not changed; they are just the way they were when we left, and that would include the heart-breaking stories that illustrate the situation along our southwest border. I have talked, as you might imagine coming from Texas, with a lot of Border Patrol personnel who found migrants crammed in parts of cars that you didn't even know exist. I visited the unmarked graves of those who have been abandoned by their human smugglers in essentially desert conditions and left to die. I have seen the disgusting stash houses, where dozens of migrants are held at a time to avoid being caught before they are transported up through the Interstate Highway System to distant locations. I could fill a book with all of the sights I have seen and the stories I have heard over the years, and I am sure, with the stories compiled by the Border Patrol agents and officers, we could fill an entire library. The story, though, really is about how ruthless and inhumane and completely reckless and thoughtless with regard to human life these criminal organizations truly are. One headline, though, during this recess period, stopped me in my tracks. Even this, I thought, could not be the case. It read: A 3-year-old was found alone in a field by Border Patrol agents. His name and phone numbers were [written] on his shoes. A toddler, not even old enough to talk to the agents who found him, was abandoned. Customs and Border Protection believes the boy was part of a larger group trying to enter the United States with their human smugglers. When the group encountered Border Patrol agents, the adults ran into the Rio Grande River and back to Mexico, leaving the little boy all by himself. He was, as the Border Patrol does in every instance, taken into custody and treated well. He was taken to a hospital for a medical evaluation, and, miraculously, he was found to be in good condition. While the agents tried to track down the boy's family, one supervisory patrol agent purchased clothing for him out of his own pocket; other personnel entertained the little boy, watching movies and playing games. These agents aren't just patrolling the border to catch illegal crossers; they are now being forced, because of the crisis at the border, to act as caregivers for some of the most vulnerable individuals they come across. Unfortunately, what that means is, they are also diverted from their No. 1 job, which is law enforcement and to protect the security and safety of the American people along our borders. They are now diverted from that mission, as well as their counterdrug mission, essentially handing out diapers and juice boxes for little boys and little girls. I think this should be a reminder for some of our colleagues who seem to think that the status quo along the border is just hunky-dory that it is far from humane. Many of our colleagues have said: Well, we need to abolish ICE because somehow that is inhumane; enforcing the laws passed by Congress and signed into law by the President, that somehow is beyond the pale. Enforcing the law isn't inhumane. Apprehending people who try to illegally enter into the United States or import their poison so it can be used by Americans who then overdose and lose their lives due to consuming those drugs, that is inhumane. What is inhumane and lacks simple compassion is doing nothing to stop this practice. Leaving security gaps that are exploited by smugglers, traffickers, and criminal organizations who have zero regard for human life is inhumane. These people, the drugs, the contraband are mere commodities to these criminal organizations. They don't care anything about them. Giving people an opportunity to smuggle an innocent child across our border alone and leaving him to die in the desert is not humane. Making criminal cartels rich by exploiting our porous border is inexcusable. To be clear, the criminal organizations perpetuating this cycle are the bad guys, not our law enforcement personnel who work to protect our border at substantial risk to themselves and who take compassionate care of those in their custody. I think one of the reasons this story garnered so much attention is because that is not what the average person imagines the Border Patrol encounters at the border, but increasingly it is. The Border Patrol encounters unaccompanied children and families consisting of one adult and one or more children along the border because the criminal organizations that smuggle them to the border are exploiting gaps and vulnerabilities in our asylum laws. Many people believe the typical migrant is an adult traveling alone, but more likely than not, that is not the case, and, in fact, it is becoming less and less common. In fact, according to the most recent statics, there is no new net migration from Mexico. Almost all of the migration into the United States, either by people who illegally enter or asylum seekers, is from countries other than Mexico, most notably Central America, but, literally, those could be merely the transit points for people coming from all over the world, up through Mexico, into the United States. From October 2018 to March 2019, a 6-month period, more than 360,000 people--360,000 people--were apprehended along the southwest border. That is a remarkably high number for this point in the year, based on historical statistics. Only about one-third of them were single adults, more than half were traveling as a family unit, and the rest were unaccompanied children, like this 3-year-old little boy. He was found by agents in the Rio Grande Valley, far and away the busiest Border Patrol sector in the country. In fact, more than 40 percent of all unaccompanied children are apprehended in the Rio Grande Valley sector. These numbers are far from normal. Unsurprisingly, our Border Patrol and Customs and Border Protection agents, our local communities, the nongovernmental organizations, the churches, and others who try to lend a helping hand to these migrants coming across the border are not equipped to handle this huge surge of humanity. Customs agents are being pulled off inspection duty to help process the apprehended migrants. Security checkpoints are being shut down. The flow of legitimate trade and travel is being impacted. Individuals are then being released because there is simply not enough space to hold them, even though they violated our laws or have not yet proven their right to an immigration benefit under our asylum system. I had a group of manufacturers come see me before the latest break. They told me that from Juarez to El Paso, which is right across the Rio Grande River--that because commerce was backed up, the truck traffic that was transporting car parts as part of a just-in-time inventory program to manufacturers on the American side, they literally had to hire an airplane to fly 11 minutes from Juarez to El Paso. Car manufacturers that operate in Texas, Missouri, and other parts of the country, depend on this cross-border supply chain for their products. Eventually, if we don't do something about this flood of humanity and the blockage it is creating to legitimate trade and commerce across our ports of entry, we are going to see Americans lose their jobs because it simply was uncontemplated by anybody in that business that they would have to suffer those kinds of delays. Instead of a 1-hour delay coming across the ports of entry carrying manufactured goods that can be assembled in the United States or otherwise used in products made here, some are taking as much as 24 hours to get across. People are literally sleeping in their truck because they can't get through the ports of entry, in part, because the Customs and Border agents are being diverted, like I said earlier, handing out juice boxes, handing out diapers, taking care of this huge flood of humanity coming across our border. Don't just take my word for it. I remember when President Obama made comments talking about a humanitarian crisis. He called it a humanitarian and security crisis back in June of 2014. At that time, we saw as many as 135,000 during the month of May and June 2014 apprehended at the border. Just to put that in context, in February and March of this year, 180,000 people were detained at the border--back when President Obama called it a humanitarian and security crisis, 135,000; February and March 2019, 180,000. Simply put, this is a manmade disaster, and the only one that can fix it is the U.S. Congress, and it is going to get nothing but worse. All of the pull factors, the things that attract people to come across the border to take advantage of these gaps in our asylum laws, are going to do nothing but attract more and more and more people. Certainly, we all understand, as a matter of simple human compassion, why people would want to leave if they can't get a job, if they can't provide for their families where they live, but we simply cannot continue to accept the tens of thousands. Now, indeed, in a 2-month period of time, 180,000 new people have been coming into the country essentially jumping in line ahead of others who are trying to legally immigrate to the United States. It is overwhelming for our communities and our Border Patrol and our Customs agents. We know many of these migrants pay smugglers to lead them on this dangerous journey north or have to pay others a tax to pass through territories along the way, including the so-called plazas which are adjacent to the U.S.-Mexico border. So while migrants and vulnerable children are being left for dead in the desert, and we are struggling to manage a devastating humanitarian crisis, these criminal organizations are getting richer and richer. This is part of how they do business. While it is hard to know exactly how much money these groups are making, a recent study by RAND estimated that revenues to smugglers moving migrants from Northern Triangle countries--that is in Central America--range from about $200 million to about $2.3 billion in 2017 alone. These are the same people, again, who are commodity agnostic, who care nothing about human life. They will move migrants for economic purposes. They will move people who are being sex trafficked, and they will move drugs, some of which contributed to the 70,000 Americans who died of drug overdoses last year, since Mexico is responsible for about 90 percent of the heroin and much of the fentanyl that comes across our southwestern border. Of course, all of this is tax-free. You better believe these networks and their operations will only continue to get richer and richer and more and more ruthless and more and more dangerous. If you think these problems are going to go away on their own, you are wrong. The number of children and family units found along our border is already climbing at an appalling pace, and we need to take action to alleviate the strain on our personnel on the southern border and to eliminate the clogs and delays in legitimate trading commerce that is the lifeblood of our Nation, as well as our counterparts in Mexico. Unfortunately, rather than trying to put out the fire, many folks here in Washington would rather fan the flames. The topic of border security has become a hot button, a zero-sum game that people seem to be willing to talk about more than look for solutions. As we all know, that is not how to get things done around here. We need to work together to try to come up with solutions to change our asylum laws in a way that is both compassionate and one that respects the rule of law and allows us to control this vast flood of humanity seeking to enter our country and take advantage of our asylum laws. I have been speaking with our colleagues here in the Senate, as well as those in the House, on both sides of the aisle, about commonsense reforms, what they might look like, and where we might find common ground. We can't wait to do comprehensive immigration reform in order to fix this particular problem where children and families turn themselves in at the border because of these flaws in our asylum laws. We need to address that and to do what we can, but once we accomplish that, we need to move on to do other things that we know we need to do in the best interest of our country and in the best interest of the rule of law. I think it is amazing what you can accomplish when you talk to other Members of Congress instead of just the news cameras, but that seems to be solely where the conversation is occurring--for the benefit of news cameras. We have had some productive discussions about how we can provide our frontline officers and agents with the resources they need--staffing, authorities, infrastructure, and technology. I, for one, am here and ready to talk to anyone who is willing to work in good faith to provide relief for the humanitarian crisis occurring on our southern border. That is what President Obama called it, and it has gotten much worse. It doesn't help to be labeling this some sort of fake emergency, as some of our colleagues on the other side of the Capitol have. To deny reality is a pretty big impediment to trying to solve the problem. I hope our colleagues on both sides of the aisle can take stock of the situation, accept the facts, and muster the courage to put politics aside and work together to create a much needed and long-overdue reform of our immigration policies because this problem is not going away. There were 76,000 people detained at the border in February and 103,000 detained at the border in March. There is no good reason why the 103,000 will not grow to 150,000, to 200,000, or to 250,000. All of the same pieces are in place and all of the same flaws are being exploited by these transnational criminal organizations to move people into the country, where they can essentially circumvent our immigration enforcement and border security measures. It is going to do nothing but get worse when it comes to impediments getting in place of lawful commerce and trade, which are so important to our economy and the economy of Mexico and our common border. With that, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, while many folks in Washington, DC, remain ambivalent about what is happening along the southern border, I am here to report that we are reaching a breaking point. Every month, Customs and Border Protection releases the total number of people who attempt to cross the southern border. The total includes those who cross illegally between the ports of entry, as well as those deemed inadmissible at a port of entry. Just to give you an idea of the size and scope of the numbers we have been dealing with in the past, since June 2014--the month that President Obama referred to this as a ``humanitarian crisis''--more than 66,000 individuals were encountered along the border. At that time, we thought 66,000 was a huge number, but it pales in comparison to what we are seeing now. Last month, more than 103,000 people attempted to illegally cross the border. That is 103,000 up from 76,000 the previous month. A few weeks ago, I know we got into a debate about what did and did not constitute an emergency or a crisis at the border. I don't care whether you call it a crisis or an emergency, but the entire system is breaking, and it is unsustainable. This is the highest number of people who has attempted to enter the country that we have seen since 2007. The mind-boggling figure represents the strain that is being felt by the personnel--those being U.S. Government employees--whether they be Border Patrol or Customs or whoever is trying to manage the influx of the migrants. The men and women of the CBP lack both the manpower and the facilities to appropriately respond. The already understaffed Agency is reassigning personnel to try to make do, but 40 percent of the Border Patrol's manpower is spent processing migrants and providing care and transportation, and many of the agents are taken off their patrol lines to do this work, which leaves areas of the border vulnerable to exploitation by drug cartels and others. The detention centers at which these migrants are housed and processed are relatively small facilities that are not designed for these kinds of huge numbers. They were originally built to house single adults for a short period of time, but the skyrocketing number of unaccompanied children and family units is now putting a serious strain on those resources. Last month alone, there were more than 53,000 families and nearly 9,000 unaccompanied children who were apprehended at the border--53,000 families and 9,000 unaccompanied children. Customs and Border Protection simply lacks the facilities to hold these children, and it lacks the personnel to provide appropriate care. Do we really want the Border Patrol handing out juice boxes and diapers as opposed to interdicting dangerous drugs and other contraband that come into the United States? I don't think so. We know they are desperately asking for additional detention space and staff to be able to manage the migrants who are in custody. Why is it so important they be detained? It is because, if we engage in the practice that has come to be known as catch and release, then it is doubtful we will ever see these migrants again, even though they will be notified of their time to appear in front of immigration judges months--maybe even years--into the future. They will simply melt into the landscape. If they were to have bona fide reasons to claim asylum but were to fail to appear for their hearings in front of immigration judges, they will have waived those rights and be deported if they are ultimately located in the United States. We know customs inspectors have been reassigned from their duties at ports of entry to do things like process migrants and provide transportation. With fewer customs agents on the job, you are now seeing lengthy delays at the ports and checkpoints along the entire border. In what is just right across from El Paso, TX, truckers have been reported as sleeping in their vehicles for hours and sometimes days so they will not lose their spots in line. I have heard from some of the car manufacturers that require there be a flow of their supply chains into Mexico and vice versa, so they are literally hiring aircraft to fly from Juarez to El Paso because that 11-minute flight is faster than a trucker waiting 24 hours in line. Also, when many of our car manufacturers that depend on just-in-time inventory can't get their inventory just in time but have to wait 24 hours, it disrupts their manufacturing lines and endangers their businesses. Of course, it is easy to see how this could have a ripple effect on the entire border and the American economy. This slowdown isn't just affecting businesses along the border; it has businesses across the country worried. Mexican products feed the supply chain for many manufacturers in the United States, and these slowdowns affect production. While folks who live far away from the border may have just chosen to look the other way until now, they don't have a choice anymore. The system is breaking. The ripples will soon be felt across the country unless Members of Congress, on both sides of the aisle, work together and are serious about enacting a solution. We know what we need to do, but politics is preventing us from getting it done. It is time to provide our frontline officers and agents with the personnel, the resources, and the legal authorities they need in order to do the jobs we have asked them to do. Yet, without support from Congress, we are sending them into a losing battle, and we are setting our economy up for a disaster.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I would like to start by sharing a story about one of my personal heroes, Debbie Smith. Debbie Smith is living proof that one person can change the world if they have the courage to tell their story and fight for justice. In 1989, Debbie was at home doing laundry. Her husband Rob, a police officer, was asleep upstairs after working a night shift. Suddenly a masked man entered her home and threatened to kill her if she screamed. He blindfolded and abducted Debbie and took her outside to a wooded area behind her home, where he robbed and repeatedly raped her. The man threatened her over and over, saying: Remember, I know where you live, and I will come back to kill you if you tell anyone. After he finally left, Debbie ran upstairs to tell her husband. She begged him not to make her go to the police. But he, as a police officer, insisted that she report the crime and go to the emergency room for a sexual assault forensic exam, sometimes called a rape kit exam. Debbie did go for that examination and did report the crime. But for Debbie and millions of other survivors there are no immediate answers. Because of the nationwide backlog of untested rape kits, it would be years before she was able to identify her assailant and find any sort of peace. Although the exact numbers are hard to estimate, experts believe that hundreds of thousands of rape kits remain untested in the United States, and, of course, each one of them represents a unique story of a sexual assault victim and holds the key to apprehending a violent criminal. Waiting for that evidence to be tested can be excruciating. Debbie said that fear took over her life. She was haunted by the man's voice threatening to kill her. She was terrified for herself and her family, and she even became suicidal for a time. It wasn't until 6\1/2\ years later that Debbie finally got the answer she had been looking for when a DNA cold hit revealed the identity of her rapist. She later said in an interview that DNA gave her back her life. Debbie chose to harness her pain and to use it to save others from living through years of uncertainty as she did. She has become the fiercest advocate in the Nation for eliminating the rape kit backlog. She has devoted her life to making a difference for victims of sexual violence. The aptly named Debbie Smith Act was originally signed into law in 2004 to provide State and local crime labs the resources they need to end the backlog of untested DNA evidence from unsolved crimes through additional funding and increased capacity. Under this law, Congress has provided more than $1 billion since then in vital funding to forensic labs for analyzing crime scene DNA evidence, uploading the results into the CODIS database, which is what happens to the test after it is completed, and identifying violent fugitives and taking these violent criminals off the street. Not only does this sort of testing provide relief for victims like Debbie and justice for their attackers, but the evidence is also effective in assisting investigations for other crimes. This is important because violent offenders will often commit many different types of crimes in many different jurisdictions. For example, if a criminal commits a burglary in one State, DNA evidence from that burglary case can be used later to connect this offender to an unsolved rape case in another State. The States, thankfully, are following suit. Texas, I am proud to say, has led the Nation in passing mandatory rape kit testing laws, conducting audits of the backlog, and using Debbie Smith funds to analyze untested sexual assault evidence. I am proud to report that over the last 7 years we have reduced our statewide rape kit backlog from more than 20,000 to just over 2,000. This is an astounding achievement, and thankfully it is being replicated all across the Nation because of this important legislation and because of the courage of one woman, Debbie Smith. By ensuring the Debbie Smith Act funds can be used to analyze evidence from all types of crime scenes, we can help forensic labs address their systemic backlogs and holistically target the cycle of violence. The Debbie Smith Act of 2019 will reauthorize the Debbie Smith Act program to continue the testing of DNA evidence from unsolved crimes nationwide, including rape kits. It will also reauthorize DNA training and education for law enforcement, correctional personnel, and court officers, as well as forensic nurses who take this DNA evidence during these rape kit collections to make sure that all of them are prepared to gather the evidence and to test it. Since 2005, Debbie Smith Act funding has led to the creation of 43 percent of all forensic CODIS profiles. Again, this is the FBI database, where the rape kit information can be entered to see if it matches previously entered DNA profiles. Let me say that again. Since 2005, Debbie Smith Act funding has led to the creation of 43 percent of all forensic CODIS profiles as well as 20 percent of all offender samples in CODIS. In total, Debbie Smith DNA grants are responsible for 45 percent of all matches made in CODIS, which is truly remarkable. Reauthorizing this legislation once again is a top priority for me as we work to continue chipping away at the nationwide rape kit backlog and provide these victims with the answers and relief they need. Over the years, I have had the pleasure of meeting and working with Debbie several times, and we have been fortunate to have her share her perspective before the Judiciary Committee on multiple occasions. I have also worked with two other inspiring victims from Texas-- Lavinia Masters and Carol Bart, who, like Debbie, had the courage to come forward and talk about a very difficult event in their lives, but to use their pain as a way to help others. Lavinia and Carol have also lent their voices in advocating for reforms to reduce the rape kit backlog. I am grateful to these and countless other survivors who bravely share their stories and ideas as we work together to eliminate the backlog once and for all. I hope the Debbie Smith Act of 2019 will soon be reported out of the Judiciary Committee and will quickly make its way to the Senate floor, pass in Congress, and make its way to the President for his signature without delay.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that all postcloture time on the Domenico nomination expire at 2:15 p.m.; further, that if confirmed, the motion to reconsider be considered made and laid upon the table and the President be immediately notified of the Senate's action. I further ask unanimous consent that the Senate recess from 12:30 until 2:15 p.m. today.

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I was fortunate to grow up in a military family. My dad served for 31 years in the U.S. Air Force. He actually started out at a very young age as a B-17 pilot in the Army Air Corps before the Air Force was even created. He was stationed at Molesworth Air Force Base in England and flew missions across the English Channel into Germany during World War II. He flew 26 of those missions, and he was successful in completing each one of them except for the last one. On the 26th mission, he was shot down and captured as a POW for the last 4 months of the war. Growing up in a military family obviously means a lot to me. I grew up with a father who demonstrated every day what it means to be a patriot. Of course, like most military brats--that is what we called ourselves--I spent a lot of time traveling around the country. Of course, I was born in Texas and consider San Antonio home, but we lived in Mississippi and in Kensington, MD, right outside the District of Columbia. I graduated from high school in Japan. This is pretty typical of a lot of military families because they tend to move around quite a bit. One of the biggest challenges, being a student growing up in a military family, is frequently having to change schools. That requires a little bit of resilience on the part of the student because they have to learn how to make friends, even in new settings. Despite the challenges of moving around as a kid, there was one thing I was always grateful for. I had the privilege of witnessing not only my dad but so many others of our U.S. military servicemembers in action. Seeing their courage and sacrifice showed me early on that there is nothing we can do to adequately repay these men and women for their service to their country, but you better believe we have to try, and we are going to keep trying--not just to repay them but to recognize them and to honor them. In Congress we accomplished a lot for our military over the last few years. We restored America's defense with the greatest investment in the military in decades, including the largest troop pay raise in nearly 10 years. That is after we tried unsuccessfully to do what we have done from time to time, which is to cash in the ``peace dividend.'' Unfortunately, we can't cash in the peace dividend because there never seems to be peace, as much as we would hope and pray for that. But supporting our heroes on the battlefield is only part of our responsibility toward the military. We are also focused on ensuring that they get the care, support, and opportunities they need once they come home and take the uniform off as a veteran. I have heard from many of my veterans in Texas who are frustrated with the services provided by VA facilities. They shared stories about having to travel hours upon hours to receive care, sometimes forcing them to accept lower quality care or sometimes to forego it entirely. Both in Texas and across the country, VA facilities have notably been plagued by inefficiency, lack of accountability, and quality of care issues. Making matters more challenging, the VA has been hindered by unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles. The Veterans' Administration has more than 300,000 people working for them. So bureaucracy should be its middle name. It is not designed to be efficient, but it is incredibly frustrating and costly for our veterans as they seek to get the care we promised them and that we are dutybound to provide. Sadly, in some cases veterans turn to alternative coping mechanisms that can lead to destructive addictions. We know that self-medication is a real problem, particularly for mental health issues, and veterans, unless they are diagnosed properly and receive the correct medical care, can spiral down as a result of an alcohol or drug addiction, which is a coping or self-medication mechanism that does not work out well. Those stories do not end well at all. Those are some of the challenges we have facing our veterans and trying to provide them with the services they are entitled to and have earned. But there is a good news part to this story. Last summer we took a major step to provide veterans with the healthcare they deserve when we passed the VA MISSION Act. This legislation will make significant reforms in the Department of Veterans Affairs and provide veterans with more flexibility to make decisions themselves regarding their healthcare. In other words, they don't have to adapt to the system. The system can adapt to them and be flexible to their needs. One of the most common frustrations I hear from my Texas veterans is that it is sometimes impractical to travel to the next VA hospital when they need care. This legislation, the VA MISSION Act, consolidates and improves VA community programs. In other words, you can get the care in your community. It allows veterans to receive care from private hospitals and doctors. It also provides funding for the Veterans Choice Program to continue until the approved Veterans Community Care Program matures and is fully in effect. The VA MISSION Act included some of the most substantial reforms to the veterans healthcare system in years, lowering the barriers to care for veterans and giving them more treatment options. It has also provided the largest funding increase in recent history for veterans' care and services and modernized the VA's electronic health record system. My hope is it will provide some needed relief to veterans and their families who aren't happy with the status quo, and we will continue to work with them until we get this right, to build on these reforms until we are able to provide the sort of care all of our veterans need and deserve. We don't want to just provide for these men and women's physical needs, we also need to ensure that they have adequate mental health resources as well. Last Congress, I was an original cosponsor of the Veteran Urgent Access to Mental Healthcare Act. Enacted as part of the 2018 Consolidated Appropriations Act, this law now allows those discharged under certain other-than-honorable conditions access to critical mental health care facilities. Veterans who are struggling deserve to be carefully evaluated at the onset of their mental illness and supported with the VA medical treatment necessary for their recovery. I was proud to introduce the Mental Health and Safe Communities Act, which established peer-to-peer services that connect qualified veterans with other veterans to provide support and mentorship. One of the things I hear from our servicemembers, when they take the uniform off, is that what they miss most about the military is the camaraderie and sense of teamwork and mutual support. This legislation is designed to try to provide some transitional support for peer-to-peer services, to connect qualified veterans with other veterans during that period of time. It will also allow qualified veterans to obtain treatment, recovery, stabilization, and rehabilitation services. While providing physical and mental healthcare for veterans is a top priority, it is only part of providing a smooth transition for those who leave military life to return to civilian life. We want to ensure that they have ample employment opportunities as well. Last month, the veterans unemployment rate was 2.9 percent--down from 4.1 percent in March of last year and lower than the national unemployment rate. I would like to think that is, in part, a result of the concerted effort we have made to provide more opportunity to our veterans to transition into a meaningful career after life in the military. I am encouraged by those positive numbers. We will continue to follow them and make sure it is not just a blip on the radar screen. Last Congress, I introduced the American Law Enforcement Heroes Act, which is now law. It amended a 1968 law to allow grant funds to be used to hire and train veterans as career law enforcement officers. Everywhere I go across the State of Texas, I talk to police departments that were really having huge challenges trying to fill the vacancies in their ranks. This will allow more of our veterans who are trained to serve as career law enforcement officers and use grant funds to hire and train them further to make sure they have the skills needed in a specific police department or law enforcement position. This bill makes sure veterans can get hired by local law enforcement agencies when they come out of the military with the very skills that are needed by those police agencies working to keep our communities safe. I also introduced the Jobs for Our Heroes Act, which was signed into law last January. This streamlines the process by which Active-Duty military reservists and veterans receive commercial driver's licenses. Finally, another bill I will mention was the Harry W. Colmery Veterans Educational Assistance Act, which made much needed updates for veterans facing school closures while enrolled. It also increased the resources and opportunities for educational assistance for veterans pursuing STEM careers--science, technology, engineering, and math-- something we need more of. Every piece of legislation I mentioned was signed into law by President Trump and represents our commitment in the Senate to supporting America's veterans. I am proud of the work we have been able to do together on a bipartisan basis--big and small--to provide America's veterans with the support and resources they need as they transition to civilian life. There is more I would like to accomplish this Congress to provide greater care and open more doors to veterans. I look forward to working with all of my colleagues to do exactly that. Tribute to Lieutenant General Paul E. Funk II Madam President, finally, I want to take just a moment to congratulate one outstanding servicemember from Texas who just received a big promotion. The Senate recently confirmed LTG Paul E. Funk II for his fourth star and for the position of commanding general of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command. Since 2017, General Funk has served as commanding general of the Third Armored Corps at Ford Hood, where he commands about 100,000 soldiers on five installations across five States. As excited as we were for him to take the helm at Fort Hood, it felt more like a homecoming for General Funk. As a matter of fact, he was born at Fort Hood and is the son of a previous commander of the Third Corps at Fort Hood. They were the first father-son duo to command the unit and joined a small but impressive group of other fathers and sons who have commanded the same corps. Throughout his career, General Funk has been deployed five times and led soldiers during Operations Desert Shield, Desert Storm, twice in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom, and Operation Inherent Resolve. General Funk is highly decorated and has received multiple Distinguished Service Medals, the Defense Superior Service Medal, multiple Legion of Merit awards, and numerous Bronze Stars, among other medals. I wanted to say a few words to congratulate soon-to-be General Funk and his wife, Dr. Beth Funk, on this incredible accomplishment. He is an outstanding soldier, leader, and patriot, and will do great work at TRADOC. The State of Texas is sad to say farewell, but we wish him the very best as he heads to Virginia for this incredible opportunity and his continued service to our country.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the mandatory quorum call be waived.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, 1 have 12 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing on drug pricing and prescription cost. Committee on Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Jeffrey L. Eberhardt, of Wisconsin, to be Special Representative of the President for Nuclear Nonproliferation, with the rank of Ambassador, and James S. Gilmore, of Virginia, to be U.S. Representative to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, with the rank of Ambassador, both of the Department of State; and Alan R. Swendiman, of North Carolina, to be Deputy Director of the Peace Corps. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions The Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the pending nominations and Gordon Hartogensis, of Connecticut, to be Director of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on immigration. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on abortion policy. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a closed hearing. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing. Subcommittee on Airland The Subcommittee on Airland of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 3 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities The Subcommittee on Emerging Threats and Capabilities of the Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 2:30 p.m., to conduct a hearing. Subcommittee on East Asia, The Pacific, and International Cybersecurity Policy The Subcommittee on East Asia, The Pacific, and International Cybersecurity Policy of the Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Tuesday, April 9, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Madam President, we learned yesterday that Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen was stepping down from her position as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. I just got off the phone with her and thanked her for her service. When the Department was first established more than a decade and a half ago, we knew that this position would be a very tough one, especially in the aftermath of 9/11--the terrible terrorist attacks. We knew that protecting the American people from the growing threat of terrorism was job No. 1. The truth is that this job has only gotten tougher as time has gone by. While counterterrorism remains a central focus for the DHS, the number of missions it is responsible for, both on the ground and in cyber space, has multiplied to include a myriad of natural and manmade threats. Since Secretary Nielsen has taken this job, she has led the Department's response through flooding and wildfires, foreign attempts to infiltrate our election infrastructure, and the growing humanitarian crisis we continue to see unfold along the southern border. Above all, Secretary Nielsen has been a fierce advocate for the men and women at the Department who carry out these diverse missions on a daily basis. With more than 240,000 DHS employees around the world-- many of them in Texas--keeping them mission-ready is one of the most important responsibilities the Secretary has, and it is one she has taken very seriously. I have had the opportunity to work closely with the Secretary on a number of issues but in particular on attempting to find commonsense reforms to secure our border and close loopholes that are being exploited in our immigration system. I have been consistently impressed by her deep knowledge of the issues and of her steadfast commitment to finding solutions. America is better off for her service, and I hope we will continue to find good people like the Secretary who will be willing to contribute their service to the betterment of our country. I thank her, and I wish her well in the next chapter of her life.

Mr. CORNYN

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

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I have 6 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: Committee on Armed Services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 4, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on Energy and Natural Resources The Committee on Energy and Natural Resources is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 4, 2019, at 10 a.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: David Bernhardt, of Virginia, to be Secretary, and Susan Combs, of Texas, to be an Assistant Secretary, both of the Department of the Interior, and Aimee Kathryn Jorjani, of Wisconsin, to be Chairman of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 4, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., to conduct a hearing. Committee on the Judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 3, 2019, at 2:45 p.m., to conduct a hearing on the following nominations: Daniel P. Collins, and Kenneth Kiyul Lee, both of California, both to be a United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, James Wesley Hendrix, and Mark T. Pittman, both to be a United States District Judge for the Northern District of Texas, Sean D. Jordan, to be United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Texas, Ronald D. Vitiello, of Illinois, to be an Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security, Virgil Madden, of Indiana, to be a Commissioner of the United States Parole Commission, and Nick Edward Proffitt, of Virginia, to be United States Marshal for the Eastern District of Virginia, Department of Justice. Select Committee on Intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Wednesday, April 3, 2019, at 2.45 p.m., to conduct a closed hearing. Subcommittee on Aviation, Operations, Safety, and Security The Subcommittee on Aviation, Operations, Safety, and Security of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, April 4, 2019, at 10:15 a.m., to conduct a hearing.

Mr. CORNYN

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, over the last 2 years, since the beginning of the Trump administration, our Senate Democratic colleagues have brought our work to a crawl over judicial and executive branch nominees. It is as if they have frustration and surprise over the election of President Trump in the first place and still haven't gotten over it. This is another way in which they have sought to undermine the administration--to deny the President the staff necessary to populate the various executive branch Agencies as well as the judiciary. The way you do that in the Senate is by stringing out the amount of time it takes to confirm nominees who ordinarily would have been confirmed by consent or by voice vote--certainly, not by taking 3 days or so at a time to generate a confirmation. It is not because these nominees are unqualified or even controversial; it is simply because this is how the resistance operates at a time when President Trump is President of the United States. These nominees are being used as a weapon to slow the work of the Senate and, really, to deny us the floor time in which to do other things that we might be doing that would be beneficial to the American people, and they have been running this play repeatedly over the last 2 years. In February of 2018, President Trump nominated John Ryder to serve on the board of the Tennessee Valley Authority. The work of the TVA is undeniably important, but this isn't the sort of high-profile job that typically leads to a contentious nomination. In fact, these board positions are normally confirmed by voice vote. Mr. Ryder was, by any account, well qualified for the job. He received unanimous support from the committee of jurisdiction, the Committee on Environment and Public Works. Under normal circumstances, he would have been quickly confirmed by the entire Senate. Our Democratic friends, instead, decided to delay and delay and delay some more and forced the Senate to hold a cloture vote on the nominee, which caused him to sit in limbo for 400 days. I wonder how many Americans who want to serve their country in some positions that require Senate confirmation can afford to put their lives on hold and wait for 400 days or more just for the Senate to get around to doing something that should be somewhat of a routine job. With Mr. Ryder, in the end, the irony would almost be funny if it were not so pathetic. Ultimately, he was confirmed by voice vote. For 400 days, we waited to achieve the result we all knew we were to have all along if Mr. Ryder were to hang in there long enough. For 400 days, the TVA waited for the vacancy to be filled without there being an end in sight, and for 400 days, Mr. Ryder and his family waited and waited and waited with uncertainty. Sadly, he is not alone. He is part of a long list of nominees who have received similar mistreatment. There is one Texan, a friend of mine, who had to wait even longer. Susan Combs is a fourth-generation rancher from Big Bend who has led an impressive career in both the public and private sectors and has gained the respect of virtually every person who has crossed her path. She served as a member of the Texas House of Representatives, then as the first female agriculture commissioner of Texas, and later served as the Texas comptroller of public accounts. When she was nominated to be the Department of the Interior's Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget, I was thrilled, and I was happy to introduce her before her committee hearing. Less than a month after she was nominated, Susan was unanimously approved by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. Again, I was hopeful that her nomination would sail through since it, clearly, was not a controversial nomination. Unfortunately, that was not the case. Here we are, 631 days later, and Susan Combs has still not been confirmed. Again, it is not because she is not qualified for the job or that she is a controversial nominee. Just the opposite is true. This is simply the way our Democratic colleagues have sought to deal with nominees from this President. If Senate Democrats were delaying well-qualified nominees like Susan to make sure they had adequate opportunity to debate their nominations, we wouldn't have any disagreement with that, but we know, by their actions, that they will stop at nothing to bring the work of this body to a screeching halt, particularly during the time of the Trump administration. Over the last 2 years, our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have forced votes on nominees who in previous years would have sailed through the Senate. During President Trump's first 2 years, we held more than five times the number of cloture votes on nominees as we did during the same time for the last six Presidents combined. So to call this unprecedented is not an exaggeration, and the long list of vacancies is growing. Our government is suffering, and the services that we provide to the American people are being obstructed as well. The Senate's duty of advice and consent is important, but it is not our only job. We have a lot of other things we are supposed to do here, and they are falling by the wayside while we try to work through these, largely, noncontroversial judicial and executive branch nominees. Unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues' delay tactics have brought us to the point at which we really don't have many other options. We have tried negotiations. We have been told they will be happy to limit postcloture debate time but that, oh, by the way, they will not agree to that unless it starts in the year 2021. This is hardly a principled position. This is simply about resisting President Trump, his administration, and this administration's ability to do the job the President was elected to do. What we have proposed is something that will not make nominations easier to be confirmed. The process will be largely the same, and the vote threshold will remain the same. It will simply keep us from wasting valuable time that we should be spending on debating and voting on other important policies, not widely supported nominees. This certainly isn't as radical a change as many of our Democratic colleagues are presenting it to be. In January of 2013, current Majority Leader Schumer and then Majority Leader Harry Reid led the charge to make similar changes in order to process President Obama's nominees. At that time, Republicans were in the minority. What did we do then? Well, we weren't exactly fans of President Obama's, but he had just been elected to his second term, and suffice it to say that while we were hoping for a different outcome, we weren't about to obstruct his ability to populate and staff the various Departments in the Federal Government. We didn't obstruct nominees. We didn't sulk. We didn't try to prevent the President from filling these nominations throughout the entire government. This is our government. In fact, we took the opposite approach. Along with several of my Republican colleagues, I joined Democrats in voting for a resolution that would speed up the consideration process for lower level nominees. I have to give Senator Alexander, the Senator from Tennessee, a lot of credit for negotiating that in the first place. But it has now expired, and we are back to the status quo before that temporary change went into effect. Like the changes we are talking about today, it didn't change the threshold for nominees; it just made the process a little more efficient. It received votes from 78 Senators on a bipartisan basis. So that is why it is a real head-scratcher that we find ourselves where we are today. Unfortunately, I think we know what the answer is. This is part of the anti-Trump resistance. Unfortunately, it is not playing out just in social media or on TV; it is playing out right here in the Senate--what used to be known as the world's greatest deliberative body. When our colleagues Senator Blunt, chairman of the Rules Committee, and Senator Lankford of Oklahoma introduced this resolution, I was surprised that our colleagues across the aisle wouldn't do what we did back in 2013. Back then, all but one Member of the Democratic caucus voted for the resolution--again, something very similar to what we are proposing today--but yesterday, they refused to even proceed to debate a similar change. They could have offered amendments. They could have made changes to the resolution where they thought it fell short. But no--their commitment to obstruction remains. It is clear they don't really oppose the resolution; they oppose supporting a resolution under the President of another party. Indeed, they oppose supporting this resolution under President Trump. When 78 Republicans voted for a similar change in 2013--as I said, we didn't vote for President Obama, but we understood the importance of protecting the Senate as an institution and allowing our valuable work to continue on behalf of the American people. I wish our colleagues across the aisle had that same commitment today. Just as I supported this modest change in 2013, I will support it again today. This will allow us to make meaningful progress in confirming the long list of pending nominees without impeding our ability to do our other work, like legislation. In particular, there are four district court nominees from Texas I am eager to get off the Senate calendar and on the Federal bench. I yield the floor.