Tom Cotton

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, our Tax Code is a mess. No one voted for it, no one wants it, and no one likes it. I have said many times we should eliminate all of the special interest loopholes in the code and use that money to cut taxes for everyone, including American businesses. We want to encourage them to invest, grow, and create more jobs right here in America. I know my colleagues are working on a tax bill, and I want to stress how much I support their efforts. I will, of course, withhold judgment on any proposal until I see the final text, but I also want to say today, I have reservations about one idea that is being considered. It is called a border adjustment tax. It sounds like something from Orwell's Newspeak. Here is how it would work. We would cut taxes for corporations. To make up for the lost revenue, we would tax businesses whenever they bought something from another country. For instance, every time Ford bought an auto part from Canada, it would pay a 20-percent tax or every time your local grocery store bought bananas from Guatemala, it would pay a 20-percent tax. Whatever money businesses made from selling their products in other countries would be exempt. In other words, what all this would amount to is a 20-percent tax on imports. The proponents of this tax contend it would stop businesses from leaving our country because right now some are moving overseas to avoid paying our corporate tax rate, which is the highest in the modern industrial world. Under this proposal, it would not matter where you put your headquarters, you would be taxed according to what you bought, not where you put down your stake. The hope is, this arrangement would mean more headquarters, more factories and the jobs that come with them staying right here in America, which of course is a desirable goal, no doubt, but I am not at all convinced this is the best way to do it. Consider this. It is estimated that this one change alone would produce something like $100 billion a year in additional tax revenue. That is a lot of money, and someone has to pay for it. I will tell you exactly who is going to pay: working Americans who have been struggling for decades. A tax on imports is a tax on things working folks buy every single day. I am not talking about caviar and champagne. I am talking about T-shirts, jeans, shoes, baby clothes, toys, and groceries. I have heard from thousands of Arkansans who are already struggling just to get by. Why would we make the stuff they get at Walmart more expensive? Its defenders say the tax will not increase the cost of imports. What will happen, they say, is our exports will be cheaper because we no longer tax them so then more people overseas will buy our exports from us, which means the dollar itself will increase in value. That means imports will not be expensive because you will be able to buy them with a stronger dollar. So even with the tax added on, you will still come out right where you were before. This logic reminds me of Orwell again: Some ideas are so stupid only an intellectual could believe them. This is a theory wrapped in speculation inside a guess. Nobody knows for sure what will happen. No one can know for sure because currency markets fluctuate daily based on millions of decisions and events. Just because an economist slaps an equation on a blackboard does not make it real so I am more than a little concerned these predictions will not pan out. As the old joke goes, after all, economists have predicted nine of the last five recessions. But if that happens, it will not be economists and intellectuals and politicians in Washington and New York left holding the bag; working Americans will get stiffed again. Finally, I want to say a word about jobs. One of the biggest reasons for fixing the Tax Code is that it would help create more jobs, but if we increase the cost of goods, people obviously can't buy as much, which will hurt retail sales and retail jobs too. Retail companies are the largest private sector employers in almost every State. Are we really going to impose a huge tax on the livelihood of so many Americans and say: Oh, don't worry. It will all work out in the end. We have to take a hard look at this proposal right now. Therefore, while I support fundamental tax reform and commit to reserve judgment on any final bill until I read it, today I want to put on the record my serious concerns about a border adjustment tax. Many other Senators share those concerns. We most certainly will not keep our powder dry and see working American's railroaded with a precooked deal that raises their taxes and increases the price of the stuff they buy every single day. It is February 15. By law, the President is required to submit a budget to Congress by the first Monday of this month. That was over a week ago. Now, being a new administration, we expect him to be a few weeks late as has typically happened in recent times. The difference this year, though, is that President Trump still does not have a budget director. We are 4 weeks into his Presidency, and we are only just now getting around to confirming his nominee. For those of you keeping score at home, that is the longest delay in recent history. Every one of the last six Presidents had their budget director confirmed by a week's time--as in 7 days. In other words, what we are seeing is a deliberate act of obstruction. Here is the real problem. We have serious work to do. It is that much more difficult for the President to do his job when all he has is a headless horseman bureaucracy. Senate Democrats might consider this payback. They might consider it their chance to audition for the 2020 Presidential primary, but the American people are the ones paying the price for this obstruction. I want to say again, this is not a game. This is not a protest. This is our job. This is what the American people sent us to do. It is time we got down to business. In that spirit, I want to say a few words in support of the President's nominee for the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, Mick Mulvaney. I don't have to cite or recite Mick's biography for many of you. He has been representing the good people of South Carolina's Fifth District in the House of Representatives for more than 6 years now. Before that, he led an impressive career as what he called a serial entrepreneur, starting four different businesses. I hear some of them may have even succeeded. He has worked in fields as varied as law, real estate, homebuilding, and restaurants. He is highly educated and very accomplished. I would like to point out, he is a friend of mine, a trusted confidant, someone whose advice and counsel I have often sought. I can say with confidence, he will serve President Trump and the American people with dedication and distinction. I believe Mick will bring a needed voice to the President's Cabinet, a voice for fiscal responsibility after so many years of irresponsible sky-is-the-limit spending. All that experience in the real economy gives him something more than a lengthy resume. He knows from personal experience what it takes to create jobs and create opportunities out of almost nothing. He knows the self-discipline it takes, the hard work, the perseverance. He knows what Americans have to go through every day just to earn an honest dollar. That is why he has been so protective of every taxpayer dollar ever put in his care. That is the kind of man we need as our next OMB Director. It is only when Washington appreciates what goes into making all of those taxpayer dollars that it will show the taxpayers the respect they deserve. I want to express my strong support for the next Director of the Office of Management and Budget, my friend, Mick Mulvaney. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

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

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I have five 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, February 9, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. committee on foreign relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 9, 2017, at 10 a.m., to hold a hearing entitled ``The United States, The Russian Federation and the Challenges Ahead.'' committee on the judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on February 9, 2017, at 10 a.m., in SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. select committee on intelligence The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Thursday, February 9, 2017, from 2 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., in room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building. subcommittee on regulatory affairs and federal management The Subcommittee on Regulatory Affairs and Federal Management of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on Thursday, February 9, 2017, at 10 a.m. in order to conduct a hearing entitled ``Empowering Managers: Ideas for a More Effective Federal Workforce.''

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, as I said before, we should not be holding up any of the President's nominees. There is far too much work to be done, but I think that is especially true for the man whose nomination is before us today, the next Secretary of Health and Human Services, Dr. Tom Price, who I am happy to say has my full support. It is especially important that we confirm Dr. Price because, as we all know, our health care has undergone some serious turmoil as of late. This was undoubtedly caused, at least in part, by the rolling calamity of ObamaCare. You can step back and you survey the wreckage, and it is sobering to see what that law has left in its wake: double- digit premium hikes, very high deductibles, and millions of canceled plans. For all the fanfare over the law's passage, and all the arguments that followed, it seems we have forgotten the person who matters the most, the patient. That is what the next HHS Secretary is facing, a Herculean or perhaps you might say a Humpty-Dumpty-like task of picking up the pieces and rebuilding our health care system from the ground up. So as we consider this nomination, I think it is appropriate to ask ourselves: If we need someone who will focus on the needs of patients, why not pick a doctor? Dr. Price was an orthopedic surgeon in private practice for nearly 20 years. He taught and trained young doctors personally. So when he hears the phrase ``quality, affordable, personalized care,'' it is not an abstract notion to him. It is not something he dreamed up in the Halls of Congress because he himself has provided just that kind of care to real people. When we repeal and replace ObamaCare, we have to avoid the kind of thinking that gave rise to it. We need someone with on-the-ground understanding of what it takes to care for patients, someone who knows what it is like to stand at a bedside with a patient comforting her in a confusing and frightful moment. Dr. Tom Price is that man. Tom Price is also my friend. We served together in the House of Representatives. He is a good man. That is why, during his time in public service, he has earned the respect of his colleagues as he has worked his way up the ranks: chairman of the Republican study committee, chairman of the House Republican policy committee, and, most recently, chairman of the House Budget Committee. He has studied our health care system from top to bottom, and he is no stranger to the health care battles the last 8 years. You could say his chief qualification for the job of replacing ObamaCare is he had the good sense to oppose it in the first place, but Tom Price did not just vote no. Contrary to what you have heard from the Democrats, he also offered his own alternative, the Empowering Patients First Act. You may or may not like that bill, but I think you have to admire that he was willing to make a serious proposal. That is the kind of leadership we need at the Department of Health and Human Services. I want to express my support for Tom Price's nomination to be the next Secretary of Health and Human Services. I urge all Senators to vote for his confirmation. I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. COTTON

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

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I have to admit that this is a bittersweet moment for me. I come here tonight to express my support for Jeff Sessions' nomination to be the next Attorney General of the United States. It is a high honor, and the nominee is more than worthy. The truth is, I will be sad to see him go. In all the time I have known Senator Sessions, I have found him to be a consummate gentleman. We actually met before I entered the Senate. It was 2013. I was serving in the House of Representatives--a first-term Congressman. Senator Sessions, of course, was my elder in both age and rank. Yet he reached out to me humbly to discuss a hot topic-- immigration. Back then, there was an effort afoot to force through Congress a massive immigration bill the American people clearly did not want. So the two of us worked together to stop it, and I am glad to say we were successful. I took away more from that experience than an appreciation of the Senator's legislative skills. I got a sense of his character: how he saw the world, what he believed, and why. If I had to sum it up, I would say this is a man who loves the law--who has spent decades doing all he could. Senator Sessions knows the law shouldn't be the spider's web of old, which catches the weak but cannot constrain the mighty. It is supposed to uphold the entire community so all Americans can thrive. What we have is a legal system that at its best strives to be a justice system. I think if you look at Senator Sessions' career, you can see the same qualities represented by the balance, the blindfold, and the sword of Lady Justice. First, like the balance, he has a judicious mind--honed over his 12 years as a U.S. attorney and his 2 years as attorney general of the State of Alabama. He evaluates the evidence carefully and comes to a well-considered conclusion. I would argue it is this very approach that led him to advocate for an immigration system that works for working Americans. I have every confidence, as our top law enforcement officer, he will keep the interests of American citizens uppermost in his mind. Second, like the blindfold, he is impartial and fair-minded. I think of the fair sentencing law he passed, with bipartisan support, to bring harsh penalties that fell disproportionately on African Americans more in line with the kinds of penalties that fell on other criminals. I also think of his work on behalf of a more equitable distribution of funding for HIV-AIDS patients. Just as Senator Sessions strove to represent the interests of all Alabamians, I think Attorney General Sessions will strive to uphold the rights of all Americans. Third, like the sword, Senator Sessions believes in swift and strong enforcement. Perhaps the best argument for his candidacy is the extensive list of endorsements he has received: the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Sheriffs' Association, and the list goes on. I would think such widespread support among the people he would oversee would make a deep impression on any Senator's mind. If the people who actually enforce the law believe in his leadership, then so do I. So I am sorry to see him say goodbye to this august body, but I am confident he will serve the American people well. He is the right man for the job. I urge all Senators to vote for his confirmation. Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Reserving the right to object, I feel like Yogi Berra when he said ``It's deja vu all over again.'' Just 18 hours ago, the Senator from New York and I stood here, and he made the exact same request, and I objected to it. And I will object again. I will object tomorrow, and I will object for as long as he wants to make these requests. I will point out, though, that the business of the people is not being done. For all of you up there in the Gallery, we just started 20 minutes ago. That is the regular order under which the Senate starts when it can't reach agreement on when to start earlier. We typically would start around 9:30 or 10, but the Democrats refused to allow us to come in earlier today to start processing some of the President's nominations. You may have heard on TV that Democrats on the Finance Committee have boycotted their hearing this morning. They refused to show up to do their job to confirm some of the President's nominees. I don't know how long they plan to do this. I don't know if they intend to abscond out of the district, if we are going to have to vote to have the Sergeant at Arms track them down and haul them into work to do their business. I see him standing right over there. He has a distinguished record in military and law enforcement. He could probably do that effectively. I wish, though, that they would simply show up and have a debate and do their work and confirm the President's nominees in an orderly process. The Senator from New York mentioned State Department officials who had left work last week. Well, there is a simple solution for getting political accountability at the State Department, and that is for this body to confirm Rex Tillerson to be the Secretary of State. Finally, I just want to make a few points about Ms. Yates's firing last night, since that is the only thing that has changed since the Senator from New York and I were on the floor yesterday. Ms. Yates, in her letter about the President's order, did not cite any provision of the Constitution, any Federal law that suggested the President's order was unlawful or unconstitutional, nor could she because her own Office of Legal Counsel, which provides legal guidance for the executive branch, had already reviewed the order before it was issued for its form and its legality and had signed off on it. Her decision was a policy decision, which is not a decision of the Attorney General--certainly is not a decision of a holdover Acting Attorney General--to make. She was grandstanding. She should have been relieved. I am glad the President relieved her. The American people deserve to have a politically accountable Attorney General to make these decisions, which we would have, yet again I say, if the Democrats would simply do their job and process these nominees in an orderly fashion. So, as I said, on behalf of the Republican Conference, I object. I will object tomorrow. I will object for as long as we make these frivolous, dilatory requests.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I want to express my support for Rex Tillerson to be our next Secretary of State. Mr. Tillerson is one of the most distinguished businessmen in the world. His reputation precedes him. I don't have to recount for all of you his remarkable career--rising from an entry-level production engineer to CEO of ExxonMobil, the largest oil company in the world. Mr. Tillerson's story should be an inspiration to kids across this country: Through hard work, discipline, and striving, you can achieve your dreams, even if you weren't born into wealth, power, or privilege. Like the Boy Scouts he has mentored, like the Eagle Scout he was, Mr. Tillerson inspires by his example. No one can doubt Mr. Tillerson has acquired a wide range of skills throughout his notable life, as well as a gold-plated reputation. I think it goes without saying that a man of such varied experiences will bring a well-informed and shrewd perspective to the post. In fact, I would suggest that it is the very perspective which recommends him most for the job. I met with him in December, and we had a wide-ranging conversation about Russia, the Middle East, human rights, and the many other geopolitical challenges and opportunities facing our country. I was impressed by the breadth of his knowledge, his familiarity with so many world leaders, and his understanding of their peoples. The one thing that really stood out to me was his clear-eyed, hard-nosed prudence. It is little wonder that Mr. Tillerson comes highly recommended by Dick Cheney and Bob Gates, seasoned statesmen with no illusions about the world and no doubts about America's role in it. I am confident that as Secretary of State, he will protect the interests of the American people just as he protected the interests of ExxonMobil's shareholders as their CEO. I have heard some Senators wonder whether a businessman can really walk away from a company and its financial interests--as if it were the money that made the man, instead of the man who made the money. Their concern reminds me of similar questions raised about one of the best Secretaries of State in the modern era, George Shultz. When President Reagan nominated him, Secretary Shultz was president and director of the Bechtel Group, a large construction concern with business across the Arab world. People asked whether Secretary Shultz would therefore tilt U.S. policy toward those countries. I think anyone looking back today on his record would marvel at those fears. In 2015, the World Jewish Congress awarded Secretary Shultz its prestigious Theodor Herzl Award on behalf of his work with America's good friend Israel. Yes, Secretary Shultz went on to lead a very successful tenure, working with different countries all over the world and always putting America's interests front and center. If anything, Rex Tillerson's business experience will only enhance his ability to provide the President his sound, unbiased judgment. If you need any more evidence, just look at the way Mr. Tillerson has conducted himself throughout the confirmation process. He has answered every question and addressed every concern. He has been calm and steady under pressure. These are precisely the qualities we need in our next Secretary of State. Today, I offer my strong support for an outstanding businessman and an American patriot, our next Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson. I encourage all of my colleagues to vote for the nomination. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I object to the first request.

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, so once again we are hearing the Democrats and the media traffic in fake news. We heard a lot on this floor and over the weekend about a Muslim ban. This is a so-called Muslim ban that applies only to seven countries, and it does not apply to Indonesia, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, or Nigeria--the five largest Muslim populations in the world. I have heard lots of claims on TV about 134 million Muslims who could be affected. Of course that leaves 1.6 billion Muslims who are not affected. This is not a Muslim ban; this is a temporary pause of movement from seven countries, which President Trump did not pick from thin air. He picked from acts of this Congress and the Obama Department of Homeland Security--five countries in a state of near anarchy; a sixth country, Iraq, which has had a large part of its territory overrun by the Islamic State; and a seventh, Iran, which is the world's worst state sponsor of terrorism. Moreover, it is not a ban; it is simply a temporary pause for 3 to 4 months to evaluate whether Obama administration policies are strong enough to keep this country safe. We also heard claims that this is somehow unconstitutional. However, there is no free-floating global right of people around the world to come to this country. President Trump's order is nothing more than a temporary pause on migration from countries with very weak state institutions or which sponsor terrorism, while the President and the administration take a more thorough review of our vetting procedures and the refugee program as a whole. Secretary Kelly has stated that it does not apply to green card holders. Secretary Mattis is reportedly advising that the long-term policy accommodate Iraqis with a documented history of serving with our troops, which I obviously support. In fact, a temporary pause for security evaluations is so sensible that in November 2015, after the Paris terrorist attacks, even the minority leader suggested that ``a pause may be necessary.'' It wasn't beyond the pale then, and it is not now. Moreover, the people who are enforcing our laws on the frontlines agree with President Trump. The union for Border Patrol and Customs Enforcement agents has stated that they support this order and two other related immigration orders. Yet here is the minority shedding crocodile tears over President Trump's immigration refugee policy, but where were those tears for the last 8 years when President Obama's foreign policy created all of these refugees? Where were the tears when President Obama overthrew the Government of Libya with nothing to follow? Where were the tears when President Obama withdrew from Iraq, leaving that country to fend off Iran and the Islamic State? Where were the tears when President Obama gave Iran $100 billion to continue its imperial campaign throughout the Middle East, to include overthrowing the Government of Yemen through its proxies? And most notoriously, where were the tears when President Obama stood idly by and watched Syria go up in flames? Spare me the tears now. If the minority is worried about the President's counsel and wants to make a difference in the real world, I suggest we get to work and we confirm Rex Tillerson to be the Secretary of State and Jeff Sessions to be the Attorney General. In the meantime, I object. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I reserve the right to object. If the Democratic leader wants to proceed.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, today I urge all Senators to confirm Mike Pompeo as Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. Mike is a distinguished Congressman, a successful businessman, an Army veteran, and he is my friend. I served with Mike for 2 years in the House of Representatives. Over the last 2 years, we both served on our respective intelligence committees. I cannot count the hours we have spent together reviewing analytic products, assessing the needs of the intelligence community, conducting oversight of that community, and we have traveled the world together to do those things. From personal experience, I can tell you this is a man who understands exactly what it takes to keep America safe. He understands it because he has dedicated his life to it. When he was 19, Mike decided to join the Army, writing a blank check to his country for any amount, up to his life. He graduated first in his class at West Point and afterward joined the 1st Squadron, 2nd Cavalry, patrolling the Iron Curtain in Germany. For some people--including not a few in this Chamber--the Cold War is little more than ancient history and mostly the unfortunate result of American provocation and misunderstanding, but for Mike Pompeo, it was real life. He saw for himself the tank divisions, the gunships, and the eastern frontier of freedom. He knows, from personal experience, that conflict is rarely just a big misunderstanding, something you can clear up with reset buttons, open hands, and nice gestures. Our enemies have made a deliberate choice to oppose our way of life, and if we are to protect it, we must be equally deliberate, clear-eyed, and hard-nosed in our defense. I have every confidence that Mike Pompeo will do that. He has succeeded in everything he has ever done. After his military service, he excelled at Harvard Law School. Later, he started his own company and went on to serve as president of another. He is a community leader in his adopted home of Wichita, where Kansans have elected him in repeated landslides to serve them in the House of Representatives. In the House, Mike is a sober, respected voice. In short, Mike has spent his entire life preparing for a moment like this. It is clear why President Trump didn't interview anyone else for the job after meeting Mike. It is a big job, and the CIA will benefit from new blood and fresh leadership. Mike is ready for the job. As he said himself, he doesn't take a backseat to anyone when it comes to protecting our security and our privacy. Some politicians may say things like that, but it is all talk. It is nothing but talk. With Mike, it is the real deal. Don't take my word for it. Here is what prominent Democrats are saying about Mike Pompeo. Leon Panetta, a respected public servant and former CIA Director himself, says Mike Pompeo ``is somebody who understands the intelligence agencies, is smart, and somebody I think will be a good director.'' John Brennan, who just departed as CIA Director, says he ``looks forward to being able to hand this baton over to somebody who is as dedicated an American as Mike Pompeo.'' Adam Schiff, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, says Mike Pompeo ``is bright and hard-working'' and ``he is willing to listen and engage, both key qualities in a CIA director.'' I couldn't agree more. It seems, among the people who actually know Mike Pompeo--and who actually know the job--there are no last-minute political stunts or petty delaying tactics. They understand intelligence is deadly serious business and ought not be treated like a political football. In a world as dangerous as ours, with threats gathering every day, there is no more time for dithering. We need a CIA Director of the highest caliber, and Mike Pompeo is the man for the job. I commend President Trump for this inspired nomination, I thank Mike for once again answering the call of duty, and I also thank his wife Susan for her love and steadfast support of Mike in the trying times and sacrifices that inevitably will lie ahead. The time has come to put aside partisan politics and do the right thing for our country and the brave men and women of the CIA. I call on every Senator to vote for confirmation and to send to the CIA a strong leader, a wise counselor, and a fierce patriot. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I have one request for a committee to meet during today's session of the Senate. It has 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 Foreign Relations The Committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 23, 2017, at 4:30 p.m.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, my home State of Arkansas lost one of its great statesmen last week with the passing of former State Senator Stanley Russ. Stanley was a man of the soil. Born in Conway, he grew up on a dairy farm just outside the city. He went through the public school system and earned a degree in agriculture from the University of Arkansas. Although he spent the bulk of his career in the life insurance business, over the years he continued to raise cattle. Even when he was an old man, you could find him clearing brush on the road to his house. That is how we thought of him--always keeping busy, always working, and always in touch with the needs of the land and its people. As a veteran, I have to say that one of the things I most admired about Stanley Russ was his military service. He served in the Army for 2 years, completed Officer Candidate School, and became an instructor in artillery. After being discharged, he served as a company commander in the Arkansas National Guard for several years. In 1995, Stanley was inducted into the U.S. Field Artillery OCS Hall of Fame at Ft. Sill, OK. His true calling in life was public service. Stanley represented Conway for 26 years in the Arkansas State Senate. More impressive than his lengthy tenure was his unimpeachable integrity. Stanley Russ was universally known as good, sturdy stock. The story is often told that during his first campaign, one of his opponents had some of his poll watchers thrown in jail. But Stanley won the race anyway and went on to pass legislation protecting the rights of all poll watchers. He served in the senate with distinction, championing quality education for all of Arkansas' students and eventually rising to the office of president pro tempore. Stanley Russ was a model for all of us in public service. I got to know Stanley well in my first campaign. He remained a friend and trusted source of advice and support until he passed away. I have heard Stanley died peacefully, surrounded by his loving family as his granddaughter sang the hymn, ``Great is Thy Faithfulness.'' In his words, he considered himself ``greatly blessed, highly favored, imperfect, but a forgiven child of the King.'' But perhaps the best summing up was given by the man who now holds his seat, State Senator Jason Rapert. As Senator Rapert put it, Stanley Russ was ``the kind of man that God made only one time.'' As I stand on the Senate floor, I wish to say on behalf of our grateful State: Stanley Russ, rest in peace. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I would like to recognize Shelby Gardner, of Warren, AK, as this week's Arkansan of the Week, for her work with the Arkansas Veterans Hospital posttraumatic stress disorder program in Little Rock. Shelby is a senior at Warren High School in Bradley County and is proof that you are never too young to give back to your community. Shelby wanted to find a way to honor the men and women who put their lives on the line for our safety: our veterans. Specifically, she wanted to help those veterans who suffer from posttraumatic stress. After learning about the Arkansas Veterans Hospital posttraumatic stress disorder program, Shelby began to talk with anyone who would listen about the program--friends and family, her church congregation, civic clubs, and other organizations across Warren and Bradley County. She told them about her passion for helping veterans, the good work this program does, and how much it would benefit from additional support. Her hard work paid off. With the help of a local auctioneer, Shelby organized a community bake sale auction and managed to raise $8,000 for the Arkansas Veterans Hospital. But Shelby wasn't finished. She and a group of other volunteers spent hours preparing and selling sandwiches at the Bradley County fair and raised an additional $2,000, for a grand total of $10,000 for veterans suffering from posttraumatic stress. A veteran in Shelby's community was struck by her commitment to such a noble cause and in his nomination of Shelby wrote: ``Her actions are proof that patriotism runs deep in small town America. She is an exceptional representative of many young people in our nation deeply committed to the men and women who serve protecting and defending our nation and our way of life. Shelby is a shining example of the caliber of young person this country requires to ensure the survival of our nation and our values. She is a focused, goal oriented young woman who is a credit to her family, her church, her community, her state and nation.'' I am equally as inspired by Shelby's hard work and her commitment to our veterans. Patriotism does indeed run deep in a State like Arkansas. Now, because of her efforts, the Veterans Hospital in Little Rock can better serve Arkansans who suffer from PTSD. It is an honor to recognize Shelby Gardner as Arkansan of the Week, and I am thankful for people like Shelby who, using the resources around them, work to make others' lives better.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, today I wish to recognize James A. Ross of Cotter as the Arkansan of the Week for exemplifying what it means to be a great Arkansan. After serving in the U.S. Navy, Jim and his wife Mary Lou moved to Cotter in 1959 to raise their three boys because they saw Arkansas as a State that puts people first. Jim worked as a carpenter and played a role in the construction of many buildings in Cotter, Mountain Home, and other areas in North Central Arkansas. Until his retirement, he worked tirelessly to ensure the success and stability of his family, his church, and his community. Jim is a popular guy in Cotter. He has always been an active member of the community. He served as the Cotter school board secretary and worked to help build the current Cotter City Hall. Additionally, Jim has served as a deacon for First Baptist Church in Cotter for over 40 years. Jim and Mary Lou have been married for over 64 years. Jim now spends his time enjoying his three children and a number of grandchildren and great-grandchildren. In fact, it was one of those grandkids, Cameron, who nominated Jim for Arkansan of the Week. In his nomination, Cameron wrote: Jim's faith drives his every move, and at 86-years-old, he still gives as much back to the community as he possibly can. On any given day you can find him driving around town waving at passersby, or working in his garden in front of his green- and-brown house with sunflowers painted on it. Cameron continued: Jim Ross is a great Arkansan, not because he has done one major thing, but because he has done countless little things to further his city, his state, and his nation. I couldn't agree more. Jim truly embodies what it means to be the Arkansan of the Week. We could all take a few lessons from him about commitment to faith, family, and community. Jim and Mary Lou came to Arkansas because they saw it as a State that puts people first, and it is people like Jim who make that recognition a reality. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Madam President, reserving the right to object, I share mutual esteem with the Senator from Iowa. I hate to find myself on the opposite side of an issue with him. We had this conversation in February as well, almost 9 months ago. There are many fine provisions in this legislation, as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee outlined, including his legendary work on holding agencies and recipients of Federal funds accountable and working with the GAO to ferret out fraud and abuses. My objection to this legislation is very specific. It is not, as the Senator from Rhode Island said, about the jailing of juveniles for so- called status offenses; that is, for something a juvenile would do-- such as smoking cigarettes, running away from home, skipping school-- that wouldn't be a crime if you were 18 years old. So for all these young pages down here who are not supposed to be smoking cigarettes, the law currently says you cannot put them in jail for smoking cigarettes--and you shouldn't smoke cigarettes regardless. However, if a juvenile goes before a juvenile judge and the juvenile judge issues a valid court order and tells him ``Don't smoke any more cigarettes, don't skip school, and don't run away from home'' and that juvenile flaunts the authority of the judge, that judge needs some mechanism to enforce his orders. That is no longer a status offense; that is contempt of court. In my many conversations with Arkansans--be it judges, prosecutors, parents, or public defenders--they have said repeatedly that the judge needs that authority to get the attention of that juvenile delinquent. I want this legislation to pass, as I said 9 months ago in a colloquy with the Senator from Rhode Island. I thought we had an agreement worked out about a provision on the inherent authority of judges. It didn't work out, but we worked together in good faith on it. On multiple occasions, I worked with the chairman of the Judiciary Committee to resolve some of these issues. Some activists say that we shouldn't do this to kids who are so young, so I proposed an age floor in the teenage years. Some say they might be corrupted or hardened by even more hard-core juvenile delinquents in a detention facility. I said let's impose a separation requirement. Some activists have said that they could be detained indefinitely. I said that is fine too; let's put a time limit on how long they can be detained. But repeatedly we have been told this legislation cannot be changed. I would submit to the Senate that these are all small, reasonable changes that would allow this legislation to move forward quickly in the Senate here in these final couple weeks and again on the suspension calendar in the House of Representatives. But when Arkansans have specifically passed justice reform legislation in recent years in our legislature and they retained this authority of juvenile judges not to detain delinquents for their status offenses but because they disobeyed a valid court order, I don't think we in Washington should dictate a single one-size-fits-all solution for every State in the Union. This legislation or legislation like it has come before the Senate multiple times in recent years, and every time it is hung up on this specific issue. I want to protect Arkansas' interests. I want to ensure that judges can enforce their own orders. I want to do what is best for the people of my State and our criminal justice system. I also want to pass this legislation. So I would offer to both proponents of this legislation that we continue to try to address some of these proposals I have made, but until then, I am going to have to, regrettably, object.

Mr. COTTON

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

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, my Arkansan of the week is Jack Shatford, and the recognition is both honorary and, sadly, posthumous. Jack passed away last month during one of his many hunting trips to Arkansas. He loved our State and its people, and we all miss him badly. Jack first got to know Arkansas on the other side of the world in Vietnam. Jack and my dad Len served together in the same infantry squad in Vietnam in 1969 and 1970. They became closest of friends, a friendship that only grew over nearly a half century. Jack was from Missouri, so he and Dad were able to see each other regularly, often on deer-hunting trips in Arkansas and duck- and goose-hunting trips in Missouri. He became like the brother my dad never had, a second son to my grandparents and Aunt Pood. Jack also got to know my mom Avis, just as my mom and dad got to know Jack's wife Joy. Over time, my sister and I came along and Jack and Joy became like an aunt and uncle to us, just like my parents felt about Kurt, Jack and Joy's son. Some of my oldest memories are traveling to Missouri to see the Shatfords at places like Six Flags, Silver Dollar City, and Branson and seeing how happy and excited my dad was in the days leading up to Jack's visits to Arkansas. Jack was a lifelong hunter and outdoorsman. He worked for 34 years at the Missouri Department of Conservation. If it flew, ran, or swam, you can pretty much bet that Jack knew how to find it, track it, kill it, and cook it. In fact, I have to confess that Jack probably put more meat on the Cotton family table than my dad ever did. He taught me a lot of lessons as well, not just about the outdoors but about life. Jack helped me see some things through my dad's eyes, and I figure he probably did the same thing for my dad. Their example from Vietnam contributed to my decision to join the Army. That wasn't an easy time in the Cotton household, believe me, but Jack was there to help smooth things over, and he encouraged me all along the way. Jack was a patriot. He had put his life on the line to defend the country we love so much. I know from my dad's war stories that Jack was fearless and brave, but he was also gentle and outgoing, the kind of guy who makes fast friends. He sure made a lot of friends in Dardanelle where he was like an adopted son. He even belonged to our Yell County Wildlife Federation. Above all, though, Jack was a loving family man, a devoted husband to Joy, and father to Kurt and his wife Mary, and Jack was a doting grandpa to Sarah and Shelby. They will miss Jack as we all miss him so dearly. The pain hasn't gone away yet. It will not for a while, and it may never go away, but with the pain, we ought to be swelled with pride and gratitude to have known and loved such a fine man. Jack Shatford, rest in peace and follow me.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, in honor of the National Park Service's 100th birthday year, I would like to recognize the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail, which covers nine States and thousands of miles of land and water routes. The Trail of Tears is rooted in a painful, unfortunate time for our Nation. Following the passage of the Indian Removal Act of 1830, five tribes were forced from their homes and into what is now modern-day Oklahoma. These five major Southeast tribes consisted of Cherokee, Choctaw, Muscogee, Chickasaw, and Seminole Indians. The trail gets its name from the painful trips these individuals took across the country as disease, desertion, and death characterized many of their journeys. Arkansas is a State full of rich history and heritage. While it is sometimes painful to recall, the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail is a critical part of that history. The National Park Service gave this trail this distinction in an effort to preserve the story of the forced migration of these Native Americans. We must learn from the mistakes of our past so we do not repeat them in the future.

Mr. COTTON

Mr. COTTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on September 22, 2016, at 2 p.m., in room SH-219 of the Hart Senate Office Building.