Richard Durbin

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, American jobs have changed dramatically in the last century, but the reasons Americans work have not changed. Work is about more than a paycheck. A job is--or ought to be--a source of dignity. Men and women who work hard may not be able to live on Easy Street, but they ought to be able to walk down Main Street with their heads held high, knowing that they can provide for the basic needs of their families, and they ought to be able to retire with dignity and security. Keith Kelleher understands this. He understands that treating workers--all workers--fairly is not an outdated idea; it is a requirement for a sound economy and solid future. He has devoted more than four decades of his life to improving the lives of some of the lowest paid workers in our economy, including nursing home workers and home health aides. As founding president of SEIU Healthcare in Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, and Kansas, Keith Kelleher has helped secure the right to form and join a union for more than 91,000 traditionally low-paid healthcare workers and to negotiate for better wages and working conditions. Not only that, like Walter Reuther and other great labor leaders of the last century, Keith Kelleher has championed broader causes of social justice. In 2014, Keith Kelleher and the members of SEIU Healthcare helped lead the fight in Illinois for marriage equality, a year before the U.S. Supreme Court made marriage equality the law of the land. This week, Keith Kelleher is stepping down officially from the union he helped found. He is retiring after more than 30 years at the helm of SEIU Healthcare, and I want to thank him for his contributions to economic and social justice in Illinois and in our Nation. Keith Kelleher moved to Chicago in the early 1980s from Detroit. He was working with a group called the United Labor Unions, an organization that trained people on how to organize and work together to advance their common good. He lived as simply as the people he came to help. He focused on the home care industry because it had some of the lowest paid workers in the state. Private-sector workers hired by the State to provide services for seniors and people with disabilities earned an hourly rate of $3.35, with no benefits. They were a forgotten group, one largely ignored by traditional labor unions. In 1983, Keith Kelleher gathered seven home health aides in the basement of the United Methodist Temple in downtown Chicago, and they voted to organize a union. That moment was the beginning of Union Local 880. Twenty-five years later, Local 880 had grown from 7 members to 68,000 members. All great things come from small beginnings. Keith Kelleher built Local 880 from the ground up by going door-to- door in some of Chicago's poorest, most neglected neighborhoods. He helped convince thousands of workers to pay membership fees even before Local 880 could engage in collective bargaining. They won that right in 1984, when the National Labor Relations Board officially recognized Local 880. He convinced people that they mattered and that they could change their own lives though collective action. He found innovative ways to raise funds for the fledgling union, canvassing for donations, selling chicken dinners on payday, and holding tag sales. Keith and his wife even figured out how to turn their wedding into a union fundraiser. In 1985, the independent Local 880 merged with SEIU, the Service Employees International Union. In 2007 and 2008, Local 880 merged with two other SEIU local unions in Indiana, Local 20 and Local 4. In 2009, SEIU Healthcare Illinois/ Indiana merged with the SEIU Healthcare local unions in Missouri and Kansas. Keith Kelleher was elected founding president of the new combined union. For nearly 40 years, Keith Kelleher has helped forge new partnerships and fought new battles. He is as determined as they come. One battle took nearly 20 years to win, but SEIU Local 880 never gave up, and in 2005, Illinois' Governor finally signed an executive order recognizing unionized home care workers who work as contractors for State agencies as public employees. That victory gave 50,000 workers the legal right to bargain collectively for better wages and working conditions. They have since won a 35 percent wage increase over 4 years and other improvements in benefits. Under Keith Kelleher's leadership, Local 880 has become a significant political force. You cannot miss SEIU Health members at public events. They are often known as ``the purple people'' because of the color of the t-shirts they wear. Keith Kelleher has fought for justice for union members and for those who don't have the benefit of union membership. In addition to marriage equality, he has fought for a higher minimum wage across the country. Like Tom Joad in ``The Grapes of Wrath,'' wherever there are people in need of justice, Keith Kelleher seems to be there. As he steps down officially this week from the union he helped create, I want to thank Keith personally and wish him, his wife Madeline, and his two daughters Ryan and Aileen well. He has made a real difference in the lives of tens of thousands of workers, and his life's work will continue to lift workers up for generations to come.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, earlier this year, I had the opportunity to visit Venezuela, a once proud Latin American democracy that is now in a state of collapse. The country was planning a Presidential election a few weeks after my visit in late May. My message to President Maduro and members of his government during this visit was clear and simple. They should run a clean election in which opposition candidates are released from detention and allowed to participate. Local and international observers should be allowed to observe the entire electoral process. The election should be administered in a fair and open manner by credible nonpartisan election commissioners. These were the same messages told to Venezuela by its neighbors in Latin America. I suggested that meeting these obvious international norms and restoring the power of the country's duly elected National Assembly would help ease Venezuela's isolation and the suffering of its people. Tragically, obstinately, President Maduro and his circle of corrupt colleagues chose to double down. They held a sham election. Its legitimacy was rejected by the international community and the consequences have been predictable: continued mass exodus of desperate Venezuelans to neighboring countries, inflation nearing 1 million percent, deepening international isolation, and of course, an increasingly ruthless crackdown on political opponents to further solidify the regime's illegitimate hold on power. This regime already had a shameful history of jailing political opponents. Their victims include Judge Maria Afiuni, who had the courage to rule against the government on a case before her, Leopoldo Lopez, the former mayor of Caracas who was a highly popular national candidate and therefore remains under house arrest and unable to compete in elections, and so many others including a number of dual American-Venezuelan citizens. And now, it has jailed young elected National Assembly Member Juan Requesens on highly questionable charges. His crime? Criticizing President Maduro and the staggering human suffering and the demise of democracy under his dictatorial rule. Haunting videos of Requesens in detention have surfaced which strongly suggest torture and inhumane treatment. Several months ago, I had the great pleasure of sitting down with several of Juan's colleagues when I was in Caracas. These are the next generation of young leaders, brave men and women who won at the ballot box in many areas previously won by Hugo Chavez and Maduro. They won because they made an effort to understand voters' economic concerns and how former ruling parties had too often become corrupt or ignored the poor. They were the hope for the future, but to this Maduro regime, they were a threat. So voter and candidate registrations were manipulated to make it harder for opposition parties and candidates to compete. Elected National Assembly Members were harassed and threatened. In some cases, their passports were confiscated. I will never forget when they told me that, if I returned a year later, that half of them might be gone, jailed or chased into exile. Sadly, they were right. My colleagues Senators Menendez, Nelson, Rubio, Cornyn, and I will introduce legislation in the days ahead that will further targeted sanctions against those Venezuelan officials responsible for this scandalous regime and those responsible for Juan's detention. It will also provide additional aid to help with the humanitarian crises in and along Venezuela's borders. I wish we had not reached this desperate moment. I wish the Maduro regime would play by basic democratic rules and let the Venezuelan people freely decide their leaders. I wish the Maduro regime had the courage to compete in a free and fair election. But it didn't. So until it does and until Leopoldo, Juan, and the many other Venezuelan political prisoners are freed, the National Assembly's powers restored, and a legitimate democratic process is reestablished, I will continue to support pressure on this corrupt regime and sanctioning those responsible for the Venezulea's misery.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Florida Mr. Nelson) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from California (Ms. Harris) and the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Florida (Mr. Nelson) and the Senator from New Hampshire (Mrs. Shaheen) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Brown) and the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Sanders) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, this is a sad time for the Senate and our Nation. With the passing of John McCain, our country lost a legend, and this Senate has lost a towering figure. I have lost a friend. America owes John McCain and his family our gratitude and respect for his courage and sacrifice and for the trials he endured to serve the Nation he loved. John McCain entered this world with big shoes to fill. His father and grandfather were four-star admirals in the U.S. Navy. John McCain met and exceeded his family legacy. I first met him 35 years ago, in 1982. We were brand-new freshmen Congressmen elected to the U.S. House. I spotted him on the other side of the floor in the Senate and, of course, I knew instantly who he was and worked up the courage to go over and introduce myself. Then, I asked him a favor. I said: John, would you consider doing a cable TV show that I could send back to my Central Illinois district? He said: Sure, I would be glad to. I thought: That is amazing--a Democratic Congressman asking a new Republican Congressman to help him back in his district, and John McCain said yes. It was the beginning of a friendship. That cable show wasn't shown beyond Central Illinois, but I still remember it and still thank John for his act of kindness. It was my first exposure to a unique style of communication that America would come to know as the ``Straight Talk Express.'' Sitting for that interview is a typically generous John McCain act, for which I am still grateful. There is an old joke about an Irishman who walked past a brawl and said: Is this a private fight or can anyone get into it? I think that man's name may have been McCain. Everyone who knew or served with John for any period of time got crosswise with him. I can remember there, in the well of the Senate, John McCain walking up to me, getting within an inch of my face and chewing me out about some article that he had read in the Chicago Tribune. He was so mad he was about to explode, and he wheeled around and walked away. I thought: What did I say? I can't even remember the article. I raced back to look up the Chicago Tribune article he referred to and still couldn't understand his anger, and I thought: How am I going to make amends with John. He has been my friend for so long. The next day he came up to me, and I got ready for the second round. He put his arm around me and said: It wasn't that bad after all. We are still friends. That was typical John McCain--a volcanic temper but an embracing, loving approach when it came to friendship. That was John. He was passionate in his beliefs, but he was not a man to hold grudges. He understood that two people can disagree on issues today, and still both love this country and work together tomorrow. Occasionally, he would invite you on a trip. Be careful. I said yes several times. A John McCain trip over a weekend was something you don't soon forget. If there is anybody out there who thinks that Senators with John McCain were sitting poolside drinking these mixed drinks with paper umbrellas, they have it all wrong. John McCain's trips on the weekend were more like Bataan death marches. From the minute you got on that plane until you got back to Washington, it was a nonstop schedule. Everything had to be done. We had to see three countries, not two, and we had to get it done and get back to Washington. You learned so much. I went to Ukraine with John. I remember walking the streets of Kiev in Ukraine. People were coming up to John--people who remembered that he showed up in the Maidan Square when the revolution was underway and spoke for those who were defying Moscow--and they still remembered John McCain and couldn't wait to come up and say hello and thank him. It was that way in so many places of the world. I was lucky to be there. I was lucky to be a part of it, lucky to see history unfold, and lucky to count John as a friend. John and I had our disagreements. In fact, there was one solid year when we barely spoke. At the end of that year, I found an excuse to walk over to his office to see him on some issue. I remember that he stood up and greeted me. He shook my hand. He looked me in the eye and said: I am glad this is over between us. So was I. It was one of the happier days I served in the Senate. His ability to see beyond party labels was one of the qualities that so many of us loved and admired about him. It was a lesson he learned from his family. It is a truth, I imagine, that he came to see even more clearly during the 5\1/2\ torturous years--two of them in solitary confinement--that he spent as a prisoner of war in that hellish place known as the Hanoi Hilton. We are stronger together than we are divided. John McCain knew that. His entire life was a testimony to that powerful truth. It is why, as a prisoner of war, John McCain refused offers of release. He knew what the rules were. The rules were ``first in, first out.'' He was not the first in. He just happened to be the son of an admiral, and the North Vietnamese were going to make him a symbol and release him. He wouldn't do it. He wouldn't accept it. His body was broken by the torture and the plane crash, but he stayed in that cell and waited his turn, until the moment came when he could leave with his head up. John didn't want to be defined as a professional prisoner of war. I love the story about a party that was given for John and his fellow captives after they got home. One young man was telling the story of his confinement in some detail when he happened to look over and see John McCain. He suddenly felt conspicuous and said to John: I shouldn't be going on about my time as a prisoner of war. I was there for 6 weeks, and you were there for 5\1/2\ years. With typical John McCain humor and wit, John replied: Oh, no, go right ahead. The first 6 weeks were the toughest. Like Abraham Lincoln, John McCain knew that laughter helped to make the unbearable bearable, and like President Lincoln, he was secure enough in his own reputation and in his own achievements to be modest. John endured the hell of the Hanoi Hilton more than many. He served in the Senate longer than many. He leaves his mark on this body and our Nation. When the issue of torture and detention was front and center before the American people, when we were trying to decide what were the boundaries for this democracy, faced with the threat of terrorism, there was one voice in the Senate who was credible. It was John McCain. I made speech after speech on the subject, but when John McCain got up and spoke about the issue of torture, there was silence on the floor of the Senate as we listened carefully. He proposed a resolution establishing humane standards of treatment, realizing the humanity we showed toward our prisoners is the same humanity we expected if Americans were taken prisoner. His effort was enacted by the Senate with over 90 votes, a strong bipartisan rollcall. John McCain, more than anything, was a champion of the U.S. military--the men and women who serve in our Armed Forces. They never had a better friend. Our Nation's veterans and their families never had a stronger ally. He was a leader in the fight to curb the influence of special interests in politics and to make our government truly a government of, by, and for the people. Russ Feingold and John McCain moved us toward what America is longing for--putting the special interests behind us, putting the people first, ending soft money. He treasured our heritage as a nation of immigrants. I have such profound respect for John McCain's efforts to reach across the aisle and try to find solutions for America's broken immigration system. Even as his own party railed against him, we spent almost a year together-- eight Senators, four Democrats and four Republicans, led by John McCain--to write a comprehensive immigration reform bill. It was one of my proudest moments in the Senate. It was why I ran for the Senate. It was what John McCain told us over and over was to be our mission in life as Senators: To solve the problems facing America and not to be worried about taking some heat. He took a lot of heat as a Republican who stepped up and offered a real solution to our comprehensive immigration challenge. We put together a bill over the course of a year. I think it was an extraordinary effort. We all had to compromise. John compromised and I compromised, but we ended up with a bipartisan bill that passed overwhelmingly on the floor of the Senate. There hasn't been another moment like that in the time I have been here, and John led the way. He took a lot of grief for it. His poll numbers were not that good, particularly among the most conservative Republicans, but John knew we had a problem to solve, and he stepped out and did it. I was honored to be a part of the small group that worked night after night, week after week to put that effort together. Of course, what I remember now more than anything is that middle-of- the-night vote a little over a year ago. He walked through that door, just having spoken on the telephone with President Trump, and he came to the well of the Senate and stood right next to that table. Because he had limited motion in his arm because of that plane crash and torture in Vietnam, he barely lifted his right arm and pushed his thumb down and said no. With that ``no'' vote, he preserved health insurance for millions of Americans, and he invoked the ire of conservative Republicans, who will never forgive him for that moment. It was one of the proudest, most courageous votes and moments in the history of the Senate. I was honored to be here and had a chance to thank him personally that night. I also remember when he came to the floor and spoke at that desk, which is now bearing the vase of roses, a tribute to John McCain, and reminded all of us why we run for this office. Sure, it is a great title and a lot of Americans never get close to a title like U.S. Senator, but to John McCain and to many of us, it is much more. It is not only a great honor. It is a great challenge for us to do something with this title to solve the problems that face this country. I didn't always agree with John, but I always respected the fact that he wanted the Senate to be an institution that was serving the people in this country and solving the problems we face. John was principled and courageous time and again. There were times when we had our differences. I can recall when he came to Illinois to campaign against me. He was campaigning on behalf of a State Representative in Illinois named Jim Durkin--not Durbin, but Durkin-- who had been John's supporter for President in the State of Illinois. John returned the favor by campaigning for Jim Durkin against me. You might wonder, in this world of politics, how you react to a person who is trying to take your job away, which John was doing. I understood it. I expected it. Jim Durkin was loyal to John McCain, and John McCain was loyal to him and came in and campaigned for him. After the election was over, the people of Illinois decided I should be the Senator. It didn't deter John McCain one bit from working with me from that point forward. There is an empty space in this Chamber without John McCain. There is an empty space in America without his spirit. He will be missed, but he certainly will never be forgotten. I endorse the proposal to rename the Russell Senate Office Building in honor of Lieutenant Commander and Senator John McCain. Like Senator Schumer, I hope that decades from now, children who are visitors to the Capitol grounds will ask: Who was this McCain they named the building after? They will discover he was a man worthy of our respect, a man who in his heart was a public servant, a man who was an American hero. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN

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

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent. [Rollcall Vote No. 195 Ex.]

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy) is necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Delaware (Mr. Carper), the Senator from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono), the Senator from Alabama (Mr. Jones), the Senator from Vermont (Mr. Leahy), the Senator from West Virginia (Mr. Manchin), and the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, yesterday, a fire ravaged several homes in Little Village, Chicago. It was the deadliest fire the city has experienced in a decade. Today, we mourn the tragic loss of eight lives taken by this disaster. In the early hours of the morning, the Chicago Fire Department received a call that a fire had started on the porch of a home where children had been having a sleepover. The fire eventually took the lives of eight precious children, ranging in age from 3 months to 16 years old, and critically injured two others before spreading to several other homes. My deepest sympathies are with the loved ones of those who were taken far too soon, and my prayers for recovery are with the two teenagers in critical care. Please know I am grieving with the families of Little Village as they work to remember those lost and rebuild their community. I want to thank the Chicago Fire Department and emergency workers for their quick responses and dedication to saving lives and putting a stop to the deadly fire, as well as workers from the Red Cross and local organizations, who immediately came to the scene to provide support to residents. I know the people of Little Village will come together to support one another, and they will be stronger for it.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono), the Senator from Washington (Mrs. Murray), and the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Schatz) are necessarily absent.

Mr. DURBIN

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, I thank my colleague from West Virginia and support his amendment. It is a good amendment for West Virginia and a good one for America, and I look forward to voting for it. I ask unanimous consent at this point to enter a colloquy with my friend, the senior Senator from Iowa.

Mr. DURBIN. Madam President, have you heard of a drug pricing proposal that is supported by both Democratic and Republican Senators, the American Association of Retired Persons, the American Medical Association, the Federation of American Hospitals, America's health insurance plans, 76 percent of the American people, President Donald Trump, and the Department of Health and Human Services? What kind of idea can this be that has that kind of support, bipartisan support in Congress, as well as in the White House? Well, Senator Grassley and I have a simple amendment to the spending bill that is before us which provides $1 million--small change by any Federal standard--for the Health and Human Services Department to issue rules regarding pricetags on direct-to-consumer ads for prescription drugs. While this underlying bill includes many important provisions that I support, it doesn't do anything to tackle prescription drug costs. And we know, American families know across the board, that it is time for us to act. If I ask you whether you have seen any commercials for prescription drugs on television and you answer no, then I know one thing for sure: You don't own a television, because they broadcast an average of nine drug ads that each of us see every single day--nine a day. You know what I am talking about. It is the ads with those unpronounceable names of drugs and then that long, mumbling ``Don't take it if you are allergic to it; this may kill you''--all the warnings they give you at the end of the ad, over and over and over again. The pharmaceutical industry spends $6 billion a year so that we get a steady diet of these drug ads. How many countries in the world have television advertising for prescription drugs? Two--the United States of America and New Zealand. Each year, $6 billion is being spent for one purpose: so that finally, after watching an ad for the 45th time, you can spell ``XARELTO'' and walk into the doctor's office and ask if you can have XARELTO blood thinner rather than Warfarin or some other version. The difference, of course, is that the XARELTO prescription drug costs $560 a month, and it may not be any better for you than the generic version that is a lot cheaper. Do you know what the No. 1 drug is that is advertised on television and sold in the United States of America? When I tell you, you will nod yes. Here it is: HUMIRA--HUMIRA. It was designed to help people with rheumatoid arthritis, and that is a terrible disease, and the people needed a helping hand. Then they discovered it had a positive impact on psoriasis. Well, psoriasis can be a terrible thing to suffer from, but there are a lot of us who just have a little red patch on our elbow who technically have psoriasis. What I showed you here you don't see on television, incidentally. How much does HUMIRA cost? It costs $5,500 a month--a month. Do you wonder why the cost of healthcare is spiraling out of control--$5,500 a month? Sadly, many of these high-priced prescription drugs are being prescribed by doctors when it is not necessary, and that drives up the cost of healthcare. It is why a major health insurance company in my State has told me they spend more money each year on high-cost prescription drugs than they spend on inpatient hospital care. Think about that--more money. It is going through the roof, and there is nothing to contain it. So the Senator from Iowa, with his Midwestern commonsense approach to legislation, has joined with the Senator from Illinois, who hopes to aspire to the same goal, to come up with a basic idea: If you are going to run a drug ad, put the price of the product on the ad. We will then know what it really costs, and we will also know when they start raising it again and again and again. Well, the pharmaceutical industry hates this bill and this amendment like the devil hates holy water. They don't want to tell you what it is going to cost. They want you to go into the doctor's office and say: I just have to have Humira. I have this little patch on my elbow, and I absolutely have to have it. Too many doctors write the prescriptions. So what Senator Grassley and I are trying to do is to give the American people more information about drugs and, particularly, their costs. We are trying to make sure that information gives transparency to the transaction, and we are trying our very best to give the American consumers a break and perhaps to start to slow down the cost of prescription drugs. This is a simple amendment--$1 million to the Department of HHS to issue rules requiring pricetags on ads. One Senator opposes this--one. We are trying our best to convince him not to oppose us. We think it is a good idea to move forward on this. I yield the floor to my friend, my colleague, and cosponsor to this measure, Senator Chuck Grassley.

Mr. DURBIN. I thank my colleague from Iowa. Patience certainly is an important part of this job, but the American people are impatient. They want to know why they elected us to office and we don't solve problems. This is a problem that Senator Grassley and I want to start solving: informing consumers about the actual costs of prescription drugs--what a radical idea. The first time you realize what a drug costs is when you stand in front of the cash register with your mouth wide open saying: You have to be kidding me. Instead, people ought to know going into this conversation what these drugs cost. That is not an unreasonable request. We do it for cars, for gas, for so many things. Why don't we do it for this? The American people want to get it. We want to get it. I hope we can convince one Senator who is holding us up to give us a chance to inform the American people on a bipartisan basis of something that will help, in a small way, perhaps, but it will help to bring the costs of healthcare down in this country. I thank the Senator from Iowa. I yield the floor.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I thank Senator Kaine, Senator Wicker and Senator Warner for raising this issue. Plans for procurement of Ford- class carriers will be debated in the upcoming conference on the defense appropriations bill. I look forward to the Department of Defense and the Navy providing more information on the proposal, and I will keep Senator Kaine's comments in mind as the discussion continues.

Mr. DURBIN. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President, at the outset, the issue of abortion is a divisive issue in America. Many people have different and strongly held beliefs on this particular issue. We have a law on the books now--and have for decades--that no Federal funds may be spent for the performance of abortion procedures, including at Planned Parenthood. Yet Planned Parenthood does much more than that. Planned Parenthood provides healthcare for millions of women across the United States, and Planned Parenthood provides family planning so that these women can avoid unplanned pregnancies, which, sadly, in many cases, lead to abortion. Regardless of your position on abortion, the position of Planned Parenthood is to counsel families so they can control the number of children they have and avoid unplanned pregnancies and the likelihood of abortion procedures to follow. It is for this reason that I have consistently voted against Senator Paul when he has stood here to defund Planned Parenthood, and I will today. Yet I am about to make a modification request in the hopes that we can have the vote that he just asked for, the vote on Planned Parenthood, as long as we can also have a Democratic vote--one of each--on an amendment that is being offered by Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia, which basically states that we in the U.S. Senate will join in an effort to preserve those portions of the Affordable Care Act that protect families who have members with preexisting conditions. That is basically it. Time and again, we have heard Republicans say they don't want there to be discrimination against families because there is a child who is a cancer survivor or because there is a spouse who has diabetes. They do not want them discriminated against and to be charged more for health insurance. That is all Senator Manchin is asking for. So we will have a vote on the Paul amendment on Planned Parenthood and on the Manchin amendment, which goes to the heart of the Affordable Care Act's preexisting condition protection. Those two amendments can bring us to a close on this debate. I think that is a fair, bipartisan conclusion. I agree with what Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky has said in that this is the right way to end this debate--with a Republican amendment and a Democratic amendment. I move to modify Senator Paul's request. I ask unanimous consent that the following amendments be called up en bloc and reported by number: Paul No. 3967 and Manchin No. 3865. I further ask consent that at 4 p.m., the Senate vote in relation to the amendments in the order listed and that there be no second-degree amendments in order to the amendments prior to the votes and that each amendment be subject to a 60-vote affirmative threshold for adoption. I further ask consent that following the disposition of the Paul amendment, the managers' package, which is at the desk, be agreed to--a bipartisan package--and that all postcloture time be yielded back.