Steve Daines

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I want to recognize Riley Slivka, of Winifred, MT. Riley is a senior at Winifred High School whose outstanding work in promoting both agriculture and film in Central Montana deserves much recognition. Through his YouTube channel, Imagistudios, he displays the beauty of the Missouri Breaks region, near Winifred, as well as the ins and outs of running a Montana farm. Here, one can view his short film, Harvesting Along the Edge in Central Montana, which provides a comprehensive look at the harvesting season. The short film, with over 21,000 views in just over 2 weeks, has beautiful cinematography and exhibits the heart of Montana's agriculture community and the Winifred region. Riley has worked all over his family farm, from running the combine to working as a semi-truck driver for harvest. Riley is planning to major in agricultural communications and film. In the spring of 2014, Riley placed ninth in the country in the BPA digital media competition in Anaheim, CA. I am thrilled to recognize Riley for his contributions in promoting our State's No. 1 industry through film in Montana.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Madam President, if Iran's ultimate goal is to obtain a nuclear weapon, the deal reached by the Obama administration sets Iran on course to do so. From the time this deal is agreed to, Iran has 10 years to fill their coffers with tens of billions of dollars from newly unsanctioned oil sales and pursue the research and development of nuclear capabilities. As the world's leader of state-sponsored terrorism, it will only be a matter of time before Iran achieves its ultimate goal, and that is obtaining a nuclear weapon. These are bipartisan concerns. This deal will not prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and the American people deserve a better deal. This deal is stacked against transparency and accountability. It provides up to a 24-day delay before Iran is forced to comply with inspections of nuclear sites on their military bases. This is a long way from ``anywhere, anytime'' the American people were promised. Can you imagine if the EPA or the FDA came knocking on a Montana farmer or business owner's door, and they said: Well, you can't come and inspect right now, but come back in 24 days. That is what we have set up right now with the Iranian Government through this deal. Through this deal, the American people are being asked to enter into a binding trust agreement with the world's leading state sponsor of terror. In fact, just yesterday I looked at my Twitter feed, and the Supreme Leader of Iran--he is called the Supreme Leader for a reason-- Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said: ``I say that you [Israelis] will not see the coming 25 years and, God willing, there will not be something named the Zionist regime in [the] next 25 years.'' And then he went on to reiterate in calling America the Great Satan. This is whom the United States is making this bad nuclear deal with. It is not a mistake to push for tougher sanctions. The American people deserve a better option. Two nights ago, I had a tele-townhall meeting, calling into 100,000 Montana households. Overwhelmingly, by 3 to 1, Montanans opposed this deal. As we close, let me say this: As I step back and look at the numbers today, if we look at the Senate, it looks as if about 69 Senators are opposed to this deal. There are 42 supporting it. Those 58 who oppose it are bipartisan. The House numbers are similar in ratios. The point is this: There is bipartisan opposition to this deal, both Democrats and Republicans joining together. The only support is partisan. It is a mistake to not push for a better deal that can be supported by more than one segment of one political party. I yield back my time.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. I want to thank Chairman Enzi for his commitment to solving the wildfire funding challenge that is increasingly forcing the Forest Service to spend more of its budget suppressing fires rather than preventing them through enhanced management. Like many other Western States, Montana has already experienced several high-intensity fires this year. The fire season thus far has been one of the worst in the past decade and has only made more evident the urgent need for a wildfire funding solution. As a cosponsor of the Wildfire Disaster Funding Act, I believe it is critical that Congress end fire borrowing and ensure that the Forest Service can spend more of its budget on making our National forests more resilient to fire, while also equipping the Agency with the tools and authorities it needs to restore active management. I look forward to working with Chairman Enzi, other Budget Committee members, and fellow colleagues to find consensus on these high-priority reforms.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, as I have served Montana's veterans and military members in Congress, I continue to be amazed and humbled by the incredible stories of Montanans fighting for our country in all corners of the world. Montana is home to more veterans per capita than almost any other State in the Nation, and tribal members enroll in the military at a higher rate than any other minority. I wish to recognize one of America's heroes who exemplifies the best of Montana, who is also an enrolled Crow tribal member: William P. ``Butch'' Gardner. Mr. Gardner served our country during the Vietnam war. This brave gentleman selflessly served for a number of years during the conflict before he was honorably discharged. Mr. Gardner's commitment to service did not stop when he took off the uniform; in his community, he and a handful of other veterans serve as the color guard on the Crow Reservation. He continues to serve in the honor guard despite losing his leg to an amputation 2 years ago. His peers describe Mr. Gardner as the backbone to the color guard. Montanans are proud of our diverse heritage, and it is truly an honor to celebrate an individual who so humbly embody the spirit of patriotism.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I wish to recognize the work of the impressive Montana teens who attended the Family, Career and Community Leaders of America, FCCLA, STAR Event in Washington, DC. This group of young men and women made our State proud at their national conference, and brought home a combined 31 gold medals, 26 silver medals, and 3 bronze medals. Some of the standouts in the Montana FCCLA that I would like to recognize are Garrett Christiaens of Valier, MT, who was just made the new national vice president of programs, and Mariah Pierce, Katlyn Gillen, and Loren Minnick--three Park High School students who not only took first place at the FCCLA State competition, but also went on to win gold medals at the national level. The Montana FCCLA has approximately 70 chapters across the State, and is part of the Family and Consumer Sciences curriculum offered in over 100 of Montana's high schools. Members of these chapters actively work to make a difference in their families, careers, and communities. I had the opportunity to meet a group of these students last month during their national conference, and I was impressed by their work ethic and dedication to those around them. Their success at the National Leadership Conference affirms that they are indeed making a difference and demonstrates how Montana students can effectively rise to meet both local and national challenges.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I would like to shift gears for a moment and share some comments about President Obama's news that he made yesterday with the EPA. Yesterday, President Obama and the ``Employment Prevention'' Agency, the EPA, continued to wage their war on American energy, American families, and American jobs. As President Obama was announcing his plan to devastate Montana's coal industry and the good- paying jobs it provides, yet another coal company filed for bankruptcy. At the same time, the J.E. Corette powerplant, in my home State of Montana in Billings, is being dismantled as we speak in the aftermath of President Obama's previous anti-coal regulation. In addition to supporting 30 jobs, the Corette powerplant has powered tens of thousands of Montana homes and contributed several million dollars in tax revenue to Montana and Yellowstone County every year. Over the past year, Montanans have braced themselves for the release of the Obama administration's final regulations, which were already set to wreak havoc on our coal industry and make construction of any new coal-fired plant virtually impossible. The proposed rule was bad. The final rule is even more devastating to Montana jobs and to Montana families. The final rule announced by the Obama administration makes the retirement of existing coal-fired powerplants inevitable within the next few decades. The rules moved the goalposts and, I might add, to the wrong end of the field. These rules will most likely lead to the shuttering of Montana's Colstrip Power Plant and countless others across the Nation. It would be devastating for our economy and hard-working families across the State. Energy rates will increase. Thousands of Montana family-wage jobs would be lost. Critical tax revenue for schools, for our teachers, roads, and our infrastructure would evaporate. In the Obama administration's final rule, they took an already bad rule and they made it worse. The so-called Clean Power Plan forces Montana to achieve even more aggressive standards than originally proposed. According to POLITICO, in 2012 Montana produced 2,481 carbon pounds per megawatt hour. Under the President's plan, by 2030, he wants Montana to produce only 1,305 carbon pounds per megawatt hour. That is a 47.4-percent reduction in Montana's carbon emissions because in Montana more than half of our electricity comes from coal. In fact, my mobile device is powered by coal. Coal also powers good-paying jobs for thousands of Montanans, including Montana tribal members and union workers, and generates nearly $120 million in tax revenue every year. America is poised to lead the world's energy needs, but this will be done through American innovation, through American ingenuity, not more regulations. The Obama administration's regulations are completely out of touch with global realities, and this is why: Global demand for coal-fired energy will not disappear, even if the United States shuts down every last coal mine and coal-fired powerplant. Nations such as China, Korea, and Japan will continue using coal as it is reliable and it is affordable. These nations should be powered by cleaner Montana coal because the coal we produce in Montana is cleaner than Asian coal. In terms of the environmental picture for the world, we are better off using American coal, Montana coal--not coal from Asia. Rather than dismissing this reality, the United States should be on the cutting edge of technological advances in energy development and leading the way in promoting the use of clean, affordable American energy. In fact, according to the International Energy Agency's 2013 data, the world consumes about 6 billion metric tons of steam coal for power generation. Of that, the United States consumes 750 million metric tons. Let's put that into apples-to-apples comparison. That means the United States consumes about 12 percent of the coal. The rest of the world consumes 88 percent. As the world sees an increased demand for power, it is clear we need to be leading the way in clean coal and energy innovation. The United States should be leading. Let's be working toward clean coal, clean energy, and leading the world as our 12 percent could have an influence on the other 88 percent. America, we can and we should power the world, but we could only do it if the Obama administration steps back from its out-of-touch regulations and allows American innovation to thrive once again to not only lead America but to lead the world. I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. DAINES

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

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, as I like to say, there are only two types of companies: those that have been hacked and those that know they have been hacked. This was recently seen at JPMorgan Chase. Last summer the company suffered a cyber attack that involved the theft of contact information for about 76 million households. In the aftermath, JPMorgan Chase is expected to double its budget for cyber security efforts this year. But the case of JPMorgan is not unique nor a simply cautionary tale for other major companies. In the last few months, we have seen one of the largest cyber attacks on our Nation's technology infrastructure and other major cyber breaches affecting our financial and transportation sector. I share these comments in the context of having worked as an executive for a cloud computing company for 12 years prior to serving in the Senate. In the midst of these attacks, we see radical Islamic terrorists infiltrating American social media networks to recruit Americans to join them as jihadists overseas. We must work to address these challenges, and our response must be measured as well as thoughtful, not only about the immediate threats to our cyber infrastructure but also to the long-term effects on our national security and our constitutional freedoms. As we are seeing with the European Union, after years of debate, the EU is currently working on a policy to ensure their citizens are notified of cyber breaches within 72 hours and that victims of these attacks are notified without undue delay. This is the type of response we need in the United States, much like the notification reforms that I have worked for in Congress. On a near daily basis, we see headlines in our major newspapers that underscore the absolute importance of creating a concrete timeline for implementing timely notification standards. Having spent more than 12 years working on technology, I know firsthand the power that Big Data holds. I also understand the importance of setting standards and clear guidelines. As we always said in 28 years of business, if you aim at nothing, you will hit it. It is important that we not only expect more but that we also inspect. We want to be assured that guidelines are being followed. It is unacceptable that any American is left in the dark when their personally identifiable information or PII may have been breached. That is why I have been fighting to strengthen notification requirements and ensure that the American people know when their personal information is compromised. When I was running customer service operations at RightNow Technologies and looking out for our customers, when we had a problem, our policy was that we notified our customers as soon as we were aware of the problem. Maybe we did not always understand the magnitude at the time of the problem, but we believed we owed it to our customers to get back to them as soon as possible. The customers, the consumers of this country, should be served in a similar way. But as the Senate prepares to consider cyber security reforms, we also need to strike the right balance between protecting our cyber security infrastructure and the personal information of Americans, while also protecting the constitutional rights and the liberty of the American people. We must protect our Nation's security while also preserving our civil liberties. We must remain vigilant. We must ensure that we have robust and transparent debate about cyber protection and what reforms must be implemented to protect American civil liberties. We see some of these protections in the legislation I cosponsored, spearheaded by Senators Mike Lee and Pat Leahy. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act Amendments Act of 2015 modernizes our Nation's electronic privacy laws and brings protections against warrantless searches into harmony with the technological realities of the 21st century. The protections currently on the books may have been robust in 1986 when the ECPA was written, but they do not adequately defend our citizens against the mass data storage that currently exists. Nobody in 1986 would have ever envisioned where we are today as to the massive amount of data that is collected and stored today on the American people. This bill ensures that the Federal Government gives our law enforcement officials the tools they need, while ensuring that Montanans and the American people are not subjected to invasive and unwarranted searches. Privacy and security both matter. I believe we can find a balance that protects both. I urge my colleagues to join me in finding reforms that stop cyber criminals from infiltrating our security networks and also preserve the privacy and the civil liberties that Montanans and Americans hold dear.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. I thank the Senator from Oklahoma for having this colloquy today because I do believe we are at a crossroads. With this vote we will have in about 20 minutes, we have a choice set before us, one that each one of us must make as a Senator and one that each American must make with us. With a ``yes'' vote--a ``yes'' vote is to defund Planned Parenthood-- we reaffirm our dedication to women's health. In fact, we recommit every dollar made available to support things such as well-baby care, cervical and breast cancer screening, prenatal and postpartum care, immunizations, family planning services, including contraception, sexually transmitted disease testing, and relevant diagnostic, laboratory, and radiology services. This bill does not take a single dollar away from women's health. I think it is very important, as we debate this decision in front of us, that we do not get caught up in rhetoric. Let's get focused on the facts, on what this does and what it does not do. This is a vote about our culture. This is a vote about our ethics. Most importantly--and I say this as a daddy of four children, two boys and two girls--this is about the value of our children. Over the last few weeks, we have seen these videos. Americans have been horrified at high-level Planned Parenthood executives who are callously discussing the price of baby organs harvested from the tiny bodies of aborted babies. In fact, just last week we witnessed an abortion doctor poking through the pieces of a tiny and broken body. He was pointing out the heart and lungs and discussing what each of them should cost when sold, meanwhile exclaiming it is a baby. We have heard so many arguments today: Well, this is about the woman's body. We respect the body of the woman, and we want to make sure that the proper services are allowed to protect a woman's health. But this is not about the woman's body. This is about a different body with a different DNA. This is about a little baby--a baby who now has a price not just on its head but on literally every part, as these videos exposed. When we place a price on the outcome of the destruction of our children, we incentivize it. In another setting, we would call this price-per-specimen arrangement a bounty scheme, because with potential for such financial gain, there is little wonder why there are 149 abortions to every 1 adoption referral at these clinics--149 abortions to every 1 adoption referral at these clinics. The discussions we heard are not exceptions or even the actions of a single clinic. This is a systemic issue within Planned Parenthood. We heard direct testimony that clinics act in concert, with the consent of their corporate headquarters at Planned Parenthood, and that no single clinic acts alone. We learned that an overarching legal department works to build layers upon layers of defenses so that no one clinic is left holding the bag. Such a culture shows little regard for women's health. This is a culture that has been embroiled in a number of lawsuits about making false reimbursement claims to the Federal Government and helping to facilitate the covering up of sexual abuse and statutory rape. In fact, just last week a complaint was filed with the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies against one of these clinics regarding a little 13- year-old girl who was sexually abused, had an abortion, and was returned to her abuser. No report was made by the clinic or the abortionist. Her parents were not contacted--all in violation of the laws of Colorado. So a ``no'' vote on this bill supports this culture. It devalues both the woman and that tiny little baby, that child. We do have a choice today. We can work to change that culture if we choose to vote for women, if we would choose to vote yes, because a ``yes'' vote redirects--again, let's get the facts straight here and separate them from the rhetoric--funds from Planned Parenthood and provides that money for women's health services to the numerous community health centers. You heard Senator Paul talk about 9,000 community clinics around the country versus 700 Planned Parenthood centers. It would provide these dollars to those clinics, to local clinics, to hospitals, to other providers that already serve the majority of women. I must tell you I was deeply disturbed--as a daddy of four--with this most recent video where a doctor pokes around the aborted baby's parts until she finds the legs, and she shouts and exclaims: It is another boy. There can be no denying what she was saying. We hear those words for the first time. I heard those words for the first time from a doctor during an ultrasound when Cindy and I were seeing the doctor as we were pregnant or in that ecstatic phone call that comes from an expecting mom or as the new father takes that newborn son into his arms. That doctor was the same one to say: It is a baby. There is no doubt that this is what the little boy is; it is a baby. I cannot support an organization that would place a dollar amount on body parts. I cannot support an organization that would incentivize his death. That is why I will vote for this bill, and my vote will be a vote for women's health. To be very clear, this bill won't touch 1 cent of funding for women's health--not 1 cent. That means that this vote is for one thing and one thing only. A ``yes'' vote is a vote for women. It is a vote for our children. I urge my colleagues: Let us vote for women. Let us vote for our children. Let us vote yes.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I come to the floor today to share some remarks on what is going on with Planned Parenthood. Prior to sharing those remarks, I wish to inform my colleagues that we received some tragic news that has come out of Montana. I literally just got off the phone with Chairman Darrin Old Coyote with the Crow Tribe in Montana. I wish to take a moment to discuss the reports of a tragic shooting that has occurred on the Crow Reservation in Montana. This afternoon we received word of a shooting in the community of Pryor, MT, on the Crow Reservation. I literally just got off the phone with Chairman Darrin Old Coyote before I got to the floor just to see how things were going and to be informed of the latest developments. There are two confirmed fatalities and at least one other injured individual who has been life-flighted to Billings. My wife Cindy and I are deeply saddened by the news of today's tragic shootings in Pryor. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the Pryor community, and the families of all victims are in our prayers. I understand this was a couple who had children and grandchildren and are well known in Pryor. I am staying in close contact with Crow leaders, with local law enforcement, Federal officials, and community leaders during this time. It is our understanding and it has been confirmed that the suspect has been apprehended and is in custody. My staff and all of the staffs here in Washington stand ready to help those affected by this tragedy. Our hearts break for the victims and for their families. I ask my Senate colleagues to join the Montana delegation and all Montanans in keeping the community, the victims, and their families in their thoughts and prayers. Planned Parenthood Mr. President, 655,306 kidneys is more than $49 million, which equates to 256 Lamborghinis; 327,653 hearts is more than $24.5 million, which equates to 128 Lamborghinis; 1,310,612 arms and legs is $98 million, which equates to 512 Lamborghinis--this is the envisioned price tag were every one of Planned Parenthood's 327,653 abortions performed last year to provide body parts and organs to harvest. The utter callousness of Planned Parenthood in discussing the price of baby parts, as if handing over a menu, is clear evidence of the culture of an organization enriched through ghoulish and disturbing practices. This is a culture which protects tissue over life and lays out harvested organs as financial milestones toward a new car. Planned Parenthood has worked its way into the American lexicon, becoming synonymous with women's health but hiding its abortion practices. Planned Parenthood received $528 million of Federal taxpayer money last year alone. And when asked on the street, so few even know that Planned Parenthood does abortions. But now the veil has been lifted, exposing inexcusable and unconscionable behavior. This organization, Planned Parenthood, performs more abortions than any other organization in our country. But now our own calloused hearts--the heart of our Nation--are shocked out of apathy, and we have a choice. We cannot accept the destruction and the selling of our children, to stare clearly into the face of the appalling and do nothing. We can allow our consciences to be moved and then remove the public endorsement of these actions. We can remove Federal taxpayer funding of the organization that has perpetuated such horrific actions. I am proud to join Senator Joni Ernst and Leader McConnell, as well as 23 of my Senate colleagues, in the introduction of legislation to protect women's access to health services and defund Planned Parenthood. This bill ensures that funds allocated to Planned Parenthood will be redirected to other eligible entities to provide women's health care services. Let me be very clear, so the information is clear about what this bill does and what it doesn't do. This bill ensures there is no reduction--not $1 of reduction--in overall Federal funding available to support women's health. This bill ensures the preservation of Federal funding for women's health services which include important services of relevant diagnostic, laboratory, and radiology services, for well-child care, for prenatal and post partum care, for immunization, for family planning services, including contraception, sexually transmitted disease testing, and cervical and breast cancer screenings. Let me say again, this bill ensures the preservation of Federal funding for these very important services for women. This bill does not reduce any funding for women's health services. This bill does not allow any Federal funds to go toward Planned Parenthood to continue its practice of trafficking baby parts. We bristled when we heard of an abortion doctor that left babies born alive to die, and we sensed justice when that same doctor was sentenced in a court of law for his crimes. Similarly, we shuddered as parents. Cindy and I have been married for 29 years. We have four children, two boys and two girls. We shuddered as parents at the idea of baby parts being harvested and sold in the context of equating that value to purchasing a Lamborghini. Will we see this to the same end? We are a society. We are a nation that values life so much that in our Declaration of Independence it is clearly articulated that all have the right to life. We Democrats, Republicans, and all Americans must stand strong in the defense of those who are most vulnerable. We must advocate and be a voice for those who do not have a voice, for the most vulnerable in our society, including the unborn. Over the last year, we have cringed at terrible images coming out of the Middle East. We have seen horrible images coming across social media, and we have called loudly for action. That was on soil thousands and thousands of miles away from America. Today we cringe at terrible images that have occurred on our own soil. Nothing, not even a Lamborghini, is worth the lives of our children. Planned Parenthood has clearly articulated the value they have placed on babies' organs and limbs, but what they have failed to acknowledge is the value the American people know full well, and that is the value of our children, which is priceless. I yield the floor.

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

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I wish to recognize Caley Clark, an educator from White Sulphur Springs, MT. Ms. Clark has recently been chosen from among more than 300 other applicants to participate this week in the Library of Congress' Teaching with Primary Sources Summer Teacher Institute. Every year, the Library of Congress hosts five teacher institutes in Washington, DC for a select number of K-12 educators from across the Nation. During the Library's Teaching with Primary Sources Summer Teacher Institute, Ms. Clark will work with education specialists and subject-matter experts about how to best utilize primary sources in the classroom. In doing so, she will explore the world's largest online collection of historical artifacts, and will be able to access millions of unique primary source documents for her work as an educator. Teaching with primary source documents is an effective way of educating students not just about the history that these firsthand sources give us, but also helps students to develop important skills like critical thinking. Ms. Clark will have the opportunity to bring what she has learned at the Library of Congress back to her students and colleagues at White Sulphur Springs School. I am proud to call Ms. Clark a fellow Montanan, and to recognize her achievement and her contribution to the students of our great State.

Mr. DAINES

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

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, today I rise to speak about the Nation's cyber security. Prior to being elected to the Senate, I spent nearly 12 years working at a cloud computing company. This is a company we started from virtually nothing. We took the company public, and we grew to over 1,000 employees. It became a leading cloud computing company in the customer experience sector. I have seen firsthand the opportunities created by advances in technology, but I have also seen the power Big Data holds because our information becomes currency for both companies and for hackers. These risks are even greater when they impact our children, and as the daddy of four children, I know the importance of maintaining a close relationship between the parents and their children's school. Today, student electronic records are used in schools across the country, and updates can be easily made and can follow a student from one school to another. This more accurately reflects the nature of students' movements within the school system. But at a time when overseas hackers are fighting to gain access to any information they can, these technological gains also come with some risks. Securing students' digital information is critical to ensuring that our kids' privacy is protected. That is why I am grateful and proud to announce that I joined Senator Blumenthal in introducing the SAFE KIDS Act. The Safeguarding American Families from Exposure by Keeping Information and Data Secure--the SAFE KIDS Act--protects student privacy by establishing clear parameters for third-party operators when using data collected from students. This bipartisan legislation empowers parents to control access to their children's information because keeping personally identifiable information secure will lead to a uniform way to secure our students' data. By placing that power back in the hands of the students, in the hands of the parents, and in the hands of the schools, we can make progress toward protecting the privacy of our children because our schools and our kids aren't the only ones at risk for a serious breach. This week we are debating ways to provide the certainty and resources needed to improve our Nation's infrastructure--our roads, our bridges, our ports, our highways--but recent news reminds us that we must also consider the security of the cars that are driving on our roadways. In fact, just in the past week, news broke that Fiat Chrysler announced a recall of 1.4 million vehicles due to a vulnerability that could allow hackers to disable the vehicles on the highways. In fact, through the radio of a Jeep Cherokee, hackers disabled the vehicle's transmission as a driver drove onto a public highway in St. Louis. This episode is telling in that cyber hacks can affect every sector of our economy, from the financial sector to our automotive manufacturers. Our military installations across the globe are also vulnerable to an attack, according to a new report from the GAO. In fact, our utility systems that provide water, electricity, and other essential services to our military installations worldwide have limited defenses against cyber attacks. Report details that the industrial control system--ICS-- the computers that monitor or operate physical utility infrastructure, ``have very little in the way of security controls and cybersecurity measures in place.'' In fact, in a recent July 25 Military Times article, they cite: ``An example of a successful cyber-physical attack through an ICS was the `Stuxnet.' '' It was a computer virus that was used to attack Iranian centrifuges in 2010. By hacking the Iranian nuclear facility's ICS, the centrifuges were made to operate incorrectly, causing extensive damage. The fears of a massive cyber security breach don't only rest in the Pentagon. Just yesterday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch said on ABC's ``This Week'' that a cyber attack by the Islamic State is one of the terrorist group's biggest emerging threats to our country. In fact, during the interview, Attorney General Lynch noted that the terrorist group now boasts over 20,000 English language Twitter followers. Our country's most sensitive data can be in the hands of our enemies at the mere click of a button or press of a screen. As I speak today, we have yet to obtain answers from the Obama administration on the scope and the perpetrators from the massive hack at the Office of Personnel Management. This attack has paralyzed the Obama administration. They haven't put in place any real, meaningful reforms at OPM. I have called for Chief Information Officer Donna Seymour's resignation since June 24. Yet she still remains in her post and we still don't have any concrete answers for the 21 million-plus Federal employees who were victims of this attack. We must do more. We must act more quickly and more nimbly than those seeking to wage a terror attack on our Nation's cyber security infrastructure. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Madam President, some in my home State of Montana like to say we have two seasons: winter and construction season. In fact, I grew up in the construction business. You learn in Montana there is a famous line when you are paving and putting in infrastructure. It is called 40 degrees and rising. In other words, if the temperature is not at least 40 degrees and rising, you are not supposed to pave. What that means is that we don't have a real long construction season in Montana to build our highways. I also know how important it is to have certainty before you can break ground, before you can plan a project. With long winters and short summers, Montana construction workers know what it is like to wait for 40 degrees and rising before putting down the asphalt. Unfortunately, they have also learned to wait a long time for a long- term highway bill that provides the certainty needed to make the long- term investments in infrastructure. Congress has passed 33--let me say that again, 33--short-term extensions in an attempt to keep the highway trust fund solvent. Those are 33 too many short-term extensions. As somebody who has spent 28 years in the private sector, I think it is ridiculous as I watch the way the Federal Government operates to try to manage in this spurt- driven, short-term-driven environment of Washington, DC--and I would argue crisis-driven environment. This uncertainty, coupled with rigid programs that make planning and executing projects very difficult, is prohibitive to progress and strengthening the infrastructure in our country. These short-term extensions, these short construction seasons for those who live in the Northern part of our country, along with these rigid regulations, leave States such as Montana with their hands tied and hard-working Montana construction workers with their pockets empty. Montana's short construction season is already well underway, and it is critical that Congress approves a multiyear solution that provides Montana and the rest of our country with the certainty needed to make long-term infrastructure investments. Montana's extensive transportation is a pillar of our economy. It allows visitors, our tourists, to come to our State and enjoy our national parks. It allows our residents, including our farmers and our ranchers, the ability to traverse the State and to get their goods to market. In any final transportation bill, it is critical to maintain Montana's share of Federal highway, transit, and safety programs. Congress needs to maintain support for the rural as well as the metropolitan areas. In fact, vehicle miles traveled increased in Montana by 43 percent from 1990 to 2012--to nearly 12 billion vehicle miles traveled. This is estimated to increase another 30 percent by 2030. Because Montana is a bridge State, we play a vital role in national connectivity. For example, Interstate 90 connects the east coast to the west coast. It runs from Boston to Seattle. I-15 connects our northern- to-southern borders. Now, I-90 is 3,000 miles long. Nearly 600 miles pass through the State of Montana. In fact, you add up the number of miles of interstate highway we have in Montana alone, it is over 1,000 miles. How far is 1,000 miles? To put that in DC terms, it is like going from Washington, DC, to Kansas City. In fact, the I-15 stretch that runs north-south in Montana is the second longest section of I-15. It is only 4 miles shorter than the entire north-south direction of the State of Utah. In fact, studies by the research group TRIP have shown the two largest transportation challenges facing Montana are I-90 and I-15. There is inadequate capacity, there is deterioration of the pavement, and we need bridges replaced because these inadequacies will have a national impact. TRIP estimates $7.4 billion is needed to address Montana's top 20 list of challenges. However, there is only $1.2 billion currently available. That leaves a nearly $6 billion backlog. What we need is to support a long-term highway bill. It creates construction jobs--union jobs. That is what is sitting on the table right now and what we will be debating this week in the Senate. These new jobs, created by increased access and infrastructure capacity, are being left unrealized. Specifically, in these times of constrained funding, it is critical to allow our States to have the flexibility to direct funds to their top needs and their most effective projects. The bill we are now debating will create a multiyear highway authorization and provide time to plan important long-term projects around the country and provide 3 years of guaranteed funding for the highway trust fund. I am an engineer by degree. In fact, I am the only chemical engineer who serves in Congress. When you are in engineering, you take a look at a problem and you find a solution. When you are an engineer, you lay out project plans. We need to put certainty in place so we can plan to improve the infrastructure of this country--to rebuild our highways, rebuild our bridges that are so much in need of repair at the moment. If we pass a multiyear highway bill, it will reverse Congress's trend of short-term, temporary bandaid fixes to fund the Nation's transportation network. Across the country and in Montana these patches have left States and localities without the certainty they need to plan and build long-term infrastructure projects. In the Senate committee on commerce, I have been working to ensure we have some of these needed reforms, and I want to thank Senator John Thune for his efforts in leading the committee. I look forward to a robust amendment process and debate on this much needed legislation. The bottom line: I am looking forward to passing a long-term, multiyear highway bill that provides certainty, that improves the infrastructure of our country and most importantly creates jobs. Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I want to bring attention to the serious wildfires going on in Montana as I speak. There are currently two large active fires burning in Montana, including 4,000 acres called the Reynolds Creek fire right in Glacier National Park, as well as the Cabin Gulch fire, 2,500 acres, near Townsend. Our fire crews are putting themselves in harm's way to protect our lands, our forests, and our communities. With lower-than-average snowpack, we have had less-than-average rains. It has created a situation. We have very low water levels in our rivers and our streams, and our firefighting teams are facing ripe conditions for wildfire. They are also being driven by high winds and dry fuels. So far this year, we are experiencing the second worst fire season in terms of impacted areas in a decade. The situation could only get more serious in the coming weeks and months. Our communities, our watersheds, our wildlife habitat, our access to recreation--all of these critical Montana treasures--are at risk for wildfire. Please join me in praying for the safety of our firefighters, and please thank them for a job and service well done for the State of Montana.

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my very brief remarks Senator Sullivan be allowed to speak.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I wish to recognize Lesley Robinson, the newly elected member of the Executive Committee of the National Association of Counties, NACo, as Montanan of the Week. Mrs. Robinson was recognized during NACo's 80th Annual Conference and will now act as the regional representative for the western region of the United States. Mrs. Robinson will also serve as vice chair of NACo's Public Lands Steering Committee, which oversees all matters pertaining to federally-owned public lands. As a rancher from Dodson, MT, Mrs. Robinson understands the western lifestyle and hopes to protect the interests of Montana and other western counties while working on the executive committee. Mrs. Robinson wants to highlight issues regarding resource management, endangered species protection, and wildfire prevention. Beyond her work at NACo, Mrs. Robinson is also an active member of her community. She works with local organizations like the Bear Paw Development Corporation, Phillco Economic Council, Phillips Transit Authority and the Joint Powers Trust, and the Montana Stockgrowers Association. I am proud to see Montana being represented by women like Mrs. Robinson, who have dedicated their lives to improving the betterment of Montana and the west for all.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Regulatory Impact Scale on the Economy Small Business Act, also known as the RISE Act. One of Congress's most fundamental responsibilities is to provide oversight to its vast regulatory structure, particularly as it pertains to small businesses. However, Congress lacks the proper framework to effectively monitor the impact of regulatory activity on small businesses. Today, there is no transparent, standardized means to realize the economic scale of regulatory rules, either proposed or finalized, to frame their economic significance on a comparative basis. Likewise, the American public also has no means to effectively gauge and monitor the significance of regulatory rules. With the current lack of scale, there is no means to categorically delineate between a ``big regulation'' and a ``really big regulation,'' resulting in less effective oversight. In addition, agencies wield tremendous discretionary power in determining whether required small business analysis applies. Today, regulatory flexibility analysis is triggered when a proposed rule is determined by the issuing agency to have a ``significant economic impact'' on a substantial number of small entities. However, Congress has provided no bright-line standard to determine what constitutes significant economic impact, allowing agencies to exercise an unnecessary amount of leniency to bypass regulatory flexibility analysis, which is meant to give special consideration to small businesses. To improve both Congress and public's ability to provide regulatory oversight, I recommend that Congress should require agencies to categorize each proposed and final rule based on the following categories of economic impact: category 1 between $100 million and $500 million; category 2 between $500 million and $1 billion; category 3 between $1 billion and $5 billion; category 4 between $5 billion and $10 billion; and category 5 at $10 billion and over. To disallow agencies from abusing broad discretionary power, Congress should establish a bright-line standard for ``significant economic impact'' of $100 million. Providing such guidance will provide accountability and consistency across the vast regulatory structure and provide efficiencies for Congress. I believe this important piece of legislation will provide clarity and direction for our regulatory efforts, and I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, the headlines in the past few months have been enough to paint a startling picture of how our Nation is handling technology and security these days. Before I came to Congress, I spent 12 years working in the technology sector, but it doesn't take an extensive background in these fields to see that in the ever-changing realm of technology and online communication, America's constitutional freedoms and civil liberties are at risk and our security as a nation is under attack. When it comes to protecting American citizens' privacy and personal information, we as a nation need to respond to the new threats our enemies are posing and the new tactics they are using and demand equal vigilance from those in our government who claim they have American safety at heart. The modern battlefield is changing. We see it changing before our very eyes, and America needs to adapt. With the incredible advantages that modern technology offers, also with that come greater risks as well as greater responsibility. Our enemies, America's enemies, are utilizing social media in particular to recruit others to their side to plot against our rights, our freedoms, our American way of life. As Michael Steinbach, the Assistant Director at the FBI's Counterterrorism Division, said to the House Homeland Security Committee just last month: ``The foreign terrorist now has direct access into the United States like never before.'' We know for a fact that ISIS aggressively uses social media to spread its propaganda, to target individuals in our own country, and to urge them to attack us on our own soil. In March of this year, the New York Times reported that ISIS's use of social media, including Twitter and high-quality online recruiting videos, has been ``astonishingly successful,'' and the speed at which modern social media moves means America must move faster. In fact, we read about the recently foiled terrorist attack in Boston, where Islamic extremists planned to behead law enforcement officials. It shows us the importance of engaging these online terrorists, their propaganda machines, interpreting their encrypted communications, and cracking down on the spread of online terrorist networks--but how can we fight back against these cyber threats from abroad when our own government officials show themselves to be woefully incompetent? We in this country spent months debating the National Security Agency's bulk collection of Americans' metadata, and in the meantime, while we are having this debate, Chinese hackers stole millions of Americans' personal information. In fact, it is estimated now those Chinese hackers broke into the Office of Personnel Management-- basically the HR system of the Federal Government--and stole over 20 million records of employees of the Federal Government. This recent breach of Federal employees' information may possibly be rooted in a phishing email. In fact, in a recent article in Ars Technica on June 8, they said: It may be some time before the extent of the breach is known with any level of certainty. What is known is that a malware package--likely delivered via an e-mail ``phishing'' attack against OPM or Interior employees--managed to install itself within the OPM's IT systems and establish a back-door for further attacks. The attackers then escalated their privileges on OPM's systems to the point where they had access to a wide swath of the agency's systems. These hackers broke into the computers at the Federal Government's Office of Personnel Management. They were downloading the very forms Federal employees use to gain national security clearances. In fact, earlier this month USA TODAY said: The hackers took millions of the forms used by people to disclose intimate details of their lives for national security clearances. The information could be used to unmask covert agents or try to blackmail Americans into spying for an enemy. In fact, I was one of those millions of Americans--as were other Members of Congress--whose personal information was compromised in this breach, and I demanded accountability from the Director and others at the OPM, but we also need to address the systemic problems with cyber security in this country directly. The outdated security systems at the OPM and other agencies of the Federal Government recently hacked show that America is not up to speed with the kinds and the levels of cyber threats our country is facing. Let me give an example. In the publication Ars Technica of June 8, 2015, it says: The OPM hack is just the latest in a series of Federal network intrusions and data breaches, including recent incidents at the Internal Revenue Service, the State Department, and even the White House. These attacks have occurred despite the $4.5 billion National Cybersecurity and Protection System program and its centerpiece capability, Einstein. Falling under the Department of Homeland Security's watch, that system sits astride the government's trusted Internet gateways. Einstein was originally based on deep packet inspection technology first deployed over a decade ago, and the system's latest $218 million upgrade was supposed to make it capable of more active attack prevention. But the track flow analysis and signature detection capabilities of Einstein, drawn from both DHS traffic analysis and data shared by the National Security Agency, appears to be incapable of catching the sort of tactics that have become the modern baseline for state-sponsored network espionage and criminal attacks. Once such attacks are executed, they tend to look like normal network traffic. Put simply, as new capabilities for Einstein are being rolled out, they're not keeping pace with the types of threats now facing federal agencies. And with the data from OPM and other breaches, foreign intelligence services have a goldmine of information about federal employees at every level of the government. And this just at a time when the threats to our Nation are at very high levels. The article continues: It's a worrisome cache that could be easily leveraged for additional, highly-targeted cyber-attacks and other espionage. In a nation with a growing reputation for state of the art surveillance initiatives and cyber warfare techniques, how did we become the ones playing catch up? But this isn't just about being sloppy or being slow; this is a matter of national security. America needs to get smart on cyber security and tech issues and to hold officials accountable for their behavior because there is just too much at stake if we fail. The American people will pay the price for a failure to adapt to this rapidly changing world of technology, this rapidly changing world of media, this rapidly changing world of information gathering, and for sheer carelessness on the part of those in authority. Private sector innovation and progress can help America compete. As a member of the committee on commerce and having spent 28 years in the private sector--the last 12 years with a cloud computing startup which we took public and which became a great cloud computing company, with offices all over the world but based in my home State of Montana--I admit I had to smile when I saw that so many Congressmen want to regulate the private sector to protect the private sector from private threats. Well, again, in 28 years of serving in the private sector, I never once had my information breached. I never once had a letter from my HR department saying my information had been comprised. It wasn't until I became a Federal employee, elected to Congress a few years ago, that my information was compromised. The private sector runs a whole lot faster than the public sector. I think the government needs to look within to make sure we can be at the forefront of cyber technology and security, but these efforts will be thoroughly wasted if the Federal Government does not take the necessary precautions and procedures to protect the American people. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. DAINES

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

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Regulatory Impact Scale on the Economy Small Business Act, also known as the RISE Act. One of Congress's most fundamental responsibilities is to provide oversight to its vast regulatory structure, particularly as it pertains to small businesses. However, Congress lacks the proper framework to effectively monitor the impact of regulatory activity on small businesses. Today, there is no transparent, standardized means to realize the economic scale of regulatory rules, either proposed or finalized, to frame their economic significance on a comparative basis. Likewise, the American public also has no means to effectively gauge and monitor the significance of regulatory rules. With the current lack of scale, there is no means to categorically delineate between a ``big regulation'' and a ``really big regulation,'' resulting in less effective oversight. In addition, agencies wield tremendous discretionary power in determining whether required small business analysis applies. Today, regulatory flexibility analysis is triggered when a proposed rule is determined by the issuing agency to have a ``significant economic impact'' on a substantial number of small entities. However, Congress has provided no bright-line standard to determine what constitutes significant economic impact, allowing agencies to exercise an unnecessary amount of leniency to bypass regulatory flexibility analysis, which is meant to give special consideration to small businesses. To improve both Congress and public's ability to provide regulatory oversight, I recommend that Congress should require agencies to categorize each proposed and final rule based on the following categories of economic impact: category 1 between $100 million and $500 million; category 2 between $500 million and $1 billion; category 3 between $1 billion and $5 billion; category 4 between $5 billion and $10 billion; and category 5 at $10 billion and over. To disallow agencies from abusing broad discretionary power, Congress should establish a bright-line standard for ``significant economic impact'' of $100 million. Providing such guidance will provide accountability and consistency across the vast regulatory structure and provide efficiencies for Congress. I believe this important piece of legislation will provide clarity and direction for our regulatory efforts, and I urge my colleagues to cosponsor this bill. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. DAINES

Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I wish to recognize Shayne Pierre of Polson, MT as Montanan of the Week. This week, Mr. Pierre was given the rare honor of receiving the Colonel's Meritorious Service Award from the Lake County Sheriff's Office and the Montana Highway Patrol for his selfless acts to assist all victims of a drunk driving accident that occurred this past May. Shayne was riding the school bus home when the accident occurred. A speeding drunk driver caused a collision with the school bus, injuring both Shayne and his fellow students on the bus. Upon noticing a gas leak on the pavement, Shayne quickly instructed all students to exit the bus. He also acted heroically when he ran to help the driver who caused the accident, despite the injuries Shayne himself had sustained. Shayne's quick actions and selflessness deserve many thanks and for that, I want to recognize him. Through this incident, Shayne acted as a role model not only to the students on the bus, but to his classmates, peers and community. I am proud that he is a citizen of the great State of Montana and an example to all.

Mr. DAINES

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

Mr. DAINES. Madam President, as we speak, negotiations are ongoing between Iran and the P5+1 countries regarding one of the greatest threats to global security today; that is, a potentially nuclear- capable Iran. If both sides reach a final negotiated agreement, this body will have to consider whether the agreement truly prevents Iran from becoming a nuclear state or whether it paves the way for the leading state sponsor of terror to obtain a nuclear weapon. Agreeing to a bad deal would pose a serious threat to the national security of the United States, to Israel, and our other allies. We cannot take this decision lightly. We should not base our votes on the legacy of the President. We will be dealing with the consequences of this potential agreement long after President Obama leaves office. There are specific terms of any final agreement that are vital to preventing Iran's nuclear weapons capability. One-hundred percent certainty is impossible in matters of intelligence, particularly with a regime like Iran's that has a history of being less than forthright about its nuclear program. In fact, on June 21, the Iranian Parliament voted to bar inspectors from military sites. As they were passing this resolution to bar inspectors from military sites, they were chanting ``Death to America.'' Let's not forget that Iran is the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world. It is critical that the International Atomic Energy Agency be able to conduct extensive inspections at all military facilities, including unannounced inspections, to ensure that Iran is upholding its commitments. A final deal must ensure that we have verifiable evidence that Iran is complying with the terms of the agreement before lifting sanctions. A final deal must permit international inspection to occur anytime, anywhere. A final deal must require Iran to disclose and dismantle its nuclear infrastructure, its uranium stockpile, and all other aspects of its nuclear program as specified in six--let me repeat--six U.N. Security Council resolutions. A final deal must ensure Iranians never get a nuclear weapon. If Iran does violate these terms, the deal must guarantee that strong sanctions go back into place immediately. It took years to get in place the sanctions we have today. It was largely because of these sanctions that Iran was forced to come to the negotiating table. The sanctions are working. I would also like to address the notion that we either come to a deal or we resort to military action. This is a false choice. In fact, accepting a bad deal now will make military action more likely down the road. A bad deal will provide Iran with an influx of cash to continue sponsoring terrorism around the world, while failing to prevent them from ultimately obtaining a nuclear weapon when this deal expires. Like so many Montanans I have heard from, I truly hope negotiations are successful. However, I am concerned the that based on the framework agreement that we have seen so far, the final agreement will ultimately fail to safeguard our national security and prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. No deal is better than a bad deal. If the final agreement the President presents falls short of the requirements I have talked about today, I will not support it. Over the past month, we have now blown through four deadlines. It is starting to look like Groundhog Day in Vienna. safe kids act Madam President, on a separate note, this past week the Senate began debating legislation about our Nation's educational system. In the same week, we learned more about a major data breach at the Office of Personnel Management, which put more than 21 million American's personnel information at risk. Those events and the policy debates bring to light an issue that often does not gather a lot of information; that is, protecting our student's personal information and data in the digital age. As a father of four, this issue is particularly personal to me. To date, countless schools across the United States utilize electronic records to update student information and transfer data from one school to another. But as the data is collected, it is important students' privacy is maintained and that the data is being stored safely and securely. In 2014, a working group was formed to address the issue of student data privacy. This group produced the Student Data Privacy Pledge, which intended to set self-imposed principles to ensure that information collected from students is kept both secure as well as private. This week, I will be introducing legislation called the SAFE KIDS Act, that builds on these ideas by empowering the Federal Trade Commission to oversee and enforce the collection, storage, and usage of covered information. This bill will put important reforms in place to protect students privacy, to establish greater security and transparency measures, and to encourage innovation among education technology providers, and better ensure accountability in keeping our students' information safe. As someone who spent more than 12 years in the technology sector, I am excited to see technology being used in innovative ways in our schools. As a father of four, I also want to ensure that there are proper safeguards in place to protect our kids' personal data in an increasingly data-driven world. I also want to thank Senator Blumenthal for joining me this week to introduce this important legislation to protect students' personal information and for his continued work on this issue. With that in mind, I will yield the floor so we can hear more from Senator Blumenthal on this most important issue.