Michael Enzi

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. In that case, let me say that the pending amendment, No. 3345, offered by the Senator from New Hampshire would cause the aggregate level of budget authority and outlays for fiscal year 2016 as established in the most recently agreed to concurrent resolution on the budget, S. Con. Res. 11, to be exceeded; therefore, I raise a point of order against the amendment under section 311(a)(2)(A) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the pending amendment, No. 3395, offered by Senators Wyden and Schumer, would establish a new demonstration program within Medicare Part D to coordinate the treatment of opioid addiction. The proposal would also increase the penalties on drugmakers. According to the Congressional Budget Office, the amendment would increase direct spending over both the 2016 through 2020 and the 2016 through 2025 periods. If the amendment were adopted, then the Judiciary Committee would exceed its spending allocation over both of these time periods. As a consequence of the new spending proposed, the Wyden- Schumer amendment is a violation of section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act. As I said before, we all agree that the heroin and opioid abuse epidemic is real and has to be addressed, but I believe we ought to address the problem living within the confines of the budget we previously agreed to just last December. The underlying bipartisan bill provides a good framework for tackling this problem. It provides a comprehensive, specific, and evidence-based approach to help Americans combat this epidemic. In light of that, the pending amendment No. 3395, offered by the Senator from Oregon, would cause the underlying legislation to exceed the authorizing committee's section 302(a) allocation of new budget authority or outlays. Therefore, I raise a point of order against the measure pursuant to section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, the pending amendment offered by the Senator from New Hampshire appropriates $600 million on top of the $571 million provided in the bill as reported by the Judiciary Committee over the 2016-2020 period. Unlike the underlying bill, which requires appropriators to provide the authorized funding within the discretionary spending caps, the Shaheen amendment would designate new spending as emergency not subject to budget enforcement. I am also concerned that this amendment lacks specificity in how the funds are allocated. For example, the bill provides $300 million to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration for substance abuse treatment to address the heroin and opioid crisis and its associated health effects. While we all agree that the heroin and opioid abuse epidemic must be addressed, I believe the underlying bipartisan bill provides a better framework to tackle this problem. It provides a comprehensive, specific, and evidence-based approach to help Americans combat this epidemic. In the meantime, the Senate Appropriations Committee shepherds resources to the opioid problem in the consolidated appropriations bill signed into law late last year. Nearly $600 million was included to start down the road to helping States and communities to address this problem. The appropriators, working with our authorizers inside the framework of this bill, can evaluate the effectiveness of this year's spending as they make decisions about how much to spend and how to spend most effectively in upcoming years. Finally, last year's budget resolution conference report contained a deficit neutral reserve fund, spearheaded by Senator Ayotte and adopted unanimously by the committee, to address the opioid challenge. Together, Republicans and Democrats agreed that, if Congress were to agree on policies and funds to tackle this urgent problem, we should work to pay for it. The Shaheen amendment does not do that. Also, the Obama administration did not request opioid funding in the supplemental request sent just last week for emergency Zika funding.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I wish to submit to the Senate the budget scorekeeping report for February 2016. The report compares current law levels of spending and revenues with the amounts provided in the conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 11, the budget resolution for fiscal year 2016. This information is necessary to determine whether budget points of order lie against pending legislation. It has been prepared by the Republican staff of the Senate Budget Committee and the Congressional Budget Office, CBO, pursuant to section 308(b) of the Congressional Budget Act, CBA. This is the second scorekeeping report for this calendar year but the sixth report I have made since adoption of the fiscal year 2016 budget resolution on May 5, 2015. My last filing can be found in the Congressional Record on January 11, 2016. The information contained in this report is current through February 22, 2016. Table 1 gives the amount by which each Senate authorizing committee is below or exceeds its allocation under the budget resolution. This information is used for enforcing committee allocations pursuant to section 302 of the CBA. Over the fiscal year 2016-2025 period, which is the entire period covered by S. Con. Res. 11, Senate authorizing committees have spent $147.9 billion more than the budget resolution calls for. Table 2 gives the amount by which the Senate Committee on Appropriations is below or exceeds the statutory spending limits. This information is used to determine points of order related to the spending caps found in section 312 and section 314 of the CBA. On December 18, 2015, the President signed H.R. 2029, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, P.L. 114-113, into law. This bill provided regular appropriations equal to the levels set in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, P.L. 114-74, specifically $548.1 billion in budget authority for defense accounts, revised security category, and $518.5 billion in budget authority for nondefense accounts, revised nonsecurity category. Table 3 gives the amount by which the Senate Committee on Appropriations is below or exceeds its allocation for Overseas Contingency Operations/Global War on Terrorism, OCO/GWOT, spending. This separate allocation for OCO/GWOT was established in section 3102 of S. Con. Res. 11 and is enforced using section 302 of the CBA. The consolidated appropriations bill included $73.7 billion in budget authority and $32.1 billion in outlays for OCO/GWOT in fiscal year 2016. This level is equal to the revised OCO/GWOT levels that I filed in the Record on December 18, 2015. The budget resolution established two new points of order limiting the use of changes in mandatory programs in appropriations bills, CHIMPS. Tables 4 and 5 show compliance with fiscal year 2016 limits for overall CHIMPS and the Crime Victims Fund CHIMP, respectively. This information is used for determining points of order under section 3103 and section 3104, respectively. Enacted CHIMPS are under both the broader CHIMPS limit, $1.3 billion less, and the Crime Victims Fund limit, $1.8 billion less. In addition to the tables provided by the Senate Budget Committee Republican staff, I am submitting additional tables from CBO that I will use for enforcement of budget levels agreed to by the Congress. For fiscal year 2016, CBO estimates that current law levels are $138.9 billion and $103.6 billion above the budget resolution levels for budget authority and outlays, respectively. Revenues are $155.2 billion below the level assumed in the budget resolution. Finally, Social Security outlays are at the levels assumed in the budget resolution for fiscal year 2016, while Social Security revenues are $23 million below assumed levels for the budget year. CBO's report also provides information needed to enforce the Senate's pay-as-you-go rule. The Senate's pay-as-you-go scorecard currently shows deficit reduction of $20.4 billion over the fiscal year 2015-2020 period and $95.7 billion over the fiscal year 2015-2025 period. Over the initial 6-year period, Congress has enacted legislation that would increase revenues by $17 billion and decrease outlays by $3.3 billion. Over the 11-year period, Congress has enacted legislation that would increase revenues by $36.8 billion and decrease outlays by $59 billion. The Senate's pay-as-you-go rule is enforced by section 201 of S. Con. Res. 21, the fiscal year 2008 budget resolution. All years in the accompanying tables are fiscal years. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I wish to offer a few words remembering Associate Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court. America has lost a legal giant and tireless defender of the Constitution. Justice Scalia dedicated his life to his country and the rule of law. His passing is a significant loss for the Court and the United States. Few Associate Justices of the Supreme Court capture the attention of both lawyers and non-lawyers like Justice Scalia has throughout his career. Antonin Scalia used wit, humor, and colorful writing to captivate Americans in his judicial opinions and educational talks. Justice Scalia also felt strongly about protecting the rights of the individual and did so in monumental opinions interpreting the First, Second, Fourth, and Sixth Amendments. In the immediate days following his passing, I received substantial correspondence from Wyoming residents praising his work for upholding the Constitution and defending individual liberties. A number of my colleagues have already mentioned how Justice Scalia would always put the Constitution first, even if it conflicted with his personal views. This was the case when Justice Scalia voted to uphold the right of protesters to burn the American flag--even though he strongly disagreed with flag desecration. When it comes to privacy, Justice Scalia established himself as a leading champion of the Fourth Amendment, particularly when it comes to privacy in one's home or car. Justice Scalia also authored a landmark majority opinion upholding gun rights under the Second Amendment which reiterated the constitutional right of an individual to keep and bear arms in the District of Columbia, a right which was later incorporated to all States. Justice Scalia also fought ardently for religious freedoms under the Establishment Clause and joined others in upholding freedom of association under the First Amendment. From his earliest days on the Supreme Court, Scalia approached the Constitution and statutes passed by Congress as a textualist. He protected the vertical separation of power in our federalist system which keeps decisions closer to the people and fought for the separation of powers amongst the three branches of Federal Government. Most recently, Justice Scalia challenged Executive overreach in the unanimous decision of the Supreme Court invalidating President Obama's unconstitutional recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Finally, Justice Scalia's writings, judicial philosophy, and lectures have influenced future generations of lawyers and jurists. Whether, during oral argument, asking if the government can ``make people buy broccoli'' or referencing Cole Porter lyrics in opinions, Scalia used words to rebut, challenge, and persuade. Justice Scalia's legacy and legal precedents will stand the test of time, and our Nation owes him a debt of gratitude for his service. My wife, Diana, and I send our prayers and condolences to the Scalia family.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Madam President, I rise today to express my concerns with the Customs conference report. While I support the Customs provisions in this conference report, as well as the Internet tax moratorium, I cannot support the way these issues were merged in conference. I have said for years that the Internet Tax Freedom Act should be paired with e-fairness legislation because I think it is reasonable to tell the States that when we take away their ability to tax Internet access, we are giving them the ability to collect the State and local sales and use taxes already owed on remote sales. It is beyond time for Congress to give States that right. Congress's failure to act has created a burden on our States and local governments, which are losing billions in tax revenue that they need for local responsibilities. As a former mayor and State legislator, I understand how important sales tax revenue is to State and local governments for maintaining schools, fixing roads, and supporting local law enforcement, fire departments, and emergency management crews. Congress's inaction on e-fairness legislation implicitly blesses a situation in which States may be forced to raise other taxes, such as income or property taxes, to offset the growing loss of sales tax revenue. In December, in-store sales were about the same as the year before, but Internet sales grew by about 40 percent. To be clear, we are talking about a substantial loss in revenue. In 2012, States missed out on an estimated $23 billion in uncollected but owed use taxes from all remote sales. About $61 million of that would have gone to my home State of Wyoming. Those numbers increase every year as online sales increase. States missed the opportunity to collect an estimated $26 billion in remote sales and use taxes in 2013. Wyoming lost an estimated $81.2 million, so $61 million to $81 million. Congress's failure to act is also hurting our local stores, which hire local people who support local events and help out in the community. The same stores that are required to collect State and local sales and use taxes while their online and catalog competitors are not. As a former small business owner, I believe it is important to level the playing field for all retailers--in-store, catalog, and online--so an outdated rule for sales tax collection does not adversely impact small businesses and Main Street retailers. I have given the example before of a friend in Sheridan who has a camera store. He has people come in and look at some very expensive cameras and get all of the instructions and find out about all of the accessories. Then they just take a little picture of the bar code on that and order it online. The difference in price? The sales tax. He provides the service, but loses the sale, and it is because the sales tax is not collected online. That is not fair. I used to have a shoe store. The same thing is true. They can get the fit they need, the adjustments they need, and know exactly the shoe they want. Check the bar code online. What is the difference? The sales tax. It really hurts if they order it in front of you. Televisions, bicycles--there are all kinds of examples of this same sort of thing happening. This issue also affects online stores. More and more States are successfully implementing their own laws to ensure they can collect these remote sales and use taxes. They are doing it piecemeal. This will create a patchwork of complicated, uniquely tailored, and incongruent laws for all businesses to comply with. For many years I have worked with all interested parties to find a mutually agreeable way to solve this problem. But instead of taking up legislation that prevents taxation of Internet access and also helps State and local governments and businesses, we have a conference report before us that includes the Internet Tax Freedom Act, which was just dropped in without any separate vote or debate. The Senate has not considered it in the committee nor on the floor. Instead of considering this inserted issue now, we should have combined it with legislation that restores States' sovereign right to enforce State and local sales and use tax laws. What I am proposing is not a tax on the Internet. I am opposed to that. Rather, e-fairness legislation would give States the option to collect their sales and use taxes already due on all purchases. Unlike this airdropped Internet Tax Freedom Act provision, the Senate has overwhelmingly voted in support of e-fairness with a bipartisan group of 69 Senators supporting the Marketplace Fairness Act in the last Congress, and we were not even able to get a vote on our amendment. I thank my colleagues who have worked so hard on this issue, especially Senators Durbin, Alexander, and Heitkamp. I thank the businesses, the trade groups, the State and local governments, and all of the other stakeholders who have helped us educate offices about this issue. I thank the leader for listening to our concerns about this conference report. But ultimately I oppose the conference report because, while Congress should pass the Customs bill and this provision this year, Congress should also pass e-fairness legislation this year that allows States to collect the sales and use taxes they are owed for remote sales already. I yield the floor. Amending 19 U.S.C., Section 1501

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

Mr. ENZI. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I previously revised allocations, aggregates, and levels in the budget resolution pursuant to section 4305 of S. Con. Res. 11, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2016, for H.R. 3762, the Restoring Americans' Healthcare Freedom Reconciliation Act of 2015. On January 6, 2016, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3762, which had been amended by a complete Senate substitute. On January 8, 2016, the President vetoed the measure. On February 2, 2016, the House was unable to override the President's veto. As such, I am reversing my previous adjustments for this legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables, which provide details about the adjustment, be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I would be remiss if I didn't rise during this debate on energy to address the administration's continuing efforts to wear down America's coal industry. As the Senate considers reform of our Nation's energy infrastructure, the importance of coal to America's energy portfolio simply cannot be understated, and unfortunately neither can this administration's deliberate attempts to use Executive power to put the coal industry out of business. This administration has made no secret of its disdain for fossil fuels and has unleashed a series of policies intended to subvert reliable, affordable, traditional energy sources, such as oil and natural gas, in favor of valuable but more expensive and less reliable renewable resources. We have a lot of wind in Wyoming. In fact, the first wind turbines were put in and the rotors blew off until they discovered they couldn't turn them into the wind at 80 miles an hour. But even though we have a lot of wind--I guess Wyoming could be called the Saudi Arabia of wind and solar, coal, oil, natural gas, and uranium--we have found that sometimes the wind doesn't blow, and we have found that sometimes the Sun doesn't shine and sometimes the wind doesn't blow when the Sun isn't shining, and that creates a problem unless you have alternate fuels. Coal is at the center of that regulatory battle. The war on coal is not only an affront to coal producers in my home State of Wyoming but to energy consumers across America. Let me explain how the administration's war on coal affects Americans across the country with this chart. According to the Energy Information Administration, 39 percent of the electricity in the United States was generated by coal in 2014. The only other energy source that comes close to coal for energy production is natural gas, at 27 percent. We need to ask ourselves: If we allow the administration to kill the coal industry, what energy source is going to take its place and provide our constituents with the energy they need? It is actually the only stockpilable resource we have. This issue hits close to home for me because approximately 40 percent of the country's coal is produced in my home State of Wyoming. Actually, 40 percent is produced in my home county of Campbell County, WY. According to the National Mining Association, coal supports more than 27,000 jobs in my State. Now, 27,000 probably doesn't sound like a lot in California, Washington, DC, New York, or even Texas, but that is 9 percent of our state's workforce. Nine percent of our workforce has jobs related to coal, and they are good-paying jobs. These jobs pay an average of about $81,500 a year. Multiply that by 27,000 jobs, and we are talking about billions. Let me be clear. This isn't just an issue for Wyoming or other coal-producing States. The Wyoming Mining Association reported that in 2014, 30 States received coal from Wyoming's mines. The area depicted in red on this chart are the States that receive Wyoming coal, but that doesn't mean some States don't also receive electricity produced in Wyoming from coal. Those States include California, Utah, and Idaho. And, of course on this carbon issue, Wyoming is forced to account for the carbon that produces the energy these other states consume. The second chart shows that if you represent Texas, Illinois, or Missouri, you should be worried about the coal industry because in 2014 each of those States received more than 10 percent of Wyoming's coal. Wisconsin, Iowa, Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Michigan each got about 5 percent of Wyoming's coal. Wyoming's coal was also distributed to Nebraska, Georgia, Alabama, Colorado, Louisiana, Tennessee, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, New York, and Arizona. If I didn't list your State, don't think the stability and success of the coal industry doesn't affect you. Ten other States and foreign entities also received Wyoming's coal. All of these numbers and stats boil down to this: Most of America's energy is powered by coal, and policies that raise the price of coal will hurt industries and households across the country. They will cost jobs in our country and will cause people to have higher utility bills. Unfortunately, the administration is either oblivious or unconcerned with this correlation, as evidenced by the Department of Interior's recent announcement that they will block most new Federal coal leases in order to conduct a programmatic environmental impact statement on coal development on Federal lands. About 40 percent of our Nation's coal is produced by the Federal coal leasing program. Under that program, which is managed by the Department of Interior, private entities compete for the right to lease and mine the coal mineral estate owned by the Federal Government. After a rigorous multiyear application and land-use planning process, lessees are given an opportunity to mine coal on public land. Again, that is a rigorous, multiyear application process that can and does drag on for years. In return, those companies pay BLM a bonus bid, which is an upfront fee for the right to mine. Besides that, they also pay an annual land rental payment and they pay an additional royalty on the value of the coal after it is mined. Surface mines pay a royalty of 12.5 percent and underground mines pay a royalty of 8 percent. These revenues are shared by the Federal Government and the States in which the coal was mined. This program, which began in 1920, has been a tremendously successful way to provide affordable energy to the Nation, provide jobs in places such as Wyoming's Powder River Basin, where 85 percent of all Federal coal is mined, and it provides value to the government. According to the BLM--the Bureau of Land Management--the Federal coal leasing program has generated well over $1 billion a year for the last 10 years: $7.9 billion in royalties and an additional $4 billion in rent, bonus bid payments and other fees. Again, that is money that coal leasing earns for the Federal Government--a stark contrast to most Federal programs. That doesn't even mention the taxes that are paid by the workers who mine the coal, but if we eliminate their jobs, that money is not coming in either. This administration has announced plans to halt new Federal coal leases while it takes years to study the value and efficacy of the program. This Department of Interior rule has the potential to economically devastate my home State of Wyoming and send energy prices around the country through the roof. The BLM laid the foundation for this farce last summer when it staged a series of listening sessions. I went to the session in Gillette, WY, and based on the administration's recent announcement, I don't think the BLM was listening very closely. If they were, they would know that American taxpayers are already receiving a fair return on coal resources. One gentleman, who told the BLM his story, moved to Wyoming to be a coal miner. He spoke with pride about his job. He was worried that the job that has allowed him to raise three children will no longer exist if the BLM raises royalty rates. The owner of a small business not directly related to the coal industry told her story. She was worried about the ripple effect raising royalty rates would have on Campbell County and the State of Wyoming. As a mom, she also told the BLM about the direct support coal companies provide her community through social service agencies, community events, and youth activities. She didn't want to see her kids lose that support. The benefits she referenced are a reflection of the $1.14 billion in tax and fee revenues the State of Wyoming collected from the coal industry in 2014. This is money which the State critically relies on to fund things such as schools, highways, and community colleges across the State. Wyoming state lawmakers are going through a process right now to try to figure out how to make up for the lost revenue just from last year. They are making drastic budget cuts which we wouldn't even consider here at the Federal Government even though the State of Wyoming is in better financial shape than the Federal Government. I mentioned the Gillette woman who is the owner of a small business that is not directly related to the coal industry. She said her business is down by 60 percent. That is almost two-thirds less revenue than what she would have had, which means, of course, that it affects some other jobs in the community. So there is a huge ripple effect to all of this. Despite these and dozens of similar stories, the administration announced that they need to shut down Federal coal leases and conduct a study to determine if taxpayers are getting a fair return on the Federal coal leasing program. For quite a while now, the resulting revenue coal producers and companies got to keep was less than what they were paying in taxes. If the BLM would have truly listened to the folks in Gillette last summer, they would already know the answer to this. Instead, they have gone forward with a plan to cripple the coal industry and make energy more expensive. In the words of Wyoming's Governor Matt Mead, ``Not only will [Interior's new rule] hurt miners and all businesses that support coal mining, it will take away the competitive advantage coal provides to every U.S. citizen.'' When it is part of the energy mix, it affects the other energy prices as well. As we debate energy policy reforms in the coming days, it isn't just the fate of coal that should concern us. Interior's Federal coal leasing review is just the latest in a string of regulations aimed at driving fossil fuel industries out of business. The administration has also proposed a new methane flaring rule aimed at discouraging oil and gas leasing on Federal lands. This Chamber has spoken clearly in rejecting rules such as the Clean Power Plan and the Waters of the United States, but the administration continues its regulatory war on energy. As we consider energy policy reforms, we need to make sure we are protecting the resources that have and can continue to power America, and that has to include coal. I thank the Presiding Officer, and I yield the floor.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. I agree with Senator Murkowski that fire borrowing has been mischaracterized and conflated with the Forest Service's overall concern about its discretionary budget. Although I recognize the fact that the Forest Service has serious management challenges, consensus doesn't exist in the Senate to adjust the caps so the Forest Service can spend more money on other programs within its discretionary budget. That said, Congress must find a fiscally responsible solution to wildfire funding and fire borrowing. I welcome the opportunity to review the fire borrowing issue in my committee and how the unpredictable costs of wildfire suppression have forced Congress to appropriate emergency dollars in past years. We can find a solution to budgeting for wildfires. We cannot, however, only work on the budget issues without also making changes to the way we manage our forests. It is crucial to ensure taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently and effectively. Just as there are many State, local, and Federal partners in the field when it comes to suppressing wildfires during the fire season, it is important that all the necessary committees in the Senate work together on this issue. I look forward to addressing these issues with Senator Murkowski and Senator Roberts, with my committee members, and with other Western Senators interested in the outcome.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I wish to submit to the Senate the budget scorekeeping report for January 2016. The report compares current law levels of spending and revenues with the amounts provided in the conference report to accompany S. Con. Res. 11, the budget resolution for fiscal year 2016. This information is necessary to determine whether budget points of order lie against pending legislation. It has been prepared by the Republican staff of the Senate Budget Committee and the Congressional Budget Office, CBO, pursuant to section 308(b) of the Congressional Budget Act, CBA. This is the first scorekeeping report for this calendar year but the fifth report I have made since adoption of the fiscal year 2016 budget resolution on May 5, 2015. My last filing can be found in the Congressional Record on December 2, 2015. The information contained in this report is current through January 5, 2016. Table 1 gives the amount by which each Senate authorizing committee is below or exceeds its allocation under the budget resolution. This information is used for enforcing committee allocations pursuant to section 302 of the CBA. Over the fiscal year 2016-2025 period, which is the entire period covered by S. Con. Res. 11, Senate authorizing committees have spent $148 billion more than the budget resolution calls for. Table 2 gives the amount by which the Senate Committee on Appropriations is below or exceeds the statutory spending limits. This information is used to determine points of order related to the spending caps found in section 312 and section 314 of the CBA. On December 18, 2015, the President signed H.R. 2029, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, P.L. 114-113, into law. This bill provided regular appropriations equal to the levels set in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, P.L. 114-74, specifically $548.1 billion in budget authority for defense accounts, revised security category, and $518.5 billion in budget authority for nondefense accounts, revised nonsecurity category. Table 3 gives the amount by which the Senate Committee on Appropriations is below or exceeds its allocation for overseas contingency operations/global war on terrorism, OCO/GWOT, spending. This separate allocation for OCO/GWOT was established in section 3102 of S. Con. Res. 11 and is enforced using section 302 of the CBA. The consolidated appropriations bill included $73.7 billion in budget authority and $32.1 billion in outlays for OCO/GWOT in fiscal year 2016. This level is equal to the revised OCO/GWOT levels that I filed in the Record on December 18, 2015. The budget resolution established two new points of order limiting the use of changes in mandatory programs in appropriations bills, CHIMPS. Tables 4 and 5 show compliance with fiscal year 2016 limits for overall CHIMPS and the crime victims fund CHIMP, respectively. This information is used for determining points of order under section 3103 and section 3104, respectively. Enacted CHIMPS are under both the broader CHIMPS limit, $1.3 billion less, and the crime victims fund limit, $1.8 billion less. In addition to the tables provided by the Senate Budget Committee Republican staff, I am submitting additional tables from CBO that I will use for enforcement of budget levels agreed to by the Congress. For fiscal year 2016, CBO estimates that current law levels are $138.9 billion and $103.6 billion above the budget resolution levels for budget authority and outlays, respectively. Revenues are $155.2 billion below the level assumed in the budget resolution. Finally, Social Security outlays are at the levels assumed in the budget resolution for fiscal year 2016, while Social Security revenues are $23 million below assumed levels for the budget year. CBO's report also provides information needed to enforce the Senate's pay-as-you-go rule. The Senate's pay-as-you-go scorecard currently shows deficit reduction of $20.5 billion over the fiscal year 2015-2020 period and $95.6 billion over the fiscal year 2015-2025 period. Over the initial 6-year period, Congress has enacted legislation that would increase revenues by $17 billion and decrease outlays by $3.5 billion. Over the 11-year period, Congress has enacted legislation that would increase revenues by $36.7 billion and decrease outlays by $58.9 billion. The Senate's pay-as-you-go rule is enforced by section 201 of S. Con. Res. 21, the fiscal year 2008 budget resolution. All years in the accompanying tables are fiscal years. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Madam President, on November 2, 2015, the President signed the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 into law, H.R. 1314, P.L. 114-74. This bill passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 266 to 167 and the Senate by a vote of 64 to 35. Section 101 of H.R. 1314 redefined the term ``discretionary spending limit'' to add $50 billion in budget authority for fiscal year 2016. This increase was split evenly between defense and nondefense spending. More specifically it increased the fiscal year 2016 discretionary spending limit for the revised security category to $548.091 billion in new budget authority and the revised nonsecurity category to $518.491 billion in new budget authority. Section 3404 of the fiscal year 2016 budget resolution provides me with the authority to adjust levels and allocations for such changes in definitions in enacted legislation. I am therefore adjusting the allocation to the Committee on Appropriations and the budgetary aggregates to reflect the spending limits of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015. In addition to the changes triggered by P.L. 114-74, section 251 of the Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985, BBEDCA, allows for various adjustments to the discretionary spending limits, while sections 302 and 314(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 allow the chairman of the Budget Committee to establish and make revisions to allocations, aggregates, and levels consistent with those adjustments. The Senate will soon consider H.R. 2029, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016. This bill includes numerous provisions that meet the terms laid out in section 251 of BBEDCA to generate a change in the discretionary spending limits. As such, this spending is eligible for an adjustment under the Congressional Budget Act. Earlier this year I made adjustments to budgetary aggregates and the Committee on Appropriations' allocation to reflect provisions in appropriations bills that qualified for cap adjustments under BBEDCA that were being considered on the Senate floor. The adjustments I make today take these adjustments into consideration and reflect the appropriate level for adjustments for considering this Omnibus appropriations bill. Section 3102 of S. Con. Res. 11 provides a separate allocation to the Committee on Appropriations for overseas contingency operations, OCO/ global war on terrorism, GWOT, spending. Furthermore, the budget resolution provides the chairman of the Committee on the Budget the authority to change levels, aggregates, and allocations related to OCO/ GWOT based on new information. As such, I am making the appropriate adjustments to bring allocation levels in line with the amounts provided in H.R. 2029. As a result, I am increasing the budgetary aggregate for 2016 by $36,072 million in budget authority and reducing the aggregate for outlays by $997 million. I am increasing the fiscal year 2016 non-OCO/ GWOT allocations to the Appropriations Committee by $25,000 million in budget authority for defense, revised security category, $33,666 million in budget authority for non-defense, revised nonsecurity category, and $15,722 million in general purpose outlays. I am also reducing the OCO/GWOT allocation to the Committee on Appropriations by $22,594 million in budget authority and $16,719 million in outlays. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables, which provide details about the adjustment, be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, section 4313 of S. Con. Res. 11, the Concurrent Resolution on the Budget for Fiscal Year 2016, allows the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee to revise the allocations, aggregates and levels in the budget resolution for legislation that would amend the Higher Education Act of 1965. The authority to adjust is contingent on the legislation not increasing the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2016-2020 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2016-2025. I find that amendment No. 2929 fulfills the conditions of deficit neutrality found in section 4313 of S. Con. Res. 11. Accordingly, I am revising the allocation to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions and the budgetary aggregates to account for the budget effects of the legislation. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables, which provide details about the adjustment, be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I recently traveled to my hometown of Gillette, WY. I am usually in Wyoming most weekends, but I get to my hometown only about every other month because I have a huge State to cover. I happened to get there when the senior citizens were having their annual crafts gala. As I wandered through, looking at all of the marvelous things they had done, I was shown a Christmas ornament specifically designed for our county. I was asked if I could take it and a message to our President. Of course I agreed, and today I want to share that message and that ornament with my fellow Senators. That is what it looks like on the tree. The letter says: Dear Mr. President, We seniors of Gillette, Campbell County, Wyoming, want to send you this Christmas ornament that reflects the support of many programs in our community. Without the coal and oil industries, Campbell County would not have such a wonderful school system or the outstanding programs for seniors. The Campbell County Senior Center provides hot lunches for seniors Monday through Friday and serves about 100 (or more) every day. It also offers numerous other activities such as ceramics, painting, exercise classes, social activities, computer classes, day trips to local points of interest, and assistance in completing forms for government programs. We feel the Campbell County Senior Center is the Cadillac of all senior centers. The coal and oil industries not only support Campbell County but they support the whole State of Wyoming. Much of the tax dollars generated by the coal and oil industries are distributed throughout Wyoming. When your administration tries so hard to close down these industries, it not only affects the thousands of families in Campbell County but it affects the whole state. Although we realize there are valid concerns about global warming and environmental issues in our country, we want to testify that the coal and oil industries in our county are environmentally conscience and they work hard to beautify the land here. The people of Wyoming not only receive but they also give freely. If there is anyone in need here, the people step forward and give their time, talents, and resources. If every state in this country would give as Wyoming does, there wouldn't be any hunger or homelessness. We have enclosed some photos to show you a few of the programs offered to children, seniors, and families in Campbell County. We ask that you please take the time to look at them. We would also like to invite you to visit Campbell County to see the wonderful community we have. Visit our open-pit coal mines and our oil industry along with the various forms of wildlife that share this land. Thank you for taking the time to listen to the concerned seniors of Gillette, Wyoming. May God Bless You and Your Family! The letter is dated November 17, 2015. At the end of the letter is a list of a number of the seniors who signed the letter. I ask unanimous consent that their names be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I have taken a closer look at the ornament that they gave me to give to the President. We are not only the energy capital of Wyoming, but we are also the energy capital of the Nation. We produce 40 percent of the Nation's coal, and the reason we produce 40 percent of the Nation's coal is that this coal is cleaner than anywhere else. Powder River Basin coal is lower in sulfur and other chemicals, and they have even found ways to improve the way it operates. If some of the money from the Department of Energy were used as an incentive for cleaning up coal, it could be done much better. Our university, again using money from the energy business, is also working on a few projects. One of them is to use solar power to separate hydrogen out of water and burn the hydrogen with coal to make it burn better and cleaner. We have five powerplants in my county, and we love to talk people into coming to Campbell County. We are successful at getting senior staffers, from both Republican and Democratic offices, to come each year to take a look at what it is like in that part of the country. The biggest comment that all of them make as they leave is that they had no idea that it could be that clean. They thought the coal mines would be dirty. I ran into that when I went to the first global warming conference in Japan. I went there early, as the negotiations were starting, and I guess I was one of the first people to show up in a suit, so people were leaping over tables and everything to interview me. I usually don't do that. I ask what their circulation is in Wyoming, and of course in Japan it was zero, so I didn't do any interviews. But one of the big papers in Tokyo was so interested that I wouldn't do an interview that they sent a reporter to Wyoming. They called first and asked if it would be OK if he came and traveled with me for a day. I said that it would be fine as long as he also visited a coal mine and powerplant. He came and traveled with me, and he had no idea of the distances that we have between the few people that we have in Wyoming. We are the least populated State in the Nation. He also followed through on visiting the coal mine and powerplant. Again, he had the same comment. He couldn't believe it could be done so cleanly and so well. In the early days of the coal mines coming in, people said they would never able to reclaim that land because we have such low moisture in Wyoming. We are actually considered high desert. In fact, the eastern part of that State has the most desert. God didn't put anything above the ground. He put it all under the ground, and part of it is coal under 80 feet of dirt, which is considered nothing in the coal mining business. So we have been able to mine the coal with this open pit and to reclaim it. Now it is fun to take people out to see one of these mines because when you get to it, they say: Don't let them tear up that part over there. We say: That is where the mine used to be. This is where it is going to be. They then say: Oh, go ahead and tear that up because it looks better after they put everything back in its place. It could be done better yet, but there are some requirements in the reclamation that it has to be put back the way that it was, and that puts some constraints on it. Nobody would move millions of tons of dirt on a farm or ranch and put it back exactly the way it was, down to where the rocks are placed. We have a product that is used nationally and that the Chinese would like to use. Did you know that during the Olympic games in China they had to fire out rockets that would go to a fairly high altitude and then spread out some chemicals that would clean the air so that it would look nice on television? They are extremely interested in getting Campbell County coal shipped to them so they can burn that in their powerplants and clean their air. It is the least expensive form of energy there is, and I am talking about just one of the forms of energy. We also have oil, which results in natural gas and coalbed methane. This little symbol is a uranium symbol. We also produce most of the Nation's uranium in our county. That could be used more extensively to provide clean power and as a source for agriculture as well, including raising bison. So I wanted to share this Christmas ornament with all of my colleagues and echo what the seniors have said and suggest that America is the most innovative country in the world and if we have a problem, we can solve it. A little bit of incentive can go a long way. We are an inventive country. A little bit of incentive has gone a long way a lot of times. We actually have had some private companies that are talking about restocking the space station. We have the plane that was powered by bicycle pedals that crossed the English Channel. If we can do those sorts of things, there is no limit to what can be done. We have to quit discouraging inventiveness and encourage the use of the resources we have. I yield the floor.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, last year we made a promise to the American people. If we were elected to the majority, we would get Washington working again for American families. Republicans in the Senate have been focused on putting our country on not just another course but a better course. This will allow us to begin rebuilding the trust of hard-working taxpayers who have seen their government become less effective and less accountable. Over the course of this year, as the Senate got back to work, the American people got to see something that had been missing from this side of the Capitol over the past 8 years; that is, an open and transparent legislative process. This included Members from both sides of the aisle offering, debating, and ultimately voting on amendments to not just our balanced budget resolution and reconciliation proposal but to a whole host of legislative measures. Leader McConnell promised this, it is happening, and bills are passing because people on both sides of the aisle are having an opportunity to represent their constituents, to get votes on amendments. The previous year we had 15 total votes on amendments. This year we have already had 192 votes on amendments, and the year is not over. So instead of allowing political points and partisan gridlock to take precedence over responsible governing, we are once again doing the people's business, and the Senate Budget Committee played an important role. We had the first balanced budget in 14 years. Yes, Congress this year approved its first balanced 10-year budget since 2001. Americans who work every day to provide for their families and pay their taxes understand that it is time for the Federal Government to live within its means, just as they do. Hard-working taxpayers know they can't live on borrowed money, and neither can our Federal Government. This balanced budget approved by Congress shows these families that if they can do it, so can we. Our goal is to make our government more efficient, effective, and accountable. If government programs are not delivering results, they should be improved, and if they are not needed they should be eliminated. A balanced budget would also help America tame its exploding debt, which today totals almost $19 trillion. Every dollar spent on interest on our debt is another dollar we won't be able to use for government services, for individuals in need or another dollar that won't be available for taxpayers for their own needs. Washington must live within its means, just as every hard-working family does every day, and we have to deliver a more effective and accountable government to the American people that supports them when it must and gets out of the way when it should. To get our country and economy back on track, Americans must be allowed to spend more time working to grow their businesses or to advance in their jobs instead of worrying about taxes and inefficient and ineffective regulations. We want to empower our job creators to find new opportunities to expand our economy and, most importantly, assure that each and every American has the opportunity to find a good- paying job and a fulfilling career. This is why the balanced budget also provided for repeal of the President's unprecedented expansion of government intrusion into health care decisions for hard-working families and small businesses. Our goal is to lift the burdens and higher costs ObamaCare has placed on all Americans. ObamaCare is saddling American households with more than $1 trillion in new taxes over the next 10 years, and according to the Congressional Budget Office, ObamaCare will cost taxpayers more than $116 billion a year. For every American, ObamaCare has meant more government, more bureaucracy, and more rules and regulations, along with soaring health costs and less access to care. The budget reconciliation legislation passed by the Senate will eliminate more than $1 trillion in tax increases placed on the American people, while saving more than $400 billion in spending. Most importantly, this bill begins to build a bridge from the President's broken promises to a better health care system for hard-working families across the country. The Senate Budget Committee is an important resource for facts and information about the congressional budget process and the economy. That is why my committee recently began publishing its budget bulletin again, to provide regular expert articles by committee analysts on the issues before Congress relating to the budget, deficits, debt, and the economy. This year the bulletin has addressed the highway trust fund debate; defense spending, BCA caps, and OCO special funding; reconciliation and the Byrd Rule; budget enforcement and points of order; the appropriations process, which is the spending bills; the debt limit debate; and the 2016 continuing resolution. Another important part of the committee's work is to increase oversight and transparency surrounding congressional spending. This is why I directed the Congressional Budget Office to release regular reports tracking the budgetary impact of enacted legislation against the fiscal year 2016 balanced budget resolution the Republican Congress approved. I have provided these reports after each recess work period in order to provide a status update on Congress's progress achieving the budget resolution plan. Regularly providing information such as this will help foster fiscal transparency in the Federal spending process, and over time it will encourage a heightened awareness in the importance of complying with the budget. It will also help ensure that Congress remains focused on fiscal responsibility. The recent omnibus spending and debt deal clearly illustrates that the Federal budget process is in serious need of reform, which is why the Senate Budget Committee this year has also focused on fixing our broken budget process. Instilling the Federal budget process with regular action and predictability, active legislative oversight and spending transparency are critical to strengthening our democracy and reducing our Nation's unsustainable spending and debt. We often talk about the threat America's growing debt poses to our economy and our future, but the growth in Federal regulations also poses a threat to long-term economic growth and job creation. The committee this year has been working to shine a light on these regulations and the burden they have on each and every American. It is critical for lawmakers and hard-working Americans to understand the true cost of regulations that are being issued by the administration. Taming our ``regulation nation'' will help ensure that the Federal Government works for the people, instead of people working for the government. These aren't the only things that the Senate accomplished. I was proud to be a part of the Finance Committee's efforts to replace the doc fix so that doctors could be paid properly and Medicare recipients would be able to see doctors, also to enact trade promotion authority legislation, to increase trade that increases dollars to the United States, and also to finance the highway trust fund. I was proud to be a part of the effort of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and I commend my chairman for his work on those bills. Today I also want to acknowledge Senator Cochran's work to lead the Appropriations Committee in reporting all 12 appropriations bills for the first time since 2012. Incidentally, they stayed within the budget on those, and most were bipartisan. It is the first time all 12 appropriations bills have been voted out of committee since 2012. I want to thank Senator Murkowski for her work on energy issues, including the Keystone Pipeline bill, and Senator Cornyn, for his efforts to protect victims of trafficking. I was also proud to work this year on some issues important to my own State of Wyoming by pushing back on the administration's Clean Power Plan and waters of the United States rule, primarily designed to eliminate the use of coal and drive up the price of electricity in this country, which in essence will cost the average American a lot more for their electricity. Just as importantly, it will send jobs overseas where the energy costs less. This year Congress also corrected a problem that the 2012 highway bill created for Wyoming, and I commend Senator Barrasso for his efforts on that. I also want to thank Senators McCain and Isakson for their work to support our troops and our veterans. I appreciate Senator McCain working with me to ensure small businesses have the help they need to compete for Federal contracts. This isn't an exhaustive list. There are several more things. We passed over 80 bills this year. But these are some of the things we can be proud of. The Senate is under new management, and these accomplishments and others still to come show hard-working taxpayers that Republicans in the Senate are working to deliver a more effective and accountable government, a government for the people and by the people that supports them when it must and gets out of the way when it should. We have made great progress this year, but there is still more to be done. By working together, we are proving that we can deliver real solutions and real progress that the American people want and deserve. I yield the floor.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Foreign Relations be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 2:15 p.m., to conduct a hearing entitled ``Afghanistan Intelligence Assessment.''

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Veterans' Affairs be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 2:30 p.m., in room SR-418, of the Russell Senate Office Building.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 10 a.m.

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Armed Services be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on December 15, 2015, at 9:30 a.m.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that LCDR Robert Donnell, a Coast Guard fellow with the Senate commerce committee, be granted floor privileges for the remainder of the 114th Congress.

Mr. ENZI

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, section 4305 of S. Con. Res. 11, the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2016, allows the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee to revise the allocations, aggregates, and levels in the budget resolution for legislation related to health care reform. The authority to adjust is contingent on the legislation not increasing the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2016-2020 or the period of the total of fiscal years 2016-2025. I find that H.R. 3762, as passed the Senate, fulfills the conditions of deficit neutrality found in section 4305 of S. Con. Res. 11. Accordingly, I am revising the allocations to the Committee on Finance, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, HELP, and the budgetary aggregates to account for the budget effects of the bill. I am also adjusting the unassigned to committee savings levels in the budget resolution to reflect that, while there are savings in the bill attributable to both the HELP and Finance Committees, the Congressional Budget Office and Joint Committee on Taxation are unable to produce unique estimates for each provision due to interactions and other effects that are estimated simultaneously. The adjustments that I filed on Thursday, December 3, 2015, are now void and replaced by these new adjustments. I ask unanimous consent that the accompanying tables, which provide details about the adjustment, be printed in the Record.

Mr. ENZI

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

Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to express my strong support for S. 1177, the Every Student Succeeds Act. This legislation sends the responsibility of educating our Nation's students back to where it belongs--with States and local communities. I wish to commend Chairman Alexander and Ranking Member Murray for their work to advance this legislation through a very ideologically diverse HELP Committee, which they did with a unanimous vote. The full Senate then had a vote. That vote was 81 to 17. Then we had a conference committee. We haven't had many conference committees. It was there that we met with the House of Representatives to iron out differences between the two bills, and that passed by a vote of 38 to 1. It has been a long time since we have had numbers like that record. In fact, it has been a long time since bills went to committee and had the opportunity to be amended in committee, and then went to the floor of the Senate and had the opportunity to be amended on the floor. Of course, it is even more unusual to have a conference committee--because it passed both Chambers--and come up with a 38-to-1 approval of the conference report, which is what is now before us. This is one of those instances where we get to vote for it or we get to vote against it. I am hoping that almost everybody votes for it, just as in these previous votes. We in Wyoming are very proud of our school system. We are proud of the way we support our students. We are proud of the way we support our educators. We are proud of the way we support our staff. In fact, the Constitution of Wyoming says there will be equal education for every child. We carry that to an extreme. In Wyoming, that means there has to be equal buildings, as well as opportunities, facilities, and teachers. That is run through the courts every once in a while just to make sure it is observed, and it is, and we are proud of our students, our buildings, and the education we provide. We are very proud of the way it helps to prepare our students for what is next and ensures they have the tools necessary to succeed in a rapidly evolving society. This bill, the Every Student Succeeds Act, ensures that Wyoming teachers and school leaders have the power to tailor education to meet the needs of all students, even in the most rural and remote communities. Wyoming is the least populated State in the Nation, and we have probably some of the smallest schools. We believe kids shouldn't have to ride a bus to or from school for more than an hour, and as a result, we have some schools that have one student or two students or three students. That is a little different kind of school than most of the Nation has. For too long now, I have heard stories from teachers, from students, and from parents across Wyoming about the harm inflicted by the prep- for-the-test system that has been in place. That ends with the signing of this bill. Our Nation's students deserve the opportunity to learn in innovative and creative ways that will stimulate their minds and open their eyes to the countless opportunities we have in this great country. Our Nation's teachers and school leaders deserve the highest levels of support and training to help our students recognize those opportunities and help prepare the next generation. Our Nation's parents deserve the option to choose what educational opportunities are best for their child. This act ensures that all of that can occur by empowering States and local communities to make the decisions they think are best. This is a diverse country. There are a lot of differences among our States. We have some common policies, we have some common laws, but there are still differences. I am always a little riled when we are compared with some of the other countries around the world on how our students are doing. I have been the Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee before and I did some research into that; I visited some countries to see what their education was like. One of the ways they get better scores on their tests is they kick kids out of school. In India, they guarantee a sixth grade education. They say they guarantee a sixth grade education. They do a cleansing of the schools in fourth grade. They say ``These kids are not participating in their education enough,'' and they kick them out of school. Those kids will make brooms by day and sweep streets at night, and they will earn $1 a day for the rest of their lives. That is it--no opportunity for any advancement. That is in fourth grade, even though they are guaranteed a sixth grade education. In sixth grade, they have another purge. In fact, those kids will wind up in jobs where they make $2 a day for the rest of their lives, with no opportunity for change. They allow only 7 percent of the kids to go to college. There is tremendous competition that probably makes some difference in their scores. But weeding out kids makes a difference. Thank goodness in this country we don't believe in that. We believe every kid should have an opportunity, and we give them an opportunity as long as we can. Local school boards are a terrific example of democracy at its finest. In those meetings, individuals in the community can come together to discuss and debate issues related to the education of their youth. It is in those meetings that students can voice their opinions and have a say in their own educational experiences. It is in those meetings that teachers and student leaders can put forth what they think is the best course of action to teach the content in a way that best meets the needs of that community. It is in those meetings that all of those parties can decide how they want to spend educational funds within the budget that the members of that community voted on. The Every Student Succeeds Act that we will vote on tomorrow gives that power back to the local school boards. It allows issues to be debated and decisions to be made in a room of parents, students, teachers, school leaders, and community members who know best what works for the students. It is one of the purest forms of democracy I can think of, and certainly it is something I think our Founders had in mind in their idea of America and, in particular, their idea of educating our students. I know there are some people who are going to vote against this bill, and I have asked why. The most common answer is it doesn't go far enough. It goes further than anything that has been done in this Chamber since the Department of Education was founded. This reverses things back to States' rights. I work around here under the 80-percent rule. I have found that we can talk civilly about 80 percent of the issues. If we stick to that 80 percent, we can be productive. If we go to the other 20 percent--it is 10 percent on each side, Republicans and Democrats--we both have certain things that we would like to see and that we think are right, and we have been fighting over them for decades. But if we stick to that 80 percent, we can be productive. We can find something that we can have some common ground on. I have found that we usually only have 80 percent common ground on any of the issues because, again, there is that 10 percent that each side feels is right and that we would like to do. So the best way to get some legislation done is to leave out some of those things and go ahead and get what we can. This bill does that. I think it goes beyond 80 percent, incidentally, but we can get the whole 100 percent. The way to do it is to get both sides together and keep them out of the weeds long enough--the old rhetoric they have been arguing about, where they hear a key word and know the answer to it immediately and don't have to listen. If you can get them to sit down and listen and think of a new way to do it, we would get 100 percent because when we come up with that new idea that both sides can grab on to, they both claim it is their idea, and we move on. We are not at that point yet on education. I commend the Chairman of the committee, Senator Alexander, and the Ranking Member, Senator Murray, for coming together on 80 percent of what can get done and working to get it done. The alternative is to get nothing done. We need to get something done. People have been complaining that this law has been unauthorized for years. This is the first chance we have had to actually move forward with education, to move it back to the States where it will be most effective, where those diverse States can make up their minds on what will work best with their students. Incidentally, most of our States are as big as any of those countries we compete with, with the exception of China, Russia, and India. They are making decisions for their State when they are making their education decisions. That is what this bill will do. There aren't any perfect bills. I particularly don't like comprehensive bills. ObamaCare was a comprehensive bill. But my idea of a comprehensive bill is that it is so big that people can't understand it, and it is so big that stuff can get shoved in there that nobody will even notice when it is being done. This is one of those bills that has been worked on for a long time. It has been taken carefully in steps and put together so that we can move forward with it. The question is, Will it work? Yes, it will work. Will it do everything that everybody wants? Hardly anything ever does. This bill will come as close to doing something--as I said, I believe it is the most progress we have had since we got a Department of Education, which is a whole other debate. I have been proud to support this legislation from its very early stages, and I will continue to support it tomorrow. The responsibility of the education of our Nation's students belongs to States and local communities. The Every Student Succeeds Act ensures that responsibility is given to those entities. I urge my colleagues to support this legislation, an improvement in education. Mr. President, I yield the floor.