John Hoeven

Mr. HOEVEN

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 President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, the Bureau of Land Management has a mission set by Congress; that is, to manage the Nation's public lands under the principles of multiple use and sustained yield, which means that public land should be open to everything, from hunting and grazing to energy development and other reasonable uses. The BLM currently manages more than 246 million acres of land and 700 million acres of Federal and non-Federal subsurface estate. Much of these lands are in the West, where Federal acres coexist with private and State-owned land. In order to manage its resources effectively, BLM is required to provide resource management plans. This planning has typically been led by BLM's field offices, in coordination with State, local, and Tribal governments that provide local input on how best to manage the land and its unique resources. However, in the final months of the last administration, the BLM sought to apply a top-down approach, essentially a one-size-fits-all, top-down approach to this resource management process. They termed it the planning 2.0 final rule. The rule which was finalized in December changed how this planning is done and undermined the well-established process by limiting the ability of local input, public comment, and meaningful State consultation. The final rule also pulled decision-making away from the regional BLM field offices and centralized it at BLM's headquarters in Washington, under the concept of ``landscape-level planning,'' which lets Washington define new areas covering multiple States. The rule takes important decision- making away from local officials who know the land and understand the needs of their communities. The BLM rule sought to ignore the multiple-use requirements established by Congress and diminishes the importance of energy development. The rule tilts the balance in favor of conservation and non-development and away from responsible energy development, as well as other uses, like grazing. In a State like North Dakota, with a distinctive patchwork of underground Federal minerals and private or State surface ownership, this creates more uncertainty for energy producers and more difficulty for our ranchers. By repealing this rule, we are preserving our longstanding tradition of allowing multiple uses on Federal lands, while protecting the livelihoods of our ranchers, energy producers, and many others. That is why this resolution is supported by the North Dakota Stockmen's Association, along with the National Association of Counties, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, the Farm Bureau, the National Cattlemen's Beef Association, the Public Lands Council, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, just to name a few. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of the CRA on the BLM planning 2.0 rule. I thank Chairman Murkowski, the chairman of our Energy Committee, for her leadership on this important issue. The House passed this CRA on February 7 in a bipartisan manner. I am hopeful the Senate will do so as well and send this bill to the President's desk this week. Today's CRA ensures that State, local, and Tribal input and expertise should guide the management of our public lands. Let's stop the BLM's planning 2.0 rule and give the people who live and work in these communities a say on what happens in their hometowns. We can do that by voting for this CRA. I urge my colleagues to do so. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak as in morning business.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I have 3 requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: committee on the judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary be authorized to meet during the session of the Senate, on March 7, 2017, at l0 a.m., in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building, to conduct a hearing entitled ``Nominations.'' select committee on intelligence The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, March 7, 2017 from 2:30 p.m., room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building to hold a closed hearing. select committee on intelligence The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence be authorized to meet during the session of the 115th Congress of the U.S. Senate on Tuesday, March 7, 2017 from 2:20 p.m.-2:30 p.m., in room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building to hold a closed busines meeting.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the ``Senate Committee on Indian Affairs rules for the 115th Congress'' be printed in the Record.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce S. 245., the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act Amendments of 2017. Over 10 years ago, Congress passed the Indian Tribal Energy Development and Self-Determination Act. This act was a step in the right direction to economic self-sufficiency for Indian tribes and energy independence for our Nation. It created a process for Indian tribes to govern the development of their energy resources while reducing costly bureaucratic burdens of Secretarial review, approval, and oversight. But after more than 10 years, the act has not been implemented in a manner beneficial to the tribes or efficient resource development. Bills have been introduced for the past four Congresses to improve and clarify the process but none of them have been signed into law. It is past time Congress acts and gets this bill across the finish line to be signed into law. The bill that I am introducing today would improve, clarify, and make predictable the process for tribes to enter energy resource agreements and development. I would like to highlight some of the key provisions in this bill. The bill provides clarity regarding the specific information and time frames for Secretarial decisions required for tribal energy resource agreements. This bill recognizes the need to engage tribes by requiring more robust technical assistance and consultation with Indian tribes in the planning and development stages for energy resource development. It would further facilitate the Secretarial approval process for mineral development by allowing Indian tribes and third parties to perform appraisals. This bill also includes renewable energy resource development by authorizing tribal biomass demonstration projects to assist Indian tribes in securing reliable, long-term supplies of woody biomass materials. I would like to thank Senators Barrasso, McCain, Lankford, Moran, and Heitkamp for joining me in cosponsoring this bipartisan bill. I urge my colleagues to join me in advancing this bill and getting it signed into law expeditiously.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed 5 minutes to make comments but also that my colleague from North Dakota be allowed to make comments, as well, and that we be allowed to complete those comments prior to the afternoon recess.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I rise today to honor the service and sacrifice of Colt Eugene Allery, a sheriff's deputy in Rolette County, ND, who was killed in the line of duty on January 18. Deputy Allery was just 29 years old and leaves behind his fiance, Alexandria, his four children and stepdaughter, along with many family and many friends. Deputy Allery was dedicated to serving the public and spent the last 5 years working in law enforcement. He started his career as a corrections officer, serving as a police officer in Rolla, ND, and as a tribal police officer for the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, a tribe of which he was a member. He became a deputy with the Rolette County Sheriff's Office just 3 months ago. His colleagues remember him for his friendly and positive disposition and his commitment to making his community and our State safer. He was also well known in St. John, the tight-knit community where he was raised by his grandparents. He was known for always serving his friends and his family. They say Colt was happiest when he was doing things for others, which is why he chose law enforcement as his career. Deputy Allery's life is a reminder to each of us of the enormous debt we owe to all of the men and women in law enforcement who leave home every day and go to work to protect us and help make our communities and our States safer places--places that we are proud to call home. My wife Mikey and I extend our deepest condolences to Deputy Allery's family and friends during this difficult time. Our thoughts and prayers are with his loved ones and his law enforcement colleagues, in the coming days and months and especially today, as Deputy Allery is laid to rest. May God bless him and his family. Mr. President, I yield the floor and turn to my colleague from North Dakota.

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, for all the people of North Dakota, we thank Colt for his service, and we ask that God bless Colt Allery and his entire family. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I have ten requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate: committee on armed services The Committee on Armed Services is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. committee on banking, housing, and urban affairs The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 10 a.m. committee on commerce, science, and transportation The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 10:15 a.m., in room SR-253 of the Russell Senate Office Building. committee on finance The Committee on Finance is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, in room SD-215 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. committee on foreign relations The committee on Foreign Relations is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 12 p.m. committee on homeland security and governmental affairs The Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 2:30 p.m. committee on the judiciary The Committee on the Judiciary is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 10 a.m. in room SD-226 of the Dirksen Senate Office Building. committee on small business and entrepreneurship The Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 10:30 a.m. in room 428A of the Russell Senate Office Building to conduct a hearing entitled ``Nomination of Linda E. McMahon to be Administrator of the Small Business Administration.'' committee on veterans' affairs The Committee on Veterans' Affairs is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 3 p.m. in room SR-418 of the Russell Senate Office Building. select committee on intelligence The Select Committee on Intelligence is authorized to meet during the session of the Senate on January 24, 2017, at 2:30 p.m. in room SH-219 of the Senate Hart Office Building.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I have five requests for committees to meet during today's session of the Senate. They have the approval of the Majority and Minority leaders. Pursuant to Rule XXVI, paragraph 5(a), of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the following committees are authorized to meet during today's session of the Senate:

Mr. HOEVEN

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

Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I rise again to speak about the Dakota Access Pipeline issue in North Dakota. Again, I want to emphasize that we need to focus on the facts and understand what is really going on there. On Saturday, the Obama administration announced its refusal to issue the final easement for the Dakota Access Pipeline to cross a narrow section deep underneath the Missouri River. This easement is required to finish the 1,172-mile-long pipeline which is already 98 percent complete in North Dakota--98 percent complete in North Dakota--and 86 percent complete overall. As I have indicated before on the floor, it runs from the Bakken oilfields in North Dakota, moving North Dakota light sweet crude all the way to Patoka, IL, so oil can go into all of the refineries along the eastern part of the country and the eastern seaboard. In fact, our light sweet crude oil competes with OPEC. If they are not using our light sweet crude, they are bringing in oil from places like Saudi Arabia for these eastern refineries. So very important in terms of energy independence for our country, but as I said, this pipeline is 98 percent complete in our State. Now, again, the Obama administration is delaying it. Unfortunately, this latest Obama administration decision fails to follow the rule of law, it fails to resolve the issue, and it perpetuates an extremely difficult situation for North Dakotans. Furthermore, it is estimated that over 5,000 protesters are still unlawfully gathered on Federal or Corps of Engineers land in our State. They are there in direct violation of the Army Corps' December 5 eviction notice, as well as an evacuation order from North Dakota's Governor. However, now that the Obama administration has made its decision, protesters should move from their unlawful site on the Army Corp of Engineers' land. Even Standing Rock Chairman David Archambault has finally said that protesters need to leave and return home. Let me repeat that. Even Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault has finally said protesters need to leave and return home. He is the tribal chairman. The Obama administration needs to do the same. The administration needs to call on the protesters to leave this illegal site as well. As I said, the Dakota Access Pipeline issue has been difficult for the people of North Dakota. In recent months, protesters have trespassed on private property, they have blocked state highways and damaged bridges, they have committed acts of vandalism to construction equipment by cutting hydraulic hoses, breaking windows, filling gas tanks with gravel, and setting equipment on fire. Protesters have blocked intersections in Bismarck and Mandan. They have disrupted area businesses, and farmers and ranchers in the area have reported instances of trespassing and butchered livestock. The rule of law matters in this country, but by committing acts of lawlessness at this construction site as a proxy for changing broader environmental policies, the rule of law is undermined. Just as the pipeline company must follow the law, the protesters themselves need to follow the law as well. By continuing to remain in the camp, the protesters are defying Federal and State orders to leave. They are subjecting residents in the area to additional weeks of disruption and hardship. They also require our law enforcement to continue their around-the-clock presence, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The protesters need to follow the law, just like everyone else. I repeat, it is time--past time--to leave this illegal camp. I would like to address the dedication of our State and local law enforcement officers--the professionals who make up the North Dakota Highway Patrol, our sheriffs, and our deputies around the State and from other States who have come in to assist us. Members of the North Dakota National Guard and other first responders have acted with professionalism and diligence to maintain peace and order under very difficult circumstances. They continue to protect the public, especially now with the onset of challenging winter conditions. In my 10 years as Governor of North Dakota, I spent a lot of time working with our law enforcement officers to prepare for weather emergencies. I know the preparations these situations require. Even today, our law enforcement and State Department of Transportation crews are working to keep evacuation routes open, rescuing people stranded on the highways and providing assistance to many from outside North Dakota who are unprepared to deal with the recent blizzard we had in North Dakota. The men and women in law enforcement are doing their best to protect everyone, including the protesters. We owe our law enforcement a debt of gratitude for their diligence, for their dedication, and for their professionalism, but North Dakota's law enforcement resources are severely strained. I have repeatedly called on the U.S. Department of Justice to provide additional funding and law enforcement officers to ensure public safety. Our State has requested Federal assistance and was assured--was assured--by the Attorney General that we would be given expedited consideration, but that has not been the case. Our Byrne grant application for Federal assistance has still not been approved by the Attorney General. I will continue to call on the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the Corps to provide additional Federal resources, including funding and law enforcement personnel to assist our State and local law enforcement officers and ensure public safety. As I have said before, everyone has a right to be heard, but it must be done lawfully and peacefully, whether that is during the permitting process, with its opportunities for public comment, or through the court system. I emphasize through the court system. That is the established method in our country for dispute resolution. So it is time--it is past time--for the protesters to stand down and to recognize that the courts and the next administration will resolve this issue. It is also important to recognize that this pipeline is not unique or unusual as an infrastructure project. There are more than 38,000 crude oil pipeline river and water body crossings in the United States--more than 38,000--and more than 1,000 in my State of North Dakota alone. This is one more. These crossings range from rivers, streams, and lakes to ponds, canals, and ditches. Also, it is important to understand the oil is already being transported across a river on rail and across bridges. Once again, I just want to show--this is the network of oil pipelines in the country. They cross many bodies of water. We are doing it one more time with the latest, greatest technology. The pipeline does not go in the river in any way, shape or form. It is about 100 feet underneath the river. So even if there was a leak, somehow that oil would have to come up through bedrock to even get into the area. In other words, it is the latest, greatest technology. This oil is already moving to market. It is already crossing the river on rail and on truck. If we don't build this, we are relying on the old infrastructure, which is less safe and less environmentally sound, instead of building the new, latest, greatest infrastructure with the technologies that will be more efficient, more safe, more environmentally sound. That is what makes sense. Again, it is not unique. Additionally, the pipeline company has modified its route on its own 140 times in North Dakota to avoid any important or cultural resources. So they have modified the route to avoid any cultural resources 140 times just in our State. In July 2016, the Army Corps issued its final environmental assessment, which concluded with the finding of ``no significant environmental impact'' and ``no historic properties affected.'' These determinations have been upheld not once but twice by the Federal courts, including a judge appointed by the Obama administration--a Federal district court judge here in Washington, DC. As for the way forward for this difficult issue, we need to look at the facts at hand. In the midst of the ongoing news coverage, it can seem that heated rhetoric leaves little room for good-faith efforts to find common ground, but I want to highlight that there continues to be attempts at finding consensus among the stakeholders, even as recently as last Friday. To that point, in a meeting I had yesterday with the Army Corps' Northwestern Division Commander, BG Scott Spellman, he stated that last Friday, on December 2, the Army Corps' Omaha district commander, John Henderson, convened representatives from the pipeline company, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, and Army Corps officials. They met in Bismarck for 5 hours. The meeting included tribal staff and the company's engineering and technical experts who came together for the sole purpose of reviewing Standing Rock's 19 specific safety and environmental concerns raised in the tribe's October 2016 letter to the Corps. In this meeting, the pipeline company, tribe, and Army Corps discussed all 19 concerns raised by the Standing Rock, and they considered 36 potential terms and conditions that could further reduce the risk of a spill or pipeline rupture. Again, let me repeat that. In order to directly address the river crossing concerns raised by the tribe and the protesters, the pipeline company was willing to consider more than 36 additional safeguards for this crossing. Friday's meeting actually resulted in a revised proposed easement, which was presented to the Assistant Secretary of the Army, Jo-Ellen Darcy, the next day, on Saturday, December 3--last Saturday. However, the following day, on Sunday, December 4, Assistant Secretary Darcy promptly rejected the revised easement and instead required more ``broad public input and analysis.'' Clearly, the Obama administration is not interested in finding a way forward based on the merits of the project, even in light of two Federal court rulings upholding the Army Corps' reviews and even with subsequent attempts by the company to specifically address the tribe's remaining environmental concerns. In recent days, I have met directly with President-Elect Trump's transition team and conveyed the importance of bringing this situation to a resolution. I have also spoken directly on the matter to Vice President-Elect Mike Pence and to the next Attorney General, Jeff Sessions. President-Elect Trump has now publicly communicated his support for the project, as well as for providing Federal assistance, including additional resources and law enforcement personnel. This project should be decided on the merits and in accordance with the law. Failure to do so will cast new uncertainty on all future infrastructure projects, from pipelines that carry oil and gas and other liquids to transmission lines carrying both traditional and renewable energy. If companies and individuals cannot rely on a system that follows the rule of law, nobody will risk making future investments in our country's vital infrastructure. That will make our Nation less safe, less secure, and less competitive. As I said a minute ago, think about it. If we can't build new infrastructure, then we will continue to use the old infrastructure, which is less safe and less environmentally secure. To avoid this situation in the future--the kind of standoff we have with the Dakota Access Pipeline--we need to focus on ways to improve the permitting process. We need to improve the process so we can make sure all people's voices are heard and provide regulatory certainty to companies willing to invest in large infrastructure projects. This should be done prospectively, not retroactively--looking for ways to better streamline procedures, reduce duplicative hurdles, and improve methods for public input. This pipeline can be built safely and include necessary protections for both the tribe and everyone else downstream. The fact is that our country needs energy, and we cannot have it without energy infrastructure--pipelines, transmission lines, roads, rail, and bridges--to move both traditional and renewable energy from where it is produced to where it is consumed. Move it both safely and efficiently. Let's all work together to make that happen. With that, Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN

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

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I rise to speak and also to respond to the comments of some of my colleagues on the Dakota Access Pipeline and the ongoing protests in my State of North Dakota. Here we have a chart showing the Dakota Access Pipeline. It is a 1,172-mile pipeline from the Bakken oilfields near Stanley, ND, to refineries and terminals that actually connect to Patoka, IL, and then that light crude can go into eastern refineries. It will move 470,000 barrels of oil daily from the Bakken in North Dakota and Montana to eastern markets and to refineries that depend on that light sweet crude. This is high quality. This is the lightest, sweetest crude we produce. It is very high quality oil. It is also important to understand this oil is already moving. It is already moving to these markets right now by rail and by truck. This oil is already being moved. This pipeline actually increases the efficiency and the safety with which we move this oil that is already being transported to eastern markets. Furthermore, the project has undergone years of State regulatory reviews and an extensive Federal environmental assessment which found no significant environmental impact. Again, the environmental assessment found no significant environmental impact. It has been twice challenged and twice upheld, including by the Obama administration's own appointees in Federal court. The Federal courts found that the Army Corps had followed the appropriate process that the Standing Rock Tribe was properly consulted and that the project can lawfully proceed. Everyone has a right to be heard, but it must be done lawfully and peacefully, whether this is during the permitting process with its opportunities for comment or disputing the outcome through the court system. Of course, that is why we have the court system. It hears grievances and provides dispute resolution. The ongoing protest activities which are occurring in North Dakota-- which at times have been violent--are being prolonged and intensified by the Obama administration's refusal to approve the final remaining easement at Lake Oahe. This inaction has inflamed tensions, strained State and local resources and, most importantly, is needlessly putting people at risk, including Tribal members, protesters, law enforcement officers, construction workers, and area residents--our farmers and ranchers who live and work in the area of the pipeline. It is past time that the final easement is approved and construction is completed. We need to get this issue resolved. It is past time to get this issue resolved. As the record demonstrates, it should be done on its merits through the previously established regulatory and legal process. In other words, follow the law. We are a country of laws. Follow the law. Further, the Federal law enforcement agencies should help our State and local law enforcement officers to ensure the law is followed to prevent violent and unlawful protests and see that the peace is maintained. Our law enforcement officers have worked professionally, diligently, and tirelessly to protect the public. To further describe the situation, let me provide some background. The company developed the route for the Dakota Access Pipeline beginning in 2014. The current path will run parallel to an existing Northern Border Gas pipeline which was placed into service in 1982, as well as an existing high-voltage electric transmission line. In North Dakota, this is an already established right-of-way for energy infrastructure. You have an existing gas line that goes through this same route and you have a high-voltage transmission line as well. Approximately 99 percent of the route for the Dakota Access Pipeline crosses private land. Only 3 percent of the work needed to build the pipeline requires Federal approval of any kind, and only 1 percent of the pipeline affects U.S. waterways. To date, the pipeline is already 98 percent complete in North Dakota, and it is 86 percent complete overall, from North Dakota to Illinois. That includes the route around and up to the final two-tenths-of-a-mile portion of the Missouri River, which is where most of this protest is occurring. This area of the river, known as Lake Oahe, is controlled by the Army Corps for flood control purposes and requires one remaining Federal easement. The segment at the center of this debate is a small section planned to traverse under Lake Oahe which would occur at a depth of 92 to 117 feet below the riverbed. In other words, the pipeline doesn't enter the river at all. It is about 100 feet below the river. That is very important to understand. In fact, where it crosses underneath the river, it is 100 percent adjacent to an existing natural gas pipeline. In other words, it follows a pipeline that is already built and is there now, an existing natural gas pipeline. This was done so any ground disturbances would not harm any cultural or Tribal features. That is why they followed this right-of-way. Let's put this into perspective a little bit. We have another chart that helps do that. Remember, we are talking about crossing the river in one place, right? We are talking about a pipeline that is going to cross this river in one spot. Let's put that into a broader context, into a broader perspective. The Congressional Research Service estimates there are 38,410 crude oil pipeline river and water body crossings in the United States. So in our network of oil pipelines around the country, we cross water more than 38,000 times. We are talking about doing it one more time here. But we already do it more than 38,000 times all over the country. This chart shows you that. In North Dakota alone, we cross bodies of water more than 1,000 times--more than 1,000 times. So this is hardly something new and different. The Congressional Research Service estimates that there are 3,410 crude oil pipeline river and water body crossings in the United States already existing, including 1,079 in North Dakota alone. So I guess we go from 1,079 to 1,080 just in our State. These crossings range from rivers, streams, and lakes to ponds, canals and ditches. So let's talk about tribal consultation. In total, the Army Corps held 389 meetings, conferred with more than 55 tribes, and conducted a 1,261-page environmental assessment before finding that this infrastructure project has no significant environmental impact. So they did all of that study, all of that consultation. Conclusion: This project has no significant environmental impact. So the Federal court then reviewed this decision once the protests started. The Federal court reviewed the Corps' work. In the September 9 Federal court opinion, U.S. District Judge James Boasberg noted that the company surveyed nearly twice as many miles in North Dakota as the 357-mile route that would eventually be used for the pipeline. So they surveyed a lot more than they actually used. Why did they do that? The Federal judge noted that where the surveys revealed evidence of historically important or cultural resources, such as stone features, the company modified the route on its own--140 times in North Dakota alone. So 140 times the company modified its route to make sure they avoided any cultural or sensitive features. Remember, they are using an existing corridor that already has a gas pipeline and already has a high-voltage transmission line. They still modified it 140 times to make sure they avoid any culturally sensitive resources. Additionally, in another instance, the Corps ordered the company to actually change the route where it crossed the James River, which is another river further east that has not been protested--it crosses that river too--to avoid burial sites there. They actually changed the route to make sure they avoided any sensitive sites. The pipeline company and the Army Corps have documented dozens of attempts to engage with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe to help identify historical resources and provide feedback in the planning process. Judge Boasberg, I might mention again, was appointed by the Obama administration. Judge Boasberg, a U.S. Federal court judge here in the District of Colombia, wrote: ``The tribe largely refused to engage in consultations, and chose to hold out for more, namely the chance to conduct its own cultural surveys over the entire length of the pipeline.'' Remember, the entire length of the pipeline goes all the way from North Dakota to Illinois. All right, let's go to the third chart. Further, I am going to put this up because the tribe appealed to the court to stop construction on the pipeline. The court said no. They have followed the law. They have done this appropriately. I think here is a good quote from the judge's decision. Judge Boasberg wrote: As it was previously mentioned, this Court does not lightly countenance any depredation of lands that hold significance to the Standing Rock Sioux. Aware of the indignities visited upon the Tribe over the last centuries, the Court scrutinizes the permitting process here with particular care. Having done so, the Court must nonetheless conclude that the Tribe has not demonstrated that an injunction is warranted here. So the Judge says that he came into reviewing the Corps process trying to find if they had not covered all the bases properly. He came with a mindset to make sure they had exercised due diligence. He said they had. In the spring of 2016, I helped arrange meetings between Colonel Henderson--COL John Henderson is the district director from Omaha, NE, for our district--and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, at the request of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. It was during these meetings that Army Corps Colonel Henderson imposed additional conditions on the pipeline, including a double-walled piping in response to tribal concerns about environmental safety. So he is now adding additional features after that consultation. A tribal monitoring plan has also been required, which requires Dakota Access to allow tribal monitors at certain sites when construction is occurring. So he added even more conditions after further consultation. In July 2016, the Army Corps issued its final environmental assessment, which concluded with a ``Finding of No Significant Impact'' and ``No Historic Properties Affected'' determinations. The environmental assessment establishes that the Corps made a good- faith effort to consult with the tribes and that it considered all tribal comments. In addition, Dakota Access has developed response and action plans. They will include state-of-the-art monitoring systems, shutoff valves and other safety features to minimize the risk of spills and reduce or remediate any potential damage. So, let's take a look at just some of these--just some of these. There are many of them. Again, it is at least 92 feet under the river. So if you had a break in the pipeline, it would have to come up somehow through almost 100 feet of bedrock--come up through 100 feet of bedrock somehow to get into the river. But if you did have a rupture, you have automatic shutoff valves that are monitored 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Remember that additional condition that the Corps added after consultation? It is a double- walled pipe. So it is a double-walled pipe. These are just some of the safety features. In addition, the Army Corps required the company to implement numerous mitigation plans, including: One, an environmental construction plan; two, a stormwater pollution prevention plan; three, a spill prevention, control, and countermeasure plan; four, a horizontal directional drilling construction plan; five, a horizontal directional drilling contingency plan; six, an unanticipated cultural resources discovery plan; seven, a geographical response plan; eight, a facility response plan; and, nine, a tribal monitoring plan, among other measures. Those are just some of them. So let's talk about the protests. The Obama administration's inaction on the final Federal easement crossing the Missouri River has created undue hardship and uncertainty for area residents, for private landowners, for our farmers and ranchers that live and work in the area, for tribal members, for construction workers who have been chased off the construction site by protesters, and certainly for our law enforcement personnel who have had to be out there day and night for months. Now we have winter weather conditions. Recently, with a very severe snowstorm, you have really life-threatening conditions out there for somebody who is trying to camp out in the middle of winter. Since the protests started earlier this year, State and local agencies have been put to the test in maintaining public safety, which have been threatened by ongoing and often violent protest activity. There have been instances of trespassing, vandalism, and theft. Construction equipment has been set on fire. Workers have been chased off the work site. Workers who were just trying to lawfully do their job were chased off the work site. Fires were started on privately owned ranchland. This is not on the reservation. It is on private land. Residents have endured the challenges caused by roads being blocked or closed, either by protest activity. They have shut down highways. Protest activities have shut down highways. Roads are being blocked or closed by protest activity that has shut down roads or by law enforcement's response to ensure safety, at a time when farmers and ranchers are busy harvesting, hauling hay, shipping calves, and moving their herds from summer pastures. In addition, law enforcement is investigating cases of butchered, mutilated, injured, and missing cattle, horses, and bison in areas adjacent to the site occupied by the protesters. Law enforcement has worked to protect everyone. Again, I will emphasize that. Law enforcement has worked to protect everyone. They have been patient, professional, and diligent. They have not used concussion grenades. More than 500 protesters have been arrested for breaking the law, and over 90 percent of them are from out of State. Over 90 percent of the more than 500 protesters that have been arrested are from out of State, and many, if not most, are not Native American. They are environmental activists from other parts of the country. If you want more information on law enforcement, go to YouTube, ``Know the Truth Morton County,'' which is a Web site that the Morton County Sheriff's Department uses to provide updates on their efforts to maintain law and order at the protest site. The motto of law enforcement is to ``serve and protect.'' That is exactly what they are doing. So in conclusion, in accordance with the findings of the Army Corps of Engineer's environmental assessment and the court decisions, the Army Corps needs to follow established legal and regulatory criteria and approve the final easement so that construction can be completed. In addition, Federal resources should be deployed expeditiously to protect people and property in the area of violent protests to help support State and local law enforcement efforts. As I said, this issue needs to be resolved. It is past time to get this issue resolved. I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to my Deputy Chief of Staff Stephanie Schisler, who is retiring this week after 41 years of service in the Senate. She has been working here longer than 99 of the current Members of the Senate, which you would never know by looking at her because she still looks amazingly youthful, but she and Senator Leahy, our longest serving Senator today, both began their careers in the Senate in 1975. Her dedication to this institution and to serving our country is absolutely remarkable. Stephanie is a well-known member of the Senate community, having worked for me as well as four other Senators--Richard Stone, a Democrat from Florida; Bob Kasten, a Republican from Wisconsin; a good friend of mine, Dirk Kempthorne, a Republican from Idaho; and Blanche Lincoln, a Democrat from Arkansas, before joining our office. She has a remarkable record. Stephanie's bipartisan resume is a testament to her expertise and her skill, but also to her integrity. Stephanie is beloved by the entire Senate community, from fellow staffers to Capitol police officers, to folks who maintain the building. It seems as though she knows all of them, if you can believe that. She has built wonderful relationships on the Hill, which is one of the reasons she is so effective. No matter what you ask of her, Steph knows who to call and how to get the job done and done well. That includes everything from hanging animal mounts in my front office, such as a huge buffalo or bison head, which couldn't have been an easy proposition, but she figured out how to get it done. Now there is even a drone suspended from the ceiling in our conference room. While Stephanie has always excelled at her job, she has also helped those around her succeed. She has an eye for recognizing talent. For example, when she worked for Senator Kasten of Wisconsin, she hired a young man by the name of Paul Ryan as an intern. Of course, today he is Speaker of the House. Stephanie has always been able to see the potential in people, and that is a great example. She has always worked very hard to help them to succeed. She has been a mentor and a surrogate mother to many staffers, not only in my office but in other offices and throughout her tenure working at the Senate. I want to thank her husband Gordon and her children Nick and Leigh for supporting Stephanie during all those late nights and long weeks throughout her career. Stephanie is truly a unique individual and an irreplaceable member of my team. I keep pleading for her not to retire, but so far it hasn't worked. I am not giving up, though. She is truly somebody who cannot be replaced. While we will miss Steph, we are grateful for the positive impact she has had on so many lives with her amazing influence for good in the Senate. We thank her for her service to our country, and we wish her the best as she begins this new chapter in her life. We are so appreciative to have had Steph as part of our team, and we will truly miss her. With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. HOEVEN

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

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, today I wish to recognize Dale Sandstrom, who is retiring from the North Dakota Supreme Court after 24 years of devoted service. Justice Sandstrom is a fifth-generation North Dakotan. Born in Grand Forks, he grew up in Fargo and graduated first from North Dakota State University and then from the University of North Dakota School of Law. After law school, Justice Sandstrom began his career in public service. He came to Washington, DC, to work under Senator Milton R. Young, who was North Dakota's 15th Senator and, for a time, President Pro Tempore of the U.S. Senate. Justice Sandstrom returned to North Dakota to work on the North Dakota Criminal Justice Commission. He then served for 6 years as assistant attorney general and headed the office's Consumer Fraud and Antitrust Division. In 1981, North Dakota Governor Allen I. Olson appointed Justice Sandstrom to his cabinet as the State securities commissioner. Two years later, in 1983, Justice Sandstrom was appointed to the North Dakota Public Service Commission, a position to which he was elected in 1984 and then reelected to in 1990. During his tenure on the commission, he served two terms as its president. In 1992, Justice Sandstrom was elected to the North Dakota Supreme Court. He was reelected to two 10-year terms in 1996 and 2006 and was a member of the court during my time as Governor of North Dakota. Justice Sandstrom chairs the North Dakota Supreme Court's Joint Procedure Committee and the North Dakota Advisory Commission on Cameras in the Courtroom. He is also a member of the court's Joint Committee on Attorney Standards and is a past chairman of the court's Technology Committee, the North Dakota Judicial Conference, and the North Dakota Judges Association. North Dakotans have tremendous access to justice, and the State is a leader in court technology because of Justice Sandstrom's work. In 1996, he created the court's award-winning website, and in 2011, North Dakota became the first State in the country to have its entire trial court system on an electronic record system. Justice Sandstrom is married to Gail Hagerty, who is a judge for the North Dakota South Central Judicial District. Together, they have three children and live in Bismarck. Throughout his life, Justice Sandstrom has distinguished himself through his example of integrity and hard work, especially during his tenure on the North Dakota Supreme Court. He has shown not only outstanding knowledge of law, but also wisdom in applying it. He has been a mentor to his law clerks, as well as the State bar. Outside of his work on the court, Justice Sandstrom is an active member in the Bismarck community. An Eagle Scout, he remains active in scouting and received the Distinguished Eagle Scout Award for his involvement. We honor Justice Sandstrom for his excellent work, and we celebrate his achievements. His efforts have made our State a safer and better place to live, and we commemorate him for his dedication to the people of North Dakota. The court has been well-served by his thoughtful opinions from the bench, and North Dakota will always be grateful for his service to our State.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, today I wish to recognize Farm Rescue for assisting 400 farm and ranch families during times of crisis. Farm Rescue provides assistance to farming families who are suffering from a major injury, illness, or natural disaster by lending a helping hand with planting, harvesting crops, or providing haying assistance. They also assist producers with hauling hay and grain if a farmer or rancher cannot do these critical tasks. Farm Rescue's relief efforts have come in times of natural disaster, like tornadoes, and personal crisis, such as cancer treatments, spinal cord injuries, and lost limbs. In rural communities, it is common for folks to help one another when in need, and this organization epitomizes that spirit. Farm Rescue was founded by Bill Gross in 2006, a native North Dakota farm boy who, while working as a full-time UPS pilot, donates his free time to run this organization. Mr. Gross has molded Farm Rescue into a one-of-a- kind nonprofit organization whose sole purpose is to aid farmers and ranchers who need a little help in the midst of a crisis. Farm Rescue actually does the critical labor the farmer or rancher needs to get done, while the assisted producer provides the crop inputs, like seed, fertilizer, and fuel Since 2006, Farm Rescue has assisted hundreds of farm families in the Midwest, including North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Montana, and Minnesota. This year alone, Farm Rescue has already helped 50 families, and they are still in the field assisting more. Its operations are primarily completed by a volunteer labor force that come from all over the country to help, and many of those volunteers are retired farmers seeking to lend their help and expertise to those in need. Farm Rescue's first case in 2006 was to assist a farmer whose hand was severed in an auger accident. In 2012, they harvested for a family near Wyndmere, ND, marking their 200th case, after the farmer fell off his semitrailer and broke vertebrae in his neck. One hundred cases later, in 2014, Farm Rescue helped a Fergus Falls, MN, man with harvest while he underwent treatment for blood cancer. Two years later, Farm Rescue is now completing its 400th case by enabling a family with a loved one suffering from cancer to complete harvest. It must be a great relief to farming and ranching families to know that, if an unexpected medical diagnosis complicates spring planting or multiple lengthy trips to doctor appointments make harvesting the fall crop near impossible, there is an organization that will coordinate volunteers to come out and lend a neighborly helping hand. Farm Rescue is making a positive contribution to the agriculture community all over the United States, and I am proud to be able to recognize this organization. Farm Rescue is a powerful reminder of what Americans can achieve when they work together to help each other in times of need.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. I ask for the yeas and nays.

Mr. HOEVEN

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

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, every now and then we have a chance to support a bipartisan bill that tackles a tough issue in the face of stiff, stiff opposition. The biotechnology bill before us today is just such legislation, and I come to the floor to speak in support of its passage. This measure will avoid a patchwork of State labeling regulations, and in doing so will save families thousands of dollars a year, protect American jobs, and provide consumers with accurate, transparent information about their food. This bipartisan solution is a product of the hard work of Ag Committee Chairman Pat Roberts and Ranking Member Debbie Stabenow, who have shown real leadership in putting this bill together and are now working to get it passed. Specifically, the Roberts-Stabenow biotechnology disclosure bill accomplishes three important objectives: First, it protects consumers by immediately ending the problem of having a patchwork of inconsistent State GMO labeling programs that would increase prices; second, it ensures farmers and ranchers can continue to provide Americans with an affordable, reliable, and safe food supply; third, it creates a uniform national disclosure system that will provide consumers with more information about their food products. This bill will ensure that the Vermont GMO labeling law, which went into effect last week, July 1, does not end up costing American families billions of dollars when they fill up their grocery carts. Food companies are already having to choose between one of three bad options for complying with the Vermont law and laws from additional States that may follow Vermont's lead: First, order new packaging for products going to each individual State with a labeling law; second, reformulate products so that no labeling is required; or third, stop selling to States with mandatory labeling laws. All of these options will increase the cost of food and could result in job losses in the ag economy. For millions of Americans, the GMO or bioengineered food labeling program created by Vermont will impact the affordability of food without improving its safety. Testimony provided by the USDA, FDA, and EPA to the Senate Ag Committee last fall made clear that foods produced with the benefits of biotechnology are safe. Just last week, 107 Nobel laureates signed a joint letter to Greenpeace urging it to stop campaigning against biotechnology and GMOs, stating that ``Opposition [to GMO's] based on emotion and dogma contradicted by data must be stopped.'' The real risk is that if we don't address Vermont's GMO law, real families will have a tougher time making ends meet. In fact, if food companies have to apply Vermont's standards to all products nationwide, it will result in an estimated increase of over $1,050 a year per household. For families having a tough time paying bills, this is in essence a regressive tax, and it will hurt the poor more than those with substantial means. From a jobs perspective, the story isn't any better. It has been calculated that if Vermont's law is applied nationwide, it will cost over $80 billion a year to switch products over to non-GMO supplies. Those billions of dollars a year in additional cost will hurt an ag and food industry that creates over 17 million jobs nationwide. In my State of North Dakota alone, 94,000 jobs and 38 percent of our State's economy rely on the ag and food economy. This is a bad time to be making it more expensive to do business in the ag sector. Earlier this year, economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City testified that net farm income in 2015 is more than 50 percent less than it was in 2013, and it is expected to go down again in 2016. A State patchwork of food labeling laws will only make this situation worse, as many farmers who rely on biotech crops to increase productivity will be deprived of a critical tool. I know how hard farmers work and how much they put on the line every year when they have to take out an operating loan for crops that may or may not materialize. We shouldn't ask them to feed the Nation with one hand tied behind their backs by taking away biotechnology. More than just overcoming the problems associated with having a patchwork of State regulations, I think it is important for Americans to know that this legislation ensures consumers have consistent, accurate information about the bioengineered content of their food. This measure creates greater transparency for consumers by putting in place a new national bioengineered food disclosure standard that will ensure products labeled as having been produced with biotechnology meet a uniform, national standard. As I mentioned, foods produced with the aid of bioengineering are, according to the FDA, EPA, and USDA, safe. However, many consumers do want to know if the food they are buying is produced using biotechnology, which is why this legislation provides a national bioengineered food labeling standard. Many of us who sit on the Ag Committee would have preferred a voluntary labeling standard. After all, as has been demonstrated by scientific experts, whether a food contains bioengineered material is not a food safety issue. Yet there are many perspectives on this issue, and in the true spirit of compromise, Senator Roberts and Senator Stabenow deserve a great deal of credit for coming up with a legislative solution. This bill's national bioengineered food labeling standard will ensure that a consumer who buys a food product with text, symbol, or electronic link indicating bioengineered content in, say, North Dakota, for example, is purchasing a product that is held to the same disclosure standards as foods sold in another State--for example, New York or California. Meanwhile, this bill will provide regulatory flexibility to ensure farmers and ranchers can continue to produce affordable and reliable food for the Nation. We need a solution, and this bill delivers that solution. It helps keep our Nation's food affordable, it supports jobs, and it provides consumers consistent information about bioengineered foods. I urge my colleagues to support this commonsense measure. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I thank the senior Senator from Alaska. I appreciate that. I rise today to speak in support of the NDAA, the National Defense Authorization Act, which we are currently working on. The NDAA is clearly one of the most important pieces of legislation we take up in Congress because it authorizes vital programs designed to keep our Nation secure and our people safe. We have worked very hard to make sure the bill upholds the nuclear missions at our missile bases, as well as unmanned aerial systems--the UAS missions--that have emerged as a vigorous part of our Nation's defense. I commend the chairman and the ranking member for their good work in bringing this bill to the floor. It is a massive undertaking. In particular, I thank them for their support on some important priorities. This bill fully authorizes programs to sustain our strategic forces, including plans to upgrade the Minuteman III ICBM, the venerable B-52 bomber, and our nuclear cruise missiles. The bill also fully authorizes the Global Hawk program, which is proving its worth every day and demonstrates the value of unmanned aircraft in performing intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance missions. The Appropriations Committee, on which I serve, approved the National Defense Appropriations Act last month, putting in place the funding to support our armed services. As soon as we pass the authorization bill that is now before the full Senate, I understand we will work to bring its companion bill, the appropriations bill, to the floor for a vote as well. Both are vital for our armed services. Together, these two bills--the National Defense Authorization Act and the National Defense Appropriations Act--will provide our armed services with both the blueprint and the funding they need to defend our Nation and the American people. As I have said, I have filed several amendments that I believe will strengthen the bill and our national security, and I wish to take a minute to talk about them now. First, I have filed a measure that requires the Air Force to procure, in a timely manner, Black Hawk helicopters to replace the Vietnam-era Huey helicopters that currently provide security to our intercontinental ballistic missile fields. These fields are located near Minot Air Force Base in my home State of North Dakota, as well as at missile bases in Wyoming and the State of Montana. The Air Force uses helicopters to provide security for missiles that are in transit, as well as to move security forces quickly to any missile field site that could come under any kind of threat. I love the old Huey helicopters. They are great. I have flown in them for many years, on many occasions, and it is certainly an iconic aircraft and one that has served our Nation's military very well through the Vietnam era and through today. But the reality is that it is no longer able to do the job that we need done. I spent some time with pilots at Minot Air Force Base earlier this year and heard about the challenges they face. For example, the front panel of the Huey sometimes will not light up. Remember, these are aircraft that were manufactured in 1969. The pilots flying these aircraft are a lot younger than the helicopters they are flying, but they do a remarkable job. The mechanics do an amazing job in keeping them going. For example, sometimes the front panel of the Huey will not light up. When they are flying at night, they stick a portable LED light on the dash so they can see their gauges. Think about that. We have amazing young men and women in the military flying these helicopters that are much older than they are--helicopters from 1969. Some of the gauges don't have lights on them, so they put LED lights on as a makeshift way to see the gauges in the dark when they are flying to the missile fields performing their mission. If they hit some rough weather, guess what happens. The jostling knocks the LED lights off the control panel, and now they are in the dark. They can't even see their gauges. Think about being out there flying helicopters on a military mission, and it is dark. You may be in rough weather, and you can't see your gauges. Obviously, that doesn't get the job done. That is not something that is acceptable for our men and women in uniform. The Air Force acknowledges this, and they are working on getting an upgraded helicopter. To their credit, the Air Force wanted to move this as fast as possible, but under the plan DOD had approved, it would take 5 years before we would get new helicopters. Think about the situation I just described. Here are these air men and women flying in this makeshift condition, in a situation where the Air Force has acknowledged that this equipment does not meet the mission requirements--does not meet the mission requirements. That is why we have to accelerate this timeline, and that is what this amendment does. Specifically, my amendment instructs the Air Force to get Black Hawk helicopters on contract by 2018, which accelerates the Air Force's current procurement plan by approximately 2 years. It would enable them to acquire Black Hawk helicopters under the Army contract. The Army is already buying these helicopters. It has been fully bid. They have been doing it for some period of time. It would allow the Air Force to piggyback on it and buy the Black Hawk helicopters they need. It saves millions of dollars, I think somewhere between $80 and $120 million. This is commonsense stuff. I think it is a win all the way around. This provision is coauthored by Senator Jon Tester, Democrat of Montana. Obviously, he is well aware of the problem, too, because they face the same difficulty across our border in Montana. It is cosponsored by the other members of the Senate's ICBM coalition. It is bipartisan. We have a number of Senators on board supporting it. Also, it is a companion bill to the amendment that Senator Tester and I included in the fiscal year 2017 Defense appropriations bill. We have already put $75 million in the Defense appropriations bill to start the acquisition. The dollars are there; this is the authorization that goes with the dollars. We worked very hard on this. We set it up the right way, and it is something we need to do. The second amendment I introduced will help to meet the challenge of training enough pilots to fly RPAs, or remotely piloted aircraft-- unmanned aircraft. I don't know that there is any mission in the Air Force or perhaps the whole DOD that is more in demand right now than RPAs, unmanned aircraft. All over the world, we are using this amazing tool--Global Hawk, Predator--and it is in tremendous demand right now. That also creates a tremendous demand for pilot training. Chairman McCain and Ranking Member Reed included language in the base bill that requires the Air Force to make the transition to using enlisted pilots to fly RPAs, so we would have both officers and enlisted pilots able to fly RPAs. It is needed because of the incredible demand for pilots, which results from the incredible demand for this mission. I want to make sure that if the Air Force is going to make this transition, it can guarantee that pilots in the Air Guard, who use separate personnel systems and different training schedules, are able to receive training at a rate that is commensurate with their Active- Duty counterparts. Obviously, we rely heavily on the Air Guard, and they need to have the necessary access to training. This amendment directs that the Air Force is able to use contractor services to ensure that there is enough training capacity to train Air National Guard pilots to fly RPAs in order to keep pace with Active-Duty pilot training. We know that the Air Force has had difficulty training RPA pilots fast enough to meet operational demands. One way to correct that deficiency is to use the private sector to augment the training the Air Force provides directly. In North Dakota, General Atomics--the manufacturer of the Predator and the Reaper--is building a training academy to train pilots. It is at the Grand Forks Air Force Base. It is in a technology park on the Grand Forks Air Force Base. They are going to train pilots for their foreign military sales. So for aircraft that has been purchased by our military allies--France, England, Italy, Netherlands, I think maybe Australia--there are a litany of our allies who are now using RPAs, and General Atomics will conduct that training at Grand Forks Air Force Base. There is no reason our own Air Force can't leverage that incredible resource as well or resources like it at other locations. Clearly, it is something we need to help leverage our pilot training. With that, I will wrap up. Again, I want to emphasize the importance of this and the National Defense Authorization Act. I thank both the chairman and the ranking member for their work. I encourage all of my colleagues to join together in a bipartisan way and pass this important legislation for our men and women in uniform. Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I ask that the Members of this body not only consider the underlying issue and the impact it will have on farmers and ranchers. It will also affect everybody's private property rights. I also ask my colleagues to consider their own prerogative. Under our Constitution we have legislative, judicial, and executive branches, and each has its own authority. We have to stand up on this one when an agency overreaches and takes statutory authority we have not provided. I ask that Members join with me in support of this vitally important amendment. With that, I thank the Chair and I yield the floor.

Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. President, I will yield the floor to the good Senator from Michigan for a minute.